Group of 88

The Group of 88 was a term applied to 88 professors at Duke University who signed an advertisement published two weeks after a woman asserted that she was raped by members of Duke's lacrosse team. The assertion was later shown to be false, and the players declared innocent of all charges. The prosecuting district attorney Mike Nifong was judicially removed, charged with misconduct, and disbarred.

Karla F.C. Holloway, a professor of English and African-American Studies was the person who initially thought of placing the ad.

Background

Duke lacrosse case

Main article: Duke lacrosse case

In March 2006 Crystal Gail Mangum, an African American student at North Carolina Central University who worked as a stripper, was hired to perform at a party held at the house of two of the team's captains in Durham, North Carolina on March 13, 2006. Several hours after the party, after becoming involved in an altercation with her fellow stripper that necessitated police assistance, Mangum made accusations that three white Duke University lacrosse team members had raped her, which were later shown to be false.

Inspiration

At a March 29 AAAS forum at which students "were invited to voice their frustration with the current situation and, it became apparent, with the university as a whole" leading to the advertisement

The ad described the circumstances surrounding the allegations as a "social disaster" and cited anonymous claims of sexism and harassment at the Duke campus. The ad specifically called for students to be vocal on the issues.

Statement

The advertisement was formatted with its title at the center of the page, "What Does a Social Disaster Sound Like?", surrounded by student comments about racism and fear on campus. Gray boxed text at the top read:

"We are listening to our students. We’re also listening to the Durham community, to Duke staff, and to each other. Regardless of the results of the police investigation, what is apparent everyday now is the anger and fear of many students who know themselves to be objects of racism and sexism, who see illuminated in this moment’s extraordinary spotlight what they live with everyday. They know that it isn’t just Duke, it isn’t everybody, and it isn’t just individuals making this disaster.

But it is a disaster nonetheless.

These students are shouting and whispering about what happened to this young woman and to themselves."

At bottom, the faculty members explained:

"The students know that the disaster didn’t begin on March 13th and won’t end with what the police say or the court decides. Like all disasters, this one has a history. And what lies beneath what we’re hearing from our students are questions about the future.

This ad, printed in the most easily seen venue on campus, is just one way for us to say that we’re hearing what our students are saying.

Some of these things were said by a mixed (in every way possible) group of students on Wednesday, March 29th at an African & African American Studies Program forum, some were printed in an issue of the Independent that came out that same day, and some were said to us inside and outside of the classroom.

We’re turning up the volume in a moment when some of the most vulnerable among us are being asked to quiet down while we wait. To the students speaking individually and to the protestors making collective noise, thank you for not waiting and for making yourselves heard."

The ad ended by acknowledging departments and programs that had signed it, referencing an online list of individual signers.

Departments

The department with the highest proportion of signatories was African and African-American Studies (AAAS), with 80%. Just over 72% of the Women's Studies faculty signed the statement, Cultural Anthropology 60%, Romance Studies 44.8%, Literature 41.7%, English 32.2%, Art & Art History 30.7%, and History 25%.

Commentary and criticism

National media

John Podhoretz wrote in the New York Post that: "The school has perhaps 700 professors who teach undergrads. So, at a moment when Duke students were being shadowed by a rape accusation, one-ninth of their professoriate had effectively declared that those students did not deserve the presumption of innocence - primarily because so many of their fellow students were supposedly being victimized by the atmosphere of 'racism and sexism.'" Furthermore, Podhoretz quoted Stephen Baldwin, a professor of chemistry: "There was a collision between political correctness and due process, and political correctness won."

In Howard Wasserman's Institutional Failures, he says that the Group's decision to go public so quickly left them vulnerable once more information emerged to change the case. He cites an investigation into the lacrosse players' personal behavior by Duke Law School professor James Earl Coleman Jr. Coleman found that the players were "good students who caused no problems in the class, treated Duke staffers with respect...and had no record of sexist, racist, or other forms of anti-social behavior."

Duke students and faculty

One signer, Kim Curtis of the Political Science Department, failed two members of the lacrosse team who were in one of her classes. When one of them appealed the grade, Duke did not act immediately; they eventually raised his grade to a D. Dowd and his parents sued Curtis and the university. Duke settled, listing the grade as "Pass".

An engineering professor at Duke, Michael Gustafson, was concerned that the restrictions on stereotyping had been done away with. He suggested that the accused lacrosse players had not been evaluated as individuals, but as caricatures, making it easier for commentators to criticize them.

One of the signers, English professor Cathy Davidson, wrote in the Raleigh News & Observer in January 2007 that the ad was a response "to the anguish of students who felt demeaned by racist and sexist remarks swirling around in the media and on the campus quad in the aftermath of what happened on March 13 in the lacrosse house."

A group of 18 economics faculty signed a petition which stated "the Group of 88 does not speak for all Duke faculty."

Clarifying letter

On January 16, 2007, a letter was posted at the newly established Concerned Duke Faculty website. It was signed by 87 faculty members, many of whom had been among the "Group of 88." They stated that the ad had been misinterpreted and that the intent of the original ad had been to address issues of racism and sexism in the community, not to prejudge the case: "We reject all attempts to try the case outside the courts, and stand firmly by the principle of the presumption of innocence", and rejected all "public calls to the authors to retract the ad or apologize for it."

The letter said that Duke fosters an "atmosphere that allows sexism, racism, and sexual violence to be so prevalent on campus."

Aftermath

A 2007 poll of Duke faculty showed that 82 percent were "troubled by the actions by the Group of 88."

External links

• Group of 88 Advertisement
• List of Duke Faculty signatories
• Concerned Duke Faculty website