Letters to the Editor

Swimmer asks for a little respect Providence College hosted its Annual Student-Athlete Banquet Monday night. At this wonderful banquet, held in the majestic Peterson gymnasium and catered by fabulous Sodexho, the school recognizes all the sports with a slide show, some watches for the seniors, awards for athletes, and, of course, food. The evening starts out with opening comments by a dignitary of the athletic department. The next step is usually the food. When the eating winds down, a speaker will again step up to the podium and a slide show of the past sports year will follow. The show is not very well distributed in terms of PC sports represented. As a matter of fact, you would not know there was much else in the way of sports here besides basketball and hockey if you just came and saw the show. To complete the night, the seniors are given watches as a parting gift and then awards are handed out for best male and female athletes of the year, as well as some others. I did not attend the banquet this year or last because it is the most biased event I have ever been a part of. I am a swimmer here at PC and have to deal with enough inequities during the season, especially with regards to treatment compared with other teams. What I do not need is the cherry on top at the end of the season with this banquet. At least the school could try and give some respect to the teams that do not get any during their seasons. Of course, I am talking about the sports that get no help from the school, not just financially, but also with regards to treatment. I always hear the term "Division 1" athlete, but there are only a few sports that get treated as such. The new Athletic Director has said that the unequal treatment will change, but in the financial realm there is little relief in the near future. I would understand if there is no money, but that is not the case. There is money at PC, but only for the successful sports. All I want is a little respect. If you are not going to help me out financially, at least treat me like a student-athlete in a Division 1 school. Do not slap me in the face with a tasteless meal and some slide show with a picture of a swimmer who graduated two years ago. As a swimmer I do not receive a scholarship and neither does any one else on the team, but you would not know it to see us practice for more than half of the school year, not including off-season training. The major sports at this school get enough attention during their seasons. Give me a little something more than an insulting banquet at the end of the year. In addition to all this, the seniors at this school have dedicated much of their time to showing the pride of PC sports. It is hard to compete in a demanding sport when you continue to lose. All you have to work for is pride and respect when you are not competitive. How can we expect to get respect from other teams if our own school shows us none? These seniors could use a little more than a handshake and a watch.

Thomas Darrow '03

Weight Coach dedicated to strength Many of us students, particularly those that have spent some time playing on and working with PC athletic teams are saddened to learn that Strength Coach John Rinaldo has been asked to leave PC. I feel that Coach Rinaldo has always given his best in trying to work with athletes and coaches. I also have observed, in my near-daily interaction in the weight room, that some coaches work very closely with both their athletes and Coach Rinaldo in attempting to improve their players' strength and conditioning. Some actually conduct complete workouts with the entire team. Other coaches have not been in the weight room all year. Coach Rinaldo has had a tough time trying to get some of these athletes, who may or may not be in the mood to train on a given day, to make any gains without much support from a coach. Outside Coach Rinaldo's weigh room is a sign that says "commitment line." Commitment is a two-way street. John Phillips '02

