Tag: president

ComCil in Crisis

Row Over RAB Leads to Tears and Tyranny

Like an endless Greek tragedy, last week’s Comcil was yet again fueled by the RAB discussion. In an effort to give the paper tiger its claws back, the council for the first time did not talk about REB, but fully focused on the revival and restructuring of the excising advisory board instead.

The meeting began with a quick update by the Subcommittee on Community Learning Structures, which was formed on October 12th in reaction to a memo that President Lawry had presented in Adcil several weeks ago. In the memo he outlined his views on the tasks and position of several community organs, including Comcil and AdCil. The sub-committee has taken on the job to research the history of all organs and find out whether the President’s standpoints reflect the function they were originally endowed with. In its first update, the committee briefly mentioned how it divided its chores and what sources it will consult, including Antiochiana and former presidents of the college.

The subject quickly moved on to the ongoing RAB discussion, in an effort to find workable solutions for some of the problems that were addressed by the initiators of the proposal for an editorial-board. ComCil shot down a revised REB-proposal authored by the Vice president, the Dean of Faculty and the CM two weeks ago. Instead the members voted in favor of a motion to restructure the existing Record Advisory Board.

The revised proposal had failed to win over hearts in ComCil, because the adjustments to the original were too minimal and general questions concerning the accountability of the board prevailed with the members. REB was thus off the table for the first time since the debate about the need for an editorial board started four weeks ago, leaving room to fully concentrated on ideas to bring more representation in to RAB without taking away to much of the power dynamics in the advisory body.

Some members were asking where the Dean of students and the Vice president were in this discussion, as they had been shining with absence since the original REB proposal was tabled 3 weeks ago. In the mean time the proposal had been rejected and a motion had brought about a constructive discourse to enhance the quality of advice presented to the Community’s newspaper. So far, the veto of REB elicited no reaction from the president’s office. Following the “no news is good newsâ€? motto, ComCil stoically continued its move towards reforming RAB, by further elaborating the tabled motion with concrete suggestions to add two extra faculty seats to the existing board and introducing staggered two year appointments for non-student members. Brainstorming and discussion, however, quickly turned into tears and anger after Record co-editor Luke Brennan returned from the President’s office with an unexpected letter from the Dean of Faculty. In the letter, (found on the back of this issue) both Brennan and co-editor Foster Neill are addressed personally, in what Bloch calls “a final admonition that the Antioch Record not be a platform for menacing and threatening speech.” In the letter, Bloch calls into question the extent to which both editors are taking seriously the educational purposes of their co-op experience and their obligations as a paid employee of the College. Brennan, who read the letter to ComCil calmly, took a minute for himself after putting down the paper. Vice-president Jurasek, who had just walked in to the meeting about half way into the letter, took seat in the back to listen. After a ! clear moment of silence, it is CM Levi B. Cowperwhite who first speaks up, addressing Jurasek personally: “I’m pissed! Why wasn’t this taken to RAB? Why is this system so unimportant to you? We fight for what we love, we think it’s important. We talk about it all the time. It means nothing to you. This is what we work so hard for every day. That’s what makes leaders, Rick. What are you teaching us?” He pauses for a second, but doesn’t get the desired answer. “You are skipping every educational moment here. By writing this letter and not bringing this to RAB. What makes you think you’re so damn important? And I mean you Rick! I know this is also you.â€? The CM takes moment, before he continues: “We’re trying to make it better, we’re trying to safe this unsavable thing. You don’t care. We’re just a bunch of crazy kids to you. You don’t care that we’re loving and thoughtful kids who care for this. I have no respect for you any more. Respect is something you have to earn. And you did nothing today to earn that. “

For a moment the room went silent, nobody knowing what to say. Many stared down at the table in front of them in silence, glancing up briefly at the person sitting on the opposite side of the table. The chairwoman cried, and she wasn’t the only one. After this unexpected speech concluded a somber silence filled the room. A member of the Alumni Board that attended the meeting as a guest was clearly affected by what she had just seen.

It was Jurasek’s turn to break the silence. “Well, I’m slightly surprised. I thought I was going to come here to reform RAB. I can’t comment on what’s in the letter, since I didn’t write it, but I guess it isn’t necessarily widely unrelated. Does that sound understandable? There are often separate tracks to things. And they sometimes seem to contradict each other, they don’t necessarily. We still have to work on how we manage editorial policy. I want to work to reconfigure RAB, parallel to the letter, that is separate but not widely unrelated.

