People Who Hate Me

    The following is an unedited, uncensored (aside from unpublished last names) example of how stupid and uptight people can be. Some of it's short, some of it's long, some of it's good, some of it is just a big rant about how great some people think West Virginia is. I have added links to each of the articles they are referring to. "--" means that I inserted this as a new comment well after the controversy died down. Attached to the e-mail examples are my responses. The list is in newest to oldest. Enjoy, and feel the hate!
 

(The stuff at the top may not be the only stuff that's been updated)
NEW 9/15/04 - Letter to the Editor [Dead presidents, acts of God, marriage laws]

Journalistic bias?

Mr. Editor,

As a matter of journalistic integrity, referring to an elected official without their title is rude and definitely disrespectful. On line 6 of paragraph 4 of Grant Machamer's and on line 8 paragraph 2 of your article, you make this mistake. Every reference earns the distinction. You may not like them, but they were elected as your leader by your peers. If it weren't for President Reagan and Vice President Cheney's defense and service to our
contry, we may not have the right to have a newspaper, hence the Cold War and Gulf I. Just as a military figure is always referred to by their highest rank, these statesmen deserve distinction. If you spend a little less time publishing liberal brainwash and a little more practicing ethics, it'll take
you far. Comparing President Reagan's body to the Stanley Cup says to me that you don't understand a State Funeral. Making homosexual jokes about the resignation of a governor seems to be a bit poor in taste. Focus and analysis should be given not only to the feelings of the RNC protestors but also to the platform and plans of the GOP. Downplaying the RNC as a stand up act with the highlight of the President's daughters is a little lacking in substance. This RNC article also contained the mistake of spelling president with a lower case p. This is done only when talking about the presidency or the president as the institution. When referring to a president either current or past, it is proper to write President. One sided editorials are more tolerable than one sided reporting. That is what the New York Times is for. This issue of the Tartan was great. The 9/11 article was the most fair and proper piece. Take a lesson from Ashley Baird.

Brian Erskine
2nd Semester Freshman

--He's a freshman, and he sounds like it.

2/24/04 - E-mail [U can't touch the 90s]    [What gets drunk, must come down]

dude i am getting sick of your (poo poo). in your latest "exploits" you say about Noriega and i quote "I'm so glad that they got that drug-dealing bastard. Finally, the economy of Panama can return to normalcy." YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. why didnt you inform everyone that he helped out the United States and that he brought a (poo poo)load of jobs to his country. ya he did some stuff like join cubas side when that whole cold war era was happening. the economy actually suffered after his capture. believe me because i am a history buff. and another thing. in one of your previous blabberings you were joking on the solar haus incident and how the kids were all drunk and the kid who got killed was also. you (sex)er i had friends there. there was no alcohol, the kid was pushed when they were dancing and it was an honest incident and how dare you criticize the people there. you have no idea what you are talking about in any of your articles. i think that my unborn children can write better than you ever will.

Harrison M.

    Response:

Dude,

First off, thanks for reading.  That has to be the fastest turn around of feedback I've ever gotten, I mean the paper must've been delivered to you about an hour ago.

Anyway, the Noriega thing, it was 1990, of course I had no idea what I was talking about, I was SEVEN.  The whole point of that paragraph was that I obviously didn't have these advanced political views.  I'm something of a history buff myself, in fact, it's my minor.  I know that the US backed him, hell, who hasn't the US backed at one point?  And I know the economy suffered,  that's normal for the economy of any newly-liberated country. But let's face facts, the man had serious acne issues.

As for the other matter, I believe you're talking about the column where I talked about the rash of falls at Tech.  Nowhere in there did I mention any
particular place, as there were at least 3 cases, if memory serves.  And not only did I not make fun of the people who fell, I said that it was NOT funny several times in that particular column.  What I did was come up with safety tips.  As for the Solar Haus, there have been safety complaints about that place for years, the incident you mentioned was inevitable, and hopefully the safety issues will be addressed.  Personally, I think they should install bungee cords, it could even attract more customers.

As for your unborn children, how far along are you?  Have you picked out names yet?  Clearly, they are talented little darlings, since, and I am taking your word for this, they can write, much less better than I can, and I've only been at this since Kindergarten.  Make sure you don't abort them.  Anyway, thanks again for reading.

Bryan McBournie
--Well, the Panamanians have spoken. Vulgar bastards, aren't they?

