SGA Plenary Meeting 02/23/2014
Absent: Emma Rosenblum, Nina Shmorhun, Hannah Hastings, Jessica Arbon, Jennifer Mendez Alba, Phoebe Jordan
Natalie starts Plenary at 12:00 PM.
Quorum is reached at 12:56 PM.
Natlie Kato ’14: First we will be reading from the resolution packet then we will move into the resolutions
AGENDA
1. Overview of Plenary (Welcome)
2. Approval of the Rules of Order and Agenda
3. Resolution 1: Reaffirmation of the SGA Constitution
4. Resolution 2: Constitutional Name Change of the Recycling Committee to the Green Ambassadors Committee
5. Resolution 3: More Gender Neutral Language in the SGA Constitution
6. Resolution 4: Inserting Content Warnings in Syllabi
7. Resolution 5: Adjusting Pool of Faculty Representatives to the Honor Board
8. Resolution 6: Allowing Dean’s Designee in Honor Board Hearings
9. Resolution 7: Defining Third Party Resources in Conflict Resolution
10. Resolution 8: Updating the General Language of the SGA Constitution
11. Resolution 9: Revisions to Article IV of the SGA Constitution
12. Resolution 10: Revisions to Article III of the SGA Constitution
13. Resolution 11: Resolution to Renew the Constitutional Review Committee
14. Resolution 12: Establishing a Time Limit for Reaching Quorum, Special Plenary, and Digital Reaffirmation
HISTORY OF PLENARY
In 1892, Bryn Mawr College became the first institution in the U.S. to give students the responsibility to decide on how they should govern themselves. While it was considered a radical experiment, it has become one of the most valued aspects of the Bryn Mawr education. The tradition of student autonomy and responsibility has created a unique campus where students participate in discussion and resolution of the most important issues facing the College.
Twice a year, students get the opportunity to present resolutions to the entire student body. The Spirit of Self Governance is a beautiful thing and should make all Mawrters proud.
ROBERT’S RULES OF ORDER
Plenary uses a form of communication based on Robert’s Rules of Order. They ensure that the will of the majority is done while protecting the voice of the minority. The rule of order may seem awkward and sometimes constraining, but it will limit chaos and personal attack. Please give your attention to the guidelines and follow them. In the long run, they will make Plenary run smoother and faster.
Quorum is essential and required. This means that everyone must enter and exit from the side door of Goodhart. Votes are only valid if there is quorum.
Order of Business:
Each resolution will be presented as follows:
- Reading of the resolution by the presenter(s)
- Explanation of the resolution by the presenter(s) 3 minutes
- Floor open to questions and Pro/Con statements 12 minutes
(questions are given priority during this time)
(If amendment is presented, it is given an additional 8 minutes)
- Floor open to Pro/Con statements only 7 minutes
- Rebuttal period for presenter(s) of the proposal 3 minutes
- Voting on the resolution
If there is discussion occurring at the microphones, then discussion will occur for at least 12 minutes as outlined above, before the question may be called. This is to ensure that a minimum discussion is given to all proposals, as the community has already warranted these resolutions worthy of discussion.
If there is no discussion at the microphone, the SGA Executive Board will give a 30 second time limit for those who wish to speak to identify themselves by either approaching the microphone or alerting their section counter. If after the 30 seconds no one has announced that they wish to speak, the amendment or resolution will be voted upon.
There will be a member of the SGA Executive Board moderating as well as another member keeping time for each resolution. One minute and 30 second warnings will be given for each timed period.
SPEAKING
**If you wish to ask a question, please line up at the middle YELLOW microphone.
**If you wish to make a statement in favor of a proposal, please use the GREEN microphone.
**If you wish to make a statement in opposition to a proposal, please use the RED microphone.
There will be a moderator at each microphone who will limit the number of people standing in line. Please keep your statements to one minute, so that everyone may have time to speak. Please listen carefully to the speakers to avoid asking the same question or making the same basic point. If you have already spoken on an issue, you will not be allowed to speak again until everyone else who desires to speak has done so. If you must talk while in your seat, please be considerate of those around you who may be trying to listen to the discussion. Most importantly, please be patient and respectful of all other members. Even though you might not agree with an idea, everyone has the right to speak and be heard.
The President will call on microphones alternating Pro/Con. Only the people at microphones who are recognized by the President will be permitted to speak, and again, no one will be allotted more than one minute to the proposal.
VOTING
Voting is a right and privilege extended to all members of the Association. The options for exercising this right are pro, con, and abstain (no opinion, or you feel like you don’t have enough information to provide an informed vote). For a motion to pass a majority of members present must vote pro.
Please raise hands high, and know who your counter is for your section. The President will ask that everyone return to her proper seat during a vote, as to make sure everyone is counted accurately.
All votes will be done visually unless there the majority of the vote is unclear. If you believe you are not being counted, please see a counter or come to the front of the stage.
DEFINITIONS
AMENDMENT: An addition or change that is proposed to a resolution which is on the table for discussion. Please try to use language such as “strike,” “add,” and “replace with.” If the amendment strays too much from the original intent of the proposal, the President may declare the amendment to be out of SCOPE, or outside of the resolution’s jurisdiction or purpose.
After an amendment is presented, it must be seconded at a microphone by another member of the Association, and is then open for debate. At this time, all discussion regarding the original resolution ceases to allow adequate attention to be given to the amendment. If you are speaking to the main resolution during this time, the President may request you to come back to the microphone when debate on the main resolution resumes.
