Sarcasm will make me friends!

The letters in the opinion section of the Daily Universe can make me so mad.  Why do I keep reading them?  Not reading them doesn't make the people who write them go away.

I just browsed the opinion section on the Universe website, and some of the letters included there are saying that:

• People around campus should smile more
• People shouldn't leave before the closing hymn and prayer during the Priesthood conference session
• Let's not pick on the way girls dress; instead, let's pick on the guys!!
• People should abstain from facebook and texting as a fast
•  People should walk in the crosswalks
• The people in the author's ward should stop hassling him to come to FHE

I understand that these could be considered valid concerns or ideas; a main problem I find with them though is that they carry the attitude that "if I think this is a good idea, then everyone should think it's a good idea."  Do you think it would help you to take a break from facebook?  Great, do that, and I hope it does help, but you don't need to tell other people that they should do it too.  You want people to smile more?  Stop picking on them and pointing out what they're doing wrong.  Maybe someone isn't smiling because s/he isn't happy; why don't you work on thinking of the why part of why people don't smile?  I hate the letters to the editor about the way girls dress, but I hate the ones from girls about guys almost as much; it's not right to criticize someone for something and then turn around and do a similar thing to them.  The ones from the guys are demeaning to girls, but the ones from girls make us girls look bad too.

The one about Priesthood session had a good reason for not leaving the session early: the noise bothers people still in attendance.  But you can still leave early and not make noise.  This letter has a self-righteous attitude and includes things like this:

Maybe it’s the traffic (waiting 2-3 minutes to get out of a church parking lot is brutal, I know), maybe by some amazing coincidence all of those brethren had to be at work right after the session. Whatever the reason, it’s disrespectful to the brethren sitting around you, the leaders you just heard from, and the choir that prepared a closing hymn to seal the spirit of the meeting.

Shame on you for disrespecting leaders!  Sarcasm will make me friends!

As for the FHE letter, the DU opinion section is not the proper forum.  The author should just talk to his FHE group leaders about it instead of letting them read it in the paper.

Yes, here I am saying what people should do.  But at least I'm not writing into the paper about it.

intelligent, but not intellectual

I like to make collages out of pictures I find in books.  I wanted some photos of real people, so I checked out some issues of Newsweek from 1965.  At the same time, I'm both grateful for how the world has improved and appaled at how it used to be.

Two cases in point:

An article discussed a new higher demand for stewardesses because of the increase in international travel by plane and because so many of the current stewardesses were quitting because they were getting married.  Ads gave a height and weight range that potential employees had to conform to, and they had to pass rigorous tests, among them an IQ one (an IQ of 105 was required).  Stewardesses were important, because they brought that extra magic and hospitality that could make a man leave smiling even if his steak was cold and his margerita was in a paper cup.

Sure, these women are complimented for their manner and service, but they're important because they're serving the businessmen who fly on the plane.  Women may do a great job at what they do, but what they do is always subservient to men.  Also, the idea that bothers me to no end is that women work/go to school while they wait to find someone to marry, and then their life goes out the window.  Having a job is just a placeholder until you marry someone to support you.

The caption below a photo of a stewardess quoted in the article read "the best school for brides."  I am glad at least that the article acknowledged that this phrase, appearing on ads encouraging young ladies to apply for a job as a stewardess, was just too much.

An article that did profiles of college students interviewed one Matilda Gholson from the University of North Carolina.  Here is an excerpt:

Matilda, the 22-year-old daughter of a Henderson, N.C., attorney, is a "straight-B" student, a senior majoring in education who chose teaching because "I like children and it seemed important."  But Matilda sees her true career with "a husband and a family."  She has no steady now, dates mostly on weekends, more and more for quiet dinners instead of swinging fraternity "combo parties."  She knows what kind of wife she wants to be.  "A woman's role is secondary to her husband's."  While at college Matrilda looks to her parents for direction.  "I like to think I'm not a conformist," she says, "but I am."