Vagina Monologues language questioned I was surprised to see such a broad band of negative reaction to David Holman's critique of The Vagina Monologues. I had thought his remarks thoughtful, honest and rather mild. In fact I had considered scolding him for being so kind to such a bad piece of work. I had already taken Sara Stolfi's advice by seeing the play myself and formulating my own opinion. It's not the only negative opinion around, as your online poll attests, that 36% of those questioned found the play empty of political value and offensive. But I have no objection to the campus performance, which I hear was quite good, the play's the thing here. When several good questions are directed at the play and its author, the answers come up wanting. For one thing, what sort of image comes across? Well, it's the American woman generally, multicultural but still mostly American. Dominated by the author's line of questioning, that composite image is loud for the most part, funny but largely superficial, occasionally interesting but more often than not thoughtless. Ensler characterizes herself as crudely immature, with the interests and range, say, of a fourteen-year-old. To re-word this question: is that the sort of image that discerning American women want circulated here or abroad, especially in the light of the vastly superior images of American women that female novelists, poets, filmmakers and playwrights have offered us since the beginning of the Women's Liberation Movement in the 1960's? While fans of Ensler may recommend her play to their female friends, I would say forget her — catch up on Alice Walker, the best of Meryl Streep and the strongest poems of Sylvia Plath. Another hard question for this play to answer is, how does language work? "Watch out for that movie," parents sometimes tell a daughter, "it has strong language." But does anyone with a little experience really think that a slew of Anglo-Saxon monosyllables is "strong"? Having spent four years in the U.S. Navy as a young man, I can attest that all of Ensler's obscenities and vulgarities mean little — and the more they're repeated the less they mean. Sailors who lack a vocabulary and want to sound as if they're saying a lot use obscenities as filler. In his book Writing Well, Donald Hall calls them "blank words." When we call anything we don't like "shit" nowadays, the word means practically nothing. Here is the question in another form: can a play that relies on so much vulgarity claim to have an interesting script? Well, it may be noisy— it may seem shocking at first—but the language is essentially dumb. A final question I'd like to pose has to do with the truth of the mater. Granted, Ensler can exaggerate, poke outrageous fun, fictionalize and edit a monologuist's talk. That's all part of her comic persona and purpose. It's another thing, after seeing the play, to say it carries a serious, profound or comprehensive message. Indeed much of the time Ensler is tearing apart the serious and profound ideas of others, about women for example as stereotypes. But she does get serious, doesn't she, more than once implying that we ought to see our sex roles (and act them out) differently. When the play does this it makes a stab at the truth and, like any drama or novel, it presupposes that truth can be validated by the reader's or viewer's personal experience. For myself, the play has little new or profound to say about social and political reality. I've seen or read all this before, and in far more convincing form. Most of Ensler's truths turn out to be hackneyed. I'd much rather Adrienne Rich and June Jordan on the subjects of sisterhood, empowerment, gay love and male roles. Sometimes in fact Ensler simply lies. Not every adult, much as we regret it in Ensler's case, has been abused in early childhood. Ah, but you have put your money down, you say, you saw the play on stage, you must have heard great things about it. I read the usual hype in the New York pres. But none of my theater-going friends in New York recommended it. No, about three months ago a PC student asked me if I'd like to see a video that his mother had taped off HBO. So when a PC faculty friend told me how glad he was about seeing the PC production for only five dollars, I said, "Too bad—I saw it for nothing—a little more than it's worth." Edward McCrorie Professor of English

Cowl fan sends summer wishes Since the Cowl is likened to a bottle of old wine that improves with age, I wish to commend both Editor-in-Chief Ryan Ainscough '02 and Associate Editor Kristin DiQuollo '02 for doing a fabulous and diligent job. I also wish to commend all of the members of The Cowl for their sincere efforts in publishing Providence College's uncensored official newspaper. Thank you, Commentary Editor Dave Holman '03 and the incomparable Erin Simmeth '03 for reading and editing my letters to the Editor. I find Cowl commentary more enlightening than that of the Providence Journal. I also wish Dave Holman '03 success as Editor-in-Chief of The Cowl during 2002-2003. In closing, I wish all members of the Cowl staff a happy and safe summer and good luck and health in the future. Watch your back as terrorism is still wit us. I will remember all of you in my prayers and please pray for both the victims and perpetrators of sexual abuse that is prevalent in the media. Always remember that public opinion inside or outside the Providence College community is the cornerstone of democracy. Please continue "High Fives and Nose Dives" in The Cowl. God Bless America! Russel P. Demoe '73

Congress powerless on club baseball Three years ago, PC witnessed the demise of one of its most beloved, successful, and longstanding sports—baseball. On April 22, 2002, an attempt was made to bring back baseball at the club level. Following a year of preparation and research, Adam Coppola'04 and Paul Sullivan '04 presented club baseball to Student Congress. After an hour of debate, Student Congress approved club baseball. However, PC won't see any baseball games next year. Fr McPhail, the moderator for Student Congress, vetoed the approval, despite strong support for the club, on the basis of lack of funds. My question is this: what voice does the student body have if the Congress is merely a puppet organization under the iron fist of McPhail? Russell Jarem '04

On-line:

