meeting - THE RECORD

Lunch With President Leaves Bad Taste in Student’s Mouth

By The Cooperative Council for a Non Wack Social Scene

This past Monday I had the pleasure filled opportunity of participating in a lunch date with our distinguished president Steve “the bulldog�? Lawry. This opportunity was one I did not take for granted, as up until yesterday Steve was the sort of legendary character I only found myself within spitting distance of in my dreams. I do not think it would be a stretch to describe him as elusive. I mean I never see him at community meetings, or meals, he never knocks on my door, never stops by just to say hello, not that I’m hurt or anything.

The mood of the meal was a little bit tense as first year students frothed at the bit to ask Steve questions about issues concerning their everyday realities, such as the disappearance of friends, any upcoming curricular changes, or any sort of hint as to the college’s future. I had the fortunate opportunity of getting to actually eat food two people away from Steve. Yes community, Steve Lawry eats. In fact it can be noted he likes beans, mixed with peas if anyone wants to cook him a meal to get in his good graces. I got to know him a little better as we chatted about his background, and he very diplomatically asked us about ours. Turns out Steve-o received his doctorate from the University of Wisconsin in Madison, where he enjoyed the “lively, open and diverse (campus) with much choice in terms of outlets for expression.�? Second year transfer student Erin Cizeski inquired as to the difference in campus culture between such a big school as U.W., and a little Liberal Arts institution such as Antioch and Steve remarked “Everyone should be open and welcome, Sexuality is a choice, no group should dominate. Straight culture dominates, but a campus should be open. There is less conflict in a big school, everything can be taken in its embrace. At Antioch it is intensified, people feel strongly and want to challenge others, to make them uncomfortable. We need to challenge and question what is an appropriate level of discomfort; none of us have all the answers.�? This statement would be contradicted later on in Steve’s formal Q & A forum, as he was often heard making empirical “I�? statements in regard to his opinions on drug use and “radical identity politics�? I have compiled the following list of Steve’s responses to student’s questions about the recent expulsion spree, and the subject of identity politics:

“I can’t speak to the issue�? (*note to future students who plan on attending these forums; he will not speak to this issue, continuously asking the same questions with fancier wording will not fool him.)

On the subject of the well being of the expulsees:

“I have larger responsibilities to the overall campus climate. Drugs are corrosive, Marijuana deadens peoples minds�? or how about :

“I am the President. I am responsible for the intellectual experience. Drug use is corrosive in my opinion, that’s the way it is.�?

Steve spoke to a room of Antioch students of his vision of an idyllic Antioch student- “ An Antioch student walks a different path, asks tough and difficult questions, lives a meaningful life not a consumerist or nihilistic one. They want to contribute to the betterment of society.�? As long as they don’t smoke pot, or make people uncomfortable with wild displays of deviant sexuality and identity politics, which was the sentiment I got from the comment; “Sometimes I feel there are Antioch students out there who should be here, but are intimidated by drugs, or the insistent argumentative stridency (of the student population) sends people off.�?

Transfer student Preston Krafft had to say of the event “ I don’t think he communicated effectively what he wanted to about the drug policy, and the core programs. I felt what he had to say was reasonable, he just didn’t articulate it in a way a younger generation would understand. He used his stature as president as a way of garnering the final say on the topics questioned. Saying “this is the way it’s going to be, and I back this up because I am the president�? would make perfect sense to someone of the baby boomer generation, but for the student population that’s a major turn off. He should have tried a more humble approach by asking for our cooperation, not demanding it.�?

I apologize if this article doesn’t speak much to the actual content of the question and answer period of Monday’s forum, but unfortunately I don’t feel there is much to speak to. There was a lot of emotion in the room, people feeling like they had been wronged and wanting to have their voice heard to which there was a lot of very defensive responses from Mr. Lawry. He made it clear that his responsibility is to the college’s financial future, giving the sense that the 3rd and 4th year students are disposable and being shepherded out, where as our class is a kind of testing ground for policy and curricular change to benefit the next wave of Steve’s utopic versions of nonoffensive, drug free Antiochians.

