Oracle Online

Chris Matter’s article “Women’s Lacrosse vies for varsity status, strapped as ‘club’” is poorly researched and is rife with false statements about our team, our league, and the status of collegiate lacrosse in Minnesota.

Matter states, “Presently the women’s lacrosse team plays against varsity programs from all around Minnesota.” This statement could not be more wrong. With the exception of Northwestern in Illinois, virtually no college or university in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, etc. have NCAA Women’s Lacrosse programs. Instead, all schools participate in the WDIA, which is the intercollegiate branch of the NCAA, and is a USLacrosse sanctioned league. Our sub-league within the WDIA is the Upper Midwest Women’s Lacrosse League, or the UMWLL. There are two divisions within the UMWLL-North and South. Hamline University plays in the North division of the UMWLL.

It is true that we are a club team, but so are all the other teams in the state. We are, together, working with MIAC athletic directors and the NCAA to get women’s lacrosse to varsity status. It is not an individual effort by any one team.

Matter wrote that the program “is handcuffed as it tries to expand due to the team’s classification as a club sport. Further complicating the team’s strive for status, the coach is unable to recruit potential players to Hamline. If a lacrosse player was considering attending Hamline and desired to play lacrosse, the university would not recognize the enrollment.”

This not only is untrue, it also does not make any sense. I can say that the only thing that keeps us handcuffed from expanding is a lack of money. I can recruit players if I want, but I can’t offer them money, nor do I receive any money to send out letters, go around to high schools, etc. And if a player enrolled at Hamline and wanted to play lacrosse, why on earth would the admissions office deny enrollment to that student? All she would have to do is see one of the many signs we post around campus advertising the team, join, and keep going to class, and the university would only be the better for it.

It is true that we need to raise our own money and that we sold T-shirts. However, the logo on the back was NOT, “lacrosse: shafts, skirts, balls and nets,” as Matter wrote in the article. I am a writing consultant here and would not allow my players to make such a shirt. Our logo is much more clever than that. Check it out (i.e. actually read one of the shirts).

Matter reported the score of our game against Gustavus as 4-3; in fact, it was 13-9, Gustavus. Still a great game, though.

While Matter did speak to one of our first-year players, Katie Lasota, he did not inform her that it was an interview for an article, nor did he ask her permission to quote her.
Other inaccuracies in the article: I am allotted one two-minute timeout per half after a goal is scored. Carded fouls can receive a yellow card, a red card, or a green card.

There are no conference championships played in our league-the divisions of the UMWLL face off in a round-robin tournament at the end of the season with a championship game to end it.

Heidi Rivers
Women's Lacrosse Head Coach

Lack of facts in conspiracy theory claim

As a scholar whose research examines conspiracy theories and how they work, I read with some interest last week’s guest column by Tim McDonald, in regard to a “Diversity Cabal.” But as someone deeply invested inčand committed to-the diversity of our community, I also feel obliged to write not merely to discuss but to openly challenge his essay’s hypotheses.

To write a conspiracy theory, you start with a few stray facts that do not tell a complete story. You string them together within a framework of rumor and belief to shape a plausible narrative. You find parallels between seemingly disparate events, and hypothesize a sinister force at work, shaping all of those events.

It’s reasonable-even admirablečto try to make sense of what has happened, or seems to still be happening, around diversity at Hamline.

I would note that, in regard to the termination of the search in Global Studies and the situation that erupted in the City Pages last year, the facts remain stray because the matters involve confidential personal and personnel matters. That unknowabilityčthe secrets of what really happenedčcan be frustrating.

I would, however, also note that the facts I know run somewhat counter to the ones McDonald repeats, which might suggest that I have better sources than McDonald. In regards to the “journalism” in City Pages, such shoddy research is deplorable. In regards to a guest editorial in the Oracle, I’m willing to assume a more reasonable, even if not-very-well-reasoned, purpose.

Ostensibly, that purpose is to think about how rigid visions of “diversity” restrict our thinking and our actions. But his reliance on hot-button events does not tell a full story about diversity at Hamline, nor does the linking of “diversity” to a term like “Cabal” suggest much interest in a full story about diversity at Hamline. I know from my scholarship that conspiracy theorists, in fact, do not really care about facts; they have a set of beliefs and suspicions, and facts become quite pliable in the service of those larger objectives. McDonald’s essay embodies the kind of restricted vision he excoriates; the limits of his thinking and his ideologyčand really the limits of his attention to the facts, let alone to the deeper complexities of these issues even at a small place like Hamline-lead him to foregone conclusions. What seems to be a reasoned repudiation of a poor way of doing things relies upon that poor way of doing things. That is how conspiracy theories generally work.

I had contemplated being rather flippant about the Diversity Cabal. I kind of like the idea of a secret group intent on shaping events toward some positive ends. Maybe there are other shadowy groups doing their nefarious work around campus? The Kindness Underground? The Equality League? But I realize that the term “Cabal” carries with it a distinct air of elitism and aggression, and I recognize that the linkage is meant to disable-or at least has the effect of undermining-any reader’s commitment to “diversity.” Makes it seem dirty, dishonest, destructive.

I’ll go so far as to say to McDonald and to everyone: our responses to issues of diversity, race, class, difference, justice can provoke visceral, sometimes vicious, often antagonistic reactions across and throughout our community. The end resultsčin hot-button events like the ones McDonald references-can be horrible for all, and are to be lamented. But the way for us to respond to these events, and to our reasonable differences in approach and ideology, is to use our reason, not merely our rhetoric. To communicate with one another, not trade accusations and conspiracy theories. When someone acts inappropriately, we need to call them on suchčnot smear their whole way of thinking, whether they are for or against our beliefs. For that reason, I felt it crucial not simply to dismiss, nor simply to deride, but to aggressively criticize McDonald’s editorial.

Mike Reynolds
Asst. Professor of English