MOTION TO EXTEND TIME: This needs a simple majority for approval. When making the motion, please specify a length at which time shall be extended (4 more speakers/5 minutes, etc.). It must be made before time has expired, seconded, and then passed by a simple majority.
MOTION TO COMMIT/REFER: If you feel like more research needs to be done in order to support the motion you may move to refer to a committee (I move to refer_____ to a committee/task force). Upon doing so please specify the size, responsibilities and whom will be on the committee.
POSTPONE INDEFINITELY: This may be done if you feel like there is inadequate information and you feel like the motion does not warrant discussion. The effect would be to postpone debate entirely and move on to the next order of business. If desired, it could then be brought up at Plenary the following year.
CALLING THE QUESTION: A request to stop all discussion IMMEDIATELY and put the resolution to a vote. This MUST be voted upon, and requires 2/3 support. It is basically a vote to vote. The first vote will be to close discussion and move to the final vote. If this fails discussion continues; if this passes then the presenter moves to the rebuttal period and then we vote on whatever debate is currently occurring—i.e. an amendment or the original resolution. If you CALL ALL PREVIOUS QUESTIONS, this would include the same premise as calling the question, only we would proceed to vote systematically on any amendment on the table and the original resolution. This motion may only be made after the original 10 minutes of discussion have elapsed, and must be recognized by the President.
POINT OF ORDER: A motion made after an infraction of Robert’s Rules of Order. May be made from any place in the room. The Parliamentarian will confer with the President regarding the error and then will present a method of recovery to regain order.
***IMPORTANT***
These motions as well as the amendment process are serious procedures; which can, if abused, hinder the process or render it unfair. Please use them with discretion and allow the existing process to work as efficiently as possible. All motions must be presented at the microphone, and all amendments must be written down in advance of approaching the microphone and presented to the microphone moderator. All amendments must be presented and discussed as written.
FOOD
All food must be consumed in the atrium and the lobby. In the case that food is consumed in the Auditorium, SGA will not be allowed to use Goodhart in the future. Please abide and uphold the Social Honor Code by respecting this rule.
Resolution 1: Reaffirmation of the SGA constitution
2014-2015 SGA Executive Board: Syona Arora ’15, Alexis De La Rosa ’15, Charlie Bruce ’16, Rachel Clark ’16, Melanie Bahti ’16
Whereas, the Self-Government Association of the Undergraduate School of Bryn Mawr College is the first and oldest system of self-governance in the United States,
Whereas, the spirit of self-governance permeates almost every aspect of the Undergraduate Bryn Mawr College experience,
Whereas, the students of Bryn Mawr College have pledged to work together for the welfare, benefit, and preservation of the community as a whole,
Whereas, we recognize that to reach full potential of our community, we require a commitment on the part of each and every individual,
It is hereby resolved that we, the members of the Self-Government Association of the Undergraduate School of Bryn Mawr College present today, the 23rd of February, 2014, on behalf of the entire Self-Government Association, reaffirm our commitment to self-governance, the SGA Constitution, and the Honor Code.
Syona Arora ‘15: This resolution is presented once a year to reaffirm the Bryn Mawr community’s commitment to self-governance and the documents.
Natalie Kato ’14: The resolution passes by a visual ballot.
Resolution 2: Constitutional Name Change of the Recycling Committee to the Green Ambassadors Committee
Piper Martz ‘16 and Rudrani Sarma ‘16
Whereas, Article VII, Section I, Subsection C and Article VII, Section II, Subsection D, Subsection E, and Subsection F of the Constitution of the Self-Government Association of the Undergraduate School of Bryn Mawr College (henceforth known as SGA Constitution) references “Recycling Representatives” and “Recycling Committee,”
Whereas, Article VII, Section II, Subsection F states that the “Recycling Representatives shall oversee recycling in the dorms and other activities the committee undertakes,”
Whereas, the recent expansion of projects and responsibilities of the Recycling Committee and Recycling Representatives have surpassed the overseeing of recycling in dorms to include a variety of other “green” projects and initiatives that encompass sustainability efforts at Bryn Mawr College,
Whereas, the term “Recycling” restricts the implications of the committee’s extent and responsibilities,
Whereas, Victor Donnay, the chair of the Sustainability Leadership Group, has indicated support for changing the name of the “Recycling Committee” to “Green Ambassadors Committee” and the title of “Recycling Representatives” to “Green Ambassadors,”
Whereas, Jim McGaffin, the Assistant Director for Energy and Project Management of Facilities Services, has indicated support for changing the name of the “Recycling Committee” to “Green Ambassadors Committee” and the title of “Recycling Representatives” to “Green Ambassadors,”
Whereas, the Sustainability Leadership Group Committee, has indicated support on Friday, September 20th, 2013 for changing the name of the “Recycling Committee” to “Green Ambassadors Committee” and the title of “Recycling Representatives” to “Green Ambassadors,”
Whereas, the 2012-2013 Recycling Committee met consensus regarding this name change during the fourth quarter of the academic year, after the 2013 spring plenary,
Be it resolved, that henceforth all initiatives set out by this committee will be attributed to the Green Ambassadors and Green Ambassadors Committee,
Be it resolved, that the use of “Recycling Committee” in Article VII, Section II, Subsection E be changed to “Green Ambassadors Committee,”
Be it resolved, that the use of “Recycling Representative” in Article VII, Section I, Subsection C and Article VII, Section II, Subsection D, Subsection E, and Subsection F be changed to “Green Ambassadors.”
