Discussion around cartoon ignores real racism
Coach Stubbs… obvious racial stereotypes! What are you talking about? Why don’t you specify these items in the cartoon, because I am convinced they don’t exist. You say the cartoon does not portray you as a professional, but doesn’t it show you wearing a suit? Maybe the lips were a little big, but get over it. The cartoon was a caricature of you, not a portrait. Congratulations on bringing your skin color into a piece that solely discusses your performance as a professional.
Reading your letter disappointed me, because I though race relations in the United States had come further. In a time when a black man will likely get elected to the highest office in the country, it is your oversensitivity — not the cartoon –that seems like it comes from another era. Your concerns are ridiculous and petty compared with what real racism is. It is people like you that will ensure race remains an issue for decades to come. Get over yourself and your self-righteousness. And while you’re at it, win some volleyball games.
Brad Frenier
senior, business management
Oct. 21 cartoon not an attack
In response to oach Charita Stubbs and Keisha Demps’ campus forum letters on Oct. 24, I believe their perception of racism is skewed. Racism, as defined by Merriam-Webster’s dictionary, is “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities.”
The depiction of Stubbs in the cartoon printed on Oct. 21 in no way undermined her intelligence and abilities. In fact, as she pointed out, she is a very intelligent, well educated and successful woman. Her attempt to call an unflattering caricature of herself as racist is allowing her own bigotry to propagate racism throughout society.
In a world that is on the brink of electing an African-American as the next president of the United States of America, it is clear the race is becoming an issue of a bygone era. Racism exists in much of America today because people like Stubbs and Demps feel that is necessary to blow something as silly as a cartoon in a school newspaper wildly out of proportion.
As I saw it, there was obviously no ill intent or racial undertones in this cartoon — its aim was to make note of the teams number of ACC wins this season. Perhaps there is an underlying motive for her disgust. Could it be her team’s win-loss record?
Bryan Owens
senior, mechanical engineering
Don’t complain about caricatures
In response to coaches Stubbs and Demps’ letters complaining about the caricature of Stubbs in the Oct. 21 Technician. It is a caricature, “a picture, description, etc., ludicrously exaggerating the peculiarities or defects of persons or things.” I don’t see how it is offensive, by definition it is ludicrous which means you are supposed to laugh at it. Have you ever seen a caricature before? They all look the same. Stop whining, get a sense of humor and win us some more games.
Adam Nock
junior, mathematics
Defining pro-life
Last week, Justice for All was accused of forcing religion onto the student population. It is important to note that the display did not in any way reference religion of any type. Also, abortion is not an issue exclusive to religion; some atheists and agnostics are also against abortion.
Secondly, “anti-abortion” was a term used several times last week. Abortion is a focus of the pro-life movement because of the enormous number of lives destroyed, but pro-life issues also encompass stem cell research, cloning, euthanasia, capital punishment, prejudice — in short, the respect and defense of all life, from conception to natural death. Being pro-life is not a political choice; it is a position on morality. If we can see the moral wrong of abortion, then we can also understand the moral wrong of the issues listed above.
Therefore, the letter to the editor that suggested pro-lifers would object to an anti-war display is incorrect: war is inherently a situation where life is lost. Finally, addressing comments against the images themselves, the pictures are definitely gruesome; but so are the images of war, famine and genocides that are used to create awareness of violence and injustices occurring in the world.
The images on the JFA display were not “misleading graphics” (Campus Forum, Oct. 24, “Don’t shock students – inform them”). The pictures are images of reality — they show the results of abortion on human fetuses. Yes, the pictures are shocking; but they are also informative.
Emily Boros
senior, creative writing
