To the Editor,
In his letter to the Dartmouth on November 7, "Jack-O Derecognition Would Be Expressive of Sincere, Yet Misguided Campus Anger," Matthew Benedetto makes a valid point regarding the mistake inherent in a derecognition of the Jack-O. Unfortunately the rest of his letter was not so reasonable. In the month and a half I have spent on this campus, I have heard numerous references to the "racism/homophobia/sexism" of the Dartmouth Review.
While those expressing these sentiments appear to sincerely believe them, I have yet to see any evidence of their accuracy in the pages of the Review. No article I have read has included any discriminatory tendencies, "cloak-and-dagger" or otherwise. I have been informed that there have been serious incidents in the past involving the Review. While I deplore the conduct of those past staffers, that has little relevance to the present behavior of a newspaper that offers a different, but inoffensive, set of perspectives from your own.
Moreover, I resent being informed by an individual whom I have not even met that I am racist, homophobic, and sexist because I feel the Review's opinions, as put forth in this year's articles not any past year's, are often accurate. If Matthew Benedetto and those like him are attempting to keep the Review and its "racist/homophobic/sexist" ideology from gaining new adherents, then in presenting allegations based solely on old preconceptions they are being counterproductive.
