I was absolutely dumbfounded by what appeared in The Dartmouth ("A new social experience," The Dartmouth, Sept. 30) under the byline of Amiri Barksdale '96.
First, let me begin by saying that yes, I go to fraternities, but no, I do not weigh even close to 115 pounds, and certainly do not have a trust fund. Nor am I an only child. As a matter of fact, I cannot think of any of my white female friends who are only children either. And what exactly is the connection between being an only child and being spendthrift? Sure, I get the L.L. Bean and Lands End catalogs. But doesn't everybody?
It seems to me that the mail-order companies have been sending them to the HB's for years, regardless of to whom that box belongs. Since when does looking at a catalog in the Hop automatically imply that one is poised and ready to max out her credit card?
I, for one, have never bought anything from either of these catalogs, because I can't afford the prices. My credit card bills come to my name in my HB and I pay them in full myself, thank you.
I know what it means to operate on a "shoestring budget," as Barksdale says. There are plenty of students here of all races and both sexes who cannot really afford to go to Dartmouth, but scrape by as best they can. Barksdale is right that there are plenty of spendthrifts at this College, but they certainly are not exclusively white females.
As for some of the other points in Barksdale's column, I wonder where he gets some of his information. Many of the characteristics he assigns to women sound like stereotypes to me. I know many women who don't need to be drunk to dance and to have a good time, and many women who feel just fine about ordering what they want when they dine out.
Barksdale also might be interested to know that I, a white female, did the unthinkable just last night: I cooked dinner for my boyfriend. I did it because I wanted to, though, not because I owed it to him, as the tone in Barksdale's article seems to imply. In return, he would do the same for me, as he has on a number of occasions. I wonder if Barksdale has ever visited a kitchen.
What is most disturbing about Barksdale's train of thought is that he seems to view women as disposable commodities. If a white one doesn't do enough for you, try a black one. Hey, it's just like having one's own Aunt Jemima.
Perhaps Barksdale doesn't realize that Dartmouth is not a finishing school where women are supposed to learn behavior "conducive to marriage or a long-term relationship." In fact, it seems safe to say that the majority of women in college today, both black and white, are not there simply to find a potential mate. They are there to develop their own personalities and intellects, and if they find someone to share those qualities with along the way, so much the better.
Barksdale might be surprised to know that there are plenty of women out there who can fall in love with a man and still consider themselves feminists. The two are not mutually exclusive.
In sum, I found Barksdale's uninformed diatribe to be quite insulting to all women. Black women are "better" than white "waifs" because they won't bother you for your credit card and they can all cook like Aunt Jemima? I don't think I have ever heard such a ridiculous categorization.
Furthermore, I can't imagine that the black women on this campus are happy to be lumped into one category, offered by Barksdale to the white men on campus as ripe for the picking.
The black women Barksdale supposedly reveres deserve more than that. So do all the women of Dartmouth.
