Page Two
QHffNtttmu; (EOT
Member of
JJjtbs Aaaonalfxm
of (Emmmmoiraltf? (Eampuara
Editor-in-chief RAY GEIGER
Managing Editor GARY THORN BLOOM
Sports Editor MIKE McGINLEY
Format Editor PAULTABOLT
Photos JIM ROSE
Advertising SAM BERNIK
Business KATHY JUNECKO
Interim Advisor NORMAN GEHRLEIN
Staff: Carolyn Beck, Doug Brower, Paula
Brunner, Mike Cox, W.T. Eberlin, Cliff
Hahn, Ginny Koontz, Sam Kroungold, Dick
Lecker, Doug Leichliter, Rick Martino,
Debby McCall, Dave Ruef, Leigh Scam
mell, Barb Slingland, Kathlene Sparks,
Chris Watkins, Patsy Wheatly.
REPRESENTED FOR NATIONAL ADVERTISING BY
National Educational Advertising Services
'S f A DIVISION OF 'N /
ft KADurc disist sale* m services, inc. *4
Li 360 Lexington Ayb.. New York. N. V. 10017 | j
EDITORIAL
OPINION
In Loco Parentis?
Visitation has been granted and yet denied. The ad
ministration has seen fit to grant only a limited visitation
program for the students at Behrend while maintaining the
fundamental concept in Loco Parentis.
In our time, when the maturity of students and of dll
young adults is being reemphasized by their concern for
their nation and community, should not this maturity be
embodied in the attitudes and organization of Behrend
Campus. But by granting only a very limited-cprogram of
visitation directly under its supervision and guidance, the
administration has denied the maturity and responsibility
of the Behrend students. They have said, in effect, “You are
not ready to govern your own lives. You are not capable of
making individual moral or social decisions. We know what
is best for you. Trust us!”
But trust is not a one way street. It requires mutual
respect and open lines of communication. We know that the
administration is concerned. But concerned about what?
About peace, quiet, order and their control on the Behrend
Campus? Or about encouraging the students to develop
their own personalities, to learn and above all else to act in
a responsible and mature manner? In their “bestowal” of
visitation “privileges” they seem to have incorporated the
former and to have denied the latter.
Even though they may deny our maturity we will not
confirm their denial. Maturity means not only to exult 'in
victory, but to persevere in spite of defeat? And persevere
we will! As mature and responsible Penn State students,
we, at the Behrend Campus, will take what we have as
bitter a pill it may seem to be, and make it work. Although
our administration may repudiate the visitation program
already implimented at our main campus, we will continue
in our efforts to have it initiated here. We will do this by
making what we have obtained work; work so well that no
one can deny our ability to govern our own moral and social
lives; work so well that no one can question our respon
sibility and maturity. We will not defend our maturity. It
needs no defense. We will assert it by our responsible ac
tion.
But if we as students will seek to make this limited
visitation program work, should not the administration
labor to extend this program to make it compatible with
that at the University Park Campus and with the hopes and
desires of the Behrend students.
If we will listen, they must hear. They must be responsive
to the students requests or else take the responsibility for
EVERYTHING on this campus. Either they will heed our
responsible action, or, like the parents of infants, take the
responsibility for everything that the child does, or speaks
or is.
They seem to have confused passivity for respect, disdain
for love, indoctrination for education. How long can this
continue?????
EDITORIAL POLICY
The editorials appearing in this
newspaper will be opinionated
and therefore subject to
criticism. All letters that are
typewritten and submitted to the
newspaper staff will be printed
with the exception of those that
are repetitions or in poor taste.
The staff reserves' the' right to
by Ray Geiger
CUB Editor
correct or delete portions for the
letters or publication purposes.
All letters must be signed, but
names will be withheld upon
request.
Signed columns represent the
view of the author only and do not
reflect the Editorial policy of the
THE NITTANY CUB
Letters To The
All letters published
reflect the views of the
authors, and are not in any
way to be construed as in
dicative of the editorial
views of the Nittany Cub.
Dear Nittany Cub,
We sat and watched the in
famous Behrend student' Gov’t
aid our procrastinating ad
ministration in another suc
cessful attempt at neatly
avoiding another issue. We were
dazzled by their diplomatic
means of using unrelated
testimony to confuse the issue,
and scare off intellectual con
frontation. We could be
describing any issue, at Behrend,
but we are referring to
VISITATION.
