The community dialogue between members of the Tufts Feminist Alliance (TFA), Delta Tau Delta fraternity (DTD) and the greater Tufts community was an important event for our campus. For those of you in attendance, I hope that you left Hotung that night, as I did - hopeful that this event would be replicated. Hopefully, this type of dialogue will continue so that there might be real discourse on this campus about critical and controversial issues.
As I listened to student after student stand up to explain how this rush poster and how in general images of women as sexual objects affected them, I was proud to be at Tufts. I felt good not only because people were making strong points, and not only because the people who were making strong points agreed with me, but also because the students who passionately spoke showed that they cared about more than just the issue at hand. These students cared enough to put themselves out there about an issue that was important to them, and they cared about making other students understanding their perspective.
That night in Hotung, I heard students whom I had never heard speak about feminist issues step up to the microphone. I heard students speak personally about this issue, not because they wanted "our side" to sound right or "win" the "debate." They wanted to give DTD an opportunity to understand the effects of their actions and hopefully incorporate what they heard into decision-making in the future.
I cannot speak for everyone who attended the dialogue, but most people seemed pleased and thought it was a positive and constructive evening of discussion. It concerns me that what was such a refreshing moment of dialogue on this campus was put down in a Viewpoint on Tuesday, and that the Tufts Feminist Alliance was inappropriately criticized and insulted.
Harris Dainoff, author of "Tufts Feminist Alliance picked the wrong fight" published Nov. 27 2001, was not at the community dialogue about the DTD rush posters. I regret that Harris wrote his Viewpoint without having attended the event because he raises an important and interesting issue; the value of his point is lost in a misrepresentation of the TFA/DTD event and his condescension towards TFA.
If Harris had attended the dialogue, he would have heard the opening comments from the Tufts Feminist Alliance and would have realized the absurdity of his introducing his Viewpoint with an excerpt from the First Amendment.
TFA thought long and hard not only about the points it wanted to make, but about how it wanted to frame this discussion. For this reason, the TFA opened the dialogue by explaining that it was not challenging DTD's freedom of speech or right to create or post the rush posters. It stated clearly that it was not the TFA's objective to officially limit the use of such images by student groups through censorship or new policies.
The TFA asked explicitly for people not to feel like they must "choose sides" (a point that was reiterated by a speaker from the floor), but rather that its intention was for to have an opportunity to explain its concerns about the rush posters and to hear from DTD and other members of the community.
As I mentioned previously, hidden beneath factual inaccuracies and unnecessary criticism, Harris does have an interesting point to make. I believe that Harris's Viewpoint - if redirected - could further the conversation that began at DTD's rush and continued at Hotung. Harris challenges the expanded use of such language as "violence against women" and "culture of rape" to include sexual harassment and sexual images, an issue that not all feminists agree with and an issue with strong arguments for both sides. This is material for an interesting and complex conversation. Instead of initiating this dialogue, though, Harris Dainoff used his Viewpoint as an opportunity to insult, judge, and put down the Feminist Alliance. I cannot fathom why Harris chose to frame his Viewpoint with such antagonism towards both the event and the Feminist Alliance. There is too much criticism and condemnation on this campus and not enough dialogue.
I am concerned about the shutting down of communication on this campus and of the polarization of political camps into "us" and "them." I am also concerned that it is more acceptable to criticize a person or a group's actions in print than to personally approach them to disagree and try to better understand one another.
I regret that Harris buried his challenge to the expanded use of the language, "violence against women" and "culture of rape," in inappropriate and hurtful attacks on TFA, because in doing so, he contributed to the criticism and lack of understanding that is tearing our campus apart. When I put aside my anger and frustration and tried to think about what Harris was really trying to say - the need for a critical dialogue - it is this notion that I would like to see receive more energy and commitment from our community.
Liz Monnin is a junior majoring in women's studies and peace and justice studies. She is a co-chair of the Tufts Feminist Alliance.
