Zeke Issues

Zeke Dialogue Key
March 2 Editorial

This is a dangerous time for the Oberlin College community. There is a palpable sense of rage in the air that this campus has seen all too often, and the animosity threatens to poison student relations for years to come. The events surrounding Zeke last week are too plain to ignore and too important not to talk about. The key, however, will be to actually talk –– not to yell, to rant, scream or rave, but to actually talk and listen when others are talking.

Briefly, this is the rather disastrous series of events and coincidences. Last Thursday Residential Life and Services voted to make Zeke co-ed beginning in Fall 2001. The next day, Athletic Director Mike Muska’s article “Sportsphobia at Oberlin: Myth or Reality?” appeared in the Review. A number of offensive and sexist acts of vandalism, in response to the ResLife decision, were found in Zeke Saturday. During the past week, the Women’s Resource Center posted a number of fliers protesting both Muska’s column and the vandalism, advertising an ‘action meeting’ that was to be held Wednesday in Wilder 215 (and was moved to Wilder Main to accomodate its larger-than-expected size). 

The meeting went poorly, to say the least. Nobody should get into a game of finger-pointing as to who was responsible or why; in the case of such acrimony as appeared Wednesday night in Wilder, there is seldom an absolute moral high ground. It is simply not important at this point to scrutinize the minutiae of each side’s argument as to why they are not to blame. What the current situation calls for is mediation and compromise. 

Too often at Oberlin when a major issue is discussed, partisan students will say their piece and then shut their ears, listening only to themselves and those they pre-select as their allies. This tactic inevitably leads to frustration on both sides, as they see that their rhetoric is failing to impress their opponents, leading to a general venting of passions and an abandonment of reason. 
When an individual or group of individuals chooses to go down this road, it serves to accomplish nothing but a loss of their own credibility. The most credible and prudent action for any actor(s) in such a situation, and especially now, is respectful silence and a thoughtful listening process. This goal will not be accomplished without outside intervention. 

A good first step would be for a mediation between concerned parties, facilitated by Oberlin’s much-lauded ombudsperson, Yeworkwha Belachew. Such a meeting is already in the works for the next week. This should not and cannot be the end of the discussion; it must be only the first step. Indeed, this potentially poisonous situation could signal the beginning of a wider and more open discussion of gender and group issues –– if discussion continues beyond the resolution (or quieting down) of this immediate dispute. The opportunity is now on the table for the establishment a regular, campus-wide dialogue mechanism to ensure that future problems do not explode into a firestorm as currently exists. Administrators can and should facilitate and play their part, but ultimately this set of issues is one that is up to the students; we have created it, and only we can solve it, should we choose to do so.


Male Housing Viable
February 23 Editorial

Yesterday the Housing and Dining Committee passed a proposal to change Zechiel Hall to a co-ed housing option beginning in Fall 2001. This is, without question, a good thing. But there is also, without question, a place for all-male housing on this campus. Nor are these mutually exclusive conclusions.
Zeke, as currently constituted, is an Oberlin aberration. It is a place that many students, female and male alike, do not feel comfortable entering, and this should be true of no place on Oberlin’s campus. It is not, in any sense of the word, a safe space.
That being said, there is a place for all-male housing and even perhaps a male safe space at Oberlin. This is a College that values diversity and a comfortable student environment, and providing a living environment and/or safe space for the College’s largest minority –– men –– certainly fits within that vision. 
Where should the College go from here? There is already a demonstrated, if small, demand for all-male housing, even in the form of Zeke; an average of 21 students over the last seven years have requested to live there. While this is certainly not enough for Zeke (with 43 beds), it is enough to justify some sort of all-male campus housing arrangement.
Now is the time when that demand, if it still exists, will most fully manifest itself. Deprived of the last guaranteed all-male living space on Oberlin’s campus, men are now just like any other group on Oberlin’s campus. They must demonstrate that not only is there a demand for all-male housing, but that such an arrangement would be in some way educationally beneficial and would include some sort of programming schedule. Zeke’s becoming co-ed could in this way prove to be a net positive for all-male housing on Oberlin’s campus.


Zeke Men Set Record Straight
March 9 Letter

To the Editor:

I am sure by now that everyone has heard versions of the “extracurricular activities” which occurred in Zechiel Hall Friday night and Saturday morning of two weeks ago. Everyone from ResLife to the WRC has been wasting their time wondering who did this instead of pursuing the more beneficial question of why this event occurred. First, any accusations that this vandalism has been attributed solely to Zeke residents or to football players are ungrounded and (believe me) entirely false. We, the members of the Zeke community, do not condone the actions and events of that Friday night and Saturday morning; however, this vandalism succeeded in illustrating a very disturbing point to us: it requires actions this extreme to gain the attention we have been requesting for the past four months.
On Friday afternoon, Zeke residents had to find out from the front page of the Oberlin Review that a building which has been all-male since its construction was to become co-ed. This should not have happened, and the members of ResLife, Housing and Dining and whoever else was responsible should accept responsibility for handling this situation very poorly. I am not speaking of the actual decision to make Zeke co-ed. I am saying that there should have been anticipation of a negative response. We should have heard this news from ResLife or Housing and Dining before we had to read it in the newspaper. At least someone could have come by after the article was printed in order to calm people down, provide alternatives and prevent retaliation. But no one came. No one was there to advise us or show us appropriate channels to express our frustration. Instead, we were let loose to deal with this disappointing news ourselves.
Regardless of who vandalized Zeke, all of a sudden on Sunday night, ResLife was there to talk to us about Program Houses and theme housing. They explained to us the process by which and reasons why Zeke became co-ed. I even sensed feelings of sympathy and a genuine desire to help us out. But where was this guidance on Friday afternoon? I never even heard of theme housing until our dorm was trashed. Unfortunately, the message was “write letters and organize petitions and we will ignore you, but trash your dorm, costing us money, and now you have our attention.”
Know that our community does not condone the events of that Friday night and Saturday morning, nor will we accept responsibility for this destruction; however, as a result of this vandalism, we are finally starting to see some results. We are being presented with new avenues of action and new promises that our community may not be disbanded after all. Unfortunately, these newfound benefits have come at a price, both to the Zeke community (whose reputation has been further marred), and to the College, which must pay for the damages. Perhaps this could have been avoided if the action and attention we, the Zeke community, have craved since September was provided before disaster struck instead of during the aftermath.

