H -°, L 6° | Tomorrow: 
H 18°, L 6°The CW is a fledgling UHF television network that crutches heavily on teenage superhero angst and 140-pound aspiring supermodels. The CWC, or the Campus Women’s Center, is a fledgling registered student organization that crutches heavily on cries of viewpoint neutrality violations in hopes of restoring a greater percentage of its funding. Both should be ignored.
Unfortunately, while the joys of expanded cable make avoiding The CW as natural as “enhancement” supplements, the CWC, thanks in large part to the continuous shenanigans of the Associated Students of Madison, is in no rush to slide down the dial.
Last Wednesday, ASM Student Council voted to cut CWC’s Operations Grant from $33,100 down to $15,376, under the notion that the original budget covered money for services, not essential operational services. Operations Grants, after all, exist to provide funds for day-to-day business that is essential to the group’s existence, not paint supplies.
Interestingly, CWC was the only group whose budget fell to the additional scrutiny of Student Council. Both Rep. Max Love and CWC Program Coordinator Tina Trevi�o-Murphy, never hesitant to flail “wolf,” surmised that the only reason Student Council revisited CWC’s numbers was the sheer size of its grant.
Well, duh. Ever since Deepthroat taught a nation to “follow the money” — and probably well before that — we’ve been programmed to look at large numbers with a hint of scrutiny. At $33,100, CWC’s original budget accounted for nearly one-fourth of total Operations Grant allocations, and even at $15,376, it’s around double the size of the next largest grant. To suggest that amending CWC’s budget is biased, and not merely fiscally responsible, is quite a stretch.
Enter Tina Trevi�o-Murphy, who might as well be a taffy puller. Labeling the funding cut as a “misogynistic crusade,” Trevi�o-Murphy is arguing this action was nothing more than a furthering of Kurt Gosselin, Matt Manes and Matt Beemsterboer’s personal vendetta against CWC — and, one can only assume, every woman. Ever.
Of course, we heard similar viewpoint neutrality violation wails when Student Services Finance Committee gave CWC the funding ax last fall. But the bottom line here is that Operations Grant money cannot, by Finance Committee policy, be spent on supplies for “event oriented” usage, and the $15,376 the group received is there to ensure the group can simply keep its head above water. The supplies that were cut from the budget — including money for paint supplies, whistles and lube — don’t meet that standard.
CWC can always reapply for programming funds with SSFC next year. As long as it hires a financial coordinator next year who has some basic understandings of the application process for SSFC, it should have no problem getting refunded.
The Student Council session is over, so, with any luck, this is the last we’ll hear of this for a while. But while Trevi�o-Murphy sifts through the thesaurus finding new ways to say “injustice,” we’d like to simply offer her the words of someone she undoubtedly respects: “Grow up. You’ve created a horrible situation in which no one wins and all of campus loses. Congratulations.”
IP hash: 52326917
You guys are Assholes! I dont even care for Tina all that much, but you are asses! Way to go Badger Hearld, you’ve just wasted moments of my life with your bable.
… stuff like this is why i dont read small scale papers..
IP hash: 29d5335d
SMH, “bable” like your retort to the “Hearld” is why people don’t take online commenters seriously.
IP hash: 9634763f
Hey! Leave Tina out this. Fucking men…
IP hash: a5f8ec00
Ha.
IP hash: cd8be671
I’m severely disappointed in the Badger Herald for writing this article. For starters I don’t think making snide remarks about other students you do not like is the an ethical use of an editorial. Secondly, this editorial is just plain bad reporting.
The CWC applied for an operations grant, which is different than an events grant. The bylaws of ASM nor the rules of the Finance Committee do not specify that operations grant money cannot be spent on supplies. While there are restrictions on how the money is spent, if the organization can explain why the product is beneficial to the organization and it meets other requirements it should be included in the budget. For example, whistles are given to students to help protect them against sexual assault, which is one of the CWC’s main priorities. If a bylaw or rule exists that does not allow op grants to be used on supplies, then ASM and the Financial Committee needs to make that information public.
