Furthermore, the email received by the University community sent the message that the administration remains unconvinced that racial profiling has real and tangible consequences. Pamela Wheelock makes the distinction between whether the community issafe (referring to crime) and whether the community feelssafe (referring to racial profiling). But racism is coded, and the implicit message here is that the real and serious lack of safety for people of color on campus (especially that of Black men) is merely a perception. Whose Diversity? is gravely disappointed in this language because it ignores the reality that what Pamela Wheelock calls “feelings” leads to a Black person being killed by police every 28 hours in the United States. Members of Whose Diversity? ask, “Why does the administration think removing racial descriptors from only a third of crime alerts is sufficient, when racialized crime alerts feed a system that literally kills Black people daily in this country?” This is to say nothing of how constant threats to the safety of Black students impact their studies, mental health, and ability to graduate - racialized crime alerts have consequences far more pervasive and consequential than mere “feelings” in the lives of students of color. Racialized crime alerts put the psychological, academic, and physical survival of students of color on the line. It must be asked: how committed is the administration to truly ensuring that Black lives matter on this campus? On what side of history does the University administration want to be?