------Sorry to interrupt this beauty with a moment of dire seriousness--------------

(LorAnon comment #194)

Listen folks, Senate's meeting Tuesday from 1:30-3:30 in the Bates Meeting Room to talk about SLC Anon among other things.

The administration is likely to use Slcanon's excesses as an excuse to invade our collective privacy and track down IP addresses to expel the authors of certain comments. I heard this from a senate member who was in favor of it. And once that right to privacy has been popped--the fun don't stop. Remember the Patriot Act? Wiretapping? The triumph of free trade? We're not too far away. A crisis is always used to justify an agenda people already had.

I agree that the comments made about Michal were tasteless, frightening, scary, violent, objectifying, inhuman--and they have rightfully made many women feel unsafe here. (Particularly awful examples include: ‘someone just kill her,’ ‘smack her with a dick,’ ‘I'll pay a $100000 to the first dude who fucks her and brings me evidence,’ ‘I would rather fuck her in the ass first… Then you can kill her if you want,’ ‘Just sell her into the sex trade to Africa. She will probably get Aids and die anyway,’ and ‘Just put your hand over her mouth and suffocate her while fucking her.’) And the people who wrote those things should hold themselves accountable to the highest extent including any atonement asked of them including leaving--but accountable TO MICHAL as the victim, not to our fucking overlords. The poor girl is of course saying yes to anything that might alleviate the pain she's in on top of her very first conference week. Ruining even more lives doesn't help build this as a community where objectification and threats of violence are off the table. The entire slcanon community should hold itself accountable as well, as a community. Whoever put it up should take it down quickly and without comment, providing no more fuel for the fire. Refugees who still want an anonymous post now have somewhere else to go. We can accommodate them, can't we?

All that said, let's not get so caught up in the problem that we forget our solution. This site. We have proven in two days that we as a community are mature enough to handle anonymity if it's framed right, if the tone is right. The worst of the worst in SLC students comes out on slcanon half the time. But that's its reputation, that's what people think about it, that's what its for to people. It's a place to trash all the sensitivity you've ever learned in this community and revert to something deeply base, mean, and selfish. There are other more harmless strains, but we've tried to import them and their authors here.

LorAnon was founded yesterday to be funny, witty, cute, and silly, and I think it's done a great job. We can moderate, but we've only had to delete posts the mistakenly non-anon authors were already trying to remove. 193 posts now and counting, two days in. Let's pat ourselves on the back.

But back to the troubling issue of our anonymous black sheep of a cousin. How about we meet at the Black Squirrel at 1 o'clock to discuss it and choose a course of action. Then, at 1:30, one of us (noses!) can enter the senate meeting and sit through bureaucracy while we hang out and collage. When it's time to go in, z/s/he'll text us and we can storm the meeting with dramatic readings of anonymous joy and harmlessness. Or whatever we decide to do when we have our 1 o'clock huddle in the Black Squirrel.

&&&&&&&&&&

Senate's email to the community:

"Dear Friends,

This Tuesday, December 9th at 1:30pm in the Bates Meeting Room, Student Senate will
have our final meeting of the semester. During this meeting we will discuss two
incredibly important topics that effect us all both as individuals and members of
our community.

I. We will first discuss the SLC Anonymous Livejournal, and it's impact on students,
faculty and staff here at Sarah Lawrence. There has been much discussion on campus
over the content and tone of SLCanon, and this week we will address these issues and
share our thoughts on the role of this blog in our community.

II. The second topic on our agenda is student involvement in Strategic Planning.
Strategic Planning plays a significant role in defining both academic and
non-academic life here at Sarah Lawrence. As students of this institution I believe
we have an inherent obligation to participate in this critical process. Strategic
Planning ultimately outlines the core values of our college, and in such times where
the future of our institution is uncertain, it is essential we collaborate to
preserve the culture and pedagogy of Sarah Lawrence. Our meeting this Tuesday
provides an opportunity to discuss these issues and establish the role of students
in this incredibly important process.

In order to ensure student participation in Strategic Planning, Student Senate has
also formed a taskforce called the Student Economic Adaptability Committee (SEAC).
This taskforce is comprised of both senators and other members of the student body.
These taskforce meetings are open to the community and all are welcome to attend.
Within the next few days you will receive an email with the official date and
meeting time of SEAC.

Again, I would like to encourage you to attend our meeting this Tuesday, December
9th at 1:30pm in the Bates Meeting Room. Student Senate meetings are open to the
entire community. If you have any questions, comments or concerns, or would like to
suggest a topic for discussion for future meetings, please email
studentsenate@gm.slc.edu.

