661 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(02/17/93 10:00am)
Engineering freshman Vu Do didn't think much of the prank phone calls he was receiving until he was called a "yellow-skinned bastard" by the man on the other end of the line. Do, who finally called University Police after four "annoyance calls," is one of many victims of telephone harassment at the University. Do said he received a total of seven phone calls containing threats, racial slurs and falsified information. During one of the calls, the caller pretended to be a Daily Pennsylvanian reporter who said that he had "received a list from the dean's office that said [Do is] an international student," Do said. Do replied, "No, I don't think so because even though I'm Vietnamese I come from Austin, Texas." On a subsequent call, Do was congratulated and told that he had won a prize in a contest. When he asked the caller what the prize was, the caller said, "A trip back to Vietnam." Do's racially harassing calls eventually stopped after he told the caller that his phone was tapped. But racially harassing phone calls are not the only type of "annoyance calls" students receive. In fact, most harassing phone calls are sexually oriented. A female College senior, who asked not to be identified, said she received a number of sexually suggestive calls before she contacted University Police. "He knew my name . . . I knew [that] I knew his voice and it scared me," she said. "When I told my roommates about it they kind of laughed it off. [They said] it was just some kid playing with the phone." The student said the phone calls became "obscene . . . sexual calls -- suggestive, not anything a decent human being would say," and at that point she called the police. The student eventually used the "Star-69" feature on her off-campus phone, which immediately connected her with the caller's answering machine. While she caught the man who was harassing her, on-campus students, like Do, do not have access to the "Star-69" feature. Penntrex Manager Darien Yamin said that even if the "Star-69" feature is added to the Penntrex system, students would still have to request the feature from University Police or Victim Support and Special Services. This is the same process that students currently must go through in order to have their phone calls monitored. According to University Police Sergeant Ivan Kimble, students should not call the telephone company to report incidents but should call University Police first. "We're usually the initial contact for those kind of incidents," he said. "We make out the initial report." Rose Hooks, interim director of Victim Support, said the police officer who files the report usually refers the victim to her office. Hooks said that Victim Support offers several suggestions on how to cope with continuing "annoyance calls." "If they know [when they pick up the phone] it's going to be a harassing phone call, we tell them to hang up right away and not to talk to the person on the other end of the line," she said. "If they are hang ups, we tell them to date and log the time of the calls received -- keep a record of it." Hooks added that keeping a record will help the phone company if it needs to track calls. Kimble agreed that hanging up is the best idea. "They shouldn't give any kind of feedback to the person," he said. "If you don't really respond to it, a lot of times it will stop on its own." Hooks said that if the phone calls "continue to come in two to three times a day," a phone tap may be installed through Bell of Pennsylvania. Hooks also said that telephone harassment complaints tend to increase during "high pressure periods." "It happens quite frequently . . . during the stress times," she said. "It seems to escalate during exam times." According to the Almanac, which lists all "threatening," "harassing" and "unwanted" phone call complaints weekly, the greatest number of complaints in one month came last October. In that month, 14 incidents of telephone harassment were reported. In November, 13 incidents were reported. During December and January, a combined 22 incidents were reported, and Winter Break consumed at least three weeks of that time period. To date, ten reports have been filed with University Police this month. Kimble said these statistics are slightly misleading because people often misinterpret calls as being harassing when they actually are not. "Sometimes it's not harassment but people take it as such," he said. "Their phone number might be similar to a pizza place's number . . . [And] a lot of times it's someone they know."
(01/18/93 10:00am)
The Acacia fraternity, after being plagued by sexual harassment charges, social probation, and a lack of new pledges this year, has decided to revamp its entire system, former Acacia members said. "We are reorganizing the chapter here," said Matt Bixler, alumni vice president in charge of on-campus activities. "We're opening it up to all freshman and sophomore men who don't already have fraternity membership." Bixler and Acacia alumnus Andy Haut said that all 16 of Acacia's current members would be granted alumni status. "We want new members to feel that it's their house," said Haut, a 1988 Wharton graduate. "What better way to insure that than to make them the only members -- it has to be their house." Bixler said that while the fraternity admits it has had image problems on campus, he does not feel that the current membership has made much effort to change that perception and would be unable to conduct a fall rush. "There's not a level of commitment from the actives to do things to change the image," he said. "If you can't come up with enough guys to make a commitment, you can't do anything period." Interfraternity Council President Mo Massel, a College junior, said that the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Affairs is aware of their plans and fully supports the decision. "We look forward to working with them and making sure that they play by the book and create a good and strong brotherhood," he said. "As far as I know this is occurring." Acacia is currently serving a probation for its involvement in a nude photo incident in 1991. Judy Schlossberg, a December 1992 College graduate, filed sexual harassment charges against four members of Acacia after they photocopied and distributed a nude photo of her which belonged to her boyfriend, then an Acacia brother. In November of 1991, the Judicial Inquiry Office and the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Affairs ruled that Acacia was collectively responsible for the incident. Schlossberg said yesterday she is skeptical about Acacia's decision to revamp. "If the decision was made by the national [fraternity organization], then I applaud them," Schlossberg said. "If it's their [recent] alumni doing it to improve their image, I don't think it will work." "I hope that what happened to me and my publicizing it contributed to this," she added. "The campus knows what happened. It sounds like a decision made just to keep their chapter alive." Bixler said the idea to revamp was brought up to the national organization which approved. He also said that the Acacia alumni have expressed regret with what happened. "I myself am not pleased with what happened. Andy [Haut] is not pleased, and neither are the alumni," Bixler said. "We do realize we have a bad image. One, we want to fix that. Two, we're not comfortable with what occurred [and] we do not approve of what occurred. [Schlossberg] is a victim of a crime [and] in that way I feel sorry." Haut emphasized that new members would have "no connection" with the old members, which would allow them essentially to start over. "With the new membership, we're trying to learn from the mistakes of the past and not repeat them," he said. "In their education to become a member, we'd like to work with the women's groups on campus to stress the sensitivity of women's issues. The education would insure that they would be good campus citizens." There will be an informational meeting Thursday evening at 9:00 in Smith-Penniman Lounge for interested freshmen and sophomores, and a second meeting next Tuesday at the same time and place. According to Bixler, there will then be several social events for the interested students "to get to know each other" before interviews are held and final decisions are made. "[We want] as many quality guys as we can get -- that's the goal," said Haut. "We want to create a strong organization whose members can look back at their years at Penn with pride."