Piper Martz ‘16: We want to change the name to Green Ambassadors because we no longer deal with just recycling. Some of the initiatives include light switch stickers, the light bulb exchange, a rummage sale, composting, electronic recycling, Earth Day, and collaborating with other groups. Keeping the name the same reduced the implication, so we officially want to change the name to represent the projects
Alisha Pandit ’15: How is this different from BMC Greens? Won’t this create confusion
Rudrani Sarma ‘16: This is the Green Ambassadors Committee, and it can be abbreviated if need me, but we don’t go by Greens, so there won’t be too much confusion
Piper Martz ‘16: The Recycling Committee is a committee, and BMC Greens is a club. We collaborate but there is a differentiation. Otherwise, green groups collaborate together, which is a wonderful thing. We want to expand the name to have that implication of collaboration.
Natalie Kato ’14: The resolution passes by a visual ballot.
Resolution 3: More Gender Neutral Language in the SGA Constitution
Submitted by Sofia Oleas ‘15 and Elizabeth Vandenberg ’16
Whereas, The Constitution of the Self-Government Association of the Undergraduate School of Bryn Mawr College (henceforth known as the SGA Constitution) does not consistently use gender neutral terms throughout the document,
Whereas, “Freshman,” “Freshmen,” “Freshwoman,” “s/he,” “his/her” are non-neutral nouns and pronouns,
Whereas, the titles that use the term “Mistress,” “Mistress(es),” “Mistresses,” “Mom(s),” “Mom[s],” “Mistress(es)-Elect” are gendered nouns,
Whereas, the title of “Webmistress(es)” is a gendered noun,
Whereas, any changes to the title of a position in the SGA Constitution should be done in ways that allow the language of Traditions and Bryn Mawr College to apply to past and present members of the Bryn Mawr community,
Whereas, not all students of the Bryn Mawr College student body identify with the gendered language of the SGA Constitution,
Whereas, the SGA Constitution should use inclusive, neutral language,
Whereas, Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, Point 4; Article V, Section I, Subsection A and Subsection G; Article VII, Section II, Subsection O, Subsection P, and Subsection Q; and Article VIII, Section IV, Subsection B use the words “Freshman” and “Freshmen” when referring to first-year undergraduate students,
Whereas, Article VI, Section IX, Subsection A uses the word “Freshwoman” when referring to the Songs Mistress,
Whereas, Article VI, Section VI, Subsection A uses “her/his” and Article VIII, Section III, Subsection E uses “s/he,”
Whereas, Article II, Section I, Subsection C, bullet point 10; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 1; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 2; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 3; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 4; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 5; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 7; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 8; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 9; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 11; and Article VI, Section IX, Subsection A use the title “Traditions Mistress(es),”
Whereas, Article III, Section I, Subsection E, point 8 uses the title “Webmistress(es)”,
Whereas, Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 4 uses the title “Freshman Class Songs Mistress(es),”
Whereas, Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 6 and Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 7 use the title “Traditions Mistress(es)-Elect”,
Whereas, Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 6 uses the word “Mistress(es)-Elect,”
Whereas, Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 8 uses the title “McBride Scholars’ Traditions Mistress(es),”
Whereas, Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 10 uses the title “Traditions Mistress(es) Representative,”
Whereas, Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 11 states “the outgoing Traditions Mistress(es) (herein referred to as the Traditions Mom[s]),”
Whereas, Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 11 uses the title “Traditions Mom(s),”
Whereas, Article VI, Section IX, Subsection A uses the title “Class Songs Mistresses,”
Whereas, Article VI, Section IX, Subsection A uses the title “Songs Mistress,”
Whereas, Article VI, Section IX, Subsection A and Article VIII, Section IV, Subsection B use the title “Freshwoman Songs Mistress,”
Be it resolved, that the use of “freshman” in Article V, Section I, Subsection A shall be changed to “first-year,”
Be it resolved, that the use “freshmen” in Article V, Section I, Subsection G shall be changed to “first-years,”
Be it resolved, that the use of “Freshman Dorm Representative” in Article VII, Section II, Subsection O, Subsection P, and Subsection Q shall be changed to “First-Year Dorm Representative,”
Be it resolved, that the use of “her/his” in Article VI, Section VI, Subsection A shall be changed to “their,”
Be it resolved, that the use of “s/he accepts” in Article VIII, Section III, Subsection E shall be changed to “they accept,”
Be it resolved, that the use of the title of “Traditions Mistress(es)” in Article II, Section I, Subsection C, bullet point 10; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 1; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 2; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 3; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 4; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 5; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 7; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 8; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 9; Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 11; and Article VI, Section IX, Subsection A be changed to “Traditions Mistress(es)/Master(s)/Mistx,”
Be it resolved, that the use of the title of “Webmistress(es)” in Article III, Section I, Subsection E, point 8 be changed to “Web Mistress(es)/Master(s)/Mistx,”
Be it resolved, that the use of the title of “Freshman Class Songs Mistress(es)” in Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 4 be changed to “First-Year Songs Mistress(es)/Master(s)/Mistx,”
Be it resolved, that the use of the title of “Freshman Songs mistress” in Article VIII, Section IV, Subsection B and Article VI, Section IX, Subsection A shall be changed to “First-Year Songs Mistress/Master/Mistx,”
Be it resolved, that the use of the title of “Traditions Mistress(es)-Elect” in Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 6 and Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, Point 7 shall be changed to “Traditions Mistress(es)/Master(s)/Mistx-Elect,”
Be it resolved, that the use of the title “McBride Scholars’ Traditions Mistress(es)” in Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, Point 8 shall be changed to “McBride Scholars’ Traditions Mistress(es)/Master(s)/Mistx,”
Be it resolved, that the use of the title of “Traditions Mistress(es) Representative” in Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, Point 10 shall be changed to “Traditions Mistress(es)/Master(s)/Mistx Representative,”
Be it resolved, that the use of the statement “the outgoing Traditions Mistress(es) (herein referred to as the Traditions Mom[s]),” in Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, Point 11 shall be changed to “the outgoing Traditions Mistress(es)/Master(s)/Mistx,”
Be it resolved, that the use of the title of “Traditions Moms(s)” in Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, Point 11 shall be changed to “the outgoing Traditions Mistress(es)/Master(s)/Mistx,”
Be it resolved, that the use of the title of “Class Songs Mistresses” in Article VI, Section IX, Subsection A shall be changed to “Class Songs Mistress(es)/Master(s)/Mistx,”
Be it resolved, that the use of the title of “Songs Mistresses” in Article VI, Section IX, Subsection B shall be changed to “Songs Mistress(es)/Master(s)/Mistx,”
Be it resolved, that the use of the title of “Freshwoman Songsmistress” in Article VI, Section IX, Subsection A and Article VIII, Section IV, Subsection B shall be changed to “First-Year Songs Mistress(es)/Master(s)/Mistx.”