I do feel like this luncheon was a good start to bridging the gap spoken about during the meeting between the students and the administration. The general feeling on campus is that Mr. Lawry isn’t very receptive to student voices, so I send out this plea to you community: If you have an opinion on the current state of affairs, go to Steve. He made it very clear at the end of the meeting, that we were all welcome. He urges us to stop by his office and make an appointment with Nancy Wilburn. In fact he can be quoted as saying “Everyone is welcome, and I’m always happy to meet with students.�? I feel it is out civic duty to participate in the wonder that is shared governance, and if you have a problem or concern call up Nancy Wilburn, let her know Steve sent you, and schedule a meeting. Steve made us an offer, let’s hold him to it.

Bringing Censor Back!

Record awaiting installation of new Editorial Board

by Kim-Jenna Jurriaans

Awaiting ComCil’s vote on last week’s proposal concerning the installation of an editorial board for the Antioch Record, hopes persist that this week’s ComCil meeting will bring more clarity about the future outline for the community’s newspaper. The board, if approved, will function interim for the fall term 2006 only, until a permanent board is established by the beginning of spring term 2007.

Dean of Faculty Andrzej Bloch, Vice President Rick Jurasek, and Community manager Levi B. Cowperthwaite, in reaction to recent controversy over student’s answers to “the Question of the Week�?, in the September 15 issue of The Record, brought the proposal to ComCil last week. According to a memo sent by President Lawry to advisers and staff on September 18, several resonses to the question “What would you say to the Narc?” were seen by the College’s Lawyer as “high-threat messages” entering “high-risk legal territory”, thereby putting Antioch in danger of liability charges being pressed against the College. This, in combination with strong feelings within the administration that The Record is missing a clearly defined editorial policy, led to discussions about, and eventually putting down on paper of an outline for a new, empowered board to take responsibility for the Record’s content.

REB vs. RAB
The proposal, sent in to ComCil last Thursday, foresees in the installation of a Record Editorial Board (REB) to set out and enforce editorial policy, to be carried out by The Record’s editors. In doing so, the new Editorial Board would take on the role of the little, but more powerful, brother of the existing Record Advisory Board (RAB), which has been functioning as the main source of advice to editors and staff in previous years. So far, the existing Record Advisory Board only had the power to advice on editorial policy, without having the authority to enforce it. The new board, which would not replace but function in addition to RAB, would cover this authority-gap, in favor of more structured, institutional, control over printed content.
When asked about the reasons for installing the new board, Andrzej Bloch answered: ” It is our job to represent the interests of the school as an institution. Everything that is printed in the Record has the Antioch name on it and it reflects the school as an institution. The same applies if a faculty member would do something outrageous in class. The question is always, how do you balance academic freedom with respect of the institution.”

Educational value

In another memo, sent to the college faculty two days after his first testimony of concern about the content of this newspaper, President Lawry urges faculty to “be supportive and responsive” to requests to join the editorial board. In the memo, forwarded to the Record by various members of faculty, Lawry states that: “The college is the owner and publisher of The Record, which functions as part of the College’s educational mission. As an educational institution, we are responsible for the ethical and educational development of young people. Too much of the content of The Record suggests to me that we are failing in that mission.”

It is precisely this educational development, which the president urges so strongly, that others fear will be the first victim of the new policy. Community manager Levi B on ComCil concerns to the proposal: “There are several parts of the proposal that ComCil isn’t happy with. For example, why have two boards? Why put energy into this reactionary ad hoc board instead of investing in the old one? But there’s also the educational side. Part of education is taking risks. Taking away that option is taking away part of the educational value.”

According to Levi B, the CM, the number of seats on the board and the way they are filled is also an issue that worries ComCil. The proposal mentions the board as consisting of 4 members, 2 members of faculty and two students, who will be appointed collaboratively by the College President and the Community Manager. The latter mentions ComCil’s view that this board is not representative of the community.

