12
Editorial Board
Adam Lucas
Laura Parker
MaijorieHall
Ellen Yutzy
Statement of Purpose
The Forum exists to facilitate
dialogue and expression on
matters of importance to Guilford
College and its mission. Toward
this end, active community
participation in these pages is
vital.
Editorial Policy
Every effort will be made to print
appropriate submissions of
editorials, cartoons and letters to
the editor. They must be signed,
with the phone number of the
author or artist included and
turned in to the box outside the
publications suite by 3:00 on
Monday before that Friday's
publication date. Editorials must
be no longer than 400 words and
letters to the editor must be no
more than 250 words. The
Guilfordian reserves the right to
edit submissions for grammatical
correctness and brevity.
THE GUILFORDIAN
"Since 1914, but never quite like this."
Editor-in-chief. Adam Lucas (286-1214)
News editor. Marjorie Hall (316-3171)
Features editor. Will Dodson (316-3727)
World editor. Ellen Yutzy (316-3808)
Editorials editor. Laura Parker (316-3683)
Sports editor. Dan Gatti (316-3843)
Photography editor. Chris Carlstrom (316-3752)
Co-photo editor. Becca Lee (316-3844)
Layout editor. Alicia Grogan-Brown (316-3120)
Online editor. Steven Rentz (316-3278)
Business manager. Amy Broach (286-1214)
Faculty advisor. Jeff Jeske (316-2216)
Staff writers: Laurah Norton, Betsy Blake, Paige Mcßae, Greg Rinaldi,
Astor Ankney, Allison Strizak, Morgan Reffell, Chris Weber, Jack Shuler, Amanda
Becom, Annie Buchanan-Clary, Jonathan Carter, Kelton Cofer, Kelly White, Zack
Hample, Matthew Zuehlke, Jacob Noble, Katy Hunter, Phoebe Jewett, John
Clinton, Dana Mendoza, Jeff Irving, Peter Morscheck
Staff meetings are Mondays at 7:30 pm in the Passion Pit. All are
welcome.
How to reach us:
By mail: 5800 W. Friendly Avenue, 17717 Founders Hall, Greensboro, NC
27410
By phone: (910)316-2306
By fax: (910)316-2950
By e-mail: Guilfordian@rascal.guilford.edu
On the Internet: www.guilford.edu/Guilfordian
Political correctness is a folly
STAFF EDITORIAL
As a private, liberal arts school,
Guilford has little legal obligation to en
courage free speech.
However, as a school which prides
itself on the openness of its community,
Guilford has every reason in the world to
create an environment that fosters free
speech.
It is only by having an atmosphere
where students of all backgrounds,
creeds and opinions feel safe in express
ing their ideas can Guilford live up to this
idealistic, lofty goal.
Recent events on campus have chal
lenged Guilford's commitment to free
speech. Race discussions are unnatu
rally one-sided when any segment of
campus feels unable to talk.
If we are to make progress, then
every effort must be made to prevent
students from being afraid of backlash
caused by misunderstanding. We must
put aside personal differences and bel
ligerent attitudes.
John Robichaux expressed his opin
ions in a now infamous anonymous letter
Forum
addressed to the editor of this paper. He
later came forward, voluntarily, and took
credit for authorship of a letter which, at
that point, had become one of the foci of
what bordered on a crisis at Guilford. He
should be commended for having the
courage to come forward at all.
The letter penned by Robichaux
was not necessarily right, and this edito
rial desires to make no pronouncement
on the appropriateness of the ideas
therein expressed. Those ideas were,
however, clearly not politically correct.
Political correctness can be a
touchy subject. It is also detrimental to
conversation. When people are more
concerned with the language used to ex
press ideas than with the ideas them
selves, the potential for growth from that
discussion is hindered.
What good does it do to learn that
the use of the n-word is improper if the
underlying attitudes and stereotypes be
hind the language go unchallenged, un
voiced due to the veil of political correct
ness?
The problem extends far beyond
race and Guilford.
Cowards oil computers
There seems to be an increasing
amount of students who are too scared to
step out of their comfort zones and instead
choose to hide in vax notes.
Now, with the Senate vax notes, stu
dents are able to say what they feel in an
overtly racist and ignorant manner.
No one has executed this privilege
more tactfully than John Robichaux.
Robichaux loves being in his comfort zone,
where he can fine at will all the ignorant
comments he has and face no repercus
sions because vax notes are only used by
him and his followers.
The ignorance has now spilled over
into Senate, and an increased amount of
Molly Martin bashing has ensued.
While all of these comments are pub
lic, none of the authors have come forward
during Senate to disclose what they have
been saying on vax notes.
Instead they keep silent about the
race issue until they find their comfort zone,
which is in front of the computer screen
and away from their constitutions. I thought
this issue was to be tackled face to face.
Robichaux's cowardice and computer
misuse should not surprise our campus,
BY JACOB NOBLE
Staff VMer
Women are not to be referred to
as broads, chicks, or bitches.
A headline using the phrase "head
negro" recently sparked an outcry in
Boston. The discussion centers not
around the history of the issues involved,
but over the use of that specific term.
We are taught to not use terms
which are not "politically correct." We
are taught that those terms are inherently
bad. This results in repression instead of
exploration of any ideas associated with
that terminology.
The national debate over race re
lations has a tendency to get bogged
down in its own rhetoric. Guilford has
an opportunity to rise above rhetoric and
make real changes in the attitudes of the
people in this community.
Changing the outlook of people
who leave Guilford and enter our preju
diced society would be far preferable to
instructing those people as to which
terms they may and may not use.
The choice is now ours. Will
Guilford College have a true discussion
or simply punish those who have the
courage to voice unpopular ideas?
however, seeing how he has used comput
ers before to bestow his ignorance upon
What is worse about Robichaux and
his entries is how he manipulates Quaker
principles and teachings so he can be seen
in a more favorable light, yet not have to
directly look at his dissidents. If he is so
strong about his beliefs, he should be able
to look someone in the eye and justify them.
So far Robichaux has been incapable of
doing that.
That is why he is a coward.
Quakers conduct meetings through
live attendance; they do not hide behind
technology and fail to face their constitu
ents. I have a suggestion for Robichaux: if
he has a problem with the direction Guil
ford is heading with race relations, why do
not he and his friends write a letter and this
time sign their names? Then he can orga
nize his colleagues and attend an AACS
meeting and proceed to Senate. They need
to stop hiding and start standing.
Colin McFadden-Roan, Nathan Par
sons, and John Robichaux, I have read your
vax note entries; your ignorance is quite
evident and dangerous to the Guilford com
munity. These three men are examples that
technology + ignorance = cowards on com
puters.
The Guilfordian
April 10,1998