Sofia Oleas ’15: We felt that there was a lot of gendered language in the constitution. This does not encompass students who do not identify as female or who go by “she” pronouns. It is inclusive to have gender-neutral language
Lindsey Crowe ’14: Should this be passed, when deciding what labels to be called, will that be announced when the position is elected and then printed in handbooks? If I was elected Traditions would I announce what I would like to be called at the SGA introduction and then would it be printed as such in the handbook when it is passed out?
Elizabeth Vandenberg ‘16: This will affect the Constitution. All three options would be in the handbook. Whoever takes the positions can refer to themselves as whatever they prefer.
Lindsey Crowe ‘14: We would call Pamudu and Anna Traditions mistresses but then when new people are introduced would they choose the label to make sure it is known across the community?
Sofia Oleas ‘15: I think in that case the handbook would remain the same but it would be during their announcement.
Colin Baumann ‘14: Point of information: we can change the list of people’s titles on the websites.
Sally Little ’17: First-year refers to all students in their first year at Bryn Mawr, even transfers at an upper class level. How will this distinction be maintained?
Sofia Oleas ’15: First-year refers to incoming students. Transfers refers to transfers as they are coming into their first transfer year. McBrides are referred to as McBride. We are just changing freshman and freshwoman.
Anna Sargeant ’15: Can I propose an amendment? Rather than changing the name of Traditions Moms to ‘outgoing Traditions mistress’ could we change it to ‘Traditions Emeritus/a/um [i/ae/a]’?
Natalie Kato ‘14: Anna is going to write and present the amendment.
Maxine Wicks ’17: I just noticed that the gender-neutral abbreviation mistx is an abbreviation for the TV show “Murder in Small Town X” and if you Google it that’s all that comes up. Maybe that should be brought up.
Elizabeth Vandenberg ‘16: We chose mistx because it is consistent with other two options of mistress and master. Also x is commonly used to denote gender-neutrality.
Sofia Oleas ‘15: Do you have another term in mind?
Maxine Wicks ’17: No. Just thought you should know in case it gets confused.
Chris Lichtenstein ’16: The mistx abbreviation is sort of unfortunate. How about substituting leader? It’s semantically similar to master/mistress, and gender-neutral.
Elizabeth Vandenberg ‘16: We went with adding master and mistx because mistresses is used by Bryn Mawr undergraduates and alums. It’s ingrained in how we talk about traditions and how we view them. We thought making such a big change to that word might be confusing and inconsistent with how members of the Bryn Mawr community view traditions.
Amy Xu ’17: I have a question about the distinction between he/she and traditions master/mistress. He/she is not considered neutral, so why does traditions mistress/master follow as such. If he/she is changed to he/she/they then shouldn’t all mistresses be mistx?
Sofia Oleas ‘15: We consulted with the Traditions mistresses. We want to respect the position itself and the position holders. These seemed like good options from the conversations we had.
Amy Xu ’17: If somebody wanted to be referred to as he/she how is that different from traditions mistresses/songs mistresses/web mistress?
Sofia Oleas ‘15: ‘They’ includes a very large group of people. For positions it is individuals. That’s how it’s different.
Mattie Wechsler ‘14: You changed he and her to they, etc. There’s no ‘him’ in the constitution. You haven’t changed ‘him’ to ‘them’?
Sofia Oleas ’15: In article 6 section 6 subsection a we change her/his to their. In article 8 section 3 subsection e we change she/he to they accept. Those are the only two sections. There’s no use of him.
Rhett Richardson ‘15: These options are too packed, with too many slashes.
Suki Lopez ’14: For first-year songsmistresses/master/mistex. Some things you change he/she to them. Why can’t it be he/she/them and have three options?
Natalie Kato ‘14: Rhett just asked the same question.
Suki Lopez ‘14: It’s not consistent. Sometimes it’s 3 options sometimes it’s 1.
Anna Sargeant ‘15: Amendment: Be it resolved, that the use of the statement “the outgoing Traditions Mistress(es) (herein referred to as the Traditions Mom[s]),” in Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, Point 11 shall be changed to “Traditions Emeritus/a/um [i/ae/a],”
Chris Lichtenstein ‘16: Emeritus/a/um in Latin is not gender neutral. It refers to the masculine and the feminine. –um is an inanimate neuter which applies to objects and animals, not people. I’d recommend a change to third declension as –is for singular and –es for plural. Emeritis and emerites for singular and plural.