Continuity

One major problem that RAB seems to have been struggling with in the past is continuity. Finding former editors to take a seat in the Advisory Board, for example, has been difficult at times. Introducing a system of stacked appointment in the board is one of the goals Andrzej Bloch sees for REB. The interim editorial board doesn’t solve the problem of continuity; it merely bridges the gap until negotiations over the form and authority of a permanent Editorial Board have finished. The administration sees a permanent Editorial Board as the best means to guarantee continuity and future implementation of the new editorial guidelines that will be set out by the interim board this term. So far, a lot of questions about the approach that the interim board will handle and what the permanent board will eventually look like, remain up in the air. Hopes are that a decision on the interim board proposal will be announced in this weeks ComCil meeting, with or without amendments.

Where it started

Back to the roots

Going back to what has started the argument about “bad editorial judgment” and the need for a cleaner editorial policy, the administration’s reaction to the comments printed in the September 15 issue of the Record managed to surprised many on and off campus, including faculty and people from the Yellow Springs community. And for many, it is seen as an example for the iron wind of change that seems to be blown thru the Antioch campus recently, to radically clean up whatever leaves of campus culture are still left lying in the grass, that characterize a college identity that doesn’t fit into the vision of the clean cut suburbia lawn that is set out for it.

Reports of students being called into the Dean of Faculty’s office, Memo’s to student advisers, urging them to meet with their advisees to denounce “hostile street-language” and “menacing speech”, in addition to the need for a midnight proof-read of a recent issue of the Record to protect it from further repercussions, are widely perceived as ways of intimidation and signs of an institutional tour de force to streamline the college.

Jen Parnell, who’s comment was found to be most damaging by the College’s lawyer, was called into the Dean of faculty’s office to discuss the possible consequences of her comment. “I was told that my statement was found prosecutable and felonious by the college lawyer and if the ‘Narc’ would feel offended, he could press charges. I had been in contact with my lawyer, who told me that since there is no clear and present danger to specifically named person, there is no liability. Andrzej insisted that that wasn’t true and that I had to watch what I say.” Denouncing rumors around campus, Andrzej Bloch made it clear to he Record, that “Jen’s comments were never and will not be a reason to expel her from school.”

Phone calls to the Civil Liberties Union, as well as attorney Mike Hiestand, legal consultant for the Student Press Association, also point towards the absence of liability in Jen Parnell’s specific case. Mike Hiestand: “even if the ‘Narc’ would make himself known and claim to be offended, that is his problem, not the student’s. There is no liability here.” This stands in strong contrast to the college’s legal council, that, according to the September 18 memo, said “these responses clearly signal that an unnamed person has cause to fear serious physical harm. This is intolerable as it is illegal.”

Since the school is a private institution, the 1st amendment, which prohibits censorship by government officials doesn’t apply. Actions to prevent certain material from being printed are therefore left to the discretion of the college. “Even so,” Hiestand continues,” Although actions against a student or the student paper would in this case not be illegal, it is still highly out of proportion.”

In an issue of the Record, printed in June of this year, last term’s editor William Parke-Sutherland was already voicing his concern about what he called efforts to censor the Antioch Record, calling it “a path down which I refuse to walk.”

Unclear

An interesting point of attention will also be the choice of sources that the interim board will turn to for information to base the new editorial policy upon. Levi B: “I don’t know the specifics yet, but I say we will look at Internal policy, the Honor Code, the Civil Liberties Code and advice from lawyers. The idea is that the board sets editorial policy to create a relationship of trust. It will not have hiring and firing power.”

Although they both tabled the proposal for the interim board, when it comes down to the appointment and position of the permanent REB in the community, the Dean of faculty’s view seems to be different from that of the Community manager. In answer to the question what procedure will be followed to install the new permanent board, Levi B. says: “My understanding is that it goes thru Comcil and that a rewriting of the legislative code is necessary. That means there has to be a two third majority in two different terms before it can get installed.” Contrary to CG’s views, Dean of Faculty Andrzej Bloch says he does not see the need to write the new Permanent board into the College leg-code: “Actually, I see this as business for AdCil rather than Comcil. The suggestions for appointments should be made by AdCil, with final appointment by the president.” Community manager Levi B.: “The Record comes out of activity fees, not part of the annual operating budget. Appointments don’t represent the community ownership. “Installing the interim board for this semester only requires temporary suspension of the code, which can be done with a majority vote. Following regular procedure, the permanent board should have to go thru a tougher procedure in order for REB to be written into the Leg-code. Whether a proposal for the permanent board will be presented to ComCil or not will likely be the result of discussion between the Community manager, the Dean of Faculty and the office of the President. This and other issues, including whether REB will have hiring and firing power over The Records editors need to be resolved within the course of this term.

