I have been attending a Lenten book study at church and we’ve been reading “A Faith of Many Rooms” by Debie Thomas. This week’s discussion centered around paradoxes in the Christian faith and paradoxes in our daily lives. There was intense discussion around how to “live into” accepting many perspectives, approaching folks fundamentally different than ourselves and finding joy in those with whom we might vehemently disagree. After class, I read the Holland Sentinel article “Rhodea, Miedema respond to Joe Moss letter to GVSU,” and thought about all of the paradoxes in the article.

Commissioner Joe Moss attended an anti-transgender event at GVSU carrying a gun in his belt, in violation of GVSU policy around weapons on campus. After the event, Moss (District 5) sent a letter to GVSU President Philomena Mantella on county letterhead expressing demands “to protect the safety and civil rights of (the) individuals” who visit GVSU, and to comply with recent federal executive orders. In total, he requests the school “take all necessary steps to shut down” DEI initiatives, discontinue “segregated graduation celebrations,” recognize “biological reality and the differences between men and women” and add concealed carry exemptions “for peace officers and (licensed individuals).” Mr. Moss chose to use county letterhead as the vehicle for his demands, implying county policy and perspective. Subsequent to Mr. Moss’ letter, Commissioners Sylvia Rhodea and Allison Miedema sent letters to GVSU with similar language on letterhead.

County residents expressed concern over misuse of official county communications methods. Commissioners Moss, Rhodea and Miedema were expressing personal opinions – not county policy. The County Commission has no responsibility for policy, procedure or curriculum at GVSU; yet the commissioners saw fit to express their personal opinions on letterhead. Why? These commissioners frequently lecture on First Amendment rights to speech and protest, yet feel it necessary to throw additional weight around via their elected status. Paradoxical.

At the Planning & Policy Committee meeting Thursday, April 10, Mrs. Rhodea dismissed the letters as a “non-issue,” saying the board was “getting all worked up over silliness” and “suffering from Moss Derangement Syndrome.” Interesting. Last time we heard about a “Derangement Syndrome” in Ottawa County it came from John Gibbs, former county administrator, hired by Moss and Rhodea, who coined the phrase “Ottawa Derangement Disorder” to describe anyone who questioned the actions of the Ottawa-Impact-majority-board from 2022-2024. Gibbs was fired after pointing out gross incompetence on the part of Kallman Legal and board members – was he suffering Moss Derangement Disorder? Or was it Ottawa Derangement Disorder? Or was he correct?

Mrs. Rhodea’s dismissive rhetoric around those who might question her actions is quite paradoxical. She was adamant in the last full board meeting that she was representing constituents in questioning several contracts the county enjoined; yet when constituents question her actions or the actions of Moss, they are suffering from mental illness? Seems paradoxical. When one resorts to the “calm down” response to an issue it is tantamount to admission of guilt. Mrs. Rhodea knows she was wrong to use letterhead. Admit the mistake and move on; deflection is cheap.

Moss, Rhodea and Miedema are elected commissioners in a democracy. All three have consistently dismissed questions from constituents and denigrated those that might be in opposition to any given position they hold. This level of disrespect and animosity toward the participation of the American public in political discourse is fundamentally opposed to their position as leaders in a democracy. I urge these commissioners to reflect on their attitudes towards constituents, especially those whom they represent despite policy disagreement.

Dear Lanthorn editor,

In the October 28, 2024 iteration of this very newspaper, an opinion piece was written by Macenzie Conn regarding a new program being offered by Grand Valley State University, where incarcerated individuals take classes to earn a bachelor’s degree. One of Conn’s sentiments was that the program, which started this academic year, needed more awareness, and I thought that maybe I could help.

My name is Conner McCowan, and I am the president of the Student Voice Council for this groundbreaking GVSU program. I, along with 16 of my peers, am an incarcerated individual at Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility in Ionia, Michigan. I am working toward earning a bachelor’s degree in public and nonprofit administration.

Maybe you’ve heard of this program already, or maybe you are just learning that it exists. Either way, I hope this column can show you that even though our two worlds are completely different, we as GVSU students are a lot more similar than you might realize.