Noa Eagles McBride: Will we be able to choose what we are called in everyday life? Is there still a choice in the matter regardless of the constitution?
Sofia Oleas ‘15: Yes!
Tess McCabe ’16: I’m confused about how the suffixes could be used. Is it just the suffix or could you say the full word?
Anna Sargeant ‘15: If you retire, emeritus is the honorary title to use, like professor emeritus and emerita. You have emeritus, emerita, emeritum for singular peoples. Since the constitution says Traditions mom(s), which is talking about plural people, plural suffixes are included.
Sofia Oleas ‘15: Are they gender neutral?
Anna Sargeant ‘15: Emeritum/a are gender neutral singular and plural. This is a title used in academic settings. It is a legitimate title.
Sofia Oleas ‘15: It’s a friendly amendment.
Natalie Kato ‘15: This amendment passes by visual ballot.
Piper Martz ’16: I’d like to propose an amendment to change the name of the resolution from ‘more gender neutral’ to ‘gender flexible’ because some terminology is gendered and some is gender neutral.
Elizabeth Vandenberg ’16: This is a friendly amendment.
Natalie Kato ‘14: This amendment passes by visual ballot.
Rhett Richardson ‘15: Be it resolved that uses of her/his or s/he be changed to her/his/their or she/he/they.
Colin Baumann ‘14: If we are using she/he/they, could we include other pronouns as well?
Brenna Levitin ‘16: If you’re going to specify pronouns you need to specify all pronouns.
Sofia Oleas ‘15: We can just go back to original ‘they’? We will still vote on it.
Airen McClure ’16: I am making a pro statement. Using she/hey/they is great parallelism to mistress/master/mistx. It makes more sense. We want the constitution to be as legible and understandable as possible.
Nikki Barker ’16: I support the original motion to make the entire language ‘they’ because I see that as the most accessible. It keeps constitution a little bit on the shorter side
Rebecca Reiss ’15: This college has so many identities. But this resolution is an expanded way to define yourself. We are proud of gender identities. I’m all for putting as many categories as we can. Getting rid of categories is getting rid of identity.
Rhett Richardson ‘15: Her/his/their would make it longer… but there are only two instances.
Ruby Mills ’17: I want this to stay as neutral as possible. Some people may have preferred pronouns but don’t want to tell people or don’t feel comfortable explicitly stating it. Categories won’t always be explicitly stated. If ‘they’ is used it may not be perfect but it is an umbrella.
Colin Baumann ‘14: I’d like to call this amendment to question.
Natalie Kato ‘14: This is a request to stop discussion immediately and put the amendment to an explanation and vote.
Sofia Oleas ‘15: We approve of the parallelism.
Natalie Kato ‘14: This amendment passes by visual ballot.
Anna Kalinsky ‘15: Propose that every mistress/mistresses be changed to mistress/mistresses/master/masters/mistex.
Colin Baumann ‘14: I am pro amendment with mistex. It maintains the same power as mistress/master.
Dixie Oullette ‘15: This is with parentheses, not fully written out?
Sofia Oleas ‘15: We support this amendment.
Elizabeth Vandenberg ‘16: It’s friendly.
Natalie Kato ‘14: This amendment passes by visual ballot.
Charlie Bruce ’16: Motion to move this resolution to a committee/task force. It is a contentious issue and worth a much longer discussion. Some of the student body has strong feelings, and others are not as committed. We can create a group for gender-flexible language in the constitution.
Natalie Kato ‘14: You must state how large task force should be.
Charlie Bruce ‘16: 10 people from different class years.
Natalie Kato ‘14: Since there was a motion to refer to a committee we are going to do a 2/3rds vote.
Alisha Pandit ‘15: I support this.
Kate Hinchey ’16 McBride: It shouldn’t be just different class years. The entire resolution is a problem because of using first-years to refer to transfers and McBrides. It should include representatives from the McBride and transfer community.
Elizabeth Vandenberg ‘16: You can make an amendment to the resolution.
Charlie Bruce ‘16: I meant to mean all students of the undergraduate college.
Rhett Richardson ‘15: Does this necessarily mean tabling the resolution now, or pass it? Or would you make the task force a separate entity and work on it separately?
Charlie Bruce ‘16: Table discussion to the task force and discuss at another time
Colin Baumann ‘14: I’m with Charlie. We’ve talked about the task force. I’m asking Charlie to propose an amendment so the resolution can be passed. This is not the most hospitable place and with gendered nouns in the constitution being used I am reminded that I am not a part of the community. I would like to pass this resolution. It is necessary to stop further discrimination as non-female-identifying people at this college.
Marissa Jackson ‘14: Bryn Mawr is a place that is very diverse and open to people and experiences and it’s special to our community. I’ve learned a lot. At the same time, Bryn Mawr is a women’s college and has a history of educating women. While I am in favor of using gender-neutral pronouns I still wonder what the greater implication would be for the school as a whole given our history and mission statement. I am in support of the resolution but it does deserve more conversation.
Rhett Richardson ’15: Not everybody identifies as a woman. This is ignoring students that are present in this space at this moment.
Charlie Bruce ‘16: Historically this is an all-women’s college. It was created to give women who were disenfranchised and had limited access to education an opportunity. By making the task force it is acknowledging that there is another disenfranchised community that we are also trying to empower. As a Bryn Mawr student I’m proud to be in the community and I feel so loved and so supported and sometimes when in this space I don’t feel the same support. That’s why I want to create this, to give more power to all communities here.
