LETTERS: A misrepresentation of words

To the Editor: In my speech I said: "I'm not going to make a reductive argument here and say that because men read Penthouse, women get raped." Yet Joseph Gentile, who was not present, accuses me of making just such an argument ("A night reserved for all survivors," DP, 4/8/97). Go figure. My reference to Sports Illustrated, which Gentile also misreads, came as I emphasized the degree to which women are "seen but not heard." I didn't mention Tyra Banks or male sexual desire. My only reference to desire was my "pro-sex" suggestion that Speak-Outs can help survivors reclaim their sexuality in positive, guilt-free ways. Melissa Goldate was apparently present at the Speak-Out yet her "analysis" of my speech is also founded on an alarming misreading ("All sexes can support women's rights," DP, 4/7/97). Failing to distinguish between my lengthy remarks on the purpose of Speak-Outs and my brief comment that I think the empowering marches which follow should be women-only, Goldate utterly misrepresents me. I didn't say men should not attend Speak-Outs. Rather, I stated emphatically that I wished the entire University were present. What I did say was Speak-Outs should involve men only as listeners. Why? 1) Over 90 percent of sexual violence is male on female. Is it too much to ask that once a year we concentrate solely on abused women? (and not, as Craig Abbs suggests, on everyone). That we take time to consider the deep-seated misogyny which underlies this statistic? Abuse exists in many forms but handling them simultaneously diverts attention from the gendered power-relations that produce this statistic. When it shifts to 50 percent, let's talk about a co-ed Speak-Out. Meanwhile, let's address the issue at hand. 2) Goldate asserts "I doubt Take Back the Night is a popular event for rapists." But my speech recalled that, last year, a man thought it appropriate to share his experience as a rapist. Many women were distressed by this and it made a mockery of the event. Speak-Outs were designed to support, embrace and empower survivors -- not perpetrators. I did not say there is no place for men to join us in crusading against sexual violence, nor even that the stories of ex-rapists should go unheard. There is a time for such testimonials but it should not be during the only time that has been created to enable women to vocalize their horror stories about the abuse they endure. As a woman, a survivor and a feminist, I dared to argue there should be a time when women speak and men listen. Within the conservative, patriarchal discourse dominating Penn's campus, this renders me an "aggressive extremist" and a "male-basher." Since when has asking to be heard signified aggressive extremism? Are men so vulnerable that they feel "bashed" when asked to listen? This hyperbolic language only emphasizes my point: women truly are expected to be "seen and not heard." And what if someone had said "men should castrate themselves to atone for the sins of their brothers?" I'd call that "aggressive extremism." My accusers would have no labels left for it for they've used them all up on me. The final, sad irony is this unsophisticated and misinformed labeling of me diverts attention away from the actual focus of last week's rally: women bashing. Litty Paxton SAS graduate student Need for college houses To the Editor: When I began to read the DP's article "Off-campus living may strain town-gown relations," (DP, 4/3/97) I thought to myself, "Finally, the administration is learning!" I was so happy to read that Carol Scheman, vice president for government, community and public affairs, has begun to make comparisons between the school-community situations at Penn and Harvard. As Scheman observed, Harvard's relations with Cambridge are much better than those between Penn and West Philadelphia, primarily because almost every Harvard student lives on campus. At this point in her analysis, I was sure Scheman might go on to make the only logical next step-- to compare residential living at the two institutions and conclude Penn ought to gravitate toward a Harvard-style residential system. But, alas, Scheman and other administrators opt instead to pursue a forced integration of the undergraduate population and the community. They state the University must face the reality of having large numbers of students choosing to live off campus. Why? Although I admit a huge shift in Penn's undergraduate residential living system would be expensive and long-term, why must the school accept the trend of the last few decades, exporting Penn undergraduates to the community? The reason Harvard undergraduates opt to live on campus is because they have a traditional system of 12 residential colleges, each of which has been constructed in a beautiful collegiate architecture. Harvard has nurtured a much stronger sense of tradition among its undergraduates by placing them in these classic structures, whereas Penn has alienated its students by giving them abhorrent '60s-inspired monstrosities like the pre-fabricated high rises and the freak show that is Hill House. The bottom line is that Harvard students like living on campus. Throughout my three years here at Penn I have wondered at the astounding inability of Penn's administrators to see the light. Penn doesn't need academically oriented college houses, lodged in tenement-style high rises; it needs an instantiated sense of residential tradition. When a friend at Harvard was eagerly looking forward to her house's formal, I was shocked. "Normal people actually participate in activities organized by university residences?" I asked. "Of course, don't they do it at Penn?" she responded. The next step for Penn freshmen, upon leaving the Quad, should be such a universally popular college house, not a slumlord's decrepit town house on Baltimore Avenue. I hope the comparisons to Harvard persist in the minds of Penn administrators -- it will serve the University well. Lee Bailey College '98 A daily stop at Tuscany To the Editor: On any other Monday afternoon at this time, I would be contentedly sipping a Sumatra Mandheling at a table in the Tuscany Cafe. My eyes would lazily sweep over a copy of the DP (or that neglected bulkpack article), soothed by the sounds of Lee Morgan's "The Sidewinder" and waves of caffeine-induced euphoria. It has been nearly a week since the ominous handwritten sign -- "Closed! Indefinitely." -- appeared in the front window of the cafe at 34th and Moravian streets. Tuscany was a comfortable refuge from the cold, a veritable crown jewel of the Penn campus. Tuscany was my morning ritual and my afternoon reward. It boasted the coolest barristas and, without question, the best coffee west of the Schuylkill. Yes, life will continue without the Tuscany Cafe. I'll start frequenting Le Bus, I suppose. But every morning my elegiac cry will sound over this campus as I pass the darkened storefront of what was once my favorite cafe. Nate Chinen College '98 A 'clean' surprise To the Editor: I would like to express my delight about our clean streets. The participating Penn students did a wonderful job! Now, let's all work together to keep it clean. It is so easy to pick up some flying papers and put them in a trash can. And on trash day , broom up the spilled items. It just takes a minute and it makes such a difference in our quality of life. Thank you again! Isabel Bohn