ZIBBY PILLOTE /// Editor-in-Chief

“The Easiest Move: Stay On Campus!” read an email dated Jan. 28 to rising junior and senior students currently living in dorms. But securing a desirable spot on campus is not all it’s cracked up to be. This spring, Campus Living implemented a new strategy for assigning students to on-campus housing for the 2013-2014 school year. The strategy involved incentivizing rising upperclassmen to stay on campus by offering them the first choice of housing accommodations, a three percent rent reduction on the 2013-2014 room rates and the chance to win iPads, parking permits and bookstore gift cards. The email from Director of Campus Housing Sandi Bottemiller also emphasized new block meal plans and free laundry.
In order to be eligible for such benefits, students had to enter into a lease agreement that involved a “required (non refundable) $200 deposit.” While the email mentioned the sense of community and benefit of convenience that comes with living on campus, it failed to state how many apartments were available for rising juniors and seniors, and through what sort of process the applicants would be chosen.
Ted Jack (’15) took issue with the way his deposit was handled after he did not receive the apartment that he had applied for. “The general sense was that if you applied early, you would get an apartment,” said Jack. Jack and his friends were wary of the “non-refundable” fee, but wanted to take advantage of the opportunity to significantly increase their chances of getting the apartment of their choosing. “We only proceeded with the application because we had been told that if we didn’t get our apartment we would be able to get refunds. This eventually became the general consensus among students.”
Originally, the early action housing initiative was assumed to be on a first-come, first-served basis. On March 13, Bottemiller announced that Campus Living would be switching to a lottery system in order to assign apartments “in the most fair way.” According to the first-come, first-served system, rising seniors were given priority over rising juniors, who were first-time applicants to the apartments.
When Jack and his friends began to suspect that they would not receive a four-bedroom apartment and would instead be split into two double apartments, the group decided to try to cancel their lease agreement. Bottemiller alerted the group eight days before announcing outcomes to all applicants that they would not be issued refunds because Campus Living “could have accommodated [them] in two-bedroom units.” Though Bottemiller’s Jan. 28 email clearly states that deposits were nonrefundable, other Campus Living employees had told Jack that in the event of a four-bedroom being split into two two-bedroom apartments, the deposit could be refunded.
The initial decision was that no person who had applied early would be issued a refund under any circumstance; this included students who had applied for four-bedroom units and were offered two-bedroom units, as well as students who had applied for either and received nothing. After a number of students voiced their dissatisfaction, Campus Living changed the policy so that students who did not receive either two- or four-bedroom assignments could get a refund, and students who received two-bedroom apartments after applying for four-bedroom apartments could receive a partial refund and have the rest of the money go towards living on campus. The inconsistency in granting refunds was extremely frustrating for Jack, who was determined to do something.
The lease agreement for the apartment states that students may receive a refund if their application is cancelled before July 1 for the fall semester, or Nov. 15 for the spring semester. Early action applicants are an exception to this rule—for the privilege of signing up early, deposits may not be refunded.
After a meeting with Dean of Students Anna Gonzalez and Bottemiller, Jack received his deposit back in return for his silence. “They essentially asked me at the meeting to let people speak for themselves and stop taking action on behalf of the student body about this. What I took from it was they were saying, ‘Yeah, we’ll refund you, now shut up,’” said Jack. Jack encouraged other students affected by the debacle to share their stories with him in the hopes of building a legal case against the school.
“It turned out I couldn’t take legal action. They refunded me so I couldn’t [do anything] on my account, and the other person in my situation received an offer [for a partial refund] from [Campus Living] and she took it,” said Jack.
On March 28, students were notified as to their apartment living situation. Jack was forwarded an email by a friend sent to “Students awarded doubles” that clearly states that in lieu of losing the $200 completely, “you may opt to apply for a residence hall room instead...We will refund $100 of your deposit if you choose to complete the housing contract, keeping the remaining $100.”
The event has sparked a series of discussions on campus, in the Campus Living office and beyond. On April 1, a meeting was called in Akin Hall to address these issues. “Bottemiller seemed to [think] that I was making all this up and there weren’t any problems, and we addressed the fact that they refunded some people but they aren’t refunding other people, and they won’t tell people what the actual requirements are to get a refund, and there’s just a lack of transparency,” said Jack.
“It leaves you with a bad taste in your mouth. You’ve got all these students paying $40,000 a year to go to school here, and they’re not going to refund you your $200. Really?” said Jack.
Jack says that he and his friends will be living in a house off campus next fall. He admits the apartments are nice, but does not believe that they are worth so much trouble. Two-bedroom apartments and four-bedroom apartments each cost $3,677 a semester before the addition of a required meal plan. Four-bedroom apartments feature a full stove and oven and a full-sized fridge, while double apartments have a two-burner stove and microwave oven.

In a state where problem gambling affects roughly three percent of all people (as well as the people who care about them), some of Lewis & Clark’s pioneers have become part of Oregon’s solution: the Graduate School for Education and Counseling Psychology opened a gambling treatment center almost three months ago, where problem gamblers and those impacted by their behavior may receive a free year of counseling services from professionally-supervised students. Open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays, the center is the first and only in the Portland area to provide problem gambling counseling services on weekends.

