Discussion with McCulloh leaves student disappointed and unsatisfied

In my four years at Gonzaga, I'll admit that I've developed a reputation as a "crazy liberal hippie" and in accordance with this moniker, you might guess my stance on the recent upheaval over the "Vagina Monologues."  I feel strongly that this production should be performed on Gonzaga's campus, that it would benefit our community on many levels, and that any ban on the work reflects poorly on our University and runs counter the core values we claim to espouse.  I could list a plethora of arguments for this cause, but that's not why I'm writing this letter.

I left last Tuesday's discussion with the president regarding the "Vagina Monologues" disappointed and frustrated — not because Dr. Thayne McCulloh's stance remained unchanged or because of his extensive prevarication, but because of how inarticulately and disrespectfully many of my colleagues presented and shared opinions. 

We can all agree that succeeding a president with the cult-following Fr. Spitzer had places McCulloh in a tenuous position.  To immediately overturn one of Fr. Spitzer's most polemical decisions would create an enormous conservative backlash under the guise of loyalty, ultimately hindering the long-term liberalization Gonzaga needs.  I believe Dr. McCulloh wants to work for positive changes within this University, but if he attempts to do so without the support of the Board, his detractors will pull the "interim" card — a semantic title that affects the presidency only by sapping its glory, not by reducing the stresses and responsibilities of the position.

What I've extracted from his equivocation is that perhaps we can make the Board believe it was their idea to lift this ban.  But the moment he makes a public statement of such a plan, it loses efficacy.  So, until the Board meets, be patient with Dr. McCulloh.  And before you start hurling personal accusations of misogyny, consider that perhaps he is approaching this dilemma with prudence, rather than sexism.  Maybe I'm wrong.  Maybe deferring to the Board is a delay tactic, one big façade of appeasement and false hope.  We won't know until we hear the Board's decision and Dr. McCulloh's response.  But in the meantime, personal attacks will accomplish nothing. 

This is not an enjoinder to sit down and shut up.  And this is not to say that you shouldn't sign letters, you shouldn't send e-mails, you shouldn't protest, and you shouldn't attend public forums like the one conducted last Tuesday.  (Believe me, I'm all about protesting.)  I simply believe that doing these things intelligently and respectfully will be far more effective. 

And so, looking back on last Tuesday's discussion, I implore you all: if you have not read the "Vagina Monologues," if you are too angry to engage in respectful and rational dialogue, or if you are more interested in publicly misusing lofty vocabulary than in verbalizing coherent and concise arguments, then please do not attempt to be a spokesperson for our cause.  By doing so, you weaken our arguments, you hinder our cause, and you make it far less likely that we will see the "Vagina Monologues" performed on this campus — this spring or ever.