(12/04/92 10:00am)
From Paul LaMonica's "A Room With A View," Fall '92 Heterosexual males, constantly preoccupied with thoughts of sex, are not able to separate their libidinal urges from their duties as a doctor. They cannot possibly remain professional, faced with seeing the most sexually desired parts of the female body every day. Correct? If this argument seems as ludicrous to you as it does to me, then why is there such a fuss about homosexuals serving in the military? On Veterans' Day, President-elect Bill Clinton reiterated a campaign promise that he would lift the ban on gays and lesbians in the military. Immediately, homophobics began sounding off about their fear and anger over the prospect of homosexual soldiers. In a New York Times article on November 16, heterosexual servicemen were asked their opinions on the subject. Here are some of the responses: "Out at sea, there would be no place for them to go but after you." "We just don't want them around us; we just want them to stay out of the Marine Corps." "If you work with some guy who's gay, how can you be sure you won't get AIDS? It would make me feel unsure, unsafe. I would definitely get out in a heartbeat." The sailor who worried about gays going after him assumes erroneously, as many other people do, that all homosexual males lead promiscuous lifestyles and are attracted to every man they see. I'm heterosexual, and I am not attracted to or distracted by every woman I see walking down Locust Walk. I honestly can't comprehend how gays would be able to function in society if the sight of any male turned them on. Myth One shattered. Myth Two: Gay equals AIDS. Yes, homosexual males are the highest risk group for contracting the AIDS virus. However, let's look at what some of our celebrities say about AIDS victims. NBA All-Star forward Karl Malone publicly worried that "working with" Magic Johnson could lead to spread of AIDS through the cuts and scrapes common during a basketball game. Despite the conclusions of doctors and scientists that the chances of catching AIDS through rough -- and possibly bloody -- contact in a physical sport are infinitesimal, many basketball players said they would not want to play against Magic. Citing these fears, Johnson retired once again. Oh, one thing I forgot to mention. Magic is a heterosexual. He contracted AIDS by having unprotected sex with scores of women. Wait a minute. I guess there are absolutely no soldiers who conceivably could be as promiscuous as Magic was, and therefore, run the risk of being HIV positive. But I thought only gay soldiers could get AIDS. Check the facts. AIDS is not a gay disease exclusively. Unless our soldiers share needles with, receive blood transfusions from or have sex with a gay serviceman who happens to be HIV positive, AIDS is not a threat. Myth Two: shattered. Even a homophobe would admit there are homosexuals already in the military. They have seen combat, fought in the Gulf War and served their nation with honor and distinction. One homosexual -- a Gulf War veteran and former Marine -- said in the Times article, "I don't think that there will be a mad rush of raging queens down to the nearest recruiting office. The two lifestyles just don't mesh." Do you really think that homosexuals would enlist in the military if they didn't want to serve? Why would people lie about their identities and subject themselves to the rigid and structured life of the military, unless they really wanted to serve their nation? The military is a career. When someone has a job to do, they do their job. But if a homosexual in the military was foolish enough to attempt to force a sexual relationship with a heterosexual member of the same sex, then a disciplinary action is warranted. It would constitute a violation of ethical standards. First, it would demonstrate that this soldier's desire for sex superceded his loyalty to serve and superceded his duty to place the good of the country above the good of himself or herself. More importantly, the person would be placing a fellow soldier in a highly uncomfortable position against his or her will. Consider the case of the retired Navy lieutenant who had to pretend that she had a fiance, and even bought a diamond engagement ring. But she didn't put on this charade to quell rumors that she was a lesbian. She did it to stop the sexual advances of a male commanding officer. How about that? Incidents like the Tailhook fiasco are not just statistical abnormalities. Sexual harassment of females is present in the military! If the military is so worried about unchecked hormones, they should start with this problem. The military should severely crack down on sexual harassment. Wouldn't it be best to send the message that members of the military should treat each others as equals, regardless of sex or sexual orientation? Why must such an important sector of this nation exclude people capable of performing great services for our country because of sexual orientation? Why can't gays and lesbians in the military be allowed to reveal who they are, instead of pretending to be something they are not? I thought our armed forces were supposed to protect our civil rights and liberties -- the belief in freedom established in the Constitution. Isn't it highly hypocritical that the upholders of our personal freedoms will not tolerate the personal choices made by fellow soldiers? Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney has admitted that excluding gays and lesbians is probably anachronistic, but that it is a military tradition. Historical footnote: President Harry S. Truman encountered much resistance when he broke a "tradition" and integrated the army. That was 1948. Our society is enlightened enough now in 1992 to recognize the folly of those who disagreed with Truman. Aren't we? Maybe now in 1992, the military will be forced to recognize its errors and "open the closets," ending the suffering of all the soldiers on duty -- and R.O.T.C. students on campuses just like ours -- who have kept their sexual orientation a secret. Maybe in 1992, the military will finally recognize people for their merits, and admit that homosexuals can perform just as well as their heterosexual peers. Maybe in 1992, fears fostered by ignorance will finally be dispelled. Maybe. Paul LaMonica is a sophomore Psychology major from North Babylon, New York. "A Room With A View" normally appears alternate Tuesdays.
(11/23/92 10:00am)
As a daunting question mark looms over the now-vacant Theta Xi house on Locust Walk, the Coalition to Diversify Locust Walk is busy working on changing University history. Currently, Coalition members are re-addressing their demands for diversifying the residences on the Walk that were made at a meeting with President Sheldon Hackney and other University administrators late last spring. And some Coalition members said they want to see the University respond to recommendations and complaints group members have lodged in the past and will bring up again. According to Wharton and Engineering senior Nicole Bloom, a Coalition member, the Coalition was established last January by a group of undergraduates, graduate students, faculty members and administrators. In its first move, the Coalition published a statement with about 300 signatures in The Daily Pennsylvanian and The Graduate Perspective last spring to notify the University community of its existence, to express a "desire for change" in the composition of the Locust Walk population and to show that "people who have a lot of power at this University support this issue." The statement criticized Hackney for his refusal to remove fraternities from their Walk houses and also said the University was promoting racial and sexual discrimination by permitting the Walk residences to be inhabited by "privileged white males living in fraternities" which were frequently sites of "verbal and physical harassment" for a number of "students, staff and faculty." About 20 Coalition representatives met with President Hackney, Assistant to the President Nicholas Constan and Vice Provost for University Life Kim Morrison on April 28 to address the problem of the dearth of diversity among the residents of Walk houses, Bloom said. In their meeting, Coalition members made several recommendations: · 1) The immediate and permanent removal of fraternities who misbehave from Locust Walk. · 2) A commitment to provide two or more diverse residential living spaces on Locust Walk each year for the next five years. · )The creation of an on-going task force with representatives from the Coalition to enforce public accountability for misbehavior on Locust Walk. · 4) A follow-up meeting with Dr. Hackney within two weeks of April the 28th to begin the implementation of the Coalition's goals. Bloom said the University officials were not particularly receptive to their proposal and were unwilling to make further commitments outside the report that Hackney's Committee to Diversify Locust Walk made in spring 1991. Another meeting was never scheduled because the school year ended and little progress had been made during the two-week period said former Faculty Senate Chairperson Louise Shoemaker, another Coalition member. In a letter that Hackney sent to the Coalition in May, the president failed to promise quick and permanent removal of misbehaving fraternities. Nevertheless, he said he would strive to strengthen University procedures dealing with fraternity "violations and misconduct," but without the aid of the recommended "oversight task force." In the letter, Hackney said he could not guarantee the provision of two or more diverse residences each year for the following five years, but highlighted the success of the Community Service Living-Learning Program's first year in the Castle. He also mentioned the "residential conversion" of 3609-11 Locust Walk, which uprooted the University Counseling Services, the Management and Technology Department and the Tutoring Center, for future residents. Constan said yesterday that the renovations for 3609-11 are now underway for occupancy in the fall of 1993 and said the University Police department at 3914 Locust Walk will eventually be relocated to 40th & Walnut streets. Constan said he does not yet know what will occupy either of the structures.