1/22/04 - E-mail [2003; it sure did happen]

McBournie,


I contemplated writing this email because I feel that you are just wanting to draw attention to yourself. But looking at it longer at the amount of disrespect you included in your article "2003; it sure did happen" I was forced to change my mind. I felt that most of the article was uncalled for but two places really stood out.

First the beginning of the article in which you show disrespect to people of another University, William and Mary. I am not aware of the background of the statements but I do feel that it is not necessary to take a position on a school newspaper to "pick a fight" in front of the portion of the University that read the Tartan. If you have a problem with these people form William and Mary take care of it on your own time.

Second, persons who lost their lives in the 2003, or any year, should not be made the center of jokes. The names that you included in your list had family, friends, and fans that would not find any humor in anything you had to say. The people you make fun of accomplished more in their lives then you could ever hope for. You should ask yourself if your death is going to make papers and the news across the nation, because I doubt it. However I do hope that after your death people do not center jokes around you. One statement you made showed your view and understanding of religion and how low your morals really are, " He answered when God told him to come on down." Based on religion God would never "call you down," God resides in Heaven not Hell.

I assume that you were trying to be cute and funny but your note of "only kidding" does not cover the amount of disrespect you showed. Maybe next time you should be more sensitive and considerate of your material.

Thank you for your time,
Richard H.

    Response:

Dear Richard H.,

First off, thanks for reading the Tartan. We appreciate it and hope you continue to do so. Now let's get down to business.

Of course I am trying to draw attention, why else would someone write their views in a public forum? However, you are wrong that I am trying to draw the attention to myself. I am trying to draw attention to what I observe and find amusing about society. If you do not share in the amusement, that's your choice, and no one will debate that.

I have a tip for you: when telling someone you do not like their actions, it is best not to admit you don't know the cause for them, especially when you can find out by clicking around a little bit at www.thetartan.com or the hate mail section of my own website. With a little research, you would easily see that last semester a William and Mary student sent me an e-mail bashing my column, the Tartan, and most importantly, Radford University. This student has since gotten more of his W&M friends to scour and pick apart my column, the comment you refer to was me thumbing my nose (with the support of many fans here at RU) at them. I didn't pick the fight, as you assume, they did. You also make a common mistake when you imply that my words were representing the Tartan. Many people get confused about that, and if it were any other section but Insights, you might be right. However, Insights is the Tartan's opinion section, and the views are my own. Don't like it? That's fine.

Now on to the meat of the issue. The fact is, Richard, that you and I live in a society that takes itself WAY too seriously. I try to poke fun at this,
while at the same time making fun of myself. You mentioned that the celebrities who croaked in 2003 had friends and family, I agree, or at least I
hope they did. However, they were celebrities (in fact, I respect all of the celebrities I mentioned except for Maurice Gibb and Keiko the Whale, and I sincerely hope Keiko's family does not take offense), living life in the public eye, and I am not the first to make fun of celebrity deaths. George Carlin, Dave Barry, Johnny Carson, Denis Leary, almost any major comedian you can name has done it and will do it again. As you suggested, I just asked myself if my death was going to result in jokes across America. The answer is, I have no idea when I am going to die, but if it's any time soon, of course not, as I am not a celebrity, and if I die a celebrity, I hope people make jokes, because I'll be making them laugh even in death. But I must also ask if you were implying you wanted to kill me?

I am concerned that you are selling you, me, and everyone else here at RU short when you say "The people you make fun of accomplished more in their lives then you could ever hope for." Are you saying that because of where we are right now we cannot achieve celebrity status or achieve great things? Cheer up, you've got plenty of life ahead of you to make it happen.

Another question I have for you: have you ever seen the Price is Right? I'm going to assume you haven't, because clearly you didn't get the joke. Rod Roddy was the announcer for the show for 30 some odd years, and when they would call contestants from the audience, he'd say their name, then say, "come on down! You're the next contestant on the Price is Right!" I know where Heaven and Hell are in traditional Christian lore, I went to Sunday school as I am sure you did. But if I had said "God called him up," it just wouldn't make any sense. Surely you can see that.

I'm sorry you feel disrespected by my material, but being offensive is what comedy is about. If it wasn't, we'd all be reduced to listening to knock-
knock jokes.

Once again, thank you for your patronage, and I hope you continue reading the Tartan.

Bryan McBournie
--Never underestimate the power of literate people with no sense of humor, or are just not able to understand some jokes.