My last word on the subject is that I believe the Chair of the Finance Committee needs to stick with his committee’s decision even if he/she personally disagrees. The Finance Committee decided that the CWC op grant met the requirements and although Council members can disagree with the Finance Committee’s decision, the Finance Committee Chair should not. The Chair should represent the voice of the committee and I am disappointed that Matt Beemsterboer was unable to do that in the discussion of the CWC budget at the Student Council meeting.
IP hash: 7d38cfed
This is pretty harsh on Tina…
IP hash: 196d3c94
I think Tina opened herself for criticism when she libelously accused certain ASM people of misogyny
IP hash: 3b6a3cb5
I agree completely. If somebody like Trevino-Murphy lashes out at a group and accuses them of misogyny and illegal activities without any evidence to back it up, the media should be harsh.
IP hash: 85265cac
Maybe the misogyny was out of line, but she’s got six months worth of evidence that the major players have committed VPN violations and a complete disregard for their own procedures when it gets inconvenient.
IP hash: 59042b1d
Especially by calling her a stupid-head.
IP hash: c6eec3ce
A “fledgling student organization” ?
The Campus Women’s Center has been on campus since 1983. That’s older than even you, Smathers. Older even than your beloved ASM.
Fact check fail.
IP hash: 49534d27
Smathers beloved ASM? Do you read the Herald?
IP hash: 6919e998
Not only has the CWC been around since 1983(well before most of us on this campus were even born), the dialogue that took place in the student council meeting was not view point neutral by any means. The CWC was held up to a higher level of scrutiny than other groups. The CWC IS a GSSF funded organization this year and WILL be a GSSF funded organization in fiscal year 2012. It is no secret that the application was filled out wrong on the CWC’s end. Moreover it was only 1% of coordinators’ time that was being questioned. It isn’t that the CWC isn’t eligible, it is that they showed it poorly. And by the way, anyone else disturbed funding was cut for rape whistles during Sexual Assault Awareness Month. In my opinion, that is probably where the claim of misogyny is founded.
IP hash: 1e92e374
if members of groups could simply claim that they were eligible, i don’t think you’d ever see anyone that wasn’t, would you?
and you clearly dont know what viewpoint neutrality means so you should probably refrain from using big words before you hurt yourself.
IP hash: c11b69ce
The CWC was eligible last year, and the year before, and how many years after? Before you comment on the claims maybe you should visit the CWC or have been around during the SSFC eligibility hearing. The forms the CWC submitted were confusing (I read them and they really didn’t make sense), but once the forms are submitted there is no hope of amending them. Presentation of information is what the CWC got caught on. The history of the organization on this campus is a testament to its eligibility, so I wasn’t making a blind claim. Moreover, I will admit to not elaborating on the VPN violation, but saying the opposite of me doesn’t make you right anymore than it makes me wrong. Operations Grants are given to organizations are given on a different basis than GSSF funding. An organization that provides services to a limited amount of students is equally qualified as one that services the whole campus. However, that does not mean all groups deserve equal funding. A lacrosse budget will be small and in accordance with the organizations size. A group like the CWC that provides the range of services it does, necessarily will need more money to accommodate. That would be all things being equal. The debate in the meeting failed to take in to account that reality, and in fact, used the CWC’s current standing as GSSF against them. The money asked for was not for programs and the CWC is changing its structure to accommodate the limited funding. However, the counsel used the current structure against the org. That I am pretty sure is a VPN violations: using the views of the group (provide programs) against the group.
IP hash: fe64bd8e
yep, you clearly don’t have a good grasp on what youre talking about.
IP hash: 6919e998
this is a university right, maybe we should all take a step back and learn. you seem to think you’re enlightened. embark on the edification of all us who fail to grasp VPN. or do you not know and just feel like agitating by restating a negation of statements made by other?
IP hash: 9e712b95
Ed Board = Misogynists
See, I can play this game too.
IP hash: 8989c1a5
Is it really necessary to start every paragraph with a cringe worthy analogy?
