If there is one thing that LMU is good at, it's showcasing a great image. Once inside the warm nest of whole-person-education, we are led to believe that our mere association with the benevolent Jesuit garden-that sits above a Native American burial site-will result in a metamorphosis from secular-ego-centric-capitalist into socially-just-emissary-of-Christ. Much to the chagrin of those of us who desire such a transformation, this is a tremendous task-one not completed by merely associating with the entity propagating the virtue.
Perhaps the best way to get to the heart of the matter being raised here is to appeal to the most current and tangible example of it at LMU: the philanthropy known as Derby Days. Spreading "rape awareness" and raising money for facilities that assist victims of rape are certainly noble things and should be commended. However, a disturbing notion comes to mind. The awareness being promoted by this sometimes philanthropic organization conflicts with the ethos of the organization itself.
I should stop here and make certain to specify that such a statement is not to suggest that the organization is running rampant with rapists. What it does suggest is that a contradiction arises when the notion of "spreading rape awareness" is paired with the organization's affiliation with the "rape culture." Before anyone soils themselves at such a suggestion, understand that binge drinking, exemplifications of sexualized roles (think of theme parties) and an overt display of misogynistic music and its tendencies (sexually derogatory tunes synchronized to young women bouncing on a seesaw) are not conducive of an organization that focuses its philanthropy on "rape awareness."
In the spreading of such "awareness," would young women then be informed to avoid several scenarios that are facilitated by these aforementioned rape-crusaders? Protecting women and men alike from rape is indeed a high virtue. However, many would find it oxymoronic if the United States Marine Corps had a fundraiser for Iraqi families affected by the invasion. Such a fundraiser would indeed be moral, and a step in the right direction, but only pokes at the body, and leaves the head attached to the beast so it can regroup and actualize its intrinsic desire for destruction.
To deny that my claims made, or implied, here are based in reality would be a pathetic attempt at a cover-up. While an all-encompassing, "we don't condone or participate in rape," response may be issued; I would encourage those in disagreement to consider the following: ethos matters.
No accusations are being made about specifics instances of the horrible transgression of rape. Instead, I am only asking that those involved with the philanthropy look inward, and take a look at the ethos of their organization. Outright denial is oftentimes a clear sign of guilt-during these Days of Derby, late night forced binge drinking still occurs.
It has been many moons since I've written here, and I can restrain myself no further. I am compelled to reappear in this section because I can no longer stand to watch columnists and contributors alike writhe in discontent over isolated events. Don't get burned out by any one specific event, or even a series of them-the things that plague you are systemic. Or in the words of the professorial prophet known as DSC, "Context, context, context." It's time to shift the focus to the ethos surrounding whatever it is that vexes us.
Although the proof may be in the pudding, rotten pudding comes from a foul batch.
This is the opinion of Jeremy Tratner, a senior theology major from Valencia, Calif. Please send comments to adwyer@theloyolan.com.
