Letters to the Editor

Author: [no author name found]

To the Editor:

At the Ross meeting about homophobic graffiti one student suggested The Campus should have regular coverage of LGBT issues. Last week's issue had three pieces, but not of gay-positive coverage. Why is it so easy to be distracted by a silly argument about alleged discrimination against athletes? Why was even The Wall Street Journal interested in that story, while we forget the very real homophobic attacks on people who might really know what it's like to be stereotyped? Why was it that Roman Graf's incisive analysis of institutional homophobia was not printed (read it on the website dis.course), when it would have taken half the ink that was spent last week on arguments shifting the focus from homophobia? Could it be that there is indeed an institutional bias - in The Campus, on the campus, and in society - that ranks legitimate complaints of LGBT people below even phantom grievances of those who enjoy heterosexual privilege?

The question posed at the April 11 Town Meeting in McCullough was "Why at Middlebury?" Because two years ago the college administration fudged the military recruitment policy. Because over the summer the policy language was amended without telling the very community that had overwhelmingly voted to change it: it now effectively reads "we must allow recruiting because we value money over principles." Because just this past fall the College with much fanfare accepted an endowed chair named for a man who as recently as 2003 ruled it constitutional to put homosexuals behind bars. Maybe that's why.

Sincerely,

Kevin Moss

Professor of Russian



To the Editor:

In the recent heat surrounding homophobic graffiti, it seems Middlebury Open Queer Alliance (MOQA) has divided the student body into three categories: Those that support homosexuality and MOQA by becoming an ally, those that hate the gay community and support hate speech, and those that are just too apathetic. I would like to point out that there is an alternate view: it is possible to disagree with the concept of homosexuality, yet still maintain friendships with gay people.

But I feel that there's not much room on this campus to say homosexuality is wrong nowadays. Yet, disagreements can be expressed in a respectful manner, and I can disagree with homosexuality and homophobic hate speech at the same time. If we believe in freedom of speech, we should give those who believe that homosexuality is wrong as much space to express themselves as those who believe otherwise.

And if we are so concerned about the use of homophobic hate speech, we should be fair and try to eliminate hate speech in other forms as well. For example, everyday we hear people using God's name in vain. For some of us, God plays a significant role in our lives. How would we feel if the College community started using our best friend's name or our father's name to curse? As our thoughts go to those who are affected by the homophobic graffiti, let us not go to such extremes that we in turn suppress those who have different views on homosexuality. Two suppressions do not make equality.

Sincerely,

Magdalena Widjaja '08

Jakarta Utara, Indonesia



To the Editor:

Have you ever seen "God Hates Jocks" written on an athlete's door? Have you ever heard of an athlete getting beaten up because they choose to play a sport? Historically, athletics and the hyper-masculinity they engender have fostered homophobia and reinforced a heteronormative culture; they continue to do so today. On our campus and in American society, athletes hold powerful, privileged positions.

Whether or not the comments about athletics on the Office of Institutional Diversity display in the library should have been removed, the fact is that those opinions are still present in our community. There is a reason these comments were written, and simply erasing them does not solve the problem. People at Middlebury College feel the effects of homophobia first-hand in many areas of their lives, and the athletics department is not free of heterosexism.

Middlebury Open Queer Alliance understands that the comments are problematic. However, we need to talk about the nature of the comments precisely because they raise so many problems. It must be the responsibility of each and every one of us to address what the connection is between athletics and homophobia on this campus.

MOQA ardently supports and encourages dialogue at Middlebury College. We believe that, in order to truly address any divisive issue, dialogue must be open not only to honesty but also to passion and anger. Let's remember the passion and the energy that these discussions have created in order to continue having real, honest conversations in September.

Sincerely,

The Middlebury Open Queer Alliance



To the Editor:

After having read two opinion pieces about the lack of a satisfactory social scene and the "unjustified" enforcement of underage drinking laws, I feel it necessary to comment. While these opinions are just that - opinions - I am slightly disturbed by the insinuations that they tend to imply. While I admit that Animal House-style parties are few and far between here at Middlebury, there are other ways of having fun. Criticizing genuine efforts like the Brainerd Party or MCAB events is unnecessary and disrespectful. If one would like to drink oneself into oblivion, there are ways to do procure such beverages and do so easily. Many students, however, do not fall into this category; instead, they prefer to enjoy a night of music, movies or just hanging out with friends.

I don't know about you, but when I think Middlebury, or any other small NESCAC-type school for that matter, I do not imagine raging parties with hundreds of people, enough beer to drown in and police standing idly by while underage college students make dumb decisions. That brings me to my second point: Why should Rutland County Liquor Inspector Michael Davidson exempt minors from drinking regulations when it is his express responsibility to do exactly the opposite? I don't understand the argument that Mr. Davidson should stop "sticking with such a narrow interpretation of the drinking laws around here." It wasn't apparent to me that there were different interpretations of drinking laws. I also didn't realize that college campuses did not have to follow said laws. Perhaps it is not Mr. Davidson's "misguided guidance" that is the problem here.

I agree that drinking and inevitably getting drunk is an established part of the college tradition, but in no way does this mean that police or Public Safety should sit back and watch as Middlebury students drink away their college lives.

Sincerely,

Elliott Fox '10

Newton, Mass.



To the Editor:

As the academic year draws to a close, we would like to reflect on the incidents of hate speech and homophobia that have preoccupied our campus this spring. While the occurrence of these incidents is dispiriting, we have been heartened by the community's response.

From the public meetings in Ross and McCullough to the articles and letters in The Campus to the signs, murals and displays to the informal conversations that have taken place throughout the College, students, faculty and staff from many backgrounds have spoken out against anonymous expressions of hate and intolerance. We welcome these exchanges, and believe that additional discussion needs to take place in order to promote the traditions of free speech and expression that are so vital to academic institutions such as Middlebury. We recognize that free speech can, and should, include provocative, even unsettling forms of expression. However, we are profoundly concerned when these anonymous postings are meant to intimidate members of our community, and thereby throttle their right t
o free expression.

Looking ahead to next year, we pledge to use whatever resources we have to create opportunities for meaningful dialogue. We would like to move beyond the reactive posture that hate speech inevitably prompts, and create a framework for addressing critical issues - of identity, equity, stereotyping, intolerance, hate speech and free speech, among others - on an ongoing basis. Initiatives we are already committed to pursuing next year include:

Continued investigation of the reported incidents on campus of hate speech acts.

Revamping the training of residential staff during orientation and throughout the year to equip them to address diversity-oriented issues.

Enhancing first-year orientation so that it includes more in-depth exposure to, and discussion about, diversity issues, including gender and sexuality.

Working with the Student Government Association and Community Council to assess the benefits of an institutional social honor code.

Planning events and forums within our five Commons and across campus to further engage issues of difference.

As an administration, we are committed to developing policies and structures that foster and sustain inclusion on every level and in every division of the College. We have a great deal of work to do, but we are confident in this community's willingness and ability to make Middlebury a stronger, more welcoming place - all in the name of creating for our students the strongest and most vibrant environment in which to learn and grow.

Sincerely,

President of the College Ronald D. Liebowitz

Dean of Institutional Diversity Shirley M. Ramirez

Dean of the College Tim Spears