IP hash: 384018f2
Back off of Tina. This is pathetic. She’s upset. She’s spent countless hours doing work for the Campus Women’s Center, and on top of that, countless hours fighting for funding. She’s clearly passionate about the issues the Campus Women’s Center was founded to address- thank God someone on this campus is. Maybe if the Badger Herald Editorial Board or a few ASM members cared a little more about the issues and a little less about playing face and putting others down to keep their ever important college hierarchy in place, we would have a better campus and actually be able to make progress as a student body.
And Tina, if you even bother reading this bs, here’s a quote from someone we all undoubtedly respect: “You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.”
IP hash: 6f377a49
I saw the editorializer on the bottom most left picture slink off the stage at the Anti-Semitism/Journalism ethics forum because he couldn’t take the heat. What a rube.
IP hash: 4acc80b2
This is absolutely ridiculous. It’s one thing to be harsh on actual news-based items, but the ed board is personally attacking Trevino-Murphy and that is absolutely unacceptable. Grow up and learn how to be a real reporter.
Let’s see what happened to the CWC: after being denied funding for a paper work error, they were denied the right to continue their essential services to half the campus. Now, I understand they messed up their paperwork. It was not acceptable. However, when it comes down to it the CWC was denied funding because providing childcare for student parents was not considered to be direct services to students. Oh, because you know going to school and paying $2,000 a month to childcare is so conceivable. Now, ASM decided to cut their budget AGAIN. During sexual assault awareness month, the CWC’s funding has been cut to the extent that they cannot provide rape whistles. What sort of message are we sending to our female students? That ASM doesn’t give a fuck if they are provided with a safe space, free latex-free condoms, rape whistles, and support? And to further reinforce this message, the Badger Herald really has the audacity to present a smear campaign as ‘news’?
Get some facts, kids. And then, maybe build a real argument instead of relying on cliches and catch phrases in order to try to promote an unbelievable message.
IP hash: a5f8ec00
Agreed.
IP hash: 19ba285f
why should my seg fees pay for someone’s child care?
IP hash: 6108dc3c
God forbid you ever have a child and can’t afford to go to school, have a job, and pay for daycare. Good luck with that one! Students should help fellow students whenever they can, so you can take your classist, social hierarchy-based views and shove it. Some people have kids and still want an education, and you can pay $3/year to help provide them with the opportunity to better themselves. A newly renovated rec space when we already have two perfectly functional facilities I can do without, but those students cannot do without childcare.
IP hash: fdae8d28
CCTAP.
IP hash: 6919e998
CCTAP is one service for student parents, but it is by no means a comprehensive or end all be all solution. Childcare is expensive and time consuming.
The CWC’s childcare services provide students who are parents an opportunity to have reliable child care from individuals sympathetic to the demands of academia. It also provides students who aren’t parents an opportunity to get involved in local and personal community service. It is students helping students. The connections are facilitated by the CWC. It is a resource the CWC provides and people depend on it in addition to CCTAP.
IP hash: 6919e998
It is part of the human condition to be dependent on others at points in our lives, and, moreover, to be vulnerably to dependency at all moments of our lives. Childhood is a vulnerability ALL humans are exposed to. To have adults in a society we necessarily must insure the care of children.
You were a kid once and someone took care of you, with help. Might not have been students, but there are many ways society as a whole “pays” for the caring of other people’s kids. (I’ll pass over my personal feelings at our societies inadequacies at this right now.) As a society we have some serious stake in helping each other succeed.
We are only as good as the weakest among us. Statistics prove that college increases chances for success and it is common knowledge that success breeds success. So if we want to continue to prosper as a nation we need our citizens to prosper. I will pay for the condoms that will keep you from repopulating, and I will gladly pay to help the mothers and fathers of this university better themselves and our nation as a whole.
IP hash: 8c41ab29
CWC would still be able to provide their babysitting service. Just create a volunteer base (seeing as I doubt they were being paid to babysit before) and go from there.
As for condoms? You can get them from Sex Out Loud, UHS, Planned Parenthood, and so many other places.
IP hash: 79f1d163
Nowhere besides the CWC offers free LATEXFREE condoms. I promise I know, considering I’m allergic to latex and polyurethane is expensive as shit.
