Opinion,_
Readers respond to‘sexist’ comments by student
Women won’t stop
fighting because
of menstruation
At first, I though Joe Davis’ letter
(DN, April 20) must be a joke --
“Women suited for kitchen duty, not
combat duty.’’ I kept reading, but
there was no punchline, no interest
ing twist.
Davis admits that women are in
combat in other countries, but he
continues with “the American soci
ety has always viewed and treated
women as something less than men.”
This is true. But, unlike Davis, not all
of us agree that it is a good thing.
Women are, and have been, working
to change these ignorant altitudes.
Women are not innately “something
less than men.” Do not attempt to tie
us down — we will not let you.
Let’s assume for a minute that
Davis' picture of male nature is cor
rect. Women could indeed be a dis
traction for sex-starved men. But let’s
not forget about all the other distrac
tions. If men do have no self-control,
as Davis suggests, what’s to keep
them from raping village women,
iiwi vy» vuvii v/uivi . t * nui o ivy
keep them from masturbating when
they should be fighting? If Davis is
correct about men’s lack of seif-con
trol, perhaps we should exclude men
from combat.
Davis is also obviously ignorant of
the effects of the menstrual cycle.
Personally, I know of many women
who arc not bed-ridden during their
“period.” You’re right, Joe, the war
won’t stop when a woman has her
period. But the woman won’t stop
either.
Jennifer Pctray
graduate student
Testosterone
poisoning cause
of Davis' attitude
Joe Davis, have you seen a doctor
about your terminal case of testoster
one poisoning (DN, April 20)? I rec
ommend it.
Nanci Rivenburg
junior
biological sciences
Letter is proof
Women s Center
needed at UNL
To everyone who has ever uttered
(or even imagined) the question ..
but why do we need a Women’s
Resource Center?’ ’ may I direct your
attention to Joe M. Davis’slctlcr(DN,
April 20).
As long as there are people in this
soc icty (and no, Joe Davis is not alone
in his myths and misinformation) who
believe that women arc “naturally ”
weaker and more emotional;
as long as there are people who
persist in blaming women for the action
of others (i.e. “homy men” getting
killed because they can’t leave women
alone);
as long as there are people who
will justify mistreatment of women
by saying “that is just the way it has
always been;”
as long as there are people who
insist on using stereotypes and worst
case scenarios to keep women from
being given equal chances and oppor
tunities;
as long as one in every three women
will experience rape or sexual assault
in her lifetime;
as long as there are people that feel
women arc “somewhat weaker and
better suited to domestic activity;”
as long as conditions in our society
exist which allow people like Joe
Davis to develop such misinformed,
misguided and appalling attitudes
toward women;
we will need places like the
Women’s Resource Center. A place
where women can come together with
common concerns, support each other
and learn ways to reach goals and
achieve opportunities that the Joe
Davis’ of the world would deny us.
No, Joe Davis, we arc not getting
‘ ‘carried away. ’ ’ In fact, we are being
quite polite about all of this. As long
as there are people like you, Joe Davis,
women will continue to scream in
protest. Thank you for giving us (and
CFA) ample evidence that we need a
Women’s Resource Center.
Gina Matkin
coordinator
Women’s Resource Center
P.S. Your myth that women with PMS
are incapable of combat could be
dangerous....
Comments written
only to capture
strong response
When I first started reading the
letter by Joe M. Davis, sophomore,
criminal justice, (DN, April 20) I
became angry.
Then, of course, I realized that
Joe’s opinions cannot possibly exist
in an adult, mentally functioning,
human male’s body, and this diatribe
was created to only agitate and elicit
powerful response.
Sorry Joe, it didn’t work here. Your
statements are too outlandish to be
given serious consideration and then
argued against. If you really feel that
way about women, I doubt you would
be attending an institution of higher
learning where one of the by-prod
ucts (hopefully) is open-mindedness.
It is wonderful that you have such
creative writing skills. Much reform
is needed in the criminal justice sys
tem, and I am sure you will make
wonderful contributions. Instead of
using your energies for this uncon
struclive essaying, why not start
working on some real problems. At
the very least you could use your lime
studying for finals.
Rene Bailey Himber
senior
geology
Sheer strength
not only thing
needed in combat
Mr. Davis’ prehistoric altitude about
unmi>n in ih<* miliiarv and u/nmrn in
general (DN, April 20) lacked evi
dence. Having been in the active Air
Force for the past 2 1/2 years, I, too,
feel that there are certain valid argu
ments pertaining to women in com
bat. But Mr. Davis discussion fo
cused on ignorant,chauvinistic state
ments.
