I would like to take a moment to respond to the two authors who had issues with my comments regarding the V-Day poster images last week. Let me start by responding to the letter by Donna Dietz. Dietz makes mention that art can be created to depict nudity “without maligning the human body.” Although the logo on the V-Day posters was indeed ASCII art, it was by no means “art” in the classical and common sense of the word. The images were meant to shock people and draw attention by their very in-your-face nature, and were not created for their artistic value.

The other author, Kathleen Brown, wrote in her letter that women at RPI face challenges every day. I cannot doubt that, especially considering that women here at RPI are surrounded by a population of nearly 75 percent men. While it is true that men on average have a stronger sexual drive than women, I highly doubt that all men at RPI “grunt like Neanderthals.”

Brown continues by claiming, similar to Dietz, that the poster graphic was not offensive and cites fraternity rush posters for their graphic nature. It is my opinion that these rush posters too are wrong. Brown goes to suggest that such posters should be banned. I fully agree, and would support any such amendment to the campus-wide sign policy that addresses this issue.

Brown further mentioned that these posters could not have possibly offended females on campus. This statement runs counter to the women I talked with during the week, and I wish to point out to Brown that The Poly refused to print the V-Day logo. I find it hard to believe that men could be the only driving force that made this decision. I believe I would not have encountered such gender-based criticism on this issue had I been female or published with a pseudonym.

Perhaps the most important concept that was missed was the simple idea of choice. Members of the RPI campus simply did not have the ability to choose whether or not they could ignore the suggestive V-Day posters as they walked to class. If folks wish to actively seek out imagery such as this, it is their choice to do so, and the free nature of this country grants them that right. It is when people are not given the option to choose to view such imagery that I take issue.

Jacob D. Hunt