Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (May 16, 1997)
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: Steven Asbury MANAGING EDITOR: Thom Schoenbom NIGHT EDITORS: Steven Asbury &• Sarah Kickler EDITORIAL EDITORS: Ashley Bach & Brian Diamond ' * III Hi * it i \ editorials, letters, commentary and perspective NEWSROOM: (541)346-5511 DISPLAY ADVERTISING: (541) 346-3712 BUSINESS OFFICE: (541)346-5512 CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING: (541) 346-4343 EDITORIAL Policy changes reflect, improve campus reality ■ OUR OPINION: The new laws dealing with sexual misconduct and student/faculty relationships will help solve difficult problems The decision has been made. The University Senate approved changes to the Student Conduct Code and a proposal for an Ore gon Administrative Rule Wednesday that clarify and create University policy for relationships between students and faculty as well as sexual misconduct. That’s a lot to swallow. But put sim ply, the decision helps clear up the messy world of sexual assault and in jects a bit of common sense into policy regarding student-professor relation ships. We support the senate decision, on both counts. - -i . a-** Last fall, we were less than enthusias tic about both policies. Our present change in heart mostly lies in specifics. Last fall, neither policy had any. Now they do. The original changes in the conduct code were particularly troublesome. In October, we called the policy’s defini tions of sexual assault and explicit con sent “broad” and “dangerous.” After months of work, the Student Conduct Code Committee worked to improve many of these deficiencies. We applaud them for that. Now explicit consent is defined as “voluntary, non-coerced and clear com munication indicating a willingness to engage in a particular act.” This reflects more accurately the reality of sexual be havior among University students. Other important terms specifically defined in elude “sexual assault” and “rape.” Another welcome addition is mandat ed punishment for those who have sex with students who are in “mental inca pacitation,” like under the influence of drugs or alcohol. This is also an impor tant aspect that reflects much of what happens on and off campus among the student body. The student-faculty edict is a bit more simple. It seems the only people getting up in arms about it are faculty and per haps a few students with wide dating preferences. With this law especially, we wonder why it wasn’t implemented long ago. Of course professors should not be dating students they supervise. Of course this is a conflict of interest. Even our original fear of this law being a “broad proclamation banning chaste behavior” seems to have been quelled. The specific language of the law pre vents witch hunts or abolition of proper student-professor relationships. The fact that a third party can issue a complaint has also become less prob lematic. Now, any parties with com plaints “found to have been intentional ly dishonest or made with willful disregard of the truth” will be punished with the "full range of sanctions avail able.” We like all these changes. Now let’s get these new rules into effect so they can start making a difference. Even if they don’t automatically make the cam pus community safer, they’ll definitely make it a lot simpler. This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald editorial board. Media innate common sense story weeks in advance. Before that, it was former journalism dean Arnold Ismach suggesting that we devote more energy to this “important” issue. Yesterday, Good Morning America, ABC News, The Oregonian, the Associ ated Press, Portland television and radio stations from Southern California called the University to get informa tion on the subject. What’s the topic all the nation’s media want to know about? The University’s new sex policies. The University Senate’s move to revise the Student Conduct Code's definition of sexual misconduct and to reprimand faculty members who engage in sexual or romantic relation ship with students they directly super vise is important, and we commend their decision. But it’s not the most important thing happening on campus. There’s a bill before the Oregon Legislature that could possibly eliminate the incidental fee process and the student programs it funds. There’s a debate between President e expected reporter Tad Shannon and The Register-Guard to cover it — but not three Dave Frohnmayer and student groups over corporate sponsorship and farm workers’ rights. Measure 47 is forcing the University and the surrounding community to plan for major budget cutbacks. The concept that teachers shouldn’t date their students isn’t a revolution ary idea. Neither is students’ needing explicit consent before engaging in sex. These concepts should be part of everyone’s common sense — not the hottest topic since the discovery of possible life on Mars. Now that the senate’s decision has been made, our energy should be focused on some of these other issues. Maybe the media will follow. ui inio iiu i bninduiwuMUiON One final note: When ABC News called the Emerald to inquire about the sex policy, they said they’d be coming to campus on Tuesday, and they asked us where they could find a good party. Anyone got an idea? This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald editorial board. READER VOICES Do you think students should be allowed to date professors? PY “I don’t think it’s right be cause it could lead to eth ical problems and a con flict of interest, whether or not they’re taking a class from them." Reuben Burda Freshman “It could be a problem if it leads to special treatment. A line has to be drawn some where for profession alism." Dennis Asa! Freshman “If they’re not in a class, they can date them. If they're in the professor's class, I don't think they should ,if not, then it’s OK." Connie Rawson Sophomore “I feel that teachers should be able to date their students only af ter the student is done taking a class from them.” Jessie Thompson Sophomore Contact us ■ BY MAIL: P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403 ■ BY PHONE: (541)346-5511 ■ BYE-MAIL ode@oregon. uoregon. edu ■ IN PERSON: Suite 300, EMU LETTERS Biking maniacs This marks the fifth time I have been struck by a bicycle while walking on University sidewalks. The fact that I am bruised and sore shouldn’t stop folks from racing around on pedestrian walkways. What should stop them is the law. I have always been on a side walk when these collisions oc cur. Am I at fault? Probably so if (gasp) reading while walking counts. I just have a feeling the if I were to take a Harley and do the same ride as some of our bicy clists, I would soon be looking at a judge. I have noticed a dis regard of offenses by our cam pus gendarmes — I suppose parking tickets are of much more importance than public safety. Riding bicycles on sidewalks upon the University’s grounds is illegal and occasionally very painful to old folks (original word replaced) like me. If you can’t help yourself and just have to ride the walks, could you at least slow down? W. Richard Patty General Science