Dispatches from Community Meeting

By Kathryn Leahey

The term’s second regularly scheduled community meeting proved to be less exciting than the first. To begin, Beth Jones and Meredith Root (or Be-Root, collectively), the masterminds behind the Womyn’s Center, were named Community Members of the Week. A string of thankfulness involving organized events then ensued. Hope thanked Robin for providing the meeting with refreshments, and Ivan Dihoff thanked all those who had attended the previous emergency community meeting, the organization of which prompted Amanda to offer her gratitude to Levi. Caitlin thanked Jimmy Williams for the Constitution Day festivities while Kaleigh lauded Melody for the Shabbat and workshop she organized this past weekend. CG as a whole was also recognized for bringing Swan Island to campus. Chelsea and Jenna both thanked the women’s rugby team as well as the Cincinnati Women’s Rugby Team. Jenna also extended her thanks to her friends for their assistance during her period of limited mobility. Finally, Luke thanked all Record readers who complimented the first issue of the term.

When the entire community’s gratitude was exhausted, we proceeded with the candidate’s forum. Six students have decided to run for ComCil, while only four students and one faculty member are making an attempt to be elected to AdCil. Those running for ComCil are nearly all third-years and seem to be overwhelmingly female. Brian Utley, the sole second- year male candidate, made it known that he feels his minority opinion would be an asset to the council. Others’ reasons for running differed. Nicole wanted to make sure that campus voices continue to be heard during the changes that are occurring at Antioch, and Meghan Pergram felt as though her thorough understanding of the Leg Code would be an asset. Chelsea Martens and Julie Phillips both cited their previous community involvement as a reason for electing them while Sarah Buckingham banked on her sheer love for Antioch. Questioning began, and we discovered that, although all of the candidates are already exceedingly busy, they all believe that will have ample time to fulfill their ComCil duties if elected. When asked about specific policies, Meghan referenced a long-term guest policy that she would like to see devised and Brian mentioned an idea to support low-income students throughout the registration process, although exactly what he went by that was not made clear. Most candidates were found to have ideas for making meetings more efficient. Brian announced that he was a trained meeting facilitator while others presented ideas about preparation, redirection, and sub-committee use. Meghan, however, felt as though long conversations are often very useful. Chelsea and Meghan also both gave some ideas for strengthening the council’s presence on campus and its standing with the administration which centered around assuring timely progress.

Finally the interrogation of the prospective ComCil members ended and future AdCil members were up to bat. Hassan Rahmanian., the only faculty member who came forth, has been on AdCil for 10 years, but this is his first instance of running on the community side. Two prospective council members, Erin Winter and Ryan Boasi, decided on the spot to run. Both cited frustration with the state of the school as the reason for their decisions. Erin is also, apparently, a morning person, a statement that cannot be truthfully made about most college students. Corri Frohlich, another candidate, is trying to make the big move between ComCil and AdCil. Chris McKinless, the final student hopeful, is most concerned about AdCil’s advisory board status, a concern that he say is his reason for running. When asked by Caitlin how he plans to handle that concern, he mentioned “creative methods�?, although he didn’t explain what he meant by that. Ryan and Erin responded to the question by saying that AdCil needs to improve the student body’s relationship with the administration by acting in a strong but respectful manner. However, Corri, as opposed to Chris, sees nothing wrong with AdCil’s status as an advisory board. Although some of the questioning by the community devolved into statements rather than inquiries, Amanda’s question about AdCil taking action had all five candidates poised to show their passion for actually getting things done.

