Jordan River Forum

Oprisko not educated about feminism\nI found myself somewhat bewildered upon reading Robert Oprisko's editorial ("Elves and Other Myths," Oct. 1) and being confronted with his vaguely worded stabs at feminism. The American Heritage Dictionary defines feminism as "Belief in the social, political and economic equality of the sexes." Oprisko notes this and then moves entirely off topic by stating a common misconception of feminist ideals and beliefs (" ... men and women are the same with the exception of genitalia ...") and attributing it to the entire feminist cause.\nAs a proud member of the feminist movement, I constantly find myself bothered by such broad generalizations. The feminist movement, like any other group of people devoted to a political cause (or a culture or belief system or anything else), consists of individuals with personal beliefs and ideals. Many feminists acknowledge that there are some fundamental differences between men and women.\nOprisko's generalization is more likely based on his misunderstanding of what is a fairly common (though not all-encompassing) ideal among feminists: that men and women should be TREATED equally. Sex, gender identification and gender expression should not be bases on which people are judged. \nFeminism is about allowing women the same opportunities as men (and vice versa, as men are stigmatized against certain "feminine" realms of behavior and action, as well). It's about judging capability on the basis of the individual, not the biological sex to which they belong. Men on average have more upper body strength. But if there's a woman with big muscles who wants to do it too, then she should be allowed. If there's a man who wants to stay home and take care of his children while his wife goes to work and pays the bills, then he should be allowed. \nFeminism isn't about ignoring that men and women are biolgically formed differently -- it's about realizing that we're far more alike than dissimilar and that sweeping generalizations of either group are neither accurate nor welcome. It's about judging people on what they posess inside, not what's between their legs. That's the basis of feminism. Perhaps Oprisko, and those who agree with his groundless attacks on feminism, should take his advice and "go to their local libaries and educate themselves."\n

\n'Land of the Free' means all opinions welcome\nI'm writing this in response to the article (Oct. 2 "Student upset after told to change anti-American shirt") about the Wabash high school student who was ordered to take off her shirt that depicted an upside-down American flag. I find it deeply saddening that the administrators would even consider stopping something that is essentially free speech. I'm sure that the girl was well aware that many people did not agree with the message that her shirt sent, but the school has done the wrong thing. Instead of ordering her to stop wearing the shirt, they instead should have done everything in their power to ensure that her freedom of speech was protected. It actually hurts to see in this country, the "Land of the Free," that people must bow down to what's popular. Nevertheless, all that these "defenses of freedom," or the kids who attacked those wearing the anti-flag shirts and the school administrators have done is proven to this girl that she's right. America isn't so perfect, and this is just one example of what's wrong with it. This girl, Chalice Starling, shouldn't be forced to hide her beliefs. She should be able to scream it out loud as long as it doesn't endanger the safety of anyone, and the school should do everything it can to make sure she can do just that.\n