To the Editor:First and foremost, the article in last week's issue was not written to stir controversy or to propagate change. More so, neither its wording nor its meaning was meant to offend, and I apologize for inadvertently insulting any member of the Brandeis community. The article was a cultural evaluation -- an observation of why and how we Americans respond towards the socially labeled minorities (I stress "socially labeled" because many readers failed to understand that the term "underdog" is not a personal judgment or degradation of minorities, but a commonly used term to describe those with fewer rights and/or opportunities). While my article was an evaluation of all Americans it implied and stated that it is most pertinent to white (rich and male) Americans, as they are least susceptible to victimization. It is therefore surprising that my article offended minorities, seeing as how they were neither the target (an inappropriate word considering that I was not writing an attack, but an evaluation) nor even the main focus of the article.

Ironically, the biggest issue with the article was barely relevant to its subject matter. The campus was outraged at my declaration that all the hoopla with "The Men's Room" incident was about nothing. I attribute this outrage to one of two things. The first can be my lack of clarity as a writer. It would have been more accurate to have said that the hoopla was disproportional to its instigation. However, this variation would doubtfully make a significant difference as most readers ardently argue against the very implication of disproportionality and not against my exaggeration (the use of the word "nothing") to express it. While the comments were socially inappropriate, perhaps morally shaky and unacceptable on college radio (which I had stated), they were not hateful or violent, and relatively (to the consequent outrage), harmless. The Brandeis community was shocked because of our well-developed sensitivity towards minorities and a desire to prove this sensitivity to ourselves and each other. I AM NOT implying that it is only this desire that motivates our outraged response, nor am I implying that every one of us is equally a product of American politically correct culture. However, all Americans have been exposed to and affected by culturally enforced sensitivity, meaning that to varying extents it did play a role in our reaction to the comments on "The Men's Room."

Seeing as how my article seemed to offend many minorities (although once again, it was addressing all Americans, with an emphasis on the white) I'd like to entertain the possibility of any of my comments being racist. First of all, I see a distinction between racism and stereotypes (no matter how ignorant or inaccurate). The former is a morally unacceptable and negative discrimination, meant to hurt or to disadvantage. The latter is a socially unacceptable, sometimes inappropriate and rarely immoral generalization, regardless of the nature of its intentions or sources. The example of "all black people being good at basketball" is a stereotype and NOT a form of racism. I brought it up not to assert its validity or to express my point of view, but to demonstrate our (and yes, our refers more to white Americans, in this particular case excluding black Americans) fear of seeming and being racist. This example worked because in such a case that fear would be unjustifiable, since thinking that all black people are good at basketball is silly and ignorant, but not racist, especially since this example deals with thoughts rather than actions.

My article was meant to show that our culturally-enforced desire to be politically correct, and sensitive has been internalized into our personalities, and therefore inevitably influences our behavior towards those for whom sensitivity is especially needed. Not all of us would be this caring and sensitive and politically correct if not for the influence of this aspect of American culture. At no point in the article did I imply that this influence was negative and needs to be extracted. Yes, I think it is silly that we worry so much about being racist on account of silly generalizations, but the overall end result is positive, since we are eagerly trying to wipe out racism and insensitivity. One can make fun of the overabundance and sometimes sheer stupidity of American litigation (such as suing for spilling coffee on oneself) but can still conclude that, despite its absurdity, it is well intended and beneficial to society. My article was an evaluation of American society and the role of political correctness. If one disagrees with my assessment of the influence of political correctness on society, then one disagrees with my article. However, to argue that political correctness is great or to assert that all black people are NOT good at basketball is irrelevant to my point.

-- Yana Litovsky '05