For starters, my fellow classmates and I had to undergo the same admission process of any person wishing to attend the University. We filled out our applications, wrote our essays and proceeded to wait with bated breath to find out whether or not we had been accepted.

Once admitted, we started our classes in the fall, just like many of you did. We often wondered what students on campus were thinking or feeling as the semester started and progressed. Then came midterms and finals, and now that our first semester is in the books, I am proud to say that my fellow classmates and I achieved an average 3.68 GPA, and many of us made the dean’s list. This to me, is extremely remarkable, considering we have all been out of school for over a decade, some of us even nearing half a century. You can rest assured we worked our tails off for those grades.

Unfortunately, because of our physical location, we don’t have access to computers at this current moment, so our research is done rather primitively. This means that all of our essays are either typed using a typewriter or are handwritten. Trust us, MLA and APA formatting with a pen and pencil is the bane of our existence as students.

More than anything, what my classmates and I want you to know is that we are just like you. We get nervous as a big exam approaches, we second guess our work right before we turn it in and we even sometimes suffer from imposter syndrome. However, I am sure that once our professors read this, they will scratch their heads and wonder how or why we would feel this way.

I say that because this cohort of 17 students at Bellamy Creek are really gifted individuals, just like we all know you are. We have a student here who I think knows more about artificial intelligence than the average person, despite being incarcerated for more than 20 years. There are also students who study real analysis and quantum mechanics in their free time, and a student who aspires to become a doctor, and is taking the necessary steps to make that happen. Many of my fellow students have already expressed interest in pursuing a master’s degree in the nonprofit field, and will undoubtedly be successful in their pursuit.

The thing I am most proud of is my classmates’ desire to give back. Ask any individual in my cohort what their plans are upon release and they will surely explain a goal that is meant to make a positive difference in the community. Some students desire to start peer support groups to help those struggling with mental health. Others plan to start nonprofits to build homes for the unhoused, lend support to people reentering society and provide food for the hungry.

It brings me so much pride to be surrounded by others in this program, and knowing we are not alone. We recognize we have a family of thousands of fellow students in Allendale and we all feel so much pride in knowing we are Lakers. We want you to know that you have a family in us as well.

We look forward to sharing more of our writing with you in order for you to learn more about us, and we can learn more about you.

Sincerely,

Conner McCowan

“Pétalos De Cambio” is a mural – inspired by accounts of femicide, homophobia and transphobia in Mexico – that questions the position of the church, as well as other systems of power, relative to these tragedies.

The work was completed as a senior project for GVSU’s studio art program, and first displayed in the Performing Arts Center Gallery during the Winter 2024 semester. It was then purchased by the University’s Art Museum for their permanent collection, in recognition of its visual and conceptual merits. The museum has a long history of purchasing exemplary artwork from student exhibitions, which are proudly displayed across our campus. In the summer of 2024, the mural was installed in the Kirkhof Center, where it resided until Feb. 4.

“Pétalos De Cambio” is also a work rich with symbolism some find offensive, the purchase and display of which some consider evidence they’re unwelcome on campus and which has motivated some to protest its very existence. Those engaged in protest, principally members of GVSU’s Catholic student community, have provided quotes to various news sources asserting unequivocally that the mural depicts violence toward Mary, a figure sacred to several faith communities, and has no other possible interpretation.

To be sure, this work was not created as idle decoration, but to promote dialogue. Yet no one can assert their interpretation of “Pétalos De Cambio” as incontrovertible – not even the artist themself. In general, the language of visual art is not comprised of symbols we’ve all agreed upon, like A-B-C or 1-2-3. Rather, it uses metaphor, color, expressive typography and the proximity, separation, scale and repetition of formal elements to communicate in ways distinct from other modes of expression. The possibility of multiple meanings is central to its power. Likely those reading this letter have never confused a poem for a scientific essay or a pop song as an instructional recording. In a similar sense, “Pétalos De Cambio” is not a diagram.

One symbol from the mural that has incited considerable concern is an “X” over the face of a figure in the far right panel. This figure may represent the church, victims of femicide or even serve as an avatar for the viewer. In figurative works of art, there is often conceptual space to identify as both subject and spectator. Is the “X” representative of blindness, rejection or some form of erasure? It could be anyone or all at once. Is the blindness willful or simply ignorant? Who or what is erasing them? Is this an expression of sadness, wishfulness or some other sentiment more complex? It may be all of these.