12/4/03 - E-mail [Enough about be, let's talk about you]

Bryan,

Greeting from Williamsburg. As the older sibling of a current Radford student, I often read Radford's online "newspaper" the Tartan Online. Although I love my brother very much, I am rather ashamed that your school actually hosts a student newspaper that is so poorly written. Really, can't you guys do better than this? I would cite specific examples but describing 75-80% of each paper I have read would take too long.

One of the main problems with your paper is your sophmoric column. I realize you mean for it to be funny, and I realize everyone has a different sense of humor, but I shudder to think that many Radford students actually think your columns are as hilarious as you think they are. I think they are about as funny as reruns of Beavis and Butthead or the Anna Nicole show. Perhaps I am wrong though, and maybe Radford students do enjoy your column but if that is the case then I feel awful one of my family members has to wade through excrement like your column.

I think that you ought to limit  your column to your website and keeping it off the Tartan because prospective students may read your column and 1)intelligent and witty prospectives may get a bad feeling about Radford or 2) Radford might attract more people with the sense of humor reugularly exhibited by middle schoolers.

Have a nice day

Ed

ps

If you feel like raising the level of your paper, I suggest reading some other college papers on the web and seeing just how far your Column has to go and how you could make it more funny and less idiotic

    Response:

Ed,

While you only sent me one greeting from Williamsburg, I send to you greetingS from Radford.  It is one thing to attack my column, it is quite another to attack my friends and our university's publication.  As a member of the Tartan editing staff, both in its print and online forms, I must respond by cordially asking you to not read our publication if you do not like it.

However, as a student and hard-working writer, I must say: dude, get a life.  While I know nothing about you, your e-mail spoke volumes about your attitude.  I must wonder what sort of a college student regularly reads a student newspaper that he not only describes as poorly written, but does not even attend that school in the first place.  Then, that student writes an e-mail long on insults, short on actual examples.  Not to mention, where does someone who does not proof read or use proper punctuation get off telling a newspaper how to work?  Apparently, your brother does not seem to mind or care, so why do you?  Everyone involved at the Tartan puts in long hours and works hard for the final product, keep in mind the product is for RADFORD students.

Now let's talk about your assessment of my column.  You said it was "sophmoric," after an unsuccessful attempt to find this word in the dictionary, I can only assume you meant "sophomoric."  If my analysis is accurate, then yours is as well.  For the nature of my column and the brand of humor it presents, I make no apologies.  Regularly, strangers recognize me from my picture in the print version of the Tartan, and tell me that they enjoy my column.  My column has also attracted readers in England, Lithuania, and even a Marine in Iraq.  If these people make you shudder, so be it. You spoke about how far my column has to go, I'd say it's gone farther than most college columns.

Next, you compared my humor to that of Beavis and Butthead, thank you.  As for the Anna Nicole comment, I can assure you, I am not an rich, obese whore.  In fact, I am middle-class, male, and of respectable reputation.

You may think our paper does not help Radford stereotypes, but your e-mail just reinforced those that we at Radford have of William and Mary students.  Arrogant, uptight, condescending, and generally unwelcome.

If you don't like it, don't read it.

Bryan

PS: I appreciate your input on what you think I should do with my column.  In turn, I think you should take your uninvited opinion and firmly insert it into the condescending orifice of your choice.
--"You tore him a new one." "That is awesome!" "Way to go man! I loved your response to their letter, and fuck those ignorant retards." Those are a few of quotes from the responses I got from peers.
 

10/1/03 - Open Letter

"Y'all need to chill"

To begin with - I live in VT, and attend Champlain College, not Radford.  However, I read McBournie's column all of the time, and although he is rude and speaks his mind, he's very funny. You people all need to lighten up.  I understand that he expresses views that are controversial, but he's not trying to persuade people of anything- he's trying to make you laugh. It's not like he's forcing you all to read his articles, if you don't like it - don't read it (skip over it). You're all just looking for something to get pissed off about.

I have known Bryan for the past 3 years, and he is not a bigot, racist, homophobe or anti-feminist.  In fact he's anything but those things.  You people are the ones that have the problems, you're the ones passing judgement on him.  His articles do not attack you directly, they're generalizations intended to make us laugh- so chill the fuck out. Oh- and I'm just as strong an opinionated as the next woman, but I'm not pissed off or offended. Wake up- the majority of people do associate feminists with bitches and nazis. That's your fault-not ours.

elise
graphic design
sophomore
--This is addressed to people who hate me. Kudos, Elise.

