Quantcast The State Hornet
College Media Network

Get macromedia Flash Player

Faculty targeted

Abstract:
Controversy surrounds a letter e-mailed by a Sacramento State student that targetted professors for their support on Proposition 8, the measure that banned same-sex marriage in California....

  • Displaying 1 - 16 of 16

Brian San Diego

posted 12/03/08 @ 1:58 AM PST

Excellent Savino. If that instructor feels like he has a sign on his head that says gay hater, then he obviously IS ashamed of his own actions. There is a reason why campaign donations are made public. There are always consequences to our actions. I applaud Savino for his committment to equality for the LGBT community. There will be more like Savino. Just wait and see. Good job buddy!
Post a reply to this comment

Stephen Schwichow

posted 12/03/08 @ 9:33 AM PST

I give my full support to Daniel Savino for confronting bigotry at the source. I gave money to the No on 8 campaign and if someone wishes to take me to task, they are welcome to. I am not ashamed of my contribution nor am I afraid of the whole world knowing.

If people feel ashamed or embarassed that their contribution to Yes on 8 is now publically aknowledged beyond the Secretary of State's website, then that says a lot in and of itself.

If one is not embarassed, then there should be no reaction, one way or the other, to having others aware of the contribution. If they're not embarassed, then they should be proud of the fact that they put their money where their beliefs are. I am and did!

However, if they are embarassed, then I must ask "why?"
Post a reply to this comment

Michael Fitzgerald

posted 12/03/08 @ 10:39 AM PST

And by publishing this very long story, the State Hornet has now taken an incident that is several weeks old (and nearly forgotten) and brought it to the attention of the entire campus - at least that portion that reads the State Hornet.
Post a reply to this comment

Mandy Partlow

posted 12/04/08 @ 10:21 PM PST

[QUOTE id="015309fc-41e1-4aa1-8d3d-2ecf13aee757"]And by publishing this very long story, the State Hornet has now taken an incident that is several weeks old (and nearly forgotten) and brought it to the attention of the entire campus - at least that portion that reads the State Hornet.[/QUote/]

It is far from forgotten!
Post a reply to this comment

Elizabeth Rowell

posted 12/03/08 @ 2:23 PM PST

I applaud Savino's letter in that it eloquently asks Prop 8 supporters why they support dicrimination. I read the letter and in my opinion it never once took on a hateful tone, instead it poured respect and curiousity as to why this battle is even a public debate that people vote on.

I question, though, why no one was featured in the article who supported Savino. I understand that the professors had to be interviewed but then to only talk to students and fellow professors who disapproved of his actions speak of nothing more than a bias from the Hornet.

Like Savino said, this isn't a witch-hunt. If one firmly stands behind their beliefs and the contributions that they give in support of their beliefs then this letter would have not been a front-page feature.

If some homophobe wanted to confront me about opposing Prop 8 I would have no problem standing up to them and backing my beliefs....cowering behind your hate professors?
Post a reply to this comment

Randy Auer

posted 12/03/08 @ 5:36 PM PST

I am not certain that the previous posters supporting Savino's methods understand why pressuring someone about political contributions is a bad thing.

I could write about reversing this situation and use an example of a church sending out an email to denouce the 'vile supporters of sin' who voted against Prop 8 (or whatever church rhetoric you'd like to insert there), which might well shame and humiliate some people in their religious social circles, but should there really be a need? Should I -really- have to write out that example for others to examine this action from multiple angles and understand how ridiculous this action was?

Savino's letter SAID it was about an exchange, not a witch hunt but a respectful exchange, of ideas/information. The result of the action does not support his words. Speaking with the individuals would have been easy; instead he chose to speak "at" them while speaking "to" the media. That was his real audience: the media. It seems to be rather petty and mean-spirited and makes him look like a jerk.

Wait, you say, why does it make him look bad and why is pressuring someone about a vote bad? Here is why. Because attempts to legislate love- and that is what defining marriage as only a pairing of a male and a female is, legislating love- seem sourced in intolerance, lack of respect and deception. Savino adopted these very qualities in his letter: Intolerance for the choices and opinions of others, lack of respect for the opinions and views of others, and a deceptive difference between his stated intentions in the letter and his actions in sending it.

