Editorials

Zeke Dialogue Key

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 accommodate 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.

Senate Must Reform

The time has come, once again, for Student Senate elections. And nobody, Senate least of all, seems to care.
To be perfectly honest, there is no particular reason that anyone should care — with the exception, perhaps, of Senate itself. Each election gives Senate a chance to re-assert legitimacy, and each of the many elections in recent years has seen an utter failure to do so. Added to that is the frequency of elections, due to an atrocious retention rate, which inspires not only apathy but a general distrust of Senate’s usefulness as a campus institution.
A central problem is that Senate simply fails to do anything; or at least that it seems that Senate fails to do anything. Even more troubling is that an average student could probably not name what organizations like Senate are supposed to do, regardless of whether or not they actually do it. The Review and the Student Finance Committee, argue what you will about the quality of their work, are known for what they do; that is, respectively, to produce a newspaper and to distribute money to student organizations. Senate is known, at best, by virtue of its existence, and little else.
This is, quite honestly, a travesty. There was a time, not even so long ago, when the Student Senate was powerful: powerful, because it chose to be so, powerful because it chose to maximize its unique potential and position as the ultimate and legitimate mouthpiece and loudspeaker for student views and concerns to the College administration. Currently, it does nothing close to that; a quick perusal of these pages every week does well to show the range of student views and concerns not being addressed, or being addressed through other, less potentially powerful avenues than Senate. 
In the last year, Senate has talked of addressing self-scheduled exams and co-ed dorm rooms. And yet these issues stand at the same place they did last year at this time. Or perhaps they don’t. Perhaps Senate and the administration are close to unveiling sweeping new plans on both of these fronts. But if so, Senate has been scrupulously quiet about it. And if so, in this way it is also failing in its duties. Senate should be a loudspeaker for students to the administration –– and also a loudspeaker back toward the students who have elected Senate, always keeping the student body abreast of progress of the lack thereof.
Senate is in a unique position as a student organization. It is essentially assured of its survival — how could they get rid of Student Senate? — and has an opportunity with every election to rise from the ashes and return to legitimacy. The question is whether it will care to do so.