Taken aback by SAC “attack”
Re: Where are all the other candidates?, Mar. 6
I was taken aback by J.P. Antonacci’s recent polemic against the current SAC executive, as it showed a lack of nuance and depth which Mr. Antonacci is generally in command of. If The Varsity’s main criticism of the current SAC executive is that they haven’t self-promoted enough, my whole-hearted kudos go out to SAC. As for claims that SAC does not foster student involvement, a simple perusal of the SAC calendar could have informed Antonacci of all of the events SAC puts on jointly or in partnership with other groups (SAC frosh day, the Stephen Lewis talk, Unity Through Diversity, etc). So, granted that SAC has put together a scandal-free year, within budget, and has hundreds of volunteers, are Mr. Antonacci’s comments accurate? No. But accuracy isn’t as inspiring as it used to be, I guess.
Alex Tepperman
To each their own?
Re: Panel tackles women and Islam, Mar. 6
In reading this article I was struck by several things, the first of which was Naheed Khokhar’s statement that the Danish cartoons constituted “freedom of blasphemy”-but what about freedom of the press? Saying that the media is subject to the rules of any religion effectively guts it of its very essence, the responsibility and the function of education, the very concept that this panel supposedly espouses. Why must people of other faiths be subject to the rules of religions that they do not follow? Certainly the media ought to observe a modicum of tact in dealing with sensitive subjects such as faith, but under no circumstances should they be barred from discussing such subjects because of that sensitivity.
Secondly, I was struck by the discourse of the panel itself-specifically, the premise put forth by Khokhar that Islam has granted rights to women. If this is the case, then could someone please explain to me why theocratic governments still support the institutions of honour killing, stoning, etc?
To say that women are responsible for concealing themselves as a “requirement” to remove themselves as an object of temptation for men is to fly in the face of the women’s rights that Islam purportedly espouses.
Ultimately, it is a woman’s choice to dress the way she dresses and to pray the way she wants to. But please don’t insist on others having to adhere to those same rules. Liberal, secular governments have been the historic supporters of the adherents of any faith to worship as they please; theocracy has been the traditional enemy of the same.
Miriam Milstein
Self-help for spoilers
Re: A typology of lecture spoilers, Feb. 28
I just wanted to say that Dominic Wong’s comment was absolutely brilliant! I am sure that everyone on campus knows someone who fits the profile of a lecture spoiler. And for those who think they don’t, they are probably the ones spoiling the lecture. There is nothing worse then someone who thinks that the lecture is being given for them and only them. I believe this article addresses a very serious problem that often starts in high school but doesn’t really become a problem until university. If it encourages even one lecture spoiler to get help and quit spoiling, it will have been well worth it. Honestly, the best article I have read all year. Well done!
Jenna Pettinato
