In response to Todd McSorley's reply to my columns of April 11 and 18: I'll concede your initial point about my arrogance, since its accuracy has been confirmed by people who are in a better position to judge than yourself (i.e. people who've actually met me.) Your second charge, that I believe students incapable of making up their own minds, seems less well-founded, considering that critical thinking and questioning � even of the teacher � is a goal I try to encourage in my classes. I'm unsure what the rest of your opening paragraph means since it rambles considerably, so I'll dismiss it.
Your point about discussion of teenage sex being analogous to discussion of racial issues is not explained, and overlooks the fact that I've always supported discussing both, just not with tones of accusation and judgement. As for my flawed "backlash" theory, as you call it, to what exactly about it do you object? Do you have some evidence or personal insights one way or the other? Share something I can accept, other than witty sarcasm, and Ill gladly change my mind. In your last line, are you implying I have prejudice against Midwesterners? If so, then you've misread my April 11 column where I suggested regional prejudice may be an overlooked problem at SCSU, a natural enough suggestion from a native Midwesterner like myself. Clearly, Todd, your studies at SCSU have helped produce social consciousness. It is regrettable that those same studies have not yet improved your reading comprehension and writing skills � at least in this case--to a level where we can hold an intelligent, and hostile-free, discussion about how to change society. Lots of that going around, unfortunately.
Dr. Jim Leiker
Dept. of History