This eloquence seemed to strain the heads of the burned out ComCil members slightly. It had been an emotional meeting and everybody was eager to leave and get some fresh air. Cigarette consumption was again at its peak after the meeting was adjourned. Several parties at the meeting seemed to be going into a private second round afterwards, as issues were clearly not resolved for all. “ComCil does RAB� act 6: in a theatre near you, as this paper goes to print.

On a more positive note, the RAB debate has opened up a wider discussion and growing interest for the Advisory Board meetings. In a meeting of the board held in the Record office last Friday, RAB appeared vigorous and eager. Community and ComCil members joined the dialogue with editors, writers and members of RAB about last week’s paper; an encouraging sight after the gloomy ComCil departure the day before. To keep the progress going, all community members are encouraged to join this weeks RAB meeting, Friday at noon in the Antioch Inn.

Uncle Ben Bags Rice Award “With Bare Minimum of Scholastic Credits”

by Kim-Jenna Jurriaans

20061027-cliff.jpg

Humble and majestic is the impression actor Cliff Robertson leaves on his audience during an intimate and humorous speech in the Herndon Gallery Friday night. The Antioch alumnus with more than 60 movies and countless TV appearances attached to his name made his way back to his alma mater to be lauded with the Rebecca Rice Award for his life’s achievement in the performing arts.

“Who the heck is Rebecca Rice?” I can hear myself thinking in the third row in the audience. Reading some of the faces around me when president Steve Lawry takes the stage to shed some light on the matter, I dare to assume that I am not the only one. And indeed, even our distinguished president acknowledges he didn’t know untill several days before. In a priceless Freudian slip, Lawry recalls his e-mail exchange with “Antioch’s renowned anarchist” Scott Sanders, much to the amusement of the audience who figure that “archivist” is probably the word he was looking for. The president quickly corrects himself, but by that time the room has already burst out in laughter. When the giggling dies down, we find out that Rice was a student of that other Rebecca, professor Rebecca Penell, back in the late 1800s, and known to be the first woman trustee of Antioch College.

Schmoozing

The attention moves back to the man with the star on the Hollywood walk of fame, as head of the Alumni Board John Feinberg takes over the lectern to go through an extended list of achievements in a flattering introduction to Robertson’s life off and on the silver screen. Robertson became critically acclaimed in the 1950s, winning the academy award for his leading role in ‘Charlie,’ before being hand-picket by John F. Kennedy to portray a young JFK in ‘PT 109.’ “Too bad he didn’t also get you into Harvard,” Feinberg jokes when mentioning the movie, much to the actor’s amusement.

But Robertson applied to Antioch for a reason. “They seemed to have a realistic approach to life,” he says. “I knew that the world was different from that little schmug old place I had grown up in. I had seen poverty before, everybody had, but I had never really seen it. I came here and saw people who wanted to see what was out there, and wanted to know whether they could do anything for the people out there. And obviously, there’s always more to be done. “

For the baby-boomers growing up in the 70s, Robertson was CIA agent J. Higgins in ‘Three days of the Condor’, as well as a young Hugh Heffner in ‘Star 18.’ In the mid-80s it was Falcon Crest, to which even I, barely born around that time, had — thanks to Dutch network television re-running American soaps for decades in a row– at some point been exposed. The rest of my generation, however, will better know Robertson as Uncle Ben in the recent Spiderman trilogy.

Standing on the sideline with his notes in hand, Robertson manages to make the audience laugh even before he takes the stage, pretending to rub away some tears when Feinberg addresses him as ‘Cliffton Parker Roberson the third.’ “Congradulations John, you have just out-staged me,” the actor jokes after taking over the microphone. “If I were better educated, I would know the precise definition of the word intimidating. But I don’t.”