Elsewhere in the composition a gun is depicted, floating in space. Who does it belong to? It appears close and may invite us to hold it. Is it ours? Is the gun pointed at the figure or does it serve to represent violence more broadly, referring to events not visible in the work? It could be either and it could change tomorrow, depending upon world events. The mystery is intentional and key to the work’s effectiveness in generating discourse.

As one last exercise in the polysemy of art, consider a typical depiction of the crucifixion: there is no clearer example of an image intended to communicate multiple meanings. For millions, it simultaneously symbolizes death and life, hate and love, violence and peace, betrayal and forgiveness. In one moment, a devotee may identify with Christ Himself, the martyr, in another as a beneficiary of His sacrifice and in another as the one to pierce His side. A crucifix means different things in different contexts, at different stages of one’s spiritual journey and certainly to people of other belief systems/faith traditions.

As useful guidance toward understanding “Pétalos De Cambio,” the artist has shared several hundred words of label copy, describing the work’s inspiration and underlying ideas, and curators at Grand Valley have added further detail. Still, questions over its specific symbolism remain forever open, all translations available. Anyone can have their own, but it is not The Truth.

All that said, it seems as though no number of possible interpretations is sufficient to assuage those who describe being offended by the work and demand it be removed from GVSU’s collection. Even after several meetings with Grand Valley leadership – who sought to assure these students of the University’s respect for them, provided background behind the mural’s acquisition and added context to its display – the complainants elected to take their indignation to state lawmakers for validation, and later staged a rally, even after “Pétalos De Cambio” had been moved from Kirkhof to storage (under threat of its destruction and physical harm to GVSU administrators). At this point, their actions appear motivated less by specific symbolism than an unwillingness to accept and respect its portrayal of Catholicism in a critical light* and the University’s decision to support the free expression of that perspective.

*It should be noted here that the national Catholic organization, TFP Student Action, who circulated a petition in support of the mural protesters, are openly, aggressively anti-queer.

I would not presume to tell anyone else what they feel or don’t feel, just as I cannot assert what an artist truly meant to say. Yet, I find it hard not to see the protest as part of a larger, troubling national trend wherein some belonging to historically/statistically majority groups (ex. white, male, cisgender, Christian) express feelings of oppression, just as others from historically marginalized communities enjoy progress toward greater representation and visibility. For example, through a mural that integrates Spanish text to raise awareness around the violent oppression of women and queer folks in the Global South.

I fully admit my struggle to imagine why a member of the GVSU community would unironically claim to feel unwelcome on the basis of their Christian faith. Our campus is so representative of West Michigan, a region where more than two-thirds of the population identify as Christian, the majority Catholic. Though we are not Aquinas, Calvin or Hope, the names of conservative Christian donors adorn numerous buildings, a stark reminder of their values. Laker Catholic and many more Christian faith-based organizations are supported by the Student Senate through funding opportunities and other resources.

Off-campus, I am reminded of the dominant role Christianity plays in our culture by the frequency of church marquees, faith-based non-profits, pro-life billboards and a news cycle teeming with stories about conservative policies that seek to undermine the rights and protections of queer folks, book-ended by updates on the health of Pope Francis, a religious leader who wields almost unimaginable global influence and power. A Christian faith system is clearly the presumed context for life here (yesterday, both Google and a GVSU email reminded me that I’m writing this during the Season of Lent) and to identify as an adherent of that faith is to enjoy the privilege of overwhelming representation and ideological leverage.

Concurrently, my classes include individuals who have long felt reluctant to share their preferred names, gender identities, who they love and what they believe for fear of violent backlash from the culture described above – who often struggle to find safe spaces and community at GVSU. Many have shared that religious institutions (including the Catholic church) have been complicit in their oppression. Works of art such as “Pétalos De Cambio” – though focused on transphobia, homophobia and femicide in another part of the world – represent an important structural critique on their behalf. Its display symbolizes Grand Valley’s respect for them.