5/7/03 - E-Mail [Another year under the belt, ah nostalgia!]

I am an alumni of Radford University, and having lived on both Clement and Fairfax streets, your article brings back many good memories of drunkenness with the boys and hanging out with friends.....oh yeah, and lesbians, but...
 
Your article is dumb as hell.  I can't say much more then that, but I do hope that journalism is not going to be your career.
 
Semper Fidelis,
 
Captain James M. R., USMC
Al Halliah, Iraq

    Response:

Dear Capt. R.,
    Thanks for reading.  You hit the nail on the head.  It's supposed to be dumb.  I'd figure a guy like yourself would be able to appreciate the dumb humor (some of it in reference to previous controversy) found in hating the cops and making sexist comments.  It's opinion, it's humor, but it's not journalism.  I can write news when I have to.  And you can bet your ass journalism is going to be my career.
    In any case, thanks for what you guys are all doing over there.  Not all of  us in the media are opposed to the war in Iraq.  Thanks.
 
Bryan McBournie

    Reply:

Not a problem with being over here.  Just doing my job.  If it weren't for a good war now and then, the President would be forced to have a "military drawdown"  That is another term for "layoffs."  While it is ashame that we killed so many Iraqi's, they should have thought about that long before March 19th and overthrown their own dictator.  
 
That is good that the Tartan gave you an outlet for humor.  I can remember an officer named Kenny Ford that was quite the asshole when I was there. Always cut me a break though.
 
I appreciate dumb humor, was just in a pissed off mood last night.  Got a couple hours to surf the web and thought I would log onto the web and cruise the Oasis vineyard site up in Hume and the RU site just to reminise about home a bit.
 
Go back to Radford in the fall and get a Masters partner.  There is no need for you get out into the world just yet.  Unless you have a burning desire to make money and pay bills with it.
 
Do you have a job lined up?  I know some folks at USAToday up in Sterling (I think that is where they moved up too with the main office)
 
S/F,
 
R. sends
--Yes folks, that is real. A marine in Iraq was reading my column. We seem to have worked things out. Oorah!

4/23/02 - Letters to the Editor (same issue) [My wife left and my dog ran away, so pass the couvasier]

Follow-up:
--Kisssea and I are cool, now. A week after this letter saw print, we met, hung out, and reached common ground. Perhaps I'm not such a bad guy after all.

4/16/03 - Letter to the Editor [Dart cameo]

Dear Editor,

        I am a third year student at Radford University and in these years Radford has been a place where I have felt safe and experienced very minimal amounts of sexual orientation discrimination. However, I am truly disappointed to say that this has changed. In the past year, I feel as if the world and our community in particular has began to move backward in time. I have recently read things in our school paper that make the myself and the GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender) population of Radford shudder. The most recent was an article written by Mr. Bryan McBournie mentioning gays in the military. His claim that the only lesbians in the military are the "butchy" ones left me wide-eyed in disbelief. While I am appalled that this was allowed to be printed, I am also appalled at Mr. McBournie’s ignorance of the subject he speaks so freely of. Sure, it was only a joke and while many students probably chuckled at his lame attempts at hilarity, others of us felt the brutality of his statement. Using "butchy" as an adjective to describe lesbians is similar to using a racial slur to describe an African-American student, something that would never be printed in our paper and/or tolerated on our campus. So why is it okay for the Tartan to print hate speech toward lesbians? It isn’t okay. Hate speech is intimidation and in many states that is a CRIME. I am scared that a student at Radford uses words like this freely; what does this leave him capable of doing? Hate speech is only a half step away from hate crimes, which brings me to my point: The freedom of speech is NOT absolute. If what Mr. McBournie writes in his articles makes someone feel uncomfortable (or intimidated), the Tartan should not print it. When he says things like "butchy", it not only hurts lesbians, but the rest of the community as well. What does this say about our school? We have derogatory comments written by a student and PROMOTED by our school paper. Yeah, that looks really good to a passer-by that may happen to pick up a copy of the Tartan. Furthermore, the state should not allow these comments to be made, but they do.  The state allows for people to write things like Mr. McBournie did; the state allows people to yell hate speech at me while I am walking through campus. This is how it began for Matthew Shephard. It started with some guys yelling a few hateful words related to his sexual orientation at him and he ends up dead, beaten, abused. There are no laws protecting us. People can do what they want; we just hope they won’t. Mr. McBournie’s comments kill that hope. It must be nice to be able to take for granted living in a community and not having to worry about people accepting you or the consequences of some narrow-minded neighbors opinions of you. With all the things my population has to be cautious of, the last thing we need is to pick up a local paper and read ignorant, derogatory comments towards homosexuals written by someone with no real knowledge on the
subject. And as John Massey expressed his opinions in a letter to the editor earlier last semester, he asked why it was necessary to print the names of people who are "out" and their allies on National Coming Out Day. Hopefully, I can finally answer his question: It isn’t necessary, but I think the GLBT population of Radford has something to be damn proud of. We hold our heads high and are proud of who we are no matter what the consequences. Bryan McBournies comments are just the beginning. Again, hate speech is not far from hate crimes. So if you think I’m overreacting about a stupid joke made by an ignorant writer, think again. A joke CAN go too far, and this time it has.

