ARTS P. 8 PAC stand-up show sparks hearty laughter
SPORTS P. 11 The Independent Student Newspaper at Williams College Since 1887 VOL. CXXXIII, NO. 10
Students, faculty discuss free speech By REBECCA TAUBER and SAMUEL WOLF NEWS EDITORS
On Oct. 29, several members of the faculty sent out a petition calling for the College to adopt the Chicago Statement on Principles of Free Expression, originally released by the University of Chicago in July 2012. The statement, which addresses the occasional disinvitation of controversial speakers, claims that almost all speakers should be permitted to address an institution of higher education, citing the importance of free speech. The university, the statement said, “is committed to the principle that it may not restrict debate or deliberation because the ideas put forth are thought to be offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong-headed.” However, the statement also made exceptions for banning harassment or defamation. Since 2012, 45 colleges and universities have adopted the statement. While many faculty members collaborated on the petition in support of the Chicago Principles, the three names associated with the petition were Associate Professor of Biology Luana Maroja, Associate Professor of Theatre David Gürçay-Morris and Professor of Philosophy Steven Gerrard. The petition took a strong stance in favor of the Chicago Statement and free speech on campus in general. “While there is an understandable desire to protect our students from speech they find offensive, doing so risks shutting down legitimate dialogue and failing to prepare our students to deal effectively with a diversity of opinions, including views they might vehemently disagree with,” the petition stated. The creators of the petition hoped that, if the petition gained sufficient signatures, it could gain the attention of President Maud
Mandel and ultimately lead to the College’s adoption of the Chicago Principles. In a blog post titled “Freedom of speech at Williams College: are the walls closing in?” Maroja cited a roundtable featuring religious scholar, Reza Aslan, as a catalyst for the petition. During this roundtable, Aslan's view on freedom of expression concerned her. She wrote that Aslan “started by bragging that he had once been disinvited from another venue, proceeding to say that anything that offended him should not be allowed, and finally asserting that ‘only factual talks’ should ever be allowed in campus.” Maroja also expressed concern with student reception of his speech. “This nonsense was met with intense student applause,” she wrote. “It was appalling.” Former President Adam Falk’s disinvitation of John Derbyshire in 2016 also weighed heavily on the Chicago Statement debate. Derbyshire, who has described himself as alt-right and who once opined that America would be better off if women were unable to vote, was invited to campus by the group Uncomfortable Learning. President Falk ultimately canceled his speech. “Many of his expressions clearly constitute hate speech, and we will not promote such speech on this campus or in our community,” he said. Gürçay-Morris, another one of the petition’s creators, was guided by his belief that the free exchange of ideas and freedom from censorship is essential for any institution of higher education. “I don’t know how to make art without the basic assumption of those things, and I definitely don’t know how to teach art … if there isn’t a basic assumption of freedom of expression to do things, to fail things, to do better next time,” he said. For GürçayMorris, the ability of some people to disinvite speakers who oppose
their beliefs betrayed those principles. He also emphasized that the initial creation of the petition was intended to spur a dialogue rather than to push an agenda. For Gerrard, another creator, the petition was part of a broader national movement. “My goals in helping to write the petition were to express solidarity with our colleagues in colleges and universities across the country, especially in the South, who face censorship of their views,” he said. According to Gürçay-Morris, the petition was originally sent to tenured faculty, with the purpose of not placing undue pressure on untenured faculty to sign it and with the expectation to slowly broaden the discussion. However, many students felt that the petition was being withheld from them, a viewpoint which Gürçay-Morris rejected. “There was nothing about trying to keep it secret or only to the faculty,” he said. “We were trying to do the most bottom-up grassroots thing ever.” The petition’s creators were taken aback by its quick spread, as the petition gained over 100 signatures from both tenured and untenured faculty by Nov. 5. With this proliferation came a misconception that achieving a certain number of signatures would cause the principles to be adopted, whereas the petition did not have that power and was originally meant as a conversation-starter. Shortly after its introduction, the petition generated controversy amongst faculty, staff and students, and was discussed at a forum on Nov. 11, which demonstrated the range of ractions and pushback on the petition and Statement. Gail Newman, professor of German, who spoke with faculty against the petition and reached out to supporting students organizing against the petition,
