You are currently browsing the category archive for the 'Student vs. Student' category.
The nine members of the American River College student government who voted to endorse California’s anti- same-sex marriage Proposition 8 have survived the recall vote that attempted to remove them from office.
The vote in the recall election was nearly seven times as high as the vote that brought the student government to office — 3,531 votes, as opposed to about five hundred — but still amounted to only nine percent of the ARC student body. Each of the student government members received about 53-54% of the vote in the recall.
With the presidential election shaping up as an Obama blowout in California this year, the biggest issue on the November ballot there is Proposition 8, a measure that would overturn the state court’s recent ruling in favor of same-sex marriage.
Polls show California voters equally divided on Prop 8, and the campaign is dividing the students at American River College (ARC), a Sacramento-area community college, as well.
On September 30, the ARC student government voted 8-3 to endorse Proposition 8, and anti-8 students immediately set to work gathering signatures for a recall election to remove the pro-8 representatives from office. The recall election was held earlier this week, and votes are still being counted.
The recall highlights low voter turnout in student government elections. According to one source, only 300 students voted in the last election at ARC, a college of over 37,000 students.
Five of the representatives facing recall are Christian students from the former Soviet Union, and controversy has arisen over dual-language flyers distributed during the recall effort on behalf of those students.
One blogger had the Russian text of a flyer translated, and found that where the English-language side of the handout asked “Does responding to Student requests by passing a resolution endorsing Prop 8 (Marriage Protection Amendment) make them ‘incompetent’ or unqualified for Office?”, the Russian-language side bore this message:
Stop homosexuals! They want to silence the voices of the believers and the Slavs in our college and they want to take the light from everyone who supports marriages!
Back in May, we reported on an online survey that Mother Jones magazine was conducting on contemporary student activism. (At the time, we noted that the survey’s title, “Are Today’s Student Activists Lazy?”, seemed oddly hostile to student organizing.)
Well, it’s back-to-school time, and the survey results have been posted, along with a cartoon guide to the varieties of present-day campus activists and a handful of other sidebars.
We’ll be posting an annotation of their “Student Activism Firsts” timeline later this week, and we’re interested in hearing your thoughts on that and the rest of the feature — feel free to post them here, or in the comments section over there.
As we reported last month, the student government of Toronto’s York University has voted to deny recognition to campus groups that oppose abortion rights. Now comes word that one such group, Students for Bioethical Awareness, is challenging the ban as a violation of the campus’s code of student conduct.
The student government of York University in Toronto has voted to deny recognition to pro-life clubs and organizations.
According to an article in the National Post, at least four other colleges — Capilano College, the University of British Columbia Okanagan, Lakehead University, and Carleton University — have taken similar action in recent months.
The Post also reports that the Canadian Federation of Students has passed a statement resolving that “member locals that refuse to allow anti-choice organizations access to their resources and space be supported.”
Mesa State College’s student government used online voting exclusively for the first time this spring, and their method of dealing with write-in candidates caused the student judiciary to throw out the election results in the race for student trustee.
The student government constitution at Mesa State provides one nomination process for standard candidates for office, and another, with a later deadline, for official write-in candidates. This year, one student ran for student trustee in the ordinary fashion, and two others ran as write-ins.
The voting software the student government used for the election had no provision for write-in candidates, however, so student election officials and advisors agreed to place the names of all three candidates on the ballot screen, with “(write-in)” following two of them.
Write-in candidate Susanna Morris won the election by a two-to-one margin, and incumbent Ashley Mates, the sole non-write-in on the ballot, brought suit in student court.
A new election will be held in the fall.
Ten members of Tulane University’s Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity were arrested this week, and the fraternity was suspended, after a brutal hazing incident that sent two pledges to the hospital. In a statement, the university declared that it has “zero tolerance for any type of … incident which can potentially endanger the well-being of any student.”
But the Tulane student government urged the university to investigate Pi Kappa Alpha, known as PIKE, for drugging female attendees at its parties more than two years ago, and its complaint was ignored.
In March 2006 the undergraduate student government at Tulane sent a five-paragraph letter to the university administration raising concerns about Pi Kappa Alpha, stating that there was “legitimate reason to believe” that the frat had “served drugged beverages to unsuspecting guests” at a party the previous month.
According to the letter, such allegations had been made “every year” in “recent memory” by female guests at Pi Kappa Alpha parties, with attendees “suspect[ing] that they may have been date raped” while drugged.
The letter also charged that “numerous people were taken to the hospital or injured” as a result of incidents at Pi Kappa Alpha parties, and that the university had responded with “minor punishments and slaps on the wrist.” The fraternity was engaged in “egregious and continuous abuse of the students and the rules,” the letter said, and “the situation gets worse every year.”
In a statement this week, the Tulane administration said that there had “apparently” been “no response from Tulane to this letter.”
