midates me. i believe, however, that

re others on this campus who would have taken

the paper’s development were it not for its iation with mediocrity.

ave a wish, a wish that all those who feel that men d women are human beings first and separate sexes > nd would stand up and be counted. I wish that fone who recognizes that there are some injus- :in our world against women and minorities

nid, instead of attacking these groups, work with em to find creative solutions to with these long- inding wrongs. I wish that all people would realize that in each sex there are chauvinists and radicals, but ‘the most part, men like women and women like

. Ifmy desire to encourage peace and harmony ng the sexes sounds a little too optimistic, per- this will help: Many people consider themselves minists, and yet we all get along fabulously, for we pect each other. I would like to think that at the yest levels of the debate that had gone on this year tween the *‘Politically Correct’’ and the ‘‘back- ash’’, the opponents involved have remembered to fespect their adversaries’ right to hold their point of

. Yourjob, Mr. Large, should have been to

ote tolerance for different views on campus. You e failed. Asan editor of a campus newspaper, you Id have written editorials and developed an edito- [policy of explaining all points of view, including ‘middle ground. This is your last chance, Mr.

‘ge. The middle found is wide open. Come out linst date rape because it is wrong, not for any hinist reason other than that it is a woman’s pre- ative to say **No’’. Come out for motherhood, eand marriage because they are beyond reproach.

d ‘ak against intolerance on the basis of sex, race, religion. Most people will support you. I will be yng the first to stand up and be counted.

, n en Heckbert

ESSAYS. Siairhe eS ES ct

PYPING Nm BHG 5413

Dear Mr. Editor;

I] am writing to ask you to correct an omission. In the March 19, 1992 issue of the X-Press, my letter con- cerning the proposed UPEI Employment Equity policy was printed.

My name, however, did not appear.

It was neither intention nor my expectation that my name be withheld at the time of publication. I fully

exnected mv name to annearand he associated with the ideas in the letter.

Please publish this letter in order to set straight this part of the record. Sincerely

R. David Smith, Ph.D.

Department of Sociology and Anthropology tel. (902) 566-0433

FAX: (902) 566-0420

BITNET: DSMITH@UPEI.CAI1

Dear Editor,

I must question an interesting phenomenon that I discovered in the course of my experience with the X- Press. Ido appreciate the paper for giving me the opportunity to make my voice heard, and congratulate it for the diversity of opinion it has permitted; but I am curious about the implications of the following: When I planned the supplement for this week’s X- Press, I was told that it would not be fair to have a Christian supplement, since that would be biased, giving unequal opportunity to a single point of view. In order to receive publication, I would have to sim ply be part ofa general Religious Supplement, includ- ing several other points of view. That was notan unreasonable request for you to make. My article on pluralism (see the Supplement in this issue) should reassure you that lam notangry orresentful that | did not receive exclusive treatment; and that neither did I actually expect to receive the opportunity to voice only my own point of view. Lamcurious, therefore, as to why such requirements were not made ofeitherthe Women’s Supplement or the Homosexual Supplement, Do not men and non-feminist (non- radical feminist) women (both do exist, by the way) deserve the equal opportunity to have their opinions

RESS — —~March 26, 1992 Page 5