Editor gives opinion on rape, gets fired.
 

Central Connecticut State University Students rallied Thursday in response to an editorial published in the February 7 edition of the campus newspaper, The Recorder.

The article, written by opinion editor John Petroski, was titled "Rape Only Hurts If You Fight It." In what Petroski claims to be a satire of sensational media, the editorial touts rape as a "magical experience" and a blessing to "ugly women."

Editors of The Recorder stated that the opinion piece was meant to be funny and no harm was intended. But students said there was nothing funny about the article. Instead, it reopened the wounds of those who had previously been raped. The students also stated that the article reinforced misogynistic behavior.

The day after the article was published, student protesters marched and carried signs that read "Real Men Don't Rape" and "Take Back The Recorder." They demanded that the college create a safer environment for women and minority groups. They also called for the resignations of Petroski and Editor-in-Chief Mark Rowan.

Rowan posted a written apology on the bulletin board outside The Recorder's office. In it, he stated, "We didn't know the campus community as well as we thought we knew, and because of that that's why we're getting this backlash and we're sorry because of it."

Rowan also stated that the article proved the point they were trying to make about sensational media. "The front page of the paper had a very important story about students losing their Social Security numbers, an issue that affects the entire campus," he said. "But nobody is talking about that. They're only talking about the rape article."

University President Jack Miller walks a fine line. In a statement, he defended Petroski's right to free speech, but condemned the article, calling it a violation of responsible journalism. "Rape is a profound violation of body and spirit, and to make light of this, even in satire, is abhorrent," he said.

John Petroski, a sophomore at Central Connecticut University, issued an apology on Monday. "When I wrote the article, I didn't think that many people would care so deeply about the subject," he told the New Britain Herald.

In a written statement circulated to fellow students, Petroski said he was truly sorry. "I wasn't writing this to try and hurt people though," he said. "I was trying to point out that people don't give a damn about anything in a paper besides something they can rally around. It looks like I succeeded, especially with our front page.

"That doesn't excuse what I did," he continued. "I should have used a much less touchy pseudo-subject to do this with. Like animal rights or something like that ..."

He refused to resign "out of principle" and was subsequently fired.

SOURCES:

"University Op-Ed Piece on Rape Draws Outrage, Protest," The Advocate, February 8, 2007
====================================


This guy is a...a...I don't even have a good word for him :x

Wow. What an absolute idiot. But I guess he learned that the subject of rape is NEVER funny.

Hmm, not sure what to think about that. But if it was a satire, I'm not sure that it counts as his actual opinion...

Not one to condemn writers without having seen their work, I looked up the editorial (someone copied it here from a PDF of the Recorder). It is either a very poorly written attempt at satire or a crazy rant thinly disguised as satire. It's very difficult to call this satire, though, because for the life of me I can't figure out what he's trying to satirize.

It might have been more acceptable if he'd stuck to historical commentary-- he makes some references to events such as the "Rape of the Sabine Women," an event memorialized with a famous painting that I remember being shocked by in my history book. He could have made some snarky comments linking historical attitudes to modern times. But he just goes way, way, way over the line with what he apparently thought were clever comments about the benefits of rape. I'm all for freedom of the press, and I absolutely love satire, but this is just idiocy.

I was going to post this because the school is close to mine, and a lot of people are talking about it. The reason I didn't is because I stand by this kid's right to print stupid stuff like this, and most people I've talked to about it automatically think that since I believe in freedom of speech that means I'm a rapist, or at least that I don't take it seriously.

i'll be in the minority here.

People need to lighten up. Its not like this guy was drunk, pissed at women, and decided to write this up in an act of rage. He's just, y'know, trying to poke fun at a touchy subject. SNL and a bunch of shows do it all the time. But when its written as an article, people dont sense the sarcasm with no laughtrack.

No sh*t he was fired. I make dead baby jokes daily and I'd know better than to write an article about the 'blessing' of rape. No, you are not a cool rage-against-the-machine sage who cleverly exposes the flaws in society with his razor-sharp wit, you're just a f*cking moron.

*E

This is exactly what I'm talking about. WOW YOU ARE SO CLEVER

Freedom of speech is not about getting to say any fool thing you want without consequence. It's about getting to speak the truth without landing in jail. It protects you from the government, not the people. You have to deal with the people yourself, and as long as there are no illegal threats against you, it's your responsibility.

This was a moronic thing to print; it was meant to make an obscure, high-handed point about something completely unrelated. He took a risk and failed miserably. He got fired for it. Welcome to the real world, kid.

I would like to say that nothing can never be funny. However, the article was written by somebody who really wasn't as talented as he may have thought he was, and his goal was unsuccessful. He should not have been fired for writing a satire on the subject of rape, he should however, suffer the consequences of not being a good writer, which in the case of a professional writer, may be loss of a job.

So, fair result, but for the wrong reasons.

Also, get over it, people are more riled up over this than an actual rape. :sleep:

I'd say he did get fired for the bad writing. Other people have successfully satirized this subject.

I read that people vandalized the newspaper building, and even after he's fired, people still aren't happy with the consequences.

And nobody ever cares about rape jokes when it's guys getting raped in jail. Probably because these jokes usually don't use the word rape, but make refrences to big bubba, dropping the soap, not being able to sit comfortably, etc

Yes, you can totally draw this conclusion, because we have rape threads all the time.

Also, this isn't a joke. This isn't satire. It's supposed to be, but this guy is a terrible writer as well as an idiot. Writing an article like this and then going 'HAHA, IT WAS MEANT TO BE A JOKE AND YOU JUST PROVED MY SUPER-CLEVER POINT' when someone criticises it doesn't make it well-written, doesn't make it funny, it just gets you fired and the only thing it proves is that you're a retard.

Do not argue about this; there is nothing to argue about. This has nothing to do with 'free speech', humor or making a point, and no-one gives a sh*t.

Yea, thanks for reasserting my point for me. I was afraid people would take it the wrong way [/irony]. :roll:

Believe it or not, a lot of people do care about that, including me. Human Rights Watch just did a report (Warning: somewhat graphic) on the problem in American prisons. People have a strange attitude toward it as being somehow "deserved" or "part of the justice system," which is absurd... but helps explain why US prisons are so atrocious and the jokes are not taboo. :P

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Liberty

My main man Mill explains freedom of speech

And before someone quotes the part where he says "unless it harms others," he would probably say for this case that the harm of preventing free speech is more harmful than people getting their feelings hurt while reading it. If you go to the HTML part and read the whole thing, he explains the reasons why.

Yes, except I didn't as I have not referred to actual rape at all, which was your supposed point. This is neither here nor there, but still, nice try.

And for clarification, my last post wasn't directed at you specifically.

Unless under the mentorship of a a popular comic, that man shouldn't make a satirical version of the subject. Pardon me, a poor satirical attempt. And even then, why would he get himself fired over that? Perfect example of a man who doesn't think.