Many of the announcements made after the candidates’ forum involved help being requested in one form or another. The Phone-a-thon still needs workers, as does the Coretta Scott King Center, Events, and the Tecumseh Land Trust. Volunteers were called for by Jelesia for Make-A-Difference day as well as the CG office, the community garden to build a scarecrow on Saturday, and the SOPP office for a poster campaign. Despite all the help that is apparently needed, only one organization asked for any money. One hundred dollars was requested for the Queers Only Party on Friday, about which we were told to “be there or be straight.�? The Womyn’s Center is holding an event entitled “Love Your Body Night�? on the 29th and a Planned Parenthood Potluck on October 6th. Everyone should also check posts around campus about upcoming Wellness Center activities.

The most anticipated part of the meeting, clarification from Robin Heise, shared little new information and left some with a bad taste in their mouths. Robin read from a statement that she had posted to First Class, reinforcing basic ideas repeatedly. John Minter apologized for any misinformation that he may have taken part in, and Meghan thanked him on behalf of all of the students for being so available; Robin followed up his statement by saying that John had not been working in financial aid long enough to truly understand it. The statement was likely well-intended, although some felt as though Robin was more chastising John than coming to his aid. After the financial aid talk, Melody led a brief party etiquette refresher course. The wisdom imparted? 1) Don’t break anything! 2) Clean up after yourselves! 3) The SOPP still applies, even if you are drunk.

The final major topic brought up at Pulse was a discussion over the appropriateness of last week’s Question of the Week. Most saw no harm in the topic, although some felt that it was possibly exacerbating a standing problem. The misunderstanding related to the Record feature was determined to be due to the difficulty of judging a person’s tone in print without the use of the dreaded emoticon. Noam Chomsky and Voltaire were quoted and ideas about personal rights and discretion were discussed, but no real conclusion was reached except that the article was provocative. Tune in next week for more information about union workers on campus having to submit to drug testing.

Vandals Supply Steamy Welcome to New Semester

By Kim-Jenna Jurriaans

A recent spree of vandalism that struck the campus last week leaves Antioch to pick up the $3500 bill to pay for the restoration of destroyed artwork and windows, general repairs and labor hours.

The events approximately started on Sunday, September 3rd with bricks smashing the windows of both the president’s and the vice president’s offices, and ended in the flooding of the first floor of the union building early Tuesday morning, after unknown vandals purposely clogged and repeatedly flushed the upstairs toilets. The broken windows in Main Hall were discovered on Monday morning between 11.30 and noon, when one of the bricks was found on the floor of the president’s office. Another was found in the surrounding area.

According to Darrel Cook working at the physical plant, the flooding at the Union didn’t occur till the following night or early the next morning. After clogging the toilets, the offenders urinated into the water, causing urine filled water to leek into the cafeteria. Four workers spent two hours non stop sanitizing the area in order for the cafeteria to open on time for Tuesday morning breakfast. Dean of students Jimmy Williams was especially alarmed about the effects the incident might have on the ability to feed the campus community. “We’re talking health violations here. Those requirements are quite strict. We were close to having to shut the Caf down.�?

In addition to the incident at the Union, vandals found a way into the science building where they left a $2500 trail of damage to artwork in the downstairs hall. The art consisted of digitally re-mastered photographs of the first generation of Antioch alumni from the 1850s. “Those Photographs had only been up there for about a year�?, says Darrel Cook, assistant manager of the Physical Plant in charge of the clean up. “Whoever it was took them down and tried to flush them down the toilet. All artwork was urinated on and smeared with feces.�?

According to Dispatcher Campbell of the Yellow Springs police department there are no official leads so far as to who is responsible. Given the nature of the vandalism, however, both campus crew and administration find it likely to be someone familiar with the buildings and the community.

The Science building is usually locked over the weekend, but with the number of keys in circulation among students that is hardly a barrier. Dean Williams goes on to say: “This is Antioch. This is not a place were we keep busy locking people out. If you want to get into a certain building, you will find a way.�?

Cook says he above all felt discouraged by the incident: “The maintenance crew had worked very hard for the last three weeks to get the campus nice before the new students arrived. It only takes a couple of people some hours to make our lives hell.�?

Dean Williams was similarly disheartened by the nature of the vandalism: “We’ve had vandalism before, but in terms of nastiness it has escalated�?, he says.

