Letters to the Editor

Celebrate today's women To the Editor:

On the eve of a weekend during which both homecoming and the 125th anniversary of women at Penn will be celebrated, many female students are planning on spending their time partaking in only the events associated with homecoming.

With few exceptions, the Office of Development and Alumni Relations has focused their anniversary efforts primarily on fundraising -- hosting steeply-priced events -- and have consequently neglected to involve the majority of Penn's female undergraduate population. At a time when four of my female colleagues head major student organizations, and many more are making major strides in the academic, social and athletic communities, event organizers have used female students mostly as event staffers, instead of inviting them to contribute ideas or sit on panels.

While a single undergraduate leadership dinner has been planned, and there have been efforts to make the celebration affordable to undergraduates, the event has not been widely publicized and a great number of female Penn undergraduates will not be involved. The extent to which event organizers and the University administration have attempted to involve female (or any) undergraduates in this celebration has been both disheartening and disappointing.

By merely soliciting students to staff tables and functions -- and by involving a small number of female undergraduates in a special dinner -- the University has failed to capitalize upon and utilize the wealth of resources at their hands. It is astounding that less than 3 percent of the undergraduate women have no knowledge of or part in this celebration.

An anniversary of this magnitude comes along only so often. Hopefully by the time the 150th rolls around, administrators will realize that one of the best ways to celebrate an anniversary of "women at Penn" is to involve the current "women at Penn."

Meredith Chiaccio

College '02

Ironic Commentary To the Editor:

Again, I am put off by one of Dan Fishback's columns ("Gay marriage debate not fodder for laughter," The Daily Pennsylvanian, 10/29/01). Despite what he attempts to put forth, his argument has already been crippled by what I have heard of his behavior at the PennForum debate.

I thought that the point of the PennForum was for ideas of all kinds to be brought before Penn students as fairly as possible. While the laughter that infected the debate should not be labeled specifically as Fishback's fault -- I do applaud him recognizing its rudeness -- his much-noted smugness at the debate (and even in his column) betrays a certain appreciation for it. Now he writes a column condemning the laughter while claiming that it was actually an ironic comment on how society feels about gay marriage?

And he pulls the faux-saintly act of "fixing" things with some ill-considered napkin philosophy that compares his conservative opponents to the Taliban? Ouch. I now understand why legalizing gay marriage is such uphill battle.

Seems to me that Fishback is both not a pretty boy and not a pretty good proponent of the issues he supports -- much to the disappointment of those who take such issues seriously.

Kane Anderson

College '01

Haphazard headline To the Editor:

I would like to express my dissatisfaction with your headline article of October 29 ("Wharton junior commits suicide," DP) and some of the articles related to this tragic event. This news item may be widely perceived as a matter of public concern, but the treatment afforded by a front-page article and banner headline in the DP seems decidedly insensitive.

The provision of extraneous details of the suicide and a catalog of primarily speculative comments from acquaintances serves no function other than to dramatize the event. Interspersing these articles with occasional conjecture on what might have averted this tragedy is pernicious and takes scant note of the media's potential influence on suicide.

Some of the more personal information, such as details of Jose Joseph's relationships and comments made by him shortly before he died, should have remained private if only as a mark of respect to his family.

I think the balance between reporting for the public interest and treating a sensitive issue in a careful and circumspect manner is somewhat lacking in your coverage of this issue.

Thomas Frewen

Chemical engineering Ph.D. student

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.