LETTER: Brilliant Woman

Sumeet Goel may be well-intentioned in his critique of Anita Hill and the American Way of making a buck (DP 4/9/92). But his argument is flawed and he misses the point. So Hill was paid $11,000 to speak at Penn. She is a reputable professor of law. Goel thinks the side effect of bringing the issue of sexual harassment to the forefront of public concern is not worth Connaissance paying her the money to speak. It's a cost-benefit analysis. Starting discussion on an important issue is as worthwhile as having the various politicians and academics whom Connaissance has paid to speak in the past. So maybe Goel thinks it's not a big enough issue. Yes, a series of discussions throughout the community about the cause would be constructive. Hill's discussion can be an important, needed impetus for such discussions. The fact is, Connaissance pays speakers large sums of money to speak here at Penn sometimes. They are expected to talk in areas of their expertise. In Hill's case, this is sexual harassment and law. In lamenting Hill's omitting juicy details about the Senate hearings, Goel is asking for the sensationalism which he claims to criticize. Goel's argument is therefore misguided. Hill was a deserving guest and an enlightening speaker, who contributed to my knowledge on the subject. To quote Goel out of context, "She's a brilliant woman." KIM DIXON College '93