Squirm flyers discussion continues in VSA

Asya Magazinnik Guest Writer

On Oct. 9, at the weekly meeting of the Vassar Student Association (VSA), the Squirm Editorial Board called the Council’s attention to the removal of Squirm’s flyers around campus. They said that as a result of flyer removal, they have been experiencing lower turnout at their meetings and events since the beginning of the semester.

Squirm’s Literary Editor Kristy Lilas ’06 spoke on behalf of the Editorial Board. She first addressed the removal of flyers on the first floor of Strong House by House Fellow Dayle Rebelein, who was concerned about how the graphic sexual material would affect her 11-year old son.

Lilas refuted the Strong House Fellow’s assertion that only flyers containing “full frontal nudity or profanity” had been removed, showing several examples of Squirm’s signs.

Rebelein later described the particular flyers that she had removed. “I took down approximately four fliers that looked identical,” she said. “A naked woman on her hands and knees in a seductive pose. Very stylized and Playboy-esque.”

Lilas requested that the VSA revise their decision to prohibit advertising on the first floor. Strong’s Secretary and House President proxy Stephanie Quezada ’08 suggested that Squirm post fliers in the first floor bathrooms Lilas replied it is considered sexual harassment for a pornographic magazine to advertise inside bathrooms, and that the most effective advertising space is in the first floor hallways.

The members of the VSA Council agreed to include notices in their e-mails to their constituents asking students not to rip down signs. Squirm also plans to speak with the House Fellows Committee about their advertising in the dorms.

Joshua Schreier, Co-chair of the House Fellows Committee and a Davison House Fellow, later discussed the difficulty of striking a balance between the rights of a House Fellow and those of a student organization. “If a number of people live in the same place, the place must be comfortable for everyone,” said Schreier. “In other words, semi-common living arrangements generally require compromise. Also, students should respect the fact that when House Fellows with children live in the dorm, they are also responsible for providing their children with a suitable environment.”

At the same time, Schreier said that he personally had no problem with Squirm’s advertising.

Co-chair of the House Fellows Committee Mark Epstein added, “Faculty are generally well-apprised of what they are getting into when they take on this amazing experience known as House Fellowing, and they have a responsibility to welcome the full panoply of student expression in their shared living quarters. However, since our living spaces are our homes as well as the students’ homes...we are all under obligation to mediate, in community, the parameters of how it is acceptable to behave, what is acceptable to display in that shared space.”

Lilas expressed concern, however, that Squirm’s core values and not just its advertising are coming under attack.

Squirm’s defense of its freedom of speech on campus has also evoked comparisons to the recent controversy surrounding The Imperialist, Vassar’s conservative and moderate political publication. But Lilas disputes this analogy. “ Squirm has become an outlet for the justification of oppressive freedom of speech, implying that if a supposed sexist porn magazine exists on campus, then a racist conservative publication should be able to exist also,” said Lilas. “There are many things wrong with this perception. Rather than coming from a status of power to attack a minority group, Squirm is an outlet for mostly oppressed bodies and minds to express their own sense of empowerment.”

According to Quezada, Squirm and Rebelein will meet to discuss a compromise on advertising in Strong House.