(11/16/92 10:00am)
Vice Provost for University Life Kim Morrisson and some Greek leaders said Thursday that they are disappointed with the behavior of students at the Interfraternity Council's bid signing meeting Monday night. At one point during the meeting, several students in the crowd began hooting and whistling at Tricia Phaup, director of the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Affairs, as she walked to the podium to address the audience. Morrisson said the behavior does not "speak well" for the Greek system at the University and that Greek leaders "need to recognize that and deal with it." Panhellenic Council President Debbie Frank and Bicultural Intergreek Council President Mia Piggee joined Morrisson in criticizing the students' behavior. IFC President Jeffrey Blount, who defended the meeting's overall program, acknowledged that the behavior of "those few members" was "inappropriate and cannot be excused." He also criticized The Daily Pennsylvanian's account of the meeting for "neglecting to mention" parts of the program dealing with issues such as acquaintance rape and drug and alcohol awareness. "Yes, some people did things that were inexcusable," he said Thursday. "But that is exactly why we hold programs like the one on bid night -- so that we can teach and educate the members of the Greek system about different people's views and feelings." Blount said the IFC has the "record to prove" that houses have been heavily involved in awareness programs, adding that he was "100 percent certain" that upperclassmen in the Greek system would not exhibit similar behavior. Despite her criticism, Morrisson said the University would not take any action towards the IFC. "It's an educational process, partly, and the system itself has to respond and take some leadership in that process," she said. "There is leadership within those houses that presumably should be working with [new members]." "I think that an educational process takes time," she added. "I hope it is enough. If it is not, I think that would be a very sad statement and would only add to my disappointment." But Piggee said that those programs may not be enough to prevent a repeat of the bid night behavior, especially because the rushees were not even officially members of the system. And she said that Greek leaders who were present bear some of the responsibility for the behavior because they should have done more to stop the whistling and hooting. "I think that they at least had a responsibility to do something, should at least have stepped in, just out of respect for [Phaup]," she said. Piggee added that there should have been "some kind of sanctions on the bids," possibly even denying bids to the offending students. "Shoot, if you don't have any respect for the system right now, why should I give you the bids?" she said. Frank said yesterday that Panhel "does not condone the sexist attitudes portrayed by many" at the bid meeting. "With many strong, intelligent women in our system, we are prepared to aid individual fraternities in quickly facilitating educational programs, which specifically address sexual harassment," she said. Phaup could not be reached for comment last night.
(11/11/92 10:00am)
To the Editor: The speeches were obviously composed, based on the stereotypical image of the fraternity member who is only interested in drinking, drugs, and sex. It is, therefore, no wonder that the pledges responded as they did -- that is, the way in which they were expected to respond -- with "hooting and howling." I would hope that University administrators -- not to mention the University community, in general -- change their attitudes towards the Greek system in the future. Perhaps viewing and treating fraternity members as mature, responsible young men will encourage them to behave as such. At the very least, administrators will be able to absolve themselves of blame in any cases which may link fraternity members to sexual harassment, once they stop contributing to the problem by reinforcing old stereotypes. There are some people on this campus who do not subscribe to the notion that fun is defined as "getting drunk and getting laid." I am one of them. And the administration may be surprised -- read: shocked out of their minds -- to find there are a lot of us out there. I wish the administration would stop putting their "Sex Education Seminars" and "A.I.D.S. Awareness Weeks" together with the following mind set: "Yes, abstinence is actually the safest -- read: foolproof -- option, but since you horny little critters have no common sense or self control whatsoever here, have a condom!" Frankly, I find this mentality insulting. Give us the respect we deserve by at least mentioning it as an option -- and a positive one, at that?even for guys. Please don't throw that old double standard back in our faces! CORINE TAKIGUCHI Wharton '94
(11/11/92 10:00am)
To the Editor: It disappointed me to see Panhellenic Council president Debbie Frank's comments, suggesting that last Monday night's incident was an act of sexual harassment. University Policies and Procedures define sexual harassment as "unwanted attention that: "1. Involves a stated or implicit threat to the victim's academic or employment status; "2. Has the purpose or effect of interfering with an individual's academic or work performance; and/or "3. Creates an intimidating or offensive acadmic, living or work environment." The "hooting and whistling," in the context of that single meeting, fails to meet the University's own definition of "sexual harassment." The young men who committed this "unholy of all P.C. acts" have not been formally charged with sexual harassment by Tricia Phaup, director of the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Affairs, nor has there been an opportunity for a fair trial through the student judicial system. Instead, they and all fraternity members are considered guilty by misleading suggestions and unfair generalizations. If this incident represented such "inexcusable" behavior, why weren't formal charges being pressed? Finally, how dare Mia Piggee, Bicultural InterGreek Council president, suggest there should have been "some kind of sanctions on the bids" without any formal charges or hearings. Feminist dictator Pigee also suggests Panhel does not condone sexist attitudes which are, in fact, protected opinions under the University's Open Expression policy. Penn students, beware the politcially correct mandate for a homogeneously-thinking society. DWIGHT ARAKAKI College '96
(11/05/92 10:00am)
To the Editor: We do not know the facts of the incident which allegedly occurred at Senator Arlen Specter's victory party. But nonetheless, our club does not condone sexual harassment. We made it known to the DP that the two students were not affiliated with our club. They did not come with us, nor were they invited by us. In fact, our club is sensitive to women's issues, and in the days before the election, we co-sponsored an event with Republican Coalition for Choice on the role of women in politics. We are upset that our club has been connected with the actions of persons who do not represent us. DANA LYNCH College '94 Chairman College Republicans STEVEN DE MOTT Wharton '93 Vice-Chairman LAURIE BALES Wharton '94 Executive Director BRIAN DORAN Wharton '93 Treasurer JAMES SOUTH Wharton '94 Secretary
(11/05/92 10:00am)
