Oppenheim Column Trivializes Women's Issues

To the editors:

It is surprising to hear that issues of sexual assault, rape and discrimination at Harvard are indeed not "women's issues" or matters of "gender politics" but rather issues of "public safety," as Noah D. Oppenheim posits (Opinion, Dec. 17).

Oppenheim writes that feminist activists need "to take a little time-out for a good old-fashioned reality check," arguing that "Surely, sexism, sexual harassment and sexual assault are issues that belong to everyone. Why are women's meetings any more deserving of protected space than anyone else's?" While issues such as sexism and sexual assault might "belong to everyone," the victims are disproportionately female. Their experiences are unique and can be emotionally and physically debilitating. The reasons for assault extend beyond the simple realm of "public safety" and into the more complicated ways in which gender hierarchy is constructed and perpetuated.

Relegating the needs of these women to "more meeting space and an occasional hug," as Oppenheim does, reveals the pervasive ways in which women's status continues to be demeaned and their experiences trivialized. Moreover, while the glorious call for equal opportunity and non-discrimination sounds pleasant to the ears, it ignores the methods in which inequality is initially constructed. "Equal opportunity" and "non-discrimination" hence become ways to mask and then perpetuate the unequal conditions that exist.

As Oppenheim notes, "The overwhelming majority of undergraduate women are not complaining of any rampant discrimination by Harvard." Yet the lack of complaint and awareness lies precisely at the heart of the issue (what is activism but the exposure of previously unrealized problems?)--an issue that must have escaped his notice as he busily and self-righteously attacks members of the U.C. for not attending the town meeting.

I congratulate Oppenheim for his attendance record, though he seems to forget that awareness at Harvard of the dearth of female tenured professors, sexual assault or of broader issues of women's rights around the nation and globe continues to be lacking. Many women's groups on campus also attempt to travel beyond issues of sexual assault and rape on campus to tackle the problems that women across the world confront, from reproductive rights to sweatshop labor.

Yet the low level of participation and the muted visibility of this feminist activism continue to plague Harvard. Oppenheim, perceiving women's groups merely to be a place for fuzzy self-esteem games, questions the existence of the Ann Radcliffe Trust at a time when advocates for women's issues should no longer remain silent. Oppenheim shows his lack of understanding when he asks, "As for the existence of 'emotional support,' don't we all need a bit of that?" Perhaps what's really needed at Harvard is not a women's center to address intricate issues of gender politics, but a center to soothe the bleeding wounds of young soldiers like Oppenheim who fight valiantly for equal opportunity for all.

Oppenheim's article foolishly caricatures "women's issues" as illusory concoctions of overzealous activists. The next time I see a girl who was sexually assaulted, I'll remember to give her that "occasional hug," ask her if she's got a meeting place for a bit of that "emotional support" and tell her that being raped has nothing to do with her gender. After all, somebody needs to give these unfairly protected people that good old-fashioned reality check.

Michelle Kuo '03

Dec. 18, 1999