Fake modesty

Softly spoken and quick witted, he captures the audience immediately: “Yes ladies and gentlemen, like the speaker indicated, I was a student of miss Rice in the 1870s?” There’s widespread laughter in the audience, as Robertson continues to tell his little fake anecdote. “She was a hell of a teacher! And she kept telling me ‘hang in there.’ And I’ve been hanging there all my life. But I thought I give you little disclaimer in addition to that whole list that was just presented.” Robertson flips through the pages of his notes, as if he is looking for actual facts. “I am the only recipient of the Rebecca Rice Award with a bare minimum of scholastic credits; with professional recognition not paid for through political extortion, nor organized crime. In addition, I’m the sole recipient of the RIS Bookkeeping Award, as well as the Foe Humility Award for fake modesty.”

By this point the audience is his. The actor goes on to entertain the guests by reciting a short story starring a 5-year- old Cliff Robertson attending his cousin’s miserable high school play, recalling a phone conversation with his 8-year-old granddaughter advising him to get another job, and sharing childhood anecdotes about his fascination for aviation.

Antioch

When Robertson came to Antioch, in the early 1940s he had set his mind on becoming a journalist, but things went a little different for the boy from South California. “I worked for the Springfield news for about 20 minutes. Then I fell in with the wrong companions and didn’t really care anymore,” he jokes.

“I never intend to be and actor. I never had that plan. But In grammar school I learned that if you volunteered for that stupid little play and you play a vegetable –I was a reddish, I was short for my age– then you wouldn’t have to stay after school and clean the erasers. And in prep school I learned that if you volunteer for that stupid little play you wouldn’t have to walk around with a 40 pound military pack and a rifle. So for me, acting has always been a gimmick. And sometimes I think it still is.” So far, that gimmick has brought RObertson an Oscar, an Emmy and the prestigious Theatre Award, making him one of the few actors rewarded with the “triple crown.”

But above all, Robertson’s passion lies with flying. He feels free and calm in his little glider between the mountains, he says. And even here, the man has managed to move into the rows of the great, with his recent ascend into the Aviation Hall of Fame.

As he approaches the end of his speech he lowers his voice. He stops for a moment. Then softly, almost whispering he says:

“The wind is my closest friend, and I’m for ever, ever grateful.”

The audience prologues the silence for a second, but then moves on to present Robertson with a standing ovation. After the speech, it seem to be the women in the audience who are especially eager to make use of the opportunity to shake hands, express admiration, hug, kiss and congratulate. Robertson undergoes all of it kindly — after 50 years in the industry he must have gotten used to the attention. Still, he makes everybody feel welcome, joking and taking time for each and every one who wishes to share a moment with the actor. “Makes me feel younger already!” Robertson remarks to an enthusiastic blonde who gives him a passionate peck on the cheek.

Charming

In his five decades of cinema, Robertson starred in movies alongside actors like Michael Cain and Robert Redford and turned the heads of leading ladies like Faye Dunaway, Janer Fonda. 81 years old, Mr Robertson is still as charming and flirtatious when he sits down with me for a chat, about to turn the head of yet another lady.

“What’s that accent? Where are you from sweatheart?”  Taken off guard, I briefly mention the clogs and tulips and quickly move on to the original subject of the conversation: Cliff Robertson.

But alas…. No such luck. The room has largely emptied out by now and we’re joined by his oldest college friend and partner in undergraduate crime back in ‘42, Frank Woodress. Both look nowhere near their 80 plus years and, judging by their wit and cheekiness, are not planning to any time soon. Seeing the two of them together, all sparkle-eyed and still full of boyish charm, it is easy to visualize two boys in their late teens, hanging out of a 4th floor window in South Hall, trying to catch a glimpse of the girls on the other side of the lawn.

“Do you hear that accent Frank? I used to go out with this Dutch girl when I was younger. She just had the loveliest accent and beautiful blond hair. This one sounds exactly like her.” Feeling slightly mocked in my serious journalistic endeavors, I take some comfort in thinking I can take it from the man whose last movie included Tobey Mcguire in a red body suit.

Flattered as I am, I and can only imagine what a heartbreaker this man must have been when he wandered the halls of Antioch in the summer of ‘42. Answering my question whether he was a ladies man back in those days, Robertson says: “I didn’t have time for it. I was too busy doing other stuff. I worked at a news paper and radio in Springfield, so I had to hitchhike every night.” one can’t help but smile a little at the fact that the honor guest of the night has actually only been to Antioch for one semester, of which he evidently spent the largest part somewhere on the road between Springfield and Yellow Springs. But it’s the thought that counts, right?

