An Open Letter to the College Republicans

Recently I was the subject of a College Republicans’ blog post, which features a photo, my full name, and a comment I made on ShoutOut regarding the fliers for their Kate Obenshain event. (Being a vocal feminist with a penchant for what my mom calls foul language, I probably should have seen this coming). I said that I took their fliers down (in what was not the nicest way), as I find them to be sexist, racist, classist, and homophobic. Before I say anything else, I fully acknowledge that removing the fliers was wrong, and I am truly sorry for that. However, I also want to explain why they are so offensive, not just to me, but to many other members of JMU’s community as a whole. A friend of mine, blogging under the name femistorian, has also posted a critique of the flier on her own blog. I am not the only woman at JMU to be offended by their implications.

The posters feature three white women, who appear to be upper-class given their clothing, with the sentence:

“To find out more about how to counter the feminists on your campus and promote women like the ones pictured here, visit our website at www.cblpi.org.”

Given the sexualized images of these women (they are sexualized by showing cleavage, and the very posturing and presentation of their bodies), and the fact that they are all white; it is offensive that the group would want to “promote women like the ones pictured here.” The “ones pictured here” represent a single, dominant race and a single dominant class. They present no room for women of color, women of lower economic status, women who are not cis-gendered (cis-gendered means that your sex corresponds to your gender identity, and it is privileged status in society), and women who are queer (meaning, not “LGBT-whatever”, but LGBTQIQ). Thus, women who are not white, straight, upper-class, cis-gendered, or heterosexual may feel alienated by the ideas that the posters are presenting, on the campus they came to for education and acceptance. Promoting only women like that would be detrimental to JMU as a whole. What about diversity of women on campus? I, for one, would like to see more diversity here and believe that diverse groups should be thoroughly represented here. Our campus is predominantly white, middle-upper class, making us a homogeneous campus where diversity, as in people of color and queer individuals are ghettoized as small subsets of the community. Monday of this week was the first day of GayMU, a weeklong celebration of acceptance of the queer community on campus. Celebrating GayMU is hugely important. It is absolutely necessary that the queer community claims their marginalized voices. However, the very fact that heterosexuality and being cis-gendered are considered the norm is a problem, promoted by those posters and by Obenshain’s talk. When she said “LGBT-whatever”, she was intending to erase the identities of people she dislikes on the basis of how they identify themselves. Attempting to erase the identities of people in your rhetoric, whether it be in a speech or on a poster is wrong and harmful.

Furthermore, the event and fliers themselves attacked the Vagina Monologues and V-Day, an amazing, inspiring annual event that means to eradicate men’s violence against women, and help women understand their own bodies. Society has made it a stigma for women to be knowledgeable of their own bodies, unless that knowledge is purely for babymaking purposes. They are not outdated, and will not be outdated as long as women are taught little to nothing about their bodies, and as long as women are taught to devalue their bodies and pleasures. When I helped to organize the Vagina Monologues here last year, the proceeds went to the V-Day foundation’s annual charity, which was to help the victims of systematic rape in the Congo. Our proceeds also went to two crucial local organizations, the Collins Center, which is a rape crisis center, and First Step, which is the domestic violence shelter. This event can help survivors of assault feel like they are regaining agency, and understanding and controlling their body again. Often, the Vagina Monologues are presented in tandem with Take Back the Night, another annual event meant to raise awareness of sexual violence against women. TBTN is an immensely powerful event, especially given that it features a speak-out where survivors of assault can share their experiences. The College Republicans planned Obenshain’s talk the same week as TBTN, and it seems like that may have also been an intentional way to attack an event that is connected with the Vagina Monologues. If that is the case, it is completely reprehensible that they would target this event. Men’s violence against women is an absolutely pervasive epidemic in society. One in four women on college campuses will be sexually assaulted before they graduate. One would hope that everyone agrees that eradicating violence against women is absolutely necessary to achieve equality.

So like I said, in response to my comment saying that I took down three of their fliers, they responded with posting my ShoutOut profile photo and full name. To post the full name and photo of someone you disagree with is simply reactionary and intended to harass that individual. Knowing that I am listed in such a manner on the College Republicans’ blog makes me feel uncomfortable and, to a certain extent, unsafe. I am aware that the name I use on the blog is a shorter version of my full name, and that I posted that ridiculous picture as my blog avatar on my own. However, it is being misused by the College Republicans on their website, especially given that I never consented to letting them use that information. I feel vulnerable to attack and harassment at any time now, both via the internet and in public. This is not a reasonable way to address a concern. While I should not have taken the posters down (no matter how offensive they may be), posting such information in an inflammatory manner is a step much further than what I did. It is a cyber attack, and it is fully intended to incite harassment against me. As is posting the emails and IP addresses of alumni who disagreed with the event. It invites people to personally attack others as opposed to their ideas. I would hope that taking down a total of three fliers did not cause actual harm to any member of the College Republicans, whereas I am now a target for actual harassment. The College Republicans chose to target me as an individual without actually addressing anything I said. They are not targeting my ideas, nor my critique of the event (which was posted in my comment).

They went on to label me as an intolerant liberal, but I have some issues with their use of the word intolerant. I am intolerant of homophobia, racism, sexism, and classism, as anyone should be. As I mentioned, the fliers display all of these negative attitudes, which, once again, is no reason to take them down, but does reinforce a culture that is oppressive. When we are tolerant of ideologies that intend to marginalize and oppress non-dominant groups, we further a system that disadvantages people based on race, class, gender, gender identity, sexual identity, ability, and so on. Tolerance is typically considered to be a social and cultural good, that benefits the collective. However, they are using tolerance to protect ideas that are intolerant, which is incredibly ironic. In this case, “tolerance” is being used as a way to degrade and oppress those who do not belong to majority groups.  We should never be tolerant of attitudes and ideologies that are, to use their word, “intolerant” of others due to racial, gendered, or socioeconomic characteristics.

As someone who writes for a blog, I can assure you that I see the point of blogging to be a way to express your ideas. Critiquing someone’s words and ideas can be an effective way to have discourse, however personal attacks are detrimental to both sides, and can have very negative ramifications, such as making someone feel unsafe in the community where they go to school. The two are very different ideas, and while critiquing words can advance discourse,  attacks are intended to silence people. Given that I recognize that removing the fliers was not the right thing to do, I hope the College Republicans will respond in kind, removing my personal information from their blog. (The photo is no longer on the page, but I believe that is more likely due to the fact that they hotlinked the image, which I promptly removed from the blog after seeing it up on their website).