To the Editor:
I read Pete Woodruff '99's letter ["Holocaust Should Not be Compared to Skateboarding," The Dartmouth, May 21] with a large amount of sympathy until the very end when he made a false reference to Maxwell Knight '99s character, something which has long been a trend among those with poor understanding of reason. (Woodruff's letter was in response to Knight's column, "Skateboarding is More Than Just a Hobby," The Dartmouth May 20.)
It was bad enough when Woodruff took Knight's analogy about Jews as a blatant reference to the Holocaust. Knight's statement, "Would the aptly named 'Sleazy' comic have been funny if it were Jews [rather than skateboarders] being led out of town or humanely tranquilized?," could have made reference to any group subject to discrimination: blacks, women or gays. This is not necessarily a reference to the Holocaust, which certainly involved much worse than leading Jews out of town and humanely tranquilizing them.
My main contention, however, centers on Woodruff's second to last paragraph. He asserts, "If [Knight] really believed skateboarding were so important, then he wouldn't have to defend himself to anyone." I expect I'm about to offend a lot of people. Let's try a little substitution: 'If Woodruff really believed the Holocaust were so important, then he wouldn't have to defend himself to anyone.' Apologies, but I hope my point is clear. Something important is worth defending. While it is not as important an issue as the Holocaust, skateboarding is important to Knight -- he should be commended for defending it, not ridiculed.
Perhaps his vehement defense stems from a belief that skateboarders are in general being treated unfairly.
I'm sure I'll get lots of comments from people because of the opinions in this letter. But I hope the responses will be intelligent, reasonable, and devoid of fallacies.
