No Surprise Over Salary Discrepancies Resulting From Structural Sexism
To the Editor: When I read Brian Sung '97's piece on the Stroh-Reitman study of salary discrepancies (" ... Sexism the Cause?," Nov.
To the Editor: When I read Brian Sung '97's piece on the Stroh-Reitman study of salary discrepancies (" ... Sexism the Cause?," Nov.
To the Editor: The First-Year Experience Committee report was issued in May of 1994. The follow-up summary was released two weeks ago. Some students think that the report is about "Freshman Dorms," "new meal plans" or "changing the name of the Freshman Office." To narrow it down to these simplicities is to let mis-information stifle a very important debate.
Before I start, I'd like to qualify my opinions by noting that I am not a member of a Greek organization. I am speaking as someone who has formed his opinions on fraternities, sororities and co-ed houses through interaction with friends, parties that I have attended and from events of which I have heard. In my two years at Dartmouth, I have become convinced that too many people disparage and criticize the Greek system without an adequate understanding of its many different positive aspects.
There is a sexually transmitted disease called chlamydia that you might have right now. In 79 percent of women who have it, according to one study, there are no symptoms, but the ultimate effects include infertility, premature births, stillbirths and ectopic pregnancies.
Recently, The New York Times reported that two separate studies had shown that, on average, men whose wives stayed home and didn't work received more pay raises and substantially higher salaries than men whose wives did work. The first study, of 348 men at 20 Fortune 500 companies, found that over a five-year period, single-earner husbands received 20 percent higher pay raises than men with working wives.
To the Editor: Challen Stephens '95's review of the Rocky Horror Picture Show (Oct. 31) assumes that having an entire audience of seasoned Rocky Horror cult members is necessary for a good time. I think that Saturday night's show proves that this is not the case.
To the Editor: I was disheartened to see the column by Allison Krasnow (Oct. 27, 'Listen to be Heard') criticizing Dartmouth students who spoke at a forum on sexual harassment charges at the elementary school in Hanover.
This last term marked a dramatic increase in the number of Dartmouth students arrested for possession of alcohol.
I like to think of myself as the people's columnist, so I am always looking out for the well-being of everyone here at Dartmouth.
This past weekend I traveled to Harvard to visit a friend. Since it was the first time we had seen each other since going off to college, we naturally conversed on the various positive and negative aspects of our respective schools.
The Trustees have decided to raise the goal of the "Will to Excel" campaign to half a billion dollars.
To the Editor: Wednesday's editorial ("A Cause for Outrage?") is seriously flawed by its assertions and insinuations. Is illegal police activity a cause for outrage?
To the Editor: As one of the organizers of Domestic Violence Awareness Week, I am compelled to respond to the Oct.
To the Editor: While I appreciate the coverage The Dartmouth has given the Domestic Violence Awareness Week events overall, I would like to express my concern about the house editorial in Thursday's paper titled "Speaking Out?" To begin with, I'd like to emphasize and applaud the strength and courage of the survivors of domestic violence who shared their stories at the vigil.
Public Meeting Thursda To Discuss Alcohol
To the Editor: The Dartmouth seems to have missed the point about the whole uproar over the Hanover Police policy. The editorial in Wednesday's issue of The D ("A Cause for Outrage?") states that the whole blitz barrage and discussion of the situation at hand is geared at protecting the underage "'right' to party." This is not the case.
To the Editor: Your editorial last Wednesday ("A Cause for Outrage?") was way off base. When trying to point out student political apathy, blaming students for reacting to civil rights violations does not help your argument. The Constitution protects our right to atheism, our right to revolution, and yes, our right to party.
Human life is worth less and less in the world we live in. We hear about murders and deaths almost to a point of comfortable numbness.
To the Editor: As the person who is too frequently called upon to write obituaries for Dartmouth students, I'd like to make a small protest about the easy assumption that drunken students pose no harm to themselves when they walk from a party to a dormitory room. We could wish that were the case, but it isn't.
To the Editor: I read with dismay the house editorial that appeared in Thursday's issue of The Dartmouth regarding the vigil for domestic violence awareness.