LC’s treatment facility is also the first and only in Oregon to act as a training center for problem gambling counselors. This trailblazing trend may be attributed to Coordinator of the graduate school’s Professional Mental Health and Addictions Counseling Program Dr. Boyd Pidcock: facility Program Director Rick Berman explained that Pidcock has spent many years as “a leader…in workforce development for [Oregon’s] problem gambling services” and established the clinic as a contribution to such development.

Along with the Chair of the graduate school’s Counseling Psychology Program Teresa McDowell, Berman and Pidcock supervise four graduate assistants who do the actual counseling and five graduate volunteers who handle the outreach and program development aspects. Each treatment room is equipped with cameras that take live footage of counseling sessions, so supervisors can look on and later provide student counselors with feedback. Fellow student counselors may also watch the sessions as a way of learning from their peers.
While all state-supported gambling support services in Oregon are free, LC’s counseling center makes significant efforts to be accessible in ways that similar facilities are not. As a result of making services available in Spanish, roughly 25 percent of the center’s clients are Latino and speak Spanish as their first language (interpretive services in any language are also availwable).

Located at 4445 S.W. Barbur Blvd., the center is only a mile south of downtown Portland. It also relies on a treatment philosophy that encourages family involvement, which contributes to the weekend-exclusive schedule. According to Berman, the center’s desire to “help reduce barriers to high-quality services” stems directly from LC’s commitment to social justice.   

Due to its combination of student counselors and progressive supervisors, LC’s problem gambling treatment facility has the capacity to use highly innovative counseling methods with its growing group of clients.  To reiterate the center’s newness, Berman said, “We’re very early in the process of developing and testing our treatment model.” Still, current treatment already includes unique attempts at integrating a family counseling model with a standard model of individual addiction counseling in order to explore the relationship between interpersonal interactions and problematic gambling behavior.

Berman predicts that at least six months will pass before the center reaches full client capacity, and right now, anyone who seeks help can get it immediately. This facility presently serves a vital role in the greater Portland community, but also sets a positive tone for the future of problem gambling treatment. Thanks to the center’s experiential learning opportunity for students, Berman and his colleagues “expect [that] a whole new generation of problem gambling counselors will enter the field with a much higher level of competence than before.”

Nate Cohen (’13) spent last semester working as a medic in eastern Uganda at a clinic run by the the Foundation for International Medical Relief of Children. This clinic is three hours from the nearest city and usually sees 65 patients a day, three-qaurters of which are under the age of 12.  
To aid their efforts at becoming solar powered, Cohen and SCRIPTed, with the help of a capella groups Momo and the Coop and Semper Solus, hosted a fundraiser on April 17.
“There is electricity, but it is extremely touch-and-go. It will not work for sometimes weeks at a time. This eliminates computerized record systems or refrigeration for things like vaccines or blood,” Cohen said. “Pretty basic things.”
In collaboration with the a capella groups, Cohen even freestyled, perhaps remembering his time in Uganda without electricity.
“One of my favorite things that happened while I was there was that the power went out and they told us that gorillas had got the wiring. We asked them gorillas with an ‘o’ or guerillas with a ‘ue.’ And they said they didn’t know. Then I realized we’re out here,” Cohen said.
This show took whatever donations students had to offer, but to donate directly, visit http://www.fimrc.org/ or get in touch with Cohen directly.  

Walking down the steps past the Manor House, and winding around the lawn, it was an unusual sight to see electricians working on a power unit between Watzek and the freshly plowed bushes. Changes to our environment at Lewis & Clark are constant, often subtle, but sometimes shocking. Many changes happen over the summer for a variety of reasons, surprising students who return in the fall.
Just over $10 million appeared in the Approved Capital Projects and Equipment budget for the following year. Facilities Services manages the projects, which have an array of purposes. “It’s important to consider each project in its context and understand things as parts of greater systems,” said Associate Vice President of Facilities Michel George.
Composting toilets are coming to LC for the first time. The initial units will be installed at the Huston Sports Complex to fill the absence of toilets. This trial of a new method of composting will determine if more such toilets will be spread around campus to areas such as the outdoor tennis courts.
The aim to deal with sewage on campus is also being addressed this summer with two major pipe section repair or replacement jobs. One of these areas is under the gravel pathways near the statue of Sacagawea, and the other stretches from the front of Pamplin Sports Center to the south side of BoDine. Changes underground mean reassessing the surface content; some of the gravel pathways will be replaced with pavers.
Along with resurfacing the track and performing some maintenance work in offices and research labs, the College is investing $140,000 in furthering surveillance on campus via security cameras. Existing cameras are in the bookstore, at the Law School and monitoring the vehicle gate entries onto the academic side of campus. The additional cameras would monitor street entrances onto campus and other areas that may be susceptible to crime. The motive in the expansion is to reduce bike thefts and other property crime.
Facilities will be replacing the windows along the west side of Miller after negotiating discounted prices for self-installation. Major building rehabilitation will happen this summer on Platt West. Each year, Facilities focuses on significantly improving the conditions of one of the residence halls. Much of sustainability in building management is focused on maintenance and repair instead of replacement.
LEED Certification has been given to many of the buildings at LC and is a sign of a sustainable initiative. The qualifications for LEED act more like a checklist than a comprehensive assessment of building properties. Alternative building plans include Green Globe Design and the Living Building Challenge, which has a Net-Zero Energy certification. Regardless of certification, Facilities looks to further campus sustainability, as well as to reach out and educte students further about campus projects.

Portland’s only law school might have a reputation for animal law, but when it comes to the First Amendment, it seems they could use some brushing up.