Robertson last visited the campus 11 years ago when he gave a lecture on America’s corrupt corporate climate. “Did you know they made me an adjunct in the theatre department? They did. But they never called back.”

I ask Mr. Robertson whether he has any wisdom to share with the college community, besides, of course, never trusting the college to call you back. “You want some wisdom? From me? Well, I’m not a philosopher, but I have been around the block a few times. I would seriously consider injecting some new dimensions of a little humor around here.” Somehow I get the feeling I could have seen this one coming. Robertson himself, at least, seems to have gotten his own advice down to perfection. “As you are younger, you tend to take yourself very seriously. When you grow older, you start to take yourself a little less seriously. Lighten up a little.”

In perfect cinema fashion, Mr. Robertson and I depart with a kiss.

I’m still in the afterglow of excitement when I open the door of South hall to make my way into the fresh October night. Looking into the brightly lit Herndon gallery, I can see the two friends leaving towards the foyer, walking arm in arm, helping each other out a little. I smile and make my way across the lawn, towards the hall where once the girls had been secretly looking over to the boys. And all the way home I can’t help but think:

If only I were 60 years older…

Come Together: Fighting the ‘Purification’ of Antioch

Come Together: Fighting the ‘Purification’ of Antioch By Jeanne Kay

An open letter to the community (that includes you, Steve)

Purity is the opposite of integrity—the cruelest thing you can do to a person is make her ashamed of her own complexity. The stories of our lives have no morals.

–Excerpt from Fighting for our lives, CWC.

Two issues are prevalent on the campus political agenda this fall: President Lawry’s would be coup d’etat over community governance and its bundle of repercussions (censorship of the Record, growing risk of expulsion…) and the seemingly unbridgeable gap between first and third/fourth years. And the more I think about it, the more I believe that those two are linked. If we newcomers feel estranged from the upperclassmen, it may not be our supposed puerility that’s to blame but our assumed inability to recognize the gravity of that first matter. “Our Antioch is fading away!� seems to be their leitmotiv, but what can we say after less than two months on campus? Can we even all it ‘our’ Antioch? On what grounds can we join the ranks of old-time Antiochians fighting for the integrity of their alma mater? We cannot root our commitment to a bond to an idyllic past, but we certainly know and care about the Antioch we applied to.

Now because of our relative inexperience of the old Antioch spirit as cherished by the old-timers, we first years might ask what all the fuss is about. We might see it as an exaggeration, a mere case of ‘good-old days’ syndrome, and detach ourselves from the struggle for the preservation of Antioch’s identity. I am writing now so that this does not happen. From the perspective I’ve developed after having sat with Steve Lawry at the Monday 10/2 lunch and the Thursday 10/5 breakfast, read his response to Daniel Solis’ intelligent open letter on Pulse, and listened to third and fourth years talking about their growing frustration and disillusionment at Antioch’s culture shift, I can only conclude that President Lawry’s controversial decisions of the past month have not been a series of spontaneous oppressive interventions in mere reaction to a chain of events but a carefully planned out attempt to make an authoritative stand. He is clearly set upon changing the Antioch culture and has been taking advantage of this start of term’s “incidents� to make it clear to the community that the intended power shift is on the march.

On ideological, personal, emotional levels, we have every reason to rise against the takeover endeavor. The mere idea that our culture of idealism is being threatened on the pretext of economic efficiency—however badly we might need it—should be enough to infuriate any of us. But does this intended cleansing of the campus radicalism even make sense on a pragmatic level? If I think about it, Antioch’s reputation of radicalism is the very reason why I came here. Politics and freedom, especially to the most extremist levels, are why I chose Antioch over any other place in the world. And if those are taken away, what’s left? State of the art facilities? A wide-ranging curriculum? An exhilarating social scene? Or just the overall excitement of living under Ohio skies? Frankly, if you pull out radicalism from Antioch’s culture, if you try to tame the wild forces that make it the unique place it is, these very forces that Steve Lawry dismisses as “corrosive to a learning environment�, and shift our culture from libertarian to merely liberal, then I might just as well move to any other neutral, mainstream college that at least has available Russian literature classes and dorms free of toxic mold! So why does the president seem so positively set upon taming Antioch’s culture a top priority? How does marketing and prospecting for new students fit into this logic? Two possibilities come to mind: either Antioch’s radicalism bothers President Lawry on a personal, ethical level, or he is genuinely concerned with our low retention rate and candidly believes the complaints he has received from discontented transferring students. If it were the case, all would come down to the mission statement, the core identity of the college. Is Antioch for everyone? No! But this answer isn’t as blinkered or elitist as it seems, for it is not based on superficial labeling of someone’s beliefs or identity, but on her ability to deal with our challenging them. In the majority of cases, I think, we are not saying: “Conservatives go home� or any kind of “if you don’t think like us, go away.� What we are saying is this: “We are a bunch of committed, passionate people, and our politics are part of our profound identities, so we will not be afraid to defend them and to confront you about yours.� And maybe not everyone is up to endure this kind of dynamics, which demands perpetual reconsideration of one’s beliefs and the ability to defend them. In this way, and in this way only, is Antioch not for everyone.