Intelligent, but not intellectual, Matilda sounds like the belle ideal of Southern womanhood.

So many things.  The idea that teaching was an ideal job for women because they work with kids.  And I say this as a female studying to be a teacher!   Look, if you want to stay at home and make being a wife and mother a career, that's perfectly acceptable;women don't get enough recognition for their household roles that really can be considered careers (except you don't get paid and don't get vacations!)  However, it is disturbing to me that this young lady said with her own mouth that her role will be secondary to her husband's.  Not secondary, Tilly—equal.  She believes this because that's all she hears.  I just wonder how often she thinks about these tenets and if at any time something in her brain tells her that there's something wrong with these thoughts.

It's a similar feeling I have when I hear people talk in sacrament meeting or in a class about how gracious God is and how they're less than dirt, etc. and how they're so grateful for forgiveness.  It's so often in a way that really insults them themselves.  We should be grateful for forgiveness, but not in a I-should-be-damned-to-hell-for-eternity-for-this-mistake-but-instead-God-is-SO-merciful-and-does-this-when-I-don't-deserve-it-at-all way.  It bothers me so, so much when people think that to elevate God or some other important figure that they have to debase themselves.

That last sentence quoted—I love that not being an intellectual fits in with being a Southern belle.  And I'm not sure whether the author's comment about her intellect should be taken as a sexist remark.  I watched a video on youtube that's a news story from around 1964 about the new popularity of the Beatles.  The reporter, a man, mentioned that so many girls loved the band, and "some of them can write," referencing to the amount of fanmail the Beatles received.  Not "some of them write fanletters," or "some of them do also write to the band," but "some of them can write."  It didn't stand out tome when I watched it, but someone in the comments brought to my attention how awful that can sound (yes, there were intelligent comments on a youtube video!!!!1!).

Obamarama

Letter: Just enjoy the message
Wed, 07/01/2009 - 23:13

I am writing in response to the June 30 letters “Stop ignoring the new president” and “Newsflash: Obama is president.” First off, I would like to say the slideshows that were shown at the BYU Patriotic Fireside were wonderful. I don’t know why people were getting so worked up about George W. Bush being shown in a few more pictures than President Barack Obama.

Second, in most of the pictures that showed Bush, he had his hand over his heart. If you haven’t noticed, Obama doesn’t always put his hand over his heart during the national anthem. Maybe Obama would be in more BYU devotional slideshows if he did an action that every American should do — especially the president of the United States.

Nachelle Stewart
Provo

Yeah!  Take that, you communist!  The reason that Obama wasn't shown in more pictures isn't that there's a Republican bias at BYU–it's because Obama doesn't put his hand over his heart!  It's not BYU's fault, idiot–it's Obama's!  

Really?  We're still discussing the hand-over-the-heart issue?  And I'm not an authority on Barack Obama's motives (yeah, I know you thought I was.  Sorry to disappoint you.), but you shouldn't take everything at face value.  I think we often assume the outward appearance of something is a negative reflection on someone's character, when it's often not.  Maybe Obama really is an unpatriotic America hater.  Or maybe he wanted to show his respect a different way–internally (he could be thinking about respect for the country.  And Bush, with his hand over his heart, could be thinking about French fries).  Who knows.  Just don't jump to the conclusion that he is showing disrespect on purpose.  And since when is this specific action the ultimate mark of patriotism and respect to one's country?

The point has been made before that the BYU Honor Code does focus on outward actions, such as dressing modestly, but that what someone does outwardly is not always a mark of what he or she really thinks or believes, and thus following the Honor Code isn't the end-all indication that you are righteous.  There are wolves in sheep's clothing–someone may dress modestly and use clean language and have a missionary haircut, but he could be rotten inside.  Of course, there really isn't a way to monitor someone's thoughts and motives (and I'm glad!  The Thought Police are scary!  And so are rats!  Do it to Julia!), so outward appearance is often a good indication.  But it's still as true as ever that you can't judge a book by its cover.  An action is only as potent as the meaning behind it and the committment to it.  Putting your hand over your heart in front of the American flag does not guarantee that you are patriotic; Osama bin Laden could also put his hand over his heart in front of the American flag and it wouldn't mean a thing.  I would like to think that Obama doesn't want to just go through the motions of putting a hand over the heart and is choosing a more meaningful way for him to honor the flag.  Or maybe he's making a point that putting a hand over the heart doesn't make someone a patriot.  Or maybe he's a communist and we should stone him, because communists are always evil.   

