Letters to the Editor

The Excalibur opinions section welcomes typed, double-spaced letters (no longer than 300 words). All submissions must be accompanied by the writer’s name, major, year and  telephone number/email address. Submissions longer than 300 words will be sent back to be shortened. All submissions will be edited for clarity, spelling and grammatical errors. All editing is up to the discretion of the editor.Materials deemed libelous or discriminatory by Excalibur will not be printed. All opinions expressed in the opinions section are those of their authors and are not necessarily those of the Excalibur staff, editorial board or Board of Publishers. Send submissions to our office at 420 Student Centre, fax to 416-736-5841 or email to letters@excal.on.ca. Please embed submissions in the body of the email.
“Controversial anti-Iran film to be shown Thursday”
news» feb. 9, 2011
Alarmist rhetoric Anita Kim
I attended the screening of Iranium on campus to see what the fuss was about, and came away disappointed by its message.
Jesse Zimmerman’s assessment of the film as “an attempt to manufacture a certain perception […] hysterical and […] fear mongering” seems to be accurate; the concluding narration stops just short of actively endorsing military action against Iran.
While some points of criticism against the country’s administration are valid (e.g. ongoing human rights abuses), this kind of alarmist rhetoric is not justified.
“Love & Sex banner”
front page» feb. 9, 2011
Sensationalist tactics Mayana Slobodian
Community papers offer a chance to rise above the sensational tactics of the mainstream news industry, and do something more. Unfortunately you’ve chosen to beat them at their own game.
I worked for Simon Fraser University’s student paper for two years, and I sincerely hope we never stooped to the kind of childish and pathetic editorial decisions as last week’s cover photos: Muslim women protesting in support of Egyptian democracy and, above the fold, a woman’s breasts.
If this is the only way you can think to garner interest in your publication, I think you’d better take a long, hard look at what you’re doing, and consider whether you’d be happier over at a paper like the Metro.
“Porn: A misunderstood world”
features» feb. 9, 2011
Adolescent approach Hayley Chown
I am disappointed with Excalibur’s Love and Sex supplement, featuring an image of large breasts on the front page. I had hoped the contents of the Love and Sex special might present thoughtful ideas on gender and sexuality; however, the “journalistic” material inside accurately reflected the raunchy photo on its exterior.
Demonstrations of mature, thoughtful discourse on sexuality, such as the article on Shannon Boodram’s book, were in short supply. The majority of the special demonstrated a juvenile, adolescent approach to sex that not only encourages the objectification of women as a form of “female empowerment,” but limits their sexuality to mere parts – some tits here and some ass there.
This view was communicated in the “Porn” article, which attempted to address society’s repression of sexuality. Arguing the undervaluation of pornography is somehow “a failure of society’s lack of sexual maturity,” the article attempted to educate me on what I “get wrong about porn” – that it is mere fantasy, suggesting its viewers should not take seriously scenes depicting what would otherwise be illegal activity; that it is not exploitative because porn actors choose to participate.
It seems irresponsible on the part of both the author and Excalibur to publish this article without some consideration of the alternate view: how women in these scenes are referred to as “bitches,” “whores,” and “sluts,” or how gang-bangs, rape, and teen sex fantasies are often played out in these films, or how ex-porn stars have exposed the physical pain and humiliation they experienced in the industry.
But somehow this is all justified because it is only a fantasy, right? And because the participants choose to be there?
If Excalibur wants to promote a mature feature on sexuality, it might be wise to publish work that actually strives toward this aim instead of that which only serves to negate it.