–Ryan O. Catignani 
College senior
On behalf of the Zeke Community


Hazen, Pierson Argue Review Edit
March 9 Letter

To the Editor:

We are writing in protest of the Feb. 23 editorial, “Male Dorms Viable.” While we are not inherently opposed to an all-male dorm, we disagree with some of the arguments being made.
First, the idea that Zeke is not currently a “safe space.” Was Zeke ever intended to be a “safe space,” and if so, from what or whom? The editors used this highly political phrase in a misleading and misrepresentative way, willfully disregarding the fundamental concept of what safe spaces are created for. As we understand them, they are intended to be spaces in which traditionally marginalized people — women, people of color, queers, et al. — can exist and feel safe, politically and socially, from the traditionally dominant oppressive forces in society.
The editors also claim that men are Oberlin’s “largest minority” on campus. For one thing, the fact that numerically men are in the “minority” (another abused term) does not diminish their inherent power in our society. Additionally, men are not and will never be just like “any other group” on campus, regardless of numbers, by sheer virtue of their privilege as men in this society.
And for the editors to claim that Oberlin’s love of diversity necessarily translates into the need for all-male housing and “even perhaps a male safe space” is downright ludicrous. The whole point of neo-liberal “diversity” is to integrate those other than straight, white males into the mainstream.
Lastly, to say that we should have an all-male housing space in order to create balance presupposes that having an all-women’s dorm disrupts a previously existing balance. That supposition has absolutely no basis in reality. Why? Think about it this way: does the existence of Afrikan Heritage House or Third World House imply we need to have Anglo-Protestant House to “balance” things out? This argument of “balance,” which we personally have heard quite a few people espouse, leads you nowhere but down a slippery and ultimately disastrous slope.

–Emily Hazen 
College senior

–Alita Pierson
College senior


Safe Spaces Have Been Misinterpreted, Doggett Says
March 16 Letter

To the Editor:

I write this to speak out against the recent ugly turn the discourse in this forum has taken. The back and forth over “sportsphobia,” Zeke going co-ed, safe spaces, identity politics, etc. has hardly been civil, the anti-Baldwin cartoon in the last Review being one recent example. Four years ago I was told enough scare stories about both Baldwin and Zeke to keep a sane person away from either. Now, as someone with friends in both Zeke and Baldwin, I want to say that these myths are dangerously misleading.
Zeke’s parties are not my cup of tea, but Zeke is hardly the Paleolithic pit of Neanderthals I was told of. It is patently not “a source of violence, rape and abuse” that one letter described it as. Nor is it the exclusive domain of whites and straights that others implied. Likewise, a man entering Baldwin is not immediately castrated (and yes, that is literally the first thing I ever heard about Baldwin). When I consider the discomfort and fear I’ve heard expressed about Zeke by women and Baldwin by men on this campus, I can only think that such feelings are a deeply unhealthy situation for Oberlin.
A perfect example was the screening of Alien/Aliens last Saturday at Baldwin, which was advertised across campus in a sincere effort to be open to all. Only one male showed up. An unfortunate parallel example is the misogynistic vandalism at Zeke in response to ResLife’s decision, which only served to vindicate Zeke’s harshest critics. “Whore” is quite simply one of those words that nobody should ever use to call another. With this incident, the actions of a few individuals seriously hurt the cause of all those who wanted to keep Zeke all-male.

Much of the recent controversy has focused on the concept of safe space, and as far as I can tell, two entirely different definitions of safe space are being used. A political one, centered on the idea of giving underprivileged groups a haven, and a more generic one that does not associate with the issue of privilege. A male safe space is anathema to the political definition, but entirely consistent with the generic one. Regardless of how you define safe space –– I’m agnostic on it myself –– I’d hope we can agree that the desire for some form of all-male housing should be fulfilled.

Many people, of both genders, either hold values that conflict with or simply do not desire co-ed housing, and ResLife should make reasonable efforts to accommodate them. By making Zeke co-ed and not replacing it with some form of all-male housing elsewhere, they have failed to do so. Further, while men do occupy a privileged position within society, society also sends plenty of conflicting messages about “how to be a guy.” In a single Obieism, guys have “issues” too. Therefore, any male who says he wants to live in all-male housing, whether he wants to call it a safe space or not, has my respect, support and understanding.
With luck all-male housing will be restored in some form in the near future, and hopefully it will not be stigmatized the way Zeke has been. Just as with Baldwin, the decision of those who want to live in a same-sex dorm should be the subject of respect, not misguided fear as it is now. As long as this is the case, then no same-sex dorm is going to be a truly safe space, by any definition.

–Thomas Doggett
College senior