Posted By Gettysburgian Staff on Apr 11, 2025 | 1 comment

This article originally appeared on page 18 of the No. 5 April 2025 edition of The Gettysburgian magazine

By Jordan Brown and Aidan Martin, Guest Columnists

We write today not just as Anti Racist Collective executive board members, but as representatives of a greater student body who are concerned for the future of our campus. The Young America’s Foundation has have conjured accusations that are an affront to our way of life and all we stand for. It is imperative that we not only examine, but whole heartedly condemn their misleading statements and continue to uplift diversity, equity and inclusion. As many on this campus are likely aware, we recently saw the organization known as the Young America’s Foundation (known colloquially as YAF) file a civil rights report with the freshly decapitated Department of Education. In their ongoing quixotic mission to ensure free speech, the group has once again confused disagreement with censorship, and has failed to comprehend the true meaning of free speech.   

The letter in question rails against the College’s alleged infringements on free speech, which they claim stems from the mere existence of groups that do not agree with their worldview. The group’s justification for this is twofold: the Trump administration has called for the dismantling of all DEI and “exclusive” programs to end what they view as discrimination, and that because many of these groups are organized around racial or gender identity, they are exclusive and discriminatory. 

On college campuses, it is commonplace for communities to form around political belief, cultural expression, or national heritage — YAF itself is an example of this. But despite the claim that membership and admission into identity- and culture-based student groups are denied to those who pass a paper bag test and score a one on the Kinsey scale, these groups are open to all. In fact, these groups host events that are hallmarks of Gettysburg life, and are enjoyed by the vast majority of students, while also serving as opportunities to learn more about an interesting group of people, a sharp contrast to the picture YAF paints in their report. 

It cannot be stated enough that their entire argument is based on the farcical notion that all of these events are exclusive to the members of the communities that advertise them. In no way do any of these allegedly discriminatory gatherings have identity prerequisites to participate. YAF is suggesting the very nature of spaces existing which don’t center white, christian, heterosexual, cisgendered men is inherently discriminatory towards them. YAF also complained in their letter about the unequal funding given to their Young Americans for Freedom chapter at Gettysburg compared to other clubs. For a club that argues in favor of “merit based” systems, it is incredibly paradoxical to be upset about as an inclusionary world where everyone’s identity is treated equally and fairly doesn’t quite the fact that their club, which rarely throws events that can be enjoyed by the entire campus , was not able to get funding. The letter even goes as far as to describe the International Day of Tolerance as “Orwellian”, which begs the question of if anyone in YAF has actually read 1984, match the description in the book. 

The group continues its tirade of doublethink with its renewed attack on transgender individuals and visibility, including advocating for a “de-transitioner’s day of visibility.” YAF seems to believe that their perspective on transgenderism holds more importance than others, despite, to our knowledge, none of the members being transgender. It is worth noting that while the views of people who de-transition are valid they represent 13% of the trans community, with new research suggesting they could be as low as 2%. This hyperfixation on the bodies and lives of other members of our community is disturbing and incredibly divisive. It is not their place to question, dissect and object to the identities of other students, just like how in their opinions, we have no right to question theirs. Their demand for “free speech” is predicated on the elimination of other’s free speech because they do not have facts on their side, just elementary school feelings of disdain towards differences. 

Reaffirming their tradition of fragility and sedition, the group also seeks to censor our own curriculum, citing the woman, gender and sexuality studies department as harmful “gender ideology.” They cite specific WGS courses, all of which had started and been paid for before the executive order they address was signed, as being in direct violation of the law. It is their goal to silence the voices they disagree with rather than explore a new perspective. They also seek to limit housing options, alleging that one of the identity-based college houses is exclusive to people inside that identity group, which is blatantly untrue. Later on they also hilariously misidentify the school’s gender inclusive policy as a “gender expansive” policy, again arguing the College is violating  recent Trump executive orders. In short, the group demonstrated a clear lack of understanding of College policy. 

In the end of their letter the author states that they hope for a renewal of the “marketplace of ideas” and freedom of expression that the College held, according to them, before its “leftist” takeover. This is blatantly hypocritical and deserves ire by every group on campus that cares to maintain its position as an independent student club. The existence of clubs and communities that you do not agree with is inevitable, and to invoke unjust laws in order to wipe the slate clean and declare yourself victor over a social desert is a selfish endeavor to say the least. It is cruel to name and shame students, faculty and staff in a letter with the possibility for such strong repercussions, and indicative of a lack of care for our community. It should always be the policy of forward-thinking institutions to decry and ignore unjust policies, as is our moral duty as American citizens, and the Gettysburg College administration and community should be no exception. It is a disservice to their peers, their educators, and themselves to claim that diversity, equity and inclusion do not belong in this space. And the animus they adamantly claim is held against the white race because the rest of us have been given a space in which we are allowed to thrive and cultivate a lively culture of our own is a disgrace to our Constitution and an affront to our personal liberties.