On April 5, Chief Justice Roberts presided over Lewis & Clark’s inaugural moot court competition. In what amounted to an unpublished print article and four days of prior restraint, several College officials insisted on having an article covering the moot court event be screened by Chief Justice Roberts’ office. When Ruiz questioned the legalities of such restrictions by Chief Justice Roberts’ office, a College official informed Ruiz that his tone will not be “tolerated” and that the Dean of Students Anna Gonzalez was informed of the situation.

The Pioneer Log was not made aware by LC officials that an article involving Chief Justice Roberts would have to be “pre-approved” before Tuesday afternoon.

After sending the article in on Tuesday for approval in an attempt to maintain cordial relations with the Law School, The Pioneer Log was well aware that the story would have no chance of being approved before its Wednesday evening deadline. Two emails were sent to the Law School expressing the urgency of this matter and the impending 5 p.m. deadline. The Law School did not send a copy of the article to the Supreme Court until 11:36 p.m. Wednesday evening­—over six hours past deadline.

The Pioneer Log never received confirmation that the article had been received by the Law School, and did not receive any follow up communication until the Oregonian article went live on the night of Friday, April 12.
In an email to The Pioneer Log, Dean of the Northwestern School of Law of Lewis & Clark Robert Klonoff apologized and said that he “regrets” what he called a “misunderstanding.” Klonoff later also apologized via an online comment to the Oregonian story published on the matter.

On Friday, Kolonoff informed Oregonian reporter Betsy Hammond that the article was only sent to the Supreme Court as a “heads-up,” yet his email to Chief Justice Roberts’ office states, “Attached is the college newspaper article about the Chief Justice’s visit. Please let me know if it meets with your approval.”

The same morning, Ruiz and Pillote received an email from Director of Public Relations Lise Harwin stating, “there was a misunderstanding with the Supreme Court. They have just informed us that student newspaper articles do not need to be approved by their office and have apologized for any miscommunication.” Harwin stated on Tuesday, Apr. 9, that the article had been sent to the Chief Justice’s office by the Law School, but emails indicate that this is incorrect.

LC’s Student Media Board bylaws assert that “the student press at Lewis & Clark is free from censorship and advance approval of content.”  That said, the Office of Public Affairs and Communication and the Law School both independently claimed that they were given explicit instructions from the Chief Justice’s office that the article would need to be approved.

While the covenant was broken temporarily between the College and The Pioneer Log, there is a learning opportunity. The administration and Dean Klonoff have already apologized for their involvement in this matter. What we can learn from this is that First Amendment and freedom of the press issues are paramount in the minds of students, and that any form of censorship will create barriers between the administration and the students at large.

Regardless of the orders from Chief Justice Roberts’ Office, the College should have refused to send in any independent student publication for prior approval. The College has admitted its error and we look forward to having an open relationship with the administration in the future.

The award-winning student-run Pioneer Log has been an institution on campus for over 60 years. During this time, faculty advisors have come and gone, sometimes leaving students in the dark to make important decisions without a form of professional guidance. This semester, there is no dedicated faculty advisor to The Pioneer Log.

More importantly, of the 14 sections being offered in the Rhetoric and Media Studies Department for Fall 2013, none are explicitly related to journalism. This means that there are no dedicated classes on journalistic law or writing practices at LC.    

Several editors and writers at The Pioneer Log have stressed the importance of an academic experience for writers and editors, and have expressed disappointment in the lack of academic support offered by the College. It is the position of The Pioneer Log that LC should invest in the journalistic education of its students in order to prevent future “misunderstandings” as well as demonstrate a continued support of free student press.

People like to throw the word “myth” around as if it were synonymous with bullshit. By definition myths are untrue, but their narrative power keeps them from being relegated to the realm of  “lies.” Humans love myths. Myths and stories shape the way we see our reality, guide our actions and provide structures and explanations for a chaotic world. Many people are still unaware of the inaccuracies in our culturally accepted rape myths, and while some people have started to to realize their falsehood, the myths are so deeply ingrained in our culture, news media and everyday lives that they are difficult to combat, even for people who know the truth—and even for students at Lewis & Clark.  

This is precisely why we’ve made it our mission to understand rape myths and how they manifest in our LC bubble. Debunking the myths and understanding the true nature of sexual assault is the first step in planning actions for a safer world because it is a lot harder, if not impossible, to finish a puzzle while looking at the wrong picture. Building on a campus-wide conversation, we would like to share our own experiences and research regarding sexual assault to help understand the consequences of two important rape myths.

The first myth we want to debunk is that most sexual assault is reported. According to the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network (RAINN), 54 percent of sexual assault is not reported to the police. Within the range of sexual assault, the Bureau of Justice Statistics has found that 64 percent of forcible penetrations go unreported. Sexual assault and rape are two of the most underreported violent crimes in America and reporting rates at LC mimic national trends. Our Annual Campus Security Report, mandated under the Clery Act, lists three forcible sex offenses in 2009 and 2010, while six were recorded in 2011. From our experience, we can say these official numbers do not come close to the assaults we are aware of, especially for sexual assault ranging up to forcible penetration. It was nearly impossible for us to quantify the number of unwanted interactions we have seen at LC because they are too diverse and numerous.

