By Hayden Mortensen
Intersectionality. Pacific Lutheran University (PLU) students have intersectionality. That’s all there is to it. But there’s an invisible tension due to overgeneralization which clouds our vision and corrals us into a contentious dichotomy between upper and lower campus.
A historic divide
PLU’s The Mooring Mast newspaper filed an athlete profile in October 2014 with this opening statement: “Lower campus is known as a home to the ‘jocks’ of [PLU], where partiers live and are looking for more fun than education.”
In the very same month, The Mooring Mast filed a twin profile of an upper campus student. The student hated the stereotypes placed upon them, but the article never said what those stereotypes were. The title harbored some clues: “An upper-campus non-artist.” The title alludes to the novelty of non-artists on upper campus.
I scoffed at both articles’ generalizations because they are far from the truth. Yet in spite of their inaccuracy, polarizing generalizations have persisted in the PLU community for a long time. Baseball coach Nolan Soete had this to say:
“The relationship between upper and lower campus when I was a student at PLU was not a strong one… I have been at PLU for 20 years now as a student, assistant coach, and head coach and I can honestly say that some of this divide exists today, but overall the relationship between upper and lower campus has improved a great deal.”
But improved apparently does not mean eliminated….
Current contention
I entered PLU around two years ago at age of 21 and I’ve never lived on campus (unless you count South Hall). I have a sphere of influence that encompasses lower and upper campus – friends from lower campus athletics and friends from my upper campus major and minors. In my experience, I never felt a rivalry between campuses, but I’ve always heard it’s there. From silly stereotypes to a notorious EMAL controversy, I’ve heard many reasons why one side of campus feels disdain for the other. My assignment to this article led me to find some common themes in this friction.
Scheduling conflicts
It’s been said that PLU has too few NARPs (Non-Athletic Regular People) because PLU sports attract so little fans. I’d go so far as to say there aren’t enough Non-Involved Regular People (NIRPs) because there aren’t many consistent spectators at any PLU event. Too many PLU students are overly involved. Practices, games, rehearsals, recitals, clubs, and community service take a toll on top of classes, homework, and jobs.
“This makes my free time a premium, and while in theory I could attend other programs, I generally would rather spend [free time] doing stuff with my friends, leisure activities, etc,” Junior athlete and music member James Waltz said.
I found that students cannot regularly support programs other than their own. When they can, they usually don’t want to unless a group of friends joins them. Students have to make time to go.
Scheduling conflicts ironically cause contention because of attention needs.
“I feel as though it’s a lot about participation in each other’s activities,” Sam Ebner, President of PLU’s Student Athlete Advisory Committee (SAAC) said.
When students don’t show up to performances or games, performers or players may feel shafted. However, those performers and players may not go to other events either.
Students may not hear about other events enough during their busy schedules which could be due to a break-down in advertising.
“I feel like lower campus in general is not informed about non-athletic events and probably vice versa,” SAAC Secretary Kennedy Robillard said.
Waltz confirmed this when he said, “The biggest complaint I hear about this issue is all the press athletics gets compared to other upper campus programs.”
Perhaps students spend too much time on their own campus so they are unaware of opposite campus events.
Territorial divides
It may be convenient to live next to one’s program facilities, but that’s not what PLU needs. Physical barriers affect the campus divide. Athletic facilities and dorms are on lower campus while art buildings and other dorms are on upper campus. “Hinderlie Hill” separates both.
“[The hill] may be enough to keep some community members from making as many casual visits with friends or colleagues as we might without the hill,” professor of physics Dr. Katrina Hay said.
Nevertheless, we can’t move the hill, so it’s easier for students to stay on their respective campuses which limits interaction with others. There are more divides than just the hill.
Junior Kiyomi Kishaba said, “I think the themed dorms contribute to the divide.”
PLU might mean well by designating special dorms for various demographics, but that system causes more harm than good.
“They need to mix different students together and stop intentionally dividing different demographics,” former PLU student and football player Garrett Johnson said.
Intentional campus separation causes territorial issues. Johnson feels athletes may be frustrated with upper campus students being in the way in places like the gym. On the flip side, Joel Robison, a choir singer and rower, said:
“I feel the friction every time I go into the UC, knowing not to sit in the lounge seating because that’s where the lower campus football guys are going to eat. Or when I’m getting ready to go into choir at MBR and a Business major cuts through only to catch the attention of every single music student in the building.”
Students take pride in their spaces and some may feel disdain for trespassers. But even if we got rid of physical barriers, there still are some cultural challenges to overcome….
