A letter to the editor by Simon Sibelman in the Northwestern revealed that he was 'physically assaulted' on campus by three men who objected to the fact that he was wearing a Vote No on the constitutional amendment button.
I hope that there will be an investigation. Who were these thugs? Where were the campus police? If he reported this crime, why haven't we heard about it before? If not, what sort of climate reigns on campus that he didn't feel it would do any good?
A campus republican gets a story in the Northwestern for a spurious death threat, but a professor gets assaulted and there is nothing?
What is wrong here?
BTW, Simon's letter is the second one down.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
It was in the busted section of the A-T. The campus police provide little information when it came to the incident since it is still under investigation.
The professor should go on Facebook and find a picture of the students. I bet they have an account with pictures on it.
I also suspect there has been more threats of violence to other individuals. I also bet this is why the Chancellor sent out a letter about this behavior.
The death threat was announced by a third party which was trying to make it a political issue.
Facebook won't work if it was a non-student. There is a large guy from the East Coast that has been working with the student group "Conservatives in Action" - he is NOT a student but he was questioned regarding yet another incident of harassment on campus. He's big, has a goatee/beard thing, wears a golf hat, tan coat with brown shoulders. He's all over campus.
It is completely ridiculous that there is this level of hostility on campus targeted toward gays and lesbians! Students do not feel safe on campus at night and I don't blame them. What gives these students a right to physically assault and intimidate others for no good reason? Does the University need to wait until someone draws blood before it takes action? Oshkosh does not need a Matt Shepard, this needs to be stopped.
The guys Simon described match the description of the guy and his cronies who harrassed me. I am really scared on campus and none of the administration or police are helping me at all. What can I do? Where can I go? What will put this to an end?
As a member of UWO's LBGTQ Council, I can tell you that we are aware of several similar and recent incidents of physical and verbal harassment on campus. We are also very concerned about the safety of gay/lesbian/straight allies, and the (lack of) response from campus police and administration.
Winneblogo asks the question "What is wrong here?" As a lesbian, I can tell you that the answer seems obvious to me: our community views gays and lesbians, at best, as second-class citizens; at worst, as legitimate objects of hatred.
Facebook was a suggestion not a solution. If it works great.
Dawn's comment is very troubling. Unfortunatley she is probably right.
It sounds like from the above comments that these are people from outside of the community.
Jack Straw
They aren't people from the outside community--just that one huge F'er from out East. The rest of them belong to one of three groups
College Republicans
Conservatives in Action
Student NRA
and yes, there is ONE key player in all of it
Nate Nelson.
Who insists he had nothing to do with derogatory chalkings around campus, however, the night before the words "fag" and "homo" were so lovingly written on university cement, a friend and I spotted him and his cronies with posters and chalk---hmm...
I'm downright sick of this complete and utter BS on campus. I am extremely upset with administration, and I am worried about what is to come with last night's election results.
All that hard work--and it wasn't even a "gay" issue.
I digress.
Hang in there everybody.
mmh
Unfortunately, the bigots won again yesterday.
The bright light in the results was that the under 30 crowd voted overwhelmingly against the constitutional amendment. It was the non-college educated, over 50 set who came out to vote yes.
Almost 70% of those who voted on campus also voted no.
Perhaps there is hope for the next generation.
I think the biggest problem with the admendment question was that there was too much in the question and it was in the wrong place. Marriage issues should be cival law, not constitution law. More than that, I believe, was the fact that this admendment was really two questions and that made it really confusing for many, many people.
Post a Comment