Letters to the editor
I want to express my upmost appreciation and respect for your participation in Monday’s tuition hearing with the Arizona Board of Regents. It is clearly evident by the overwhelming attendance that the students at the UA are not only passionate, but also aware of the importance of advocating for an affordable and accessible quality higher education.
I want to congratulate you for having the highest student representation across the state, requiring two overflow spaces in addition to the screening room. As a student leader, I am moved by the courage that was displayed by the students who shared their personal stories. Your activism has ensured that the voices of students at the UA, and across the state, will be heard by our Regents and university leadership.
For those students who did not have the opportunity to speak, I ask that you would voice your concerns by either contacting the Board of Regents directly, or by outreaching to me by email. I encourage you to continue your efforts by joining me at next week’s ABOR Tuition Setting, March 11 and 12 in the Grand Ballroom of the Student Union Memorial Center.
Contact information for
the Arizona Board of Regents:
Arizona Board of Regents
2020 N. Central Ave. Suite 230
Phoenix, AZ 85004
602.229.2500
peggy.martin@azregents.edu
Christopher M. Nagata
Student body president
asuapres@email.arizona.edu
Comments from dailywildcat.com
On ‘New Rec Center flooded,’ March 1
Wasn’t one of the “”green”” aspects of the expansion rain harvesting? Maybe it used to be part of the plan, but then they scrapped it, but never altered the layout of roof tilt gutter placement, landscaping and it all just pooled next to the basement and flooded it?
Matt
Rec center engineering — your student fees at work!
João Carlos da Silva Ribeiro
On ‘Don’t drink the jungle juice,’ March 1
This article says much about the state of sexual assault concerns today.
“”Should the fact that she willingly got herself into an advanced state of inebriation prevent her from complaining about anything that happened to her while she was in that state?””
The error here is that this statement is that it is based upon the presumption that the sex happened *to* her. Did it happen *to* her, or did she initiate it? And remember: There are a variety of ways to initiate it. The hunter that traps is no less a hunter than the hunter who pursues. And if she’s too intoxicated to remember whether or not she consented, how can she remember that she didn’t initiate the sex? And if being intoxicated negates any form of consent whatsoever, why are men the only ones to blame when both are intoxicated, when either person could have initiated it? If both are intoxicated, did they rape each other? Should they both go to prison for 20 years?
“”No matter what the state of the victim when the alleged act occurred, a woman or a man should not be shamed by society for being sexually assaulted.””
I agree with this statement. A word of caution, however, when using these kinds of defenses: I often see it said that pointing out that a woman getting drunk or wearing a short skirt, once she made a rape allegation, is “”victim-blaming.”” But to make the allegation that someone is victim-blaming, they must first assume that the rape allegation is 100% true. Dressing promiscuously or getting sleazy with someone is not an invitation to nonconsensual sex (rape), as some say; dressing promiscuously is an invitation to the opposite: sexual attention.
That does not mean that anyone who dresses promiscuously is lying about rape; it just means that, in he-said-she-said cases, dressing promiscuously is more indicative of consent than nonconsent, and that if there is no other evidence we just have to wash our hands of the case. In such a case, automatically assuming the woman is the victim of rape would be no fairer than automatically assuming the man is the victim of a false allegation.
While it is good that society shows concern with rape victims, society should also be aware of the double-bind it often puts men in. Double-standards and vague redefinitions of sexual assault that unnecessarily broaden the definition of rape not only trivialize the experiences of rape victims but also generate a sullen resentment among men, who often feel like they are being backed into a corner. Furthermore, let’s be honest: A significant number of women purposefully get intoxicated to lower their inhibitions, and it is unfair to punish men for this whenever the woman changes her mind the next day — especially when the men are intoxicated as well. I would wager that very few women actually get so wasted (and unintentionally so) that they cannot give consent in some form, while at one and the same time their partner is completely conscious of their actions.
Gogo
