Wisconsin DEMOCRAT Rep. Jason Fields, while addressing the State Assembly, conducted himself more like a thug than a lawmaker.
Jason Fields, not shouting obscenities or throwing microphones
Of course, passions run high on certain issues, but that doesn't mean an elected official, like Fields from Milwaukee, should use profanity to degrade his colleagues.
Milwaukee-area lawmakers heaped heavy criticism on a bill expanding the city’s Parental Choice program, during debate on the bill Tuesday night. The legislation removes the enrollment cap for vouchers and expands the program to private schools in all of Milwaukee County.
Milwaukee Democrat Jason Fields (D-Milwaukee) accused lawmakers from both parties of playing with the lives of kids, angrily telling them to “knock it off.” Fields questioned why lawmakers have a problem with kids in MPS, before saying “you’re all full of (expletive)” and throwing his microphone.
Here's video of Fields being interviewed by Mike Gousha in March 2009.
It shows he's capable of conducting himself in an appropriate manner.
Clearly, Fields is very passionate about the issue of school choice and the plight of black kids in Milwaukee. It's a shame he couldn't control himself. Rather than delivering powerful remarks, they become lost in his anger and language. His message gets lost in his poor conduct.
I suppose Fields succumbed to frustration yesterday, but that's absolutely no excuse to yell at the Assembly, "You all are full of sh-t."
That's debate in Madison?
All members of the Assembly should have jumped to their feet and shouted in unison, "SHAME, SHAME, SHAME!" ________________
Transcript of Jason Fields' remarks to the Assembly, May 10, 2011
REP. JASON FIELDS: You know, I wasn't gonna talk on this kinda stuff because, quite honestly, I feel like it's futile. We've been here before. We do this all the time. And some of you are starting to piss me off. You couldn't just keep me cool. You're pissing me off with your tactics.
It's funny to me how you all have a say-so when it come to children in Milwaukee. You all got a say-so. I don't like the talk on this floor because, quite honestly, I don't even think the intellectual capital is that high.
We doin' this and at the end of the day, what is it about? What is it about?
Everybody, look at my face: You're pissing me off. Because it means NOTHING to you.
(Shouts)
NONE of you! You don't have kids in your house, you haven't taken care of 'em. But you got the morale. Really? Show me how many black men you've taken care of. YOU HAVEN'T. YOU HAVEN'T! I HAVE!
FOUR YOUNG BLACK MEN. NOBODY TOOK CARE OF NONE OF 'EM! BUT YOU GOT THE AUDACITY TO SIT HERE LIKE YOU DOIN' SOMETHING!?!? FOR REAL? FOR REAL!
WHERE ARE YOU? ALL OF YOU, where are you?
(Lowers his voice, but still angry)
You're quick to send 'em to jail. So let me get somethin' straight, because again, I don't like to talk about this kind of stuff because I, I... honestly, it ticks me off.
I think you have an amendment comin' from me. Y'all, y'all playin' with black kids, man, y'all playin'. All of you, you're playin'. Knock it off. Knock it off. You're playin'.
(Raises his voice)
The same people on my side of the aisle, you're, you know, with all due respect, knock it off. KNOCK IT OFF!
YOU DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT THESE KIDS! And y'all has high morals. You ain't took none of 'em in! Where were they? Did they go to your house?
HELL NO! SO KNOCK IT OFF, WITH YOUR HIGH MORALS!
And with all due respect to my friends on that side of the aisle, I gotta say this: You can't show up and be like, you know, 'I'm gonna be cool with black kids today.'
You ALL are wrong! And you have been!
YOU DON'T SLEEP WITH 'EM! YOU DON'T SEE THE PAIN THEY GO THROUGH! I DO! Because I'm there. I'm there. They in my house. I feed them. I put 'em in dress shirts.
So which one of you will tell me that I'm wrong?
Stand up. Which one of you?
That's what I thought.
It's easy to pretend to be like this. It's easy, but honestly, I gotta be honest with all of you. I'm tired. Because I'm fighting for young black men and I'm tired. And you're not helping me, none of you. You're not helpin'.
You get caught up in school choice, MPS. Really? Did y'all notice that they all black kids? Did you all notice that? Guess what? The kids in MPS don't have a problem with the kids at the Milwaukee Parental Choice program. They don't have a problem with each other. So why do you?
A recording released by the Republican Party of Wisconsin exposes University of Wisconsin - Oshkosh Professor Stephen Richards using class time to actively campaign for the recall of State Senator Randy Hopper, encouraging his students to sign recall petitions offered by circulators present in his classroom.
In the tape, recorded during a criminal justice class, Richards can be heard encouraging a female student to sign the recall petition even though she thinks she lives outside the district, and instructing students to sign using their campus address instead of their parents’ home address. He also tells students to look for petition circulators all around campus and “in the bars.”
...In the recording, Richards openly discusses his involvement in the recall effort, detailing organizational meetings he has attended, and using the term “we” to describe recall organizers.
As the Professor discusses the various reasons he supports the recall efforts, he promotes several falsehoods about the effects of the budget repair bill, saying at one point “It will be a lot less, um, rewarding to be in law enforcement, because they're gonna cut all the police unions."
"Either he’s purposely lying to students in an effort to provoke them to sign the petitions, or he is woefully misinformed and spreading severe inaccuracies along to students who rely on him for factual information,” says [Mark] Jefferson, [Executive Director of the Republican Party of Wisconsin]. “Teachers and college professors have a responsibility to their students and to their communities. We trust them to deliver facts and stay above the political fray - at the very least when they are at the head of a classroom. This Professor has seriously failed his students. One has to wonder if this is an isolated incident or a more common occurrence in our state's classrooms."
Sen. Randy Hopper called for an investigation into the political activity of college professors along with the resignation of a University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh faculty member who encouraged his students during class to sign a petition to recall the Republican lawmaker.
The state GOP, college Republican groups and several lawmakers immediately demanded accountability for UWO criminal justice professor Stephen Richards Tuesday after a conservative radio host broadcast a candid recording of Richards encouraging students on March 7 to sign a petition to recall Hopper, R-Fond du Lac.
“Quite frankly, nothing short of this professor resigning will be adequate for the students and the parents of UW-Oshkosh,” Hopper said.
...The UWO professor’s actions raise more questions about irregularities in the recall petition process, Hopper said, calling the issue a “misuse of authority” that should not be tolerated.
“People send their kids to school to be educated not indoctrinated, and this professor took state-funded time to make a political stand,” he said.
One of Richards’ students made the audio recording and later released it to the Republican Party of Wisconsin, a spokesperson said. Conservative commentator Charlie Sykes of Milwuakee-based WTMJ-AM (620) broadcast the recording Tuesday with Senate President Mike Ellis, R-Neenah, demanding an explanation from the university.
UWO Chancellor Richard Wells issued a statement Tuesday afternoon saying the issue was investigated after students complained, and corrective action as taken by the end of March. Students have since reported classroom conditions improved, according to the statement.
Kudos to the student for recording Richards' completely unacceptable behavior and busting the guy.
Richards has shamed the university.
"Corrective action" was taken.
Right.
Like what? A warning not to gather signatures during class?
If Richards is willing to do something as blatantly wrong as using class time to round up signatures to recall Randy Hopper, I'm sure he allows his political views to color his "teaching" on a regular basis.
Richards got caught this time, but I don't think his is an isolated case. This sort of misconduct permeates public institutions.
Richards should not be talking about recalling Governor Scott Walker or shilling for unions.
He's lying to his students. This guy is a disgrace.
Sickening.
I also question the fact that Stephen Richards, a convicted felon, is a tenured professor at UW Oshkosh.
A jury convicted him of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than 1,000 pounds of marijuana.
In 1984, Richards began serving a nine-year sentence. By the time he was released on parole three years later, he had been housed in nine federal prisons.