There are many reasons why sexual assault goes largely unreported both nationally and at LC. Sometimes victims/survivors do not recognize what happened to them as sexual assault or feel as if they should have acted differently. Victims/survivors are afraid that people will not believe them; that the system will not work in their favor; that they will be blamed; or any number of other distressing reasons. All these fears are compounded when there is a lack of clarity about the victims/survivors’ experiences in reporting their assaults. To begin to address this particular barrier, we have compiled a graphic to briefly show what LC’s reporting process entails. For more information, please talk to any of the groups listed as resources or search “Sexual Assault Misconduct Policy” on the LC website. 

Our second myth is “The Stranger in the Dark.” We understand this myth to be the picture and visual imagery associated with our culture’s dominant rape narrative. This is the story of a male stranger in a dark alley with a weapon who uses physical force to rape a woman, who was characterized as having been “asking for it.” Most times sexual assaults gain attention in news, TV or film they tell the story of “The Stranger in the Dark.” But given national data, “The Stranger in the Dark” represents only a sliver of real life incidents. Our intention is not to discredit the experiences of these survivors but to help people recognize that these assaults, despite their inordinate coverage, are not how the majority of cases are perpetrated. This public perception of what counts as sexual assault deters many people from reporting assault or intervening in risky situations.

According to RAINN, roughly two-thirds of assaults are committed by someone known by the victim, and this figure is even higher for assaults on college campuses. This myth falls short of describing national sexual assaults, and it does not ring true with our experiences at LC. Of all the assaults we are aware of, only one has been what people picture as “rape”—in the dark, forcible, male on female and outdoors—but even in this case the survivor knew the perpetrator.

“The Stranger in the Dark” myth is one of the most dangerous barriers in beginning to deal with sexual assault because it helps ground a flawed argument that women should to be constantly on alert for a deranged stranger rapist instead of creating a world in which all men (and women and genderqueer individuals) are expected to act respectfully and understand consent. This myth is also important to understand because it validates victim blaming. When we begin to understand sexual assault as an intimate act perpetrated by an acquaintance, friend or partner, we are able to understand that victim blaming is never acceptable. Consent training and raising awareness are more essential ingredients in preventing sexual assault at LC than advising women to blow a whistle, shout “no” loudly or avoid going out at night.

Graphic by Camille Christie and Catlin McCartney\

This is the second article in a two-part piece on sexual misconduct in The Pioneer Log this week. 

A note on the article
The authors acknowledge the inherent gaps present in both articles. Unfortunately, not all experiences and perspectives were able to be represented. We strongly encourage the LC community to understand and apply the meanings of consent in their interactions with others, regardless of your previous relationship with them and both their and your genders and sexual orientations. The authors want to express their gratitude to the women who came forward to The Pioneer Log during the spring 2012 semester to share their stories. We regret the delay in the publication of these articles and offer our deepest apologies. We also want to thank Rye Druzin ('13) for serving as both an advocate for the interviewed survivors and an advisor throughout the lengthy process of bringing these articles to fruition.

Warning: The following story contains material that may be triggering or uncomfortable to read.

I. The Policy

Lewis & Clark College has a very comprehensive sexual misconduct policy. The policy, which can be found on the LC website, claims that the College “does not tolerate sexual misconduct in any form” and provides detailed information regarding both preventing and responding to the following offenses: sexual harassment, non-consensual sexual contact, non-consensual sexual intercourse and sexual exploitation.

A handful of administrators, including Director of Health Promotion and a Sexual Assault Response Advocate, Melissa Osmond, have commented on the strengths of the policy. Osmond believes that LC is “more liberal in defining what constitutes sexual misconduct” than pertinent federal legislation. Results from sexual misconduct hearings, according to Osmond, have been “mostly satisfactory for the survivor. We have been able to successfully remove perpetrators from campus.”

LC’s policy also provides clear definitions of consent and outlines individuals’ responsibilities in reducing risk.

“It’s a very comprehensive policy,” said former Forest Area Director and former SARA, David Rosengard. “I don’t think it gets hung up on legal definitions. I think it is more focused on what has actually happened to a person.”

The SARA program consists of a team of seven administrators divided between the undergraduate, law and graduate campuses. The team circulates a pager that, according to the SARA website, “provides 24/7 anonymous [and] private support for survivors and friends regarding any form of sexual misconduct.”

Rosengard explained that the primary goal of the SARA program is to balance the wishes of the survivor with the safety of the greater LC community. According to Rosengard, SARA attempts to “maintain the survivor’s degree of control because they have already had far more control taken away from them than ever should have happened.”

However, reporting to a SARA is only one of several primary avenues available for students. The Feminist Student Union and Queer Resource Center are both student-run safe spaces that operate in ancillary reporting capacities.

“I think the tradeoff there is that you’re going to be reporting to someone [a Resident Advisor] who has a connection to a much deeper range of resources,” Rosengard said as he discussed the difference in reporting to a FSU or QRC representative as opposed to a RA.

Though all groups are trained by Osmond in survivor support, the difference is that RAs, as student staff, are required to report to their AD if a survivor comes forward.

“RAs play a critical role. They are here to speak for students who are not in a position to speak for themselves,” Rosengard said. “I’ve certainly worked with students who wouldn’t have reported if they hadn’t been able to report to an RA that they trusted.”

The College is required to comply with Title IX of the Educational Amendments Act of 1972 which mandates that educational institutions report all instances of sexual misconduct, among other statistics, to the Department of Education. The team of Deputy Title IX Coordinators is spread between LC’s three campuses with Vice President and Provost Jane Atkinson as the coordinator.

