Letters to the Editor

Anscombe Society to promote chastity, not exclusion

Regarding "Chastity group to get University funding" (Tuesday, Feb. 22):

We have, rightly, received concerned emails about the fact that the Anscombe Society espouses opposition to homosexual relationships and abortion. Though the philosopher for whom the society is named, Elizabeth Anscombe, might have opposed these issues, the application and mission statement of this particular student group did not include, in any form, information about taking a stance on the exclusion or discrimination of homosexuals. In fact, the officers repeatedly stated that the group would be open to any student "choosing to lead a chaste lifestyle" no matter his or her creed, race, religion or sexual orientation. The Society's idea of "traditional sexual ethics," as presented to the SGRC, embodied ideals of chastity, not of exclusion or discrimination in any form. Emily Arensman '06 SGRC Chair Jackson Murley '06 USG Student Groups Liason

Tiger Magazine in need of a humor lesson

Regarding "Full text of Tiger response to BSU letter" (Tuesday, Feb. 22):

The editors of Tiger Magazine ask us to "look below the surface" of their "joke" and take "humor as humor." You know what you get when you look below the surface of anything regarding the KKK? Racial and religious hatred, pure and simple. Where's the humor in all this? Still looking. In linking the facebook name of an African-American arts company and the KKK, the Tiger editors were definitely targeting a particular race, even if they did so subconsciously or without any malicious intent. I would suggest that instead of dismissing Ms. Lee's concerns out of hand, the Tiger staff should make an honest effort to adress the issues that the BSU has raised and to prevent such an incident from happening again in the future. Catherine Chou '06

Recruiting a diverse administration

Regarding "University examines employee diversity" (Monday, Feb. 21):

Vice President Janet Dickerson claims that the University will try to increase the recruitment and retention of "diverse employees" and that this will be fairly easy because of the local concentration of "people of diversity". Now wait, since when can a person be diverse? Dickerson must mean "people of color," but her carelessness is another instance hiding behind the sacred god of diversity to gain support for a misguided program.

The reasons for this initiative to hire more minority administrators are summarized by Chris Willis '07: "If we constantly see minorities in a lower position, it might perpetuate stereotypes." While this may be true, affirmative action also perpetuates stereotypes. Hiring people based on their race or ethnicity rather than their qualifications only strengthens the belief that minorities are not qualified to be University administrators.

Perhaps its true that the scarcity of minority administrators is solely a function of poor recruitment. If so, then all the better. We'll have more competition for the top jobs and the quality of our hires will be better. But if we have to resort to hiring less qualified people in order to boost the number of minority employees then we are doing a major disservice. Let's not sacrifice quality for quantity. John Vermylen '05