Culture clash
Kishaba hit the nail on the head when she said, “We are at college to pursue our passions, and people who are interested in theatre will end up hanging out with people who like theatre, and athletes will end up hanging out with people who are athletes.”
Gravitation towards similar interests is the nature of the beast. Robison said that these differences become subtly ingrained in our psyche. Unfortunately, this leads to stereotyping which makes it harder for opposite campuses to want to be with – let alone support – each other.
The most notable stereotypes are that lower campus students are unintelligent, partying athletes while upper campus students are lily-livered, sensitive freaks; but let’s set the record straight. Kishaba noted that groups from both campuses have their exclusive kickbacks, but she, Johnson, and Waltz have seen similar proportions of upper and lower campus students at bigger parties.
Furthermore, SAAC Secretary Robillard doesn’t believe the stereotypes.
“I, as an athlete, have lived on upper campus and I have met great people and friends on lower campus who are not athletes” she said.
I’ve also seen very intelligent and dignified individuals from both sides of campus. Ultimately, these issues stem from generalizations.
“Rarely are any complaints I see leveled about athletes themselves, but more athletics as a whole,” said Waltz.
I’ve also seen that’s the case for arts as well. In fact, Ebner said he doesn’t think there’s a whole lot different between the actual people of upper and lower campus.
Perhaps these disturbing generalizations come from myths about jocks, thespians, and music students. Whatever the case may be, Ebner and PLU SAAC are working to combat friction….
SAAC offers solutions
Members of SAAC provide a voice for student athletes on campus and they invite other campus leaders to share their thoughts. SAAC accomplishes this by going to PLU Board of Regents meetings as well as holding their own meetings with leadership guests.
Ebner, Robillard, and the rest of SAAC try to find ways to fix the complicated tension between students and programs. Sharing voices at meetings is one helpful way towards unity, but it is indirect.
A more direct way that SAAC tries to improve student spectatorship is the “buddy team” system. In the buddy team system, sports teams earn points by attending events with or for another team they are assigned to. The team with the most points gets rewarded at the end of each year. This system helps improve camaraderie within the athletic department, but how does it help upper campus? Ebner said that extra points are awarded to teams that attend upper campus performances.
Baseball took the SAAC initiative to heart. They attended the theatre department’s A Christmas Carol in November 2018.
Coach Soete said his team really liked the experience and his team captains decided to commit the team to attend at least one non-athletic event every year. They were going to attend a performance this spring, but were unable to because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
As this system gains more traction, artists should expect more groups of athletes in the audience. Athletes hope artists will return the favor.
(Dis)Unity community
There are many more ways the PLU community can fix the upper v. lower campus issue, but it will be difficult. Change is not impossible, and Coach Soete thinks we are heading in the right direction, but some like Johnson are frustrated by underlying tensions at a university that prides itself in community and thoughtful inquiry. Why is mutual support so hard at a place Dr. Katrina Hay claims “feels like a coherent mission-driven community?”
World-renowned philosopher, Dr. Kwame Appiah, gave PLU some answers to this question.
Dr. Appiah spoke at the Wang Center Symposium this past March, just before the onset of COVID-19 fallout. In his speech titled Uses and Abuses of Identity he said “individuality is mediated by social categories.”
It is our psychological default to make categories, generalizations, and labels. He said such labeling tells one how they should act and tells how others think they can treat them. He said this can be good or bad, but it is easier to accept and act on generalizations if they are negative towards a group.
Such ease has crept into PLU as we can see from the negative generalizations within. Dr. Appiah also said that we make labels when we compete for resources. Lower and upper campus are competing for attention. Thus, PLU is divided even though “tolerance” is preached.
Luckily for us, Dr. Appiah reminded PLU about the contact hypothesis. The contact hypothesis is that individuals become more tolerant when they have contact with their others and when they need each other for support. He said that segregation of any kind makes it unlikely to have contact with the other. I’d say that contact is near impossible with social distancing currently in effect, but when we return to a “new normal,” our work will be cut out for us. Both campuses rely on each other for support whether they realize it or not.
Will we find a new normal with regular, mutual contact?
Robison uttered this sentiment that we could embody once we return: “When I connect with a diverse set of students, I find myself in a position for success at PLU.”
It seems PLU is far from perfect, but improvement is on the minds of students, faculty, coaches, and administration.
Coach Soete noticed that the biggest difference from his time as a student until now is that concerted efforts are being put forth to address and improve the unity in our community.
Multiple students shared feelings of hope and suggestions for improvement.
Ultimately, in the words of Robillard, “It is just going to take a group to commit and lead the way until they create a following that begins to change the culture at PLU.”
