Hooters sign does not oppress women

By Gus Bode

Dear Editor:So, I’m reading this article (“Fraternity sign causes controversy,” Feb. 17) about the fraternity responsible for female misfortune nationwide, and my first thought is, “This Professor Benford dude isn’t getting enough fiber in his diet.” Most of you are too young to remember Dick Nixon, but he had a similar problem.

Here’s some objectivity. In some countries, women are so revered they are not allowed to expose any portion of their bodies to sunlight, lest the reflection of their beauty drive men into lust-filled madness … right. The added benefit of all this reverence is they get to be chattel as well, having no more say in their destiny than your average steer in Kansas City. No one ogles them, though, by God, and they are not treated as sex objects for the sport of horny adolescents (and that inevitable few who never mentally grow beyond adolescence).

On the other hand, I can’t remember reading anywhere or even seeing a segment on “60 Minutes” describing how these young ladies are conscripted in one way or another to this life of degradation. No one, it seems, is twisting their arms, either metaphorically or physically, to enter into this contract of self-abasement. Imagine. Free will or something equally disquieting seems to be at work here. And hey, let’s not forget those tips. Best hot wings in the world notwithstanding, most of these girls are making a pretty good living.


Tell ya what. You want to feel sorry for someone, I’d look into the bitter dregs those poor bastards call lives who are forced to disrobe and display themselves on the pages of such sick slicks as Playgirl. Talk about objectifying. To reduce a man to nothing but a sweaty flank and dangling goodies just so some woman can get her jollies. Now there’s something that needs to be stopped.