IP hash: 9634763f
NOT TRUE! THEY HAVE THEM AT SEX OUT LOUD! THEY’RE SHINY AND GOLD! I AM SHOUTING!!! (Also, this ed board is a bunch of men…stupid, white men.)
IP hash: 71261be4
Except for the two women.
And Sean Kittridge.
IP hash: fdae8d28
What an interesting series of comments.
IP hash: 9397281b
I respect the Badger Herald Editorial Board, but singling out someone who expresses her opinion and flinging personal attacks at her is unacceptable. I realize that you criticized many of Tina’s ideas in this opinion piece, but the snide remarks were unnecessary.
IP hash: fdae8d28
Nothing she didn’t do first, it would seem.
IP hash: 6919e998
Delivery is definitely a discredit to this piece. Even in opinions, I expect less tabloid and greater adherence to … human decency? Wrong word … greater respect amongst peers.
IP hash: 73d12684
Did you read the LTE Tina wrote? Unfounded accusations of hatred against women because her group didn’t get everything it wanted. Where are all the comments defending the student council members who made the cuts from inappropriate accusations, etc?
IP hash: 4ea08677
Why can’t this editorial board ever have something nice to say?
IP hash: 19ba285f
They were held to a higher level of scrutiny because they were receiving 25% of the operation’s grant funds. Why the hell you believe that is fair to all of the other organizations on this campus is beyond me. Oh you that t-murph is passionate and blah blah blah, but you were the very same people calling NatUP supporters irrational and stupid for being passionate about what they believed in.
On a side note, I’m glad to see that their funding got cut. Hopefully that will appease all of the No New Seg Fees groups because this will help contain seg fees and make their increase less likely.
You guys (excuse me, guys and gals, wouldn’t want to upset any feminists) are so hypocritical that your presence on this campus is a joke.
IP hash: 6919e998
There is a difference between using student money to ensure students remain enrolled in university and using student money for a gym. There is also a difference between funding students helping students and the university leadership making up for neglecting to fundraise for a building job. The services provided by the CWC are in no way equatable to the services provided by the Nat. Moreover, the large budget is due to the wide user base (that being anyone in the whole campus who feels so inclined to walk to the 4th floor of the Union or attend any CWC sponsored events).
IP hash: 6919e998
Jokes are usually funny. I fail to see what is funny about a group that provides support services to sexual assault victims on this campus. Everyone/thing has flaws. Provide constructive criticism instead of dismissing with one hand everything a group the size of the CWC does. And to that note, support services for sexual assault victims is not the only thing the CWC does.
IP hash: 6919e998
People who care about things seldom “give-up.” You would think people would have come to accept the not giving up on the part of women by now… Women have been fighting in US since before the passing of the 19th amendment. Take a Gender and Women’s Studies course sometime and close your jaw. There is no need to have it gaping open at someone fighting tooth an nail to protect the Campus Women’s Center.
IP hash: 719f168e
This editorial is highly offensive, infantile, and disgraceful.
The way you so condescendingly and childishly equate CWC with something like CW is just absurd. Really… couldn’t you come up with anything more creative? Or remotely related? I mean not only is your attack on Tina and the CWC unprofessional, but its in fact just fucking stupid. What a way to waste your readers’ time with an unimaginative and stretched analogy that offers nothing. Next time just get to the fucking point.
Furthermore, what is with the ad hominem attack on Trevi�o-Murphy? Three of nine paragraphs in this excuse for an editorial consists of such nonsense. And that’s not including the introductory quips about the CW. You attack Tina for calling out bullshit when she sees it, but think about what that means. She’s representing a huge segment of this campus that is outraged. She and others are organizing and making their voices heard. This level of participation and engagement with student government should be encouraged not mocked. Their arguments should be given real thought and consideration not immediate dismissal. This Ed Board and the ASM/SSFC leadership have made their hostility toward the CWC clear, but the justification and reasoned support for such aggression remains cloudy.