In addition to Title IX, LC adheres to both the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (commonly referred to as the Clery Act) and the Dear Colleague Letter. The Clery Act, named after a university student who was assaulted and killed in her residence hall in 1986, “requires colleges and universities to collect, report, and disseminate crime data,” which includes everything from hate crimes to instances of sexual misconduct.

While Clery provides comprehensive guidelines, Osmond conceded that “there are some gaps.” One of these gaps is the discrepancy between Clery’s reported instances of sexual misconduct and the much higher number of unreported assaults taking place within the LC community.

“I try to figure out how [Clery’s definitions] match with our definitions of sexual misconduct,” Osmond said. “We’re more liberal in defining what constitutes sexual misconduct, and it’s a broad range of behaviours and activities from sexual harassment to penetrative rape.”

Osmond’s disappointment in Clery’s narrow definitions and the aforementioned gap was echoed by Rosengard: “There are going to be some things that constitute sexual misconduct in the College’s eyes that don’t fit any of the Clery Act categories and therefore aren’t reportable. You can only report exactly what it wants you to report.”

The College’s on-the-ground resources for survivors is a hefty list of trained professionals and ancillary support groups. Osmond said that throughout her tenure at LC “the outcomes have been mostly satisfactory for the survivor.”

Osmond explained the transformation she has seen survivors undergo: from being traumatized to finding the right help and resources for them and “[coming] through that process as okay as they can be.” However, she acknowledged that “making someone whole after an experience like that is not necessarily possible.”

LC’s survivor support network has a purposefully diverse base so that students are able to contact whomever they are most comfortable with. SARAs, RAs, ADs, the QRC, the FSU, Deans, Campus Living, the Provost and Deputy Title IX Coordinators are only some of the initial channels students—whether they are survivors, friends or perpetrators—can contact to get support.

II. The Problems

During the Spring 2012 semester, a member of The Pioneer Log staff conducted a set of interviews with several students willing to speak about sexual misconduct at LC. While that staff member no longer works for The Pioneer Log, current staff have reviewed the interview transcripts to finally bring two of these women’s stories to light. Their names have been changed for the purpose of this article. Their interviews highlight student dissatisfaction with LC’s sexual misconduct policy and hearing procedure.

The following interviews contain material that may be triggering or uncomfortable to read.

“In the fall of my junior year, I was raped by my best friend,” said Anne Jones. “Everything was initiated when I was sleeping. I woke up and told him to stop.” The assailant did not listen and continued to rape her. “It’s something that I can say really happened and not just something I dreamed about,” because there was intense physical pain that lasted for two weeks following the attack.

“I didn’t do anything about it for about a whole year,” said Jones, “because there was a lot of extreme guilt and trying to come to terms with the fact that your best friend and someone you trust out of anyone and everyone in the world would do something like that to you.”

Jones sought counseling before contacting a variety of college administrators, including Osmond, Associate Dean of Students Jeffery Feld-Gore, then-AD of Copeland John Stewart, and Director of Campus Living Kelly Hoover.

Jones eventually filed a formal complaint and the alleged perpetrator was found guilty.

According to Jones, the Sexual Misconduct Review Board “gave the verdict that he could come back to school once I graduated. They recommended that he go to counseling, but didn’t require it. And [he could return to campus] if he wrote a paper about sexual assault. And that’s all it takes for an attacker to come back to this school and walk among the rest of the students.”

Another survivor, Jane Smith was repeatedly raped by her friend and fellow student. At the time the assaults started, the perpetrator was living in isolated overflow housing.

Smith explained that the perpetrator, who had a history of depression, reached out to her, making her believe that “this [was] a safe person to be around” before he took advantage of her. Initially, she was confused and hoped that “maybe he’s just playing around. It rapidly became very clear that he was not. Especially when it got to the point where he put a belt around my neck. That was the point where I knew I was in deep shit.”

Both of the aforementioned survivors did not realize that they needed to find the appropriate professional resources for many months after the initial attacks.

“People say, ‘Why did you wait so long to come forward?’ People feel like after you’ve been raped you automatically know you’ve been raped and have no qualms about it. That’s not how it is,” said Jones. “You have this feeling of complete self-blame, like you allowed this to happen, which is why it took me almost a whole year to even come forward.”

Smith echoed Jones’ feelings of confusion in the period following the initial attack.

“They don’t understand that when you’re being raped, you’re not even thinking it is rape,” said Smith. “You’re thinking, ‘Am I just going to be raped, or am I going to be raped a lot longer, a lot more?’ That’s all you’re thinking about. And you’re not even calling it rape. 

“People ask why I didn’t scream when it happened. I didn’t scream because I knew nobody would do anything.”

Months later Smith realized the hopelessness of her situation and lost control. The following few minutes she experienced alone in her room solidified her despondency.

“My roommate wasn’t home, and when I realized that I just sat down on my floor and I just started screaming,” Smith said. “The walls are paper thin. Nobody asked. There was no call. There was no text. Nothing.”

Both Jones and Smith spoke to the cycle of learned helplessness survivors get trapped in.

“There’s no emotion. You are worthless,” said Jones. “You feel like it’s just this thing that happens and you don’t care about what other people do to your body anymore.”

Smith was only able to comprehend the severity of her situation once she was removed from the recurring abuse.