During his Monday lunch with first years, Steve Lawry cited the case of a student who dropped out because of his Nike sneakers being vandalized by some Antiochian extremists. He presented it as an example of radicalism being “corrosiveâ€? to the community and the kind of attitude he was determined to make disappear. This might look like a reasonable demand, considering that you don’t believe in the use of violent means in ideological struggles, (it is not necessarily the case— and although this might not be the point here, I believe it would still be good to acknowledge it), but it is not something to be enforced from the top-down. Imagine that I knowingly chose to go to a conservative college; I would stand in the minority on an infinite number of issues and I would face different kind of pressures—in a variety of degrees of violence. Would I still call the school president to complain because people have attacked my anarchist beliefs? Would I expect him to start a campus-wide campaign to promote ideological tolerance? Of course not. But because at Antioch the voice coming from the flock is that of the minority position, it changes everything. It seems threatening to the average person who isn’t used to it being expressed freely, who isn’t used to living in a place where our alternative realities are considered the norm. So any judgment, censure or condemnation of the means we use to fight for our minority positions is up to us as a community, and to us only. Bottom-up is the only healthy approach. And, of course, we will be hearing about the threat of physical violence as a latent upshot of too much libertarianism and as an argument for more control and censure. But we all know where instrumentation of people’s fears lead to, don’t we?…

A top-down attempt to transform any pre-established culture anywhere is not only dictatorial and oppressive it is also absolutely impossible. The only way Steve Lawry can succeed is by gradually phasing out Antiochians and replace them with the mainstream, tamed, innocuous students he wishes populated this college. Only by screening entering students at the source, in Admissions, can he ever obtain his dream student body. But that’s not us. Like ungrateful brats quintessentially incapable to please our exacting parents, we’ll never be up to fulfill our president’s expectations. Should we sigh in relief? No, because even if our identities are untouchable at the core, our freedom to express them in the open is likely to be increasingly jeopardized by the administration’s attempts to sanitize the campus.

“Antioch-this is/Your chance to come together/To unite and fight� reads a Haiku Declassified in last week’s Record. The idea that an ideological battle between part of the administration and Antiochians has started is slowly making its way to the stratum of first-year students. I am part of it, and ready to meet the challenge. Are you?

Letter from Callie Cary

“In our society the two institutions commissioned to provide the substance of a democratic public sphere, as a place for critical nquiry, are the news media and academia.�
This quote comes from a review of David Horowitz’s book “The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America� by 1979 alumnus Robert McCheseney entitled “David Horowitz and the Attack on Independent Thought,� “ in which both McCheseney and Antioch alum Gordon Fellman ‘57 are included.

Robert McCheseney is a Research Professor in the Institute of Communications Research and the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign.

Changing campus culture in the name of intellectual freedom is certainly not a new theme in the higher education community. The larger question is how is the term intellectual freedom being defined and by whom? Are the standards universally applied to everyone in the community, and who or what are the arbiters of those standards? And finally, what are the intended educational outcomes of these cultural changes?

It was made clear by President Lawry in his first address at Community Meeting last spring, as well as at subsequent meetings with the Alumni Board and alumni groups around the country, that he seemed to arrive with an agenda, a preconceived opinion about the campus culture and the governance system.

