‘Dear Editor:

I would like to respond to the letter written by the people who call themselves ‘‘Humanists’’ in the November 1 9thissue of the ““X-Press”’.

Firstofall, itwould have served you well had you provided some examples of the ‘‘per- ceived’’ harassment by Feminists. Person- ally, Icannot recall any such incidents and if youare going tomake such astrong statement against others, youreally should provide some concrete examples. Ifyoucall people standing up and speaking for they believeisharassment, youare wrong. I wouldlike to suggest, how- ever, that perhaps it is you who is constantly harassing others with your childlike attitudes, petty personal attacks and repeated attempts

to **bait’” us. Youseemtohaveanoverabun-

dance ofenergy which could best be put to use in more positive causes.

Secondly, your definition of Humanists makes absolutely no sense (along with paragraph four). This calls to mind another of Sarah MacLeod’s letters which was illegible in laces. If you feelso strongly about something, ind feel you must share it, you should take ‘aution in ensuring that it is readable.

nthe Webster’s Dictionary, ‘‘humanism”’ is lefined as ‘‘a way of life centered on human nterests or values.”’ ‘Feminism’ is thetheory the political, economical and social equal- ty of the sexes. Humanism, as I see it, must nclude feminism if it is, if fact, centered on luman interests. Anything of interest and alue to women is a human interest (we are luman) and feminism is concerned with wom- n’s advancement in a society predominantly Oncerned with male interests and values. It loesn’ tmean weare againstmen; only that we ‘antto be equal to them (which is something ‘¢shouldnothaveto struggle for). Feminism 4 pretty simple concept; however, people vho feel threatened by itturn itinto something hat itis not, making it complex, exclusive to lany and harmful to society. As Rebecca Yestwrotein 1913, ‘‘Imyselfhaveneverbeen ble to find out precisely what feminism is: I tly know that people call me a feminist ‘henever] express sentiments that differenti- "cme from a doormat,”*

tegards to your opinion of feminists as F iveand confrontational, youhave, again, ‘led to provide examples. The only aggres- /°" or confrontation that [have witnessed is 'n which feminists were the victims. You So must remember that when people are

Rte

< personally attacked or backed into a corner,

they will respond. Perhaps that is what you consider confrontation -- when the people you are trying to silence speak up.

Inregards to the ‘‘movie’’, itseems to methat you “‘don’t see the forest for the trees’’. Al- though you may secitas asilly satirewhich you have therightto show, youare, in fact, promot- ing the hatred, degradation and violence to- wards women (especially feminists) which themovieportrays.

Is this a humanist value? Those who are offended by ithave good reason to beand you are criticizing them for exercising the very rights to which you socommonly refer. Atno time, did we suggest that others are weak- minded or incapable of forming their own

"_..you are promoting the hatred, degradation and violence towards women which the movie portrays."

opinions. it is logical, however, that if the movie is to be shown on campus, it should be done in an educational light. It actually is a very good film for people with feminist theory to critique and since no one in the Soc/Anth Department offered to do this, we suggested that we would provide the evaluation.

Personally, I am sick of hearing the words ‘academic freedom’’. I feel it is a lame excuse used in offending others and a right which, I feel, you are abusing.

Inclosing, I would like to say that I believe you are justanother part ofthe “‘Backlash”’ against feminism and encouraging you to voice your opinionscausesmeto feel very proud ofmyself and happy because know Iam doinga good job. Thank-you.

Libby Whelan P.S. Ididn’t have the time to get people who

supportme to sign this, but know they are out there and] amconfidentenoughto sign alone.