[1501] in peace2
1/4 women raped?!
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jimmy Wu)
Mon Feb 25 20:34:37 2002
From: "Jimmy Wu" <jimmbswu@hotmail.com>
To: alsmith@mit.edu
Cc: jimmbswu@mit.edu, gsc-officers@mit.edu, gsc-hca-chair@mit.edu,
peace-keepers@mit.edu
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 20:33:52 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F104fhTGBe932VXI2PG00007c4e@hotmail.com>
The claim that 1/4 of all women are raped during their lifetime is very
exaggerated. I have pointed out this mistaken statistic to you before.
Please do not use wrong statistics again. You don't want to be in the wrong
with statistics. People will stop listening to you.
Check out http://www.iwf.org/news/010417.shtml
>Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 18:04:31 -0500
>From: Aimee L Smith <alsmith@mit.edu>
>To: jhbrown@ai.mit.edu (Jeremy H. Brown)
>cc: gsc-officers@mit.edu, gsc-hca-chair@mit.edu, peace-keepers@mit.edu,
> peace-women@mit.edu, pro-choice-request@mit.edu,
>stop-officer@mit.edu,
> ua-csl@mit.edu
>Subject: Re: Racist sexist images
>Message-Id: <200202252304.SAA26076@gold.mit.edu>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>1st I love arguments that say, "well, if you would have asked
>nicely, then I would have given a shit..." If this were the
>first time I had had to complain about this issue, you might have
>a point. And since you are so concerned about the feelings
>of others, I will come to you first for advice about how to make
>positive social change.
>
>2nd There is a difference between free speech in a public
>environment and in a workplace and/or home environment
>(such as a dorm.)
>
>You don't have the right to contribute to a hostile atmosphere
>for people protected under the Civil Rights Act. (You may or
>may not be happy to know that you DO have the right to discriminate
>on the basis of a person being a member of the communist party
>or other such group -- let's hear it for McCarthy.)
>
>In a Corporation, you are working in the context of a private tyranny
>and virtually any kind of speech can be banned except for
>complaints of harassment. Yes, we do shed all constitutional rights
>to expression when we enter a private organization except those that
>allow us to have equality under the civil rights act (and to organize
>unions, at least until that one stopped being enforced.)
>
>MIT as a not for profit corporation, can choose to bar Sterret or
>any of us from free expression. The only difficulty it will have is
>one of moral outrage at an organization claiming to be a learning
>environment that takes hoards of federal money silencing the polite
>questions of an employee that might make Shell realize they don't
>own MIT. Incidentally, (although this may change soon) the
>Civil Rights Act does *not* protect members of corporations from being
>questioned about their organizations' possible involvement in criminal
>activity. One who chooses to work for Shell is not being "made to
>feel uncomfortable" on account of their race, religion, creed, sex,
>or physical ability. In fact, the Shell reps seemed to be quite fine
>with the questions and perhaps even relished the chance to respond to
>such criticisms in an open dialogue. We also had a nice respectful and
>enjoyable discussion after the Shell recruiting event. I don't think the
>Shell reps felt very threatened, but I guess you will have to ask them
>to be sure.
>
>3rd I must say, I do like the castration posters, but I understand why
>others
>might choose to take them down. If I had been clever enough to come up
>with
>them, maybe I would have. Nevertheless, the fact that people feel no
>reservations about tearing them down is only helping to make the point that
>some expression is not tolerated on this campus, yet when it targets women,
>it is. I asked some of the ZBT brothers what would serve as a symmetric
>image
>to ones objectifying women considering that men don't face the same degree
>of
>terror at the hands of women as women do via men (and not even so
>abstracted
>from the whole frat-party scene i.e. date-rape drugs have been used at MIT
>frats.) The brothers could offer no alternatives to something like the
>castration posters. I was involved with a counter flyer last year that
>used a much more abstract castration symbol, and that didn't stay up
>either. Let's face it, how many Lorrana Bobbitts are there in this land?
>1 in 4 women are estimated to be raped in their lifetime, the threat of
>death has never been abstract to me -- my babysitter was raped and murdered
>when I was about 10. Again, check the stats on "Stop Our Silence" web
>site.
>So, while I am not sure how I feel about the castration poster, what do
>you suggest as a way to demonstrate to unaware men to test their devotion
>to the concept of freedom of expression? The Nu Delts failed miserably
>last year and the ZBT were no better, although I think the ZBT might have
>had more anonymous help than the symbolic poster extracted.