I would rather have someone not go through the motions of something just to look good in public if the action has lost meaning for him personally.  Which I'm not saying is the case for Obama.  But it could be.  And if it is, I'm fine with it.  

I am embarrassed for the sheer imbecility of this failed rhetoric.

Here are two letters to the editor from today that made me sit in silence and mentally weep for the people who think like this about me. My comments are in bold. I hope you enjoy.

Refresher course

In the March 30 letter, "Proper appreciation," the author openly suggests that BYU is forcing women to be subjects of society pressure. Your tone, sir, suggests that this is a bad view because it is wrong. Nope. Perhaps a refresher course on the church's viewpoints would help. Thank you sir, for taking the time out to educate a flighty, ignorant female. Your tone is patronizing, and I don't like it. First of all, perhaps BYU and the Church encourage women to prepare themselves to get married and raise a family in order to fulfill the gospel. I am not saying those things are all a woman can do, but the church does state that the woman is responsible for those things. You don't mention anything else a woman could do in a positive light in this entire letter. Just because you say, "I'm not saying that. . ." doesn't mean you're not implying it. As the Proclamation to the World on families I didn't know this was about families; thanks for enlightening me. By the way, I just love it when people quote scripture, etc. in these letters. implies, men and women have different roles. They are equally important, but they do have different roles. This sounds just like lip service ("they are equally important") because he doesn't seem to believe it. Also, the roles are not mutually exclusive; they overlap. Men have family responsibility too.

I apologize to the author for being behind the times, what a generous apology. but I personally encourage the Church's (and BYU's) efforts in helping women prepare for a more traditional role. This sounds really nice coming from a man. Last time I checked, women still could take classes to learn skills such as managing your finances and other classes to help women break through "the glass ceiling." Come to think of it, I think you can even major in whatever to want these days. OK, those two sentences are just stupid. I have never heard the argument that BYU restricts what classes women can take and majors they can pursue. He makes it sound like this is a great point that's supposed to stop the opposition dead in their tracks, but it's just dumb. I am embarrassed for the sheer imbecility of this failed rhetoric. The point is what these classes and majors are preparing women for.

Lastly, I am sorry the author's experience at BYU has been so outdated. You don't sound sorry, sonny. Perhaps you could transfer to a school that is more ready to openly support a woman's right to have an abortion, sexual promiscuity, and all the other things that our women's rights activists fight for today. Yeah! Those dang feminists, fighting for abortion, promiscuity, equal pay in the work place, equal respect for women if they choose to have a career, prevention and punishment of sexual harassment, the list of these sinful things just goes on and on. And yeah, like there's no sexual promiscuity (hang on, what other kind of promiscuity is there??) here or anything. I wonder if a lady rejects Blake's NCMO invitation, he would say that she is not yielding to his natural authority as the man and is one of those sinful feminists. And I hate the implication that all other schools are just filled with promiscuous women who abort their babies. That's pretty dang judgmental. There are good people everywhere. Hey, you might even get the priesthood there HA! Woman having the Priesthood! Preposterous! It's not called the Priestesshood, hardy har har! and find buildings that have women's names on them! HA! Women's names on them! Take that! Yeah, like that'd be a good idea! Ha ha ha ha ha! I don't know how anyone could even consider such a ridiculous idea! That was a good joke, there, Blake.

Blake Johnson I want to smack you. Oh, that could be misinterpreted-I mean physical violence, not public affection.

Orem I could say that you're so narrow-minded because you're from Utah, but I won't stoop that low.