From 1977 to 1990, Lenza served time in Missouri’s State Penitentiary in Jefferson City, also called “The Walls.” He was convicted of murder in 1975 after confessing to killing his first wife and mother-in-law, putting his mother-in-law’s body in a barrel and throwing the barrel into the Mississippi River.
Lenza says he had a happy childhood while growing up in St. Louis County. In fact, he credits his family for their unconditional love and for never giving up on him. He says he never could have made it through his incarceration without their support.
Although he refuses to speak of the murders (partly because he feels that while he can defend his actions, his victims cannot), Lenza says that when people are in their late teens and early 20s they don’t understand consequences and outcomes the way they do in later years.
“Things seem impossible, overwhelming. You don’t have a long-term view,” he says. He adds that his incarceration showed him the downside of violence.
“My years at Missouri Eastern Penitentiary, The Walls, which is one of the most violent societies in America, certainly showed me the futility in violence in solving issues. You have to find other ways,” he says.
Good Lord!
Lenza is a staunch advocate for the abolition of the death penalty. His wife of 12 years, Sherry Lenza, is no less steadfast in her views. “Executions don’t deter; they just brutalize the population,” she says.
Since his release from prison, Lenza has completed college, married, begun pursuing doctoral degrees and become a father. As Lenza takes his son, Michael Jesse, from his wife’s arms so she can answer the telephone, he says that “peace is its own truth” and today is a different day.
While he knows his past will always be part of his life, Mike Lenza concentrates on where he is now. “It’s not like you totally leave that behind,” he says. “It’s been almost 30 years. A lot changes in 30 years.”
Of course, Lenza opposes the death penalty.
Lenza was convicted of MURDERING his wife and mother-in-law.
If I were Sherry, Lenza wife #2, I would be a little nervous.
I also don't think that Lenza belongs in the classroom. ______________
UPDATE: Apparently, Richards didn't learn his lesson, in spite of UW Oshkosh taking "corrective action."
Charlie Sykes posts an e-mail he received from a student in Stephen Richards' class:
Hey Charlie,
I'm sitting in Dr. (I use that term loosely) Richards' class as I'm writing this. Just wanted to let you know that instead of apologizing for his actions and everything that has come out in the last couple days, he scolded us. He started by telling us that he has had a police escort all day due to death threats. He then proceeded to tell us that it is illegal to record a professor without his/her permission. He stated that "anyone has any smart phones or recording devices, to turn them off or leave." He then proceeded to tell us that he could have charged those students with some sort of BS crime and had us arrested and kicked out of school. His rant has been going on for the better part of 20 minutes now and isn't showing any signs of slowing down or stopping. Just like his political rants which take place multiple times per week, this is the kind of crap that disrupts our opportunity to learn at an institution of higher education.
I don't see the need to be scolded because this idiot finally got busted. As a criminal justice student graduating in May, this guy is a disgrace to me and the rest of the students in the program.
Just a heads up that absolutely nothing has changed since the "corrective action" that was handed down from Chancellor Wells. The guy is a joke and doesn't deserve his position.
Thanks for getting this story on the air. The CJ students really appreciate that our story is finally being heard.
Bottom line: "NOTHING HAS CHANGED." ______________
University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh officials said today they will not ask a professor who encouraged his students to sign a recall petition to resign, nor will they conduct a full investigation into the on-campus political activity of faculty as requested by some state lawmakers.
State Sen. Randy Hopper, Senate President Mike Ellis and the Republican Party of Wisconsin demanded the investigation and resignation of UWO Criminal Justice Professor Stephen Richards after an anonymous student released an audio recording on Tuesday of Richards urging his class in March to sign a petition to recall Hopper.
UWO Chancellor Richard Wells said during a Friday afternoon press conference that he respects the senators, but “we don’t always have to agree.”
UWO is standing by Richards.
I suppose that's because Richards is on the same page politically as UWO officials.
He's safe and he knows it. That's probably why he runs political rallies out of his classroom.
I would like to once again apologize to my students for not showing more restraint in the classroom. I regret that I crossed the line when I failed to comply completely with UW System policy concerning political discussion in the classroom. I am sorry that this may have tarnished the reputation of the university community. I wish all my students continued success in their studies.
Professor Stephen C. Richards
University of Wisconsin Oshkosh
After "I wish all my students continued success in their studies," I think Richards left out "if they agree with me politically and do all they can to get Republican state senators and Scott Walker recalled."
Richards' apology seems extremely forced.
UW Oshkosh has made documents relating to Richards available online after a public records request by the Oshkosh Northwestern.
A former Rutgers University freshman was indicted Wednesday for secretly viewing a same-sex encounter involving his roommate - who later jumped to his death from the George Washington Bridge.
Dharun Ravi, 19, of Plainsboro, N.J., could face up to 5 years in prison if convicted of the top charges in the 15-count indictment announced by Middlesex County prosecutor Bruce Kaplan.
Ravi was charged by a grand jury with bias intimidation, invasion of privacy and witness and evidence tampering for using a webcam to spy on Tyler Clementi's dorm room date with another man.
Once Clementi's Sept. 22, 2010, suicide became public, Ravi asked witnesses not to implicate him and gave misleading information to investigators, Kaplan said.
According to the indictment, Ravi also knew the target of his webcam would be intimidated because of his sexual orientation.
"The grand jury indictment spells out cold and calculated acts against our son Tyler by his former college roommate," the Clementi family said in a statement.
"If these facts are true, as they appear to be, then it is important for our criminal justice system to establish clear accountability under law. We are eager to have the process moved forward for justice in this case."
What Ravi did (allegedly) to Tyler Clementi was beyond cruel. It was criminal.
If Ravi is convicted, he could spend 5 years in prison.
I think the odds of him serving that sort of sentence are slim. But hopefully, he will be held accountable under the law and given more than a slap on the wrist.
It seems inadequate to use the term "bullying" for what Ravi did to Clementi. Clearly, Ravi took bullying to new heights.
How does it get to the point where bullying becomes a crime? How could Ravi, an adult, be so callous and inhumane and lacking in conscience?
Somewhere along the line, Ravi wasn't reined in. I don't believe this was the first time Ravi bullied someone. I doubt that he suddenly turned into a thug. I suspect it was a life-long pattern with him.
Bottom line: People in positions of authority - teachers, coaches, parents, adults - cannot look the other way when they see a child being victimized. They must intervene and take bullying seriously. The bullies must face consequences. They must be punished for their anti-social behavior.
No happy, healthy individual would torture another innocent human being.
Authority figures must NOT blame the victims. When the adults ignore the sadistic behavior of bullies, they passively condone it. That is unacceptable. It is unconscionable.
The bullies are empowered and their hate-filled habits escalate.
It is inexcusable.
When people in positions of authority fail to stop bullying, they create monsters like Ravi.
There's no question that some dedicated teachers have suffered as a result of the viciousness of the anti-Scott Walker budget protests and the union thuggery that has gripped the state since early February.
Some teachers have been unfairly criticized for being selfish and lazy and greedy.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel comes to the rescue!
It offers several sympathetic vignettes depicting teachers as heroes, suggesting they've been victimized by the budget battles and the fallout from the endless ugly protests.
They have been called lazy and greedy on blogs and website comment boards.
Their motives and commitment to their profession have been questioned.
They have been told they're paid too much money for their nine-month contracts, that their health insurance is too generous and that they need to pay more toward their retirement.
In recent months, Wisconsin's public school teachers have found themselves at the epicenter of a widespread fight over public-sector workers' earnings, their ability to bargain and the burden they pose to taxpayers and local governments.
And yet, they feel an expectation to shrug off the criticism and enthusiastically report for work every day, where they are entrusted to teach even their critics' children, and meet an ever-growing set of demands on their performance.