SEE PETITION, PAGE 4
High school students vandalize MinCo office By DAVEY MORSE STAFF WRITER The College is currently investigating two instances of vandalism in Paresky that occurred over Thanksgiving Break. On Saturday morning, Nov. 24, dining services reported to Campus Safety and Security (CSS) that ’82 Grill employees had found condiments and napkins strewn all over the Luetkemeyer Lounge in the basement. On Monday, Nov. 26, the Office of Student Life reported that a few chairs were broken and crude drawings and writing were left on the blackboard in the Williams Minority Coalition (MinCo) office on the second floor of Paresky. CSS believes that the incidents occurred on Friday and Saturday night, respectively. CSS, with the aid of the Williamstown Police Department and staff at local high schools, is leading the investigation. It believes that a group of local high school students were responsible for both incidents; however, it has not yet identified the individuals. According to Vice President for Campus Life Steve Klass, once CSS does identify them, the College will likely issue a no-trespass order. “That process consists of sending a letter to each person we identify in which we specify a time period during which, if they’re caught on college property, they’ll be identified as trespassing and arrested,” Klass said. The typical timeframe for the order is one year, after which these students can appeal it to resume access to the College’s campus. The two incidents were similar in nature. “They both occurred over break when there was open access to the building and not a lot of people around,” Klass explained. “The damage in each area was similarly juvenile in nature – objects tossed on the ground, broken chairs, a
crude picture on a blackboard, etc.” Moreover, both spaces were relatively accessible; the basement area outside ’82 Grill is an open space and MinCo co-presidents Rodsy Modhurima ’19 and Tyler Tsay ’19 noted that they generally leave the MinCo room unlocked, as it is often used independently by MinCo’s several constituent student groups. From these facts, the administration believe that the high school students were not looking for a particular office and that the events can best be characterized as “the making of disrespectful mess.” Vice President for Institutional Diversity and Equity Leticia Haynes, Dean of the College Marlene Sandstrom and Klass authored an
“Given all that we know now, we are quite certain it was neither bias-oriented nor targeted.” Leticia Haynes, Steve Klass and Marlene Sandstrom email to the student body on Friday, Nov. 30, that affirmed this message: “Given all that we know now, we are quite certain it was neither bias-oriented nor targeted.” When students first learned of the vandalism, however, it was unclear whether it meant to target MinCo. Modhurima and Tsay were first informed of the Saturday vandalism on the afternoon of Wednesday, Nov. 28, by the Davis Center (DC). However, Tsay reflected that “important information about the vandalism – that the event wasn't targeted, that there were other things going on in Paresky – was not adequately conveyed.”
Modhurima would not have been surprised if the vandalization were more targeted. “It wouldn't be out of the ordinary for there to be a hateful incident somewhere on campus – it happens every year,” she said. After learning of the vandalism on Wednesday afternoon, Tsay stopped by the CSS office on Thursday morning and learned then that the MinCo office incident was neither isolated nor targeted. Yet, before learning of further details from Tsay’s visit to CSS or the Friday studentbody email, several students were aware of the MinCo vandalism but not that it was isolated or devoid of hate speech. Just after hearing from the DC on Wednesday afternoon, Modhurima and Tsay informed MinCo’s constituent student groups of what they had learned. Modhurima commented, “There were a lot of a rumors and a lot of people not feeling safe in the meantime.” A student created a Facebook post on Wednesday, suggesting that the administration had been withholding important information with ulterior motives. It was shared 13 times. The comments on the post included relevant accounts from a couple of students who were at the College over the break, as well from a Sawyer Library employee and an editor at a local newspaper, The Greylock Glass. The administration apologized for the delay in communicating the incident to the Modhurima and Tsay in the Friday student-body email, remarking: “This was an unintentional delay, which may have led to theories about the timing and nature of the vandalism. ... We apologize for any distress this caused to students who worried that this may have been a targeted act.”
