<p>His statement:</p>
<p>Statement</a> from Gene Nichol: Feb. 12 | University Relations</p>
<p>The Board of Visitors' Statement:</p>
<p>Statement</a> from the Board of Visitors: Feb. 12 | University Relations</p>
<p>News version</p>
<p>it's also picked up on Think Progress . org- heading is under "Radical Right Wing Agenda". So it looks like it may be a National news Story too.</p>
<p>I must say that after reading Nichol's statement I am grateful my son chose not to attend William & Mary. Being "northeastern liberals" my son and I had some mixed feelings about the school. There was a lot he liked about the academics there, but socially he wondered about issues of tolerance and religion. And this seems to have validated those concerns. I'm very sorry not only for Nichol and his family but for the students who will suffer from their alma mater's reputation.</p>
<p>Wow. What a letter from Gene Nichol. I am deeply moved. He should not have a problem finding another position of leadership.</p>
<p>My reaction to the former president's letter was quite different from the above poster's reaction. It appears that he was not ready to lead as leadership requires respect for, and consideration of, others. The former president thought only of his agenda based on his (mis)interpretations of Constitutional "requirements". The Board of Trustees, alumni and current students and faculty should have been considered and consulted as well. For example, before removing a cross to make "others" more welcome, did he consider additions which would have had a similiar, but more inclusive effect? Porn stars on campus who were paid with school funds?! Sounds like the former president had little respect for the existing community standards--which define much of Constitutional litigation and decision making-- and little respect for the heritage and mission of the school. Reads as if the former president was ailing from a serious case of "political correctness gone awry" and forgot to add commonsense and truly inclusive leadership into his actions. Perhaps this will allow Gene Nichols' University to return to its original, less egocentric name of the College of William & Mary.</p>
<p>Nichol's credibility went out the window when he approved of a Sex Workers' Art show not just once, but twice.</p>
<p>I think last week's "Adult" art show was the straw that broke the camel's back. I will give him respect for turning down compensation to not talk about his leaving.</p>
<p>And does anyone else think that it will be very difficult for him to return to the faculty after this? Most fired CEO's do not stay with company. Or do they?</p>
<p>cmbmom, never heard of tenure? Once you've got the magic contract you have a job for life.</p>
<p>Just because he may have tenure does not mean that it will be easy for him to remain on the faculty. I would imagine he doesn't stay long, but I could be wrong. William & Mary does not deserve the bad reputation Nichol gave the college.</p>
<p>Motherdear: Why? Are sex workers not people too? Why should their voices be silenced in art expression because of distaste for their occupations? You should note that the show was sold out... so somebody thought it was worth it.</p>
<p>I can't pretend to have followed the various controversies during Nichol's tenure too closely, but it sounds like W&M is losing a very precious asset in this leader... it's really a shame. Even more unfortunately, this will embolden those that feel they can (and should) try to exert substantial influence over the leadership of the college.</p>
<p>Jefferson is turning over in his grave. If W&M cant understand the sacred principles of the First Amendment and why Nichol lead as he did, then they dont deserve someone of his character. I thought W&M could stand up to the voices of ignorance better than this. How very very sad.</p>
<p>I would not want my child's money to help bring the sex worker's show to campus. The show was brought to campus by student funded resources. Yes, these "workers" are people too but this does not belong on a college campus.</p>
<p>Well, in support of the Board, this is a public institution and they have to answer to the state. If the college loses the support of the legislature, and it appeared he had, then the college cannot function. That is the price you pay for taking a job like that in the first place. </p>
<p>Sounds like he never belonged in that job. He is tenured, and he can stay there. I don't know W&M, but at many colleges the faculty would be appalled at the way he has been treated, and would welcome him back with open arms.</p>
<p>I may agree with him on the principles, but then I would never want to be in a leadership position in a place where these actions were controversial. The notion that the president should even concern himself with the content of a nonviolent art exhibit, let alone ban it, is bizarre. Most presidents could not tell you all the exhibits on campus if their lives depended on it. Why should they know? It is a free country. Apparently the exhibit was legal. Move along.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The former president thought only of his agenda based on his (mis)interpretations of Constitutional "requirements".