No wonder Morrow, a sixth-grade teacher at Prairie View Elementary School in North Prairie, characterized the mood among her colleagues as "pretty bleak."
"I'm not sure when I became Public Enemy No. 1," she said.
Obviously, this article is an exercise in cherry-picking.
Of course, there are terrific teachers who really care about helping children learn and achieve.
There are also teachers who aren't devoted to their profession as much as their salary and benefits.
We know that there are wonderful teachers. It's really not necessary for the Journal Sentinel to defend them, and it's certainly not right to cast supporters of Scott Walker as being anti-teacher.
Since the Journal Sentinel has been doing pieces on teachers as victims, I think there should be some articles telling the stories of teachers like Fred Levenhagen, and the liars willing to give their employers fraudulent medical excuses, and the ones who chose to protest rather than teach, keeping thousands and thousands of kids out of the classroom and forcing schools to close.
The Journal Sentinel should provide balanced coverage and tell the complete story.
The reality is some teachers have been victimizers.
Sparkly rock lover 9-year-old Danielle Christenson breaks rocks apart with a hammer to see what they look like inside.
She was suspended from Rossman Elementary School in Hartford when she wanted to share her discoveries with her friends.
School officials called police when they learned that Danielle brought a hammer, a screwdriver, and rocks to school in her backpack. They suspended Danielle for THREE days for her offense.
Danielle's mom Christina thinks the school overreacted.
I think they went way overboard.
Christina is disturbed that the school principal didn't judge an innocent mistake on a case by case basis.
Principal Pam Pyzyk says she did evaluate Danielle's specific case with a threat assessment team. Pyzyk says, "It's sad to say but there have been things that have occurred in schools. And you have to take every threat and every situation very seriously."
"What if the situation arose where someone brought something and some other child came across it. There's just all kinds of opportunities for serious situations to develop."
I think it's extreme for the school's threat assessment team to consider the tools to be worthy of a three-day suspension. Calling police over the matter is ridiculous.
What did Pyzyk think the police were going to do? The police should have issued her a citation for dragging them to the school on an utterly needless call.
Yes, Danielle had rocks in her backpack.
Yes, members of the Rossman Elementary threat assessment team have rocks in their heads.
Priya Venkatesan ‘90, a former Writing 5 lecturer and research associate at Dartmouth Medical School, is threatening to name seven of her former students in a potential civil rights lawsuit against the College, DMS and Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Venkatesan announced Friday. Venkatesan also plans to write an autobiographical book that will include details of her experience at Dartmouth and name the seven students in question, all of whom were members of her Winter term Writing 5 class in 2008, she said.
Venkatesan is considering suing the College for harassment and discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which protects against employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin.
The suit would likely name faculty members as well, including Tom Cormen, chair of the writing program at the College, and DMS professor Christopher Lowrey. Cormen declined to comment, and Lowrey did not return requests for comment by press time.
Venkatesan, who said she left Dartmouth voluntarily on March 17, contends that she was subjected to “inappropriate and unprofessional” behavior while at the College. Venkatesan contacted a New Hampshire lawyer on Friday to determine whether she had grounds for a potential lawsuit. She will speak with the lawyer again on Monday, she said. Venkatesan refused to disclose the name of the attorney.
“I think that I have a good case because there were just so many instances – it was almost an incessant barrage – of hostility, nastiness and anti-intellectualism that I may just in fact have a case, but I’m not a lawyer,” Venkatesan said in an interview with The Dartmouth.
...Students were first informed of a possible lawsuit in an e-mail from Venkatesan sent on April 25, according to one student from Venkatesan’s class. The student is not one of those Venkatesan named as a potential defendant in the suit.
Behavior in the class did not rise to the level of harassment or discrimination, the student said, although many students stopped paying attention in class and complained about Venkatesan to Cormen. Students believed that Venkatesan did not accept opinions contrary to her own and would lower the grades of students who disagreed with her, the student said. The median grade in the class was a B, according to the Registrar’s website. All other sections of Writing 5 had a median grade of B+ or higher that term.
“We didn’t like her because she was not a good teacher, and she wasn’t very open to others’ ideas,” the student said. “It had nothing to do with her race or anything like that.”
As an example of Venkatesan’s rejection of views different from her own, the student highlighted Venkatesan’s cancelation of class for a week after the class applauded a student who contradicted Venkatesan’s opinions about post-modernism.
Venkatesan said the incident occurred when she was lecturing about “The Death of Nature,” a book by Carolyne Merchant, and the witch trials of the Renaissance. The student went on a “diatribe” about the inappropriate nature of challenging patriarchal authority, Venkatesan said. Vakatesan respected the student’s right to express this opinion, she said, but the manner in which he vocalized his views and the applause afterward were disrespectful and offensive.
“I was horrified,” Venkatesan said. “My responsibility is not to stifle them, but when they clapped at his comment, I thought that crossed the line … I was facing intolerance of ideas and intolerance of freedom of expression.”
Venkatesan contacted Cormen about the event, she said, but claims she received no support from him. She canceled class because the incident caused her “intellectual and emotional distress,” she said. This event, which occurred on Feb. 1, would likely be included in a list of grievances relating to a potential lawsuit, she said.
...“I understand that there are such things as bad working environments — a shithole is just a shithole, and that’s not illegal, and I know that,” she said. “But sometimes you have to take time out and address the issue of justice in society and to really implement the values that are so lacking at Dartmouth.”
From IvyGate, here's the e-mail Venkatesan sent to her students:
Dear former class members of Science, Technology and Society:
I tried to send an email through my server but got undelivered messages. I regret to inform you that I am pursuing a lawsuit in which I am accusing some of you (whom shall go unmentioned in this email) of violating Title VII of anti-federal discrimination laws.
The feeling that I am getting from the outside world is that Dartmouth is considered a bigoted place, so this may not be news and I may be successful in this lawsuit. I am also writing a book detailing my eperiences as your instructor, which will "name names" so to speak. I have all of your evaluation and these will be reproduced in the book.
Have a nice day.
How did this woman manage to get a teaching position at Dartmouth?
Dartmouth General Counsel Bob Donin does not believe Venkatesan’s lawsuit has legal merit, he said in a statement e-mailed to The Dartmouth.
“It has come to our attention that a former faculty member has e-mailed some undergraduates and faculty members mentioning the possibility of legal action,” Donin said in the statement. “We have determined that there is no basis for such action, and we have advised the students and faculty members of this.”
Venkatesan took a position at a large research university on April 14. She said she was uncomfortable naming the institution.
Venkatesan seems to have some serious issues.
Getting so bent out of shape because students applauded in response to another student's comment is really weird. The woman cancelled class for a week because the incident caused her such "intellectual and emotional distress."
Using Venkatesan's criteria, teachers and students all over the country could be suing each other.
Who doesn't experience "intellectual and emotional distress" sometime in the classroom?
Venkatesan needs to get a grip, and maybe consider pursuing a different career path.
The National Day of Silence brings attention to anti-LGBT name-calling, bullying and harassment in schools. This year’s event will be held in memory of Lawrence King, a California 8th-grader who was shot and killed Feb. 12 by a classmate because of his sexual orientation and gender expression. Hundreds of thousands of students will come together on April 25 to encourage schools and classmates to address the problem of anti-LGBT behavior.
Wisconsin's own U.S. Rep. Tammy Baldwin introduced a resolution to honor the National Day of Silence.
Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin today called on colleagues in the House to recognize this year's National Day of Silence to be held on April 25th. The annual National Day of Silence is a day in which students take a vow of silence to bring attention to the anti-lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) name-calling, bullying, and harassment faced by individuals in schools, including students, teachers, and other school staff. The National Day of Silence is coordinated nationally by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN). An estimated 500,000 students from nearly 5,000 junior and high schools in all 50 states and Puerto Rico have participated in the National Day of Silence in past years and more than 6,000 schools have registered this year.
