To the Editor:
I've often been confronted by attitudes such as the one expressed by Susan Zeiger ("Don't need to be a feminist to refuse Playboy's offer," Mar. 2, 1995) be it on pornography, racism or whatever. She talks about how, "you will ridicule not only yourself, but all women at Dartmouth, all Ivy League women and indeed women everywhere who have higher aspirations."
Her opinion is a two sided coin. One side is the positive benefit of acting with belief that you are representing more than yourself in your actions. However, on the other side it's also an attitude of taking one for the many, the attitude that perpetuates stereotypes. "Thank you, Ashley, for representing the women at Dartmouth, including myself, as sex objects whose only ambitions are to be more influential sex objects." We need to realize that we should only accept half of that coin, the side that dictates our own actions.
Yes, the portrayal of women in porgnography degrades them, but it should only degrade those women who do choose to engage in such activities. Why should women who do have "higher aspirations" be affected? They haven't bared it all. I too hope that no women at Dartmouth appear in Playboy because they have too much respect for themselves and the greater community. At the same time, the greater community needs to view the actions of indviduals as just that, the actions of indviduals.