Like many students on campus he links the events to the recent policy changes that took place at the college and which threw a rift between many of the older students and the Antioch administration: “The community is broken right now. And all sides are convinced that they are right.�?

According to the Dean the atmosphere was tense at the end of last semester. With the arrival last January of yet another president to lead “the new Antioch�? into becoming a less ‘toxic�? community, debates arose over the use of authority and distribution of power on campus, leaving many students frustrated with the new status quo. “We’ve become a community suspicious of change, partly because we’ve had so much of it these last years�?, says Williams. “People felt devaluated, they didn’t feel they were heard. There was a vacuum and if there is a vacuum something always slips in.�?

Although the issue was addressed at last weeks RDPP orientation for entering students, the reaction of the community to the incident was surprisingly calm. Some interviewed students had heard of the events vaguely, others who were off-campus for several days last week, hadn’t heard of it yet at all. Second year transfer Mariel Traiman was quoted as saying: “When I first saw the broken windows on Monday morning I remember ‘thinking this will be a big issue on campus this week’. I’m actually surprised of how not a big issue it is.�? Indeed there didn’t seem to be much of a ‘whodunnit’- atmosphere amongst students. Lunch conversations tended to focus more on upcoming classes and everyday business than speculations as to the motive of the vandalism and whether the events that took place on separate days were the works of the same persons. “I know that the college portrays the events as one incident, but I’m pretty sure they’re not�?, continues Traiman, who has been living around Antioch the last months before entering as a student this fall. “For me the throwing of the stones was a political act. The rest was just plain stupid.�?

One of the reasons the administration has taken a low-key approach to the incident seems to be not to want to spoil the overall upbeat vibe on campus that came with the arrival of the 150 new students two weeks ago. “That’s why we were so disappointed when it happened,�? continues Williams. “We had had a really good week so far. And then Bam!�? At the RDPP meeting Williams encouraged students to step forward if they had any information, but so far none have. �?I do think it is a problem that people know about it and choose to stay silent�?, he says. He acknowledges that the atmosphere has changed over the previous years, with a low point being last semester. “The culture has gotten a little mean-spirited.�? Part of the problem he attributes to a lack of communication between administration and students. “If people don’t get answers, they find answers. Administrators need to know students. In a place as Antioch that should be really easy. We should fix that.�? The Dean of students nevertheless denounces the choice of action. First year Caitlin Murphy seems to agree: “This is simply not the way you get things done.�?

“The irony is, we used to brag about being really tolerant here�?, continues Williams. “Now we’re less tolerant. This used to be the place where dissenting opinions were discussed, petitioned. Somewhere along the line that got lost. We’re in a time of confusion right now, but I think our problems have an easy fix. This is not a student – faculty problem, but a student -administration issue. We need to get out more, be more approachable.�?

So far the events don’t seem to have put a damper on the new community vibe. Since the College itself isn’t planning a large-scale inquiry into the incident, the vandalism is likely to stay unaccounted for.

Antioch is currently looking into options to get the pieces of artwork restored, but it is still unclear whether that is possible. If not, the 2500 dollars reserved for the restoration will go towards new artwork for the Science Building.

Nookie with Niko

Welcome back to another beautiful fall term everyone. Too bad I’m not there, but I think I’ll manage in the city that never sleeps. For me that because of all the sex I’m having. A big hello to all of our new community members, the first years. Enjoy your term, fall term is always fun. Fight the good fight and support your community and your wonderful CG (Levi B., Melody, and Hope).

Anyways I’m Niko, your friendly over sexed sexpert. I’m queer. I’m trans. I’m kinky and I am a SFSI certified sex educator (www.sfsi. org). I am currently off on co-op in the grand old city of New York. Last term I had the privilege of being Antioch’s sex expert. I am proudly returning this term, via the big city, to provide you sex advice. Occasionally you’ll hear from my partner, Mimi. She is also a SFSI certified sex educator. It’s good to have different opinions.

Feel free to send me questions. I’ll do my best to answer them all in a honest, accurate, funny and vulgar way. Any topic is fair game. Feel free to be as kinky as you want to be. Drop me and email or put your questions in the Record box at community meeting.