If a child acted like that, we'd put him in a corner and tell him that two wrongs don't make a right. Anyone who thinks that Prop 8 passed because of deception in advertising and misstated facts would be hypocritical in their support of Savino's actions.

The fact that this story even ran in the Hornet is shameful. I don't think I can be convinced that members of the Hornet staff did not see Savino's rather obvious intention of directing his letter to the media, and yet the Hornet was only too willing to pick up his letter and make it a front page story while burying the paper's own disclaimer and condemnation much further in. Doesn't look very professional to me.
Post a reply to this comment

Sheryl Stoneking

posted 12/04/08 @ 8:26 AM PST

Would this have been printed if Prop 8 had not passed? I don't think so! I supported Prop 8 by volunteering around my neighborhood and I am proud that I stood up for what I believe! I voted YES and would do so again and again!! I don't hate homosexuals - I just don't agree with homosexualality!! Who people choose to sleep with, or have a relationship with has NO baring on that person's job, education, or anything except their own lifestyle and personal relationships. I don't force my religious or political views on people, but if my vote just happens to be on the winning side then so be it! Don't force your lifestyle CHOICE on my political views! Prop 8 passed because people feel strongly about homosexuality not on the individuals who choose to practice it. Why don't people understand that not everyone has to accept other people's lifestyle choices? The vote is in, TWICE now! Anyone rememer Prop 22? Life is about choices and accepting those choices. I don't know when people started being afraid of their own beliefs and allowing others to FORCE their beliefs on them, but I know one thing and that is I won't be bullied anymore. My voice will not be silenced because someone doesn't like it. I will stand for what I believe in - be it political, religious, moral or ethical! My voice will be heard and no longer will I sit on the sidelines while others whine and complain after the fact. Those teachers - NO! THOSE INDIVIDUALS should be proud of their choice to not let their voice be silenced! Homosexuals are yelling and screaming and marching for their belief and choice of lifestyle... SO I wil stand and calmly stick to my beliefs and I will not allow the yelling, screaming or WHINING to drown out my VOICE!
Post a reply to this comment

Nadya

posted 12/04/08 @ 6:01 PM PST

Originally posted by

Sheryl Stoneking

 Would this have been printed if Prop 8 had not passed? I don't think so! I supported Prop 8 by volunteering around my neighborhood and I am proud that I stood up for what I believe! I voted YES and would do so again and again!! I don't hate homosexuals - I just don't agree with homosexualality!! Who people choose to sleep with, or have a relationship with has NO baring on that person's job, education, or anything except their own lifestyle and personal relationships. I don't force my religious or political views on people, but if my vote just happens to be on the winning side then so be it! Don't force your lifestyle CHOICE on my political views! Prop 8 passed because people feel strongly about homosexuality not on the individuals who choose to practice it. Why don't people understand that not everyone has to accept other people's lifestyle choices? The vote is in, TWICE now! Anyone rememer Prop 22? Life is about choices and accepting those choices. I don't know when people started being afraid of their own beliefs and allowing others to FORCE their beliefs on them, but I know one thing and that is I won't be bullied anymore. My voice will not be silenced because someone doesn't like it. I will stand for what I believe in - be it political, religious, moral or ethical! My voice will be heard and no longer will I sit on the sidelines while others whine and complain after the fact. Those teachers - NO! THOSE INDIVIDUALS should be proud of their choice to not let their voice be silenced! Homosexuals are yelling and screaming and marching for their belief and choice of lifestyle... SO I wil stand and calmly stick to my beliefs and I will not allow the yelling, screaming or WHINING to drown out my VOICE!


I'm a Mexican-American who is currently dating a white person. There are still people who disagree with interracial dating and marriage (and anti-miscegenation laws are largely off the books in most states. I believe it was Alabama that had it in the books until the 1990s and they voted it out by a small margin). If I was living before Loving v. Virginia should I have listened to the majority of people who would say my relationship with a white man is an abomination unto God? Should I have listened to the logic that "God put different races on different continents and therefore should marry within the race?"

