I'm writing in response to the Sept. 21 article: "Hook ups:", and Sept. 23 article: "Manhood". Before I continue, I want to put out a disclaimer so as to not upset the rest of the women (ND and SMC). And most people who know me describe me as a gentleman who has the utmost respect for women, so please don't hold this against me.
These articles made women sound like whiney 'female dogs'. You think everything is unfair, and revenge is the answer. Life is unfair, and we have people who are unequal. I don't think that is right, but it's true. I respect women more than men, but I don't write about how men mistreat women, as it happens both ways.
The first article portrays women as incapable of thinking for themselves. I don't think so, but stating "women don't generally try to [hook up]" suggests they follow without thinking. Is this the point you wanted portrayed? I doubt it. And the closing line of " ... how about we have a little fun at his expense ... " portrays you as a hypocrite. Suggesting that women do the same thing just to get even? If that is what we've come to, then this is truly a sad day...
As for the "Manhood" article, we want equality, but portraying yourself as helpless and having no rights is pathetic. Women fight for equality when it benefits them. Why aren't you criticizing about women not having to sign up for the draft? Currently it's only men. This is one example, but there are others like it.
Raising the argument about only males being priests is absurd! As a member of the ND community, we see how tradition plays into our lives. Do you have "The Shirt" or walk up the steps of the Dome? My guess is yes and no, since these traditions are important to us. Male priests are also a tradition. I hope this has not offended the campus, as I don't wish to create an uproar, but when writing in a public forum, think about what you're saying and make sure it's what you want.
Richard J. Skelton
sophomore
Keough Hall
Sept. 24