Alumnus RA states the facts about drinking After four years at Providence College, I thought I had heard and seen it all. I thought nothing would surprise me again. And then I picked up the latest issue of the Cowl on my way to class one morning, and read the headline "PC reacts to new alcohol study," and thought, "Oh this should be good." The article by Jamie Chase was in fact good, and mildly entertaining. The only thing more entertaining was the thought of the look on the faces of Father McPhail and Maureen Quinlan when they were posed with questions of a drinking problem on the campus of Providence College. PC? Drinking Problem? For eight years I have been an advocate against drunk driving and underage drinking across the country, and recently I have taken my message to college campuses across the nation addressing the growing problem of college binge drinking. While I haven't kept count, I could safely say that I've visited at least two thirds of the states in this country speaking to a variety of groups ranging from high school students to police officers, from college students to parents, and so on. Never have I encountered an institution so counter-productive in fighting the alcohol abuse problem on campus than that of Providence College. As a recovering RA on campus after two years, I've seen first-hand how unsupportive the administration is when it comes to upholding the duties that the RA's on campus are directed to complete. Enforcement of the so-called "strict policy in regards to alcohol" is non-existent. The RA's on PC's campus do their best to do the job that is asked of them, and are met with zero help from the very administration which put the RA's on the front lines to begin with. Many would argue, as Maureen Quinlan did, that "Providence College 'has a problem with drinking as colleges everywhere do.'" That is an accurate statement. Nationwide universities are grappling with the growing problem of student binge drinking. Countless other crimes are committed as a result of reckless drinking. However, these "colleges everywhere" have chosen to meet the problem head-on with a comprehensive disciplinary system (3-strikes and you're out, University of Delaware), followed by a zero-tolerance policy of enforcement (students at UNC are arraigned in court on campus immediately following citation), and coupled with a strong education program outlining the dangerous effects of alcohol to the brain, the development system, and society (countless Psychology Departments nationwide offer courses on the reality of alcohol abuse). All our administration has to offer are words such as: "the College is concerned," and "The College wants to deal with that unhealthy choice," and a vague intention to "educate the student that certain choices are unhealthy." Until our own administration will admit that we have a full-fledged problem at PC, how in the world do they expect students to ever do the same? The problem of student binge drinking is so rampant that an entire college curiculum could be designed around it: Accounting Department: Students spend $5.5 billion on alcohol each year, more than all other beverages and books combined. Chemistry Dept.: Even at blood alcohol levels as low as 0.02% (one drink for average-sized people) alcohol effects judgement and coordination capabilities. Economics Dept.: Underage drinking costs society $52.8 billion annually including costs for traffic crashes, violent crimes, suicide attempts, and dependency treatment. Education Dept.: Alcohol is implicated in more than 40% of all academic problems and 28% of all drop-outs. Political Science Dept.: Nearly one-third of college students surveyed said they wished alcohol was not present at college events. Sociology Dept.: 60% of college women who contracted sexually transmitted diseases were drunk at the time of infection. About 1,400 students died last year because of reckless drinking. I guarantee the tone of PC's administration would change the second it happened on our campus. What frightens me even more, however, is that I'm not so sure the behavior among the students would change at all.

Shaun E. Adamec, '02

*NOTE: Statistics cited came from www.madd.org compiled from various national studies and surveys.*

Celibacy not the solution Upon reading the commentary article "Reconsider celibacy in the Church" by Erin Simmeth in the April 25, 2002 edition of The Cowl, I was pleased to see that she was able to get past the issue of homosexuality in connection with the current situation facing our Roman Catholic Church. There are many people who cannot see that the issue is deeper than homosexuality.

However, the issue is even deeper than celibacy. Towards the end of the article, she makes reference to the historical reasons why the Church requires her priests to be celibate. While these reasons, whatever they are, may not be valid today, I think there are very valid reasons for the Church to continue to require her priests to be celibate.

She writes that there is something fundamentally wrong in the American Catholic Church, and later that the definition of "priest" in the early days of the Church had nothing to do with chastity. I would like to make an argument that both of these statements are false and contribute to an oversight of the real issue at hand.

Our American culture is filled with ideas and slogans about how to take control of your life. Why is sex any different? There are places to go with help for overeating, drug abuse, and eating disorders. Why would it not be possible to have an overactive sexual drive? Why is that it is necessary to master control over all our desires and not over-indulge in them, but it is wrong to take this view on sex? Keeping genetics aside, what makes a human person different from an ape or a dog is our capacity of reason. Just because we have a desire, does not mean that it needs to be fulfilled. If this is true on matters of eating, masochism, and drinking alcohol, why is not true of sexual pleasure?

So, to say that priests should be allowed to marry to avoid the problem of pedophilia is illogical. That only reduces the problem to incapability of self-control. The Church calls all people to be chaste. This does not mean celibate. A celibate is one who refrains from sexual activity. Chastity is a virtue of discretion and prudence. It means engaging in sexual activity within the confines of the marriage convenant for the purposes of total, complete union and the possibility of new life. That means that one simply cannot have sex whenever or wherever just because the desire hits. That also means keeping an intense pleasure controlled, even when you might not want to. It means exercising self-control.

