Letters to the editor

Matt McCluskey

WU was right to support Proposition A

To the editor:

Having read the staff editorial of Nov. 5 and student quote (“WU Words”) on that same page, both regarding the university’s endorsement of Proposition A, I feel that I must object.
Firstly, the editorial’s comparison of the endorsement of a cigarette tax to taking any stance on the issue of abortion is deeply flawed. Taxing the consumption of a proven carcinogen and using that money to pay for public health programs is quite clearly a health issue at both ends of the equation. Abortion is an issue that is in large part based upon moral judgments, not scientific ones, and abortion is a ban/permit issue rather than a taxation one.
Secondly, Tom Perotti had the issue backwards when he said that “WU is a private school and is not government funded, so it needs to stay out of politics.” It is because it is a private institution that WU should NOT be restricted from taking a stance on political issues. For a government-run organization to support something is for the government to implicitly support it; it is only because WU is a private school that it has the freedom to support whatever it pleases without sounding like a government directive. This is a good thing, and an inherent part of democracy.
Thirdly, a university such as WU is more than just a place of learning; it is an institution dedicated to the betterment of society. To that end, it should not remain silent when it finds what it feels to be clear and convincing scientific evidence of a problem, and it sees the possibility of an improvement.
Had the chancellor used his office to coerce professors into voting in a certain way or made any sort of implied threat to professors’ jobs or salaries, it would have been wrong. However, this did not happen.
I do not denounce the university for taking a stand. Instead, I praise it. I can only hope that it will continue to do so in the future and that it does so with the careful thought and research that becomes an institute of learning.

M. Alan Thomas II
Arts and Sciences
Class of 2004

Article on anonymous sex reflected heterosexism

To the editor:

It’s been over a week now, and I’m still puzzling over the news value of Rachel Streitfeld’s prominently placed report about “Bathrooms used for anonymous sexual encounters” (Nov. 1). Quelle scandal! Surely no one savvy enough to locate cruisingforsex.com would then na‹vely assume that she had discovered some new, newsworthy phenomenon. But then one wouldn’t expect a reporter (or editor) of even some little experience to assume, as Streitfeld and her editor(s) do, that Web sites never lie. The fact that that gay males probably *do* have sex in some campus bathrooms-or in dorms or apartments or library carrels (“anonymous” sex can happen anywhere with the help of an Internet chat room)-doesn’t seem as important in this case as does the Student Life’s incurious failure to even attempt to verify the Web site’s claim. More ridiculous is the assumption that the student leader of Spectrum Alliance is the first or second logical source to commentate on this “news:” “Homosexuals are involved? Call up Spectrum. They must know something about it.”
Amid all this serial assuming, the more urgent question goes begging: why is this news? Because, the article suggests, this activity may be illegal and probably is dangerous. But I don’t buy the news judgment here, since I can’t recall seeing (and don’t expect to see in the future) many articles about all the straight students who probably have sex with their classmates-in dorms or apartments or library carrels or, yes, though logistically more difficult, even bathrooms (and it doesn’t take the Internet when you’re part of the dominant sexual culture)-an activity that is also probably, too often, dangerous (see the “Take Back the Night” message) and, if one person is underage or they’re both in the wrong place, possibly illegal. I’m not suggesting that journalists can report on homosexual sex only if those journalists have also reported on the closest heterosexual analogue to that sexual activity (do heterosexuals even bother to compile lists of bathrooms in which they can have sex?). What I am suggesting is that reports of gay sexual activity on a college campus dressed up as “news” are probably a pretty sure sign of some good old fashioned homosexual panic and should be confronted as such, rather than legitimized as an investigative discovery. The real news in all this (if any is to be found) is that at a (presumably) socially progressive liberal arts university even the unsubstantiated idea of gay sex is still occasion for big bold headlines. That, depressingly, is worth reporting.

Doug Harrison
Graduate Teaching Assistant
Arts and Sciences

The truth about the tables in Mallinckrodt

To the editor:

I have quietly disagreed with the opinions expressed on the “self-segregation” of minority students. I can no longer bite my tongue. Alex Fak’s column was filled with misinformation I must correct.
Let’s get our definitions straight. Diversity does not actually “[imply the] everyday exchange of experiences and thoughts.” More precisely, Washington University is diverse because it enrolls students of various backgrounds. The celebration of diversity results in the exchange you speak of.
Let’s be consistent. These columns have continually attacked racially-based social groups, as if students of color are the only people who choose to eat lunch together. Football players and thespians often sit at the same tables. No one blames them of “self-segregation.” If we are going to accuse people of self-separation, let’s be consistent and do it across the board.
Let’s be aware of our reality. You claim that, because of our clubs and scholarships, we “[become] close friends-often to the detriment of exploring the world outside [our] ethnic bounds.” Well, maybe I should point out a fact: we are attending a predominately white university. Everyday, WU’s students of color are forced to explore this world. I wanted a Washington University education, so I had to accept the reality that there would only be four other blacks in my dorm. I had to face the fact that, in more than one class, I would be the only black student. In order to survive and thrive here, I must explore the world outside of mine.
I ask that, in the future, you might take seriously your responsibility as a journalist and be knowledgeable about the information upon which you comment.
I feel as if this entire debate has been approached incorrectly. Blame has been thrown at every group imaginable: this is the very problem. If we want to encourage cross-cultural dialogue and exchange, the finger-pointing must cease. All it ever does is make people defensive and hostile and not prime for fruitful exchange. If this could take place, some of the majority students might come to realize that sitting with people of the same race is a mechanism for support. It creates a brother- and sisterhood of people who share many of the same experiences-there is little that a white male can teach me about being a black female in America. This does not invalidate any relationship I might have with him, but does emphasize the need for black friends. And if such an exchange could take place, minority students might realize that it may simply be difficult for some white students to understand our affinity. But we’ll never reach these understandings unless we sit down, without the labels, blame and guilt, and talk it out.

