This is topic Is this really appropriate for a school paper? - Warning, this has an adult theme in forum Books, Films, Food and Culture at Hatrack River Forum.
quote: On Valentine's Day, nothing says "I love you" like oral sex. It's a great way to express your appreciation or love for someone.
I can not believe this article made it into a school paper. the quote above is the least offensive of the entire article.
Don't get me wrong, sex, expressed however you wish to express it, is a good thing for a couples who wish to express there love for one another. But to put something like this in a paper, where kids have access to it is not a very good move by the editor.
These articles should probably stay where they belong, penthouse or playboy. That way I could, I mean...people, ya, people could choose to read them once I, uh..they were finished with all the other articles.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
It's ridiculously inappropriate. Stunningly. The editor and the author should be suspended, if not let go immediately.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Is this a college or high school paper? If high school, I absolutely agree with Tom. If it's college, I'm not sure I agree with suspension.
It's definitely inappropriate, though.
Dagonee
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
From what I read before it is an independent Student Run paper at Northern Arizona University.
AJ
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
To have an online edition, I'm pretty sure it's college. Not to mention the vodka, assuming there are underage reading it. That just jumped out in a scan. I don't know of a religion that uses vodka- though a quote from Speaker comes to mind. Anyway, it does seem tasteless. But Oral Sex has kind of become PG-13 material.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
I think this is a college paper. I believe in freedom of speech but this is rediculous. Perhaps the author could have handled the subject a little less graphically and then it may have been ok. But this is a how to piece the likes of which Larry Flint would be proud of. Do you really need that kind of detail when reading the friendly pages of your local college paper over your pancakes in the morning?
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
Yo.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
It's a university. Northern Arizona University.
I think it's incredibly inappropriate, because explicit sexual details, like how to give oral sex, don't belong in any medium where access by minors is probable. A university newspaper is not Penthouse or Playboy, it's not sold in a paper cover at adult book stores, where minors aren't supposed to be. It's something that gets dropped on the kitchen table by an older brother or sister, and is easily read by anyone in the family.
Free speech and all that, but we do have some standards of decency in society where minors are concerned. That's my only issue with it - I think it's in very poor taste and it should not have been published by a newspaper. After all, if it appeared in Penthouse, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Posted by Kasie H (Member # 2120) on :
There's no way this would have been published in a high school paper -- they're almost never independent organizations.
At first I was pretty affronted by it. But the more I think about it, the more I think the paper has the right to print whatever it wants, but is ultimately responsible to its readership -- I know one professor wrote a letter responding to another one of this girl's columns calling for the paper to be shut down. Kids could stop reading it; maybe someone will try to set up a competing paper.
Maybe this is a little too free market for some....but I don't think we ought to be prohibiting bad taste.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
Pooka -
Yea, oral sex has become somewhat less threatening to see and hear about lately but that is usually in the form of jokes and sly comments. This is a little too in your face, parden the pun, to be acceptable. I'd rate this much more along the lines of XXX.
Posted by Kasie H (Member # 2120) on :
Belle, there aren't a whole lot of minors in college, usually.
The occasional 17 year old, maybe.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
There may not be many minors who attend college but there are a lot who would have access to this article. Most professors have children and then there are the custodial staff, the dining staff, the office and clerical staff, and on and on and on...
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I used to read the independent college paper when my sister was in college and I was in high school.
Posted by Kasie H (Member # 2120) on :
Usually those people aren't going to be living on campus. And it's the responsibility of their parents, anyway, to protect them from this kind of material -- if there's something offensive in it, don't bring it home with you.
Posted by Kasie H (Member # 2120) on :
Look, when I was a "minor" I used to go to the local bookstore and buy Cosmo. Should they not have the right to publish, even though they discuss in detail various sexual positions, simply because a minor might accidently stumble upon it?
Hell no!
Posted by Derrell (Member # 6062) on :
This is indeed the online version of The Northern Arizona University paper. I personally think they should have put some kind of warning on the website or done something to limit access to the story by minors.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Calling something "inappropriate" is not the same as advocating censorship.
Posted by Kasie H (Member # 2120) on :
Dagonee,
Agreed. I also think it was in bad taste.
But suspending/firing the editor isn't the way to go.