Sincerely,
Pam Mullins
Music
--Hey Pam, try using paragraphs! Not to mention, learn how to quote me, I said "butch" not "butchy." If you can't evern quote me correctly, how and I supposed to take you seriously? How dare you compare me to homophobic murders? You're probably just another uppity butch lesbian, anyway.

Follow-up:
Guest book posting:

Date:

07 Oct 2003

Time:

23:44:03

Comments

Hi Brian. It's me, your best friend, Pam. I would just like to comment, no drama, to the response you gave on your website to my letter. The letter that I sent to your editor was complete with paragraphs and the correct quotes. However, it was butchered (by the editor, I assume) upon print. Too bad you didn't get to read the letter in it's entirety. I'd also like to add that I am an "uppity butch lesbian", but not "just another one." Hopefully someday I will be able to make a difference in this world and put a stop to ignorance like yours being printed on public domain. Have a nice life.
--Welcome back, Pam, even if you can't spell my name. I can assure you that the above was the exact and un-edited letter you sent, however, we did insert paragraphs and change the spelling of your quote, so you could sound more factual. I hope you make a difference in this world, too. However, before you do that, I hope you develop a sense of humor, or at least learn to let go of issues that have been dead for six months. I wish you the best.

4/3/03 - E-Mail  [Random questions and dirty hippies]

First off I'd like to start off by saying I find your choice of subject matter  to often be cheap and taudry.  Until today I did not feel it necessary to convey my opinion to you, but I feel your ignorant article elicited it. While you may feel that you have mastered the art of rhetoric to the point that you can discuss anything, no matter how little knowledge of the subject you genuinely have, you are actually wrong.  Yes, I do understand how hard it must  be to fathom that you could be incorrect; atleast this is what I have gathered  from the boldness of your statements.  You seem to posess only the biased opinions held by the American media.  I find it quite sad to think that you actually think our media is a reliable source of information as you have first hand experience with it.  You don't hear your "hippies" telling you your opinions are invalid so please do me the same respect and until you become better infformed about what is ACTUALLY going on do not use the paper which my tuition pays to print to convey your ignorance to the masses.  
 
Thank you,
Amber H.
  if  you would like to respond I would be quite interested in what you have to say.

        Response:

Hi Amber,

#1, thanks for reading.  
#2, you're dead on with cheap and tawdry, I'll never sell out.  
#3, you and I live in a country where diversity is embraced, and opinions to be expressed freely.  Unfortunately, we also live in a country where people are afraid to speak their minds. So those who have the courage to express themselves without doing something stupid like getting naked in a field or lying on a NYC street during rush hour, are often criticized.  If you don't like my opinion, you have every right to a rebuttal by writing a letter to the editor, but until then, let's try to honor those freedoms.  
#4, just because you disagree with me doesn't mean I'm wrong, though it may not mean I'm right.  To help your argument, next time supply facts to back you up.  But the fact is, I have yet to hear any real arguments from protesters to the actual dangers faced right now.  All I hear is that tired old blood and oil chant I debunked in my column, and all I see are protesters wielding
puppets or singing songs to demonstrate their beliefs on the blood/oil situation.
#5, you're probably the first person I've heard who thinks that the American media is conservative.  And if I sound like the American media, guess why?  That's my future field of work.  I'm insulted that you think the media is not a source of news.  Yes, we do have Geraldo to deal with, and I'm trying to kill him as soon as possible, until then, back up your statements with evidence.  Would you rather me sound like the Iraq media next time?  Or maybe the fair and balanced reporting of an anti-war organization?  
#6, I DO hear hippies all the time saying my opinions are invalid, you're just the latest.  
#7, what do you define as "ACTUALLY going on"?  
#8, not only will I continue using your tuition dollars to print what you call my ignorance (for which I presented evidence), but I will also continue to get paid with your tuition dollars for doing it.

