Letters to the EditorThe latest assault of an MIT student does not indicate the dangers of living on an urban campus, but the insensitivity and lack of concern shown by MIT regarding safety. This was not the first time an MIT student was assaulted this year.
What surprises me is the effect such an incident has on the MIT community. Life goes on as usual, and no measures are taken to reduce the chances of such instances happening again. We at MIT pride ourselves on being some of the smartest people around, yet we exhibit no spectacular learning behavior after each incident. MIT needs to carefully examine the scenario and to find out what is under the control of the administration and the police department, to reduce the risk the students are exposed to.
I propose that MIT seriously consider the following:
* Ask students what measures can be taken to increase student safety on campus.
* Install bright lights along Memorial Drive and all other streets that students usually use late at night to shuttle between home and work.
* Increase the size of the Campus Police and increase the number of patrols, especially on deserted streets.
* Enhance Safe Ride to include areas that are not independent living groups.
* Start paid student patrols within living groups. Students know who lives in their building, and could be effective guards.
* Enhanced surveillance in the garages and all other areas with high incidents of theft.
* Install more emergency telephones throughout the campus.
* Give whistles to all MIT students to use in case of emergencies.
Wasiq Bokhari G
Party Poster Letters Miss the Mark
I must reply to the two responses to a letter by Charles E. Robin `92 that appeared in The Tech ["Party Poster Obscene," Sept. 11]. The letters concerned a GAMIT party poster depicting two nude women engaged in sexual activity.
I have never seen the poster in question, so perhaps I am not the best judge of its acceptability. But to assert, as Rebecca Widom `94 does in her letter ["GAMIT Poster Misunderstood," Sept. 15], that the poster is acceptable because a lesbian drew it is grossly false. No one has the right to portray other members of his or her group in a potentially offensive manner. Where a question of pornography or "good taste" applies, the standards are the same regardless of the publishing party.
I found Robert J. F. Messier '93's letter ["Poster Does Not Objectify Women," Sept. 15] particular upsetting. He claims that Roburn's use of the word "obscene" implies that Roburn considers lesbianism "depraved and evil." This assumption was improper.
The question must be asked whether the use of possible pornographic material was justified. Since at least one person objects, and since there is no reason to believe that his objection stems from anything other than an abhorrence for the public display of pornography, the poster, and others like it, should not be put up in the future.
Jonathan Katz '96