“Once I got back home, it took a month or two of me settling back into my normal routine, because I’d been sleeping about two hours a night and I was a little crazy,” Smith said “It took me a little while but I realized, ‘Oh shit, oh shit. That was so fucked up.’”

Smith tried to stop the perpetrator from contacting her, but was confronted by him multiple times when she came back to campus in the fall. Later that semester, Smith was informed that the perpetrator had petitioned to come back to campus. Smith immediately approached Feld-Gore, informing him that the perpetrator was “a clear and present danger” to the LC community.

Smith approached a SARA to file a formal complaint in hopes that the additional evidence would prevent the perpetrator’s petition from being considered. After hearing of the severity of the alleged-perpetrator’s imminent threat to the campus community, an investigation was launched. It resulted in the perpetrator being expelled and permanently barred 

III. The Next Steps

LC’s sexual misconduct policy is designed to promote survivor-centric support. That aspiration is backed up by LC administrators.

Dean of Students Anna Gonzalez emphasized that the College protects survivors’ “sense of agency and that is so important. [Survivors] should not be forced to do anything they don’t want to or are not ready for.”

Despite these intentions, it is not only policy that dictates the reality of sexual misconduct. The social environment that students have created and foster plays a significant role in determining whether survivors report sexual misconduct.

“How that [first] person responds is critical in starting that process of healing,” Osmond said, referring to the first external contact a survivor makes. “If they aren’t believed, they are less likely to tell another person—to get that support that they need.”

“As far as I’m concerned, people’s reactions are worse than the rape. They’re so much worse,” Smith said.

Smith’s experience opening up to a friend illustrated this reality: “I finally told one friend what had happened. He immediately flipped shit at me for not having told him before. He said that clearly I didn’t value him enough and didn’t talk to me for three weeks. People make it about them. They make it some personal thing—that they were left out of the I-knew-immediately club.”

Jones echoed this frustration.

“Everyone you know who is mutual friends with [the perpetrator] will say, ‘No, no, that’s not possible. That person is so nice,’” Smith explained. “But they don’t realize when they are supporting [the perpetrator], they are denying what happened to you. They are invalidating your story.”

In Osmond’s experience, there are three primary boundaries to survivors reporting: they will not be believed, they assume a portion of the blame and they lack faith in the system.

Osmond works to empower survivors: “I say, ‘Something bad happened to you. You have the right to go out and have a good time. You have the right to dress any way you want and have people not hurt you. What that person did is wrong and they made a choice to hurt you. There is nothing you could have done to prevent that once they made that choice. I understand you’d feel that you may have contributed to this, but please believe it’s never your fault.’ That’s the kind of language I try to use.”

Not only is combatting these three barriers one of Osmond’s main concerns, but one of her priorities is to respectfully balance the confidentiality and wishes of a student who has come forward with the safety of the community.

Osmond hopes to see more resources put toward prevention.

Other administrators shared their ideas for improving college policy for preventing and responding to sexual misconduct.

“I’d like to see a component [of the policy] dealing with consent integrated more fully into the college process,” Rosengard said.

Gonzalez pointed out that, despite the array of available resources, students may not utilize them until it is too late for prevention: “I want students to know their resources should something happen. But you don’t think it’s going to happen to you, so you don’t even think you need this resource. And it shouldn’t happen in people’s lifetimes.”

If students do not utilize these reporting avenues, the College faces the fact that anonymous perpetrators remain in the community.

“I worry about the statistics on retaliation and repeat offenders,” said Gonzalez, referencing national reports. “They’re high.”

Feld-Gore spoke to this challenge as well: “If we see a pattern, we do not want to re-traumatize somebody by going through the process again—and this is where it gets a little delicate in that we have to balance the safety of the community, too, with the safety of that one individual. We try to convince the survivor(s), ‘We need to go forward because the next person coming is going to be traumatized, too.’”

Director of Campus Safety Tim O’Dwyer also emphasized strengthening the College’s response efforts.

“We ought to have trained investigators on retainer to do sexual misconduct investigations,” said O’Dwyer.

There are resources but, as Osmond explained, students’ lack of faith in the reporting process means it is underutilized.

“I think that sometimes survivors feel like there’s nothing that anyone can do for them,” said Rosengard. “I don’t think that’s true and I don’t think they should have to feel that way,”

Between the FSU, the QRC, RAs, SARAs and the Counseling Center there is a wide range of resources available on campus that focus on both prevention and response.

“I have worked with people who are frustrated with the system [at LC] and I understand that,” Osmond said, noting the success survivors have had with off-campus resources and support.

“As a SARA and as an Area Director,” Rosengard said,  “I have dealt with survivors who have identified along a wide range of genders and sexes.”

Osmond stressed the fact that this issue applies to more than just survivors: “It’s not just a women’s thing, and it’s not just a ‘people who are interested in this kind of issue’ thing: it’s everybody’s problem and it’s a community responsibility.”

This is the first article in a two-part piece on sexual misconduct in The Pioneer Log this week. 

A note on the article
The authors acknowledge the inherent gaps present in both articles. Unfortunately, not all experiences and perspectives were able to be represented. We strongly encourage the LC community to understand and apply the meanings of consent in their interactions with others, regardless of your previous relationship with them and both their and your genders and sexual orientations. The authors want to express their gratitude to the women who came forward to The Pioneer Log during the spring 2012 semester to share their stories. We regret the delay in the publication of these articles and offer our deepest apologies. We also want to thank Rye Druzin ('13) for serving as both an advocate for the interviewed survivors and an advisor throughout the lengthy process of bringing these articles to fruition.