Natalie Kato ‘14: We will move to a vote to referring the resolution to a committee of 10 people appointed by appointments. This will table its resolution.
Colin Baumann ‘14: There is a high possibility that if we do not table this that there will be an amendment presented to create a task force so we would pass this and then move on.
Natalie Kato ‘14: We will still continue with the motion to refer to the committee, but keep that in mind.
We will not be referring this resolution to a committee and we are not going to be tabling it.
Colin Baumann ‘14: I’d like to propose an amendment. Be it resolved, that a task force of ten people as determined by the Appointments Committee evaluate the use of gender inclusive language in the Bryn Mawr community.
Kate Hinchey ’16 McBride: I want to propose an amendment. This resolution will open up a pandora’s box. Where it says to change words from freshwoman to first-year – for first-year Honor Board members, as a transfer McBride I would still be able to run and that doesn’t make sense. Replace first-years, freshwoman, freshman with frosh. I know frosh sounds like a slang term, but by not using first-ear you delineate McBrides and transfers.
Tabatha Barton ‘15: Frosh is a slang for freshman which is not gender neutral. First-year is used in many other countries. First-year is an acceptable term to use in terms of the idea of what is gendered.
Rhett Richardson ‘15: I think that is a valid point but also we are in the US and other first-year experiences include transfers and here, Mcbrides. All first-years is incorrect. It is wrong.
K.c. McConnell ‘16: Frosh is not an acceptable term to be used to describe freshman. It is slang and inaccessible to people outside of America for understanding what frosh is.
Kate Hinchey ’16 McBride: Do you have a proposed amendment?
Dixie Oullette ‘15: I question as to when first-year is not inclusive of McBrides and transfers.
Kate Hinchey ’16 McBride: In the part where it says ‘be it resolved that the article 5 section 1 subsection a’ – it’s about Honor Board elections representing a specific class.
Anna Kalinsky ‘15: This is a question that could become an amendment. Maybe establishing first-year as referring to the newly incoming class? Is that a thing? First-years referring to incoming students.
Kate Hinchey ’16 McBride: I don’t speak for the entire transfer/McBride community.
Blair Broad ‘16: I’m in favor of changing it to frosh. This is my second-year at Bryn Mawr but only my third semester. I don’t like being referred to as a first-year. The term frosh would give this year a better identity.
Brenna Levitin ‘16: I am a first-year sophomore. Defining the term first-year as newest incoming students shouldn’t be the newest incoming class… I can’t say that it needs to be defined as ‘first-year’ but also it shouldn’t use frosh.
Jo Dutilloy ‘17: In response to people against frosh – using frosh because it works better is not going to make it any worse.
Dixie Oullette ‘15: I don’t know how I feel about delineating first-year, first-year transfer, and first-year McBride.
Lindsey Marinello ’17: I support the idea that frosh is slang but also supporting the idea of defining first-year in the resolution. Also add an asterix describing qualifications, who is eligible for that year and that position.
Kate Hinchey ’16 McBride: I’d like to revise the amendment to change from frosh to first-year traditional student.
Airen McClure ’16: What about first-year traditional-aged student?
Sofia Oleas ‘15: It’s friendly
Kate Hinchey ’16 McBride: read the amendment one more time: Whereas, Article VI, Section IX, Subsection A and Article VIII, Section IV, Subsection B use the title “First-Year Tradtional Student Songs Mistress/Master/Mistex,”
Be it resolved, that the use of “freshman” in Article V, Section I, Subsection A shall be changed to “first-year traditional student,”
Be it resolved, that the use of the title of “Freshman Class Songs Mistress(es)” in Article IV, Section I, Subsection K, point 4 be changed to “First-Year Traditional Student Songs Mistress(es)/Master(s)/Mistex,”
Be it resolved, that the use of the title of “First-Year Traditional Student Songs Mistress/Master/Mistex” in Article VIII, Section IV, Subsection B and Article VI, Section IX, Subsection A shall be changed to “First-Year Songs Mistress/Master/Mistex,”
Be it resolved, that the use of the title of “Freshwoman Songsmistress” in Article VI, Section IX, Subsection A and Article VIII, Section IV, Subsection B shall be changed to “First-Year Traditional Student Songs Mistress(es)/Master(s)/Mistex.”
Natalie Kato ’14: This amendment passes by visual ballot.
Colin Baumann ‘14: I’d like to propose an amendment for a committee. This is going off of Charlie’s idea to vote on the resolution as a whole and not table discussion but allow for a task force to be used.
Alisha Pandit ‘15: Can you include something about leading community discussion?
Angela Rosenburg ‘15: Today we will vote on the resolution. If it gets passed what will the committee do? Will they re-edit the constitution?
Colin Baumann ‘14: We are voting with the resolution as a whole on the language that is presented in the Plenary packet. The task force will look at the language, evaluate, and propose amendments so as to further discussion with the Bryn Mawr community and how to better use gender-inclusive language beyond SGA documents.
Angela Rosenburg ’15: Can we save this til next Plenary and make changes as needed?
save til next plenary? Make changes as needed?
Colin Baumann ‘14: We can vote next Plenary if they want to come back. Voting for this resolution will create a task force.
Sofia Oleas ‘15: This is a friendly amendment.
Natalie Kato ‘14: This amendment passes by visual ballot.
Brenna Levitin ‘16: I’d like to call the resolution to question.
