University News
the
Visit us on Facebook or at unewsonline.com
Vol. XCVI No. 4
A student voice of Saint Louis University since 1921
Thursday, September 22, 2016
âUgly, ugly, uglyâ ânightmare inducing âeroticâ âCREATURE MascotLAGOONâ revamp FROM THE BLACK sparks mocking ânopeâ âterrifying and and bewilderment creepyâ âso inappropriateâ âyikesâ âdemonicâ âawfulâ âsatan incarnateâ âdeformed âgoblinâ âgraphic design abominationâ âshut it downâ âgoing to frighten childrenâ âatrocityâ âkill it with fireâ The new Billiken mascot was unveiled at last to anxiously awaiting fans in between the menâs and womenâs soccer game on Sept. 20, and in an online video posted by SLU. Its redesign matches SLUâs new logo, which was redone last November. But while most of the campus may have adjusted to the two-dimensional logo, the physical mascot received some especially harsh feedback. SLU students did not hold back their comments, especially on social media. Facebook, Twitter and other sites blew up within minutes of the reveal. An online petition requesting that SLU bring back the âoldâ Billiken received nearly 1,500 signatures. It has been a long time since the original mascot appeared over a century ago. The Billiken began as a Japanese good luck charm and was then brought to life reflecting similarities to SLUâs football coach, John Bender. Many models have been created over the years, but the newest one is at the forefront of Billiken fansâ minds. âI was pretty confused (about the new mascot). Howâd this scary mascot with a disproportionate head size and strange coloring get past a focus group?â sophomore By LAUREN TONDL Sports Editor
See âMascotâ on Page 7
MASCOT BACKLASH: The above are excerpts from actual Facebook comments reacting to the change
Spring Hall changes check-in process By WILLIAM KERNELL Associate News Editor
Spring Hall, the newest residence hall on campus at Saint Louis University as of Fall 2016, has brought with it a far more stringent check-in process than all other campus residence halls. âSpring,â as it is known by students, also diďŹers itself from other residence halls in that it includes classrooms. This layer of variation draws in more foot traďŹc from non-resi-
dents, requiring more security. Veteran desk worker and senior Katherine Vastis described the check-in process at Spring, saying âAnyone living in Spring Hall simply has to scan their ID at the door outside and at the desk, like all other residence halls. Between the hours of 7 a.m. and 6 p.m., I believe all oncampus residents have access to the common areas or ânon-residential areasâ like classrooms, practice rooms,
bathrooms. However, to enter residential areas during this time, anyone not living in Spring needs to be checked in. Anyone with a SLU ID can be checked in using their SLU ID and banner. If you donât live on campus or arenât a SLU student, then you need to be checked in using a photo ID such as a driverâs license, state ID, passport, etc.â See âSpring Hallâ on Page 2
Megan Hammond / The University News
SPRING HALL: Sophomore Brooke Lunn checks two students into Spring Hall.
Former professor wins suit against SLU By Jayde Rose Contributor
In the past week, Cornelia Horn, a former assistant professor in SLUâs theology department, won a $367,000 sex discrimination suit against the University. Horn, who taught at SLU from 2004 to 2012, claimed that when applying for tenure she received biased treatment for being female, and that the decision against her tenure was preceded by belittling and bullying treatment from her male colleagues. Last Thursday, after an eight-day trial, St. Louis Circuit Court jurors sided in favor of Horn. Her claim against the University was two-pronged. First, she claimed that she was the victim of sexual discrimination when applying for tenure and throughout her time at the University, and second, that she had been retaliated against after filing a claim of sexual discrimination within her department. The jury decided in favor of Horn with both complaints; 9 to 3 on the count of sexual discrimination and 11 to 1 on the count of retaliation.
According to Horn, this complaint was filed in 2010 and contained information that she had been âbullied and intimidated by male facultyâ and was among a stark minority of women in the department. The report was received by the department chair, Father J.A. Wayne Hellmann and a formal in-
...in over 40 years, just one woman was promoted to tenure within the department. vestigation followed. Months later, when reviewing her application of tenue, Father Hellmann would cite this instance as evidence of Hornâs lack of collegiality. After the theology department approved Hornâs bid for tenure, the reverend wrote his own letter recommending against providing tenure. It was in this letter that Hornâs collegiality was questioned because of her decision to file a report on sexual discrimination within her department.
As part of her suit, Horn claimed that it was the contents of this letter which led the university committee to ultimately deny her tenure. Horn filed an appeal to the decision, but SLUâs thenpresident Fr. Lawrence Biondi upheld the decision. During the trial, Hornâs lawyers heavily focused on the diďŹerent treatment for male and female professors within the department. They asserted that in over 40 years, just one woman was promoted to tenure within the department. Most male tenure track professors were promoted, while many female professors had their contracts terminated before they were able to apply or had their applications denied. SLU stated that it was disappointed in the decision and is exploring its options. In a released statement, it was expressed that tenure is a âsignificant decisionâ involving guaranteeing a faculty member âa lifelong appointment.â SLU has also expressed that its process for evaluating tenure is ârobustâ and does not discriminate against any characteristics protected by law.
INSIDE SCOOP: Cross country dominates at Notre Dame
A review of the Emmy Awards: 2016
Page 7
Page 5
ARTS
Why âSparkyâ deserves his own SLU holiday
SPORTS
Page 10
OPINION