After walking around campus last week I was shocked to find posters of ASCII art depicting female genitals plastered all over campus facilities. As you may or may not know, the V-Day committee—a group on campus dedicated to stopping the abuse of women worldwide—put up the posters. Speaking for myself, and at least a handful of others on campus, I would like to note that these posters were outrageous and simply uncalled for.

First, I would like to express that the noble goal of this committee hits close to home. During my life, I have had a few friends who have fallen victim to the very same abuse crimes that the V-Day committee is addressing. Details notwithstanding, these events have sensitized me to the abuse of women by others. That being said, I completely support informing the campus population about the horrors of abuse. Total gender equality cannot truly be achieved until women cease to be mere objects and an end is put to the violence.

Why was I appalled upon seeing these posters? Because they identified with women by turning (at least) a part of them into an object—albeit ASCII art—for public display. This is the very action that equal-rights groups have found so offending in the past. This runs directly contrary to every teaching that has been levied in class. Furthermore, the posters were just plain offensive. There should be no reason why any student must be forced to walk through the core campus and view these obvious images of private parts. What has happened to common decency at our Institute? Quite clearly it has gone the way of the dodo, especially when a gender-savvy group is advertising by posting these images across campus.

I would also argue that they conflict with Section II, Paragraph A of the Institute Sign Policy as material “in poor taste,” as found in The 2002-2004 RPI Student Handbook:

“Signs must not contain anything of a nature directly maligning any person or group. The Institute reserves the right to remove signs deemed to be in poor taste, in unsightly condition, or conveying inaccurate or outdated information.”

As such, the Institute’s administration has failed to make RPI a welcoming place to grow and learn.

I strongly encourage the group behind such a worthy event to reconsider the depth of its tactics. It is quite clear that their official name was meant to elicit a strong emotional reaction. There is seldom a better way to gain substantial public interest. Using visual images such as these and plastering campus with them, however, is clearly going too far.

Jacob D. Hunt

STS/ITEC ’03