Questions raised about removal of Art Wall panels, The Squirrel

Mariah Joyce
Editor in Chief

There has been some confusion over the policies which govern what content is appropriate to display on the Art Wall or include in independent publications, following recent events on campus.

Last week k(no)w, a sex-education club on campus, was told that it had to take down two panels of its display on the Art Wall. K(no)w had reserved the wall for Sex Week, a week of programming meant to educate the campus and get the community talking about sexual health, sexual assault and other sex-related issues.

According to k(no)w Treasurer Cassie Huye ’17, Assistant Director of Student Activities Julia Zimmer instructed k(no)w to take down the panels after a complaint was made that they were in violation of both the College harassment policy and the Art Wall posting policy.

According to Huye, Zimmer said the individual who complained said they felt offended and harassed by images of genitalia that were depicted on the Art Wall. Additionally, the individual said that the panels were in violation of the Art Wall policy because they were not tasteful.

The Art Wall posting policy requires that all panels, “a. Follow standards of community respect set forth in the Scot’s Key. b. Be tasteful, in both presentation and message. c. Not include copyrighted material without proper approval for use of said material. d. Not be solicitous without pre-approval for use of solicitous material.”

While Huye and k(no)w Co-president Tiffany Trunch ’17 took the panels down immediately after their meeting with Zimmer, Huye said that she was frustrated by the lack of dialogue that occurred following the complaint.

“It was kind of unclear what they were offended by. If they were offended by genitals, I have trouble understanding that and whether or not that’s a valid reason for us to take this down,” said Huye. “But if there’s something else that wasn’t articulated well in the email and its translation to us then I wanted to be able to open some sort of dialogue.” However, Huye says Zimmer would not release the name of the individual who had made the complaint.

Additionally, k(no)w Co-president Cecilia Azar ’17 said that the club was not permitted to either cover up certain images that were deemed objectionable or put up any sort of notice indicating that the club had been required to take down the panels because of a complaint.

Both Azar and Huye said they felt their club’s message had been censored.

“I wish the person [who complained] and the College had engaged in conversation and an effective dialogue, instead of just saying ‘Ah! Someone’s uncomfortable, make it go away!’” said Azar.

Huye agreed, saying “It’s frustrating because it actively suppresses our message, and I think there should absolutely have been a conversation. I feel like the College does this a lot, where they practice the protocol without thinking about the implications of those actions. By telling these students to take down this section of the Art Wall, you’re setting a precedent that when anything makes anyone uncomfortable for any reason, that it can just be removed. There’s got to be boundaries with that, and at this point I don’t see boundaries.”

The Voice reached out to Zimmer to inquire as to why k(no)w had been asked to take down the Art Wall panels and why they were not allowed to put up a sign indicating that they had been required to take down the panels, but she could not be reached for comment before press time.

However, Interim Dean of Students Angela Johnston said that she was unaware of any policy that would prohibit k(no)w from putting up a sign on the Art Wall indicating that they had been required to take their panels down.

This is not the first time this year that the College has required the removal of student materials from Lowry Center. The anonymous satirical publication The Squirrel, which has published five issues thus far, has been removed from Lowry Center dining tables several times this year because it is not an approved student publication, according to Interim Director of Dining Services Marjorie Shamp.

Shamp said that in order for the publication to be distributed, it had to be brought to the director of Dining Services in its final form for approval. While Shamp did not point to specific guidelines as to what was or was not appropriate for these publications, she said that she would post the submission guidelines in Lowry and Kittredge dining halls so that students were aware of them.

Shamp added that she has thus far found The Squirrel to be a clever and entertaining read, and she would be happy to keep the identity of its author confidential if they submitted it for approval to distribute.

Johnston said that she had had difficulty finding hard guidelines and policies for the content of student publications, and that this recent confusion indicated that these policies should probably be more clearly articulated.

When asked how one determines what is or is not offensive in a student publication, Johnston pointed towards the discriminatory and bias-related harassment section of the College’s policy on non-discrimination.

The policy states that the College will address hostile environments, which “may be created by oral, written, graphic or physical conduct that is sufficiently severe, persistent, pervasive or objectively offensive so as to interfere with, limit, or deny the ability of an individual to participate in or benefit from educational programs or activities or employment access, benefits, or opportunities.”

“I think it would be helpful to have a discussion about what is or is not appropriate for publications,” said Johnston.