- Men’s ice hockey dominates UConn 5-2
- Bobcats hold off Siena to maintain the top spot in the MAAC
- A perfect pair
- Student Media teams up against domestic violence
- The Clery Act
- University set to release new website
- Volleyball closes out home stand with win over Siena
- Putting the university to the test
- Men’s soccer beats Monmouth for fifth straight MAAC win
- Women’s volleyball picks up five set victory over Marist
Letter to the Editor regarding Greenstein’s resignation
|Editor’s Note: This is a Letter to the Editor submitted to The Chronicle in regards to Ross Greenstein’s resignation as SGA president in late November.
The Chronicle’s article on Greenstein’s resignation can be viewed here.
I am writing in response to an e-mail that I received first from Lynn Bushnell on Dec. 5 and then from Ross Greenstein on Dec. 12 in regard to the events that resulted in the resignation of Ross as SGA president.
First, I understand that I do not have the whole story of what occurred on that night. However, Ross does bring up some key points that many students have. It is fact that many of the students on campus are immature.
As a freshman, I lived in Dana English Hall and every Thursday night the boys on the second floor felt it necessary to pull the railings off the wall. Should every student in Dana English Hall be held responsible for the stupidities of the few?
Although the events that occurred in Greenstein’s room are under different circumstances, the mere fact that Greenstein’s roommates admitted to the fact that they were responsible for the mess and that Greenstein had nothing to do with it shows the steps that Residential Life took to punish the room as a whole was immature on their part. Why should an individual be responsible for the actions of others in the room?
Another concern of mine is the fact that this is getting so much attention. Greenstein, who is innocent of the charges brought against his room, has been forced to resign from his position as SGA president almost immediately for a relatively insignificant violation.
However, the basketball players that allegedly sexually assaulted the young lady are able to continue attending classes until their judicials, which have been pushed back repeatedly. One player has even been allowed to continue playing on the team.
Why is a huge violation, not only of the school but for the state, allowed to be postponed whereas a small violation is taken so seriously?
It is the job of the university to make EVERY student feel safe at this school. Knowing that playing a sport at this school allows for the immunity of the policies of the university is not very reassuring to those of us that do not play a sport.
What would have happened if those basketball players had raped that girl? Would the university still take the same actions that they are now – deferring the suspension of the players? Unfortunately, I would have to say that this would probably be true.
These two situations show that the university cares only about the money they are making by putting the fans in the seats. If the university chooses to continue using the current judicial system of holding all responsible for the actions of one, then shouldn’t the entire basketball team be held responsible for the actions of the two players?
The response to the above question is absurd, but that is exactly the steps that have been taken against Greenstein.