and ALISSA KAYE The candidates were too close for comfort, but their workers wanted to get closer and more comfortable with us. As female Daily Pennsylvanian reporters covering a senatorial race which heightened the country's awareness of gender issues in the workplace, we never thought we would ddpersonally experience sexual harassment right in the candidates' backyards. Unfortunately, we were wrong. Throughout the senatorial race, Democratic challenger Lynn Yeakel constantly highlighted her concern for women's issues and reminded voters of Republican incumbent Arlen Specter's role as a Senate Judiciary Committee member in last year's Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill Supreme Court hearings. In turn, Specter defended his actions during the hearings and stressed his strong voting record supporting women's issues. But in spite of both candidates' insistence on equal standing in the workplace -- on the distinction between work and play -- when it came down to their respective election night parties, complimentary wine and beer drowned out all the political rhetoric. Campaign volunteers from both camps made sexual advances on each of us in an ironic twist on the "Year of the Woman" idea. Had we been male reporters with short hair, we wondered afterwards, would a certain male volunteer at Specter's headquarters have insisted on moving his chair closer before he pushed hair out of our eyes? And would he have grabbed our notebooks from our hands so he could write down his name and number in case we wanted "a date . . . or concert tickets because I sell them?" Would two of Yeakel's male campaign volunteers have so avidly pressed to let them buy us drinks? And had we been men, would a male Yeakel campaign worker have had the opportunity to indelicately fondle the locket dangling between our breasts? And would two male volunteers -- and College Republicans from our own University no less -- who were sloppy drunk have followed us around Specter's victory party, saying, "Can I hit on you more? Why don't you like me?" It was horrifying then, and it is mortifying to recall it now. The campaigners' behavior cannot help but cast a shadow of doubt on both candidates' professed concern for gender issues. Maybe it's just guilt by association, but as the proverbial saying would have it, "actions speak louder than words." As we see things, it shouldn't make a difference whether a reporter is wearing a jacket and tie or a skirt and blouse. Journalists should be able to objectively cover the events at hand . . . without having to worry about others' hands on them.
(10/12/92 9:00am)
Twenty years ago, when then-University student Maureen Anderson walked down Locust Walk, she would pass fraternity brothers sitting on the roof of their house, rating the women as they walked by. The men said they were judging the women on their smiles, but Anderson and other female students felt they were being judged on the desirability of their bodies. So one day, Anderson decided to put a halt to this. She ran into the nearby Christian Association Building, grabbed a plate of potato salad -- with lots of mayo -- and smeared it all over one of the men. This, relates Carol Tracy, former student activist and former head of the Penn Women's Center, is what things used to be like on the University's campus. Twenty years later, the University is getting ready to celebrate the anniversary of a 200-person protest in College Hall which led to the formation of the Penn Women's Center and the Women's Studies Program, and which community leaders say validated female students' concerns on campus. Tracy -- who herself was one of the protesters -- said the celebration will consist of a kick-off rally at the Button and a panel on women and politics. A speech last week by Sarah Weddington, the prosecutor in the Roe v. Wade trial, is also part of the 20th anniversary celebration. In additon, Tracy said she would like to re-unite the women involved in the sit-in to celebrate the April anniversary. · The history-making protest began on April 4, 1973, when 200 women entered College Hall after a rally on the Green. It ended on April 6, when the University gave in and accepted the demands of the 55 protesters who had remained in the hallway outside then-President Martin Meyerson's office. The student protesters said they were angry about the way women were treated on campus and demanded that the University establish a women's center and form a committee to coordinate the implementation of security measures. As a result of the sit-in, the University hired three new female administrators in December of the same year to find a way to change the University's dealings with women. The sit-in, which received nationwide attention and sympathetic support in the local and national press, was conceived in an "atmosphere of fear, that finally turned to anger," Tracy, a member of the sit-in negotiating team, said last week. "And I was a royal pain in the ass to Meyerson," she added. Carroll Smith-Rosenberg, current director of the Women's Studies Program, also took part in the negotiations as a professor at the University. She recalled last week that there had been no real progress towards women's rights on campus before the demonstration. "It definitely acted as a catalyst," she said. Before the protest, Smith-Rosenberg said, students had heard rumors of rape and harassment, but nobody had come forward to press charges. And since the sit-in, Tracy said, things have quieted down considerably. "We haven't really had sit-ins like that since," said Tracy, thinking back to 1973. "I guess we were pretty radical back then." · Women who were students at the University 20 years ago felt unsafe on campus and felt that campus police were not sensitive to women's needs, Smith-Rosenberg said. One time, Smith-Rosenberg recalls, a campus police official discussing acquaintance rape said that "if a young woman in high heels gets in a car and some guy jumps her, she only has herself to blame." And she said that when two women nurses were raped at the corner of 34th and Chestnut streets, campus police disclaimed all responsibility, saying that, technically, it had happened "off-campus." At the time, only one female police officer was available to deal with rape victims. Now, according to Elena DiLapi, director of the Women's Center, the University "is recognized as a leader in creating a safer campus in terms of sexual violence." The Women's Center now has four full-time staff members and offers a wide array of services catering to everyone ranging from lesbians and minority women to lovers of rape victims. Although cuts in the University's budget have prevented the women's center from receiving the amount of money she thinks it should get, DiLapi said she still feels that "having a women's center makes all the difference in the world." "It's been nice for a change to meet men on campus who aren't threatened by women," she added. Tracy said she can see a difference in the way women are treated whenever she walks on campus now. She said that last year, she was approached by a male student who handed her a pamphlet from Students Together Against Acquaintance Rape. "Needless to say, I was pleasantly surprised," Tracy said. Ruth Wells, director of Victim Support and Special Services said she also has seen many changes in her time at the University. When she took over her job in 1976, Wells was given the task of diversifying a police corps that was made up mainly of white men, with only one woman and a few black men. Over time, she said, she has been able to diversify the police force and to overcome opposition to increase security on campus. Wells said that at first, many students were opposed to the idea of having increased security in dorms, and several administrators opposed the idea of installing blue security lights, saying they might not be aesthetically pleasing. The University Trustees, in their April 13, 1973 meeting "agreed that careful consideration [to installing phones] should be given to the question of aesthetics." The Trustees then questioned the lights' supplier "on his willingness to supply lights which accord with the views of the landscape architect." This year, the University -- headed by University Police Commissioner John Kuprevich -- installed several improved blue light phones off-campus, and campus police today patrol the surrounding areas of the University all day and night. But many women said last week that they still think male-female relations on campus have not sufficiently improved. Smith-Rosenberg said that 20 years ago when Superblock was being built, construction workers harassed the women as they went by. Now, she said, the fraternity members have taken their place. "It's very sad when fraternity boys treat women the same as construction workers did," she said. College senior Liesel Euler said she is also confronted with sexism and harassment on campus. "There is still blatant sexism on an administrative and social level," said Euler, a Women's Studies major. Euler described an incident she witnessed last week at a Locust Walk fraternity house which she said was "social" sexism. She said one of the brothers in the house had been complaining for some time about the strict regulations, the poor attendance and the lack of beer at the party. "[Then he said,] 'What sucks even more, we're paired with the ugliest sororities on campus,' " she said. "That was a blatant example of the objectification