March 22, 2011 12:21 am
Chick-fil-A Debate Continues
As the events continue to unfold over the Chick-fil-A debate, some tensions appear to have been lessened after a forum hosted by Professors Barbara Beliveau, Celia Rabinowitz, and Sybol Anderson allowed students to vent their frustrations over the Daily Grind’s “Chick-fil-A Thursdays.”
Approximately 55 students, staff, and faculty members were present to hear more about boycotts, particularly this one, and to voice their opinions about the College’s values relating to this issue.
Chick-fil-A (CFA) has been reported to have donated to the Winshape Foundation; this foundation has in turn donated money to conservative movements against same-sex marriage. Members of St. Mary’s Triangle and Rainbow Society (STARS) and the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) have charged that by selling Chick-fil-A on campus, the College has been violating the “safe space” policy.
At the beginning of the forum, several members of STARS and SDS stated that this boycott was not a campaign against personal, political, and religious values, nor was it attempting to limit the consumer choices of their peers.
The audience was then given a quick breakdown about the history of boycotts and whether or not they are successful. Professor Beliveau said boycotts are successful “if there is commitment and support” among a large group of people.
She gave historical examples of successful boycotts including the Montgomery Bus Boycotts. In 1955, an African American woman named Rosa Parks did not give up her seat to a white commuter on the Montgomery bus line.
Her arrest started one of the largest boycotts in American history, which only ended with the desegregation of the bus lines.
Rabinowitz then began a brief discussion about the College’s institutional values. The values, which can be found on the College’s website, describe St. Mary’s as a place open to “diversity in all its form and social responsibility and civic-mindedness.” The question that this boycott raises is whether or not the school selling Chick-fil-A goes against what the institution values.
Anderson then posed the question, “What does it mean to value diversity in all its form, social responsibility, and civic-mindedness?” This question then lead into a discussion about whether or not Chick-fil-A should be sold on campus.
One student said, “[Chick-fil-A] can do whatever they want.” This comment then brought many people to raise their hands to respond. Many describe how they felt that Chick-fil-A violated the “safe space” policy which made them feel uncomfortable.
There was some discussion about bringing another vendor to campus to balance Chick-fil-A. However, several members of the community felt that keeping Chick-fil-A on campus would not solve the fundamental problem at hand. One professor said it would only “skirt the main question.”
After the talk, Anderson described the dilemma and said, “we seem to have clarified what the crux of the issue is; that is, we have to decide as a community whether by maintaining our contract with CFA we compromise a set of our institutional values, in particular our commitments to diversity and social responsibility.”
As the forum came to a close, many remarked on the civility that was shown by all who participated. One member of SDS was “glad we could have a dialogue.”There was also agreement that it was good that both sides were present to voice their concerns.
Anderson summed up both arguments by saying some members see “Chick-fil-A as encouraging the violation of human rights and [that the college] should end its contract with the company,” while others “do not see Chick-fil-A as implicated in human rights violations [and] see no problem with continuing to do business with them.” Anderson continued, “that’s the dilemma we have to resolve.”
In the end, the dilemma remained unsolved. However, many expressed hope that this could be how problems in the future would be resolved. Senior Paul Sauchelli, of Students for a Democratic Society, said the forum will “set a future precedent for future discussions.”
Not sure where “tensions appear to have been lessened” when people are still harassing those involved with the boycott on campus. It may have been civil in that room on that day, but out on the path, people are still being hateful.
Examples of this hatefulness, please. I can sit here and write vague comments too.
Members of STARS have been personally harassed at their jobs and on the path, by people specifically mentioning the boycott. “I’ll be enjoying my chicken, faggot.” There’s been a lot of homophobia under the surface of our “safe space” that this boycott has unfortunately dredged up
Can anyone point me to this “safe space” policy? I can’t seem to find it anywhere, and I’m curious to know exactly how Chick-fil-A violates it. “Institutional values” are not the same as “college policy.”
If individuals are being harassed, then they should be reporting their harassers to Jboard. Article II, Section E of “To the Point” outlines that “Physical, written, verbal, or mental abuse, threats, intimidation, harassment, coercion, and/or other conduct which threatens or endangers the health, safety, or emotional well-being of one’s self or others” is in violation of the student code of conduct (To the Point, pg. 13), and therefore such action is subject to disciplinary action.
I support the boycott, but claiming that selling Chick-fil-A is in violation of college policy is a serious charge, and one that shouldn’t be made without proof.
[Inappropriate content removed by Dave Chase]
The fact that Chick Fil A donated to a charity that donated to an organization that has opposed the gay rights movement is not enough reasoning to say that the LGBTY groups on campus can claim that their safe space has been violated. In my opinion the intolerance is definitely going both ways on this issue. If chick fil A openly stated that LGBTY is a bad life choice or openly insulted the community this would be a very different issue but as it stands, we are criticizing the company for loosely taking a stand on an issue they believe in. People have a right to have their own opinions about marriage and if this violates the “safe space” agreement our school has then our school is choosing to be intolerant of people who oppose the majority opinion on campus. I personally support gay marriage i just don’t support claiming intolerance if people disagree with my opinions.
Right on @3:58. You’ve got valid points. I too am in support of gay marriage, but find this boycott to be ill-founded. Your last line “I personally support gay marriage i just don’t support claiming intolerance if people disagree with my opinions” pretty much hits it home.
@ 3:29 No it’s fucking not
Why so serious, Batman?
Man dechase is just removing comments left and right. So much for an open forum.