ag5@pucc-i (Henry C. Mensch) (10/02/84)
<<whip me, beat me, and censor me!>>
This item lifted from the Lafayette, IN Journal and Courier.
Nobody received anyone's permission to do anyting here. The article
speaks for itself:
GROUP QUESTIONS FILM BAN
BLOOMINGTON, IN (AP) -- The Indiana Civil Liberties Union is
questioning a ban of X-rated films by Indiana University administrators
Indiana University Civil Liberties Chapter officials say that
Dean of Students Michael V. W. Gordon overstepped his authority by
imposing a moratorium on X-rated films shown by campus groups.
"We feel that such a ban affects some forms of constitutionally
protected speech. The university's moratorium ranged far beyond the
narrow interpretation imposed by law on people's freedom to watch and
exhibit movies of their choice," a written chapter statement said.
Chapter presiden Susie Balliet Ross said a committee is
conducting legal research to determine whether IU administrators have
overstepped the law.
The controversy began about three weeks ago when students in
Dodds House began promoting their annual showing of "Deep Throat,"
which has been a fundraiser to sponsor the dormitory's Little 500
bicycle racing team and other student activities.
On Friday, the community council of Teter Quad dormitory voted
to prohibit the planned showing of the X-rated film "Debbie Does
Dallas" as a fundraiser because the Monroe County prosecutor said it
has been successfully challenged in the courts.
Although some student leaders do not necessarily oppose the
moratorium, they criticize Gordon for not consulting with them before
announcing the ban.
But senior Jeff Farren, Interfraternity Council president, said
the moratorium was a prudent move by Gordon because it offers a chance
for all sides to review the issue.
"I think the last thing the University wants is censorship," he
said.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
END OF ARTICLE
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
Now, of course, we don't have this sort of problem at Purdue,
THE Indiana University :-)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Henry C. Mensch | Purdue University Computing Center
{decvax|ucbvax|sequent|icalqa|inuxc|uiucdcs|ihnp4}!pur-ee!pucc-i!ag5
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Saved by Bird's Eye Cheese Sauce!"thielges@uiucdcsb.UUCP (10/03/84)
. > Now, of course, we don't have this sort of problem at Purdue, >THE Indiana University :-) > >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >Henry C. Mensch | Purdue University Computing Center >{decvax|ucbvax|sequent|icalqa|inuxc|uiucdcs|ihnp4}!pur-ee!pucc-i!ag5 That's not surprising, at Purdue, 101 Dalmations is considered racey. (remember all those naked animals) Bart Thielges from U of Illinois... THE Indiana University (Is this some kinda fad ?) A Purdue grad
mp@allegra.UUCP (Mark Plotnick) (10/05/84)
Like any good controversy, there are more than 2 sides to the issue here. First, some background. MIT's movie committee (LSC) shows almost all the feature movies at MIT (about 180 per year), and in general 2 or 3 of these were X- or XXX-rated. They never got a lot of flak about this practice (I'm told the executive committee that screens the movies always tried to pick ones with minimal offensiveness) until they decided to show Deep Throat. Evidently there's some legal precedent in Massachusetts and other states that means you can be busted if you try to show D.T or Beyond (or is it Behind?) the Green Door. A dorm at Harvard tried to show D.T. a couple years ago and that was shut down by the police. Although the MIT administration really doesn't like censorship, the last thing they want is bad publicity (some outside groups planned a protest and had notified police and area TV stations), so they pressured the committee into cancelling the film. One of the Deans said that since MIT is a private institution, the first amendment didn't apply in this case. This led to the formation of a committee of students (mainly from LSC and women's groups) and administration members to discuss the issues. The problem is of course more complex than freedom of expression on one side vs. morality on the other. Here are some of the points (I wasn't a member of the ad-hoc committee, I just read the minutes and talked to committee members who were also on LSC): - the movies were offensive to some portion of the students (it wasn't known how large this portion was; the protests had been organized by non-MIT groups, although several MIT groups had also let their objections be known). but the movies were also enjoyed by a large segment of students. Something like 40% of the entire undergraduate population goes to see the the X-rated movie that is shown at the beginning of each semester. There was talk of a campus-wide referendum but that would not really change anybody's mind since if even 1% of the community found the movies offensive that would be reason enough for some people to want to ban them. I don't know if the referendum ever took place; if it did, it would have happened this spring when I wasn't on campus. - some MIT employees did not want pornographic movies shown, because it would degrade their workplace. (a mild counterargument to this is that the movies aren't shown during working hours, and almost none of the employees go to LSC movies anyway). - there were objections to MIT (and its students' tuitions) implicitly supporting the pornography industry by merely allowing the movies to be shown. LSC is a self-supporting student activity, but MIT pays for heating and lighting the auditorium. - many people thought that the tradition of showing an X-rated movie at the beginning of each term was inappropriate, especially for incoming freshmen. - LSC argued (in addition to the freedom-of-speech issue) that nobody was being forced to go to these movies if they didn't want to; people who were offended by the movies could simply stay at home or go into Cambridge or Boston or do a thousand other things. Attendance was limited to MIT/Wellesley students and staff (no outside rowdies) who were over age. - there were some reported incidents of women being harassed by male dorm and frat members after these movies. The committee made its report, and the Dean for Student Affairs published some guidelines, some of which say (I'm doing this from memory; maybe some of the mit-eddie crowd can add anything I've left out): - XXX or unrated movies should be reviewed by a student/administration panel. - the movies cannot be shown on registration day (the first day of the term), and can't be shown in the main auditorium (the main auditorium is close to the 2 women's dorms). - advance notice should be given so that alternative events (e.g. DSA-sponsored movies and parties) can be scheduled for the same time as the movies. The above restrictions have yet to be thoroughly exercised. LSC finally showed another X rated movie at the end of last term. Threatened protests never materialized, and according to the LSC minutes, the leader of the protestors showed up to watch the movie with a date. Mark