I would also like to remind you of the meeting on Thursday, December 11th at 4pm in
Resinger. This meeting, called by the Strategic Planning Committee, is a wonderful
opportunity for student input. It is a time for students to share their thoughts and
voice their concerns. I hope to see you there.


always,

Michelle Lewin
Student Senate Chair
Class of 2009"

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

And this is an editorial on the subject by someone who didn't know about LorAnon (apologies for not asking the author's consent to post it, though she did give me the op-ed in person, and I'm sure she doesn't mind the extra readership):


Editorial: Thoughts on Harassment on SLCANON2008
Dani Young

An Open Letter to the Student Body

Comrades,
The SLCANON tradition has clearly gotten out of hand. Although I don’t know what the College can do institutionally, I believe it is essential for the students to act collectively to demonstrate their rejection of this hateful speech and malicious behavior. Conversations I have seen thus far have been about the difficulty of knowing who is responsible and concerns about Administration policing our ‘private’ lives. These conversations are unnecessarily confined to the conventional juridical paradigm: locate the objectionable act, identify the perpetrators, and punish them. But a narrow punitive paradigm presumes that punishment is sufficient to correct the situation, and makes it easy for us to disclaim responsibility for both the act itself and its resolution. I want to see a new paradigm for how we respond to wrongs against the members of our community based on student-level engagement and dialogue. We need to recognize that the harassment on livejournal represents the crystallization of existing attitudes on our campus. The purported distinction between theory and practice needs demystifying: we spend our time studying sexism, classism, racism, Othering, etc. Why aren’t people angrier when we see it manifested among and against our peers?

There are three different perspectives from which to evaluate the nature of the harassment. First, the perpetrators. It might be argued that collective action by the students or institutional action by the College is unwarranted unless the perpetrators deliberately acted maliciously. Second, the perspective of the victim(s). It might be argued that student or College action is only justified if the victim is upset and wants to see some kind of adjudication. But the third perspective is the most relevant, and trumps any arguments based on the first two: the substance of the harassment. In my opinion, regardless of the intent of the perpetrators or the feelings of the victim, the substance of the harassment itself is sufficiently malicious and offensive to warrant collective student action and possibly institutional action by the College. I think it is valuable to publicize what exactly was written so that we are clear. Particularly awful examples include: ‘someone just kill her,’ ‘smack her with a dick,’ ‘I'll pay a $100000 to the first dude who fucks her and brings me evidence,’ ‘I would rather fuck her in the ass first… Then you can kill her if you want,’ ‘Just sell her into the sex trade to Africa. She will probably get Aids and die anyway,’ and ‘Just put your hand over her mouth and suffocate her while fucking her.’

These comments are not ‘just words.’ These comments encourage murder, joke about disability, trivialize rape and prostitution, and completely objectify and dehumanize the victim. One cannot claim as a defense that the incitement to violence was ‘casual’ or ‘only joking.’ This kind of violent and misogynistic language cannot be accepted under any conditions. I will not bother noting the culturally problematic aspects of calling someone Pocahontas or using Africa as a threat. We go to Sarah Lawrence; we understand the special insensitivity of this language. That individuals in our community harbor such insensitivity, anger and malevolence is truly disturbing. We absolutely must respond against it.

This is not a private issue confined to the isolated acts of a few individuals; it is relevant to our public space and our public discourse because it happened here. What happens in private (if you want to consider the internet private) is informed by the nature of public norms and attitudes.

I want to reiterate that I am not conceiving of necessary student or institutional reaction in purely punitive terms. This is not about whether or not we can identify the perpetrators, or whether or not the school has any authority to take action. Whether the perpetrators will be or should be ‘punished’ is only one aspect of this issue. We have the opportunity to make a collective gesture against violent, misogynistic harassment. Whether or not the College responds formally, I hope students can take steps to demonstrate our rejection of this behavior, and do whatever is possible to heal and to prevent this situation from happening again. To do nothing would confirm the supposed insensitivity of our peers and our College.

What would collective student action look like? This is an opportunity to apply our studies and our talents. Some of our ideas include an all-campus anti-oppression workshop, a teach-in on hate speech and sexual harassment, and an art show through which to reflect on systems of oppression we see present in our lives. I will be leading a campaign in the spring, and I forward to a range of creative ideas for addressing this situation. We have the opportunity to reject not only the offenses of a few individuals, but also the bizarre air of hostility that tends to haunt our campus.

in solidarity,

Dani