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Umm, he is a constitutional scholar. Do you really want to debate the legal issues with him?</p>
<p>Note that the Board will not reverse his decision on the cross.</p>
<p>Oh, its national: -</a> Google News</p>
<p>Statement issued by Nichol on Jan. 28, 2008 regarding the Sex Workers' Art Show: Statement</a> on the Sex Workers Art Show from Nichol: BOV statement | University Relations</p>
<p>Letters from the ACLU letter to Nichols.PR</a> Feb. 4, 2008 ACLU Urges William and Mary to Allow Controversial Show to Go On </p>
<p>The Shows 2008 tour schedule and an advertisement.
MySpace.com</a> - SEX WORKERS ART SHOW - OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON - Progressive - <a href="http://www.myspace.com/sexworkersartshow%5B/url%5D">www.myspace.com/sexworkersartshow</a> </p>
<p>Some reviews of the Show: </p>
<p>W&M in 2007
Sex</a> Workers' Art Show: Cabaret with a Conscience - The DoG Street Journal </p>
<p>Wesleyan The</a> Wesleyan Argus - Sex workers' show features humor, reflections, and nudity </p>
<p>UCLA
The</a> Daily Bruin - Art gives sex workers voice </p>
<p>Some, uh, differing perspectives from Duke: </p>
<p>The</a> Chronicle</p>
<p>Duke</a> Students for an Ethical Duke </p>
<p>Nichol is going back to the Law School. Presumably that division of the University still remembers the First Amendment.</p>
<p>If Pres. Nichol was to use his own sense of propriety and values to censor a Sex Workers' Art Show, then I suppose he should have extended those responsibilities to ban anything that ran contrary to his own values? Shall he allow a speaker from one political party and not another? One social agenda and not another? I personally feel that evangelical religious zeal accounts for much of the violence and evil in the world today - far more than sexuality. If I get the W&M Presidency, will you back me when I take a stand and say "In the interest of peace and justice, I'll have no conservative religious views espoused on this campus"?</p>
<p>Oh my goodness. I wish there was a way to contact him so I could show support. Based solely on his letter, it seemed that he was a forward thinking, capable President who brought much to the College. His loss is such, such a shame. To have his family lives affected by his career and essentially be offered money to shut their mouths is so ridiculous. I hope that BOV will realize that they've just flung themselves and dragged the College back to the dark ages. </p>
<p>His decisions to remove the cross in a non denominational Church really resonated with me, it seems such a bold move to make other religious minorities feel more comfortable in such a conservative environment. Likewise, I feel his Gateway program and attempts to diversify the College should be applauded. I feel the issue causing most controversy is his allowance of a Sex Worker's Show. Yet that too, I support his personal distaste of the show, but refusal to let personal feelings carry over into his administration. </p>
<p>As the founder of the show, Annie Oakley, states, "She went on to discuss that it was the show's intention to initiate a dialogue about the sex work industry and stress that the people in it were deserving of safety, respect and the right to be heard. Otherwise, Annie said, the silence which most sex consumers prefer from their so-called "products" renders sex workers invisible." I feel it's important for modern day college students to realize that not all is dandy outside the college bubble, there are two sides to every story, and that the school community's reaction to the Show is precisely how morally complicated society is.</p>
<p>Wow. I had no idea. That's an impressive letter. Good for him.</p>
<p>Maybe its NYC and metropolitan areas that are really the "bubble"". Growing up in NYC, we have been immersed in diversity of viewpoints forever -- I read this and think "wow are there really parts of the United States where Nichol's actions would be considered revolutionary?" </p>
<p>It does make me wonder if dd would be able to adjust to a southern school and she is interested in this school -- at least academically...</p>