of women based on physical appearance," Euler said. And DiLapi said that there is still a marked degree of inequity between the sexes at the University. "If women were truly respected and valued, men would not be raping us," she said. Smith-Rosenberg added that the men who harass women "focus on the body rather than the mind," and she compared it to a man "walking down Locust Walk with a bunch of big gay men in leather whistling at [him] and hitting on" him. · After the April 1973 sit-in, the University formed the Women's Studies Program despite much controversy and opposition from some male faculty members. "People would say, 'Why should we study women? They're not important,' " Tracy said. "It took a group of students sitting in demanding they be allowed to study women to get anything done." The Women's Studies program originally fell under an interdisciplinary program known as the College of Thematic Studies. "I'm a feminist. Women's issues are important to me," said Euler. "Women's studies is interdisciplinary by nature, there are only a few required courses, so I can pursue varied interests." This will be a year of remembrance and celebration for the Women's Studies Program, Smith-Rosenberg said. "We want to celebrate the advances that were made -- now the Women's Studies major has an incredible faculty, as strong as any other university's," she said. "We haven't solved the problems, but there is a sincere interest in recognizing and addressing them." Although the sit-in of 20 years ago marked the high point in women students' activism at the University, students in the past few years have rallied around particular issues on campus as well. During the past three years, women students have protested the presence of fraternities on Locust Walk, spurring on the University's move to diversify the residential make-up of the center of campus. Several events in the past few years have turned to this issue, including a fraternity-co-sponsored "Take Back the Night" event, in which an anti-rape rally on College Green turned into an anti-fraternity "Take Back the Walk" protest. And several organizations focusing mainly on women's issues have cropped up on campus recently, including Students Together Against Acquaintace Rape, Penn's Eagerly Awaited Radical Ladies (P.E.A.R.L.) and the Women's Alliance. Euler said she thinks there is still a strong feminist community at the University, but that it needs to grow because the campus is "patriarchal and conservative." Euler stressed that people are drawn to feminism for different reasons and gave an account of her motives. "I'm a feminist because of the way I experience reality," she said. "My entire perception of reality is very connected to social injustice and certain series of frameworks that I perceive U.S. society to be made up of. It is basically racist, patriarchal, elitist and exclusive."
(10/06/92 9:00am)
A 47-year-old University staff member filed an age discrimination suit against the University last week, prompting the University to accuse him, in return, of sexual discrimination against his employees. William Volz, former associate director of technical support services at the University, demands in his suit to be reinstated because he was replaced by "younger, less-qualified employees under 40 years of age." The suit states that the University harassed Volz in order to force him to resign, and then fired him on July 27, 1991 "upon a pretextual ground of inept job performance." In addition, the complaint demands that the University "make [Volz] whole, by appropriate backpay awards, prejudgment interest, fringe benefits and otherwise," and says that if the University cannot give him back his job, the plaintiff should be awarded a salary, fringe benefits and other compensations until he reaches the age of 70. The University's response to the complaint stated that Volz was dismissed after a four-month probationary period in which Volz himself, according to the complaint, "[gave] proportionately less work to . . . an African-American female who worked for him." It also states he "acted in a bizarre manner by standing around [female employees'] desks without talking." The response states that during Volz's first four months on the job he failed to perform many of his job duties, including submitting status reports and reviews. It says that "it was clear that plaintiff and the job he was hired to do were not a good match." Volz's suit, however, states that "all times the plaintiff's job performance has been at least satisfactory." Volz's lawyer Daniel Weisman could not be reached for comment yesterday and University Associate General Counsel Neil Hamburg refused to comment.
(06/04/92 9:00am)
and MICHAEL SIROLLY A dispute between the University and a former Veterinary School professor who claims she suffered sexual discrimination at the University is about to be resolved, parties in the case said this week. The professor, veterinary cancer researcher Ann Jeglum, filed suit against the University in December, following an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ruling that her charges of sexual discrimination had merit. In the lawsuit, Jeglum -- once chief of onclology in the Vet School -- claims the the University discriminated against her both by denying her tenure in 1987 and 1989 and by paying "less qualified or equally qualified male employees" higher wages. There are now signs, though, that Jeglum and the University will settle out of court. Jeglum's lawyer, attorney Jeffrey Smith, hinted this week that the two parties are nearing an agreement. "There are ongoing settlement discussions," Smith said Tuesday. "We will know one way or another within the next week." Both parties have been negotiating since before the lawsuit was filed, and both sides may not have expected the suit to reach the courtroom stage. Under the EEOC's finding late last fall, Jeglum was forced to file suit within 90 days or else waive any claim against the University. Assistant General Counsel Elizabeth O'Brien, who is representing the University in the case, said this week that a settlement seemed near -- but she refused to offer any timetable. "We're continuing to negotiate," O'Brien said. "We believe we're extremely close to reaching an agreement." Regardless of whether the two parties can reach an agreement, Jeglum's case may soon need to move forward soon anyway. Judge James Giles, who is assigned to the case, last month ordered Jeglum to demonstrate by mid-June "why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute." According to Smith, however, settlement through negotiation was always Jeglum's goal. "At the time we filed, there were settlement discussions ongoing." Smith said. "It seemed the wiser course to proceed with negotiations rather than press forward with the litigation." "We've been talking and talking and hopefully those discussions are about to bear fruit," he added. Neither party would reveal any details of their proposed settlements, citing an agreement to keep the terms confidential. But Smith suggested that the negotiations have proceeded slowly because of their complexity. "The framework is a delicate one and there are several parts to it which are contingent on each other," he explained. In addition to the tenure and wage discrimination charges, the suit also alleges that Jeglum was a victim of sexual harassment throughout her employment at the University, claiming she was subjected to "offensive remarks, and unfounded allegations that she [refused] to be 'cooperative' with other members of the faculty." Jeglum left her office in the Clinical Studies division of the Veterinary Hospital nearly a year and a half ago and now works in a West Chester veterinary clinic and lab. The suit also names as defendants the Vet School and three current and past Vet School administrators. Vet School Dean Edwin Andrews, former Veterinary Medicine chairperson Kenneth Bovee and resigned Veterinary Medicine chairperson Darrell Biery are named individually, as well as in their positions at the Vet School. Jeglum seeks lost wages, benefits and expenses due to both her tenure denial and wage discrimination while at the University. She also seeks tenure retroactive from her tenure denial in 1989. While at the University, Jeglum worked in the Vet School's Small Animal Hospital and spent more than five year's researching treatments for certain forms of canine cancer.