He claimed that women arc much
too emotional for combat and that,
under torture, they would break. Since
when do women have a comer on
emotion? It is a fact that every man,
without exception, held prisoner in
the Hanoi Hilton prisoner of war camp
during the Vietnam war broke. Every
single man. And 1 know this for cer
tain, having spoken to one of the
inmates in person.
As far as physical competence, 1
agree that men have a greater poten
tial m regard to sheer muscle strength.
But I disagree with Mr. Davis in that
this sheer strength is entirely neces
sary in combat. Hand-to-hand com
bat is only one facet of war. In fact, it
has been shown that women arc physi
cally able to withstand more G-forccs
than men. This is the main factor that
hinders fighter pilots. Thus, women
have the potential to be better fighter
pilots than men.
Actual combat, even during a war,
is also just part of the big picture. I
would hope, though not expect, that
Mr. Davis will agree with me when I
claim that women arc at least as equal
intellectually to men. In this regard,
women perform a multiple of duties
that support the mission of the armed
forces with a great degree of accuracy
and excellence. These duties include
for example, intelligence and logis
tics, just to name two, and require a
great degree of intellect as opposed to
Mr. Davis’ degrading suggestions of
“cooking and office work.”
It frightens me to find a man who
not only believes that “our country
has viewed and treated women as
something less than men” and also
actively supports such a country. If I
shared his view, I would never have
voluntarily joined its military and
celebrated in the freedoms that Amer
ica brags - I hardly call that sort of
oppression freedom.
In his own words, the vast major
ity of women arc soft and weak. I
hope he finds one that will pul up with
his inane attitudes. I hope he finds a
woman that agrees with him in that it
is all right for men in the service to
“go into town and gel a whore.” I
hope he finds one that is willing to do
his domestic work and that, due to her
monthly “disability,” they won stock
in Advil. And if you, Mr. Davis, area
member of our armed forces, I hope
you become enlightened before
America really needs your support.
Lisa Giddings
junior
math/cconomics
Insulting women
won't help Davis
make new friends
I am writing in response to Joe M.
Davis’ letter (DN, April 20) about
“Women suitixl for kitchen duty, not
combat duty.” I have three points I
would like to make.
First and foremost, I think that if
Mr. Davis had any female friends
before he wrote the letter, he doesn’t
anymore.
Second, I think his example of
carrying combat gear through 30 miles
of snake and leech-infested swamp
makes two points in itself. One, that it
would certainly scare me to do that,
and I think most of my friends (men
and women, just to clarify) would
agree, and two, that only an idiot
would walk for 30 miles through such
conditions. It seems to me that one
would become very sick from such an
activity and that as long as you arc
walking 30 miles, you probably could
walk an additional five or 10 to get to
higher ground to avoid the swamp.
M vy thirst anrl firv.il rwunl it ihiK Vlr
Davis doesn’t want women in the
military, but a group of homy bar
barians who would “pull a few trains”
on their fellow personnel is a quality
representation of men in the military?
1 think not.
Mr. Davis makes a lot of assump
tions. Congratulations to the women
of the world who have been involved
in the equal rights movement.
Brian Gordon
junior
education
Women at UNL
haven't listened
to sexist males
My response to the letter (DN,
April 20), on soft, weak women, as
per Joe M Davis, sophomore, crimi
nal justice, is as follows:
1) . My first thought was, did your
girlfriend dump you and join the
military? And was that the reason you
were striking out at the women of the
world?
2) . What simple-minded, self
centered, male-chauvinist person could
be enrolled at the university?
I would like to suggest that you
take a stroll over to the Administra
tion Building and look on the bulletin
board between rooms 127 and 129.
Thank goodness these women among
the few didn’t stop to listen to males
in the world like you.
In my opinion, the world would be
a lot better place to live in if con
trolled by women. We all know God
created Man first and Woman second
— to correct his mistake.
K. A. Waldman
staff
Davis’ comments
insulting to women
and to real men
When I read Joe Davis’ letter (DN,
April 20), I thought it was the most
sexist, insulting and ridiculous thing I
have ever read. It was not only ex
tremely insulting to women, it was
also insulting to the REAL men in
this world.
You seem to think that women in
the military would “provide a dan
gerous distraction for the males in the
company” because in your opinion
men have this uncontrollable sexual
need that must be satisfied. Since
there just happens to be a few women
in the same company, then it’s OK for
the “entire unit of horny men” to use
these female individuals as objects to
satisfy their sexual “needs?” This,
Mr. Davis, is a frightening altitude
that seems to be strangely related to
the altitudes of manv ranisls. con
victcd or unconvictcd. In case you are
unaware of this, no sexual desire is
uncontrollable unless you have a very
serious problem.
