EDITORIAL Harassment policy needs careful reform The University is proposing changes in the way it deals with sexual harassment on campus, and it's atxmt time. Even though people are quirk to recognize and condemn racial discrimination, they are less aware of and morn tolerant of sexual harassment. What the University is proposing will place sexual harassment in the same category as other forms of dis crimination. thereby giving it a recognized status as an unacceptable behavior. The proposal targets "inappropriate behavior" in tho work or educational environment. Such behavior is defined as "creating an intimidating, hostile or offen sive" environment through offensive words or pictures. There is nothing to distinguish between a one-time stupid comment and a pattern of deliberate harassment. Presumably each report will be evaluated on a case-by case basis. The plan attempts to remove some of thwbur don of reporting harass ment from the victim and places it on the shoulders of co-work ers. The proposal requires University employees to report any violations they become aware of. or any allega tions of violations they become aware of. Sexual harassment, much like rape, is often not reported by the vic tim out of an unde served fooling of shame, guilt or embarrassment. Any step to remove that stigma and increase the likelihood of the incident being report ed is to be encouraged. It is in that spirit that the plan would permit victims to make anonymous accusations, but the University will not act unless two such reports are Hied against the same person. Anonymous complaints are fine, so long as they are not used against a person in any way. The accused should be mado aware of the complaint, thereby giving him or her the opportunity to rocognize the offending behavior and correct it. But any action beyond that should not be allowed to occur with no more than anonymous accusations. Mar lene Drescher, director of student advocacy, said stu dents may not file complaints if they fear being brought into an investigation. The only solution, and not a very good one. is to make it more difficult for a case to be investigated. It is entire ly unethical, and illegal, to take action against a person who has been anonymously accused. The Sixth Amend ment guarantees the right of the accused "to be con fronted with the witnesses against him," and the Uni versity should be careful it doesn't cross that line. _Oregon Daily tha Dragon Daiy Emerald ■* put*»had dariy Monday through Frday dunng tha «choo yea> and Iu«»aay and Thmaday during lha »umm#r By in* Dragon Daily Emaraid Putanmno Co me ai tna Umvwvty ot Oregon Eugana, Oagon Tha Emaraid otwataa mdapandanii) ol ma Unmarvty «nth oftca* M Suae 300 ol tha Ert> SM*n« Jsnsson Sports Editor Osvs Oartxmnosu Supptomonts Editor CsMy Andor«o" Associate editor*: 1 immy Baley. ShKtont Govrnm*nt'Aci'»s. Qaraiyn Trepoe Commurvfy. Co»een Pohkg, Hgfm BOuLStbonAiJm-mlrMtior N*w* Stott Scott Andre. Cheater Alien Mar Bondar. Justm Brown Sarah Dork. Dylan Coutt* Mag Ooaotpn Amy Davenport Amanda Ferine. Teresa Hunts*nger. L/*a Kneel* L>»* Maun. Dom.an McLean Rebecca Merntt. Steve M.ms. Titlm. Mueller, Tr>na Noel. Ml-irr Schuster. E»en Shoe Mchae- Slender. Em* Studencka. Moron Stator. **cfteie Thompton Agtaor. Amy Van Tuyt. Todd Whams Qenerel Manager: Judy Rod Production Manager. Moneie Rou Adverllelng: Tom leecn. Soar on Vat Sore* Managers Shawn Berven Omen Monog* Jwia Irda. Teresa Isabelle Ptukp Johnson It. Chris honor Jeremy Mason. Van V O'Bryan II G*an Oh. Rachael Tori. An^e Anden Bnon Wmdieen Cioeeitted: Peggy McGinn Manager Bony logon. Sharon Sauve Distribution: Rebecca Brooks. Kristi Van Gorder Anthony Wynn Business: Kathy Carbone Supervisor Judy ConnoSy Production: Ingrid Whte PtoOuCtcr Coordnekv Knslme Granger Dee McCobb. Stacy M-tehon ionrvier Roland. Jenmter Smrtn, Ann* Stephenson Ntwwoom Butm«uOftfc« ..J44-SS11 ..344-6512 Oitpiay Awnfl - cmtfim Aavruung-M»4343 ’/* IA ns ho 8*4 Sh uttt'i'fcv* u*s« Sit 'fX»W*A1t> **H* PfcOfU Twt P6oOE **JW ^*,T-(U€ **4SWtR Stt So they propped him on boshia. COMMENTARY Minority students not retreating By Jack Orozco Members of the group Students of Color Building Bridges were offended by the unsigned staff editorial regarding our efforts [ODE, Man h 3). We found the piet e to he grossly ignorant of our campaign and the attitude of the authors to he overly conde scending. We believe the edito rial's vocabulary, such as the words "alleging." "complain ing" and "threatening” were a misrepresentation, and they misconstrued the readers' opin ions. SCBB is a coalition of stu dents of color from the four underrepresented student unions and the ASUO It formed in the summer of 1992 to improve the communication and trust level between admin istrators and students of color ot the University. Recently, we let it lie known that the University, despite its wonderful rhetoric, has largely neglected to