More Pi Eta

To the Editors of the Crimson:

In all the hullabaloo over the possible closing of the Pi Eta Speakers Club--following disclosure of an in-house newsletter deemed "bad taste" by some, incitement to rape by others--there has been much talk about "right" specifically, the right of the club to free expression, to be defended against University punishment and Undergraduate Council reprimand.

Freedom of speech is not what is at stake in the Pi Eta case While we have heard much about freedom of thought, little is said about other, very basic night--rights to live and study in an atmosphere free from degradation and violence These are perhaps, right that many men take for granted Unfortunately, they are still in question for women If any of us had begun to forget this the Pi Eta newsletter has graciously reawakened us to the frightening prevalence of sexism. Thus we must not get sidetracked into polemics over definitions of freedom of expression. The real issue here is the reality of violent anti-women attitudes and behaviors at Harvard University, and the challenge this presents to the university to do something about it.

Earlier this year, the findings of a survey on sexual harassment revealed alarmingly high percentages of sexual coercion of women by male professors and graduate students, and well as undergraduate peer harassment. The attitudes expressed in the Pi Eta newsletter are an illustration of the crudest end of this. When women are regarded by men not as autonomous individuals but as sexual objects, they are also viewed as either willing or deserving recipients of insults, manipulation, and forced sexual relations This is at the heart of both the professor accosting his students and the final club circular cajoling its members to "slice into one of these meaty but grateful heffers (sic)." Just as the survey showed that sexual harassment is epidemic at Harvard, the Pi Eta case must not be viewed as an isolated, unfortunate outbreak of "vulgarity." Pi Eta violated some code of discretion, failing to keep its behavior behind closed doors, this does not means that the attitudes expressed in the recent newsletter are to be found solely at 45 Mt Auburn Street The incident of the misplaced newsletter provides all of us at Harvard Radcliffe the opportunity to fully and honestly confront the problems of sexism on this campus.

Central to understanding the intricacy and power of sexist attitudes is the relation of public words and images to concrete actions harming women. Students have shown correlation between pornography and rape, and it seems obvious that the constant emphasis placed on an objectified vision of women's sexuality and on women's supposed passivity and masochism, in the media and elsewhere, do much to shape prevailing attitudes wherein sex is expressed as violence and women are seen as the willing victims. To say, then, that the statements in the Pi Eta newsletter are merely, in the words of a Crimson "Dissenting Opinion," "expressions of thought," is dangerously misleading. The terminology of the newsletter was that of rape, and as such incitement of violence. This kind of language is in no way protected by legislative guarantees of freedom of political and religious expression. Most importantly, by labelling the newsletter "bad taste," the authors of the editorial, and others who feel similarly, fail entirely to understand the scope of the problem It is no "bad taste" to degrade other people, nor is it "bad taste" to encourage vilent conquest as heterosexual intercourse In racist literature it is standard to portray the persecuted as bestial or subhuman to Nazis, Jews were "vermin," to the KKK Blacks are "apes." Such calculated dehumanization is essential to carrying out violence without guilty conscience. The Pi's references to women as "pigs" and "slobbering bovines" are not even remotely humorous, nor just in "bad taste"--they are dangerous.

There is a long way to go before women are treated as full human beings at Harvard The fact that the administration has not openly and clearly denounced the actions of the club, or the fact that some women went to the recent Pi Eta party despite the newsletter, does not mean that the problem is relatively minor or the concern of only a few feminists What it does mean is that sexism is deeply ingrained within and around all of us, and we are all affected by it Women internalize society's low estimation of them, or are threatened with sexual violence men are forced to conform to "macho" models of brutality and insensitivity. The authors of the "Dissenting Opinion" state that perhaps when the Pi takes part in "actual sexism" punishment will be warranted. What could possibly be more sexist than the propogation of these kind of images of women and men, and the threat that poses?

The Harvard administration, if it sincerely wishes to begin to change the conditions at this college, must take a clear and firm stand against sexism, in all its permutations If there are any criteria which warrant university sanctions against individuals or organizations which have impinged on the rights and humanity of others, then those responsible in the Pi Eta club must be viewed as such violators. Insofar as the debate over closing the club is secondary to the bigger issue of sexism at Harvard, however, we do not want to scapegoat this club and in any way foster the impression that this situation is somehow unique. It would be unfortunate if Pi Eta be came, instead of an opportunity for education and university action against sexism, a martyr for the cause for freedom of speech.

The administration must clearly state its dedication to fighting sexism at Harvard, from top to bottom, if any action taken against the Pi Eta club is to be meaningful We are all now talking about the problem, we have to begin to move together to overcome it. Toba Spitzer '85   Thyra Endicott '84   Rani Kronick '84   Stephen Hanna '86   Sarah Browning '84-5   Jeanne Wirka '86   Sarah Jane Holcombe '86   Gina Cattalini '87   Elisabeth Szanto '86   Amy Gluckman '83-4   Laura McDermott '84   Viveka Fuchs '84