Thank you,
Bryan McBournie

10/30/02 - E-Mail  [You are a bad person]

quit your whinning you petty little man. if you cant get out of the way of a skateboard maybe you should go play in traffic for practice
-Eric B.

        Response:

Lighten up Eric, it's a joke.  Thanks for proving you're literate, though.  Watch out for cops.

10/30/02 - E-Mail  [You are a bad person]

Bryan,

You don't know me, however until today I was an avid reader of your column. You column was for the most part humorous and inciteful. After reading today's column I was both dissappointed and disgusted. I can understand most of your points adn I generally have a wonderful sense of humour. However your sudden attack on Canadians was pointless and rude. I happen to be a Candian citizen with US permanent residency. Your attack was so off course and incorrect I felt the need to say that while I realize you are trying to be funny, which you usually are, I didn't find any of it amusing. Canadians happen to be widely known as some of the kindest and politest people on earth. None of us have the desire to be French, the Quebecois have a desire to preserve their natural  heritage and culture which is very rich and interesting. None of us have any desire whatsoever to be American and that is a myth made up by Americans that happen to be full of themselves. we are all proud of our culture which happens to be very different from that of America. We are peace lovign people that have arangements with the US for protection, we provide much of the technology Americans use in defending themselves, we created the stealth bomber among  other inventions that your country would be lost with out. I happen to have heard that you are a hockey player here at Radford so you seem to be a hypocrite to be complaining about our fascination wiht our country's national sport. Hockey is our pride, most of your teams are made up of Canadians and  Russians. Americans obsess over football, we enjoy Hockey, that's our right, we  invented it!
-Jocelyn M.

        Response:

First off, thanks for reading and being able to sift through our typographical errors.  Second, I'm always more educated on subjects in my column than I let on.  I grew up in Vermont, so I know a great deal about the political struggles that go on up there. As for hockey, yeah, Canadians are better, there's no doubt about that, my youth team played a few teams in Quebec way
back when, and we go our asses handed to us.  Thirdly, I can understand why you would get upset at my comments, but I would like to point out that one of the first topics I wrote about this year was about my home town and how much it sucked, so don't think I'm too good to make fun of myself.  In any case, I've been pushing the boundaries of my topics this year more and more, hoping to get responses, and I'm proud to say you're the first.  Thank you, and I hope you continue to read my column.

Bryan

3/6/02 - Letter to the Editor  [Keeping up foreign relations with West Virginia]    [The war on feminism]

McBournie has a point

Dear Editor,

I guess you could call this a rant letter, and I hope that it gets printed so that the people of RU can see what I have to say on the topic of Mr. McBournie and his offensive opinion column that you print weekly.

Every week I pick up a copy of the Tartan on Wednesday afternoon after I get off of work, I take it back to my dorm room and read all of the columns, including Mr. McBournie's. I do not get offended easily, and I was not offended in the least by any of the articles that he printed. However, I can see how people could be highly offended at the articles.

There comes a point when the complaints about these articles have got to stop, though. Here it is, three weeks after the West Virginia article was printed, and I still read letters to the editor complaining, and the same thing goes with the feminism article. "You must have never been to West Virginia." "You obviously haven't been in to the women's restrooms." "He claims that his article is a joke, but it must really represent his real views." Do you know what I have to say about all of this? So what!

Many of you, whether through television or the radio, have heard or seen Howard Stern and his rowdy bunch of cohorts. If you haven't heard Stern, you may have heard Mancow Meuller, or any number of other radio shock-jocks. My point is this: these jocks would not have become popular if they were not offensive. Many people find seeing other people getting offended as funny.

I am not condoning or agreeing with any of the points that Mr. McBournie makes in either of his articles, but I am saying that people DO find these articles funny. If the Tartan wants to find a new columnist, they will. People do not listen to Howard Stern if they don't want to. If you don't like what McBournie has to say, then don't read his column. If you still read it, and if it still offends you, then I do not think that you people have any reason to write letters of complaint into the editor of the paper. It is there so that people who share Mr. McBournie's sense of humor can get a laugh out of it.

Jeffrey Bolton
Freshman
--I like this guy, he's ok in my book.

