Cross entry is a hot topic in college right now with everyone talking about it but seems like taking an action is a prolonged struggle.
One would think that such a dividing issue would incite seriousness from all parties but that doesn’t seem to be the case. A representative did not show up for a faculty-student meeting regarding the same, held on the 26th of September. This along with the countless memes and general tone of a large section of the campus regarding the campaign have made it at times, seem like a pipe dream.
The issue of Cross-Entry has existed for more than half a decade now and has been a debatable topic ever since. This year, a walk-in protest was conducted on the 14th of September which was a success, according to the organizers, as the student life committee agreed to have a private meeting on this topic on the 18th of September. In preparation for the protest, invitations were sent out to everyone, including the faculty. The speaker, Gensec, faculty and representatives the administration stationed guards outside Parijaat, the wardens stood at the Bakul gate, culminating in the director directly getting involved. Ankit Pant and Sunil Anumolu, the General Secretary and Speaker, approached the crowd and acknowledged that the institute had heard their voice, marking a victory for the protest, and would be interested in hearing the proposals made by the group. A mail sent by SLC chair Radhika Mamidi indicated disappointment that no proposals were submitted during discussions last year, a result of miscommunication according to those involved.
The validity of the arguments collected in the open session, to be held on the 14th of October, will be determined by the Parliament alone without any regard to the views of the majority or minority for the final decision.
These proposals were shared in the mail sent on October 10th along with a code of conduct for the session. The proposals themselves were quite brief and the only implementational detail mentioned was the requirement of an entry log with an ID card deposit at the hostel security gate, a measure already done for guests. Most of the document revolves around points in favour of cross entry with a focus on how cross entry would, in fact, solve the very problems that the opposition brings up. Given that the burden on those in favour of cross-entry is to propose a thorough solution, the proposal does seem to be incomplete; mentions of disciplinary action to be taken in the event of grievances, for instance, are absent altogether. While this is a promising start, how this proposal is received during the open session will decide the fate of cross entry. As of today, no arguments have been sent opposing cross entry.
Before the meeting, a google form was sent out by one of the representatives asking for their perspective on this issue. One of the submissions created an uproar amongst the supporters because of how vile it was. Sarigama, a representative in favour of cross entry, expressed concern about the general ignorance on campus and the need for ‘mutual love and respect across genders’. This would largely sum up the movement, two sides fighting over the general unpreparedness of the campus for cross-entry, with one viewing it as a con with the other using it to strengthen their arguments.
The whole point of the protest so early on was forcing the institute to tackle the issue instead of just pushing it forever. Organizers spoke about how they wanted the open session the same week of 14th September, and now a month later a date has been set. It’s undoubtedly important for the student community to keep pushing the institute to fulfil our demands, now more than ever, and hopefully bring an end to this debate once and for all.
Update: The article was corrected to reflect that this isn’t the ‘first time that Parliament has gotten involved’