In remarks on the House floor this morning, Congresswoman Baldwin told her colleagues, "This year's event will be held in memory of Lawrence King, a California 8th-grader who was shot and killed Feb. 12 by a classmate because of his sexual orientation and gender expression. Larry's death is an unnecessary reminder of what we already know: lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students continue to face pervasive harassment and victimization in schools. As students use their silence to demand schools are safe for all students, it is my hope that we in Congress will use our voices to ensure that it be so.
GLSEN reports startling statistics:
- More than 80 percent of LGBT students have been verbally harassed;
- Nearly 20 percent of LGBT students were physically assaulted by their peers at school because their sexual orientation or gender identity/expression;
- Almost 40 percent of LGBT students reported that faculty and staff never intervene when homophobic language is used in their presence;
- Nearly 30 percent of LGBT students reported missing at least one entire school day in the last month because they felt unsafe.
Reps. Baldwin (D-WI), Eliot Engel (D-NY) and Lois Capps (D-CA) have sponsored a resolution (H Con Res 328) supporting the goals and ideals of the National Day of Silence. Baldwin said Congressional support sends a strong signal that harassment and hate crimes will not be tolerated in our schools and in our communities.
Harassment of LGBT students is inexcusable.
Baldwin wants the Congress to send a strong signal that the harassment of these students will not be tolerated in our schools.
Hear, hear.
Too bad this day only focuses on LGBT students.
There should be a National Day of Silence for all kids who are bullied and harassed for reasons other than their sexual orientation and/or gender identity.
Senior Aliza Shvarts' controversial piece still could be included in the student show, which runs through May 1, Yale officials indicated.
"Her exhibit is not on display, but it's unresolved as to whether it will be," said Yale spokesman Tom Conroy, suggesting discussions were in progress between the university and Shvarts.
Discussions?
This is ridiculous. Maybe Jimmy Carter can help resolve the matter.
Shvarts kept mum through the weekend and early this week despite the school's calls for her to confess that she lied in describing how she constructed the project. She didn't respond to repeated calls or e-mails requesting comment.
Yale officials warned that unless the art major agreed to say in writing that she hadn't told the truth about artificially inseminating herself and then taking herbal drugs to try to induce miscarriages, they'd yank her piece from the student exhibit, which opened Tuesday morning and closes May 1.
Does this mean she gets an A on her project? ___________________
Aliza Shvarts' senior art project is turning into quite a battle.
The University will not allow Aliza Shvarts ’08 to display her controversial senior art project at its scheduled opening Tuesday unless she confesses in writing that the exhibition is a work of fiction, Yale officials said Sunday.
The University, meanwhile, acknowledged that it has disciplined two faculty members for their role in allowing Shvarts to proceed with a project that she claimed included nine months of repeated artificial inseminations followed by self-induced miscarriages.
As news of Shvarts’ project swept across the Web last week and attracted the ire of students and private citizens alike, Shvarts and the University engaged in a match of he-said/she-said: Shvarts stood by her project as she described it earlier last week in a news release, while the University — claiming Shvarts had privately denied actually committing the acts in question — dismissed it as a hoax that amounted to nothing more than “performance art.”
And with the scheduled opening of her exhibition rapidly approaching, the University only intensified its criticism this weekend.
“I am appalled,” Yale College Dean Peter Salovey said in a statement Friday. “This piece of performance art as reported in the press bears no relation to what I consider appropriate for an undergraduate senior project.”
School of Art Dean Robert Storr also condemned the project in a written statement Friday.
“If I had known about this, I would not have permitted it to go forward,” Storr said in the statement. “This is not an acceptable project in a community where the consequences go beyond the individual who initiates the project and may even endanger that individual.”
...Meanwhile, Salovey said in the Friday statement that he and Storr would reassess what constitutes an “appropriate” senior project and the process through which such projects are overseen by faculty.
Two days later, Salovey and Storr announced that an investigation had found “serious errors in judgement” on the part of two unnamed individuals — ostensibly her thesis adviser, School of Art lecturer Pia Lindman, and School of Art Director of Undergraduate Studies Henk van Assen — who had been involved in her project before it incited mass condemnation across campus and across the country and that “appropriate action” had been taken against them.
“In one case, the instructor responsible for the senior project should not have allowed it to go forward,” Salovey said. “In the other, an adviser should have interceded and consulted others when first given information about the project.”
...In his statement Sunday night, Salovey called on Shvarts to produce a written confession admitting that her project did not actually include the graphic acts that she had first described. He added that Shvarts will not be allowed to install her project unless she admits she did not try to inseminate herself and induce miscarriages and promises that no human blood will be displayed in her exhibit.
...If the exhibition does go ahead, it will likely require heavy security. A Yale official said last week that the incident has drawn more press inquiries to the University than any episode since the controversy over the admission of former Taliban diplomat Rahmatullah Hashemi in 2006.
But if the art opening does not continue, the University is likely to face criticism that it has restricted freedom of expression.
In his statement, Storr emphasized that the University “has a profound commitment to freedom of expression” and that he, personally, supports the legality of abortion.
“That said, Yale does not encourage or condone projects that would involve unknown health risks to the student,” Storr said. “Nor does it believe that open discourse and inquiry can exist in an educational and creative community when an individual exercises these rights but evades full intellectual accountability for the strong response he or she may provoke.”
Exactly.
Shvarts is exhibiting intellectual dishonesty.
Yale is not banning her project, disgusting as it is.
The university is demanding that she simply be honest and not misrepresent the truth of her art project.
This isn't a case of trampling on Shvarts' freedom of expression. And certainly, members of Yale's faculty are strongly pro-abortion. It's not a matter of School of Art Dean Robert Storr acting in support of anything as controversial as respecting life.
Shvarts can display her project, but she can't profess it to be something it's not.
With freedom comes responsibility.
Yale is not going to be complicit in Shvarts' irresponsibility. She can't claim that the university signed off on an assignment that would have endangered her physically.
To those of you claiming a ban of Shvarts' project would be an assault on free speech: I say, "It's not. Duh."
Senior Aliza Shvarts' controversial piece still could be included in the student show, which runs through May 1, Yale officials indicated.
"Her exhibit is not on display, but it's unresolved as to whether it will be," said Yale spokesman Tom Conroy, suggesting discussions were in progress between the university and Shvarts.
Discussions?
This is ridiculous. Maybe Jimmy Carter can help resolve the matter.
Shvarts kept mum through the weekend and early this week despite the school's calls for her to confess that she lied in describing how she constructed the project. She didn't respond to repeated calls or e-mails requesting comment.
Yale officials warned that unless the art major agreed to say in writing that she hadn't told the truth about artificially inseminating herself and then taking herbal drugs to try to induce miscarriages, they'd yank her piece from the student exhibit, which opened Tuesday morning and closes May 1.
Does this mean she gets an A on her project? ___________________
Yale student Aliza Shvarts insists that she really did inseminate herself and then abort her pregnancies as part of her senior art project.
A Yale University student who touched off a campus firestorm with her shocking claims of repeatedly artificially inseminating herself and then inducing miscarriages as part of an art project stood by her story Friday, despite statements from the university that her version of events is "creative fiction."
In a guest column that ran in Friday's Yale Daily News — which first reported her claims in Thursday's edition — senior art major Aliza Shvarts maintained that she had conducted artificial inseminations and carried out what she characterized as self-induced miscarriage procedures, though she never actually knew whether she was pregnant.
"For the past year, I performed repeated self-induced miscarriages," Shvarts wrote in Friday's column. "Using a needleless syringe, I would inject the sperm near my cervix within 30 minutes of its collection, so as to insure the possibility of fertilization.
