‘partners and I were just doing our job, scrutiniz- the campus for political incorrectness, when we overed to our glee Peter Hanus and Joseph

phy’s polemic on political correctness.

** are operatives in the Thought Police, the

-al arm ofan international conspiracy with the

ined goal of challenging white, male, hetero

al ideological dominance (patriarchal hegemony).

have accomplished our mission her at UPEI

cording to Hanus & Murphy) through the complete

ration of the curriculum so that the musings of

espeare and Plato have become unknown to the

majority of students, while the revolutionary

s of “‘Rigoberta Menchu’’ and other ‘‘majori- and women are a majority) have taken their

¢ as the central focus of study in our university

eS.

the 60 seconds that it tool us to ‘‘deconstruct”’ the f Hanus & Murphy, ( it was difficult to decide

ner the arrogance and sarcasm of these two

ts was a display of irrational paranoia or the

tened crys of marginalized white, heterosexual

3), we relieved to discover that The Backlash did

ng to threaten our belief ion the importance of

yering ““such ghastly (sic) social wrongs as

Ist wanted to respond to the letter about the busi- #8§ Society. | ama third year business student and ive bought a membership card every year. In my on, this year is the worst year since I have been True there are times when there is evidence that isa Business society, then there are other times, sat a time, that there is no signs of its’ exist- thought the society was supposed to help gether the business students. This year this is . Of course there were a few events, and there more this semester, so they say, but where is vation, the morale, the friendship, the con- laughter they promised last spring. I know w that next year I will not be wasting my amembership.

eee: aay 1992

racism, sexism, heterosexism, ethnocentrim, classism’’ and so on. In fact, our resolve to have the inclusion ofa diversity of appearance of Hanus & Murphy’s article.

We were slightly dismays, however, to find that ‘*turning a UPEI course into a pagan revival’’ (Psych.392/Religious Studies 451 Psychological Transformations and Women’s Spiritual Quest) made only a “‘slight impact’’ at UPEI. In order to more

- fully secure the interests of the politically correct we

will suggest that pagan revivals occur in all courses in the future. Itis felt that ‘‘drawing down the moon’”’ is just what is needed to destabilize the rigid (or is that phallic?), hierarchical haven of DWEMs found at UPEI.

Respectfully, THE THOUGHT POLICE (UPEI Division/Re-Vision)

P.S. We are assuming that the advertisement (paid ad?) for Men’s Rights that appeared following the Backlash was placed there merely by accident. We wouldn’t wantto conclude that Hanus & Murphy were on the slippery slope from “‘women’s studies”’ to *‘white, heterosexual men are oppressed’ would we? Perhaps this is the hidden agenda which The Backlash authors do not wish to overtly reveal to their readers (although this is implicit in the text). Now that would be funny!

Dear Editor

Iam outraged at the audacity of the Student Union. | would like to know who gave the Student Union the *“power’’ to decide what the student body ofthe University has the right to read and what not to read, especially since it is our student fees which pays for these reading materials. We are not children and it is most insulting to be treated as such, actually it is down right degrading. I am sure University students are old enough to decide what they wish to read and what they wish not to read. I am not saying the article in the Alter Ego was in good taste, in my personal opinion, but who granted the Student Union the ‘‘right’’ to dictate what UPEI students are allowed to be exposed to. The Student Union should stop trying to act like ‘‘ Big Brother’’ after all this is not George Orwell’s 1984.

Indignant student

Page 5