The superb incorporation of the
technique “the run-around”
caused an undesirable feeling of
frustration, but that is nothing
new. How long must we sit back
and let our Administration toy
with us? Are we so blind that none
of this has any effect on us? We
elected the SGA to represent us,
but they have in no way applied
the necessary pressure on the
Administration to get things
done.
Our SGA has failed us, must we
also fail ourselves? It is too late
to pressure a decision on
visitation before February 1, but
we can influence an affirmative
decision. We must once again
unite and work towards a positive
goal. Speak, as a group; as an
individual, but'we must SPEAK
OUT!!!
What are we going to do if they
say no to our proposal? Must we
once again suffer because we are
silent? Must we bend to the
desires of our famed puppeteer?
We must live here, is it
unreasonable to desire comfort?
Ed. note: This letter was
written January 20, but was not
published then for political
reasons.
Students:
Ten minuses ago the SGA
meeting was adjourned. Ten
minutes ago I did not know
exactly how I felt about reacting
to Mr. Kochel’s decision on
visitation. And now I still don’t. I
may be a commuter, but the issue
of visitation affects the entire
campus. I do have a definite view
on Mr. Kochel’s decision though.
To put it simply, his plan stinks.
What then should be done about
it? That is where I get hung up.
Apprehension has been in the
air over visitation for the last
four months and continuously
growing. It reached its boiling
point tonight. The feeling was the
“Kochel screwed us.” But then
the question again: “What
should we do?” With my
emotions, and those of nearly
everyone else, reaching this
boiling point, would the resulting
action be. rational or emotional?
I think of a boiling cup of coffee
and realize that you have to wait
until it cools off before you drink
it. Emotions are the same way.
You have to cool off before you
can rationalize the best way out.
Aid right now, I’m trying to cool
off.
Maturity and responsibility is
the key. That is what we were
working with to open the door to
visitation. Our proposal was
rejected. But let’s not lose the
key, or we will never be able to
open that door. Just because we
are treated like kids, let’s not
start acting like kids. Let’s show
that we are the stuff that is going
to make this campus progressive.
If anything should be done, it
should be to eliminate all the
obstacles facing this progression.
And the first and foremost ob
stacle would be Mr. Kochel
himself. He has spoken of
autonomy and future, expansion
and progression for Behrend, but
he is continually the force op
posing these trends. If he can’t
adjust, then he should be
eliminated. If we act out emotion
rather than reason, if we ignore
the maturity and responsibility
that we are basing our struggle
upon, then we will be eliminating
ourselves. And if we eliminate
ourselves, what hope will there
be?
Doug Brower
Students,
We have existed at Behrend
under, a very childish system
where girls and boys are put into
separate buildings and told that
they cannot visit a student of the
other sex in his or her room. The
students had finally awakened to
this archaic rule and had drawn
up a visitation policy of our own
and submitted it to the ad
ministration.
The student body agreed to
send this proposal to the ad
ministration and the SGA agreed
unanimously to back the
proposal. We received an answer
to this proposal Wednesday night
at the SGA meeting. The answer
was an attempt to win over the
confidence of the student body
without really giving us much.
We must not accept this
compromise, but instead, must
stand together as one united force
and stop the administration’s
manipulation of us. The ad
ministration has once again
denied us of our rights and we
must not let them fool us with
their administration-oriented
compromise.
A 1 Quirlan
SGA Representative
Well people the Behrend
hierarchy has done the expected
once again and true to the stereo
typed administrative past the
students needs have not been
dealt with. Our diplomatic
reasoning and rationale has
worked up the boil-type ‘correct’
channels for the past three
months and here we have the
pussy head of the situation.
Right-on with changes Mr.
Kochel and whoever else may be
behind you!
Listen kids and listen good: the
Behrend administrators know
how to deal with' you and their
tactics have worked ‘oh so fine!’
in the pash Witness the ‘Behrend
Three’ confrontation (sic) of
Spring term 1970.
For those of you who were here
let me refresh your memories a
bit and for those of you who
weren’.t here let me tell you a
little tale...'
...Once upon a time there were
three college professors who
dared to rock the boat. All the
other deckhands (professors) sat
back passively and guarded their
jobs, (after all swabbing of the
deck and catering to the captains
demands keep you into the pay.)
Onward...
At the time the captain of the
ship hinted that maybe the
mutineers just “didn’t fit in with
the Behrend mystique.” Well I’d
say the captain had a point there
seeing as how it seems that
anyone who takes an interest in
students is as good as a nigger
lover. (To me the word nigger
knows no one race, it just isn’t a
racist term in the sense I’m using
it.)