And it seems to me some (beatnix) *have* been advocating censorship.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Hmmm. I can't tell - beatnix19 has said it shouldn't have been published, but not directly that it should have been prohibited. At least the way I read it.
I can see inferring the call for banning it from the remarks though.
beatnix19 - can you clarify, please?
Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
Geez, I'm not comfortable with it even being linked, considering how explicite it is.
I'd be outraged if I were a parent paying for a student to go there.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
This is a good way to get a little attention for NAU. And colleges seem to get tons of mileage from "controversial" stuff like this. Not presidential campaigns, but definitely colleges.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
I'm advocating good taste, not censorship. Is a school paper really the place for this type of article? Definately not! Does that mean this kind of article should not be written? Again, definately not. In fact, my wife and I purchased Kim Catrell's book on this very topic last year. It was a very enlightening book and it was published in the right forum.
(Edit: sorry if that was TMI)
[ February 26, 2004, 02:59 PM: Message edited by: beatnix19 ]
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I didn't suggest firing anybody, I called it inappropriate. The fact that it's an online version, well that helps a little. And you'll note I didn't say there were minors on campus, I said it's easy for a minor to get a copy of a campus newspaper from an older sibling or even a parent who is attending college.
It's a question of expectation. You want people to keep their kids from inappropriate material - I agree. But, while I know to keep Cosmo out of my house, I don't think about censoring a newspaper. While I don't let my kids watch "Sex in the City" I do let them watch the SuperBowl.
See the difference? We have a trust that the media will uphold certain standards, and that they'll let us know when we need to be monitoring our kids. For example, putting the more violent and sexually explicit programming later at night, and Blue's Clues on during the day.
A newspaper is not something a mother is going to snatch out of a child's hand, knowing that there is inappropriate content inside.
Now, as to this issue in particular - it's student-run, independent, (though I'm not sure if no university resources were used to produce it, that might change things) and this is an online version and any smart parent closely monitors online usage by their kids. So, I don't have nearly as much a problem with it as I did when I thought it was the university's main print newspaper.
Still think it's inapproriate, though.
Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
They can do what they want, but I wouldn't give that paper too much respect.
Posted by Da_Goat (Member # 5529) on :
Don't worry. Few people give NAU respect as it is.
Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
I think it's extremely inappropriate, but not specifically because of the minors angle. University newspaper reporters and columnists are often aspiring to be reporters, columnists, or editors in the real world. Therefore, university newspapers are typically patterned after "real" newspapers (except in the sad cases where they bear more resemblence to high school papers). This topic would be inappropriate for either a real newspaper or a high school one. Also, community standards of what constitutes appropriateness or obscenity are not rooted specifically in the accessibilit of the material to children, but in what the standards of the community at large are. The community at large in this case is not, contrary to the belief of the students who published this, limited to 18 - 22 year-old college students. Finally, even if something is not explicitly deemed obscene, that does not mean that it is appropriate fodder for all venues. An article giving specific instructions in oral sex has no logical business being in a university newspaper.
I also don't believe that the aim of the students was to inform, but to push the envelope. That makes this whole article seem to me to be potty-mouthed immaturity.
And, whether it accomplishes anything or not, I think mailing a copy of the article to the families of the students (and faculty advisor) involved in publishing it is a pretty good idea.
Posted by Danzig (Member # 4704) on :
Not something I particularly want in a paper, but we have the First Amendment for a reason. I have read much worse in books, not that it really matters. As long as they did not violate any valid, pre-existing policy of the newspaper then they should have no disciplinary action taken against them.
pooka - What is wrong with vodka? Alcohol producers advertise on television all the time, and my gut feeling is that any minor who would be interested in reading a college newspaper is going to be old enough to handle the fact that people drink.
Posted by Kasie H (Member # 2120) on :
Belle,
I wasn't talking about anything you said -- I was referencing Tom's post. I actually agree with most of what you've said Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
The first ammendment doesn't change some things from being inappropriate. I'm not saying that you were suggesting it does, but I wanted to clarify, because I frequently see people use the first ammenment as justification that somethig vulgar should be expressed, or even rewarded. Just because one has the right to behave like an ass doesn't make one any less of an ass for behaving like one.
In any case, school newspapers don't enjoy first ammendment protection when it comes to violating the policies of their own administration and/or university. So while I have not advocated disciplinary action, it would not be unconstitutional.