Marriage is a social construct and a legal contract between two people and the state. Not God. In Las Vegas a person can get married by an Elvis impersonator in 5 minutes and get a divorce as soon as they want to. Marriage is not sacred, nor has it ever been, unless you consider a transfer of property from a father to the suitor "sacred."
Post a reply to this comment

ELA

posted 12/04/08 @ 6:12 PM PST

Originally posted by

Sheryl Stoneking

 Would this have been printed if Prop 8 had not passed? I don't think so! I supported Prop 8 by volunteering around my neighborhood and I am proud that I stood up for what I believe! I voted YES and would do so again and again!! I don't hate homosexuals - I just don't agree with homosexualality!! Who people choose to sleep with, or have a relationship with has NO baring on that person's job, education, or anything except their own lifestyle and personal relationships. I don't force my religious or political views on people, but if my vote just happens to be on the winning side then so be it! Don't force your lifestyle CHOICE on my political views! Prop 8 passed because people feel strongly about homosexuality not on the individuals who choose to practice it. Why don't people understand that not everyone has to accept other people's lifestyle choices? The vote is in, TWICE now! Anyone rememer Prop 22? Life is about choices and accepting those choices. I don't know when people started being afraid of their own beliefs and allowing others to FORCE their beliefs on them, but I know one thing and that is I won't be bullied anymore. My voice will not be silenced because someone doesn't like it. I will stand for what I believe in - be it political, religious, moral or ethical! My voice will be heard and no longer will I sit on the sidelines while others whine and complain after the fact. Those teachers - NO! THOSE INDIVIDUALS should be proud of their choice to not let their voice be silenced! Homosexuals are yelling and screaming and marching for their belief and choice of lifestyle... SO I wil stand and calmly stick to my beliefs and I will not allow the yelling, screaming or WHINING to drown out my VOICE!


just because a majority voted for prop 8 to pass doesn't make it right. When the jim crowe laws passed during that time did that make it right? did segregation laws make it right? All of these laws have passed just because a majority of people voted for these laws to pass. just think about it.
Post a reply to this comment

Frankie

posted 12/04/08 @ 12:35 PM PST

Mr. Savino is to be commended. Not only did he show a huge amount of bravery for stepping out and calling these professors to task, but he also showed the kind of voice, leadership and thinking outside of the box that should be the hallmark of a graduate student. Mr. Savino spoke up when professors were silent and had the courage to challenge professors to a debate, who showed by their refusal that they are not of the same caliber of courage and dedication that Mr. Savino is.
These four professors not only voted against their fellow students and faculty who are gay, but made a public statement by donating money to the H8 campaign. Now they are crying foul that they are revealed and called to task for their discriminatory actions?
Would not they have been called to task for sexism, or racism or other statements of zenophobia? But somehow homophobia should be excused with a nod and a wink.
I hope students and faculty have the courage to stand behind Mr. Savino. I hope that these professors classes are boycotted, not only by GLBT students, but also by students who believe that discrimination has no place on campus. I also hope that faculty and staff have the same courage that Mr. Savino has demonstrated and stand up to these professors and call them to task.
They made their bed by putting their homophobia on public record, and should now be examined and critiqued by the campus community for their actions. There is simply no place on campus for discrimination of any kind and homophobia is no more excuseable then racism, sexism or other forms of bigotry.
Post a reply to this comment

Rafael Zaychenko

posted 12/05/08 @ 8:16 AM PST

Originally posted by

Frankie

 Mr. Savino is to be commended. Not only did he show a huge amount of bravery for stepping out and calling these professors to task, but he also showed the kind of voice, leadership and thinking outside of the box that should be the hallmark of a graduate student. ...
They made their bed by putting their homophobia on public record, and should now be examined and critiqued by the campus community for their actions. There is simply no place on campus for discrimination of any kind and homophobia is no more excusable then racism, sexism or other forms of bigotry.


Savino's actions in no way can be considered "brave" or selfless. In the halls of academia, where this individual currently devotes his time, opposition to prop 8 is vehement, blind, and hateful. The fear of various faculty members who supported Pro 8 is justifiable, since those who surround them are very likely to not only disagree with their views, but are also likely to castigate them for their opposition to gay marriage. Savino's actions constitute a witch hunt of those who oppose his views (which are out of line with the vast majority of Americans).Is this not an example of bigotry and arrogance of the highest order?