Thankfully, over the past few decades the cultural terrain has shifted and many of those historically suppressed are less afraid to share their voices, though sadly such modest gains must be continually defended and deliberately preserved. I’m proud to work at a state school that attempts to uphold the ideals of a liberal education, which encourages and thrives on multiple perspectives and values diverse voices. We flourish when listening to and learning from communities outside our own. Our strength is in our pluralism.

And so I am profoundly disturbed that Grand Valley students who benefit from immense privilege (and can surely understand that art sometimes holds more than one meaning) would declare an expression of our rich pluralistic community (and a vital critique of systemic oppression) a threat to their own status and sense of belonging and persist in a campaign to have it removed or destroyed – a campaign that has disrupted the life of another student in the process.

When you vociferously declare an artwork is “blasphemous,” an “abomination against God” and share those allegations on social media, you bring pain and pressure to bear on the artist – a fellow Laker – in a manner reckless and lacking compassion. It is one thing to direct your ire at GVSU administrators, but to publicly expose a peer to the vitriol of self-righteous zealots is, in my opinion, immoral.

Please stop. Stop and consider whose stories and perspective it is you’re seeking to censor. I recognize that among the most challenging things in life is to admit that one may have errored, or to course correct when one has committed fervently toward an idea only to experience a change of heart and mind. Few things are more humbling, but at this time in our nation’s history, nothing would be more meaningful.

Respectfully,

Brett Colley, Professor
Department of Visual & Media Arts

Dear Lanthorn editor,

My name is Julie Barnard. I am a student in Grand Valley State University’s Bellamy Creek Program, which was written about on Oct. 28, 2024 by Lanthorn columnist Macenzie Conn. It prompted me to write to you in an effort to be transparent, spread word about the program and show that incarcerated students just want to be accepted into the academic community we are a part of.

The purpose of this piece is to reach scholars that I have an esteemed honor of calling my academic colleagues. I hope to offer a pragmatic resolution to the lack of transparency regarding the Bellamy Creek Program. The Lanthorn seemed to be the best vehicle for this.

When you think of the “college experience,” often you think of students, parties, groups, student organizations, learning and networking. At times, students get caught up in assignments, deadlines and life, forgetting we’re part of a community of academic scholars. Many students find themselves longing for a sense of belonging in their community. The same is true for non-traditional students as well. To this, I am no exception. I am a student of GVSU, yet I feel as though I am only half a member of my college.

GVSU is in the midst of what appears to be great divisions, lack of confidence in administration and a diverse political climate, which is full of uncertainty. It’s times such as these that simply airing grievances is not enough. We, as scholars, should also offer innovative and pragmatic approaches toward resolutions. This very paper published a column titled, “GV needs to be more transparent about its free prison education program,” and I agree. A realistic solution is hearing from a student in the program who is willing to extend transparency through communication.

I see things from a view that most people don’t get to see. GVSU events and happenings can be found on a myriad of platforms, and can be seen without having to set foot on campus. With this, I see the hurt, pain, frustration and division among members of the University community. I feel it is my responsibility to use my voice, platform and experiences to hold myself and those within my academic community accountable. We can’t simply admit there is a flaw, yet fail to take action.

What I don’t intend to do is sit back and point a finger at the University for failing to promote a program I am very passionate about. Instead, I see an opportunity for a student to rise and be a catalyst for change– a way to break down barriers and offer a transparent look at what some consider to be a controversial program.

Community begins with us. If you would like to learn more about a diverse, inclusive and supportive community of non-traditional students, I encourage you to look into the Bellamy Creek Program, and reach out to the Program Director, Aaron Yore-VanOosterhout.

Respectfully submitted,

Julie Barnard

I am all about people using electric scooters and other mobility devices in a safe manner on campus, however there is no policing of behavior and many are taking advantage and driving these electric devices in an unsafe manner on the campus walkways and roads. I am afraid it is only a matter of time before someone if seriously injured or killed in a collision.

I was recently walking from Kirkhof to Padnos in the morning on a crowded sidewalk. Out of nowhere my arm was almost wrenched out of it’s socket by an electric scooter driver that sideswiped me. The driver did not stop and did not even seem to notice that he had sideswiped me traveling at a high rate of speed. It is also common for scooters to approach a crosswalk at a high rate of speed and cross at high speed leaving vehicle drivers with little or no warning to yield to the “pedestrian.”

