<p>I've been trying to follow the logic here, and I think I have it:</p>
<p>I want the cross, so you must keep it.</p>
<p>I don't want the show, so you can't show it.</p>
<p>[A Constitutional republic is so, ah, difficult at times.]</p>
<p>I am a longtime admirer of W&M and the people that I have known over the years who have attended or been associated with the school in some way. It is a conservative place politically and socially, but it has also been filled historically with people that I have known to be considerate, gracious, fair and well-meaning. I know that many of them are in pain today because of the way that this situation with President Nichol unfolded and concluded. No one wishes him ill, but I suspect that many feel that, in many respects, he was the wrong man in the wrong place at the wrong time for this institution. </p>
<p>Compounding their pain is the way that others without a formed view of the College may now be getting an inaccurate view of W&M and what it has been and what it is today. The press loves these stories and creating these (IMO false, or at minimum, misleading) impressions which take down a college like W&M. No one is a winner in this situation and hopefully, the BOV will quickly find a replacement who can get W&M out of the news, but who can also carry on some of the initiatives that Nichol got going (diversity, Pell grants, etc.). </p>
<p>For the record, I do think that people should know that W&M has the following percentages of students:</p>
<p>10% Asian
7% Black
6% Hispanic</p>
<p>This is about the same level of diversity as colleges like:</p>
<p>Asian , Black , Hispanic </p>
<p>8% , 8% , 8% , Georgetown
12% , 7% , 5% , U Michigan
7% , 12% , 5% , U North Carolina
7% , 9% , 6% , Vanderbilt
7% , 5% , 9% , Notre Dame
6% , 6% , 2% , Wake Forest
12%, 11%, 5%, U Virginia</p>
<p>afan:</p>
<p>I feel perfectly comfortable debating at least some of the constitutional issues with Gene Nichol. While I would express no view on the propriety of banning the sex workers show, as a constitutional matter the government is not required to subsidize the expression of views that it sounds distasteful. Rust v. Sullivan.</p>
<p>Oh, I think the message is quite clear that WM is sending: 'we'll clean this place up, get rid of this troublemaker, and your children won't have to see anything unpleasant if they come here."</p>
<p>Rust says government gets to pick what to fund; no surprise there, as the alternative would be untenable.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It's a shame for William and Mary. The college's reputation as a bona fide institution of higher learning and intellectual discovery will suffer. The problem is, more than anything, that bright kids (and the parents of bright kids) will perceive the school as being a kind of "Stickershock U" even if it doesn't actually adhere to the crabbed definitions of art and free speech that some CC posters assert. It still looks like it, and the university will be tarred with the same brush.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't understand this post at all. The show wasn't banned, so all the enlightened people can rest assured.</p>
<p>In the next few weeks, the Sex Workers Art Show will perform at Bard, Haverford, Harvard, Wesleyan, U Michigan, and Indiana University - highly estimable colleges all, as is W & M. Are they jeopardizing their institutional futures, or their students' moral development, by providing performance space for this production? I can't see how. Colleges are places for learning about the full scope of humanity, pretty and otherwise. </p>
<p>Thanks to hawkette in post 82 above for providing accurate information about diversity in the student population at W & M today. 23 % URM enrollment could be a lot worse, and I feel certain this will improve even more his year due, in part, to Nichols' influence. As the mother of an alum (class of 2005) and an entering freshman this fall, I'm not sure that I'd describe the school as conservative politically and socially. Certainly my daughter found friends of all political, ethnic, sexual, racial, and economic types. </p>
<p>It's hard to follow a popular president, which Timothy Sullivan was at W & M, certainly with the students. I believe that, once Nichols alienated so many with his decision about the cross, his days were numbered.</p>
<p>Wesleyan got a lot of negative publicity 5 or 6 years ago when an assignment (don't know for which class) required students to produce a work of pornography. I wouldn't have evaluated the school based on that single data point - but many folks did.</p>
<p>you may want to check out the student newspaper at W and M
The</a> Flat Hat</p>
<p>The post to which I responded to has been modified. My response (and reference to the 'enlightened') was intended to be satirical. The OP's dig at another poster, renaming a university after him in a mocking way, was disrespectful and rude.</p>
<p>marny1, thanks for the link. The nature of the posts following the articles is telling. Lots of healing to be done.</p>
