Letters to the Editor: October 30, 2012

My life in college: Oh, the drama!

Dear Editor,

I would just like to say that I think it is absolutely abhorrent that there are men like Jon Hochendoner who think that preying on women is justified because some women will show more skin and go to a club for a night of drinks and dancing. While I do think that Moral Mildred should re-evaluate her life if she is getting involved with men she doesn’t even think are that classy, that she has done so doesn’t give us any right, as men, to look upon her (or other women) as an object.

I would like it to go on the record that Jon Hochendoner doesn’t speak for the entirety of the male populace, either. I would also like to call on the other men who look deeper into a woman than what’s between her legs to speak up also. Sexism is a social toxin because it degrades people as less than human beings based solely on a factor that they had no control over.

Christopher L. Young

Continuing the conversation

Dear Editor,

I also read Jon’s letter, wonderfully summarized by Chris Wilson, about “… all women are douchebag-loving attention whores,” and was offended and hurt by his words. I’m sure that you received plenty of letters similar to Mr. Wilson’s, and I applaud everyone who wrote about Jon’s insensitive, sexist, and simply inaccurate remarks regarding women. Mr. Wilson, thank you for standing up for women. Thank you to everyone who wrote a letter doing the same. Too many people make assumptions like Jon’s, not only about women, but about everyone- from the fact that they are a specific gender, race, or because they have tattoos or none at all.

We all need to re-evaluate our attitude once in a while, but we should not be scrutinized for what we are, or judge others as soon as we see them. Just because I’m a young woman with tattoos does not mean that I want to sleep with the first d-bag I see who claims to have money and a sweet ride. And just because a polite young man held the door open for me today when I went to the Wood Center does not mean he wants to get into my pants. There are some people who have respect for others and are willing to give them a chance to make a true impression. I hope Jon gets a chance to meet more people like that- perhaps he would see things differently.

Bobbi Burbank

“Sodom Lecture”

Dear Editor,

What a wealth of scientific and archaeological evidence was provided Oct. 20, at Schaible auditorium, on the topic of “Searching for Sodom and Gomorrah” by internationally acclaimed Dr. Steven Collins!

Sponsored by United Campus Ministry, during his information-packed presentation Collins stated his team’s decades-long research is even being quoted in his peer’s books and journals.

From various academic disciplines, Collins established that an extremely high-temperature fireball destroyed the people of Sodom and its surrounding cities during the time of Abraham as recorded in Genesis 18 and 19, resulting in that area being uninhabited for 700 years.

Worse than a thousand Halloween nightmares scorched in time forever, a fiery event did occur over Sodom flash-glazing pottery, crystallizing sand and leaving behind lower human remains substantiating that Sodom’s inhabitants were instantly disintegrated from their waist up as they were standing, thus, providing for us today the unambiguous example and caution not to mock our Creator nor His Holy Word, the Bible.

In summarizing this historic event, written over 1900 years ago with an eye to the eternal future, Jude 1:7 warned, “Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire”.

GOD help us all to take good heed to our own eternal souls and to the souls of others who are yet without saving faith in Christ Jesus the LORD!

Karl W. Sapp

Your move

Dear Editor,

Please print the following sentence. Do not print this sentence.

Ashleigh Strange

Editor’s note:

Dear Ashleigh,

In an editorial decision, we decided to print both sentences.  We eagerly await your next move.

Elika Roohi

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. Jon Hochendoner says:

    Well, there’s two more who missed the point. Context, perception.


    I never said anything about the justification of preying on women, in any scenario. That being said, if by preying you mean resulting in a consensual sexual act, then yes I feel it is perfectly justifiable and healthy. I don’t view women as hapless victims who are incapable of independent decisions and ignorant to their consequences. It’s a two-way street.

    I don’t look upon Moral Mildred in any particular way because I have never looked upon or spoken with Moral Mildred. I know nothing about her. I will however support her right to dress how she wants, engage in any sexual act that she wants, and write about what she wants (particularly in her current format) without enduring baseless criticism and judgement. It seems that you believe that, when intentionally dressed to be viewed as an attention garnering object, Moral should not be viewed that way but in retrospect and through distorted channels can be told she needs to re-evaluate her life. That’s a bold statement and probably makes you much more sexist than you think I am.

