Senior Iris Halpern criticized the Committee on Student Life (CSL) yesterday for what she said was its failure to adequately consider her complaint against The PrimarySource for drawings and allusions to sexual body parts constituted sexual harassment.
The CSL unanimously dismissed the charges on Monday, saying that while it did not endorse the Source's content, the magazine has a guaranteed right to free speech.
Halpern, who had hoped that her case would engender conversation about the topic of sexual harassment on campus, was not satisfied with the CSL's handling of the hearing. "This proves to women on campus that the University doesn't care and that there is no sexual harassment policy," she said.
Halpern accused the CSL of lacking neutrality in its deliberations. "They did not even answer the most central question, the reason for the whole entire hearing," she said. "We just want them to think about sexual harassment, take a stance on it, which they didn't do."
Primary Source Editor-in-Chief Sam Dangermond agreed that the CSL members came into the hearing with their minds made up. "It is entirely possible that the decision was predetermined," he said.
But with the legal question resolved, Dangremond says he will "probably not" take any steps to apologize to Halpern. "If Ms. Halpern had conducted this differently, we could have talked," Dangremond said.
Halpern filed the suit after the October issue of The Primary Source mocked the Student Labor Activist Movement (SLAM) members' "well endowed tank tops" and published a comic of a SLAM member with large breasts. SLAM, a campus group that lobbies for janitors' rights, is often criticized by the Source.
Dangremond said that most women on campus do not think the Source is in the wrong.
"I think that most women are intelligent enough to appreciate the humor of the Source," he said.
But Halpern disagrees with the magazine's definition of humor: "They can't keep hiding behind the facade of 'it was a joke,'" she said.
Student opinion on the case is disparate. Some say the comments were harmlessly rude, while others feel there were grounds for sexual harassment charges. One student, who asked to remain anonymous, said the Source should have been found guilty.
"It is definitely sexual harassment," she said. " I probably would have done the same thing she did had it happened to me."
Others took sympathetic but opposing views. "It might not have been sexual harassment, but [the cartoons] were in poor taste," freshman Laura Frye said.
"I don't think it was a nice thing to print, but it's their right," freshman Lynn Steger said.