"On the 28th day of my cycle, I would ingest an abortifacient, after which I would experience cramps and heavy bleeding. ... Because the miscarriages coincide with the expected date of menstruation (the 28th day of my cycle), it remains ambiguous whether the there (sic) was ever a fertilized ovum or not.
"The reality of the pregnancy, both for myself and for the audience, is a matter of reading."
She reiterated that the display, which she herself drew attention to with a press release circulated Wednesday, was meant to provoke discussion about the link between art and the human body.
"This piece — in its textual and sculptural forms — is meant to call into question the relationship between form and function as they converge on the body," she wrote.
..."The entire project is an art piece, a creative fiction designed to draw attention to the ambiguity surrounding form and function of a woman’s body," Helaine S. Klasky, associate dean and vice president for public affairs at Yale, said in the statement sent to FOXNews.com.
"Ms. Shvarts is engaged in performance art. Her art project includes visual representations, a press release and other narrative materials. She is an artist and has the right to express herself through performance art."
Shvarts' campus phone has been disconnected, and she did not respond to e-mailed requests for an interview. While she did not explicitly mention Yale officials' version of events in her Friday column, Klasky told various media that Shvarts had indicated what she would do if the university contended her story was false.
"She said if Yale puts out a statement saying she did not do this, she would say Yale was doing that to protect its reputation," Klasky told The Associated Press.
The public affairs official also wrote an e-mail to the Yale Daily News late Thursday night saying that Shvarts "denial is part of her performance. We are disappointed that she would deliberately lie to the press in the name of art.”
Shvarts shot back at the school, claiming her project was “university sanctioned,” according to the paper.
“I’m not going to absolve them by saying it was some sort of hoax when it wasn’t,” she told the Daily News. “I started out with the university on board with what I was doing, and because of the media frenzy they’ve been trying to dissociate with me. Ultimately I want to get back to a point where they renew their support.”
Shvarts said her project had the backing of Yale's Davenport College Dean Craig Harwood, as well as at least two faculty members within the School of Art.
Blah, blah, blah.
Pull the curtain on this one. The performance is over.
Senior Aliza Shvarts' controversial piece still could be included in the student show, which runs through May 1, Yale officials indicated.
"Her exhibit is not on display, but it's unresolved as to whether it will be," said Yale spokesman Tom Conroy, suggesting discussions were in progress between the university and Shvarts.
Discussions?
This is ridiculous. Maybe Jimmy Carter can help resolve the matter.
Shvarts kept mum through the weekend and early this week despite the school's calls for her to confess that she lied in describing how she constructed the project. She didn't respond to repeated calls or e-mails requesting comment.
Yale officials warned that unless the art major agreed to say in writing that she hadn't told the truth about artificially inseminating herself and then taking herbal drugs to try to induce miscarriages, they'd yank her piece from the student exhibit, which opened Tuesday morning and closes May 1.
Does this mean she gets an A on her project? ___________________
Pull the curtain on this one. The performance is over.
My review: Despicable. GAME OVER, SHVARTS.
_________________
Let me get this straight...
Aliza Shvarts' senior art project was "performance art." She didn't actually do what the Yale Daily News reported that she did. Apparently, she duped the newspaper and many people across the country, outraged over what she professed to have done.
Don't accuse Shvarts of lying. It was art.
Here's how Shvarts' project was described in the student newspaper on Thursday:
Beginning next Tuesday, Shvarts will be displaying her senior art project, a documentation of a nine-month process during which she artificially inseminated herself "as often as possible" while periodically taking abortifacient drugs to induce miscarriages. Her exhibition will feature video recordings of these forced miscarriages as well as preserved collections of the blood from the process.
...The "fabricators," or donors, of the sperm were not paid for their services, but Shvarts required them to periodically take tests for sexually transmitted diseases. She said she was not concerned about any medical effects the forced miscarriages may have had on her body. The abortifacient drugs she took were legal and herbal, she said, and she did not feel the need to consult a doctor about her repeated miscarriages.
Shvarts declined to specify the number of sperm donors she used, as well as the number of times she inseminated herself.
...The display of Schvarts' project will feature a large cube suspended from the ceiling of a room in the gallery of Green Hall. Schvarts will wrap hundreds of feet of plastic sheeting around this cube; lined between layers of the sheeting will be the blood from Schvarts' self-induced miscarriages mixed with Vaseline in order to prevent the blood from drying and to extend the blood throughout the plastic sheeting.
Schvarts will then project recorded videos onto the four sides of the cube. These videos, captured on a VHS camcorder, will show her experiencing miscarriages in her bathrooom tub, she said. Similar videos will be projected onto the walls of the room.
School of Art lecturer Pia Lindman, Schvarts' senior-project advisor, could not be reached for comment Wednesday night.
Both pro-life and pro-abortion proponents reacted with horror.
Ms. Shvarts is engaged in performance art. Her art project includes visual representations, a press release and other narrative materials. She stated to three senior Yale University officials today, including two deans, that she did not impregnate herself and that she did not induce any miscarriages. The entire project is an art piece, a creative fiction designed to draw attention to the ambiguity surrounding form and function of a woman’s body.
She is an artist and has the right to express herself through performance art.
Had these acts been real, they would have violated basic ethical standards and raised serious mental and physical health concerns.
Born in Espoo, Finland, Pia Lindman received her MFA from the Academy of Fine Arts in Finland, and then as a Fulbright scholar received a Master of Science in Visual Studies from Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Massachusetts. She now lives and works in New York City.
Lindman takes the site-specific art tradition as a point of departure. Her work evolves around the themes of social context and space, as well as the performative aspect of making and experiencing art. By engineered social contexts like the Hybrid Sauna at M.I.T. in 1999 and Public Sauna at P.S.1 in 2000, Lindman aims to provoke members of the audience to perform and experience a particular social practice, forcing a re-evaluation of notions of corporeality and public sphere. Lindman’s approach to drawing is informed by the tradition of performance art. After videotaping herself re-enacting gestures of mourning captured in photographs in the New York Times, she traced these gestures from video stills with pencil. By exhibiting both the tracings and the enactments, she tries to illuminate some of the relationships between a photograph, its mediation, and the idea of original content, in this instance human emotional reaction to terrorism.
Lindman has mounted solo exhibitions and screenings at “the lab”, N.Y.C., Galleri Leena Kuumola in Helsinki Finland; the Institut Finlandais in Paris, France; Artist-in-Akiya in Tokyo, Japan; Kluuvi Gallery in Helsinki, Finland; and Galleri FABRIKEN in Gothenburg, Sweden. She has been included in group exhibitions and screenings in New York such as: “Premieres” at the Museum of Modern Art in N.Y.C., “BLIND DATES” at Sculpture Center L.I.C., "The Suburban Backyard" at Socrates Sculpture Park L.I.C., "Lobby Projections" at Museum of Modern Art in Queens; "New Views, World Financial Center", with Lower Manhattan Cultural Council and the World Financial Center Arts & Events; and "Greater New York" at P.S.1 Contemporary Art Center, L.I.C. Her video series Thisplace is in the MoMA collections. She has shown internationally in galleries and art institutions such as: Kunsthalle Exnergasse in Vienna, Austria, Millais Gallery at the Southampton Institute, U.K., San Francisco Arts Commission Gallery, SF, FIAC with Luxe Gallery, Paris, France, Kunstbunker in Nuremburg, Germany, Helsinki Museum of Contemporary Art, Finland, and Beaconsfield in London, UK. She has lectured widely, among other at Yale University School of Art and Architecture, New Haven, New York University School of Visual Art, Institut Française d’Architecture in Paris, France, and the Rhode Island School of Design. She has received numerous awards, including those from AVEK (The Promotion Centre for Audiovisual Culture in Finland, FRAME (Finnish Fund for Art Exchange), the Council for the Arts at MIT. Lindman’s work has been reviewed in many periodicals and journals including: Times Higher Educational Supplement, PRINT Magazine, Rethinking Marxism, Artforum.com, Brooklyn Rail, Art Press, The New York Times, The Village Voice, ARTnews, Technikart, Thresholds, Time Out New York, and Time Out London.
