Letters to the Editor 1/26

Greek probation

To the Editor,

After reading Monday’s article,… Greek probation

To the Editor,

After reading Monday’s article, “Greeks on social probation,” I have one question. Two to 90 percent — really? Really? And yet you relied on the same “various Greeks” that gave that very accurate range to confirm all the other facts in the article. It seems like responsible journalism took a back seat to the big scoop on this one.

Matthew Pahuski

School of Arts & Sciences

To the Editor,

I’d like to point out the University administration’s naivety when it came to the entire [Greek] situation. If you take a bunch of college kids, who all happen to be friends, and then throw them for a weekend in a camp where days are filled with talks and leadership exercises, social gatherings are bound to ensue.

And as we all know, parties in college almost always involve alcohol. It’s just a shame that the people caught were Greeks, a group with a tradition of alcohol use. If the Pathfinders or SGB had a similar incident on a retreat, I bet that they would not receive the punishment we did, and that they would be given the courtesy of discussing punishment before it is handed out. Greeks could potentially be punished now for drinking in their houses with friends while watching the Super Bowl.

Yes, some of the actions of the people who attended were shameful, and punishment is rightly deserved by the two people from each house that attended. I can’t imagine someone denying that fact. Instead, Dean Humphrey is laying out a punishment for more than 10 percent of the entire school population for the actions of about 60 people. I would like to ask her where the justice is in that — or is she, along with other segments of the University, such as The Pitt News who staked out fraternities for violations, just forgetting the good Greeks do for this campus and trying to get rid of us?

Joe Garbarino

School of Arts & Sciences

Former IFC Executive Board Member

Opinions column

To the Editor,

We have many problems with Oliver Bateman’s column, “After MLK day, now time to seduce ‘sweetie.’”

The proposition that men should make women feel more self-conscious is irresponsible. One in 10 college-aged women suffer from eating disorders, and 1,000 women die each year from anorexia nervosa, according to the National Institute on Media and the Family. When women’s lives are literally being destroyed by a society-driven need for physical perfection, a column like this is insensitive and reprehensible.

We can only imagine what Bateman means by suggesting that men buy women lots of beer to “loosen [them] up.” Between 25 percent and 50 percent of female college students experience sexual assault, and 50 percent of these assaults involve alcohol consumption, according to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse. Forget “seducing the sweetie,” why not just call the article “date rape for the modern Joe”?

Bateman also reduces women to extreme stereotypes. Implying that women’s only interests are gossip magazines is outrageous and belittling.

Most women have wide interests in culture, religion and politics. We wonder if Bateman has taken the time to get to know any women as individuals. Also, Bateman’s heteronormative perspective ignores the fact that many women simply aren’t interested in men.

While it’s evident that Bateman’s column was meant as humor, it was extremely offensive and harmful to our community. Sexist humor promotes discrimination, hostility and rape. By printing this article, The Pitt News is doing just that. We deserve an apology.

Sincerely,

Robin Lane

School of Arts & Sciences

Campus Women’s Organization