According to a recent vote of the people, especially the African American community and Latinos, state prohibition of gay marriage does not constitute bigotry (In one of the most Liberal states in the nation). Latinos and African Americans were the chief supporters of Prop 8, despite being the primary victims of bigotry and racism in the United States. Does this not tell us about the nature of gay marriage; that it is not fundamental right? Yet, opponents of Prop 8 vehemently attack it's supporters, despite being on the losing side of all gay marriage initiatives by the people. Their actions constitute bigotry, the views of those who supported Prop 8 do not.
Post a reply to this comment

Olive Yoo

posted 12/04/08 @ 10:36 PM PST

STUDENT TARGETED BY HORNET!!! Savino should sue the Hornet for publishing his letter, presuming he didn't give them permission. And where does Nick Burnett get the stones to defame Savino by implying his sending email was somehow criminal behavior? Are The Hornet and Nick "targeting" the grad student? Is it being done to "embarrass or humiliate" him? What a coup for free speech!

The Hornet's calling of Savino to public account for his political views is far more contemptible than anything their 'target' appears to have done.

The four 'yes on 8' faculty members chose a public forum to exercise their free-speech right. They spoke on the record. They spoke in $, expecting silence in rebuttal.

Savino sent an email to the four public employees who so publicly lobbied to change state law. He probably sent it to their public .edu email addresses. And while there is no 'federal requirement' that the free speech of one be countered by the free speech of another, Savino seems to be on pretty firm ground even if he did send a copy of the letter to certain friends, neighbors and other openly published email accounts.

Did The Hornet have a right to reprint Savino's letter? Was it sent to The Hornet? I doubt his letter would qualify as a public document. Where was Nick's letter - it was paraphrased and eluded to - why not print it in its entirety? Maybe Nick didn't give The Hornet his permission to do so. Or maybe the paper is just a wee bit more deferential to the chair of the communications department than it is courteous toward some student who's drawn the man's ire.

Anyway, our four lilly-livered political activists should have remained silent about their views if they were so afraid emails could be sent to or about them. Did they not realize their dollars might be confronted with words? Oh, the horror! Boo-hoo.

(And for Andre, that theater guy resigned - he wasn't fired - you have nothing to fear but ideas and words. Unfortunately, we can't say the same for some in Italy, huh? I wonder how you might have voted on those gypsy initiatives. Wouldn't it be a shame if California were to go fascisti too?)
Post a reply to this comment

Andy

posted 12/06/08 @ 11:39 AM PST

Originally posted by

Olive Yoo

 STUDENT TARGETED BY HORNET!!! Savino should sue the Hornet for publishing his letter, presuming he didn't give them permission. And where does Nick Burnett get the stones to defame Savino by implying his sending email was somehow criminal behavior? Are The Hornet and Nick "targeting" the grad student? Is it being done to "embarrass or humiliate" him? What a coup for free speech!

The Hornet's calling of Savino to public account for his political views is far more contemptible than anything their 'target' appears to have done.

The four 'yes on 8' faculty members chose a public forum to exercise their free-speech right. They spoke on the record. They spoke in $, expecting silence in rebuttal.

Savino sent an email to the four public employees who so publicly lobbied to change state law. He probably sent it to their public .edu email addresses. And while there is no 'federal requirement' that the free speech of one be countered by the free speech of another, Savino seems to be on pretty firm ground even if he did send a copy of the letter to certain friends, neighbors and other openly published email accounts.

Did The Hornet have a right to reprint Savino's letter? Was it sent to The Hornet? I doubt his letter would qualify as a public document. Where was Nick's letter - it was paraphrased and eluded to - why not print it in its entirety? Maybe Nick didn't give The Hornet his permission to do so. Or maybe the paper is just a wee bit more deferential to the chair of the communications department than it is courteous toward some student who's drawn the man's ire.

Anyway, our four lilly-livered political activists should have remained silent about their views if they were so afraid emails could be sent to or about them. Did they not realize their dollars might be confronted with words? Oh, the horror! Boo-hoo.