I suppose Yale didn't want to diss the distinguished Lindman by reprimanding her for overseeing Shvarts' disgusting "art."
Cullen MacBeth, the student newspaper's managing editor, declined to comment Thursday.
Shvarts could not be reached for comment. Her telephone number was disconnected and she did not respond to e-mails or a knock on the door at the address listed for her in the campus directory in New Haven.
Why no comments?
I would think that the newspaper's managing editor would have a lot to say about being exploited by Shvarts.
And Shvarts-- she wanted to spark discussion, yet she's not talking.
Groups both for and against abortion rights expressed outrage over the affair.
Ted Miller, a spokesman for NARAL Pro-Choice America, called the concept offensive and "not a constructive addition to the debate over reproductive rights."
Peter Wolfgang, executive director of the Family Institute of Connecticut, an anti-abortion group, said his anger was not mitigated by the fact that Shvarts was never pregnant.
"I'm astounded by this woman's callousness," he said. "There are thousands of women in this country who are dealing with the pain of having had an abortion, with the trauma of having suffered a miscarriage. For her to make light of that for her own purposes is just beyond words."
I, too, find Shvarts' callousness astounding. As her advisor, I don't think Lindman should have signed off on such a cruel hoax.
Yale's Klasky says that Shvarts "is an artist and has the right to express herself through performance art."
True. Shvarts has the right to do unconscionable things and call it art.
I have the right to express myself.
Shvarts' project wasn't art. It was an exercise in heartlessness and soullessness, an assault on an audience without their permission. She's not a performance artist. She's a liar.
Senior Aliza Shvarts' controversial piece still could be included in the student show, which runs through May 1, Yale officials indicated.
"Her exhibit is not on display, but it's unresolved as to whether it will be," said Yale spokesman Tom Conroy, suggesting discussions were in progress between the university and Shvarts.
Discussions?
This is ridiculous. Maybe Jimmy Carter can help resolve the matter.
Shvarts kept mum through the weekend and early this week despite the school's calls for her to confess that she lied in describing how she constructed the project. She didn't respond to repeated calls or e-mails requesting comment.
Yale officials warned that unless the art major agreed to say in writing that she hadn't told the truth about artificially inseminating herself and then taking herbal drugs to try to induce miscarriages, they'd yank her piece from the student exhibit, which opened Tuesday morning and closes May 1.
Does this mean she gets an A on her project? ___________________
The assignment was to create a social commentary piece for a class with assistant art professor Kate Randall.
Starting about 6 a.m., students and employees walking through the student center [at University of Maine at Farmington] had to decide to either step around or step on the five, four-by-five-foot flags and the 3,000 small, handheld flags scattered over the floor. As part of her project, Crane videotaped people's feet to record their response.
"This is very emotional for me because it goes against a lot of my own beliefs about the flag," Crane said, her eyes tearing up, after holding her own against a verbal barrage.
"But I feel strongly that people should have the choice. That is what our country is all about. I expected controversy but not like this," she said.
It's not surprising that veterans and others found Crane's "social experiment" to be disrespectful.
In terms of eliciting a strong response, Crane's project pales in comparison to what a senior at Yale did.
Aliza Shvarts' senior art project is beyond shocking.
Art major Aliza Shvarts '08 wants to make a statement.
Beginning next Tuesday, Shvarts will be displaying her senior art project, a documentation of a nine-month process during which she artificially inseminated herself "as often as possible" while periodically taking abortifacient drugs to induce miscarriages. Her exhibition will feature video recordings of these forced miscarriages as well as preserved collections of the blood from the process.
The goal in creating the art exhibition, Shvarts said, was to spark conversation and debate on the relationship between art and the human body. But her project has already provoked more than just debate, inciting, for instance, outcry at a forum for fellow senior art majors held last week. And when told about Shvarts' project, students on both ends of the abortion debate have expressed shock . saying the project does everything from violate moral code to trivialize abortion.
But Shvarts insists her concept was not designed for "shock value."
"I hope it inspires some sort of discourse," Shvarts said. "Sure, some people will be upset with the message and will not agree with it, but it's not the intention of the piece to scandalize anyone."
The "fabricators," or donors, of the sperm were not paid for their services, but Shvarts required them to periodically take tests for sexually transmitted diseases. She said she was not concerned about any medical effects the forced miscarriages may have had on her body. The abortifacient drugs she took were legal and herbal, she said, and she did not feel the need to consult a doctor about her repeated miscarriages.
Shvarts declined to specify the number of sperm donors she used, as well as the number of times she inseminated herself.
Art major Juan Castillo '08 said that although he was intrigued by the creativity and beauty of her senior project, not everyone was as thrilled as he was by the concept and the means by which she attained the result.
"I really loved the idea of this project, but a lot other people didn't," Castillo said. "I think that most people were very resistant to thinking about what the project was really about. [The senior-art-project forum] stopped being a conversation on the work itself."
Although Shvarts said she does not remember the class being quite as hostile as Castillo described, she said she believes it is the nature of her piece to "provoke inquiry."
"I believe strongly that art should be a medium for politics and ideologies, not just a commodity," Shvarts said. "I think that I'm creating a project that lives up to the standard of what art is supposed to be."
This is so degrading and repulsive that I am absolutely sickened.
How could this sort of "project" be sanctioned by Yale?
Not only did Shvarts put herself at great risk by repeatedly becoming pregnant and inducing miscarriages, she showed no respect whatsoever for life. ZERO.
The display of Schvarts' project will feature a large cube suspended from the ceiling of a room in the gallery of Green Hall. Schvarts will wrap hundreds of feet of plastic sheeting around this cube; lined between layers of the sheeting will be the blood from Schvarts' self-induced miscarriages mixed with Vaseline in order to prevent the blood from drying and to extend the blood throughout the plastic sheeting.
Schvarts will then project recorded videos onto the four sides of the cube. These videos, captured on a VHS camcorder, will show her experiencing miscarriages in her bathrooom tub, she said. Similar videos will be projected onto the walls of the room.
School of Art lecturer Pia Lindman, Schvarts' senior-project advisor, could not be reached for comment Wednesday night.
That is horrific.
Again, how could Shvarts' project advisor have signed off on this?
Shvarts "did not feel the need to consult a doctor about her repeated miscarriages."
How could her advisor have been aware of what she was doing and not demand that she be monitored by a doctor?
Few people outside of Yale's undergraduate art department have heard about Shvarts' exhibition. Members of two campus abortion-activist groups . Choose Life at Yale, a pro-life group, and the Reproductive Rights Action League of Yale, a pro-choice group . said they were not previously aware of Schvarts' project.
Alice Buttrick '10, an officer of RALY, said the group was in no way involved with the art exhibition and had no official opinion on the matter.
Sara Rahman '09 said, in her opinion, Shvarts is abusing her constitutional right to do what she chooses with her body.
"[Shvarts' exhibit] turns what is a serious decision for women into an absurdism," Rahman said. "It discounts the gravity of the situation that is abortion."
CLAY member Jonathan Serrato '09 said he does not think CLAY has an official response to Schvarts' exhibition. But personally, Serrato said he found the concept of the senior art project "surprising" and unethical.
"I feel that she's manipulating life for the benefit of her art, and I definitely don't support it," Serrato said. "I think it's morally wrong."
Shvarts emphasized that she is not ashamed of her exhibition, and she has become increasingly comfortable discussing her miscarriage experiences with her peers.