While it is obvious that self-control seems to be an issue for these priests, the problem is not confined to the United States. There is also clinical psychological evidence that pedophilia is not confined to those who are not married, just as it is not confined to homosexuals. For if this were the case, incest would be unheard of, as well as cyber child pornography.

Also, would allowing priests to marry really solve any problems, or just create more? Among the many reasons that this situation is "scandalous" is because priests are viewed as role models in the realm of morals. What would be thought of a priest whose children turn to drugs, or prostitution, or even just a juvenille deliquent? What would be thought of a priest who has marriage problems? On a more practical note, many parishes are struggling to survive due to financial woes. How is it then that these same parishes would be able to support a family instead of just one man?

Again, it is comforting to see that there are others who can see that the issue is deeper than what the media portrays, but it is essential to go deeper. Life does not revolve around sex. The sooner more people realize this, the happier marriages will be, the happier all relationships will be. The sooner there will be an end to all sexual abuse. Raymond Minot '02

Enforce laws to save lives The results of a recent study on alcohol-related deaths on college campuses has raised the issue of alcohol awareness, yet again. I personally believe that American culture has ingrained alcohol as a sort of "rite of passage" or a taboo, and this makes drinking more appealing. I think 21 is an unrealistically high drinking age, and I do not think drinking is a necessarily bad thing. However, to change an entire cultural attitude would take generations, and that does not help us here.

The solution to the present alcohol problem is simple: enforce the laws we already have on the books. This includes drunk driving laws, underage drinking laws, open container laws and disorderly conduct laws. The Providence Police as well as Providence College are woefully inconsistent in their enforcement. Everyone knows the bars in our neighborhood make a living by serving underage drinkers, but nothing is ever done to the bars -- instead the Police issue citations to students. Bars that serve underage drinkers every night should probably be closed down.

As a former RA at PC, I know that writing someone up was a waste of my time because the student would appeal the sanction and I would have to further waste my time testifying to my own report, as if I was the one being accused of a violation. Then I would watch as the Director of Residence Life reduced the penalty.

If the law is consistently enforced, then less people will break the law. Blaming alcohol is the wrong answer and doing things like the pinhead administrators at URI did, i.e. making the campus dry, was completely misguided. If consistent enforcement became the order of the day, then alcohol related crimes and deaths would drop.

Christopher Roche '96 Hoboken, NJ

Double standard deeply offensive

I was quite surprised to see the new advertisements for The Cowl's information session. One of the ads calling for commentary writers boasts the headline, "Familiar with Deep Throat?" Although we all know Deep Throat was the Watergate informant, I do not think most people made that immediate connection. I think most people would have associated "deep throat" with oral sex. I personally do not have a problem with the use of sex in advertising, but I do remember the the Feb. 28 edition of The Cowl, where Dave Holman and RJ Friedman criticized the Vagina Monologues for the somewhat racy phrases included in the advertising. They felt it took away from the real message of the Vagina Monologues and emphasized the shock factor of some of the terms. They went so far as to question if this is really why students brought the show to campus. If it was offensive and wrong for the Vagina Monologues to use sex for advertisement, then it is wrong for The Cowl as well. Since Dave was so concerned about the shock value of the Vagina Monologes, how did this headline ever get past him?

Tara Conte '03

Editor's Note: The Cowl reminds readers that the views of individual writers do not necessarily represent the views of The Cowl as an organization.

Men should study women's issues too

I would like to state a few important points regarding the young women of this school. First of all the facts — one out of four college women say they were raped or experienced an attempted rape, and one out of 12 college men say they have forced a woman to have sexual intercourse against her will. Now, I am writing to you in order to let every college member out there know that this is what Women's Studies classes and feminism is all about. I am writing to try and change what goes on out there on this and all other college campuses. Women can no longer walk alone at night, without the fear that there is a man hiding around the nearest corner just waiting to attack. Some people try to blame these forced, and unwanted attacks on women because of how they were provocatively dressed. Seriously, women should be able to wear what they want, because everyone knows that men can. We need to change all of this fear on our college campus by letting men know what is going on, along with letting women know. More men should take Women's Studies classes and know that there is more to these classes than a large group of angry women with mixed-up sexual feelings and boredom. These classes will let men know what is going on in this world between both women and men, and they might quite possibly think of ways to change women's fears and oppression. Stacey Prefontaine '05