Students using room windows as space to decorate won’t be able to anymore after a display ban was issued for all campus residence halls Sept. 29.
Resident advisors and apartment coordinators advised students the week of Oct. 1, that any posters or decorations visible to the public must be taken down according to a policy amendment. The previous policy allowed students to have objects in windows as long as it was appropriate, but Director of Residence Life Aaron Macke said without a defined standard of appropriateness, conflicts arose.
“We decided to just take away the grey area and decide that windows are windows, not display boards. They let light in and that’s it,” Macke said. “Students have always been pretty good about it, but it takes away the dispute and makes everything simple.”
Macke also said this isn’t the first time Residence Life has asked students to take down window displays.
“(We) have had to go to students and ask them to take down the wine bottles in the window or the flattened beer 24 pack and take it down,” Macke said.
Though the change was not solely based on political banners, Macke said the increase in campaign material was a motivating factor in changing the policy.
“The time of the year caused me to look at this closer,” Macke said. “We have had signs that are politically motivated that we’ve asked students to take down, and they’ve all been accommodating as long as everyone’s playing by the same rules.”
Students have also complained about odd signs and mannequins placed in apartment and suite windows, and this measure would eliminate them. Anyone displaying content visible to the public will be asked to remove the it, and resident advisors are responsible for making sure it stays down.
The only campus residence buildings not affected by the change are the St. John Vianney and St. Paul seminaries. The Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis lease the two seminary buildings, so they do not fall under Residence Life jurisdiction.
Sophomore Rachel Nielsen said that the ban is a nuisance and that Residence Life should allow students to convey their views.
“I think empty bottles would be inappropriate regardless of the age, but I don’t see a problem with political campaign signs,” Nielsen said. “People should be allowed to express their opinions freely.”
Sophomore Angie Hasek said that she understands the adaptation, but she was frustrated with the the abrupt change and the message’s delivery, especially when her political sign had to come down.
“I didn’t see the note on Saturday night, but my roommate told me that the hall director came around and told her to take down my sign,” Hasek said. “I’m not upset with St. Thomas, but what made me really upset was that I don’t think that a sign in a dorm would lead anyone to believe that that’s what the university would uphold.”
Anastasia Straley can be reached at stra0669@stthomas.edu.
What about Christmas decorations?!
Anyone else remember the Paul Giamatti head in Brady? CLASSIC.
Communism…. first sign of communism :)
(@BW): Communism? Seriously, unless you’re being sarcastic, it appears you have little knowledge about communism, much as the seemingly-related word “socialism” gets bandied about as a catch-phrase to intimidate and obfuscate. Or are such impositions of University rules as “separate mens’ & womens’ dorms” or “no smoking in buildings” a form of communism? Maybe “paying tuition before receiving grade credit” is communism, too. Granted, the University is side-stepping the campaign advertizing question, but in the name of polity and decorum, such is the right & duty of its officials.
@ Don. I defiantly agree with Ben on this one. This rule change is definitely a sign that the University is heading down a terrible path that will ultimately lead to communism. I cant imagine what they are going to do next!!! God Help us! :)
* I definitely agree with Ben on this one.
I’m going to be blunt here, this is a load of something sinister. First of all, if this is in regards to campaign signage, this small amount of space is that student’s home. For at least this year of their life, that square footage and window space are all they have. If they, in this once-every-four-years show of political fervor, decide they wish to advocate a politician they should be able to at their place of residence. Second, you are removing vital flavor from campus. The Pikachu Dorm from Cretin a few years back? The Rage-Face Corner of Ireland? The sign in Dowling telling the Upper Quad that they are loved?
These kids are paying hand over fist to live here (PSA: Off-campus is cheaper.). This is their only home – they should be allowed to express themselves accordingly. I understand the concern with “inappropriate” signage – alcohol containers, hate-messages, etc. But I think, in our thoroughly reasonable campus atmosphere, we have been able to weed these out for years. I see no reason that this policy is so suddenly unsatisfactory.
I am highly disappointed in this decision and I hope to see plenty of disobedience and at least a little public outcry.
(@Don and Ben) Not necessarily communism, just totalitarianism rule, which this school has been enforcing and reenforcing since day 1 so it should come as no surprise. With things such unlocked tuition prices and public safety opening dorm rooms and waking up drunk sleeping students (which happened to me) it comes as no surprise they wouldn’t want any sort of individualism expressed in any sort of way, Im just happy they dont make me wear khakis everyday.
also moped parking
Jordan hit the nail on the head
Sad to see St. Thomas making this decision, but Jordan has the best point in this thread (off-campus is cheaper…. Way cheaper).
I can’t help but feel that this is a thinly veiled attempt to stifle any non-Neinstadt approved political signage regarding a certain issue. Way to be, St. Thomas. Way to be.
So St. Thomas once again tries to silence controversy and ends up creating more in the process. It’s comforting to know that some things never change.
Ben,
Don’t listen to Don. HE CLEARLY doesn’t know what communism is or has never been to China in the 80’s.
Fact 1:
Clearly none of you understand rules and regulations that non-profit organizations and institutions have to follow in terms of political impartiality… To display anything of a political nature can put those organizations/institutions at risk for losing their status in regards to their tax classification, deductible donations, etc… The University of St. Thomas has a tax-exempt, non-profit status, so clearly it makes sense why political ads shouldn’t be allowed in windows.
Fact 2:
The University of St. Thomas is private property, and as a resident of their property, you agree (if you would actually read what you are signing when you elect to live on campus) to forgo some of your rights. St. Thomas and the Residence Life Department are well within their means to tell you what you can and can’t do in regards to their property. If you don’t like it, move off campus, it’s that simple.
Is it that hard to think through things and form an actual, intelligent opinion on an issue?
Well said, Landon.