Natalie Kato ‘14: The resolution passes by visual ballot.
Resolution 4: Inserting Content Warnings in Syllabi
Presented by Brenna Levitin ‘16 and Emmett Binkowski ‘16
Whereas, the backgrounds and personal histories of the Student Body are diverse,
Whereas, in the spirit of the Honor Code diversity should be recognized,
Whereas, the mental health of the Student Body is an important concern that should be given due consideration,
Whereas, some classes deal with material that could be detrimental to the mental health of the Student Body,
Whereas, the Student Body has the right to emotional security in their classes,
Whereas, the Student Body has the right to know ahead of time the content of class material,
Whereas, students should not need to make themselves vulnerable by communicating triggers with individual professors personally,
Whereas, Content Warnings are defined as, for the purposes of this Resolution,
Notes used to alert people when an internet post, book, article, picture, video, audio clip, or some other media could potentially trigger harmful reactions, such as post-traumatic flashbacks or self-harm, due to its content,
Be it resolved, that anyone responsible for creating a class syllabus is highly recommended to include Content Warnings for potential triggers in class materials where necessary,
Be it resolved, that recommended Content Warnings include, but are not limited to: sexual assault, domestic violence, abuse (specify one or more of: physical, mental, emotional, verbal, sexual, child abuse), pedophilia, racism, homophobia, transphobia, suicide, self-harm, eating disorders, abortion, gore, drug addiction, and alcohol addiction.
Appendix A: Suggested formatting for Content Warnings in Syllabi
Example 1:
Monday, January 28:
Screening Leon: The Professional in class
Content warnings include: gore, physical/sexual/child abuse, pedophilia, sexual assault, domestic violence
Example 2:
2/12/2014
The Last Patriarch, p 1-103
CW: sexual assault, domestic violence
Brenna Levitin ‘16: Professors include content that is upsetting. This is a recommendation to professors to warn students to make arrangements to prepare themselves. This is a first step. Next semester probably not all professors will have content warnings in syllabi but it is a first step to demonstrate that we feel strongly about this.
Lydia Ibarra ’14: How do you expect individual professors and students to proceed should an assignment conflict?
Emmett Binkowski ‘16: Professors will put content warnings in the syllabus and students make an informed decision if they know the assignment is coming up. They can talk to the professor if they feel comfortable, but they don’t have to. They can go to their dean and have them facilitate the conversation, and the dean can tell the professor that people are uncomfortable without singling people out. We don’t want to people to have to talk about triggers with professors personally.
Lindsey Crowe ‘14: Who have you spoken to for this recommendation? Should this resolution pass, will there be an announcement? Who will be spoken with to let them know that this is a recommendation?
Emmett Ninkowski ‘16: We’ve emailed the Dean’s Office and the Provost. Because of the snow days we have not been able to meet with them but we did have the deans discuss this in a meeting, with counselors there too. We wanted to stress that we didn’t want to tell the professors how to run the classes. These are recommendations.
Brenna Levitin ‘16: Next steps are faculty representatives and the curriculum committee liaison. They will help us speak to the Provost and heads of faculty, and introduce and show there is student support.
Lindsey Crowe ‘14: Do you or do you not have a distribution plan on presenting this recommendation to faculty?
Emmett Binkowski ‘16: Theoretically we could just email all of them. We could have the deans inform them.
Halle Watkin ’16: Is it under professor’s discretion whether or not to put content warnings and is there a consequence if they do not put it in?
Brenna Levitin ‘16: It’s a recommendation so no consequences.
Emmett Binkowski ‘16: Hopefully professors will agree with it.
Halle Watkin ‘16: Before you establish whether or not there will be consequences is this going to be proposed at the next Plenary?
Brenna Levitin ‘16: This specific resolution or a resolution for the next steps? It will be proposed at Plenary.
Tess McCabe ‘16: If a professor changes the syllabus, how will they declare trigger warnings?
Brenna Levitin ‘16: Changes to syllabi come on a weekly basis. It shouldn’t be difficult to screen new material and add content warning and send emails or have a physical new syllabus.
Tess McCabe ‘16: So there is no standardized way.
Faatimah Jafiq ‘15: What is the action if a professor does not want to include something you think should be included?
Brenna Levitin ‘16: For the last ‘be it resolved’ clause?
Emmett Binkowski ‘16: It’s just a recommendation. It’s up to their discretion. Hopefully passing this resolution shows them that it matters, but we can’t make them do anything.
Faatimah Jafiq ‘15: I have a question about the language – ‘emotional security and things that are detrimental to mental health’ – this differs from student to student. Where does this end?
Emmett Binkowski ’16: Examples are given. We posted a poll online and asked people to tell us. If there were to be content warnings, what would you want to see? That’s where we got examples. Some had triggers more specific to them – then you can talk to your professor or dean. That’s just a general list we got.
Hannah Rifkin ‘17: At the last SGA meeting when you presented this resolution you were asked if you had spoken with individual professors. Has that changed? Have you spoken to individual professors?
Brenna Levitin ‘16: No, we were not able to make it to a committee meeting, but we contacted the curriculum committee liaison and received a response.
Hannah Rifkin ‘17: How do you guys establish a line for what does and doesn’t constitute?
Emmett Binkowski ‘16: The professor knows the material and would make a judgement call about whether it was something…
Brenna Levitin ‘16: We did provide a list of recommended triggers.
Ruby Mills ’17: Is there some way of distinguishing between no trigger warnings used versus no trigger warnings?
Brenna Levitin ‘16: It can be specified in the syllabus – no content warnings used versus applicable.