>
>I don't believe I am a hypocrite (at least not worse than any of us) I
>think I
>just have a slightly more nuanced understanding of Harassment and why we
>need
>to stand up against it. But it amuses me that some people think that
>hypocrisy
>is the greatest evil. I consider terrorizing others to be worse, but
>that's
>just me. The other thing that amuses me is how desperately people fight
>for their right to oppress members of oppressed groups instead of fighting
>for their right to challenge illegitimate uses of power, which was the
>whole
>basis for the first amendment, but again, I guess we all have our own
>priorities. So, I am asking as prettily as a young woman should. What say
>you, oh wise male feminist sage that you are, Jeremy?
>
>In hope,
> Aimee
>
>PS talking about pornography and images that objectify women is fine,
>acting
>to put such images all over the campus is not.
>
>
>
>
>Date: 25 Feb 2002 18:48:21 -0500
>From: jhbrown@suspiria.ai.mit.edu (Jeremy H. Brown)
>To: Aimee L Smith <alsmith@mit.edu>
>Cc: gsc-officers@mit.edu, gsc-hca-chair@mit.edu, peace-keepers@mit.edu,
> peace-women@mit.edu, pro-choice-request@mit.edu,
> stop-officer@mit.edu, ua-csl@mit.edu
>Subject: Re: Racist sexist images
>Message-ID: <uv6lmdhm8ca.fsf@suspiria.ai.mit.edu>
>References: <200202252304.SAA26076@gold.mit.edu>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> > So, I am asking as prettily as a young woman should. What say
> > you, oh wise male feminist sage that you are, Jeremy?
>
>0) I've been on the gsc-hca list since before you got to MIT. This
> was the first time you'd complained about a poster there. When you
> came to a new audience and punished them for the sins of previous
> audiences in your opening volley, you were making stereotype-based
> assumptions, and creating an automatic opposition, all at once.
> Bravo!
>
>1) Images are speech. Putting up images is speech. Get over it.
>
>2) Fer chrissakes, just admit that your husband put up the castration
> posters already. OK, so technically you didn't do it, but please
> quit acting all innocent and dumb lest we start thinking of you as
> a Bad Female Stereotypes.
>
>3) Tell me how castration posters don't contribute to a hostile
> environment for guys. They do? That was the *point*? Oh my.
> So.... it's okay for X, but not for Y. Screw double-standards.
>
> BTW, while MIT applies no content-based restrictions to postering,
> there are form-and-manner restrictions; removing or covering the
> existing ZBT posters in favor of the castration posters was a
> violation of those rules, and I'm told that's why they were taken
> down by the ASA.
>
>4) If I recall correctly, there's actually mixed case-law on whether
> or not private universities that accept large volumes of federal
> money can restrict free speech. See "The Shadow University" by
> Alan Charles Kors and Harvey A. Silverglate for details. I don't
> recall off the cuff what decisions have already been made in MA;
> I'll check my copy when I get home.
>
> Regardless, MIT allows anyone to poster on the publicly-accessible
> bulletin boards; as public forums, those aren't going to be subject
> to workplace rules regardless.
>
>5) The frequency of violence against women is frightening, hideous,
> awful, etc. It would be awful if it were only 1%. Violence is
> bad. Rape is bad. Both are also illegal. Why does this keep
> coming up? We all agree.
>
> But if you want to equate any type of *expression* with *rape*,
> please turn in your "liberal" card -- you've just joined the
> right-wingers who want to ban video games 'cause they're violence,
> Ulysses because it's obscene, Harry Potter because it encourages
> witchcraft. Art is art. Ads are ads. Expression is expression.
> It's free in America. It *should* be free on American campuses.
>
>6) I haven't labeled myself a "feminist" because the definition is so
> heavily debated. I'm an "equalist". I believe that women are
> people, that men are people, that black people are people, that
> white people are people, that gay people are people, etc. And I
> believe that all people have equal rights.
>
> Are there any more "equalists" out there, or is it just me?
>
> It's such a shame the ERA didn't fly...
>
>7) If anyone *really* wants, I guarantee you I can produce posters
> featuring a volunteer naked MIT woman holding a gun. You'd better
> have a damned good party to justify the effort, though.
>
>Jeremy
>
>PS I have really complicated opinions on Affirmative Action that I
> won't bore y'all with here.
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
