Greek community doesn’t share same values
Dear Editor:
As a member of a Greek organization, I feel compelled to comment on Jody Bivens’ letter to the editor published in the Oct. 7, 2005 edition of Student Life. Although I respect the Panhellenic Organization and the Inter-Fraternity Council for presenting Grand Chapter and other terrific events to the Greek Community, and think Jody touched on several valid points in her letter, I must object to two of her assertions.
First, I believe her assertion that the estimated “1,000” members of the community “stand for the same values and have similar ambitions” is decidedly inaccurate.ÿIdealistic perhaps, but I don’t necessarily think that the Greek community at Wash. U. is as conformist as I feel she denotes.ÿÿI also don’t think there’s anything wrong with that, and in fact, would assert that shared values and ambitions are relatively common traits shared throughout our prestigious university.
Second, while I agree with Jody that it is “reasonable” for Greek members to “donate ONE hour ONCE a semester to the greater community of which they are a part,” I find it not only excruciatingly unreasonable but also extremely deleterious to members of the very same community that IFC and Panhel be the sole decision-makers regarding what constitutes a “legit excuse.” I also believe that the reason why fines have not been levied in the past, despite being on the supposed books, is because they too are unreasonable. As a senior living off campus, I am decidedly not as involved in my fraternity as I was as an underclassman.ÿHowever, I firmly believe that my attendance at every past Grand Chapter since my initiation warrants me not be forced to attend from fear of having my fraternity monetarily punished for my absence if I am simply unable to attend what Jody calls the “cause.”
While I did not attend this year, rest assured I had what I would consider the quite legitimate excuse of a practice with my improvisational comedy group. Last, I would like to note that while I generally disapprove of Student Life’s predominantly negative coverage of the Greek community, I thought Matt Shapiro’s article was informative and well-argued, despite the minor mistakes, and notably a step in the right direction.
Eric Leventhal
Class of 2006
Unitarian Church seeks ties to WU
Dear Zach Goodwin:
I, too, was in an end-of-the-semester stupor last spring, and I can’t recall whether I read about your original idea regarding the Center. If I did and didn’t respond then, well, chalk it up to tiredness, I guess.
ÿSo, not recalling last spring, it was with some pleasure and irony that I read your Friday editorial. Pleasure, because it’s always nice to read about the positive, ethical side of students (and the general population).ÿIronic, because for about six to eight months (or more) last school year, or possibly at the tail end of 2003-’04, there was a rather large effort in our church (1st UU) to try to figure out how to reach out to the WU student population, in particular. ÿ
ÿThe ideas that you espouse in your editorial are very much the ideas of the Ethical Society, here in St Louis, and, I think more fully, the Unitarian Universalist Church (my family’s church, and the church of A LOT of WU faculty). Here is the Web site for the church closest to WU:ÿfirstuustlouis.org. After you explore it, or if you pass the info along to the woman you write about in your editorial, you or she should contact “1st Unitarian” ÿ(Reverend Suzanne Meyers) to explore ways to make a bridge to WU. ÿI would be happy to make preliminary contact on your behalf, if you (and a large enough group of students) are interested. As an extra “teaser,” I’ll leave it to you to find the connection between 1st Unitarian and WU!
ÿKeep up the good work, and know that your editorials ARE read!
Dottie Petersen
Professor of Economics
Focus on more important facets
Dear Editor:
Re: “I am not a debate,” (Matt Adler, Oct. 7)
As a student currently on medical leave, I know very little of the current controversy with regards to Professor Katz and will refrain from discussing the specifics.
First, when Matt claims that he himself is not an issue for debate, I take him to be meaning that the quality of being homosexual cannot be debated as being positive or negative. In other words, a person, insofar as he or she is a rational one, will never disapprove of homosexuality. However, this is far from accurate. Homosexuality is a hot-button topic today. For evidence of this, one need only look at the number of gay marriage bans in the last election. While at Wash. U. the majority believes homosexuality to be moral, I hail from North Carolina where the majority believes it to be decidedly immoral. This is not to say that one viewpoint is more correct. I am only pointing out that Matt displays an impressive degree of hypocrisy in condemning Prof. Katz and others for intolerance when he is unwilling to even consider opposing arguments.
Second, Matt mocks a reasoned debate of the pros and cons of homosexuality by suggesting that to do so would be akin to sitting minorities down alongside members of the KKK. Here, he commits the straw man fallacy. Certainly it makes no sense for minorities to debate with the KKK (hence the straw man). But this is an entirely different situation from the one at hand. The KKK has proven itself incapable of rational debate, but the same cannot be said for Prof. Katz (to the best of my knowledge) or others. The fact of it is that there are many reasonable people for and against homosexuality who will be more than happy to discuss why they think as they do. Reasonable debate is almost always a good thing and claiming that your opponents are incapable of it only suggests you fear to do so.
Finally, with great alarm, Matt discusses the possibility that gays will feel uncomfortable in a class with Prof. Katz. If anything Prof. Katz will in all likelihood be extremely generous to gays after the criticism he has recently received. Nevertheless, I have some advice for anyone who feels uncomfortable, deal with it! I am a libertarian (or close to it at least) and I have heard conservatives called everything from outright morons to “crypto-racists” (I still don’t know quite what this means). And I heard all of this in class! If you want a hostile learning environment try being a conservative for a day. Frankly, I don’t appreciate whining simply because a single professor disapproves of homosexuality; let’s calm down, get some thicker skin, and focus on an issue that’s actually important.
Stephen A. Kenney
Class of 2007
The Center seems like a good idea
Dear Editor:
Re: “Resurrecting the Center and fighting god,” (Zach Goodwin, Oct. 7)
As a new transfer to Wash. U. I am very busy (as I am learning all Wash. U. students are) so I will make this brief. Your center idea is very intriguing, especially since I had (pretty much) the same revelation about a week after you wrote your article. On top of that I found out within 36 hours that I had a very close friend who had been pondering the same type of institution (he called it the Church of Brunch and I have since adopted that name). As I am sure the three of us are very smart, I doubt that we are all that unique. The key question is how much of the population in our demographic is thinking about this.ÿ Now I don’t know if you just mothballed this idea, or if you have been thinking about it a lot, but I have put some time into it and came to the conclusion that the institution would be very, very hard to make to the level that it would have some influence and have it not be twisted into something we would not want it to be (lots of religions come to mind).ÿ Anyways, if you would like to talk about this further I am on the Facebook so you can see I do not look crazy (at least I don’t think I look crazy), we should have an informal meeting of the interested (I am guessing that might just be three.). Hope to hear from you soon,
TopherÿMcFarland
Class of 2007
More political engagement needed
Dear Editor:
Re: Letter to the editor, Howard Mechanic, Oct. 10.
In his letter, Howard Mechanic has sought to correct misimpressions that might be gained from your news story last week. But much more needs to be written about the campus incidents and climate of 1970ÿhere when Howard was involved.
At that time, the highly unpopular Vietnam War was being fought. This was not simply something on the 10 p.m. news, something to be ignored until the sports news came on. The war had a very personal connection with every male student. On graduating, the men stood to be drafted, by lottery, into the armed services. There was a degree of political awareness and engagement that is noticeably absent on our campus today. In many ways, the war issue is now just as important as it was 35 years ago, but most students are untouched;ÿthey are personally insulated.
In those distant days, there were student protests and counter-protests. Faculty were involved on both sides. Some of the students wanted to shut the University down and there was a sit-in in Brookings, a midnight rally in Graham Chapel. The administration and many faculty worked hard to keep WU open.
It is important that the University itself not take sides on these issues, not be seen to endorse either side, and it must continue to provide a forum where differing views can be expressed (with civility, I would hope). Discussion of the important issues of the day can be an important part of the education we make available. Howard’s generation was engaged. I wish there were more engagement today.
Michael Friedlander
Professor of Physics
Chairman, Faculty Senate Council 1969-’71
The positive press is appreciated
Dear Editor:
As a fellow student and Campaign Campus Manager for Teach For America, I would just like to thank you for including two stories about the program in your Oct. 10 issue.
To Ben and Allie, thank you for taking the time to write these articles and for your positive representation of Teach For America, its corps members and alumni. And to the respective editors, Margaret, Sarah and Sarah, we greatly appreciate your help in making these stories possible.
On behalf of the recruitment team, thank you for your support of Teach For America. We look forward to working with Stud Life in the future to reach out to top students here at Wash. U.
Suzanne Reznikoff
Class of 2006
Seeking a solution to the Katz debate
Dear Editor:
As an American, Professor Katz has the right to any view he wants. No matter what, even if plenty of other Americans find his views morally repugnant, we don’t try to stop him from holding them. And that’s a good thing-it’s one of the reasons we’re lucky to live in America. The reason I object to Professor Katz is not because I want to censor his right to free speech or because I’m afraid of the legitimacy his views could gain: his writing is too full of false statistics and wildly erroneous assumptions for that.
I object because of what Katz does NOT have a right to do. Because he holds a position of authority over students, his speech – “I am a homophobe and proud” – becomes intimidation. And that’s not something we at Washington University can allow. Every single student, regardless of sexual orientation, race, gender or other identity, has the right to feel safe in the classroom. Because of his articles and his public defense of them in Student Life, that’s not happening. I know students in his classes who now feel scared and extremely uncomfortable going to office hours or asking a question. I know people who have started sitting in the back row. I know even more students who are thinking about what classes they might take in the future, and crossing his classes off the list, even if it means delaying a cluster, taking a required course over the summer at another school, or not getting to take a class at all. That is completely unacceptable. No student here should feel like a class is closed to him or her, and no student here should feel threatened by a professor.
The discussions of freedom of speech and the accuracy of Katz’s claims are going on. But this goes beyond that. This is a real problem that is affecting real students here every day. And the solution that we as a community find needs to address that. Simply telling Katz to move his article to another Webspace doesn’t fix the problem – he has already destroyed the integrity of his classroom for every group that he targets. Firing him is probably impossible. So what do we do? We need to find a way to make his classes safe for every single student. Whether that means requiring him to teach classes in conjunction with another professor, taking away his grading privileges, supervising his office hours, or something else to make it clear to his students that we actually uphold our rules about discriminatory harassment, it needs to be done. And it needs to be done soon.
Margaux Buck
Class of 2008