Actually, I simply think the newspaper should face consequences, not the author. Specifically, the faculty advisor should be replaced and issues in the immediate future ought to have much closer supervision. They have abused their freedom and ought to have it curtailed for a bit. I also think the paper ought to (be made to) publish an apology for offending the standards of their community.
Posted by Rhaegar The Fool (Member # 5811) on :
What type of school?
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
Ic, my understanding was that it is an independent paper published by students, not an official university paper.
Which means no University policies or $ and no faculty advisor.
Am I wrong about that?
Posted by BYuCnslr (Member # 1857) on :
You know...I'm not seeing anything overly wrong with the article...it's from a college, likelyhood is that minors won't be reading it. Overall, it was well written...like it or not, it got your attention, and kept you all the way through...though possibly because of shock value. It promoted safe sex right from the start, as well as if you read between the lines, it gave the golden rule of sharing. It's a college newspaper, and should be taken as an article of such, likelyhood is that this is being taken as appaling by everybody because of the difference in cultures of generations, I can tell you right now that showing this article to a bunch of college students will produce less shock than if you showed it to their parents. Sex is rather apparent in the world, whether or not you want to acknowledge it, it's here, and it's on college campuses. Satyagraha
Posted by Kasie H (Member # 2120) on :
No, dkw, you're right.
The paper here at GW owns the building it's housed in, is independently funded, and is not overseen by the school.
They do, however, have the right to circulate the publication on campus. There may be a rule at NAU that would allow the school to disallow circulation.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
..being taken as appaling by everybody because of the difference in cultures of generations, I can tell you right now that showing this article to a bunch of college students will produce less shock than if you showed it to their parents.
Not necessarily. Not all college students are alike, nor are all parents.
I'd want to know about the paper. Is this section known for its outrageousness, its sexual content, its advice column? Compared to the rest of the paper it seems inappropriate to me, and I'm a man who can appreciate a good oral sex article.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Good point - I assumed it was a general interest newspaper when I said it was inappropriate. Context matters here. Articles like this in Cosmo or risque humor mags or Playboy are not inappropriate (although they still may be tacky).
Dagonee
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
This also happened recently at a High School newspaper here in Kansas:
Now, some of the article's I'm not opposed to, even at the high school level -- such as those that compared different types of birth control and gave information (much like we did on a recent thread here).
But I guess parents thought it was all a little too much for this age level.
Farmgirl
Posted by Danzig (Member # 4704) on :
Icarus - In general I believe the First Amendment is abused when it comes to freedom of speech and/or the press. I realize my opinions conflict with much legal precedent, but I am not even sure that I could ban yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, much less anything that has no chance of causing immediate physical injury. I do agree, of course, that if the college was connected with the paper then any existing policies should have been enforced, and certainly they would have the right to make new policies. However, if no such policy was in place then no action should be taken against anyone, even if the paper had been connected to the school. If that was in my school newspaper, or even my regular newspaper, I could scan the title and perhaps the first paragraph and just decide not to read further. No need to make a huge deal out of it.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
The First Amendment protects speech. It doesn't guarantee distribution.
While the paper could not prohibit the author from writing what she liked, there's nothing that says they have to print it, or that the college has to distribute it. She is, of course, welcome to submit it to a more appropriate venue.
Alternately, if the paper set up an advice column or regular feature about sex, then the article would not have been as unexpected or (to me) as inappropriate. This came out of nowhere.
I don't think action should be taken beyond a "knock it off" letter. If inappropriate material continues to get printed, I could see the college revoking the campus distribution privileges.
[ February 26, 2004, 05:20 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posted by Kasie H (Member # 2120) on :
....I actually think it's a regular column about sex. Try doing a search for the author's name on the website....it seems lots of people object to her columns, but she seems to be writing them regularly.
If that's the case, should judgment be as harsh? i.e. would proper action be to simply reprimand the writer and to encourage her to tone it down next time, or to still close the paper/fire the editor?
Posted by Kasie H (Member # 2120) on :
Ah-ha. It *is* a regular column, called "Something to Think About."
The column Ms. Fuller wrote the week of Feb. 19th is prefaced by the following disclaimer:
quote:Warning: The following column contains mature content, not suitable for young audiences
Some of her other column topics include condom sizes, chemical/sexual body odor ( ), and disparities in marriage and consent laws.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
So it looks as if that was added after the oral sex article to try to defuse some of the complaints.