I am not sure what the solution is to this problem but a solution is needed. Perhaps speed bumps along main walkways to slow electric vehicle traffic? It would also be helpful to have public safety give out a few warnings and even tickets to those driving in an unsafe manner on the sidewalks. There are responsible users of electric vehicles on walkways, but there are also those that are careless and dangerous.

This is conversation we need to have.

Sincerely,

Peter Wampler

But this will subside, just like the last shooting. We will go back to class with doors open. We will return to the common areas with nowhere to hide. We will be blissfully unaware of our part in the next tragedy of the new American epidemic.

I used to ask questions.

How can we prevent this? Why would this happen? Why have the societal structures built to protect me allowing this to happen? Why wouldn’t politicians enact laws to save my life?

But this is quickly met by a more visceral question.

As the bullets ripped through those victim’s tendons, tissues, ligaments and lungs – were they asking the same questions? If their pleas for answers are going unheard or ignored, then my fears will surely be as well.

The only question I have left is: When is my time? 

My words will be lost, discarded like the lives lost at a politician’s willful ignorance. This is normally where I would say “wait there’s hope” but I see no pillar supporting my claim. Again, this will subside, and we will wait for carnage to begin one more.

I’m not sure if this a call for action or a call for help, but the dread and anxiety I feel are, I’m sure, not just individual.

In this moment of international crisis, we the undersigned are compelled to respond to Russian military movement into the independent nation-state of Ukraine. As scholars at Grand Valley State University, we pursue educational achievement because we understand that knowledge profoundly enables us to be effective individuals and community members. We believe the call to scholarly pursuit is likewise a call to care. Institutions of higher learning are places where people convene to engage in shared goals, which makes us responsible for one another’s well-being.

As a community of scholars, we are committed to liberal principles of intellectual freedom, autonomy, and constructive dialogue. Our reputation as a university of academic excellence, intellectual integrity, and impassioned citizenship has drawn scholars from across the state of Michigan, the United States, and the world. Grand Valley State University is the educational home of 400 international students. This is in addition to the numerous faculty, staff, and first-generation American students who hail from nations around the world. Language recently adopted in our Reach Higher Initiative commits us to “think and act on a global basis.”

This holds us accountable for promoting our institutional values globally. The actions of the governing body of the Russian Federation are antithetical to the values we espouse at our institution. As such, we are compelled to denounce these actions upon the independent nation-state of Ukraine. In writing this letter, we wish to express unwavering support for our Ukrainian students, faculty, and staff. We extend our support to your families and friends who are also affected by these actions. You are valued members of our community, and we stand in solidarity with you.

We also recognize the efforts of numerous Russian citizens, journalists, and activists who have denounced the actions of the Russian governing body and who are now at great risk for demonstrating the courage of their convictions. A tradition of dissidence, critical thinking, and the unfettered exchange of ideas has long been the practice of global institutions committed to academic inquiry.

Any action that attempts to silence or curtail these integral components of a healthy society should be scrutinized. Here, we turn our scrutiny upon the leaders of the Russian Federation while bearing witness to these events. It is with a shared commitment to such principles that we sign this letter of support for Ukraine and its people both near and far.

In solidarity,

The GVSU community

A Letter to the Editor was published in the Lanthorn on Sept. 20 calling into question the vaccine requirements that the university has released. Seeing as the deadline has passed, the dissent is worth recognizing, and the Lanthorn editors themselves asked for a dialogue to be started, I have decided to do just that. Nobody asked me specifically, of course, but being in a community sometimes means duties are required of us, even ones we don’t like and never asked for.

Let’s lay out some of the terms of the dissent. Most college-age students are not personally at risk of major illness from the current pandemic. Even in the case that students get the vaccine they still may carry and spread the virus to some extent. Thus, the imposition of a vaccine mandate is, in the best case, disproportionate to the risk.

