Letter to the Editor: Beware of the message
Issue date: 5/5/08 Section: @Press
Dear Editor:
I am mystified that Washington University in St. Louis is choosing to honor someone who believes that women should not enjoy the full rights that men enjoy and that it is impossible for husbands to rape their wives. This sends a terrible message to the young women Wash. U. is trying to educate and to other bright young women we would like to recruit to join our university.
I do not deny that Phyllis Schlafly has been an effective grass-roots organizer. But competence is not the only measure of honor. There have been and are effective organizations that Wash. U. should not honor, because those organizations serve purposes that Wash. U. ought not and does not honor.
I do not deny that Phyllis Schlafly has provoked much public debate. But provocation is not always honorable. There have been and are provocateurs whom Wash. U. ought not and does not honor.
I also do not deny that Wash. U. has honored individuals of a wide range of political opinions without endorsing those opinions. But the university has still managed to realize that it ought not and does not honor all provocative and influential voices in the public sphere no matter what their opinion. I trust I do not need to name names of those who are plainly beyond the pale. The only question is whether Phyllis Schlafly is beyond what Wash. U. can honor. I am deeply dismayed that the university has decided that she is not.
Eric Brown
Associate Professor of Philosophy
I am mystified that Washington University in St. Louis is choosing to honor someone who believes that women should not enjoy the full rights that men enjoy and that it is impossible for husbands to rape their wives. This sends a terrible message to the young women Wash. U. is trying to educate and to other bright young women we would like to recruit to join our university.
I do not deny that Phyllis Schlafly has been an effective grass-roots organizer. But competence is not the only measure of honor. There have been and are effective organizations that Wash. U. should not honor, because those organizations serve purposes that Wash. U. ought not and does not honor.
I do not deny that Phyllis Schlafly has provoked much public debate. But provocation is not always honorable. There have been and are provocateurs whom Wash. U. ought not and does not honor.
I also do not deny that Wash. U. has honored individuals of a wide range of political opinions without endorsing those opinions. But the university has still managed to realize that it ought not and does not honor all provocative and influential voices in the public sphere no matter what their opinion. I trust I do not need to name names of those who are plainly beyond the pale. The only question is whether Phyllis Schlafly is beyond what Wash. U. can honor. I am deeply dismayed that the university has decided that she is not.
Eric Brown
Associate Professor of Philosophy
Viewing Comments 1 - 4 of 4
Jennifer Madej
posted 5/10/08 @ 4:27 PM CST
I agree with each of Prof. Brown's points in his recent letter to the editor. As the parent of a rising junior at Washington University and as a woman who attended college during the early days of the women's movement, I am disturbed by the decision to grant an honorary degree to Schlafly. (Continued…)
Cindy Sullivan
posted 5/11/08 @ 12:19 AM CST
I am a parent of a graduating senior and I also agree with every one of Professor Brown's points in his letter to the editor. I am appalled that the university would choose to honor a person whose messages are so strongly discriminatory and hateful. (Continued…)
SuzieQ
posted 5/12/08 @ 8:52 AM CST
Why is this letter so full of lies? Why must you completely malign and misrepresent Mrs. Schlafly's POV to get some cheap traction for your agenda?
The messages are your own, not Mrs. (Continued…)
Jo
posted 5/14/08 @ 6:59 PM CST
By getting married, the woman has consented to sex, and I don't think you can call it rape." (speech at Bates College, 28 March 2007; WashU's Student Life, 12 May 2008)
"The flight from the home is a flight from yourself, from responsibility, from the nature of woman, in pursuit of false hopes and fading illusions. (Continued…)
Post a Comment