"It was a private and personal endeavor, but also a transparent one for the most part," Shvarts said. "This isn't something I've been hiding."
It wasn't a "private and personal endeavor." Her multiple abortions were meant for public exhibition, artistic expression for public consumption.
Clearly, Shvarts is a disturbed individual. She is in dire need of medical care. Her body and mind needs to be thoroughly examined.
The official reception for the Undergraduate Senior Art Show will be from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. on April 25. The exhibition will be on public display from April 22 to May 1. The art exhibition is set to premiere alongside the projects of other art seniors this Tuesday, April 22 at the gallery of Holcombe T. Green Jr. Hall on Chapel Street.
This exhibition is going to be a circus. Shvarts' ghoulish freak show display is sure to dominate the Undergraduate Senior Art Show.
I feel sorry for the other seniors. Their works will be held hostage by Shvarts' submission.
I don't see how a project requiring the "artist" to have been in such physical peril would be displayed. The utter moral bankruptcy of the "artist's" project is jaw-dropping.
Does Yale have no rules or guidelines for the senior art project? I can't get over the lack of judgment shown by Shvarts' advisor.
I wonder if an art student would have been allowed to do a project like this:
The display will feature a large cube suspended from the ceiling of a room in the gallery of Green Hall. The student will wrap hundreds of feet of plastic sheeting around this cube; lined between layers of the sheeting will be the blood from the dogs and cats the student killed mixed with Vaseline in order to prevent the blood from drying and to extend the blood throughout the plastic sheeting.
The student will then project recorded videos onto the four sides of the cube. These videos, captured on a VHS camcorder, will show the student killing the dogs and cats in her bathrooom tub, she said. Similar videos will be projected onto the walls of the room.
Imagine the outcry, and rightly so. Of course, Shvarts couldn't get away with killing dogs and cats. Animal cruelty laws would kick in.
The fact that what Shvarts did was legal should give everyone pause.
Shvarts' art project sounds like a horrible Nazi experiment, an atrocity committed by a brutal regime.
A Texas sergeant and his son recently found themselves separated not only by an eight-hour time difference, several bodies of water, hundreds of miles and a war, but by a high school official who suspended the boy for answering his dad's call during class.
Cove High School in Texas, where half the students have at least one parent deployed, justified the punishment against Brandon Hill by saying he had violated the no-cell-phone policy when he took the call from his father, who is serving in Iraq.
"I have been going through a lot of stress lately and my dad’s like my best friend, so I go to him for everything," the sophomore told FOX News on Saturday.
"I needed to talk to him, so my mom got a hold of him on Yahoo and told him to call me, so I answered the phone call in class."
When he learned of his son’s punishment, Master Sgt. Morris Hill said he was unsettled.
"When my wife told me, I was pretty disturbed by it," he said in a phone call from Iraq.
"I was pretty shocked, considering that several months before we left I had talked to the … assistant principal and thought everything was fine," Morris Hill said.
...And when his mother, Patricia Hill, tried to contact school officials, she received no response until her son’s story garnered media attention.
It should not have taken media attention for Cove High School officials to respond to Mrs. Hill.
I understand no-cell-phone policies, but getting a call from a parent serving in Iraq should not warrant a suspension.
REEDSBURG, Wis. (AP) -- An elementary-school event in which kids were encouraged to dress as members of the opposite gender drew the ire of a Christian radio group, whose angry broadcast prompted outraged calls to the district office.
Students at Pineview Elementary had been dressing in costume all last week as part of an annual school tradition called Wacky Week. On Friday, students were encouraged to dress either as senior citizens or as members of the opposite sex.
A local resident informed the Voice of Christian Youth America on Friday. The Milwaukee-based radio network responded by interrupting its morning programming for a special broadcast that aired on nine radio stations throughout Wisconsin. The broadcast criticized the dress-up day and accused the district of promoting alternative lifestyles.
"We believe it's the wrong message to send to elementary students," said Jim Schneider, the network's program director. "Our station is one that promotes traditional family values. It concerns us when a school district strikes at the heart and core of the Biblical values. To promote this to elementary-school students is a great error."
Schneider co-hosts "Crosstalk," a nationally syndicated call-in Christian radio show, along with Vic Eliason and Ingrid Schlueter.
"We became aware of this from constituents in your area. Anything that concerns the populace is important enough to talk about," Eliason said. "This is tax-funded - this is not a dress-up party in somebody's house. There are parents, taxpayers who do not appreciate the imposition of a particular lifestyle being portrayed as a normal lifestyle for the kids."
After the program aired, both the school and Reedsburg School District office were flooded with calls complaining about the event.
The response surprised Principal Tammy Hayes, who said no one had raised any objections beforehand. She said a flier detailing Wacky Week had been sent home with children the prior week, and an announcement was also included in teacher newsletters.
"Nobody contacted me," Hayes said.
The dress-up day was not an attempt to promote cross-dressing, homosexuality or alternative gender roles, district administrator Tom Benson said.
"The promotion of transgenderism - that was not our purpose," Benson said. "Our purpose was to have a Wacky Week, mixing in a bit of silliness with our reading, writing and arithmetic."
The theme for Friday's dress-up day came from students, Hayes said. The Wacky Week schedule was created by Pineview's Student Senate with the guidance of secretary Shari Miller.
"It's different every year. They basically present the ideas, and they vote on what they would like from Monday through Friday," Hayes said. "I feel awful for the kids and Shari. They did not mean anything by this day. They were trying to have fun and come up with a fun dress-up day."
Good grief.
The people who flooded Pineview with calls objecting to the costume day need to get a grip.
Dressing up as the opposite sex in this context is funny. When did it become a promotion of an alternative lifestyle?
Back in the 1950s, was Mr. Television Milton Berle urging people to be transvestites? I think that was comedy.
The Three Stooges donned women's clothes plenty of times. That was supposed to be comedy, too.
On I Love Lucy, Lucy and Ethel disguised themselves as men on more than one occasion. It was funny.
And what about the classic movie Some Like it Hot? Jack Lemmon and Tony Curtis weren't campaigning to get men to dress like women. Again, it was a comedy.
Robin Williams' Mrs. Doubtfire is another example.
Are these examples of threats to family values? To the contrary, they're examples of family entertainment.
I don't consider any of these instances or the dress-up day at Pineview Elementary to be an "imposition of a particular lifestyle being portrayed as a normal lifestyle for the kids."
The kids were participating in WACKY WEEK. That's WACKY WEEK, as in silly.
This wasn't about cross-dressing as a lifestyle. It was about wearing a costume.
About 40 percent of the student body dressed up Friday, Hayes estimated, with half portraying senior citizens and half dressing as the opposite sex.
"I can assure you we will not be having this day (again)," Hayes said.
Instead of getting bent out of shape over dressing as the opposite sex, why weren't people offended by the kids being encouraged to dress as senior citizens?
That could open up a can of negative stereotypical worms, potentially mocking the elderly.
It's obvious that the Christian radio group targeted Pineview because of its agenda against alternative lifestyles such as transgenderism or transvestism.
I don't think the outraged listeners had any reason to be troubled by the dress-up day at Pineview.
Their argument that tax dollars were being used to support something that attacked traditional family values is really a stretch.
This dress-up activity for the kids was meant to be a harmless, fun event, not a social or cultural statement. It wasn't an assault on family values. It was not a lesson in the rejection of traditional roles. It was a WACKY costume day.
The outrage of the complainers was uncalled for. They should be embarrassed about their inappropriate reactions to something so innocent.
WESTMINSTER -- Adams School District 50 [Colorado] is defending its decision to punish a third grader for sniffing a Sharpie marker.
Eight-year-old Eathan Harris was originally suspended from Harris Park Elementary School for three days. Principal Chris Benisch reduced the suspension to one day after complaints from Harris' parents.
