DIY History | Transcribe | Campus Culture | Take Back the Night newspaper editorials and articles, 1982 | 1982-12-07 Daily Iowan Guest Opinion: "Rally: what was and wasn't said"

Transcribe
Translate

Take Back the Night newspaper editorials and articles, 1982

1982-12-07 Daily Iowan Guest Opinion: "Rally: what was and wasn't said"

The Daily Iowan - Iowa City, Iowa - Tuesday, December 7, 1982 - Page 7A

Editor/ Craig Gemoules
News editor/ Tim Severa
Metro editor/ Rochelle Bozman
Assistant metro editor/Scott Sonner
Arts & entertainment editor/Jeffrey Miller
Editorial page editor/Liz Bird
Sports editor/ Jay Christensen
Assistant sports editors/Steve Batterson, Melissa Isaacson
Photography editor/Bill Paxson
Publisher/William Casey
Advertising manager/Jim Leonard
Classified ads manager/Maxine Van Cleve
Circulation manager/Kevin Rogers
Production superintendent/Dick Wilson 

Rally: what was and wasn't said 

Women take back the night 

Guest Opinion 

By Janet McNaughton 

OCTOBER'S TAKE Back the Night program and the events surrounding it have received considerable - many would say sufficient - attention in The Daily Iowan. However, it has largely been attention distorted by prejudice and a seemingly wilful disregard for facts. Now that the dust has settled, it is interesting to review what was said - and not said - about it. 
Apart from Sandi Wisenberg's column (DI Oct. 25) the paper's editorials and stories focused on the rally's exclusion of men and the media and on the alleged assault of a DI reporter. As the majority of the letters printed in the DI show, the result was to divert public concern away from the purpose of TBTN into peripheral issues. 
The nature of the response confirms Adrienne Rich's comment that " The deliberate withdrawal of women from men has almost always been seen as a potentially dangerous or hostile act, a conspiracy, a subversion, a needless and grotesque thing, while the exclusion of women from men's groups is rationalized by arguments familiar to us all, whether the group is a priesthood a dining club, a dishing expedition, an academic committee or a Mafioso rendezvous" (Of Women Born: Motherhood as Experience and Institution).

THE CRITICISM aimed at TBTN suggests that the decision to make the rally a gathering for women only was more disturbing to the DI and its readers than the violence against women that we gathered to speak out against. This ordering of priorities is the reverse of what it should be, no matter how one feels about the rally and its organization. 
If, as critics of the rally claim, an injustice was done to men by abridging their access to the park for three hours of one evening, it is a relatively minor injustice compared to the sexual harassment, rape, incest and battering suffered by women at the hands of men every day. Consider: whether a women has herself been a victim of rape or assault, the fear of these things governs her movement. She can never walk through College Green Park or any other part of Iowa City after dark without considering the possibility of being attacked. This is psychological terrorism, perhaps the most insidious injustice there is. 
One of the most frequent criticism of TBTN was that it alienated men supportive of women's rights. This position was advanced by Derek Maurer, who has repeatedly referred to TBTN as an event that excluded part of the community (DI Oct. 21. Oct. 27, Nov.18) and by Liz Bird who also regretted that "the women's movement may be retreating into self absorption" ( DI Oct. 29) 

THESE CRITICISMS might be just if the rally had been the only event in the TBTN program. It was not. On the night of the rally a meeting in the Union's Wisconsin Room was set up by the rally's organizers for supportive men. The organizers reserved the room found discussion leaders and provided materials for discussion, including a sheet addressing the question of men and the TBTN program. It is unjust to say that the organizers were self-absorbed and indifferent to the need for men to address the issue of violence against women when they arranged a meeting specifically for men. 
I question the sincerity of those " supportive" men who feel alienated by the rally. Men who came to the rally were informed of the meeting in the Union and asked to attend if they wished to show support. Any man who insisted on staying at the rally to show his support was refusing to respect the wishes of the women he claimed to support. Insisting on giving "support" in a way that is not appreciated is not to support, but to harass. 
It may be that Maurer and Bird felt that TBTN should not have been split into two sex-segregated events. If so. they should have said that. To ignore the Union meeting while criticizing the exclusion of men from the rally was simply to misrepresent the TBTN program. 