(04/22/92 9:00am)
The Ombudsman's Office received a 14 percent increase in complaints last year, but handled fewer harassment cases than the previous two academic years, according to the Ombudsman's annual report published in this week's Almanac. According to the report, issued by University Ombudsman Daniel Perlmutter, the 14 harassment complaints -- eight fewer than last year -- were split unequally between alleged acts of sexual and racial harassment. Two alleged incidents involved racial harassment, while 12 involved charges of sexual harassment. Half of the sexual harassment complaints, which primarily involved students, were "brought by women who alleged that demands of a sexual nature were made that left them feeling uncomfortable and threatened," the report states. Five of the 12 cases involved gender-related complaints arising from comments directed at women. "The most blatantly offensive comments were lewd references to female anatomy," according to the report. Perlmutter declined to comment on the report yesterday, saying "I would like to have it just stand for itself." The job of the Ombudsman's office is to respond to the needs of University students, faculty and staff, by informing people of their rights, helping to protect their rights and promoting better lines of communication. All complaints to the office are heard confidentially, and the Ombudsman's office acts in an advisory capacity to those members of the University community with complaints. The 1990-91 report shows that more than twice as many complaints were filed with the office in the category of academic / procedural complaints than during the previous year. Academic / procedural complaints refer to complaints surrounding rules and procedures. The report also states that more undergraduates filed complaints with the Ombudsman than any other group. Microbiology Professor Helen Davies, who said she has not read the report yet, said last night she thinks the Ombudsman's office is very effective. "The general response I have is three cheers for the Ombudsman," said Davies, a prominent faculty activist. "[It has been] extremely important in the University for seeing that people got due process quickly without going into formal procedure." Davies added that she thinks the University's new harassment policies, which were implemented last fall and therefore had no impact on the statistics in this week's report, could act as a deterrent for future harassment. "[But] there will always be a need for the offices that can deal with harassment," she added.
(04/21/92 9:00am)
The Ombudsman's Office received a 14 percent increase in complaints last year, but handled fewer harassment cases than the previous two academic years, according to the Ombudsman's annual report published in this week's Almanac. According to the report, issued by University Ombudsman Daniel Perlmutter, the 14 harassment complaints -- eight fewer than last year -- were split unequally between alleged acts of sexual and racial harassment. Two alleged incidents involved racial harassment, while 12 involved charges of sexual harassment. Half of the sexual harassment complaints, which primarily involved students, were "brought by women who alleged that demands of a sexual nature were made that left them feeling uncomfortable and threatened," the report states. Five of the 12 cases involved gender-related complaints arising from comments directed at women. "The most blatantly offensive comments were lewd references to female anatomy," according to the report. Perlmutter declined to comment on the report yesterday, saying "I would like to have it just stand for itself." The job of the Ombudsman's office is to respond to the needs of University students, faculty and staff, by informing people of their rights, helping to protect their rights and promoting better lines of communication. All complaints to the office are heard confidentially, and the Ombudsman's office acts in an advisory capacity to those members of the University community with complaints. The 1990-91 report shows that more than twice as many complaints were filed with the office in the category of academic / procedural complaints than during the previous year. Academic / procedural complaints refer to complaints surrounding rules and procedures. The report also states that more undergraduates filed complaints with the Ombudsman than any other group. Microbiology Professor Helen Davies, who said she has not read the report yet, said last night she thinks the Ombudsman's office is very effective. "The general response I have is three cheers for the Ombudsman," said Davies, a prominent faculty activist. "[It has been] extremely important in the University for seeing that people got due process quickly without going into formal procedure." Davies added that she thinks the University's new harassment policies, which were implemented last fall and therefore had no impact on the statistics in this week's report, could act as a deterrent for future harassment. "[But] there will always be a need for the offices that can deal with harassment," she added.
(04/09/92 9:00am)
From Sumeet Goel's "I'm From Joisey! You From Joisey?", Spring '92 Yeah, she testified before a congressional committee. Yeah, she accused a potential member of our highest court of sexual harassment. In any case, did this Oklahoma University Law School professor suddenly attain jurisprudence nirvana, making her the ultimate authority on the laws of sexual harassment? The answer is obviously no. No, she doesn't know the laws better than any of our law professors. No, she didn't bring unique insight to her speech (because she never even mentioned the case itself). No, she didn't go that far beyond the five paragraph summary of the definition of sexual harassment as outlined on page A8 of Monday's Daily Pennsylvanian. Yet, no one can fault her for what she did. It's the American Way: find a sucker and then milk him for every penny he's got. She spoke to this community for an hour about her area of expertise -- law -- plain and simple. If someone offered you $11,000 to speak for an hour on the various merits of different beers, could you do it? Sure. Would you do it? Without a doubt. No, the fault lies with the University. It wasn't as if those involved didn't know how Anita Hill was going to address sexual harassment. The moment she was contacted, she told the University that she would not discuss the hearings and that she "didn't want to hear the name Clarence Thomas." Like any sane individual, she steered away from the area that would make her uncomfortable and instead stayed on the topic that she knew she could do no wrong with: law. Leaders of Connaissance told me that the true purpose behind bringing Anita Hill to Penn was to bring a timely issue onto campus for discussion and to reach as many people as possible. The controversial hearings -- not the person Anita Hill -- may have brought sexual harassment to the forefront of many a coffee table discussion, but does that mean we need to bring Hill to Penn at such considerable cost? I think not. She spoke to about 2,000 people, many of whom were not part of the Penn community. What would be the difference if, during this past week, our law professors discussed the problem in class, and were also asked to hold other presentations and/or speeches addressing sexual harassment? You don't think that could have reached 2,000 people in just the same way? C'mon, get serious -- these discussions probably would have been more pertinent, too. Hell, a series of smaller discussions held around campus would have been more effective than being told about sexual harassment law for an hour. Connaissance and the Women's Studies department can call this a success, but they know better. Face it, 2,000 people did not go to see Anita Hill because they wanted to improve their understanding of sexual harassment law. They went because of pubic hair in a Coke. They went because of Long Dong Silver. They went because of Arlen Specter, Ted Kennedy, Orrin Hatch and company. They went because of Clarence Thomas and a media blitz unlike any other. And they were disappointed. The only ones who came away with any sort of positive reaction were experiencing what is commonly referred to as "cognitive dissonance" -- I spent $20,000 last year to learn to use that term instead of "sour grapes." Anita Hill? She came away from the speech experiencing what is commonly referred to as "pull the wool over their eyes." Don't get me wrong, I am not knocking Anita Hill's intelligence. She's a brilliant woman. $11,000 per speech. Book about the hearings in the works. CBS probably planning a mini-series for next fall. If she works it right, this snowballs into a hell of a lot of money. They said that she faked it for the publicity. They said that no woman would have put herself through that hell just for the money. Regardless of what really happened, she's reaping profits now because of a country's obsession with sensationalism. Don't you feel proud to be a small part in all of it? · JUST WONDERING: Don't worry, no lyrical problems, just a question: Have you ever tried a bourbon, scotch and beer in succession? No wonder George Thorogood sounds like that. That combo would kill anyone's voice. Sumeet Goel is a sophomore Communications and Finance major from Parsippany, New Jersey. "I'm From Joisey! You From Joisey?" appears alternate Thursdays.
(04/09/92 9:00am)
Sumeet Goel may be well-intentioned in his critique of Anita Hill and the American Way of making a buck (DP 4/9/92). But his argument is flawed and he misses the point. So Hill was paid $11,000 to speak at Penn. She is a reputable professor of law. Goel thinks the side effect of bringing the issue of sexual harassment to the forefront of public concern is not worth Connaissance paying her the money to speak. It's a cost-benefit analysis. Starting discussion on an important issue is as worthwhile as having the various politicians and academics whom Connaissance has paid to speak in the past. So maybe Goel thinks it's not a big enough issue. Yes, a series of discussions throughout the community about the cause would be constructive. Hill's discussion can be an important, needed impetus for such discussions. The fact is, Connaissance pays speakers large sums of money to speak here at Penn sometimes. They are expected to talk in areas of their expertise. In Hill's case, this is sexual harassment and law. In lamenting Hill's omitting juicy details about the Senate hearings, Goel is asking for the sensationalism which he claims to criticize. Goel's argument is therefore misguided. Hill was a deserving guest and an enlightening speaker, who contributed to my knowledge on the subject. To quote Goel out of context, "She's a brilliant woman." KIM DIXON College '93
(04/01/92 10:00am)
Approximately 200 remaining tickets for University of Oklahoma Law Professor Anita Hill's lecture Saturday will be available starting at noon today on 36th Street and Locust Walk, Connaissance Chairperson Meg O'Leary said yesterday. Connaissance members, who gave away about 700 tickets on Monday in approximately two hours, will give out its last tickets today on a first-come-first-served basis. O'Leary said the group would have distributed the tickets until the supply ran out on Monday, but one Connaissance member mistakenly walked away with the 200 tickets she was scheduled to hand out. O'Leary said she knew tickets to the lecture would be popular, but said she did not anticipate the rush for tickets. "We knew they would go quickly," the College junior said. But, "they went much more quickly than we had expected." Members of the University community with a valid PennCard can pick up one ticket each for free today. Connaissance and the Women's Studies Program's Judy Berkowitz Endowed Lectureship are co-sponsoring Hill's visit. The $11,000 cost was shared by the two groups. Women's Studies is in charge of distributing the tickets for the other 800 seats in Irvine Auditorium for the lecture, O'Leary said. She criticized Women's Studies for not making more tickets available to students. "We want as many students as possible [to attend] . . . Our primary interest is in the students," O'Leary said. "We think they put their personal interests ahead of the University's." O'Leary said Women's Studies invited members of their "constituencies," which include members of the Penn Women's Trustees Council. Program officials also provided an open sign-up sheet at the Law School, she said. "It has gone beyond a VIP list," O'Leary said. "It's 800 people large. That's just not reasonable." O'Leary added that if Women's Studies has any tickets remaining, they will become available to students, but said she does not know if there are any left. Carroll Smith-Rosenberg, director of the Women's Studies Program, could not be reached for comment last night. A message on Women's Studies' Voice Mail yesterday said the program is "attempting to arrange for a hall for more seating or for a closed circuit TV presentation." Some students who waited in the ticket line Monday, which at one point extended down Locust Walk almost to Steinberg-Dietrich Hall, said they were upset that they did not get a seat. "I thought it would be easier to get a ticket," College sophomore Davora Cohen said. "I was a little disappointed." Hill, who is known for testifying that U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas sexually harassed her several years ago, will speak at 5 p.m. on Saturday in Irvine Auditorium.
(03/30/92 10:00am)
The University hosted the First Annual Student Conference on Campus Sexual Assault last weekend in Houston Hall. The event was sponsored by Students Together Against Acquaintance Rape and included over 200 representatives from schools as far away as Hawaii and Oregon. Organizers of STAAR, which was founded in 1989 and was one of the first programs of its kind in the country, said they planned the conference following widespread interest in their programs. "We got a lot of requests from other schools for help in starting up their own groups [similar to STAAR]," College Senior Jodi Gold, who coordinated the event with College Senior Beth Kaplan, said. "The response was simply so great that it became nationwide and we decided to organize this conference." The general objective of the conference was to create a student-led think tank which could establish links between various programs across the country. Ann Simonton, coordinator of Media Watch, gave Saturday's keynote address about the way women are portrayed in the media. Saturday and Sunday, workshops were held on rape-related subjects such as alcohol and drugs, sexual harassment, reaching men, self defense and multicultural issues. University Anthropology Professor Peggy Sanday, who led a workshop on gang rape, said that there were many aspects of rape which are not considered in most discussions of the issue, but which represent very serious problems. "We rarely think about male gang rape, for example," Sanday said. "But when pledges get a carrot stuck up their ass that's rape. They get a sense of brotherhood out of it and ultimately a sense of power -- power which allows them to rape again later. Abuse breeds abuse." Among the ideas addressed was that acquaintance rape affects everyone, and thus needs to be dealt with seriously. "We need to create a situation where women don't fear being raped and men don't fear being stigmatized," College senior Will Van Derveer said. "Overall the conference was incredible," Jennifer Goldner, a representative from Dutchess Community College in Poughkeepsie, New York, said. "It really got the important messages across, such as awareness and communication." STAAR was founded by four students who felt there was a need to provide education on the issue and to advocate the rights and needs of victims. Founding member and College graduate Nick King, who spoke at the conference said, "As a man, I found it difficult to get involved in fighting acquaintance rape, since it was perceived as a woman's issue." "Men, however, play a vital role," he said. "It's very powerful when a man questions another man in an acquaintance rape situation." Raising questions and issues is one of STAAR's main methods of combating sexual assault. Members believe that lasting changes in attitude can be achieved through self-questioning as opposed to lecturing. "It's very easy to stand on a stump and tell people what to think," King said. "It's much more effective to get people thinking for themselves. Several STAAR members said that they themselves were living proof of the effectiveness of self-questioning. Only after extensive self-examination had their attitudes truly changed. In addition to setting up workshops, STAAR has presented at the National Conference on Campus Violence in Baltimore, trained campus police on how to deal with acquaintance rape and worked with the administration in establishing the University's first-ever policy on acquaintance rape. Many at STAAR feel that this is just the beginning. "It's time to deal with more and different issues such as gender roles, socialization, masculinity and femininity," Gold said. STAAR would like to get as many people involved as possible, including minority groups such as blacks and Latinos, which it has had trouble reaching in the past. "Ultimately, it's the students' responsibility to bring about change," Gold said. "We're the only ones who can build a community of intolerance to rape."