Illustration by Kelsey Gray

By Grayson Arango /// Staff Writer

The Theatre Thesis Festival showcases projects and performances from senior theatre majors.
show Admission is free, but tickets are required for seating. The festival features six productions, three presentations and two original play readings. Read on for information about the six senior-directed productions, and check the Arts & Culture Calendar for information on the presentations and play readings.

Program A: April 24 & 26
Woyzeck 7 p.m.
The Lonesome West 8 p.m.
How I learned to Drive 9 p.m.

Program B: April 25 & 27
Italian-American Reconciliation 7 p.m.
And Baby Makes Seven 8 p.m.
Thom Pain (based on nothing) 9 p.m.

Woyzeck
Dir. Devan Wardrop-Saxton

Woyzeck, a play written in the 1830s by German playwright Georg Büchner, presented several unique challenges to director Devan Wardrop-Saxton and her cast—Emily Osborn (’16), Henry Kreiman (’15), Hannah Edelson (’16), Liz Horton (’14), Morgan Mitchell (’16) and Kevin Bocek (’15).
The play was incomplete at Büchner’s death, so Wardrop-Saxton is tasked with piecing the play together and working with the play’s translation from German to English. This allows her to put her own stamp on the play, making this performance a unique opportunity for attendees. Wardrop-Saxton’s theatrical interests lie in directing and dramaturgy.
“I found myself really wanting to step outside moments to watch them happen instead of being in them,” she said.
The play is based on real events and focuses on the struggles of a soldier. The play’s events, Wardrop-Saxton said, revolve around the “interaction between authority and absolute nothing, and how that basically drives [the soldier] to commit these terrible acts.” The terrible acts to which she refers are ones especially relevant to modern issues, such as the recent debate regarding mass shootings and responsibility.
“That’s kind of the theme of things…when somebody who is already over the edge, how responsible are they for the crimes that they commit, and how much responsibility do people who stand by and watch have as well.” Wardrop-Saxton asserts that the play has continued relevancy and emotional resonance today.
“Once you figure out how to engage with it, it’s a really strong story. It still speaks to people.”

The Lonesome West
Dir. Asher Ely

Director Asher Ely’s production The Lonesome West deals with the intricacies of expectations—both the ones we hold of others and the ones that are held of us. Set in Leenane, a western Irish town, the play focuses on the characters’ responses to the hardships and unexpected, difficult circumstances of family death and crime. Described by Ely, the play is “at its center…about betrayal, depression, family and redemption.”
In spite of these complicated themes, Ely assures that the play will be hilarious and thoroughly enjoyable.
The play demonstrates how author Martin McDonagh “seamlessly blends comedy with more serious, darker elements,” a trait that appealed to Ely as a director and will appeal to the audience as well. This approach may be familiar to audience members, since glimpses of it are present in McDonagh’s other plays and his well-known works in screenwriting and directing, In Bruges and Seven Psychopaths.
This play has allowed Ely and actors Trey Danis (’16), Andrea Hite (’14), Tyne Clifton (’16) and Isaac Campbell-Smith (’14) to explore “making very funny and interesting choices in terms of both physical and psychological action,” as well as opportunities to design sets and character styles. The creative efforts of Ely and the cast make this a show not to be missed.

How I Learned To Drive
Dir. Irene Handley

Irene Handley’s project How I Learned to Drive explores the unsettling relationship between a young girl and her uncle over the years. The play jumps non-chronologically as we try to understand the effects of this weird, creepy relationship and how it came to be in the first place.
In describing her interest in the play, Handley said, “It’s really beautifully written, and I think it provides really beautiful acting challenges for young actors.”
The two primary characters are played by Kenzie Batali (’15) and Robert Amico (’15), with additional performances from Tyler Wayne Patterson (’16) and Enanda Wellington (’16).
The challenges of the production extend beyond the cast’s work, as it asks viewers to approach this controversial relationship with an eye for its intricacy. Through Amico’s character and his relationship with Batali’s, the play exposes to the audience the complexity of pedophiliac and incestuous relationships.
“I think that’s kind of the nature of what the play is really trying to get at,” said Handley. “[It is] saying, ‘Look, these people aren’t obviously monsters. There’s a reason why they have the power to do this, and that’s because they’re very charming people.”
The human depiction of a character we are inclined to villainize may be difficult for audience members, but the lessons about humanity and relationships that How I Learned to Drive offers are important for modern viewers to consider.

Italian-American Reconciliation
Dir. Nate Cohen

John Patrick Shanley’s Italian-American Reconciliation, directed by Nate Cohen, revolves around a man’s efforts to reconcile with his challenging wife and his friend’s help in doing so. The cast includes Brandon Cieslak (’15), Emily Hodgson (’15) and Christopher Chew (’15), and the show will feature live music from student musician Shohei Kobayashi (’13).
Thematically, the play explores people’s capacity for love and connections as well as what it means to be a man and how masculine identity is constructed. The play pairs an emphasis on emotional honesty and realism with quick, witty humor.
“I feel like a lot of times with theatre, we get sort of caught up in the art and the stage and the beauty and the morals…This is just, it’s just about a couple of people who have feelings and the need to express them,” said Cohen.
The play seeks to take theatrical expression back to the human level, exploring vulnerability, intimacy and audience connection by placing focus on the actors as opposed to the ambiance. Cohen’s interpretation of the script’s elements shows this prioritization of the people above the material circumstances, like the omission of the play’s original setting of Little Italy.
The play’s content and the cast’s “huge amount of hyper-honesty” required for the performance will be rewards in and of themselves for the audience.
“It’s really sweet at the end…The quote that’s sort of [Shanley’s] best quote is that everything that’s worthwhile takes a little more courage than you currently have—a deep breath and a leap.”

