Insert Politically Correct Issue Here

To the Editors:

Oberlin Review Letter-to-Editor Mad Lib!

I am writing in response to the ongoing discussion of adjective and noun at Oberlin in hopes that I might spread awareness of the noun problem that pervades this campus.

I have a friend, name of friend who is very different from you, who has told me that he/she experiences at least one instance of noun ending in "-tion" every day. These acts of same noun ending in "-tion" may seem small and unimportant, but they reveal a hyphenated adjective paradigm of society that is in every one of us. Some people don't even realize they are adjective. Since we were just little plural noun, society has filled our minds with intolerance and perpetuated noun ending in "-tion". From television, to our noun, even our household plural noun are full of these things.

And friend's name isn't the only one who has experienced this on campus and off. I know many oppressed or misunderstood group of people who spend most of their lives both inside and outside Oberlin in constant fear of something scary. Yes, Oberlin is a place word for plural noun, but there is still so much intolerance on this campus. All of us must become more adjective of these plural noun that are happening every day, even maybe right now.

During winter term last year, I backpacked through name of impoverished nation or continent on a tour-bus. I experienced first-hand the adjective, adjective conditions these people live under. I spent many nights there verb ending with "-ing" myself to sleep because I felt so much guilt for having been raised in name of coolest country on earth with three plural noun in every garage, 10 plural noun on every street corner, and a healthy noun in every stomach.

Although I am not a oppressed person or a person who gets picked on a lot, I sympathize with their situation. In high school, I was at the same time considered both a "nerd" and "overweight" by the society around me. I suffered unconscionable slander by my peers and teachers, who called me things like "adjective and noun," or "really gross noun." I once overheard someone say they had seen telephone poles with skinnier body parts that come in pairs than mine. When I came to Oberlin, I thought I would find a caring, sappy adjective atmosphere. Instead I found only hatred and intolerance all around me.

What bothers me the most is that so many oppressed people ignore this noun and the adverb adjective society they live in, pretend the problems are not there. They seem to be too wrapped up in their sport or other wholesome social activity and enjoying their plural noun to realize that they are being oppressed. Even scarier is that most people don't realize that anti-noun crime is the fastest growing crime in America. And that most mainstream noun won't talk about it. I saw it on an episode of name of journalistic television program that asks the TOUGH questions.

Frankly, I feel guilty to have been born into a wealthy family of light color people. I like to pretend that I have friends, many of whom are oppressed or misunderstood, but the fact is, few people except those as adjective, adjective and adverb adjective as I am can stand being around me. Sure, I could move to impoverished or war-torn nation and join the charitable organization or the another charitable organization and really help people in true need one-on-one, but I'm doing a lot more good by living here at Oberlin and making myself feel better about my laziness by raising a stink about every little inconsequential problem that happens on campus and in the U.S.

Maybe I should just take a dinner knife and commit traditional Japanese ritual suicide. I would be much happier and would be less of a burden on planet name of planet.

--Christopher Wilson; College junior,

CDS Worker Unjustly Fired

To the Editors:

This is a letter to inform the Oberlin community of a serious injustice that has recently occurred here on campus.

Last month, Dontez Jackson and his coworker were invited to visit a student friend in her dorm, but when they couldn't find her, they fell asleep in the TV lounge of South Dorm. When awoken by security, they were told to leave, which they did. But when they arrived at work the next day, they were told they were fired. With their student friend, they went to Res. Life to explain the situation, only to be told that the administration didn't want workers "mixing" with students and that they wouldn't be getting their jobs back.

An emergency meeting was held on Wednesday with an attendance of 28 students, who marched into Nancy Dye's office to demand the reinstatement of Dontez Jackson. Dye stood whole-heartedly behind the College's actions in firing the two employees. She believes that "their presence was unauthorized in that dormitory in that way," and that "they are not welcome on the campus any longer." We feel that regardless of the workers' actions in "trespassing" in the dorms, their jobs should be no way in jeopardy because of it. Whatever we think about the policy of the school prohibiting workers from "entering areas where the students live" (Dye) - and many of us do believe that this policy is often implemented in a racist way, and that it aggravates an already antagonistic relationship between students and campus workers - the central question here is whether a worker should be fired for something that he has done in his personal life, not in a work-related incident. The position Nancy Dye and the administration have taken is that since Dontez broke the rule keeping workers out of the residence halls, he is no longer employable by the College. We maintain that he was not in the dorm in his capacity as a worker but in his capacity as a private individual, and whatever rules he may have broken in that private capacity should not affect his employment. Dye claims that his presence in the dorm was a security threat, and that his behavior "raises real questions about his safety as an employee." But he did no harm, nor did he intend to do so.