(03/27/92 10:00am)
Stuart's story is worth a thousand speeches. He is a College senior, a Locust Walk fraternity brother and a residential advisor. And Stuart is gay. Today marks the end of Bisexual Gay/Lesbian Awareness Days at the University, a week-long series of events held to proclaim pride in sexual orientation and to counter the forces of prejudice and homophobia. And behind every cry of "Hey hey, ho ho, homophobia's got to go," there is an individual voice in the masses, whose story -- like Stuart's -- is all his or her own. Stuart, like many others who discover their sexual orientation at college, came to school not realizing that he was gay. Coming from a small town, he joined a fraternity to "meet people fast." While he sensed that he was "different" from other students, he did not seek out peer counseling or the Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Alliance at the University. "I had the numbers for peer counseling, but didn't think it applied to me," he said. "I felt too awkward." But after going downtown to a gay bar and seeing men dancing with men and women dancing with women, something struck a chord. "It felt right," he said. "It was then that I realized that I was gay, and that I would have to deal with it." "Being able to admit it to myself was one of the most difficult things I ever did," he added. Stuart's difficulties increased, however, when he realized that he was living two lives -- going downtown on the weekends to meet gay men, and maintaining the facade of a straight man with his fraternity brothers and other friends on campus. He was nervous about telling his brothers, and said that "[being gay] wasn't something they frowned upon . . . but it was just something I knew they wouldn't expect." Stuart kept silent for a year and a half, feeling more and more like he was being wrenched in two different directions by his two different lives. Then, in a drunken stupor after a fraternity party at the beginning of his junior year, Stuart slit one of his wrists. He called University Police soon after and was taken to the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, where he was "locked in a rubber room" for a night. After sobering up, Stuart regretted what he had tried to do. He met a counselor at HUP who helped him sort through his feelings. "I got comfortable with being gay," Stuart said. "It was then that I started thinking about coming out." He planned to tell his closest friends in the fraternity house before the other brothers, and told his president and little brother, both of whom, he said, were very supportive and caring. When Stuart told the rest of his brothers at a fraternity council meeting -- at which he sat next to the door "just in case"-- he said he was glad to find that they were "fantastic about it." "After that, I felt so much closer to all of them," Stuart said. "Friends like that are hard to come by." Stuart's involvement with his fraternity became a difficult issue once again last spring, when he was faced with the controversial topic of diversifying Locust Walk. He attended a meeting at which the Progressive Student Alliance requested the LGBA's support for a petition which advocated removing Locust Walk fraternities on the grounds that they are guilty of harassment and chauvinism. Stuart stood up and protested. "I said that I was totally offended," he said. "[People] accuse fraternities of being bigoted and racist, not allowing minorities in. It's making huge generalizations about white heterosexual homophobes, and it's just not true of all people." Stuart is currently involved with his activities as an R.A., and with the final semester of his college career. After graduation, he says, he plans to come out to his family. "I'd rather know I have their financial support now," he said. "After graduation, it won't matter." Stuart said his story is not unique. "There are a lot, and I mean a lot, of gay people in fraternities and on sports teams," Stuart said, adding that most still closet their sexual identity. He said he hopes people will learn the lesson of toleration and respect for difference through experience. "We can be great fraternity brothers, team members, journalists, everything," Stuart said. "We're just like everyone else." "But until you actually know someone, you don't really learn," he added. "I'm a firm believer that only experience is the best teacher of diversity."
(03/23/92 10:00am)
Some people just don't get it. As members of the Coalition to Diversify Locust Walk, we are writing to clarify Bruce Forman's multiple misrepresentation (DP 3/23/92) of the advertisement we placed entitled "Real Change on Locust Walk." First. The Coalition to Diversify Locust Walk, not Women United for Change, placed the advertisement. WUC is one of the many groups that support the Coalition. Second. Diversity has become a P.C. buzzword; however, when looking at the composition of all residences on the Walk -- except the Community Service Living-Learning Program -- it is quite clear that no women can live there. Does this strike Bruce as odd? The need for diversity begins to take shape when one considers that roughly one-half of the Penn student population is systematically barred from seeking residence on the Walk. Third. Forman believes that we would be "happier with fraternities if they represented a broader palette of colors." As the advertisement implies, we do not seek the internal diversification of the fraternity system. The problem is that the residences on the Walk are predominatntly occupied by white males. To remedy this homogeneity, the ability to remove fraternities from their residences must be recognized by the University as a necessary tool to diversify the Walk. Fourth. We seek no racial, ethnic, gender or sexual preference formula for achieving diversity of the Walk. But it must be realized that alloting almost all Locust Walk residential space to males who decide to enter the Greek system is both unfair and discriminatory. We cannot continue to passively allow our diverse institution's symbolic and actual center of campus to be lined with a single type of organization. Fifth. Forman states that all can agree with removing fraternities that fail to exhibit "exemplary behavior," but ponders the meaning of this standard. The 1991 Report of the Committee to Diversify Locust Walk establishes seven characteristics that "all residential communities along the Walk should embody." Without mentioning them in the space of this letter, a not-so-liberal interpretation of these criteria lead us to conclude that some fraternities embody none of these traits. Additionally, both the Berg Report and the Faust Report identified fraternities and the Walk respectively as sites for racial and sexual harassment. These reports, along with the numerous newspaper accounts of questionable fraternity acts, provide ample evidence that many fraternities do not exemplify high standards of behavior. Sixth. The inequity of the residential status quo on Locust Walk is overwhelming. Over 300 faculty, administrators and students acknowledged this fact by signing the Coalition's statement. As a community, we must strive to create a center of campus that is a social and intellectual center for all students, both graduate and undergraduate. Oh, and by the way, we don't buy that bit about moving the heart of Penn to Sansom Street. JOHN MAZIE College '92 SHEILA ROSSELL Nursing '92
