For the fifth year running, the UW played host to the Tunnel of Oppression.

A poster initially drew my attention to the event, for plastered upon the flyer were three concepts I was either unfamiliar with or had never seen before: “environmental racism,” “language oppression” and “heterosexism.” Working my way through the display, I eventually found the answer to my queries.

We begin with “environmental racism.” At no point was “environmental racism” really defined; apparently the information put forth in this area of the tunnel was assumed to imply the meaning of the concept well enough. There was talk of how poorer countries tend to have dirtier and less “green” environments than wealthier areas. Farming also apparently places workers near chemicals that could be hazardous to their health. Add in the sporadic mention that farm workers and the residents of poor areas tend to be of color, and there you have it, “environmental racism.”

I fail to see how this is coherent. I understand the thought process they were trying to instill in the visitors, but it seemed like it was trying to show coincidence as proof of causality.

Poorer areas tend to be the location of landfills because the land is relatively cheap, not because non-whites live there in large numbers. Large farms use hazardous chemicals because they are effective in ensuring a bountiful harvest, not because the workers are non-white. Areas with mostly-white denizens tend to be more “green” than areas with mostly ethnic denizens not because the privileged whites are shoving trash onto ethnic peoples’ property, but because the rich have money to spend on recycling programs, big parks and maintenance programs.

Later on, I came to the “language oppression” section. Upon the wall was a map of the United States, with little tags on places where languages other than English are present (most of the languages were American Indians languages of some sort). The tags themselves attested to the dwindling number of people who spoke that language. This dwindling was presented as proof that “language oppression” was happening. It seems more plausible to me that the vast majority of people in the United States speak English and that there is little incentive for people who speak a language with little to no daily usage to propagate the said language.

The third and final form of oppression attested to was “heterosexism.” According to the Tunnel, heterosexism is defined as “the presumption that everyone is heterosexual and/or the belief that heterosexual people are naturally superior to homosexual and queer people.” At first glance, this seems like homophobia.

The difference was made clearer to me by the event staff, who directed me to a TV set playing the magic carpet ride scene from Aladdin. Apparently, Aladdin is an indoctrination tool for heterosexists because it ingrains into children the notion that heterosexuality is normal, setting them up to see homosexuality as less normal later on. Personally, I have trouble attributing some sort of sexual agenda to an adaptation of a centuries-old Arabic tale.

This pseudo-intellectual sleight of hand served to drag down what would have otherwise been a valid call to action.

The world as we know it is so full of real oppression and actual atrocities that I fail to see why shaky and spurious ancillaries had to be tacked on. Isn’t the world screwed up enough without going out and finding forms of oppression that aren’t really there?