According to the President’s assessment, as stated in “Lawry Challenges Campus Culture; Students Troubled� (Yellow Springs News, 10/5/06), students are too confrontational, lack mutual respect and social maturity, are self-indulgent, use menacing language, and speak irresponsibly, and all these behaviors lead to an anti-intellectual, closed community that prevents students from being able to “embrace the full spectrum of ideas and opinions, without prejudgment….� The article goes on to say that Lawry feels that “A less threatening campus…will help the College retain some of the students who tend to leave Antioch because they feel attacked by other students.�

Where did the President’s perspective come from after such limited exposure to the student body, or anyone else in the community? Is this based on anecdotal information provided by those who oriented him before his arrival? In his presentations, Lawry sites a conversation he had with a student while he was on campus being interviewed for the presidency- a student who had said that he might transfer out of Antioch because he felt uncomfortable with the campus culture. Lawry has also mentioned how a student wearing Nike sneakers got attacked for not being more sensitive to the scourge of sweatshop production. OK, but is there some concrete data to support the theory that the campus culture is the main reason we lose students, or why students don’t come to Antioch? Past data from the exit interviews conducted by the Dean of Students Office over the years has shown that students leave for a variety reasons, including financial, social, academic, developmental, and finding a dream co-op, but very rarely because of campus culture and climate. According to existing data, there has never been one overriding reason for student attrition.

And so, it’s been almost 10 months since this message was first delivered. What steps have been taken to change the campus culture? Apparently, the governance system has been targeted as an axis of confrontation and is described as “out of control� and combative with the administration.

I am puzzled by this assessment. I served on Community Council (ComCil) in 05/06 and was extremely impressed with the high and civil level of discourse between faculty, staff and students, the student chair’s oversight of the meetings, the humor and creativity of the members, and the overall sense of responsibility members felt for the community. We debated, persuaded, challenged, changed our minds, built consensus and agonized over some difficult and frustrating situations on the campus. We also made every effort to engage with the administration to orient the new President to the Council’s purpose, and to express concern over some of the decisions that were being made without any consultation with Comcil, decisions that had historically been brought to Comcil for deliberation and input.

Although at times a very frustrating experience, for me as an alum, it defined one of Antioch’s core values and part of its mission – to create informed risk takers through participation in a laboratory of democratic decision- making. It would be a mistake to define Antioch’s system of governance as a locus of power for all decision- making, but it would be equally misguided to discredit and ignore the significant educational implications of the decision-making process that happens within this system.

Community governance at Antioch provides one of the most unique educational experiences the College has to offer and, if properly facilitated, allows all community members to feel some ownership and responsibility for the community in which they live and work. For students, these skills are further developed and tested in the various co-op communities they enter around the globe. It is this praxis that, with trial and error, teaches students some sense of humility and cultural mobility. It is the ingredient that helps to turn out so many interesting, entrepreneurial, and, yes, outspoken graduates. Last year Antioch College had three graduating students receive Fulbright awards. That sort of intellectual inquiry doesn’t happen in a vacuum!

I have never understood the concern that oppositional perspectives, be they conservative or radical, are somehow oppressed at Antioch.

Antioch alumni, young and old, have always been represented throughout the political spectrum. I know for a fact that Republicans and radicals (some now democrats) actually sit side-by-side with each other as Trustees and Alumni Board members! The alumni work in both the for-profit and non-profit sectors, many are organizers, artists and educators, but regardless of their path, most feel passionately about their values. The alumni take Antioch’s first President Horace Mann’s dictum “Be ashamed to die until you win some victory for humanity� very seriously.

There are some very real challenges facing Antioch right now, and while there is nothing inherently wrong with working on creating a campus that promotes open dialog, the administration needs to be sure to walk the talk and to create a forum that builds consensus around what the walk is…and maybe what shoes should be worn. I would also hope that energy is quickly shifted to other institutional priorities with specific steps being outlined on how best to address the recruitment and retention of students and faculty of color, improving the physical plant, supporting faculty moral, professional development and the integrity of tenure, and building a culture of mutual respect and labor incentives for the union workers, exempt staff and middle managers.