Daniele Arad-Neeman ‘14: In light of extensive and important conversation, I think there are resources we could use. We are about collaborating with faculty and administration. Motion to form a committee with members of the curriculum committee and faculty representatives to make it a more significant part of the curriculum.
Natalie Kato ‘14: Motion to commit to a committee. How large?
Daniele Arad-Neeman ‘14: Probably 7-10 individuals with the hope that it would be something comprised of students, faculty, and staff. Responsibilities would be to discuss all the questions that have been asked so far – what is a trigger warning, how professors go about where to put them and what is the protocol and how does the faculty feel about consequences for putting or not putting trigger warnings?
Brenna Levitin ‘16: 7-10 is too small. I recommend 15.
Daniele Arad-Neeman ‘16: Fine with me.
Natalie Kato ‘14: Moving to commit to a committee would table the resolution.
Carolyn Jacoby ‘14: I support the committee. I spoke with faculty in hopes of feeling how we would implement it and received mixed responses. I want to see this conversation happen. Convincing them was difficult. The committee would force faculty and students to discuss and would get more changes rolling.
Emmett Binkowski ‘16: I would want to be careful about choosing who is on the committee.
Brenna Levitin ‘16: There is confusion in responses. Passing this resolution could be a show of support and also creating a committee. It’s important. Passing this resolution shows widespread student support for this kind of discussion.
Colin Baumann ‘14: This needs to be a discussion. Tabling is wrong. Passing this resolution is a positive statement.
Janielle Vidal ‘14: Can this committee include the Registrar’s office? The objective of the committee is beyond the limits of the registrar’s office, but if a student wants to drop a class, how would that affect the student?
Emmett Binkowski ‘16: Theoretically going to the first class during shopping week they would be able to see whether the class material has warnings. They will make a decision about the class and will not have a penalty for dropping the class.
Janielle Vidal ‘14: Later on what happens?
Brenna Levitin ‘16: It’s an informed vs. non-informed judgment call.
Halle Watkin ‘16: Who would be on the committee? I would hope there is a spectrum because regarding implementing this amendment I want to make sure that there are multiple opinions going into this committee.
Daniele Arad-Neeman ’14: I proposed the committee. There would be a process of applying an interviewing.
Rachel Feynman ’15: The committee can include Access Services so that each student can discuss counseling, outside services, and trigger warnings anonymously.
Lindsey Crowe ‘14: Can you clarify – would this be a forum? A sort of group of representatives?
Kate Hinchey ’16 McBride: Does that mean that an individual person would need to go to Access Services and explain their trigger? Because I would not be okay with that.
Hanna Fields ‘14: Before coming to Bryn Mawr, you fill out a survey about disabilities and allergies. It’s speaking up for yourself in some sense.
Kate Hinchey ‘16: If you are a survivor and don’t want to tell your professor then telling Access Services is the same thing.
Alisha Pandit ‘15: Would there just be an Access Services representative on the committee?
Hanna Fields ‘14: Students can write and submit anonymously.
Natalie Kato ‘14: Let me clarify. I thought the amendment was a motion to refer this to a committee of 15 people.
Hanna Fields ’14: How it would be helpful?
Natalie Kato ‘14: This is not an amendment to the resolution. This is a motion to make a committee.
Angela Rosenburg ‘15: I have an issue with Access Services being used to talk to students. If a student has severe mental health issue, your professor knows.
Daniele Arad-Neeman ‘14: Access Services could be included in the conversation and on the committee.
Lindsey Marinello ‘17: Someone mentioned students wanting to speak to access services the same way as speaking to professors. Access Services is confidential.
Natalie Kato ‘14: I want to clarify the amendment. It is to form a committee to discuss content warning in syllabi, and people are asking to include Access Services in the committee. This is not a form of action for specific reflections. The committee will be formed to further discussion. Referring to a committee would be a vote on whether or not we would like to refer to a committee and table the resolution.
Alex Mannix ‘15: The spirit of the resolution is important, and it is important that the resolution is passed. I also think that the committee is important. It would be an open community discussion.
Halle Watkin ‘16: The committee would be forced to a closed forum. It would be best if we talked more, or tabled the resolution.
At 4:30 PM the count is 381, whereas quorum is 441.
Natalie Kato ‘14: We do not have quorum. We will vote on if we want to wait or not wait. If we do want to wait we will go into a subsequent vote. We are 60 people away from quorum.
Pamudu Tennakoon ‘15: Do the resolutions that we already voted on still stand?
Natalie Kato ‘14: The three resolutions passed will stand. All others will be tabled and brought up at the writers’ discretion. If they choose to bring them up, they can do so.
Lauren Buckheit ‘15: What happens if we vote not to stay?
Natalie Kato ‘14: The resolutions will be tabled until fall at the resolution writers’ discretion.
Kate Hinchey ’16 McBride: What if resolution writers graduate?
Natalie Kato ‘14: Then hopefully they will pass it on. They will have to submit the resolution again anyway.
The vote is that we will wait.
We wanted to propose times. The different options:
30 minutes
1 hour
2 hours
We will wait then do a vote again if we want to continue Plenary then.
We will be waiting for 30 minutes and then recount.
Quorum is 362 at 5:15 PM.
Natalie Kato ’14: We are 80 people short. We will vote again about whether or not we want to wait.
By visual ballot, we will not wait any longer. What this means is that the three resolutions passed will stand as they are and all subsequent resolutions will be brought to 2014 Fall Plenary if the resolution writers wish to.