I respectfully beg to differ with Professor Jeffrey Taliaferro in his assertion that "the 'Jackson College' notion on the admissions records, transcripts, and diplomas of female undergraduates does not constitute discrimination" ("Jackson is not sexist," 11/9). I furthermore take great issue with his extremely harsh reprimanding of Larissa Johnson's Viewpoint ("A sexist degree debacle," 11/2). Prof. Taliaferro not only completely ignores the main issue, but also dances the extremely delicate line between constructive criticism and outright rudeness with very little caution.
When Ms. Johnson said that, "to find any reference of Jackson College you would have to search the archives," she is not at all out of touch with reality, as Prof. Taliaferro so tactfully accuses. The name Jackson College is certainly found all over the Tufts website and University literature, but I truly doubt that most students have a clear idea of the history behind this elusive name. Thus, Ms. Johnson is correct in that if you are interested in learning why the name exists, you must search the archives.
Prof. Taliaferro believes it is "laughable" to think that admitting all undergraduate women to Jackson College is gender discrimination. He argues that since The College of Liberal Arts and Jackson College both have the same faculty and since students live in the same dorms and have equal access to all facilities, there is no discrimination at all. The author's own argument is contradictory. If indeed everybody does have the same access to everything, then why must women have their diplomas stamped with a different college than the men? It makes absolutely no sense to call the same thing by two different names on the sole basis of gender, and under the circumstances it can be seen as a type of discrimination. Any remote sense of discrimination arising out of this discrepancy is exacerbated not only by the fact that those who are affected by this matter are not consulted, but also by such condescending responses from faculty members to genuine concerns of students.
There certainly are other colleges and universities that have separate colleges and facilities for men and women, as the author so perceptively points out. But separation is not the case at Tufts University, where facilities are not divided on the basis of gender. Thus, to compare our situation with those of schools in that category is moot.
Furthermore, the author asks how Ms. Johnson would feel about single sex colleges and universities, as if this has anything to do with this Jackson College debacle. I cannot answer on behalf of Ms. Johnson, but I personally feel that there is a great deal of merit and importance in the time-honored and rich history of exceptional single-sex institutions of higher learning in America. It is true that the courts have deemed such schools perfectly legal and acceptable, and I concur with that opinion. However, I did not choose to go to a single-sex university. As it so happens, I chose to come to Tufts, and I was under the impression that I would be attending and graduating from the same college as everybody else in the liberal arts college, regardless of gender. I had no idea that come graduation, my college would become like a public restroom and they would nicely separate the boys and girls into blue and pink sides of the room.
The author is correct; those of us in the liberal arts college were admitted to The College of Liberal Arts and Jackson College. But if Tufts University means to continue this practice of graduating men from one college and women from the other, then it should make clear in all of its literature that the College of Liberal Arts is for Tufts Men and that Jackson College is for Tufts Women. But it seems to me that a more sound decision would be to alter this arcane policy altogether.
If, in fact, men and women share all facilities, access, and academic resources on this campus, then why on earth is it that the women must graduate from a different college? Is all this fuss for the sake of a tradition that nobody takes the time to explain to Tufts women? The discrimination occurs when I go through four years of the same schooling as my male peers and then at the end of it all, my diploma is stamped with a symbol of my gender for absolutely no visible reason. Adopting the so-called logic of this practice, the name "Start House" should also appear on my diploma so that I can graduate with an indelible, and apparently indispensable, stamp of not only my gender but also of my ethnicity. Ultimately, if Tufts University thinks that it is so important to maintain the name "Jackson College," then everybody studying liberal arts should graduate from "The College of Liberal Arts and Jackson College." If this is indeed the proud tradition of Professor Taliaferro's claims, then why limit its celebration to liberal arts women?
The author believes that "it is a disgrace" to "divert our attention from addressing real issues of discrimination and equity." Last time I checked, there was not a quota on how many issues of concern Tufts students may voice, but perhaps Professor Taliaferro knows something I do not. Moreover, I think it is a "disgrace" that a professor would take the time off of his sabbatical to so scathingly demean a legitimate viewpoint of a Tufts student who would prefer that all students who go to the same college at this university graduate with the same degree.
Sarada Peri is a senior majoring in political science.
