the magazine of the columbia daily spectator
May 1 2013
Mmm, baby: The very best in food porn
April 27 2013
Alternatives to Butler
April 19 2013
Red Bull and relaxation
April 17 2013
Back to the kitchen: A short journey through sexist pop culture
April 12 2013
Bikinis and big booties, y’all
April 8 2013
Azealia Banks Did What?
April 5 2013
More stories from Columbia’s military veterans
April 3 2013
Sing, O Muse, of some sappy story
April 1 2013
Missed the Cliterary Open Mic? Check out the highlights here
March 29 2013
Sex & Low Beach
This week, we’ve devoted our cover story to an issue that many on campus may dismiss as old news. Admittedly, there’s no particular time hook for looking back at the Obamanard controversy of last spring. “Why write about this now?” is an expected and reasonable question.
In my opinion, the answer is that what happened last spring was too easily dismissed. It was not covered enough, and not adequately. As a community, we’ve allowed ourselves to forget. Bwog deleted the most offensive comments, and we all moved on without really understanding what is at stake in calling your female peer a “cum-dumpster.” In failing to discuss and analyze the comments on Bwog fully, we’ve failed to address sufficiently all of the issues at stake in an ugly episode on our campus.
Margaret Boykin’s article functions as an Obamanard post-mortem—a necessary extended look at what exactly we should take from
what happened last spring. Ultimately, Margaret sets out to prove that Obamanard isn’t just old news. The comments posted on Bwog revealed fissures and prejudices between the Barnard and Columbia communities that we still need to work on.
It is my hope that this article will be part of a continued conversation on the relationship between our two schools, but also on all persistent sexist rhetoric, especially the kind that seems dismissible. It’s easy, especially after events like this past election’s windfall of women’s rights victories, to imagine that all is well. But as we’ve seen, as soon as we get complacent, that’s when these issues seem to rear their ugly heads—and if we act like that’s not a problem, then it will be one.
We're looking for comments that are interesting and substantial. If your comments are excessively self-promotional, or obnoxious you will be banned from commenting. Consult the comment FAQ and legal terms.
© 2011, The Eye :: Spectator Publishing Company, Inc.