October 16, 2006

Dartmouth Free Press Issue 7.3: Alumni Constitution, Homecoming, and History



Unfortunately, the DFP website is not able to be updated at this time, so here [pdf] is the latest issue.

I urge you all to read our position on the Alumni Constitution and the developments that I believe could follow from this debacle.

Also please check out the Dartmouth Documents article on page 9, where you will find a letter from TJ Rodgers vehemently opposing coeducation in 1968 and a letter from Peter Robinson arguing against the Equal Rights Amendment in 1976. Nice guys, both of them.

Edit: The D has drawn my attention to a possible lack of clarity regarding our layout in the article Alumni Perspectives. We do not mean to imply that all proponents are tied to or support the Dartmouth Alumni for Common Sense (or all opponents tied to AlumniConstitution.org). The DFP is particularly sensitive to this type of thing as we have continuously been used without our permission or consent in advertising material opposing the constitution.

5 comments:

  1. The funny thing about TJ being such a downer about coeducation, is that in 1967, he wrote this hilarious letter to the editor in the D. Basically, it was him complaining about getting busted for having a girl in his room, and how rules about the opposite-sex and curfews were absurd. TJ was all about having women at Dartmouth...until they wanted to learn.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous8:35 PM

    Voting against the new constituiton empowers people like TJ and Peter.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "the DFP website is not able to be updated at this time"

    I like how you use the passive voice in that sentence, Seal.

    Also, good job keeping the shirtless picture alive.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous9:41 AM

    Check out the free press making light of sexual assault on page 15!

    If a fraternity had published that, there would be a protest.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You're right--I didn't like those two people's responses in Word on the Street. But Word on the Street is designed as a non-edited feature--we ask the question of a few people, we print their answers. It's ridiculous to assume that we support their attitude. If we had asked, do you think the US should attack Iran, and someone had answered with a racist remark about Muslims, we'd print it, even though we clearly wouldn't agree with it.

    ReplyDelete