As long as some sort of disclaimer - or warning - is involved, and the college is not funding it, I'd leave it up to the editors to decide how to run their paper.
Posted by butterfly (Member # 5898) on :
It's for college students, who probably already knew about oral sex before reading this article. I don't think it would really shock anyone, but perhaps would offend them. The majority of college students start out 18, and those who are not turn 18 within a few months or so. 18 is old enough to vote, get married, and buy a house. Why not read an article about oral sex? Besides, aren't kids having sex younger and younger now?
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
I find it boring. Oddly.
[I don't mean this as a crack or as an innuendo. It is just not particularly well-written, and I get surly when I think a writer believes I will be titillated merely by shock-value. Puh-leez. *yawn Reminds me of the XXXSEE-REAL-NAKED-GIRLS camera pop-up ads. Which is sad, because this _could_ be a very interesting topic from many perspectives. Instead it's just intellectually (and aesthetically) lazy. I'd much rather spend my time reading about what whomever gets out of his drain with the snake.
That'll be cool.
As far as this article goes, it ain't no Light as the Breeze. ]
[ February 26, 2004, 07:23 PM: Message edited by: ClaudiaTherese ]
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Arizona does it again.
Posted by Thunder's Core Smith (Member # 6234) on :
Someone used the on this thread? Oh, my.
Can we please refrain from using that and the following few smilies:
at least on this thread?
Posted by lcarus (Member # 4395) on :
Nate, is that you?
That may be the best laugh Hatrack has ever given me!
Posted by jexx (Member # 3450) on :
I read a lot of risque literature (yes, now you know something shocking about me), and I've been known to write...ahem...erotica. I believe in a frank discussion of sex in appropriate venues.
That newspaper article was, frankly, just really badly written. *shrug* To echo some of the other comments, it seemed to be written for shock value (a juvenile 'Tee-Hee, look at me, I'm *naaaughty*'). It didn't convince me to engage my partner in more fulfilling oral sex (the point of rhetoric is to convince, right?), it just made be go, "Oh, fer heaven's sakes" and roll my eyes.
Sheesh.
I hope the 'author' is not majoring in Journalism, but if she is, I hope she is minoring in something at which she is more skillful.
Feh.
Posted by Tstorm (Member # 1871) on :
Farmgirl,
I'm suprised that happened in Salina, which tends to be more conservative than the other larger cities in Kansas. Had that been Manhattan, Topeka, or Wichita in the headlines, I probably wouldn't raise an eyebrow. I went to college in that town, and it's an aggregate of western Kansas. More like a small town than the college towns of Manhattan (KSU) or Lawrence (KU). I can understand why that poor principal's phone rang off the hook.
And to all you Hatrackers, that town is pronounced with a long "I" sound, not the hispanic "E"...Sa-LINE-a. hehe, pet peeve Posted by Jill (Member # 3376) on :
This isn't all that unusual. The thing is, many college newspapers have sex columns, including Yale, Brown, Berkeley, and NYU. That doesn't make it right, but it's getting more and more common.
Nathan is going to hell. Whether he or I believe it exists or not. He's going there.
Posted by Eaquae Legit (Member # 3063) on :
During my frosh week, our campus paper, Imprint (which is a rag anyway, but that's a different story), published a "how-to" guide to sex in the dorm rooms. It featured silly-looking cartoon figures, fully clothed, and the advice was more comical than graphic. Nonetheless, it was banned in the residences, mostly because of the fact that that was the area that the parents of the frosh would be moving abouts in. It was a hot issue on campus at the time, but I think msot people have long since forgotten about it by now.
Posted by Taalcon (Member # 839) on :
I once drew a cartoon for the high school newspaper that showed the librarians playing cards. A librarian was peeking her head through the door saying, "Count me in on the next hand! Billy came in with a book 12 weeks overdue!"
The caption read, "Ever wonder what happens with those overdue library fines?"
The cartoon wasn't allowed to run, because it was deemed 'too controversial'
[ February 27, 2004, 01:01 AM: Message edited by: Taalcon ]
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
That's a shame, Taal, because that's hilarious! Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Frankly, I'm horrified by such a display of evil from Nathan!
