To the Editor:
I have always espoused the satirical philosophy that the American people (in general) were too reactionary and easily manipulated to deserve the franchise. But I always assumed that this general trend would not apply to the students at this school. I'm sad to say that now I know better.
Last Thursday night, I was talking to a girl about "The Zetemouth" incident. She expressed shock and horror that such thoughts would be recorded. She was particularly outraged by the date rape tag at the end of one of the pages. However, when I asked whether she had picked up any malicious intent upon reading the pictures in The Dartmouth, two things surprised me. First, she said that she had not read the reprintings. Second, she said that, of course, due solely to their subject matter, they were malicious. I was more appalled by this fact than I was by the actual sex papers.
First, by not reading the primary sources of the incident, people are forfeiting their right to formulate an opinion, as they must rely on other's opinions to formulate their own. People allow themselves to be manipulated, something I have always found despicable. The mere mention of the words date rape set off a knee-jerk reaction. Obviously, the case would be much different if a pamphlet with the chemical formula for a type of date rape drug, or any kind of date rape strategies, was found instead. But upon reading "The Zetemouth," I must say, I thought it was merely a not-terribly-bad attempt at humor. My thoughts are the same as most people who I talked to who took the time to read it.
Second, an attempt at humor, whether it makes us groan from the poor quality, or double up laughing, can hardly be characterized as malicious. People usually tell me that I don't give people enough credit. However, I give the members of Zeta Psi enough credit to tell the difference between fiction and realty. Just as I don't believe that playing Doom will cause someone to become a violent antisocial person, I doubt that a humorous magazine will turn the members of Zeta Psi into rapists and misogynists. Also, characterizing the incident as "boys will be boys" seems to be missing the point. The point seems to be that "the Jack O'Lantern, uncensored, would be as bawdy."
To all those who say that there are limits on free speech, that this denotes sexism and is therefore unworthy of the protection, I have two responses. First, when I went chalking outside Parkhurst Hall another person scrawled, "there is no point in protecting inoffensive speech." I concur wholeheartedly. I defend a person's right to offend any and everyone. I may disagree with what they say, I may encourage them not to say it and I may hate them if they do, but I have no right to censor them. Second, while it's true that legally, the first amendment may not apply to this instance, morally, it does.
Also, the way that the administration holds frats to a separate standard, presumably in order to slowly dismantle the Greek system, seems offensive in another way. I love diversity. It seems to me that the attempts to dismantle the fraternity system are an attack on diversity. Three reasons: first, in my personal experience, Greek houses have more minorities than the campus on a whole does, or at least some do, and it seems that less racism exists within Webster Avenue than outside it. Secondly, for some reason the College has decided that in an effort to encourage people to attend planned social options, there can be no diversity of social options (read: the Greek system) to compete against (a situation much like the former Soviet Union's policy of compelling people to buy its inferior goods). Last, it seems to me that the administration would rather have a homogenous mindset among the students, while varying the outside packaging. I would much rather have diversity of ideas and mindsets myself (although, obviously, we can have both).
It seems to me that any kind of censorship of non-malicious material is antithetical to the very principles of an educational environment. But I challenge anyone out there: if you think I'm wrong, try to change my mind. Email me, we can go out to lunch. I'm not afraid of discussion, and I'm not afraid to go out on a limb for fear of being wrong. Or, if you prefer, you can continue not to think, you can continue your knee-jerk reaction to the way other people spin the news to manipulate you.