What is most important

In the March 30 letter, "Proper Appreciation," I read her complaints about the church's emphasis on motherhood, and how she wishes BYU would concern itself with the glass ceiling and names of buildings. I agree with her concerns. I then turned on page 8 of the same day's paper and read Sister Mary N. Cook's enlarged quote,Oh ho ho, what clever juxtaposition! Gold star. Not. "[Satan] I don't trust that his bracketing is accurate. Who knows if this quote really was referring to Satan??? has made motherhood seem less important. He has been successful in confusing women about their roles in the Lord's divine plan. Then I went online and watched President Monson's talk What, like, immediately? You got up from first reading the letter, then the quote (just the quote, apparently, not the whole article), and then immediately went online? How righteous of you. from the Saturday Young Women meeting I wouldn't admit that, dude. JK. where he counseled them to have the courage to stand up for their beliefs and their divine role. He cited scriptures including Nephi's vision (also known as Lehi's vision)where those who ate the fruit were ashamed and fell away, Ooh, that nasty juxtaposition again! He's not saying it outright, but he means that people like the author of that letter are like the ashamed people who fall away and the warning to beware of those who call evil good and good evil. Equality in the workplace=Evil. Deleting all sense of your identity apart from being a mother=Good. Whoops. I just failed to listen to your advice. I fail to understand why the honor and challenge of raising the generation that will prepare the Earth for the Lord's return Wow! He even knows the date of the Second Coming; now that's impressive. appeals less to some women than the drudgery of the corporate world. Because that's the only type of career to have--working for some corporation. And let's salute the men for slaving away every day in the drudgery of the corporate world. Good job. And if it's so great (and yes, it is), why don't you mention that men should also participate in this privilege? It is not an insult to promote motherhood. That's correct, actually. It is a compliment to women's strength, intelligence and potential. It depends on the way it's done, bucko. For both men and women, our best effort and ambitions should be focused on what is most important in life: our families and our homes. OK, I do agree with that; I like that he says it's both the man's and woman's job to care for the family. But he doesn't give any hint of this view in anything he says previously.

Cameron Nielsen

Aloha, Ore. Why is there a city called Aloha in Oregon? Now that's just whack.

I read the news today, oh boy.

I thank the Daily Unifarce and its pinheaded minions for giving me fodder for this blog. Thank you for allowing dimwitted students, through the "Readers' Forum" voice their narrow-minded, offensive viewpoints. I swore off reading the Readers' Forum for awhile on behalf of my blood pressure, but the feeling still lurked that even though I wasn't reading about these opinions, there were still plenty of students around me who held them--ignoring these idiots doesn't make them go away.

I read today's Readers Forum during an hour lunch break but was still steaming mad when I got to German. I had stopped going to class because of my medical condition, but I came back today because we were talking about the Holocaust; to stop a horror and atrocity against humanity like that from happening again, we need to know about it, so I went to learn (and because I wondered how it would be different learning about it in a German class). I listened, and then before too long I realized I needed to write the response to these nincompoops I had been brewing in my head. So, while listening to my professor talk about those evil "democratic socialists," I fired this lovely letter off to some modern-day Nazis:

(by the way, here is the opinion page from today; my letter is directed to "Respect Yourself" and "Considerate Clothing." Man, those titles just say it all.)

To the self-righteous, arrogant pigs who had the gall to write letters to the editor:

What authority do you have to lecture your fellow students? How do you even have the nerve to chastise and talk down to them? I am not even one of these horrid sinners who burn copies of the Honor Code for fun and show affection on the grass, but I am still insulted. I am embarrassed that people like you go to this university. How is it your business what couples do in public? If it bothers you, don't look, you idiot. If couples lying (not laying, you uneducated slob) on each other sends you into such an uproarious tizzy, maybe it's you that needs help.