Harris used a black Sharpie marker to color a small area on the sleeve of his sweatshirt. A teacher sent him to the principal when she noticed him smelling the marker and his clothing.
"It smelled good," Harris said. "They told me that's wrong."
Eathan's father, John Harris, says the school overreacted for treating Eathan as if he was huffing, or inhaling, marker fumes.
"I think it's outlandish," John Harris said. "It's ridiculous."
Eathan shyly shook his head "no" when a reporter asked if he knew about "huffing."
This reminds me of when really little kids are accused of sexual harassment. It says more about those in authority than the behavior of the children. A perfectly innocent action is interpreted and framed as something perverted or threatening and the children are clueless.
Poor Eathan didn't know that smelling a Sharpie and his shirt was akin to drug abuse.
For one thing, IT'S NOT.
If my 8-year-old used a permanent marker to draw on his sleeve, I would be really ticked off because he wrecked his shirt, not because he was engaging in some sort of illicit behavior.
Benisch stands by his decision to suspend Harris, saying it sends a clear message about substance abuse.
"This is really, really, seriously dangerous," Benisch said.
No, it's not.
Benisch completely overreacted.
Principal Chris Benisch: Really bad judgment
In his letter suspending the child, Benisch wrote that smelling the marker fumes could cause the boy to "become intoxicated."
A toxicologist with the Rocky Mountain Poison Control Center says that claim is nearly impossible.
Dr. Eric Lavonas says non-toxic markers like Sharpies, while pungent-smelling, cannot be used to get high.
"I don't know whether it would be possible for a real overachiever to figure out a way to get high off them," Lavonas said. "But in regular use, it's just not something that's going to happen."
"If you went to Costco and bought 50 bags of Sharpies and did something to them, maybe there's a way to get creative and make it happen," Lavonas said.
See?
One Sharpie. One sleeve.
That's not "really, really, seriously dangerous."
Benisch and faculty could discuss with the children the dangers of huffing, but to suspend Eathan for smelling a Sharpie is ridiculous.
Their concern about the issue of substance abuse is legitimate.
However, this case was not substance abuse. Eathan should not have been suspended for his "offense."
Adams County School District 50 leaders were unfazed by the poison control center's medical opinion.
"Principals make hundreds of decisions everyday based on our best judgment. And in that time, smelling that marker, I felt like, 'Wow, that's a very serious marker,'" Benisch said.
Despite the medical evidence, Benisch promised to draw an even clearer line on markers.
"We've purged every permanent marker there is in this building," he said.
This guy is a real piece of work.
EVERY permanent marker has been "purged" from the building?
What about cleaning products or paint or glue or hairspray? Will those all be purged from the building as well?
Eathan Harris says he's happy to be back in school after his suspension, but he did confide he worried the school's disciplinary action might hurt his dream of one day becoming a professional football player.
That's so cute. I don't think the NFL would hold Eathan's suspension against him.
I'm really wondering what Benisch has been sniffing.
"Principals make hundreds of decisions everyday based on our best judgment. And in that time, smelling that marker, I felt like, 'Wow, that's a very serious marker.'"
It took a while for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel to note a Wisconsin story that the national media have been talking about for days.
A Tomah High School student has filed a federal lawsuit alleging his art teacher censored his drawing because it featured a cross and a biblical reference.
A Tomah High School student was punished by his teacher because he had the audacity to include an image deemed objectionable in a drawing he made as an assignment for an art class.
A copy of a drawing by a Tomah High School student, provided by the Alliance Defense Fund, features religious images.
MADISON, Wis. (AP) -- A Tomah High School student has filed a federal lawsuit alleging his art teacher censored his drawing because it featured a cross and a biblical reference.
The lawsuit alleges other students were allowed to draw "demonic" images and asks a judge to declare a class policy prohibiting religion in art unconstitutional.
"We hear so much today about tolerance," said David Cortman, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal advocacy group representing the student. "But where is the tolerance for religious beliefs? The whole purpose of art is to reflect your own personal experience. To tell a student his religious beliefs can legally be censored sends the wrong message."
...According to the lawsuit, the student's art teacher asked his class in February to draw landscapes. The student, a senior identified in the lawsuit by the initials A.P., added a cross and the words "John 3:16 A sign of love" in his drawing.
His teacher, Julie Millin, asked him to remove the reference to the Bible, saying students were making remarks about it. He refused, and she gave him a zero on the project.
Millin showed the student a policy for the class that prohibited any violence, blood, sexual connotations or religious beliefs in artwork. The lawsuit claims Millin told the boy he had signed away his constitutional rights when he signed the policy at the beginning of the semester.
The boy tore the policy up in front of Millin, who kicked him out of class. Later that day, assistant principal Cale Jackson told the boy his religious expression infringed on other students' rights.
Jackson told the boy, his stepfather and his pastor at a meeting a week later that religious expression could be legally censored in class assignments. Millin stated at the meeting the cross in the drawing also infringed on other students' rights.
The boy received two detentions for tearing up the policy. Jackson referred questions about the lawsuit to Gaarder.
Sometime after that meeting, the boy's metals teacher rejected his idea to build a chain-mail cross, telling him it was religious and could offend someone, the lawsuit claims. The boy decided in March to shelve plans to make a pin with the words "pray" and "praise" on it because he was afraid he'd get a zero for a grade.
The lawsuit also alleges school officials allow other religious items and artwork to be displayed on campus.
A Buddha and Hindu figurines are on display in a social studies classroom, the lawsuit claims, adding the teacher passionately teaches Hindu principles to students.
In addition, a replica of Michaelangelo's "The Creation of Man" is displayed at the school's entrance, a picture of a six-limbed Hindu deity is in the school's hallway and a drawing of a robed sorcerer hangs on a hallway bulletin board.
Drawings of Medusa, the Grim Reaper with a scythe and a being with a horned head and protruding tongue hang in the art room and demonic masks are displayed in the metals room, the lawsuit alleges.
A.P. suffered unequal treatment because of his religion even though student expression is protected by the First Amendment, according to the lawsuit, which was filed Friday.
A.P. was out of line when he ripped up the policy in front of art teacher Julie Millin, even if she may have taunted him by claiming he had signed away his constitutional rights.
In any case, that was not the proper way for A.P. to handle the dispute.
At least from the information provided in this article, my criticism of A.P. pretty much ends there. It sounds like Millin and assistant principal Cale Jackson weren't willing to give an inch. This notion that the cross infringed on other students' rights is absolutely ridiculous.
Why would they care about A.P.'s drawing? Are they so fragile that they can't handle viewing a landscape that includes a cross?
Of course not.
I think it's ludicrous to claim that the image of a cross in any way infringed on other students' rights.
Does anyone really think that a student's drawing of something that benign in art class would be treading on the rights of others?
That's nuts.
Art is about creativity and personal expression. While I can understand the school's prohibition of violent, bloody images, I can't understand getting bent out of shape over a cross, or a Star of David, or symbols of other religions.
If as the lawsuit claims religious items and artwork are displayed at the school, then the school's reaction to A.P.'s drawing seems far too heavy-handed and terribly inconsistent.
It appears to be very selective religious censorship. Moreover, there's a problem with a school policy that equates graphic depictions of violence with religious symbols in artwork.
With such a rigid policy on religious symbols it would be nearly impossible for students to tour an art museum.
The main goal of the Art Department is to provide a variety of visual experiences for the student to relate art to his/her own experiences and culture.
If that's the main goal of the Art Department, then Millin is failing as a teacher. She's actively preventing A.P. from relating his artistic expression to his "own experiences and culture."
I wonder how Millin would have reacted if A.P. drew inspiration for his project from Piss Christ, Andres Serrano's photograph of a crucifix submerged in his own urine.
In that case, would she have defended A.P.'s right to express himself and relate his art to his own experiences and culture?