And Baby Makes Seven
Dir. Joseph Reed

Joseph Reed’s production And Baby Makes Seven examines the complexities of what he described as a “queer family.” The play revolves around the relationship two women and a man have together. The balance of relationships and sexualities is one that Reed explores along with his cast—David Oehler (’13), Mary Weaver (’14) and Samantha Shafer (’15).
The already complicated household is confronted with change when one of the women becomes pregnant with the male character’s baby. This gives the family an opportunity to confront several issues, including the two women’s “childlike expressions of self and needs…[and] ways that they address needs that they otherwise wouldn’t be able to,” which manifest themselves as a French boy, a boy raised by dogs and a child genius. These additional characters offer Weaver and Shafer the chance to explore “generational and gender-based drag.” It is from these additional three characters/family members that the play derives its title.
Written in 1984, the play also explores the challenges of gay fatherhood in the midst of the beginning of the AIDS crisis. Both in terms of his perceived qualification for parenting and his potential non-presence as a father, Oehler’s character is faced with challenges brought in by the baby.  
With these themes and the play’s unique character offerings, Reed hopes to “emphasize [the challenging of traditional boundaries] and to allow the audience to come away with an understanding of families as not just those that we’re born into or those that are found in marriage...but also families that are created by friends.”

Thom Pain (based on nothing)
Dir. Matthew Tratos

Thom Pain (based on nothing) is perhaps best summarized by director and performer Matthew Tratos: “Mine’s a weird one.”
The show consists of two main narratives told by Tratos’ character, with additional asides to the audience and direct audience interaction.
“Big picture: it is just a general story about life, and it’s a kind of existentialist, absurdist look at it,” said Tratos. “There’s a lot of crazy things that we can’t control about our lives, and it’s filled with a lot of different pain and struggle and hardship. But also, even within this pain and struggle and hardship...there’s a lot of beauty behind it.”
This pain and struggle in Tratos’ character posed challenges as to how to convey it, since the play’s moments of greatest emotional significance come from the submission and suppression of feelings rather than the expression of them. Assisted by Jahnavi Caldwell-Green (’12), Tratos has stripped down his performance and shaped his onstage presence towards being human instead of an actor. The process of self-directing, even with Caldwell-Green’s assistance, has been a challenge in communicating vision and voice to let Tratos and Caldwell-Green come together as true collaborators.
The play appealed to Tratos because of “[Eno’s] flat-out ability to synthesize and put forth the human condition into words in such a beautiful way,” and this skillful crafting will come through to the audience. As Tratos said, “[Eno] is writing human experience.” Though the play contains this essence of humanity to which we can all relate, ita nature does distance viewers.
“If I do the show correctly, everyone in the audience should constantly be on the edge of their seats wondering what the hell is actually going on,” said Tratos. “If people are confused, then the show is probably [on] the right track.”
This confusion is part of Tratos’ larger goal as an actor and director. “I want for people to go and talk about it, think about it and ruminate about it, and then draw some connections to it.”

On March 30, 2013, the Lewis & Clark community lost a team- mate, friend and classmate in Jacob Valdiviezo. Valdiviezo, a sophomore wide receiver for the football team, touched the lives of many people at LC and had a pro- found impact on the school both on and off the field. A candle- light vigil was held on campus in remembrance of Valdiviezo the day after his passing, and many of his friends and teammates were brought together to celebrate the life that he lived.
The Valdiviezo family planned a funeral for their son, and they invited LC teammates and friends to celebrate his life in San Francisco, his hometown. On Friday, April 5, LC provided two buses for anyone who wanted to be present at the memorial. They arrived on Saturday to attend mass at St. Peter’s Church and the burial at Holy Cross Cemetery. The group arrived back on campus early Sunday morning.
Along with the dedications to Jacob Valdiviezo which occurred in San Francisco, LC has been cel- ebrating his life all over campus. On the fifth floor of Holmes, the residence of Valdiviezo, there is a table with flowers, pictures and a book, which is open for anyone to write thoughts, prayers or memo- ries in. The lu`au, which was held on Saturday night, was dedicated to the student athlete and included a moment of silence before the performances.
As Valdiviezo was an athlete at LC, his passing has had a tremendous impact on all athletic teams. The women’s softball team dedicated their games to their fellow athlete by writing “JV13” on their cleats. The football team especially has been greatly affected by this loss; however, coaches and teammates have found light in celebrating Valdiviezo’s life and his wonderful character. Head Football Coach Chris Sulages said, “The team and College will miss Jacob dearly. He made his mark on LC in such a short amount of time. Jacob lit up a room when he came in; his smile and infectious positivity were amazing. He was able to talk and communicate with people effortlessly.”
Dean of Religious and Spiritual Life Mark Duntley, and anyone else who is interested in helping, is organizing a campus wide celebration of Jacob Valdiviezo’s life which will be held later in the semester. There is also a Face- book page, “Remembering Jacob Valdiviezo,” which was created in commemoration of Valdiviezo.