[ February 27, 2004, 09:34 AM: Message edited by: Noemon ]
Posted by Thunder's Core Smith (Member # 6234) on :
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
And here I always thought I was living in the Conservative Christian capitol of the world by living in Kansas!
Of course, I'm not that surprised by the Lawrence high schools. After all, Lawrence is home to the University of Kansas, which has a massive school of Journalism, and at the University level, they like pushing the limits quite a bit (I say this as a former student there, so I know). No doubt some of that daring and mindset trickled down to the local high school.
But the Salina high school event truly was a shock, as Tstorm pointed out.
Farmgirl
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
T. Core--
Yeah, I'm not surprised by the Lawrence schools' papers doing something like this either--a lot of my friends worked on the paper when I was at LHS, and I'd say it was headed this direction at that point.
But Salina?!
By the way, for a piece of Kansas triva (which will be interesting only to FarmGirl, screechowl, T-Storm, and myself), do you know why Winfield, KS doesn't have any liquor stores?
[ February 27, 2004, 09:56 AM: Message edited by: Noemon ]
Posted by Tstorm (Member # 1871) on :
Noeman - No, and I probably should know that trivia. I'll bet it's in my book, which I have no time to consult right now.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Anybody else? FarmGirl? Screechowl?
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Does it have anything to do with winning the first prize in a 1915 model town contest?
[Ahhh, found it. I'll let you break the story, Noemon.]
[ February 27, 2004, 10:23 AM: Message edited by: ClaudiaTherese ]
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Holy crap CT!
You know, I went to school with a guy named "Bender" He was *really* bad news, if I recall. The sort of person I could have imagined growning up and doing something like that. I wonder if these Benders were his ancestors?
In answer to your question, Nope!
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
No, you go ahead CT! You found the answer, you get to post it!
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Where did you find it, by the way?
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
I wasn't paying attention, Noemon.
I thought liquor was a county-by-county decision, and Winfield was a "dry" county.
But there must be something more to the story if your posting it here!
Farmgirl
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Then, perhaps it was the fear of drunken clerks:
quote:Winfield Courier, August 23, 1883.
YOUNG MEN WHO DRINK.
We notice that the businessmen of this city who don't believe in prohibition and think moderate drinking is all right, don't keep their clerks and employees very long after they get to drinking. Several clerks have been discharged because they drank. Men who drink and get drunk sometimes, do not want drinking clerks. They know the other vices always follow in the wake of a drink, and it may not take a drinking young man long to become a gambler and a thief. We have had occasion to ask businessmen to give employment to young men as clerks, and usually almost the first question asked is: "Does he drink?" Recently a young man who we would be glad to assist, asked us to give him a letter recommending him as a salesman to a friend of ours. We could not recommend him because we knew he drank and sometimes got on a spree.
Actually, I have unearthed that Winfield is the hometown of someone special. But in my ongoing quest to reveal Kansas as the den of iniquity which it is, I read about this crime spree:
quote:Winfield Courier, August 23, 1883.
CHERRYVALE ROBBERY AND ARSON.
We have a sensational report from Cherryvale about the robbery, and burning, about two weeks ago, of the residence of Conductor Titus. Last Saturday Dr. Moore, a dentist and prominent citizen, and Mrs. Titus, the conductor's wife, were both arrested and committed to jail charged with the robbery and arson. The money, $900, has been found buried in the yard and it is stated that plenty of proof has been discovered of a liaison and conspiracy between the two prisoners.
There is also report that "an Arkansas Valley editor postmaster has been arrested for allowing his affections to wander off and entwine themselves about the buxom form and palpitating heart of a fair damsel who is not his lawful wife."
Kansas, we hardly knew ye.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
McPherson, Aug. 24. There are at least two prohibition towns in Kansas, or at least towns in which no liquor is sold openly and above board; and these two places are Winfield and McPherson. The former being the home of Senator Hackney, there is of course nothing surprising in the fact that prohibition prohibits there.
