Letters to the Editor: 11/30/12

To the Editor,

I’m concerned that Parthena Moisiadis’ article “Best-selling author comes to campus” addressed little of the controversy surrounding Tucker Max’s visit. The Campus Women’s Organization and other protesting students mainly took issue with the fact that Max, who has a history of having dubiously consensual sexual intercourse with women, received funds from Pitt. When CWO originally expressed concern over his visit, we were told that he had reformed in early 2012 and was now seeking a change in his life. However, when a member of the protest explained to Max after the event on Monday why we were protesting, he told her that he had never disavowed his previous lifestyle and in fact never would.

The fact that money from the Student Activities Fund went in the form of thousands of dollars to a man who has not only admitted to borderline illegal sexual activities but does not, in fact, repent them or his misogynistic writing and rape jokes is an incredible insult to victims of rape and sexual assault. If the University of Pittsburgh intends to uphold its “Commitment to Civility,” speakers like Tucker Max should not be brought to campus. It doesn’t matter how funny his irreverent advice is; better individuals could have given the same generic “life is tough, learn how to get over it” speech.

Sincerely,

Bella Salamone

President

Campus Women’s Organization

To the Editor:

The article and editorial from Nov. 19 on the “rift” in the Honors College (UHC) portray a fight between incompatible ideologies, but it’s really a resistance to changes in the UHC that bring it in line with today’s expectations of college graduates. First, I don’t understand the insistence that “intellectual curiosity” should be the only goal of the UHC, nor that it’s incompatible with achievement-based goals. Breadth of knowledge is great, but most students reach a point when they want to pursue one subject more deeply. Why shouldn’t the UHC help them succeed in their field?

The reading groups embody the old UHC; niche groups that attracted few students and were purely for fun. These are the makings of a club, not a college. Now the UHC is expanding programs that appeal to more students and help further their careers. The addition of a pre-med adviser raised particular ire — but a large portion of Pitt students are pre-med, and many are high-achieving; the UHC is merely responding to demand.

The UHC should retain a commitment to intellectual curiosity, but I applaud its increasing emphasis on programs that will help me build a better resumé and reach the level where I can make an impact in my field. I have participated in several honors programs, but the most valuable have been the Brackenridge Research Fellowship and scholarship advising, both focused on achievement.

Lastly, for those who care about the UHC and want to express their opinions, please get off Facebook and try starting a respectful dialogue with the administration.

Lorraine Keeler

Dietrich School of Arts & Sciences