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2018
Cross country records NCAA top-10 finish
Women’s soccer wins national championship By ALEXANDER CHRIST STAFF WRITER Women's soccer successfully defended the NCAA Div. III championship, its third in four years. Williams defeated Christopher Newport (CNU) 2-0 in the semifinals. Then, on Saturday, the women defeated conference rival Middlebury 1-1 via penalty kicks to claim their third title in four years. Sarah Scire ’20 scored a goal in each half Friday night as the women blanked high-powered CNU at UNCGreensboro Stadium. The Ephs broke CNU’s 16-game win streak and advanced to the NCAA Cham-
pionship because of a tremendous defensive effort. Goalkeeper Olivia Barnhill ’19 called it their best effort of the season. The women stifled the Captains’ attack by controlling posessions and disurpting passing lanes, capitalizing on Barnhill's four saves. CNU outshot the Ephs 19-11 in the contest, but each team had just four shots on goal. "We knew coming into this game [CNU] had incredible individual attacking ability," Eph head coach Michelyne Pinard said. "And they were exactly what we thought – they were incredible. Our goal was to deny them the
ball whenever possible and have incredibly tight cover whenever possible. I thought we did a great job of that from front to back. Our effort, not just our physical effort, but our communication and ability to consistently deny them opportunities was amazing given their ability." The Captains had not been shut out once their entire season prior to Friday night. In the game's 10th minute, they nearly got on the board as All-American Riley Cook, who had scored in 11 straight games coming into the semifinal, rocketed a shot behind
SEE SOCCER, PAGE 12
PHOTO COURTESY OF SPORTS INFORMATION. Women's soccer won its second consecutive championship Saturday, defeating Middlebury 1-1 following penalty kicks.
Following investigation, College Council votes to retain treasurer; censures co-presidents By NICHOLAS GOLDROSEN EXECUTIVE EDITOR Last night, College Council (CC) voted 12-7 to retain Treasurer Spencer Carrillo ’20 and mandated he attend educational sanctions to improve his performance. CC also voted 11-7 to censure CC Presidents Lizzy Hibbard ’19 and Moisés Roman Mendoza ’19 for raising the charges against Carrillo without placing it on the agenda or notifying CC before the Nov. 13 meeting. The vote followed a report by the Student Government Conduct Committee (SGCC), chaired by CC’s Vice President for Student Organizations Maria Heredia ’20 and Vice President for Community and Diversity Shane Beard ’20, which found Carrillo failed to meet some of his duties but recommended against removal. CC did not livestream or record the meeting – in contravention of its own bylaws – and made all votes taken during the meeting anonymous, asking CC members to close their eyes. Hibbard and Roman Mendoza presented the case against Carrillo. They reported that he failed to close out CC’s accounts on time over the summer and delayed the College’s audit, failed to file vouchers – as noted by administrators in the Controller’s Office and the Office of Student Life – and communicated unprofessionally and unreliably with CC subgroup treasurers, the CC presidents and the Minority Coalition chairs. During the summer and fall, Carrillo responded simply “No” or “No thank you” to numerous requests from Hibbard and Roman Mendoza to discuss his performance. “Moises and I tried reaching out to Spencer privately many times, spoke with multiple
administrators, and brought this issue up at the CC executive meeting prior to discussing it in general Council,” Hibbard said. “We regret it had to rise to this level. As per the CC Constitution the presidents have the sole responsibility to ‘set the agenda for the College Council.’” Carrillo defended his performance. Regarding the summer transfers, he wrote, “That error was not a result of my malpractice…it was clearly confirmed to me by a previous Treasurer that when I completed the transfers didn’t matter.” He also alleged that the submission of many vouchers was not his job, but the assistant treasurer’s, and defended his communication style: “If I am emailing someone who I know well or am friends with, I am not going to go through the tedium of drafting a formal letter to them.” Other representatives called for consideration of the method by which Hibbard and Roman Mendoza brought the matter up on Nov. 13, which they percieved as inappropriate. “Any president bringing complaints forward in such a way, effectively lambasting a council member in public for what came off as personal reasons, is acting in a way that is distasteful, unwarranted, and unprecedented. It is something that cannot be tolerated by this or any Council moving forward,” said Representative Lance Ledet ’21. Ultimately, CC felt that Carrillo’s performance fell short of what his duties required, but agreed that it implicated broader concerns with CC’s bylaws and operations and did not merit removal. “If in any way Spencer were being a structural impediment to making our
system better, I’d understand that. But he’s not. He’s willing to work on these things and he wants to,” said Vice President for Student Affairs Abel Romero ’19. “We appreciate the hard work put in by Maria and Shane,” Hibbard and Roman Mendoza said. “Their report found Spencer in violation of three of our bylaws and we agree that their proposed suggestions of structural reforms are a good way to move forward after the vote tonight.” The full investigative SGCC report can be found on the Record’s website.
WHAT’S INSIDE 3 OPINIONS CARE Now reframes free speech debate 4 NEWS Three students win fellowships 7 FEATURES President Mandel reflects on her life 9 ARTS "Widows" remakes classic heist movie 12 SPORTS Coach Renzie Lamb passes away
USPS 684-6801 | 1ST CLASS MAIL U.S. POSTAGE PAID WILLIAMSTOWN, MA PERMIT NO. 25