<p>Lest people get the wrong impression, ie, that there is a universal view that W&M's BOV should not have fired Nichol, a quick online perusal of the Virginia newspapers shows that there is plenty of support for the BOV's actions. Take a look at the Virginia Pilot (Norfolk) or the Times-Dispatch (Richmond) or the Virginia Gazette (Williamsburg). Certainly you will find commentary that opposes this move (and the press has predictably sided with Nichol as they would love to stoke the controversy to get as much play out of this story as possible), but you will also find a lot of opinion that supports the move. Here is the link to a commentary piece in today's Gazette:</p>
<p>Nichol's</a> long career -- VAGazette.com</p>
<p>My view is that W&M hired the wrong guy for this job. Some of his work to expand Pell grantees and increase diversity are laudable (and the BOV notes this), but it's not as if W&M was some rigid conservative-ideology backwater before he got the position. Frankly, the diversity numbers don't differ much with several other highly regarded national universities and furthermore, the percentages attending W&M compare positively with the demographics of the state from which it takes 2/3 of its students.</p>
<p>W&M has long been an outstanding college with more tradition and history than virtually any college in the country. I hope that the next President will know how to build on that in a positive way.</p>
<p>I was intrigued by the fact that the BOV offered Prexy Nichols and his wife substantial money not to talk about the non-renewal of his contract. Were they embarrassed about something they did?</p>
<p>My first impression of the College of William and Mary was a visit when my good friend attended in 1981. Loved the campus, it's beautiful. I should also note that in the Reagan years, this friends was the Bohemian. The girl that stood out from the rest of us as not wearing the button downs and Topsiders. </p>
<p>Fast forward to having children of my own. Daughter is now a freshman at W&M and loves it! She too, dances to her own tune, and chose W&M over UVA mostly for a more relaxed atmosphere, encouraging greater diversity and less conservatism than one can expect from public schools in Virginia. Virginia is very conservative; strong right wing Christian evangelists rule. (Home of Pat Robertson and the late Jerry Falwell) The BOV, an extenstive of this, has spoken and Nichols resigned. Right or wrong, the campus has suffered and it's reputation damaged, at least some what. And so many persons jumping on the band wagon with their opinions, only exagerate the situation. However, the College of William and Mary has been here for centuries and will continue to operate in similar fashion. Presidents will come and go and this controversy will soon subside. The Sex Workers Art Show has/will appear at many universities. Why the controversy of this showing? And yes, my daughter did attend the show. She wasn't offended, yet truly did not see the point of most of the exhibits. As for the poster calling persons hypocrites, I supported my daughter, if she wanted to attend. And God forbid she want to enter the world of a sex worker, I'd not be pleased but will love her just the same.</p>
<p>
[quote]
...but, under no circumstances will that nasty little cross be left standing on a table in the church!
[/quote]
Well, if you put the cross in a jar of urine, some would call it art & organize an exhibition. Perhaps NEA funding would follow.</p>
<p>Hawkette, glad to hear your thoughtful representation of W&M. I know that there is nothing NEAR universal outrage over the BOV's decision to not renew his contract. His letter reeks of arrogance & borderline narcissism. As FLVADAD says, he just didn't understand how to exercise leadership.</p>
<p>In reading about the Sex Workers Art Show on this thread, I felt like I was in the twilight zone.</p>
<p>
[quote]
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."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Huh??? In performing this "art" show, the sex workers are getting respect? Is it not obvious to everyone that the sex workers are being further exploited?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I feel it's important for modern day college students to realize that not all is dandy outside the college bubble.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I do too, but how are they realizing this through this "art" show?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I am somewhat comforted at the thought that -- sparklers notwithstanding --there probably isn't much physical or emotional damage involved in travelling around performing for wildly enthusiastic college students on campuses across the country.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The sex workers deal with "wildly enthusiastic" people on a regular basis, but since the audience in this case is priviledged college students, it' O.K. and not damaging???