What of the statistics cited? That 19 through 22-year-old’s represent less than 1% of deaths to coronavirus? Well, point taken, except for the fact that the campus is home to many folks not in that age range for whom we need to take responsibility as well. Though it is hard to gather evidence on this point, there is reason to believe that vaccinations do reduce the rate of spread of coronavirus, as vaccinations have done for other diseases in the past. Furthermore, 1% or so of students at risk are also worth protecting, especially at no real cost to ourselves.

But what about the supposed lack of individual risk and the capacity for us to be both carriers and spreaders too? Take the example of drunk driving. If you grew up the way I did, you have certainly seen folks drink in excess and drive as if they were limo drivers. But we don’t have drunk driving laws in place for those who may miraculously, or even expectedly, have the capacity not to cause injury to others.

We have those laws in place because we just can’t know whether you’re a drunk phenom or incapacitated from your first sip of box wine, and we shouldn’t risk your safety, or that of others, on the basis that “I’m likely okay.”

Yes, you’re probably safe from COVID-19 without a vaccine, maybe most of us are, but we have absolutely no assurance that it’s actually the case, and we have a much more certain way of reducing the risk of being wrong.

If I’m wrong, and coronavirus is no real threat to our community, then all of us will have gotten the shot and almost certainly be just fine. But if you’re wrong, and coronavirus represents a significant threat to members of our community that could be strongly mitigated by near-total vaccination, then folks may well suffer and die as a result of inaction.

Being in a community imposes certain duties on us. We don’t get the freedom to choose these duties, but we too often exercise the “freedom” to ignore them. In cases like that our institutions step in, they impose those duties upon us or otherwise punish us for ignoring them. I don’t like it, and the dissenters here sure don’t either, but what we like matters very little in this case. This pandemic brought illness to our communities, but it also brought new duties. I support the vaccine mandate, along with reasonable accommodations to religious and medical exemptions, and I hope to see our community take active measures to protect even just 1% of us.

Wishing you all good health,

George Lutz

Dear GVSU Community,

As all Grand Valley State University students know, we are required to take the COVID-19 vaccine in order to be a part of the GVSU community. It seems that not everyone in the community is on the same page with this decision, however. There have been many students that still have concerns not with the vaccine specifically, but with the fact that it is being mandated. 

We, as a community, need to come together and start discussing the measures we are taking for mitigation. So far throughout this two-year pandemic, we’ve not been able to have much discussion or interaction with our school leaders. Students that feel underrepresented in the community are now speaking up. A petition was started on change.org by student, Haley Demitroff, to start a dialogue. 

“What’s the point of forcing us to put something in our body that we may not feel comfortable doing if we can still spread  and get it?” Demitroff wrote. “Those who haven’t if they do get it are all 18 to 22 year old who will most likely fight it off and not die. Roughly 1% (actually .43% for 18-29 yrs) of those who have had it have died in the whole United States.” 

With over 6,000 signatures in just four days, the petition is certainly taking off and the points mentioned are worth considering. 

A Facebook group called “Open Up GVSU” has over 1,000 members with many parents and students active in applying for exemptions and helping one another get approved.

There is also an effort by GVSU student, Amanda Born, to set up a website that is not able to be tampered with or taken down by tech companies. She has also been organizing rallies trying to connect the students who are opposed to the mandates. More information is available in a full interview with her on the “OPEN UP GVSU” Facebook page.

One issue with the vaccine is that immunity wanes leading to the need for boosters and the vaccine may need to be altered for variants. I understand that some people may want protection. The vaccine is intended to protect them. Many are confused as to the reasoning for the mandate. 

I have had coronavirus. While the virus can be bad, the data on how often it hospitalizes college students is not given to us by our virus action team. .003% of cases are in college-age students. We need this information so that we can decide how much of a risk the virus is to us. Those numbers don’t seem to support the efforts being taken to eradicate the virus.

Those that want protection have protection. I do not want protection and I do not feel protected when protection is being mandated. Other students and many parents of students feel the same. Legislation may soon be calling these mandates into question. 

Sincerely,

Thomas Frye

GVSU Student

Editor’s note: Grand Valley State University mandates that students, faculty and staff be vaccinated by Sept. 30 unless approved for an exemption. Students can upload their vaccination status in mybanner.