(And for Andre, that theater guy resigned - he wasn't fired - you have nothing to fear but ideas and words. Unfortunately, we can't say the same for some in Italy, huh? I wonder how you might have voted on those gypsy initiatives. Wouldn't it be a shame if California were to go fascisti too?)


I wonder if you're blind or simply retarded? The picture that accompanied the story was OF him! Do you think he would agree to that if he opposed the Hornet running an article about him? I'm sure he was glad for the publicity. And an email to an employee of CSUS (who would be considered a limited public figure and who is paid by the government) is considered public documents. Do we not search through teachers emails when they have committed a crime? He could sue for nothing. Go back to college idiot.

Furthermore, the State Hornet is a student run and student funded newspaper. They are under no obligation to anyone in any department. They also do not answer to any head of the school, therefore it's safe to say they are not worried about being honest or showing their opinions. Read some archived articles, you may agree.
Post a reply to this comment

Scott Speer

posted 12/08/08 @ 9:17 PM PST

McCarthyism? Since when is it right to promote witch-hunting?
Post a reply to this comment

Frank Loret de Mola

posted 12/10/08 @ 6:45 AM PST

1.) This letter, if not a witch hunt in content, was orchestrated to the public much in the same way as a witch hunt.

2.) I don't question the content. I hold its truth to be self-evident. Savino's position is correct. But methodology matters, especially in academia; he went about this all wrong.

3.) Someone above insinuated that since blacks and hispanics, in general, supported Prop 8 that Prop 8 is not discriminatory. The warrant here was that people who are discriminated against are able to recognize discrimination and are incapable of discriminating. That's almost as bad as the Douglas Adams monster that can't see you if you can't see it, and just as improbable to survive the nature of causality. Hindus/Muslims during Partition, the initial weeks of rioting following the end of Apartheid, the Rwandan genocide, the murder of Japanese citizens at the hands of other far east asian nations post World War II can qualify as some examples where we see such a logic of victimization utterly fail.

How many minority groups supported Japanese internment?

How many non-Roman citizens supported the crucifixion of Jesus?

In a caste system, aren't all members of non-upper crust castes discriminated against, yet don't they all still discriminate on those lower on the ladder?

Isn't this what they mean when they say, "Keep the poor occupied with the poor?"


4.) Church and State should be mutually exclusive. If marriage is the Church's word, then it must be removed from our constitution and our state practices altogether, not defined to deny a group of people the possibilities of receiving equal tax benefits, visitation rights and rights of inheritance under the law.

5.) When churches around the country annulled divorces as freely as the state, they had already lost control of their word. The answer is not to make divorce illegal or prohibited, it is to let churches marry and states issue orders of civil union.

6.) If you want to be declared husband and wife, that's what church is for. Don't like Party A. and Party B.? Think it reads like paperwork from the DMV? Well, according to the state, your marriage ain't so different. It's an official document. "You may now kiss the bride" in front of your friends and family in the presence of God. God does not expect you to file your tax papers as bride and groom...give to Caesar what is Caesar's.

7.) An amendment in the California constitution specifically goes out of its way to isolate rights away from a minority group. Publius, Madison, Hamilton...these guys warned us: don't let the majority take away the rights of a minority, that is the nature of oppression. We have done that in that document that we, as Americans, hold sacred.

8.) I would like to use point 8.) to congratulate Filipinos on their collective victory over Oscar de la Hoya this weekend. Manny Paquiao is one of the most thrilling performers I've ever watched, and I'm so glad the world now views him as the pound for pound greatest, especially with how much I LOATHE Mayweather's "Hide and peck" style of "fighting." Paquiao has the chance to be amongst the greats, while Floyd, because of his shelled-turtle style and the utter banality of his brand of fisticuffs, will never in my mind be anything but the "goodest fighter" of our generation.

9.) If the issue of women's suffrage were put to a vote in 1919, when would women have gotten the right to vote? And wouldn't women have been pissed off too? And don't you think women were picketing and protesting for their right to vote?