Top-down decision-making rarely has any educational value and it generally doesn’t promote a climate of mutual respect or intellectual freedom. If retention, recruitment and fund raising are the priorities right now (as they have been for decades), the entire Antioch community should be embraced as ambassadors, future alumni, future donors, future leaders, and advocates of an extraordinary educational experience that has held a truly unique place in the landscape of higher education.

Callie Cary ‘84
Second-generation alum and former Director of Alumni Relations

Potluck for Choice Stirs Up Support

By: Jeremie M. Jordan and Bella Vilshanetskaya

On January 22nd of 1973 it was decided that banning the right to choose to have an abortion violates the constitutional rights of women. Thirty three years later, we are still arguing about it, but recently a change has come along.

On November 7th, the state of South Dakota will be deciding whether or not to outlaw abortion. Because our campus is peppered with wonderful women who believe in women’s rights, this past Friday, October 6th, there was a Potluck for Choice held in Spalt 007. Great effort was put in by the Womyn’s Center coordinators Beth Jones and Meredith Root. The 25ish guests in attendance were asked to donate at least one dollar to help support Planned Parenthood of South Dakota to fight this preposterous proposal. The food was reportedly yummy as well. On the subject of the ban, a student in attendance said, “The implications of the government putting laws on our bodies go far beyond one’s personal stance on abortion.� It’s not about babies, it’s about choice. Small people behind big desks shouldn’t be able to make our decisions for us. It is one of the goals of the Womyn’s Center to educate not only females, but the entire campus about issues concerning and affect- ing women today.
20061013-porluck.jpg

Pro-choicers have their cake and eat it, too.
Photo by Kari Thompson

The abortion ban would outlaw all abortions other than the follow-ing circumstance: If the pregnancy endangers the life of the mother. Silly excuses such as other health concerns, cases of rape, and cases of incest will not be tolerated. (I wonder how the supporters of this law would feel if their twelve or thirteen year old daughter was sexually assaulted and got pregnant as a result.) To make sure that nobody is doing anything that they shouldn’t be, a doctor could face five years in prison for performing an illegal abortion. In February, the South Dakota Legislator passed the abortion ban with ease. In order to avoid a lawsuit that would cause the courts to endlessly rehash Roe v. Wade, pro-life supporters collected signatures and the ban was placed on the ballot. In the most recent poll found, 47 percent of South Dakota voters opposed the ban, 39 percent supported it, and 14 percent stand undecided. If the ban included exceptions for rape and incest, support would be 59 percent. If the pro-choice population dominates the results, the pro-life population will include exceptions for rape and incest and put the issue up for vote again. continued ….p13 The state of the Womyn’s Center of Antioch is not alone in this fight. Nationwide, over 200 potlucks have been held so far and more are being planned. Potlucks for choice are not the only opposition to the South Dakota abortion ban out there today. The holders of the potlucks want us to think of our sisters, our aunts, our mothers, our daughters (for those of us who have offspring), our cousins, and all of the other women in our lives and how this will constrict their rights. Abortion is not a method of birth control but it needs to remain a choice. The pro-lifers seem to be catching up to us; we need to find larger artillery. Perhaps the Record’s “Munition of the Weekâ€? can help us out with that. Just kidding, we don’t want to shoot them, we just want them to see it our way.

Bright pink armbands and their explanation were handed out at the potluck. Betty Friedan, a student at Wellesley, organized a facebook group called “I’m Wearing an Armband for Choice�. The group suggests selling armbands made of hot pink cloth at a suggested donation, the profits of which will go to the Planned Parenthood Action fund of Minnesota and South Dakota, to help educate the voters. Donations from the “Armband for Choice� and the Potlucks will be sent to:

PPMNS Action Fund
Attn: Allison F.
1200 Lagoon Ave.
Minneapolis, MN 55408

Personal donations can be sent to the address above as well. If the ban passes in South Dakota, the trend will waterfall through the rest of the country. Our beloved president supports this ban. How would he feel if he was pregnant? Mr. President would probably reply “I’m a man, I can’t get pregnant.� He would become a prolifer in a heartbeat if one of his precious baby girls got pregnant. First he won’t send them to war, next he will be protecting them from the world (more so than he already does). He is a man behind a big desk in a big white house who thinks he can control the choices of women, whose population he couldn’t begin to count (he can’t count that high). Educate yourself, so that you can know where you stand on every issue that affects you and those issues which you feel passionate about.