Hackney is the fiercest and most uncompromising prohibitionist I ever saw, not even excepting St. John, and is very free in his declaration that a prohibitory plank should be put in the next Republican state platform. Whether or not the anti-prohibition element in Win- field is afraid of Hackney I cannot say, but it is very safe to assume that he would make it very sultry indeed for any member thereof who should so far forget himself as to open out a gin mill and begin the sale of liquor unblushingly. No one presumes to deny that whiskey and diverse other beverages cannot be obtained in Winfield, but there is no open sale of the same. Although the town has but one policeman, the embodying of the city marshal and street commissioner in the one person, there is no place in the state more quiet and peaceable than Winfield. There are no rows, no drunken men staggering around, no disturbances of any kind; the farmers, when they come in to sell their produce, do not seem to worry over the fact that there is not a saloon on every corner. It should not be judged from this that Winfield is a dull town by any means, for it isn't. There is not a livelier town in the state, nor one which does more business in proportion to its size. In fact, in proportion to its size, there are very few towns in Kansas which do as much business as Winfield. Therefore, if Winfield is busy and growing, and the prohibitory law is enforced there, why can't the law be enforced in other towns of the state? If the law in Missouri is strong enough to shut up the saloons on Sunday, it is certainly strong enough to close them up every day in the week in Kansas.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Well, that wasn't what I was thinking of as the reason. I've been told that the reason Winfield doesn't have any liquor stores is that a woman was fundamental in the building of Southwestern College in Winfield left the city quite a bit of money, on the condition that they never allow liquor stores within the city's limits. I'm not having much luck digging up online documentation about it, though I haven't given up yet.
That's a great site by the way, CT--I'm having a blast reading through it!
Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
I have nothing really to add to this, I'm just stunned I didn't clue into the fact that Eaquae Legit goes to my school. Wait, you're the fellow that asked about IRS, right?
Anyway, the chap that drew the pictures for said article is Evan Munday, who I was living with during the "incident". Probably the best thing to happen to his career, all publicity being good publicity. Anyway, Evan and I are going out tomorrow night and I'll have to remember to slip "The Laurier Position" into the conversation.
Carry on.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
My own hometown newspaper (The Mount Hope Clarion - no web site) runs a weekly column called "100 years ago today" in which it runs snippets from the same newspaper 100 years ago (duh!).
It is always SO entertaining to read.... some things (opinions) they printed then certainly wouldn't be allowed journalistically today!
Farmgirl
Posted by Thunder's Core Smith (Member # 6234) on :
EL is a lady, Bobble.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I'm always amused when a thread like this hits the 69 post mark.
AJ
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
CT
I'm so proud that earlier you linked to the Kansas State Historical Society web page. I was instrumental in the development of THIS page of that site. In fact, I typed every single entry in the officer database that site links to. And am very good friends with the web developer at KSHS, Matt.
Farmgirl
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
I was the editor of my college newspaper in my senoir year. It was like rolling sand uphill with your fingers to get people to submit articles because we had no journalism class the first semester. I ended up begging friends and my stable of unrequited lovers to do book reviews, cartoons, take pictures and do interviews, etc. I remember a particularly funny article after the maintenance crew misspelled 'parking' when they repainted the 'no parking ' section. It said "No Parning". We interviewed people to ask them what 'parning' was. We didn't get to print many of them.
It was a Presbyterian school.
Anyway, the most controversial thing I managed to get into it (other than revealing my lecherous Prophetic Liturature proffessor's middle name) was a cartoon of the college president. He had a habit of always sticking stuff in the waistband of his pants right at the small of his back. Usually a book or his daily planner or whatever. I think it was a habit he'd picked up in the military.
Anyway, the cartoon had the caption "If Mr. _____ had been an artist" and it had him with an easel sticking out of the back of his pants. We cleared it with him first. He had a good sense of humor. But others thought it was disrespectful.
Times have changed. *polishes cane*
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Oops, I was wrong. I was just talking to C, who lived in Winfield at one point, and she said that it was two women who put up the money for the construction of St. John's College (now defunct) in Winfield on the condition that Winfield not have liquor stores.
Posted by Anti-Chris (Member # 4452) on :
Sorry guys, I thought I was just being funny.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
So if St. John's is now defunct, do they now have liquor stores there?
Farmgirl
Posted by Eaquae Legit (Member # 3063) on :
I don't remember asking about IRS, but I might have, since my sister just got ringed last week (and the next day as well when her boyfriend - also a UW grad - proposed).
But well, I never clued in that there was another person from UW here. What faculty?
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
), and disparities in marriage and consent laws.
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
)![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
What faculty?