For the term’s first issue I have been asked to focus on our community’s values. Specifically the Sexual Offense Prevention Policy and what it means to live in a sex positive community. These are not only words on a piece of paper. It’s how we choose to lives our lives. I, for one, think we better of because of it.

Learn to love the SOPP. Live it, breathe it, do it. Not just because it’s part of Antioch’s community standards, but because you want to be a sex radical. Trust me, we have better sex than everyone else. The real reason to love the SOPP is that it teaches you to love yourself and others. The SOPP is about respect, for yourself and your partner. It’s important to always respect yourself and your partner, especially when it comes to sex. Whether it’s a fuck buddy or your partner of years you deserve to feel safe and respected.

So how do you respect your partner or partners?

COMMUNICATION!

I know people sometimes think the SOPP asks too much or that it’s awkward to ask each step of the way but it’s worth it. Once you try you’ll be surprised how easy it really is. Anyways it’s not a good idea to just “think�? something is ok with someone, or worse believe it’s okay because you are fucked up on some sort of something. Assumptions make an ass out of you and I. I know you have all heard this before, so don’t do it. Who wants to wake up the next morning and feel violated or that they violated someone, no one. Be safe, talk, talk, talk!

So how does one talk about sex?

Yeah, it can feel awkward and honestly most of us haven’t been given the skills to talk about sex effectively. Sex education is shit. Now is your chance to work on those skills and learn more about your body and sex. First start by making a list of what you are not okay with someone doing to you, aka your boundaries. I realize this can vary person to person, but having a general list is useful.

Is it okay if they suck your cock?

Is it okay if they fuck your ass, but not your pussy?

Is it ok for them to kiss you?

Figure out your NO’s. Now think about what you are okay with doing to someone.

Do you love rimming, but won’t lick someone’s balls?

Do you not like licking pussy (though who doesn’t,)?

Do you not like people to cum on you?

Your boundaries are important. They should be talked about. Don’t let someone pressure you out of a boundary. If they do it’s a good sign that you shouldn’t have sex with them. Also talk about what sex means to you. Everyone has a different definition, especially with all the kink at Antioch. You don’t want to miscommunicate about a BDSM scene, but that’s a whole other topic. Please feel free to make this sexy. Talking about sex can make you wet and hard. It can be amazing foreplay!

Another vital aspect of the SOPP is safer sex! Everyone has a different idea of safer sex. To me it means dental dams, condoms, gloves and so on with anyone who isn’t my primary partner. Though together we don’t use anything, we are fluid bonded. I have assessed my risk levels and made a decision based on what makes my partner and I comfortable. I do recommend condoms especially for any type of penetration, since this is the activity with the highest rates of sexually transmitted infection transfer. It’s especially high with ass sex. So unless it’s a silicone dildo fucking your ass please wrap it up. It’s always a good idea to use lots of latex and talk about with your partner before you get naked. It’s easier then.

5 good rules for hot safe and consensual sex:

1. Respect yourself and your partner always

2. Communicate about your boundaries

3. Communicate what safer sex means to you

4. Communicate about what sex means to you

5. And above all NO always means NO

Now what the hell does it mean to live in a sex positive community?

Being sex positive means being committed to sex education and activism. It means being open to the ideas of BDSM, polyamory, queerness, trans issues, celibacy, safe sex, and so on. In a sex positive community anything goes as long as it’s safe, fun, and consensual. When it comes down to it if a person is happy with what they are doing, or not doing, free from pressure all is good. To me being sex positive also includes working for the rights of sex workers. These people are prostitutes, porn stars, escorts, exotic dancers, pro dommes, phone sex workers, and the list goes on. They all sell sex in some way, shape, or form. They aren’t given a lot of credit or respect. I think, and so do lots of people, they deserve much respect.

Remember college is a time to expand your horizons and learn many new things. This goes for sex too. Be safe, be consensual, and have lots of fun. Experiment, explore your boundaries, read about sex, and fuck, fuck, fuck.

Happy fucking Antioch and I hope you all enjoy Fall term and each other!