    Your call to arms is nice. Saddle your white steed…

    I would guess that your closing sentence is implying that I’m a sexist and is not just a declaration. I think that your use of the word is wrong. My admission that men (including myself) sexually judge women does not have to be prejudiced, discriminatory, or imply anything about social roles. It’s knee-jerk, conscious or unconscious; a fact of evolution critical to our development and propagation as a species (women do it too). We immerse ourselves in sexual temptation all day every day but for whatever societal reason, these thoughts are encouraged to be repressed and when expressed attract ridicule, criticism, and labels. Whether or not I want to have sex with a woman says nothing about how I feel about equal rights, porn, stereotypes, wage inequality, etc.


    “…we should not be scrutinized for what we are, or judge others as soon as we see them.” -You

    “There are some people who have respect for others and are willing to give them a chance to make a true impression.” -You

    “When it comes right down to it, people judge what kind of person you are based on outward appearance and your attitude.” Chris Wilson

    “I did judge a lot of people based on their looks. Most of the time, I was guessing what kind of person they were based on how they dressed.” Chris Wilson

    Nobody said that because you have tattoos you should be assumed to sleep with a dude who lies about his bank account and leases a car. Your experiences with tattoo prejudices and your mention of gender and race have nothing to do with what I wrote. I have tattoos and had my nipples pierced for almost ten years, I’m familiar. The judgements I wrote about are wholly sexual and though they may be based on personal preferences such as race, they make no assumptions as to what kind of person that particular person is. That said, I bet Chris has some interesting interpretations as to what kind of person you are based on your tattoos.

    How do you know that the polite man at the Wood Center didn’t want to sleep with you? Could he have been polite with/without wanting to sleep with you? Can the two be totally unrelated? If he did want to sleep with you would you take that as a compliment or be offended by it? What does this comment have to do with anything?

    The term douchebag is subjective. Chris Wilson thinks that because I’ve got my inner ape on speed dial that I’m not only a douchebag but am also a predator. He also assumes that I have no respect for women and believe that they’re whores, that I get no ass, that I not only have a poor attitude but also a poor appearance (even though he’s never seen me), that I’ve been ‘friendzoned’ and that I spend too much time at the bar. Furthermore, Chris is willing to project Facebook interactions as real-life scenarios and form meaningful (to him) and far-reaching opinions from them. My perceived failures are probably based in his reality. But I’m not mad at Chris for that. From the jump I could tell that he was young and short on experience. I could appreciate his passion but his interpretation is completely off base and at times contradictory and hypocritical. The point I’m trying to make Bobbi, is be careful who you attach your wagon to. Though I may judge women sexually, I don’t judge them (or anybody) on a deeply personal level until I know them on that level. There is a distinction there. If you were offended by my letter, oh well. I won’t apologize for an interpretation gone wrong or text taken out of context.

    If there was an intended interpretation to my original letter, here it is. Read it if you want.

    “Having following this debate for quite sometime, I would like to say that Mr. Wilson’s comments are a bit unnecessary.
    Mr. Wilson: Your comments are quite hostile for such a proclaimed “white knight” of the male tribe of humanity. I understand your penchant for explaining that all men are not predatory and in fact do not look at every woman and think to themselves “Hey, I want to hit that.” Though, perhaps a bit misguided. But the truth of the matter, subconsciously or consciously we code every one we interact with or see. As human beings we are very sexual and it is only natural that we find others attractive, as it is coded in our own survival instincts. In fact try opening any biology book, while you are at it, make it a bio-psychology one too and read about human sexuality.
    What Mr. Hochendoner was snarkly getting at while addressing Kayla Harisson is the typical young adult attitude in courtship has many if not true stereotypes in college life.
    Which, is in fact what Moral Mildred’s column is about, her life in college and what its like to be a college student from her point of view. I do find it interesting that you expand on some of his points while glossing others that are equally important when you are debasing another’s opinion. You quickly debunk that women not all “… are douche bag-loving attention whores”, which by the way, nice touch with adding “whores” in Mr. Hochendoner’s mouth.
    Assuming his beliefs come from failure and his attitude towards said women is a nice touch just as I called you a white knight earlier as it seems you really felt the need to provide first-aid to women’s beliefs about all men. What he was getting at with the bar comment is that you must observe the social interactions in bars. Most of them have the typical stereotypes, dressed up make up caked on young women on the prowl for testosterone driven alpha males who exhibit certain personality traits deemed undesirable in most of society, but yet attractive in their perspective settings such as a bar. Or in this case a Karaoke bar that is centered around a cowboy western theme on the outskirts of an Army base. The main point driven home by his comments is that chastising Mildred’s actions in said bar by Ms. Harrison assuming that she is inexperienced and does not know her role as a woman was met with disdain and explained by Mr. Hochendoner who said that she was equally out of touch both in respect and as a woman in the 21st century.” Cordero Reid