On April 26 of this year two Pi Kappa Alpha pledges were hospitalized with second- and third-degree burns after a five-hour hazing ordeal in which fraternity members poured boiling water, crab-boil, and cayenne pepper sauce on pledges’ bodies. Police learned of the incident this past weekend, and filed charges against ten fraternity members on Tuesday.
Tulane suspended the fraternity the same day.
At this writing, Melissa Bruen’s article on the sexual assault she suffered during the U Conn Spring Weekend has received close to fifty comments on the Daily Campus website. (Free registration required.)
Of those comments, more than a dozen are flames. Some are critical of Bruen’s journalistic integrity. Others suggest that she invented the story of the assault. Several commenters insult Bruen’s appearance, or the clothes she wore in the photograph that accompanied the article.
It should be stressed that Bruen is characterized in third-party reporting as having been bruised in the attack. She describes the attack as having taken place in front of a large number of witnesses, and herself as having run from her attackers barefoot and screaming. She reported the assault to campus police while she was still on the scene.
And yet she is accused by commenters of having made up the incident as a “cry for fame.” Her account is described as having troubling “loose ends.” One commenter who appears to believe her story refers to the assaults as “minor shenanigans.”
And then there are the insults. One commenter calls her a “fat ho,” another a “stupid BITCH.” The shirt she wears in the photograph is described as being “in very poor taste,” and her facial expression as “rediculous” (sic).
Most of the comments to the article are supportive, and many challenge the critics with cogent arguments. But the fact that Bruen was attacked so harshly serves as a reminder of the abuse that women who speak publicly about sexual violence face, and underscores Bruen’s courage in coming forward.
Not long after midnight on January 16 of this year, twelve pledges of Yale’s Zeta Psi gathered at the entrance of the campus women’s center. They shouted “Dick! Dick! Dick! Dick!” and held up a sign that said “We Love Yale Sluts.”
Their act was part of a pledging “scavanger hunt,” and a photo of the group holding the sign was soon posted on Facebook.
Interference with the women’s center is an annual ritual during fraternity initiations at Yale. Last year an unidentified group gathered outside the center and chanted “No means yes, yes means anal!”
Under Yale’s code of student conduct, behavior that “has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work or academic performance or creating an intimidating or hostile academic or work environment” constitutes sexual harassment. This year women’s center members, arguing that the chants and the sign had the effect of interfering with women’s access to the center, filed charges of intimidation and harassment against the members of Zeta Psi.
The members of the fraternity were found not guilty of the charges nearly a month ago, but the committee’s decision did not become publicly known until this week, when news leaked to the Yale Daily News. Executive committee disciplinary proceedings are confidential, and no formal statement on the charges or their outcome has been made.
Story via Feministing, who have the best ongoing coverage of campus issues of any major political blog I know.
Update: In the course of filing the charges, the women’s center submitted a 26-page report on fraternity culture, university policies on frats and on sexual harassment, and the status of the women’s center on the Yale campus. That report is now available online.
The Wichita State University Sunflower has been told that its 2008-09 student government funding will not be disbursed until a review of the newspaper’s activities has been completed.
The funds in question are from student activity fees, which amount to approximately half the paper’s total budget. The review, however, seems to have been initiated at least in part by university administrators rather than students.
Budgets for student organizations at WSU are set by a Student Fees Committee composed of five students and two administrators. The student members are appointed by student government, but the committee is chaired by Ron Kopita, the university’s vice president for campus life and university relations. Sunflower editor-in-chief Todd Vogts says Kopita questioned Sunflower staffers about the newspaper’s operations and editorial content in mid-March, two weeks before the Student Fee Committee recommended a formal investigation of the paper.
The task force that will be reviewing the newspaper’s operations will be appointed by Kopita, not the student government, according to a memorandum that the Sunflower received from Dean of Students Cheryl Adams.
The Sunflower’s current fiscal year ends in October. Kopita has not guaranteed that the task force’s work will be completed by then.
Update: The Sunflower task force is the subject of an article in the Wichita Eagle.
Racialicious offers a roundup of recent racist op-eds in campus newspapers, to which Feministe responds with a discussion of satire, hate speech, and the obligations of campus editors. Many more important links in both of those pieces.
Update: The comments at Feministe include a link to a 2007 Campus Progress report on the lack of racial diversity among student newspaper staffs, as well as comments from a student editor and a writer of satire pieces for a campus paper. Worth a look.
Large quantities of student newspapers have been removed from distribution points in unrelated incidents at four college campuses in the last week.
At Ball State in Indiana, more than half of the print run of an edition featuring a story about the arrest of a member of the college’s soccer team were stolen while distribution was in progress.
At Loyola Marymount in California, stacks of a paper with two controversial stories were found in a campus recycling bin.
Approximately 300 copies of the University of New Orleans <i>Driftwood</i> were found in a trash can after an argument between newspaper staffers and student government officials. The issue in question contained an article critical of two student government officers.
And approximately 2,500 copies of an edition of the Kent State student newspaper were stolen for reasons that remain unknown.
