WWEGD?

I would say yes that citizens of this institution do have a potential grievance to file against the university for their handling of this situation. I think so because, like Adam said, it is very easy for the institution to interpret their codes of conduct and rules for situations like this any way they want, depending on whatever situation arises. This is unfair for the students because we are the victims of their interpretations, depending on how they choose to handle any given situation. This leaves us under recognized and underrepresented.

However, while I feel that most students will recognize the need of a grievance, none will take any action towards that end. I think this is true because many students and people our age have a hard time taking any stance on any issue unless it is directly affecting them at that particular moment. This is a subject we have already discussed in class. It is possible to appreciate the fact that this is an unfair situation, but at the same time it is very easy to go along with the mentality that it doesn't affect me so I don't need to do anything. I don't support this idea of apathy, but at the same time I can find myself getting caught up into it. I think we all do to some extent.

In thinking about Fraser's article and her terminology, I would say in this situation these groups suffering from PTSD are suffering from injustice from the institution described by Fraser as, "The second understanding of injustice is cultural or symbolic. Here injustice is rooted in social patterns of representation, interpretation, and communication." She cites examples of this situation as cultural domination, nonrecognition, and disrespect. I would say individuals suffering from PTSD are met with a lack of understanding, lack of respect, recognition, empathy, and the list goes on. They are a minority in our culture, and are misunderstood by the dominant group. Overall, I think that this group of individuals is mostly in need of recognition. Once recognition is received and understanding is increased, that is when redistribution can then occur. However, without recognition no redistribution can take place because it isn't being seen as necessary. Once recognition occurs and communication increases, that opens the door for redistribution.

Now answering the overall questions, what would emma do? Emma is a bit of a rock star, so I think she would immediately see how this can affect us all. She would understand that while she may not suffer from PTSD, she is still a part of the culture that is not representing this group and she could see how one day that lack of recognition could affect her. I think Emma would find a way to relate what is happening in this situation to everyone, she would relate it to something we can all identify with. In doing this Emma could show us all how this lack of recognition is not just bad for individuals with PTSD, but one day it could affect each and every on of us. After Emma convinced us of this, I think she would organize a protest or a march or public demonstration to advocate for this cause, to gain awareness, and support. If I had Emma Goldman's rhetorical abilities, this is what I would do. I would simply try to find a way to relate this situation to all EIU students, then I would find a public way to advocate for the cause.