You also insist on repealing that
you feel women arc naturally weaker
than men. Let me as you, then, ask if
that is why you think it’s OK for the
“unit of homy men” to “have their
fun” with the women of the com
pany? The only weak thing I can find
with your letter is the mind that was
behind all of your sexist thoughts. It is
disturbing to find out that there are
people like you in the world, but it is
even more disturbing to know that
there is one right here on our own
campus.
Sheryl Radkc
sophomore
music education
Davis uninformed
about woman s job
in armed forces
I’m writing in response to Joe Davis’
letter (DN, April 20) concerning
women in combat. First of all, Joe’s
letter started out with some good points,
uui ny me enu oi it joc maac it quite
clear whai a close-minded, arrogant
pig he is. Joe’s attitudes reflect the
opinions of society many years ago.
This is the ’90s, Joc. There arc thou
sands of women serving in the armed
forces today, and they arc doing a
great job at it. I agree with Joc that
women should be physically quali
fied before they arc allowed in com
bat, but I do not agree with the rest of
his opinions.
Joc’scomrneniabout troops being
able to find a whore during peacetime
totally degrades the men serving in
the military, and 1 am glad he is not
one of them. Maybe he is the type to
go looking for a whore, but I know a
lot of military personnel who arc not
out to find a common whore every
chance they get. I think many mili
tary families would be and should be
rightfully offended by his comment.
I would also like to point out to Joc
that women go to boot camp. Officer
Candidate School, and the Basic
School, and they do not get a week off
just because they have their periods.
Joe’s comment on that really showed
how ignorant he is. Maybe he hasn’t
noticed that women work every day
of the month at military and civilian
jobs regardless of whether or not they
have their period. His comment on
this was totally irrelevant to the de
bate about women in combat.
Also, women arc not the only ones
who would try to rescue a buddy in
combat. Many men would react in the
same way and have acted this way in
past combat situations. Since Joe is
not a woman and has not been in
combat, I would like to know how he
can say that is the way a combat
situation would be.
Being exposed to the military
throughout most of my life, I have
encountered a few men who had similar
opinions, but never in my life have I
come across someone so uninformed
and uneducated about the important
role women play in the military.
Women arc an important asset to the
armed forces and they are quality
personnel, both enlisted and officers.
These women arc willing to serve
their country and arc doing a fine job
of it. Many men aren’t qualified (or
willing) to fill the positions these
women do. Are you that qualified,
Joe?
In closing, I would like to say to
Joe: If you arc ever in combat serving
our country (heaven forbid) and get
wounded, I hope the female nurse
that is supposed to help you spits in
your wounds.
Deborah D. Robinson
sophomore
undeclared
P.S. What is Alice gear, toe?Perhaps
you meant 782 gear or deuce gear.
Get the facts right before you open
your mouth.
Simple-minded men
place all women
in one category
In response to Joe M. Dav is’ letter
(DN, April 20), I'd like to respond by
saying “the Marion Cunningham
days” arc over! Wake up! This is the
’90s, not the '60s. You’re way too
young to have closed-minded, male
chauvinistic altitudes toward women.
Women have never been consid
ered equal to men. Past history con
firms this. We have only had the right
to vote for about 70 years, whereas
you guessed it, the male has been
voting since the beginning of time.
I firmly believe women should have
the CHOICE, whether to fight in
combat or not.
The reason women arc viewed as
“somewhat weaker and belter suited
to domestic activity” is because
simple-minded men, such as your
self, pul ALL WOMEN into one cate
gory. It’s men like you that firmly
believe the only reason women arc
attending this university is for their
Mrs. degree.
As for men being “homy,” just
because women are in the armed serv
ices doesn’t give men the right to
“null a iV>ik trains: ” nrv*rl nnali
fled people in the service, whether
men or women (it doesn’t matter);
however, we don’t need rapists in the
service.
It’s a well-known fact that women
have a menstrual cycle. And, yes,
women tend to be bitchy and moody.
You would be, loo, if you had cramps,
bloating, tension, body aches and pains;
however, God blessed women with
the ability to bear children.
Your views on today’s women arc
totally unrealistic and behind the limes.
Today’s women have the opportunity
to pursue their potential, whatever
that may be.
I’ll agree that overall, women tend
to be smaller than men, but as a male
friend pointed out to me, this position
is rather moot since machine guns arc
used, rather than hand-to-hand com
bat.
I’d like to conclude by saying, in
today's male-dominated world women
should have the right to make choices
for themselves, and if that includes
joining the armed forces, then they
should be CONGRATULATED, not
DISCRIMINATED against
Christine Ryan
senior
elementary education
P.S. The general consensus is that
you must have been really bored in
order to write such an asinine letter.