These three rebels were very
meddlesome...one had the
audacity to speak out for better
visual aids...one worked actively
with the Moratorium efforts of
that Fall...they all were active in
the surrounding community.-.one
defended students charged with
conduct unbecoming to a Penn
State student...they also often
dabbled in the black-magic of
politics...they took time out for
students to just sit and rap with
them, as well as to spend their
own time helping students with
their studies...one created the
gravest error of keeping students
awake in class by maintaining
their interest and he actually
taught students to think...
Here you can at least get the
idea of the horrid things these
‘Three’ were up to. Anyone doing
these things couldn’t help but to
meet the end of every person who
dares to knock the system.
These ‘Three’ were condemned
in the democratic spirit of the
good ship Behrend...without a
trial they were sent into exile...
The passengers on the boat
rallied to the ‘Behrend Three’s’
cause when word of their plight
finally leaked out, but when the
time for action came all the loud
voiced supporters hid away in the
silence of their cabins below the
deck. Here they were safe and
sound and the ‘Three’ were left to
their fate.
As the ‘Three’ went down they
January 29, 1971
Editor
spoke last words to the
passengers- voice and'here are
some of their words, as valid now
as they were then...“...the ad
ministration is afraid of change
and will only allow those changes
or advancements which don’t
seriously affect anything... The
atmosphere' at Behrend allows so
much change as can occur
without affecting attitudes.
...Kochel administers a
junior college extremely well.
But Behrend can no longer afford
to be a junior college...ln regards
to the question of. .change
Spielmann spoke highly of
Kochel’s ability to keep things
stable and well-run for the past
twelve years, but he felt that
changes are now needed and that
by not changing with the times
that Kochel might find himself
subject to ‘a ruder shock
someday than that which I
received.’ ...Cohen feels that
Kochel’s role of ‘system, main
tenance’ was in keeping with his
goal of maintaining a status quo
in many areas...As it stands now
Kochel feels that students have
no right to know what is going
on...(Note at that time in Mr.
Kochel’s own words he felt “that
it is not in the genuine interests of
Behrend Campus for the situation
to be given any attention.” How
much has anything changed since
that statement?)... (Cohen
speaking), I don’t fear change or
revolution. I think it’s time that
society began to worry less about
its happiness and more about its
freedoms...”
...End of tale people, but
seriously, listen again; Mr.
Kochel is an expert at handling
you, at running you around, and
in general serving needs which do
not appear to be in our best in
terest.
Did you catch the SGA meeting
that the Advisory Board and Mr.
Kochel attended? If you did. you
saw how interested the ‘Advisors’
(sic) appeared. The one guy
seemed to be very involved with
checking out those present in the
middle - tion of the lecture
hall. Th-• Advisors -‘appeared
really touched by Jim Crawfords
excellent remarks...so touched
that they looked just barely
concerned with what was being
discussed.
Director Kochel appears to be
acting in our best interests also.
Right-out of Dean Lane’s office
direct and in person right to your
parents...one of the most slanted
letters explaining (putting down)
visitation that I have ever seen.
How’s that for a stab in the back
kiddies?
You work with the ever-ready
administration in drawing up the
visitation policy, follow all the
correct ‘diplomatic’ channels and
where does it get you?
“Everybody Knows This Is
Nowhere...”
If Director Irving Kochel
handles this situation in the
typical manner he will ignore any
actions we may decide to take.
By being unresponsive he will irk
some of us, but with a student
body such as Behrends the odds
are with Mr. Kochel that by
ignoring the problem it will go
away.
Don’t let things pass! Get it on
with some form of action.
Possibly the best form of action
would simply be for everyone to
hold visitation at designated
times and hold it steadily until,
the administration turns an at
tentive and responsive ear in our
direction.
All Power To The People!
Gary Thornbloom
Dear Sirs:
Over the past two years I have
listened to the Bleep. It’s a high
pitched electronic tone given off
on the hour for approximately
three to five seconds. I wanna
know what it is. and I want
everyone else to start listening.
You can hear it particularly well
in Perry Hall and the 0.8.
although I once Ijeard it on the -
soccer field. By the way, it ain’t
no pansy muffled, irritating,
- demeaning and abusive sound
like those put out by our clocks.
It’s the real thing! Brainwashing,
Mind-blowing, disoriehting-what
is the true nature of the bleep?
(Continued on Page 3)