With that said, Ed Board, I think you need to check yourself. Now maybe “misogynistic crusade” is a stretch. And maybe not (after all, at least on of these “crusaders” already has a track record of threatening female GSSF leadership). Either way I think we have an obvious case here of unchecked male privilege. We have a group of ASM members who are leading a charge to cut all spending that they themselves feel is unnecessary. Great. The problem arises when this group lacks understanding of the needs of campus populations other than their own.
Many people enter student government with a firm political agenda but an atrociously lacking concept of hierarchy, inequality, social justice, and privilege. And then they proceed to make decisions that drastically deteriorate the accessibility, inclusiveness, and safety of the campus environment for many. This is the unfortunate story of ASM and SSFC’s treatment of CWC this year. We thought it was over when this essential GSSF was denied funding based on a dispute over 1% of staff time (what a painfully petty debate that was). Now, this group of ASMers has proven that their distaste for anything CWC (or feminist, or left-leaning, etc.) is much greater than anyone expected.
Your article simply follows suit with their privilege and bias, Ed Board. You write-off things like rape whistles as just being some unnecessary expense, something that doesn’t relate to the operations of CWC. It must be easy for the five men (and apparently the two women also) on this Board to dismiss the need for such awareness and prevention measures or to completely ignore the serious need for childcare services on this campus. You can go ahead and argue that the CWC’s grant is still twice the size of others, but lets just remind ourselves that this is a group that has operated as a GSSF for many years and thus has an extensive list of services (services that the SSFC has consistently recognized as “direct” and necessary for this campus in the past). CWC offers more to the student body through its operations and programming than do most grant recipients, thus a larger budget is needed. In your words Ed Board: “Duh.”
This article states that CWC “should have no problem” getting funding again in the future. So doesn’t that just reaffirm that it probably (with the one paperwork error aside) deserves that funding now? Aren’t its services needed just as much in 2010-2011 as they are in 2011-2012? If it weren’t for obstructionists in student government and an error on a budget sheet that they were able to exploit, those services would continue to be in tact for all members of our campus.
I don’t care to hear anyone retort with tired ASM bylaw jargon. But rather how about we consider how stripping the CWC of another $15,000 after it was already set to operate at less than a third of its previous budget is going to affect our community. On a campus where sexual assault is a serious problem, where safe spaces are few and far between, and where male privilege is obviously ignored, losing the CWC’s programming is a blow we cannot afford.
So, Ed Board, next time you come up with some questionably clever way to mock the concerns of your fellow students, how about you just fuck off instead?
IP hash: 11a63034
Won’t someone think of the children?!
IP hash: 9dc45a99
Nice Simpsons reference. Love it.
IP hash: 2de74ee2
“flail wolf”? you just shouldn’t do that to the english language.
IP hash: 2de74ee2
Viewpoint neutrality refers to the criteria used by the governing body in allocating organizational funding, not the viewpoint of the individual student organization. In fact, evaluation on the basis of the student organization’s message falls under the category of content restriction and is the opposite of viewpoint neutral.
And while we’re at it, exactly how does one “flail wolf”? You just hate to see that happen to the English language.
IP hash: 7555f0e3
I find it funny how the Medical Student Association gets to spend money on strippers, and not get criticized about ANYTHING, and the Badger Herald makes it seem like it was an honest mistake. But when when Tina brings real issues to the forefront by holding people accountable to there own actions, the Badger Herald badgers her, criticizes her, and tries to make her look like a fool. I know media has to be harsh and all, but seriously, where do our priorities? Criticizing someone who holds people accountable, or a stripper, being brought on campus, to perform for students, IN A PUBLIC BUILDING!!! Which one has the most negative connotation with held by the Badger Herald…not the strippers!
It is one thing to criticize actions or ideas, but I think attacking someone personally is just too too far!
IP hash: 6a53b282
That’s because no one expects doctors to follow anything anyone else says. It’s why they’re always late.
IP hash: 9634763f
Two things:
One - Sex Out Loud does offer Latex Free condoms.
Two - An article like this is extremely hateful. Attacking one individual person is not only uncalled for, but also strikingly unprofessional. I hope this article follows you when you try to get jobs in the real world, where personal attacks get you fired and sued.