YB, director of Res. Life, and the Oberlin administration are responsible for the fact that they were fired for the nature of their actions. Dye spoke contradictorily about this responsibility, saying: "The responsibility is not the College's: we did not hire him, and therefore we didn't fire him...but it was because we contacted the temp agency that they no longer have a job." The message is clear: the school acted out of fear and ignorance and is now refusing to reconsider their decision. When asked about the security policies being implemented in a racist manner, she assured us that that this was certainly not an issue, but "that would be an interesting thing to talk to security about." We believe that the College admistration's policy in firing the two workers is unjust, and that Dontez should be reinstated. To this Dye responded, "that was an absolutely appropriate action to be taken by the College," and reiterated flatly: "No, they can't get their jobs back."

These two workers were temp workers; temps who had been employed at Oberlin for four months. Oberlin College uses temporary and substitute workers rather than fulltime permanent workers whenever possible. These workers come cheap, don't get any benefits, have no union, and, as demonstrated in this case, have no job security or grievance procedure. Dontez's co-workers are afraid to sign petitions for his reinstatement because it may threaten their own jobs. This unjust situation is not unique to Oberlin. Sodexho-Marriott Services (SMS), the company that runs CDS, is well-known across the country for their anti-labor policies. Jobs With Justice, an AFL-CIO campaign, along with HERE (Hotel and Resturant Employees International Union) is organizing a national anti-Marriott campaign. At Oberlin, a broad coalition of students called "Not With Our Money! People Before Profits" is also organizing against Marriott. We demand that our dining service practice fair labor policies, divest from the private prison industry in which it is heavily involved and use local and organic foods. We demand that any food service employed by Oberlin College with our tuition dollars should meet a basic code of just conduct - and Marriott does not. This situation with Dontez Jackson shows clearly why such a code of conduct is necessary. Please support our efforts to reinstate Dontez and workers' rights at Oberlin.

* FOR MORE INFO: Tyron.Moore@oberlin.edu

meetings: Thurs. 8:30 p.m. Wilder TBA

* WHAT YOU CAN DO: call/e-mail President Dye's office and demand Dontez's Reinstatement: # 775-8400 / nancy.dye@oberlin.edu

--Vanessa Fatton; College first-year,

Contradictory Senate Invokes Constitution in Anton Case

To the Editors:

You see, perhaps I'm being intolerant. Perhaps I'm being over-sensitive. I don't know. Perhaps I'm getting myself involved in a petty debate; which if you knew me, would absolutely have my feathers ruffled with my frustation over its utter insignificance and the complete shadow it, along with many recent debates on campus, has cast over other real, interesting, intelligent dialogue on campus.

But I'm sorry, I don't heed my own advice. The fact that, in reaction to the dismissal of Chris Anton from a recent General Faculty meeting, Student Senate is citing a section of its constitution stating that "The responsibilities of the senators will be to attend all Senate, faculty, and administrative committee meetings" is sad in so many ways. Damn, I really hate getting so petty, but this is just annoying, and I think this is a view felt by many people at Oberlin.

Before I begin (trust me, I will) I should state that I respect the efforts of Student Senate to represent the student body and ensure that its voice is heard by the administration; but, you see, they simply don't represent us, and they sure don't speak for me. It's rather baffling when senators invoke their constitution in their own defense and in the defense of Mr. Anton, while at the same time they violate various aspects of the exact same constitution. For heaven's sake, your cherished Section 4e is only three clauses away from Section 5a, which just happens to state: "15 senators are elected at-large from the members of the student body, 10 in the spring semester and 5 in the fall semester."

Hmm...elected from the student body, isn't that defined in Article I of that constitution as "all persons who are enrolled as full- or part-time students in the Conservatory of Music and/or the College of Arts and Sciences?" Nah, I guess people haven't been looking in the back of their Fussers lately. Anyway, that doesn't matter, I've mentioned this little paradox about the non-enrolled Mr. Anton's position as senator in a previous letter.