BUT WHY WAS the meeting in the Union ignored? Why was no reporter sent to cover it? Lack of knowledge of the meeting cannot be the answer, as the organizers held press conferences on the Saturday of the rally and also the following day. Can it be because this meeting took place "offstage" and did not promise a sensational story? Or is it possible that the DI staff was so incensed because women deliberately chose to withdraw from men for three hours tht they intentionally cast the rally in a discrediting light?
There is, unfortunately, some evidence for both of these hypothesus in  the DI's coverage of the assault alleged to have taken place at the rally. 
As of Nov. 1, Paul Boyum reported that " no formal charges have been filed" by News Editor Tim Severa. Yet his earlier story included five quoted or attributed remarks that refer to " violence" or " beating up" as though the facts had already been established ( DI Oct 27)
The DI has exploited the shock value of Severa's story, quoting more than once his claims that he was beaten and his life threatened even within the article stating that he had not yet filed charges. As the letters to the editor show, this inflammatory and misleading reporting has left some readers with the misinformation that charges were files (G.D Smith and S.C. Swisher, DI Nov. 5) and that the alleged assault had been proven ( E. Fleming, DI, Nov. 5). There has been however, no proof other than Severa's word that he was assaulted and given his record of harassing a former girlfriend (DI Nov. 1) this is not reliable evidence. 

THE MOST RECENT jab at TBTN Hoyt Olsen's tasteless parody, " Scholars take back the library," also betrays a bias against the program and a disregard for the issues (DI Dec. 1) While it is not clear whether Olsen is using the situation at the library to mock TBTN or vice versa, his column implicitly equates rape, an act of physical and psychological aggression, with noise, which is no more than an irritation. It is a good example of why the TBTN organizers did not welcome journalists. 
Sandi Wisenberg's column and parts of Liz Bird's column show that Olsen#s callousness is not shared by the entire DI staff. However, the paper's coverage of TBTN has been misrepresentative and sensationalistic, and it must take responsibility for that. It is the media's right to criticize, but their first job is to inform. In letting its criticisms of the rally color its coverage of the entire TBTN program , the DI obscured the serious issue of violence against women addressed by TBTN, which is a disservice to all of its readers, male and female alike.

McNaughton is Scholar-in-Residence at Cornell College, Mount Vernon.

Saving...