  2. Christopher L Young says:

    Yes. I did say Moral Mildred should re-evaluate her life based on her actions and I am going to stand by that. I’d say the same thing about a guy if he was also doing stupid things with his life, so nice try on the sexism thing (or was it projecting?)

    I think its interesting you’re mentioning things like social roles, equal rights, or wage inequalities. I wasn’t talking about any of this stuff.

  3. Jon Hochendoner says:

    Wow. It’s irrelevant whether or not you would say the same thing to a guy. The fact that you said it about Moral implies that you feel that she, as a female, should play a particular role and adhere to a set of rules. Basically you are subjecting her to prejudices and discrimination using personal norms to tell her how to behave. This is the definition of sexism. You might argue that my objectification of women can be thrown in the same bucket but I would argue that it is a drop in the bucket and is a social necessity, not a toxin, and that it is more complimentary than degrading.

    I mention those things because in labeling me a sexist you assume that I have prejudices against women that manifest themselves in negative views regarding women in current relevant issues like social roles, equal rights, and wage inequalities.

    Damn I really hope you’re setting me up for something here man.

  4. Christopher L Young says:

    There are very real dangers to drinking to excess and having random sex with strangers, hence why I mentioned that she should probably re-evaluate her life. Nowhere did I say that she should change her life or that she needs to fit into a certain role. One can re-evaluate something and still come to the same conclusion.

    And no, objectification of women isn’t complimentary. It reduces them to merely to the level of an object (hence the term), which is wrong because humans are so much more than that.

    And I never said anything about social roles, equal rights, or wage inequalities, or what you’re prejudices towrds these are. Stop pretending I did. It’s a red herring.

  5. Kayla Harrison says:

    Chris: Agreed.

    Bobbi: Holla at tattoos! Well stated, well put.

    Jon: It’s really entertaining watching you argue. It really is. LOL@you claiming Mildred was subject to “baseless criticism and judgement”…isn’t that every single argument you try to make? You say every man that disagrees with you is trying to play the “white steed”, which implies that they are taking the moral high road instead of accepting your opinion…yet you always attempt to take the moral high road by defending Mildred’s statements and saying that everyone disagreeing with her is attacking her unjustly. She put her opinion out there, she can take the heat.

    Quit trying to say you aren’t sexist. Your first four points in your initial letter said “all women love this” and “all women do that”, so I fail to see how such broad generalizations, especially with such negative and unfounded connotation, are not sexist. What you say reflects who you are, and judging solely on those statements you appear sexist.

    Obviously Mildred can write what she wants. Duh. Obviously consensual sex is not problematic. Double duh. And obviously she has the freedom to do/say/act any way she pleases. Exhaustive duh. What people getting at is that her personal beliefs about herself in combination with the way she interacted with men are not representative of all women. You brought in the sexist hodgepodge of “we’re men and we like sex and women like it when we’re douchey” and that struck a chord with people, as evidenced by the outcry. Yes some men are just looking for sex. Yes some men objectify women. Yes some women like that attention. We get it. Insofar as your statements about judging people by their physical appearance, obviously everyone judges primordially. Nobody disagrees with you. But there is a difference between objectification and the natural, subconscious act of partner selection. When selecting a partner, it is more than just looks and lust. When at a bar, it’s more of a hook up scene and people do end up objectified because people go off of first impressions. That doesn’t mean that all male-female interaction plays out this way, which is what Bobbi tried pointing out and you misconstrued. Some interactions are completely non-sexual, non-objectifying, and not purely borne from hormonal lust.

    I like how you throw out the hypocrite card in your response. Ironic, for shame.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *