This letter is in response to the editorial columns written by Charles (Chad) Calek on March 25 and April 1.

“Three Hidden Reasons for the ISU Loss”: The University Committee on Women would like to express its deep disappointment with the attitudes expressed in the columns written by Mr. Calek, but in particular, the portion marked on the attachment. The right of free speech and a free press is guaranteed to all Americans, but with these rights come a responsibility. This responsibility is not political correctness, it is about a respect and courtesy for all human beings. It certainly does not include objectifying women in the most disrespectful manner possible. These columns also discounted the hard work, dedication and effort of the ISU Basketball Team by implying that they had lost the game with UCLA through inattention.

“Time for Thicker Skin to be Grown”: Mr. Calek asks, “And why is a slang reference to breasts so inappropriate?”

The term used by Mr. Calek leads to a further objectification of women, with their parts representing the whole human being. There have been efforts to make the chilly campus climate at Iowa State University more supportive of women, but these efforts can be compromised by an irresponsible and demeaning use of words. There are consequences for what we say and do, no matter whether harm was intended (see quote below).

“Time for Thicker Skin to be Grown”: (Quote) “If I offend some people at times, I assure you that no personal harm was intended.”

In response to his Senior Editor (who had expressed “disdain” for his reference) Calek writes, “what I write is written with satirical intentions.” Most American satirists have utilized satire to truly critique the status quo, not using terms that denigrate women in the process. We encourage Mr. Calek to read American satire in order to fully comprehend its purpose and uses.

“Time for Thicker Skin to be Grown”: (Quote) “… I offer no apology but a hope that those offended will somehow retain thicker skin.”

The refusal of the author to even consider the possibility of being wrong is a further illustration of his arrogance, which we can assure him, will not serve him well in the world. And in reference to his comment concerning women retaining a “thicker skin,” we can only say this: in response to the prevalent sexism and violence against women present in society, it has been necessary that women develop a thicker skin simply to survive. Unfortunately, these editorials perpetuate these attitudes, and we should point out that eliminating sexism and violence against women is not the sole responsibility of women, but of everyone.

All writers, whether they are journalists, need to consider the thoughts and feelings of their audience, as well as the potential impact of their words on society. This is not to say that reporters are not responsible for reporting unpleasant truths, but that it should be accomplished in an objective, impersonal and unbiased manner as possible. Mr. Calek refers to his columns as being “conversations at a bar.” It seems clear that this is an inappropriate foundation or basis on which to write an editorial column.

Although this letter has stated our concerns about Mr. Calek’s columns, we would also like to say that we have generally been impressed with the Daily’s treatment of women’s issues this past year and hope to see the trend continue in the future. Members of the University Committee on Women would also certainly be willing to meet and discuss these issues with Mr. Calek and/or other members of the Daily staff.

Nancy Brooks

Chair, University Committee on Women