Brittany Packnett
Arts and Sciences
Class of 2006

Where is Professor Carnahan?

To the editor:

So when does the law school offer a job to Jean Carnahan-or is the “Fox Family Chair for Defeated Politicians” open only to Republicans?

Norman W. Pressman
Arts and Sciences, Class of 1970
School of Law, Class of 1974

Minority groups do not segregate

To the editor:

As a third-year Rodriguez Scholar I would like to take this opportunity to respond to Alex Fak’s Nov. 1 editorial, “Clubs, Events Divide Races.” In his column, Fak sketched several points that I interpreted as follows. First, racial segregation exists on our campus. Second, ethnic-based clubs and organizations promote this segregation. Finally, “race-based” scholarships are inherently bad and promote segregation.
Indeed, racial segregation exists on this campus. But segregation is not a Wash U phenomenon. In fact, all of St. Louis is extremely segregated. Furthermore, if Fak truly understood segregation, he would be conscious of socioeconomic segregation. This would imply Fak’s mere presence at Wash U was a conscious decision to segregate himself from low-income Americans not earning prestigious degrees or high ranking jobs.
Fak also underlines ethnic-based organizations and clubs as groups promoting segregation. I would like to call attention to the Photography Club who ruthlessly segregates against non-camera-owners. And, Mama’s Pot Roast? Blatant segregation of un-funny people! If ethnic-based organizations and clubs segregate, Fak might as well recognize all organizations for segregation.
Moreover, Fak assumes that club members are uninvolved in other campus activities. I say Fak must not desegregate himself much or he would know ABS/ALAS/ASHOKA, etc. memberships are highly involved in a plethora of campus activities. Ethnic representation is only a fragment of our identities.
Finally, I would like to address his feelings on ethnic-based scholarships. As a Rodriguez Scholar, and a scholarship interviewer, I must say the scholarship is not, as he believes, gained on the mere basis of ethnicity. Each scholar has demonstrated tremendous capabilities and passion for academia and service. Moreover, I have never felt less for having won an ethnic-based scholarship. I have never met a Scholar who had. I did apply for millions of other scholarships. This happens to be the one I received. I would not be here if I hadn’t.
As to the privileges the Rodriguez Program course and activities have provided Scholars, rather than close minds, the class has promoted intellectual interaction among Hispanics. In a country where intellectualism is guarded from minorities, this is vital to promoting desegregation.
Lastly, Fak assumes ethnic and racial groups are homogenous in mind and body. That is, by forming social groups we stick with people who think, look and act the same. Well, we have independent minds, and we come from all walks of life. A person who cannot understand that has never tried.
Ethnicity is something we are born with and entitled to share. Segregation is for those afraid to learn. I don’t know a Hispanic who is afraid to share. So, I guess it’s all on you.

Alba Ponce de Le¢n
Arts and Sciences
Class of 2004

Minority scholars do interact
with others

To the editor:

In response to Alex Fak’s opinion column, published on Nov. 1, I speak solely as a recipient of the Annika Rodr¡guez Scholarship, not as a spokesperson for Ervin or ABS. Commenting on organizations that you have not been in is simply asking for trouble.
If further research had been done, Fak would have realized that there are numerous events that happen on campus to unite multicultural groups. Some of these include Wash U World Kitchen, Multicultural Celebration Week through Campus Y, and Celebrations Weekend, run through Admissions. Each of these events involves the multicultural student groups as well as to those individuals who are not of an ethnic minority. As a past president of ALAS, I assure you that there are many students who are not Hispanic/Latino that decide to be active members in the group. We are not set up to separate “us” from “them”, but instead to enjoy the culture and educate the campus, point blank.
Regarding if an Annika Rodr¡guez Scholar’s self-esteem might be negatively affected, we are Hispanics/Latinos who have been awarded for our hard work, involvement in the community, leadership, academic excellence, desire to serve, and the list goes on. Being Hispanic/Latino is solely a base requirement for consideration, as many other base requirements exist for other types of scholarships. We are proud to be Annika Rodr¡guez Scholars.
Another point I’d like to emphasize is that my freshman year I met with the freshmen Honorary Scholars and Danforth Scholars (both groups of scholarships awarded regardless of cultural background) every Wednesday to discuss different topics that had nothing to do with race or culture. This was an official program that the Annika Rodr¡guez Scholars were a part of. Where, exactly, were we being divided or dividing ourselves?
My biggest qualm lies in the claim that because we spend time with each other, that we do not explore “the world outside our ethnic bounds.” I must say that my ethnic background, nor the Annika Rodr¡guez Scholars Program or ALAS, has limited any interaction I have had with the “outside world.” I interact with all ages, shapes, sizes, and colors of people on this campus. If we happen to be friends with someone who shares our same culture, this is no different from people from Chicago or New York being friends.
Caridad Souza once said that she had learned that “people will question facts before they question their convictions, especially if those convictions support stereotypes about others that benefit them in some way.” Before jumping all over the minority scholarships on this campus, work a little harder on your research. Oh. and it’s Fall Fiesta weekend, not Fall Siesta.

