Somebody Out There Likes Us
Dear Editor,
I've just finished reading over the inaugural edition of Contumacy. I applaud your endeavor and stand behind you 100%. I may not agree with all that was and will be said in the paper, but I greatly respect the open-flow of ideas and opinions expressed therein. More specifically...
Your manifesto on the trials and tribulations of Professor Lopreato is INCREDIBLE. I was extremely impressed. And extremely dismayed. Tis a damn shame what has been done to this fine scholar. One only hopes that true Justice will be found. The powers that be MUST read your piece. I hope you sent copies to the appropriate offices (seriously). E-mail them too!
I would [however] have stressed that the brand of feminism that your are caricaturing (well, I might add), is only that, "a" brand. There are other sects of feminism led by the likes of Roiphe, Sommers, Paglia, etc. You mention the first two, but did not explicitly state that their voices are indeed encompassed under the "Feminist Umbrella." One can be an ardent feminist (as am I), and agree wholeheartedly with the premise of your piece. There is no one monolithic feminist ideology or voice. But I'll be damned if it often doesn't seem like it...
My reaction to Sonia Mohammed's drivel is quite different. Her premise was in a word farcical. I won't bother here denigrating the assininity of the Pro-Life movement (yes, I myself am Pro-Abortion; note: not Pro-choice, but Pro-abortion, to quote Paglia). I confine my criticism to her silly understanding of the workings of history. An analogy will suffice: Should I abandon Major League Baseball because it discriminated against Blacks for half of it's 125 yr existence? NO! Of course not. What's been done has been done. Simply see to it that the same crap doesn't continue. Planned Parenthood does worlds of good. Worlds. But I'm heavily biased. I admit it. So is Sonia. She didn't own up to it however. Always lay out your subjective biases first, in my humbly arrogant opinion.
Anyway, a great issue. I eagerly look forward to more.
Barry Friedman
On the Park/Lopreato Sexual Harassment Case
Dear Editor,
I read your article "Salem Revisited: Academic Witch-Hunt in U.T. Sociology Department." I would like to congratulate you for your clear thinking and your courage in speaking the truth of your experiences. I am a former student of Dr.%Lopreato and although I have not been in contact with him since the graduate school, I share very much your sentiments. Professor Joe Lopreato has the respect and admiration of many of his students and former students. I find it hard to believe that he could ever harass or harm anyone. Given the type of evidence reported in your article, it is not difficult to see how this situation might have evolved as the consequence of the departmental politics, the ideology of dogmatic feminism, and a lack of tolerance for multiculturalism. Hope that the administration will bring this matter to a satisfactory conclusion.
Poopak Ta'ati, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Sociology
Montgomery College
On the Benefits of Consulting Primary Sources
Dear Editor,
Sonia Mohammed is a passionate writer. Anyone who read "The University of Texas: Co-conspirator in ethnic cleansing?" knows this is an understatement, and perhaps the only nice thing to say about the article. Mohammed contends that the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was racist and therefore Planned Parenthood is a racist organization. Mohammed then berates UT for failing to incorporate different viewpoints and proves why this is a bad idea by her own example.
Was Margaret Sanger racist? Anti-abortionists think so. A web search reveals the source of Mohammed's quotations, The Pro-Life Activist's Encyclopedia, written by Brian Clowes and published by the American Life League. A little "ideological balance" exposes a dispute over the matter; according to Planned Parenthood the quotations were fabricated or taken out of context, including Sanger's 1939 correspondence with a medical doctor in which she expressed concern that her intentions might be misinterpreted (not that her "true purpose" would be uncovered, as Mohammed declares, see http://www.igc.apc.org/ppfa/sanger.html).
Who is telling the Truth? The April 1993 issue of the Birth Control Review, available in the PCL, contains no article by Sanger nor any reference to "blacks, soldiers, and Jews". Furthermore, I could locate no racist statements by Sanger in any issue I read. Sanger was clearly a eugenicist, advocating sterilization of idiots and criminals, but not racist.
Why could Mohammed not check her sources? Is she sloppy? Perhaps. She effectively aborts her argument with her error and hypocrisy, but it is clear that it would have miscarried anyway; she erroneously argues that the ideology of an organization's founder will be held by its current members (would Sonia tell me the founding fathers intended that abortion be covered under the first amendment?).
Matt Bronstad
Editor's note: Mohammed was not available to respond to Bronstad's letter before publication of this issue. She will reply next month.