>>March
      2, 2001


      


      
Apathy and narcissism in our
      best self interest

      

      
Dear Editor:

      


      I would like to say a
      few words in defense of apathy and narcissism. The students of
      the late '60s and '70s protested the war and the draft, believing
      it was unjustifiable to send young American males to their death
      in Vietnam against their will. There was no national interest
      in a war in Vietnam. The United States was playing God there
      and trying to force the world to democracy. The students protested
      and it was mostly backed by self-interest. They did not want
      to die in an idealistic crusade for democracy in a country that
      did not welcome them.

      


      While this is a little cynical, the only reason we agreed to
      a course of action in Iraq was based upon national interest.
      Saddam and his regime are a threat to national security. If he
      had his choice, every man, woman and child in the United States
      would feel his bombs, missiles and artillery shells; he would
      delight in it. It is self-interest to stay alive. It is self-interest
      to not go quietly into a forced draft. It is self-interest to
      not be hit by SCUD missiles armed with chemical and biological
      weapons that may take YOUR loved ones from you as you huddle
      in the corner wondering if this is the end.

      
Joseph Swarner

      Junior

      
Misogynistic tendencies at
      UI abhorrent

      

      
Editor's note: the different
      spellings of women (wymyn) and woman (womon) are intentionally
      used by the author

      
Dear Editor:

      


      I have been dismayed
      to discover patriarchy and misogyny throughout UI's campus. Young
      wymyn, from various disciplines, have heard from instructors
      - advisers, even - that wymyn do not belong in their field. Some
      have been "advised" towards teaching, lest a potential
      husband's career demand relocation.

      


      Is it UI's intention to support a firmly entrenched patriarchal
      system fostering misogyny rather than talent, ambition and integrity
      of students? Academic professionals are conveying archaic expectations
      to impressionable, overcredulous future leaders. I am barely
      surprised, then, to learn that male students talk about "pimping
      girls/chicks " on the weekends. 

      


      Even the Argonaut perpetuates misogyny through inappropriate,
      sexist advertisements. The large Girls Gone Wild Videos ad subversively
      beckons "girls" to show their "tits," when
      the print actually refers to video "hits" containing
      feminine nudity and sexual content. These videos exploit and
      subordinate wymyn, denigrating them to body parts and playthings
      for men. The result? A hostile, objectifying environment toward
      wymyn.

      


      Higher learning institutions should encourage reversing social
      ills. Professors and advisors can start by examining their values
      for misogynistic tendencies and patriarchal dogma and, if found,
      ask how they can challenge these messages rather than perpetuate
      them. Further, urge the Argonaut against placing harmful, exploitative
      ads.

      


      A century ago, Charlotte Perkins Gillman aptly taught that the
      promulgation of such subordination and other misogyny stunts
      wymyn's growth, dehumanizing the gender. It is incumbent upon
      the University of Idaho and all universities to foster cultural
      transformation. Gillman noted, "wymyn are not undeveloped
      men, but the feminine half of humanity is undeveloped human."
      When perpetuating patriarchy and misogyny, UI is not promoting
      total development of wymyn students. Only teaching to half its
      student body, UI fails its mission and society. 

       

      Kim Kleckner-Miller

       Counseling and Human Services

       Graduate Student

      


      Columnist scapegoats women,
      ignores issue

      

      
Dear Editor:

      


      I am writing about Bob Phillips' latest column (Feb. 27). In
      this edition of drivel, Bob claims men treat women far better
      than women treat men. This is odd since men are much more likely
      to cheat sexually and compose 90 percent of the spousal abusers.
      They are also more likely to treat their significant other like
      a piece of meat and disregard their feelings.

      


      I will agree that the lines between genders are being blurred
      and old stereotypes are being erased. Bob claims that this happened,
      "not because men wanted this, but because the women did."
      In reality, the only way this happened (since men had all the
      legislative power in society) is because men knew women were
      being treated unfairly and decided to change things. Everybody
      should be equal regardless of sex, color, etc. Thank heaven for
      women like Martin Luther King Jr.!

      


      Maybe Bob's trouble with women is because of his massive generalizations,
      ego, and black and white stands on issues. Maybe "plates
      being thrown" have less to do with the opposite sex and
      more to do with the person in the mirror. Maybe Bob feels like
      a loser because he gets dumped for somebody that's not.

      


      Apparently, some people have nothing better to do than to blame
      other people for all their faults. Bob's column is the perfect
      example of raw, unconditioned scapegoating. Frankly, I'm astonished
      this trash was published in the school paper and I won't be reading
      again until Bob is off the staff.

      


      Wes Rimel

      Former Argonaut Opinion Editor

      Mining Engineering





      
 

      
news | opinion | arts | sports&leisure
contact us | ui | front | archives