Elizabeth “SiSi” Mart¡
Business
Class of 2004

Leave a Reply

Letters to the Editor

Andrew Ross

Student Life election coverage was lacking

To the editor:

RE: “Maintain political focus” by Andrew Ross, Nov. 12

Andrew Ross probably was in a “dream world” on Election Day. If he had come down to earth, he would have noticed that most students paid little attention to the election, and many who I know were unaware that an election was taking place. Most WU students that I spoke with who were registered in Missouri failed to cast a ballot out of either ignorance, or in extreme cases, laziness.

As a community, we failed to motivate students, and as part of that community, Student Life failed miserably. Publishing only three articles concerning the election before the vote, and not even having one front page article concerning the election on Nov. 5, Student Life failed to use its position as the only independent media outlet on campus to encourage debate or to elevate the level of discourse on campus. Although the front page of Student Life featured an article on the politics of the Board of Trustees, the largest photo above the fold featured three friends having a good time at Bauhaus, hardly an important news event considering that Tuesday was one of the most important elections in many years, a fact that should have been obvious even before we knew the results.

Daniel Berkman

Architecture

Class of 2003

Unhighlighted benefits of the Metrolink expansion

To the editor:

This Tuesday’s article on the Metrolink expansion discussed the possible benefits of the Metrolink station, but it focused mainly on how it will allow students without cars to go downtown. There are several other important benefits that the article didn’t cover that are equally as important for both those with and without cars.

Many students don’t realize that the Metrolink not only goes downtown, but the other way as well. The most important stop for students could well be Lambert Airport, the west-most stop on the route. Students will no longer have to bum rides, pay $25 for a cab, or pay to park at the airport for the weekend. They can simply pay a mere $1.25 and ride the Metrolink instead.

Another thing is the safety and security that the Metrolink can provide to students who go out at night. Who knows how many partially intoxicated WU students attempt to drive back from bars and restaurants at Laclede’s Landing, the Central West End, or other night spots? Metrolink can alleviate this problem, and since it is smack dab in between where most on- and off-campus students live, it will benefit those with and without cars alike.

Overall, the expansion’s temporary inconveniencing of Village residents can best be characterized as “growing pains,” and the WU community should welcome it with open arms.

Brian Eufinger

Arts and Sciences

Class of 2004

WU should not not make political endorsements

To the editor:

There is something to be said for accurate reading. I think it is important to draw distinction between reading another’s thoughts with objectivity and intentionally reading seeking to prove one’s point by following a principle of narrow constriction to benefit one’s arguments. That said, I take exception with the objection of M. Alan Thomas II to both the staff editorial and my quote in WU Words regarding Proposition A.

In stating my belief that Washington University is not funded by the government and should therefore not be pushing any one particular political issue, I was not denying the inherent good of democracy or Thomas’s version of it for any matter. The freedom to which he alludes must also include a certain freedom of a college student from being made to think any one way by the administration of his or her school. It is not that I would assert that WU should not promote a healthy amount of political awareness because it indeed should, but I would argue that it does not have the right to force upon me-by means of a mass e-mail to my professors-its individual view on any one issue.

The betterment of society of which Thomas speaks must embrace a balance. Just as the campus was swarming with students who supported both major candidates in the Senatorial elections, I would expect that I would have the opportunity to be informed of both sides of a topic such as Proposition A. The only way that we will achieve such betterment is through thorough examination of all of the parts that comprise the whole-not just those that are convenient or beneficial for one party, in this case the university. Though WU has the capacity to “support whatever it pleases,” it must use this ability to endorse responsibly.

Additionally, though Thomas believes that because WU is not a government-funded institution it “should NOT be restricted from taking a stance on political issues,” I question just how far he, or any one of this opinion, would be willing to extend these claims. Perhaps he is willing to allow the university to support a political issue as long as it does not encroach upon his own beliefs, I cannot say. However, I can say that his idea that this independence frees an endorsement from sounding like a “government directive” in no way makes it alright that the university passes it off as its own dictate. If the democracy under which we live engenders freedom of expression, it must then grant me the right from feeling oppressed by any one ideology. And if WU is the institution that encapsulates this democracy, it must adhere to these same conventions.

Tom Perotti

Arts and Sciences

Class of 2006

Leave a Reply