2/27/02 - Letters to the Editor (all in the same issue)  [Keeping up foreign relations with West Virginia]    [The war on feminism]

Feminism: When is it too much?

Dear Editor,

This weeks issue of the Tartan displayed many Letters to the Editor criticizing a series of articles by Bryan McBournie. None (out of at least two weeks) were positive. And rightly so, he has enangered many people. But as with most things, those who are satisfied say nothing.

As for his article, "The War on Feminism," he could not have picked a better topic to enrage people. However, there is almost no way that this article could be conceived as anything but crude humor. His description of bathroom conditions is, at worst, exaggerated; mens restrrooms are quite spartan and often underequipped compared to women's restrooms. As for the use of the word "feminazi:" the word was defined by Rush Limbaugh (The Most Dangerous Man in America) to give a name to the two dozen or so radical feminists whose zealotry and ideology was rivaled only by that of the Nazis; their goal seemed to be to place men in a subservient position. Mr. McBournie is guilty here only of a misuse of words. His point is that, as "very few women are men's doormats by choice" so very few men want similar treatment. As for those who have not yet met a woman who was not a feminist, you need to meet more women. A large group of women do not regard themselves as feminist or hold the same views as feminist groups. I can fault Mr. McBournie for being blatantly wrong for only two things: 1) wanting to allow women to be eligible for the draft, when we field the best army the world has ever seen, proven time and time again in war, without women, and 2) finding that feminists have a sense of humor.

As for his article "Keeping up foreign relations with West Virginia," I must admit that he is right in some respects. One has to admit that most of West Virginia is rural compared to New York or Washington, or even Richmond and Charleston and perhaps not as modern in very rural places. It is sad that the term "redneck" came to mean what he described, instead of it's original meaning as a hard working, tanned farmer. I'm sure that the rednecks he described are definitely a minority. But they are definitely there. As for people hauling things in cars; people haul hay (or cows) because they have to; many farmers can't afford to buy a cattle truck or hay wagon; this isn't because they are hicks, but because they have to live too. And I assure the readers that the "PET cow" that one writer saw in a truck in Pearisburg was headed to the livestock market in Narrows, and hopefully, to your plate. I can only take offense at what he wrote because whatever he implies of West Virginia is true of us here too. If West Virginia is a foreign country, then we are its closest allies.

At least he is doing one thing right, even if you think everything else he does is wrong; he gets people to think and write to the Tartan. If you truly despise what he says, don't pick up a copy of the Tartan. The stacks of unread papers will tell the Tartan more than a few letters. If you like what he says, write and support him. don't be part of what might be a "silent majority" who support his work, if not his views. It is more of a shame, with the recent events of our nation, that no one will support his right to write something so inflammatory and politically incorrect.

Matthew A. Frazier
Junior
Physics
--Does anyone have any idea which side this guy's on?

Dear Editor,

I'm writing in reference to Bryan McBournie's article "The War on Feminism." I am male, yet I found myself mildly offended by this "humor article."

Here's why:

1) It was very ignorant. His article was not based on any feminist theories or ideas, and was a petty attempt to justify his stupidity and ignorance. It was a very juvenile attempt to get a laugh.

2) It wasn't funny. The only reason I picked up the Tartan this week was because my friend had been offended by Mr. McBournie's article on West Virginia the week before. There was nothing witty about the article; it appeared to be a rehash of something Rush Limbaugh aired eight years ago. Rush Limbaugh wasn't funny back then, so what makes McBournie think his material will be funny now?

I thought that the reason people came to college in the first place was to receive an education. I can respect all intelligent points of view, though I may not agree with them. Perhaps you should look for a humor columnist with a style more befitting to an open-minded academic institution.

Phil Hunnicutt
Junior
Sociology
--Phil, I'm not a Limbaugh fan, and clearly you've never heard that humor is the highest form of intelligence. Go grow some balls!

Dear Editor,

Bryan McBournie's recent articles, "The War on Feminism" and "Keeping up Foreign Relations with West Virginia" have stirred many negative responses from RU students. Rightly so, there is a reason to be upset. I personally did not agree with either article, although "The War on Feminism" was particularly offensive to me.

In order to avoid redundancy, I will keep my statement short and sweet and hopefully enlighten a few minds along the way.

Bryan, although you probably don't realize this now, the way you try to innocently poke fun at women by laughing at feminists, our rights and so-called injustices, and even our hormones you are actually being very hurtful toward women. For those of you who think I am overreacting, I'm scared you don't understand the consequences of such an article. The more we allow women to be put down in a light-hearted manner, the longer women will be oppressed in this patriarchal society. In other words, if we, as women, continue to condone this behavior we will never rise to equal standards as men.