What has me really clucking like a chicken in the middle of the Décafé is the fact that Senate has consistently violated the aforementioned section 4e. As a news editor at the Review last semester, one of my duties was to help cover some of the same meetings senators are required to attend. So I guess I find it strange that I remember quite a few College and General Faculty meetings in which I didn't see a soul from Student Senate (in fact, meetings in which many faculty members were mysteriously absent, I might add. Hmmmn, perhaps we should call out Mulder and Scully; it seems the abhorred administration arranged an alien abduction of any and all agitators). Now, I'd accept it if they just sent a representative to report back to the full senate the proceedings of these meetings, as they can get really agonizingly boring (not always though. Man, I gotta stick to the point); but I repeat, I never saw a soul from Student Senate. I'm not saying they never attended, but attending sometimes doesn't seem to fulfill the requirement of attending "any and all" meetings as stipulated in the constitution; and I might add that it doesn't even mention anything about sending representatives.

Anyway, I think you guys can see my point. Well, actually, maybe not. This was a really unbalanced and poorly developed letter. I think. The point is Senate is not gonna get anything done flaunting the very constitution they cling so tightly to, and I'd really like them to get some stuff done. Yeah, you know, actually discuss real issues among people who can fairly represent the student body; i.e. no students enrolled at schools that aren't Oberlin, whoever they are. Even if they're really, really, really cool, I don't care. They aren't representing us fully unless they're under the same academic pressures and policies as us and do not violate their own constitution.

Man, why'd you guys bring it to this? You know how hard it is to get my feathers back in place after ridiculousness like this?

Of course, I'm just doing what I accuse them of by writing this letter and prolonging a pointless frustrating state of affairs and not actually discussing stuff that effects real life and the world at large. I've really gotta stop doing this.

--Bill Lascher; College sophomore,

Dancers Call for Solidarity at Warner

To the Editors:

The following is a statement created in support of the protest at the Spring Back auditions by members of the Theatre and Dance Deptartment, many of whom performed in the Spring Back Concert:

Institutionalized racism exists in our country and in our college. The Theatre and Dance program is by no means an exception. As members of this program, we recognize that the privileges we have received put us in a position to effect change. We support the recent actions taken by students of color, and by all those who agree that non-Eurocentric art forms have been under-recognized and under-supported by this department. Warner Center needs to be a place that is approachable, accessible and inclusive of artists of color. In order for changes to be made, students must form a coalition devoted to tackling these issues.

In solidarity,

--Abigail Rasminsky, College senior; Caitlin Medlock, College senior; Juliana May, College sophomore; Ariane Jay, College junior; Mary Moran, College junior; Kate de Zengotita, College junior; Susannah Hyland, College senior; Jenny Sawyer, College sophomore; Emily Strout, College sophomore; Anne Gadwa, College junior; Lauren Jacobs, College senior; Eli Wheeler, College sophomore; Matt Hill, College senior,

Environmental Studies Center Bathrooms are Underused

To the Editors:

It has come to my attention that not enough people have been using the restroom facilities at the gleaming new Adam Joseph Lewis Center for Environmental Studies to make the dreamy concept of a self-sufficient building a tangible reality. In fact - or so I've heard - students are being encouraged to stop on by and leave a deposit at one of the numerous filtering stations the Center boasts.

This is preposterous. Why should students stop by if they have no real reason to? With that, I would like to propose a solution: the installation of the Jack Kevorkian Cocktail Lounge, for operation following regular class hours.

Surely the already-existing labs have refrigeration facilities adequate for the storage of beverages. It would provide more campus jobs, both for bartenders and for jazz majors (who can provide a suitably atmospheric soundtrack). Obviously, the drinking age would have to be observed. Make it a Flex-run operation and have birthdays coded into OCIDs. If a student is under 21 the swiper simply won't let them purchase a drink.

The only two requirements would be as such: a three-drink minimum and a stay long enough so as to require use of the site's facilities. An alternative to this would be a one-drink requirement, providing the drink was the "Run Like Hell", first concocted by my dear friend Bret Maxwell Dawson for other nefarious purposes. The ingredients for this drink are as follows: a double shot of vodka, an inch of Kahlua, half a glass of milk and a spoonful of ex-lax.

Promote it as a watering hole in the bohemian style, a literary salon in the finest intellectual fashion or a seedy cocktail lounge lifted right out of vintage film noir; just get people drinking.

--Jesse Jarnow, College junior,