make diversity a priority. Despite President Myles Brand's and other Univer sity leaders' ceremonial lip ser vice, they have made virtually no progress on people of colors’ concerns. They fail to take peo ple of color seriously, instead entertaining us with flowery dialogue of the University being a meeting ground for all As a result, after much thought and discussion, SCBB has instigated a comprehensive campaign to pressure the Uni versity into making diversity a credible and sincere objective. We have presented the Universi ty with a petition of our griev ances and a list of demands We have asked that the University soon begin making sufficient progress in the areas of multi cultural curriculum, faculty of color and support services. Otherwise, we will initiate a sequence of consequences, rang ing from the encouragement of alumni and high school students of color to discontinue their affiliations with the University, to the withdrawing en masse from the University as an expression of our extreme dis satisfaction. Our campaign has received an overwhelming amount of sup port from community organiza tions and leaders. This senti man! is expressed by the exw u live director of Centro Latino Americano. Antonio Sardinia What the students of color advocate is precisely the step we need to take" [ODE. March 5). People nationally have made available a variety of resources for SCBB. in fat:t. Brand person ally thanked us and said he appreciates our "very construc tive. well thought out approach." Brand also assured us that administrators will offer no resistance to our campaign Some of our requests do require monetary support, and in the past, J99()'s Ballot Mea sure 5 has often been used to justify not funding these types of reforms, as was repeatedly men tioned in the stuff editorial But the measure isn't at fault; even before it was approved in 1990, the University claimed it had difficulty in locating fund ing. SCBB asks the University to look at the projects it is funding over diversity. The staff editorial also dis cussed sensitivity seminars. It said "the goal could be attained by fixing the multicultural cur riculum. not by requiring re education’ seminars. Sensitivi ty cannot be taught but is acquired as a result of exposure to other cultures and environ ments.” First, how can the Emero/d advocate multiculturalism when it has so historically opposed it? Second, sensitivity seminars aren't imposed "re-education." but rather awareness training And we have concerns over whether these should be man dated — if not. then what incen tives would assure attendance7 Finally, of course sensitivity can Ik* taught — racism certainly is. One of SCBB's most impera tive requests is the diversifica tion of the entire curriculum, not just for students of color but particularly for European-Ainer icans It's vital they are provided with an understanding of racial issues in the context of the Unit ed States. And our current cur riculum is recognized as seri ously deficient by noted national authorities. But the most offensive senti ment expressed by the staff edi torial is that our campaign is a retreat, an attempt to run away, “its members would rather give up. pack their bags and move on How can the Emerald advocate multiculturalism when it has so historically opposed it? to more diverse pastures." If it were truly a retreat, then why would we initiate a cam paign7 Why would we continue our involvement as committee members, as officers, directors and as representatives in the community? Why would we be receiving the extraordinary praise that we are? The stalf editorial’s authors believe that "if these students are interested in building, rather than burning, bridges, they will stay and carry on the struggle." But why is this burden put on us as students of color? The University has employed staff to do the exact forms of advocacy we are performing As people of color, we are the recip ients of racism, and yet we do almost everything to combat it. Because of the systematic oppression of white racism, European-Americans have an obligation to fight it. Some would say it's simply a white problem; because whites contin ue to initiate, maintain and con done it. people of color simply suffer from racism, as activist Eric Ward said. People should remember that our struggles have existed, unlike our campaign, for quite some time And we are tired of being used by the administra tion to create the appearance that reforms are being made. Wo therefore feel compelled to take our education — our activism — to an institution that sincerely struggles for diversity. March 12. University leaders will present an update of their progress on our list of demands to SCBB. It's crucial that the University and people of color continue their support over the next several months regarding our campaign lark Orozco is a member of Students of Color Building Bridges and a pre-journalism motor