Letter to the editor
While everyone has the right to free speech, it does not mean that the Daily Wildcat ought to publish the “Raising Hell” article as the lead story in the paper. By blithely or intentionally placing this story as your lead, the Daily Wildcat has chosen to mitigate the positive message of support created by last night’s “Take Back the Night” event. Furthermore, by merely providing attention to this type of speech, the Daily Wildcat has given legitimacy to the views purported by it.
It is unfortunate the message the Daily Wildcat has chosen to send to the thousands of men, women and transgendered students and faculty on our campus and in our community who are survivors of sexual assault. By introducing the possibility that these survivors deserved what happened to them, the Daily Wildcat’s credibility as a paper that represents the views of the University of Arizona community has diminished.
We should be promoting support, not “Raising Hell.”
-Vince Redhouse, Andrew Berkley and Khanh Van
In response to “‘You Deserve Rape’ sign causes controversy on UA campus” (by Brittny Mejia, April 24):
Shame on you, Daily Wildcat. How disappointing that largest article on the first page was giving attention to Dean Saxton (who even gleefully tweeted his excitement at being on the first page).
Yesterday, an incredibly important and moving program occurred. “Take Back the Night” deserves to be highlighted for its work in helping students heal and cope with sexual violence. Instead of honoring those who participated, you have chosen to honor this sick individual, and the vile he spews. By devoting articles and pictures to him, you are fuelingh is fire for attention.
The UA deserves better from you, Daily Wildcat. You have the opportunity to be a positive force for our campus; instead, you continually choose the route of sensationalism.
Furthermore, do you recognize how insensitive it is to survivors of sexual violence to not only speak of this individual, but to post a picture of him holding an incredibly offensive and potentially triggering sign? Again, you could have chosen a different path, and not photographed the sign out of respect for individuals who are survivors of sexual violence.
Shame on you.
Dean’s argument is actually this:
If you dress provocatively, then you are increasing your chances of someone raping you. Thus, by dressing like that, you kinda “deserved” to be raped, since you knew that you could dress more moderately to possibly prevent that.
Here’s a metaphor: You park your car in a sketchy part of town and leave your windows rolled down. Someone then steals your iPod from your car. Your friend then says “Dude, you kinda deserved that, you left your windows down!”
So Dean is saying, why not roll your windows up (dress moderately) and protect yourself as much as possible?
Dean is NOT saying that anyone SHOULD be raped. Just like the friend in that metaphor didn’t say that someone SHOULD steal your iPod. He’s simply talking statistics, and statistics show that if you leave your windows down stuff will be stolen.
Whether or not dressing provocatively increases your chances of being raped… I honestly don’t know. But at least understand and comprehend Dean’s argument before making false statements. He never named men as superior in this argument. Just like the thief is not named superior. He thinks rapists are awful.
—Andrew (in response to Kayla L.)
I am not a fucking car. I am a human being. I am capable of giving consent and it is not my job to make myself rape proof.
—Rox (in response to Andrew)
No. It is statistically inaccurate that wearing any kind of clothing makes you more likely to be a victim of rape. And having your iPod stolen and being sexuality violated and abused are so vastly different, your simile holds no validity whatsoever.
Wearing a skirt is not “rolling my window down.” It’s JUST WEARING A SKIRT. And until everyone accepts this as a fact, high rates of college age women will be preyed upon by people who share Dean’s mentality.
—Monica (in response to Andrew)