The Daily Iowan - Iowa City, Iowa - Tuesday, December 7, 1982 - Page 7A Editor/ Craig Gemoules News editor/ Tim Severa Metro editor/ Rochelle Bozman Assistant metro editor/Scott Sonner Arts & entertainment editor/Jeffrey Miller Editorial page editor/Liz Bird Sports editor/ Jay Christensen Assistant sports editors/Steve Batterson, Melissa Isaacson Photography editor/Bill Paxson Publisher/William Casey Advertising manager/Jim Leonard Classified ads manager/Maxine Van Cleve Circulation manager/Kevin Rogers Production superintendent/Dick Wilson Rally: what was and wasn't said Women take back the night Guest Opinion By Janet McNaughton OCTOBER'S TAKE Back the Night program and the events surrounding it have received considerable - many would say sufficient - attention in The Daily Iowan. However, it has largely been attention distorted by prejudice and a seemingly wilful disregard for facts. Now that the dust has settled, it is interesting to review what was said - and not said - about it. Apart from Sandi Wisenberg's column (DI Oct. 25) the paper's editorials and stories focused on the rally's exclusion of men and the media and on the alleged assault of a DI reporter. As the majority of the letters printed in the DI show, the result was to divert public concern away from the purpose of TBTN into peripheral issues. The nature of the response confirms Adrienne Rich's comment that " The deliberate withdrawal of women from men has almost always been seen as a potentially dangerous or hostile act, a conspiracy, a subversion, a needless and grotesque thing, while the exclusion of women from men's groups is rationalized by arguments familiar to us all, whether the group is a priesthood a dining club, a dishing expedition, an academic committee or a Mafioso rendezvous" (Of Women Born: Motherhood as Experience and Institution). THE CRITICISM aimed at TBTN suggests that the decision to make the rally a gathering for women only was more disturbing to the DI and its readers than the violence against women that we gathered to speak out against. This ordering of priorities is the reverse of what it should be, no matter how one feels about the rally and its organization. If, as critics of the rally claim, an injustice was done to men by abridging their access to the park for three hours of one evening, it is a relatively minor injustice compared to the sexual harassment, rape, incest and battering suffered by women at the hands of men every day. Consider: whether a women has herself been a victim of rape or assault, the fear of these things governs her movement. She can never walk through College Green Park or any other part of Iowa City after dark without considering the possibility of being attacked. This is psychological terrorism, perhaps the most insidious injustice there is. One of the most frequent criticism of TBTN was that it alienated men supportive of women's rights. This position was advanced by Derek Maurer, who has repeatedly referred to TBTN as an event that excluded part of the community (DI Oct. 21. Oct. 27, Nov.18) and by Liz Bird who also regretted that "the women's movement may be retreating into self absorption" ( DI Oct. 29) THESE CRITICISMS might be just if the rally had been the only event in the TBTN program. It was not. On the night of the rally a meeting in the Union's Wisconsin Room was set up by the rally's organizers for supportive men. The organizers reserved the room found discussion leaders and provided materials for discussion, including a sheet addressing the question of men and the TBTN program. It is unjust to say that the organizers were self-absorbed and indifferent to the need for men to address the issue of violence against women when they arranged a meeting specifically for men. I question the sincerity of those " supportive" men who feel alienated by the rally. Men who came to the rally were informed of the meeting in the Union and asked to attend if they wished to show support. Any man who insisted on staying at the rally to show his support was refusing to respect the wishes of the women he claimed to support. Insisting on giving "support" in a way that is not appreciated is not to support, but to harass. It may be that Maurer and Bird felt that TBTN should not have been split into two sex-segregated events. If so. they should have said that. To ignore the Union meeting while criticizing the exclusion of men from the rally was simply to misrepresent the TBTN program. BUT WHY WAS the meeting in the Union ignored? Why was no reporter sent to cover it? Lack of knowledge of the meeting cannot be the answer, as the organizers held press conferences on the Saturday of the rally and also the following day. Can it be because this meeting took place "offstage" and did not promise a sensational story? Or is it possible that the DI staff was so incensed because women deliberately chose to withdraw from men for three hours tht they intentionally cast the rally in a discrediting light? There is, unfortunately, some evidence for both of these hypothesus in the DI's coverage of the assault alleged to have taken place at the rally. As of Nov. 1, Paul Boyum reported that " no formal charges have been filed" by News Editor Tim Severa. Yet his earlier story included five quoted or attributed remarks that refer to " violence" or " beating up" as though the facts had already been established ( DI Oct 27) The DI has exploited the shock value of Severa's story, quoting more than once his claims that he was beaten and his life threatened even within the article stating that he had not yet filed charges. As the letters to the editor show, this inflammatory and misleading reporting has left some readers with the misinformation that charges were files (G.D Smith and S.C. Swisher, DI Nov. 5) and that the alleged assault had been proven ( E. Fleming, DI, Nov. 5). There has been however, no proof other than Severa's word that he was assaulted and given his record of harassing a former girlfriend (DI Nov. 1) this is not reliable evidence. THE MOST RECENT jab at TBTN Hoyt Olsen's tasteless parody, " Scholars take back the library," also betrays a bias against the program and a disregard for the issues (DI Dec. 1) While it is not clear whether Olsen is using the situation at the library to mock TBTN or vice versa, his column implicitly equates rape, an act of physical and psychological aggression, with noise, which is no more than an irritation. It is a good example of why the TBTN organizers did not welcome journalists. Sandi Wisenberg's column and parts of Liz Bird's column show that Olsen#s callousness is not shared by the entire DI staff. However, the paper's coverage of TBTN has been misrepresentative and sensationalistic, and it must take responsibility for that. It is the media's right to criticize, but their first job is to inform. In letting its criticisms of the rally color its coverage of the entire TBTN program , the DI obscured the serious issue of violence against women addressed by TBTN, which is a disservice to all of its readers, male and female alike. McNaughton is Scholar-in-Residence at Cornell College, Mount Vernon.