Description vague except race/gender

To the Editors:

On Nov. 9, 1999, the President's office issued a campus-wide letter concerning a recent assault on campus. The letter stated, "Oberlin City Police and the College Safety and Security Office believe the Black male assailant was a non-student." Though two-pages long, the letter did not go on to address a more detailed description of the assailant, leaving it simply at "the black male." This description was both problematic and disrespectful in several respects.

Every day in this country, on the news and in the newspapers and in every media outlet, black men are criminalized simply for being black men. This has been true throughout a history of racism and oppression that cannot be detailed here, but we are all well aware of these issues. Because of this history, black males become the first suspect in most crimes that are committed, and are disproportionately convicted and imprisoned for criminal acts. (Black males have a 30 percent chance of going to prison in their lifetime.) Black men do commit crimes, and the assailant in this case was a black male. But the characterization of the suspect in the President's letter contributed to the perpetuation of this stereotype that all black males are criminals, for in this letter, he was just "the black male."

The letter left the suspect without a face, an eye color, a way of wearing his hair, without a skin tone, without any definitive characteristics whatsoever. It took away his distinction as one black male and made him all black males. Every black male became a suspect, and that included not just town males but males on this campus. For though the letter stated that Police and Security believed that he was not a student, how can this belief be given any weight if the only information given is that he is a black male? No one knows what every black male on this campus looks like, and no one can therefore distinguish him from non-student black males. Because the letter did not give the suspect an identity, it took away the identity of every other black man on campus and in the town. Any "black male" approaching a student after dark or walking down the halls is seen as a potential threat because of the President's letter, and this is unacceptable.

This letter is not intended to disrespect the survivor of the assault or devalue her experience. Rather, it is intended to make the President's Office aware of the negative effects that a key aspect of their alert had on members of our student body. The characterization of the assailant in the letter was a very damaging and dangerous action that affected interactions and caused tensions between students on this campus. This is not the first time; it seems to occur every time an "event" (as campus letters often call them) happens on this campus. This negative situation should not be contributed to by an administration that claims to support Oberlin's diversity and to want to make people feel comfortable. But it was.

For all these reasons, a petition has been drafted which has currently been signed by 342 persons. We are asking that the President's office apologize to the student body for the portion of the campus-wide letter quoted above. We are also demanding the President's office and the Office of Safety and Security adopt a policy which makes it a requirement to include in these alerts a more detailed description of suspects than their race and their sex. Characterizing a suspect as "the black male" is not helpful in identifying the suspect; it is helpful in making suspect all persons of that identity, and this has to stop.

--Tarika Powell, College sophomore

It's all right, feeling of alienation will go away

To the Editors:

The trollies surprised me a little bit, but, after thinking about it, I can understand the need for the people who came to last weekend's Capital Campaign Kickoff to be "trollied" from the Oberlin Inn to the gym for dinner. Those who came (I think most of them were alumni) probably had a long flight into Cleveland in order to give the school their money. They didn't deserve any more hardship than that.

I can certainly understand that the school needs the money. I visited a few colleges in Vermont that looked like they hadn't had a Capital Campaign in a while. I have no qualms about our administrators being beholden to these people. If someone's made enough money to give some away he/she probably made it in a company that shares Oberlin's values. I'm sure it is an environmentally friendly company that engages in profit-sharing, views all of its workers as equals, encourages diversity and communication, and utilizes its role as a company to benefit the surrounding community.

It will be all right though, the feeling of alienation will go away. Our administrators are not turning into door-to-door salespeople, fast-talking about the attributes of a Ginsu knife. They are not really obligated to these people who give us tens, maybe hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of dollars. I'll get over my queasiness because one of the people who gave a few million dollars will be a trustee someday soon. He/she will guide our school the right way, by giving us a new physics building, and eliminating those pesky cash-gobblers like creative writing and film, and supplying us with as many iMacs as a student could want. New trees will be planted. It will be a rebirth. It'll be beautiful.

--Douglas Diesenhaus, College sophomore

Suggestions for Senate committees welcome

To the Editors:

Student Senate recently appointed three students to the Search Committee for the Permanent Director of Residential Life and Services. Appointing students to committees is one of the senate's most important functions, as it allows students to have a real impact on College policy.

I am confident in our selections, though I wish that we had had a larger applicant pool. I realize that Senate is partially responsible for this fact. I would welcome suggestions for ways that Senate might better publicize such important matters. Please feel free to e-mail any and all suggestions to osenate@oberlin.edu.

--Aaron Leavy, College junior, Student senator

We're in the midst of "New Coke" segment of Oberlin history

To the Editors:

If anyone knows about taking on a little more than they can handle, it's me, I'm sure. Not to say that I'm the only one, but I'm the only one that doesn't seem to learn his lesson. Well, the only one - except the administration of Oberlin College, that is. This self over-extension fosters a lot of productivity, but usually comes at the expense of something, and that something is usually academics. I wonder if the College isn't making that same mistake.

As I struggle to become Oberlin's own Joan of Arc, Oberlin struggles to become the college world's Coca-Cola. That business which is unshakable, undaunted, and phenomenally successful, even though it's made some stupid mistakes. I guess we're in the midst of the "New Coke" segment of Oberlin history. Can't wait till this crap gets pulled off stores' shelves.

I remember a time when the College expressed a concern for the maintenance of downtown Oberlin as a crucial element in the lives of college students and the masses that live around them. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't see how that commitment plays out in the College's failure to come to the assistance of the bookstore.

I'm as much for a free-market economy as anyone and am by no means suggesting that the College should have "bailed out" the bookstore. But if you look at the facts, the College could easily have stepped in with little cost and great benefit to all.

I once tried to get into a studio art class. Photography to be exact. I say once, because I'll never try again. One section, 12 students. I'm hardly prodigal with my neon-green 110 camera (free with two proofs of purchase from Cheerios in the '80s), but that's beside the point. The point is, in a liberal arts college, I should have as much access to arts classes as anyone else, talented or not.

Though some of this lack of resource comes in the form of faculty shortage, there's also a large space shortage issue as well. Anyone that's been to a studio dance concert or tried to get into Theater 107 knows that space isn't any picnic for them either.

Which makes you wonder why the College didn't accept the Co-Op's proposal to rent and renovate the top floor for studio art space, instead of letting the Co-Op close. Smart move, I guess, since in four years (or twelve, if you're like me), most of us whining activists will be gone, and this debacle will be erased from institutional memory.

What's next? Well, regardless of who buys the space, it's clear that the College is going to end up running a bookstore. If you're not frightened by this prospect, you should be. If a thirty-thousand dollar-a-year, top tier liberal arts college runs a convenience store that can't even compete with a 7-11, what on earth is to become of our books?

The College will most certainly contract out this responsibility - adding another insulative layer of liability, passing the buck again, and decreasing the overall quality of the services provided. Yet this serves as no comfort - because as the College's attention widens yet again, the attention of the administration inches a tad further away from running a college and a tad closer to running a business. I wasn't a fan of spending nearly $800 a year on books at the Co-Op before, but I'm not really thrilled about spending $17 on a dusty old glue-stick at Ben Franklin now. And I'm even less enthused about the prospect of spending $149 Oberlin "Resources of Instructional Purpose" (RIP) dollars on a $5 Barnes and Noble copy of The Raven.

--Chris Anton, College sophomore