As to your suggestion to not do anything you wouldn't be comfortable doing in front of a parent or general authority–This is an oft-used method to keep people in line. For example, John Bytheway asks youth (well, female youth) how they would feel if the prophet was staying at the same hotel where your prom was and he saw you in your immodest dress?! Well, I don't want to dress modestly out of fear of being caught, judged, and embarrassed. I also think that if I, clad immodestly, did run into the prophet, he would be kind and loving, as you ought to be. He would not make me feel bad or ashamed. There are many things I would want to do in front of a parent or GA, such as enthusiastically play air guitar complete with slashing windmills or pretend to be a duck, but that doesn't make those things wrong. We shouldn't have to live in fear of being caught doing bad things by others like parents, GAs, or back biting morons like you. Thank you, Honor Code police for keeping us all in line.

And to the sexist premie (who with his appropriate Priesthood authority, of course) blamed the young women of Helaman Halls for his unclean thoughts: how dare you. You are just perpetuating unrighteous dominion and the beating down and blaming of women for what is not their fault. If their being "half naked" (what a hyperbole) offends you, don't look at them. If they're wearing a tank top and shorts (the absolute horror!!!!), that's more modest than a bathing suit. Do you flagellate yourself after accidentally glimpsing a girl at a pool or beach? I hope you douse your eyes with acid as you should after seeing such a horrendous sight. Would you prefer us women to wear veils and long sleeves and skirts so as not to tempt you? I mean, women are sinful creatures who are temptresses to otherwise righteous men. It is always our fault that we are your pornography.

No, I'm sorry, I'm being ungrateful. I'm glad you've pointed out whom we can blame if the freshmen men of BYU aren't worthy for missions–those devilish young harlots in their slutty clothes.

Authors, maybe these iniquitous, hard-hearted people in question would actually be willing to respect what you say if you weren't so condescending, holier-than-thou, and didn't speak as if you were calling these people steeped in iniquity to repentance.

Get over yourselves and stop judging others. You are absolute jackasses, and I'm ashamed on behalf of all Latter-day Saints that there are such myopic, misguided, pompous, unspeakably arrogant moron Mormons like you.

On Friday, the issues & ideas editor Samantha Strong (whose piece on R-rated movies I actually liked) described the letters that come in reaction to other letters to the editor:

"Usually, the knee-jerks pop in first–the letters that vehemently applaud or condemn the original message. The authors of these letters have either already thought through the issue and are eager to communicate the conclusions they have carefully arrived at previously, or they are simply reacting. They say the first thing that comes to their minds, often impassioned and often unintelligible. It's usually the latter."

Yes, this characterizes my letter. Yes, it could be viewed as hypocritical since I'm berating these idiots for berating others. But whatever. I'm not sending it in. And even though it is an impassioned reaction, that doesn't mean that it has no value or is not correct.

I really wonder how those students would function at a more liberal university (and I know, there's not many that are more liberal than BYU, let me tell you!). I imagine them curled up in the corner of a dark room, holding up a crucifix to the unwashed heathen who try to communicate with them. I wonder how they survived high school; maybe they're from Utah or were home schooled.

My main issue with these letters' authors is that they feel the need to correct others, feel justified to do so, and their tone suggests that they are a moral compass to these wayward souls, who definitely need to listen to them.

Also, I had just read my sociology textbook's chapter on gender inequality, which made me notice the sexism in "Considerate Clothing" more. We discussed last semester in New Testament class that in New Testament times (plus before and after, as we see it still exists today), if a man and woman committed adultery it was always the woman's fault. Women were temptresses who needed to be contained to protect the virtue of men. My terrific professor, Dr. Holzapfel, pointed out that even nowadays, if a guy messes around and then repents or whatever people let him move on. But if a girl does that, she has soiled her name forever. There are different standards for men and women. This dumb"Considerate Clothing" letter is just another example of those horrible letters to the editor about how the women on campus are disobeying the Honor Code and need to cover up more, because they are disturbing the men. PIGS! Those people make me sick.

Stay posted for more. . . posts mocking Daily Unifarce letters to the editor! It'll be fun!