10.) Let us be thankful that this is the worst retaliation we're seeing. Remember your past, America, and how much blood was spilt in those last fights for rights...and recognize that we can still learn the philosophical lessons from the past so as not to continue to confuse our personal morals with the morality that befits a free, just nation. That we do not need to await the next Matthew Shepard incident before we REMEMBER that our fellow brothers and sisters are human beings, and United States citizens.
Post a reply to this comment

ARC_Student

posted 12/27/08 @ 3:10 AM PST

Savino is just trying to scare people into not donating next time. A typical fascist, blackmailing tactic. Whatever happened to "tolerance", Savino?
Post a reply to this comment
  • Displaying 1 - 16 of 16

Post Your Comment

  • NOTE: Email address will not be published

Type your comment below (html not allowed)

  I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Get macromedia Flash Player

Advertisement

Print Edition

Online Features Section

Handling a breakup
Online Dating
Interview with Andrew Sean Greer
Hollywood Buzz No. 5 - The Oscar results
Hollywood Buzz No. 4 - The 81st Oscars
Sac in Stereo No. 19 - What makes a great singer?
Hollywood Buzz No. 4 - Classic Christmas Movies
Sac in Stereo No. 18 - Haven't I heard this song before?
Sexcapades No. 7 - Dating your co-worker or your boss
Hollywood Buzz No. 3 - Romantic Comedies
Sac in Stereo No. 17 - Eclectic additions for any record collection
Sexcapades No. 6 - Why men and women date
Sac in Stereo No. 16 - Dillinger Four CD review, worldwide Thriller dance, Prince's secret message
Sac in Stereo No. 15 - Mixtapes and D.Willz live in the studio
Sac in Stereo No. 14 - Soundtracks for the Obama and McCain campaigns
Hollywood Buzz No. 2 - Indie and DVD gems
Sac in Stereo No. 13 - Don't call it a comeback! Should Metallica, AC/DC, Journey and LL Cool J stay or go?
Hollywood Buzz No. 1 - Summer Blockbusters
Sac in Stereo No. 12 - We (almost) interview Kanye, Justin and Amy Winehouse
Sexcapades No. 5 - Going for home base on the first date; avoiding psychos
Sac in Stereo No. 11 - Turntablism v. mashups; Coachella recap
Sac in Stereo No. 10 - Mariah Carey: bigger than the Beatles?
Sac in Stereo No. 9 - Hip-hop meets rock culture; interview and freestlye with rapper D.Willz
Sac in Stereo No. 8 - The state of the Sacramento scene (with KWOD's Andy Hawk)
Sac in Stereo No. 7 - The most overrated artists
Sexcapades No. 4 - The safe Spring-Break hookup
Sac in Stereo No. 5 - Guilty pleasures from the CD bin
Celebrity Wrap-Up No. 3 - The ugliest, most drugged-up celebrities we love
Sac in Stereo No. 4 - The top artists to watch for in 2008
Sexcapades No. 3 - Sleeping together without staying together
Sac In Stereo No. 3 - The worst albums from our favorite artists
Celebrity Wrap-Up No. 2 - Who was hottest at the Oscars?
Sac in Stereo No. 2 - Is music more accessible in this generation?
Celebrity Wrap-Up No. 1 - Does Britney Spears smell; exploiting celebrities' children
Sac in Stereo No. 1 - Why form a side project? Can local musicians even make money?
Sexcapades No. 2 - Proper anal etiquette; watching porn as a couple
Reel Talk No. 7 - Oscarbation
Reel Talk: No. 6 - The dying drive-in
Sexcapades podcast: Hornet relationships and sex: No. 1
Reel Talk: Episode 5 - That annoying guy in the theater
Sex Ed(itors) - Episode 4: Mistakes women make in bed
Reel Talk: Episode 3 - Who's hot in film?
Sex Ed(itors): Episode 3 - Kinky relationships
Rapping with Kingspade's Johnny Richter
Sex Ed(itors): Episode 2 - Fetishes
Reel Talk: Episode 2 - Cult Classics
Reel Talk: Episode 1 - Summer movies
Sex Ed(itors) : Episode 1 - Oral Sex
Local reggae artists sound off
The Dimes to flip in for nooner
Jello to slide into Union Ballroom on Monday
Mayday Parade interview
Lovedrug interview
Red Jumpsuit Apparatus interview
Select a podcast from the above list

Advertisement