Oh, I forgot, it's our children's "right." How about the rights of the sex workers?</p>
<p>
[quote]
It's a sideshow act. We all know it. There's no educational value here, other than peering in on the gritty underside to society and acting like it's an academic exercise. Please- give me a break.
[/quote]
Amen to that, Doubleday!</p>
<p>But wait!
[quote]
the Sex Workers Art Show will perform at Bard, Haverford, Harvard, Wesleyan, U Michigan, and Indiana University - highly estimable colleges all
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, in that case... :(</p>
<p>In my southern city, the homeless and other marginalized members of our society have a safe haven where they can go and create art. Some of them have created truly amazing paintings, collages and works in clay. For a few precious hours each week, they can forget about their unfortunate lot in life and create something beautiful. They have art shows regularly and sell their creations to the public. This gives them not only much needed cash, but a sense of true achievement and inner peace.</p>
<p>Let's see how this compares to "art" show touring the colleges. The "performers" are being gawked at and cheered while in humiliating poses. And this is good for the sex workers and students how?</p>
<p>I do not understand this at all; but then again, I am not an "enlightened" Northerner...</p>
<p>It's not as simple as Nichol being fired because of the sex show or Wren Cross. Many factors, not the least being W&M's record under his leadership.</p>
<p>Should</a> Gene Nichol be President at William & Mary?</p>
<p>This guy had to leave W&M, and any other school for that matter. What was he thinking? I'm glad he's out!!</p>
<p>Curiousmother, your post nails it: This ART show is pure exploitation. The comment implying that the presence of "wildly enthusiastic" boys in the audience proves there is no emotional damage to these women is truly clueless.</p>
<p>Let's see what Nichol accomplished in his two years:</p>
<p>Application growth came to a screeching halt;
Alumni donors were marginalized;
Fundraising goals not met;
$12 million dollar donation LOST- ex-president wrote Nichol an URGENT email asking him to rectify this situation, and offered any assistance and Nichol IGNORED him, then claimed he knew nothing about this retraction, AFTER making public declaration of 'record' donations, which of course were only record donations if that one was included. He basically got caught in a lie on this one.
Embarassing and divisive handling of Wren Cross controversy;
Lack of transparency in reporting fundraising status (is that no wonder?)</p>
<p>From the report:
"Unfortunately for Nichol, William and Mary alumni have had an excellent education, many hold important positions, and many have concluded Nichol is a coward, and has now proven in his official communications to regularly be evasive, misrepresent, and outright lie. It is clear to them that he could care less about their College and its traditions, much less its alumni. They suspect Nichol is simply getting his ticket punched for the next step. As far as they are concerned, it is "all about Nichol, all the time.""</p>
<p>Hm. Some of the responses on this thread make me curious about the definitions of art and free speech. I have no interest in seeing the Sex Workers Art Show (and am going to need an injection of hip before I'll remember to call these folks "sex workers" instead of prostitutes or porn performers). But. Just because I do not like a performance does not mean it isn't art. Just because I feel that certain subject matter is abhorrent doesn't mean that said subject matter has no place on a college campus. "Ulysses," "Lolita," "Les Demoiselles d'Avignon" - all were considered obscene once upon a time, weren't they?</p>
<p>I'm wondering exactly who these various student programming offices are supposed to call to make sure their programming is, um, okay.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Let's see what Nichol accomplished in his two years:</p>
<p>Application growth came to a screeching halt;
[/quote]
??? Applications in 2005 were 10,610; in 2006, 10,722; in 2007, 10,845 (these per the common data set); in 2008, an anticipated 11,400.</p>
<p>For those who truly believe in the sacred freedoms of religion and speech, Nichol being forced out by petty, Richmond beaurocrats is a sad day for all Americans. I had always hoped W&M be a modern voice for Jefferson and Madison ideas, but I see the BOV reflects the precepts of Joe McCarthy and Jesse Helms instead.</p>
<p>I doubt any principled, strong leader would take the W&M job now. We will probably get the equivalent of a James Buchanon for the future. How very very sad. I thought W&M was better than this. I was wrong.</p>