The disclaimer attached to both articles, "for humor purposes only," does little to ease the lash of the demeaning messages directed at both women and West Virginians. When a group of people are insulted, it is no longer an issue of humor; it is discrimination. I cannot take this article lightly as intended for humor because as a woman I am the one dealing with the reality of discrimination and inequality. Please respect this notion and understand why such an article upsets me.

According to a 1997 U.S. Federal statistic, the median income for a white male is $26,115 and $13,792 for a white female. Enough said.

Kelly Lawver
Senior
Fashion Merchandising
--Does anyone else see the irony of a Fashion Merchandising major defending feminism? She might as well be a Homemaker major.

Feminism and West Virginia

Dear Editor,

We are writing in response to Bryan McBournie's columns on West Virginia and feminism. Both columns share the last line: "This column is for humor purposes only." Unfortunately, neither column is humorous in the least. Humor that relies on the expression of bigotry can never be amusing.

Mr. McBournie may wish to claim that he is only joking, that he doesn't really mean the offensive things that he writes, but that disclaimer is only a defense mechanism to deflect the natural anger such offensive speech evokes.

Not only is Mr. McBournie going out of his way to be offensive, but he is basing his arguments of unfounded generalizations, whether generalizing about West Virginians or feminists. He betrays a lack of familiarity with the state of West Virginia, clearly, but his opinions of feminism indicate that he hasn't had enough experience with feminist literature to speak intelligently on the subject of oppression, whether based on region, race, class or gender.

Mr. McBournie bases his claim that men are an oppressed minority on campus apparently solely on the observation that women's bathrooms on this campus are larger than men's. He gives no indication of how many there are both, how many stalls they have, the ratio or urinals to stalls, or any kind of systematic exploration of the topic. In his mention of a piece of feminist literature that argues that men envy vagina's, he doesn't provide an author or title for this piece, or indicate whether the author may have been making the same kind of point with humor that he thinks he is making.

Mr. McBournie's representation of feminism betrays a lack of knowledge of the complex state of contemporary feminism. Instead he parrots the anti-feminist rants of Rush Limbaugh through his use of inflammatory words such as feminazi and various stereotypes, without any apparent knowledge of the many differing philosophies that comprise contemporary feminism.

The column on West Virginia, characterizing the neighboring state as a poverty-stricken, third world country, was also based on a n inadequate sample of the state. His map of the state would seem to include only wilderness and the city of Morgantown. Where in his map are Charleston, Huntington, Beckley or Wheeling, the other major cities of the state, or the many small towns similar to Radford that one would pass through West Virginia Turnpike? He also appears to have traveled very little in Virginia itself, since southwest Virginia, in which we live, is very much like West Virginia: economically, geographically and demographically.

The inaccuracy of his columns aside, the tone of Mr. McBournie's writing is unconvincing, betraying a lack of awareness of the broad audience of the Tartan. Is he aware that RU was orignially a woman's college until the 1970's? Is he aware that his audience includes not only students, but also RU falculty and staff, as well as Radford residents? He seems to have a seriuos misuderstanding of his audience, assuming that he is speaking only to the minority of people who happen to share his views. This misunderstanding of his audience may prove dangerous if Mr. McBournie continues to seek out groups to insult and offend. Language is powerful, it has consequences, and disclaimers are seldom effective shields.

Finally, we must consider how Mr. McBournie is undermining his own integrity as a RU student by insulting his fellow students. As long as he is a student here and publishing in the Tartan, he is representing. The Tartan is not distrubed only on campus, but throughout the city of Radford. He and the Tartan editors who choose to publish his columns need to consider the image presented not only by the offensiveness of his views but also the poor quality of his arguments. His inabilty to construct an effective argument, one that is conscious of all of his audience members, refelects poorly on RU as an educational institution. As teachers of English 102, we can only wish we had him in our classes so as to educate him in effective argumentation and critical thinking.

Laurie Cubbison, Assistant professor to English
Marie Bowling,
Dan Woods,
Tonya Luster,
Shaun Corley,
Shawn Mullins, graduate teaching fellows in the English department
--Oh no! I pissed off some grad students! Hey guys, if you're all English Dept. people, then why do you have so many typos in your letter? You'll never educate me, I don't want to learn Nazism.