I was absolutely appalled by Ginny Robinson's column ("Love is Propaganda?," Feb. 15). How disheartening it is to see a piece that does nothing but speak in generalizations and offer the most absurd arguments for her alleged "argument." I am not involved in the LGBT, nor did I get a chance to even pick up the shirt (I still have mine from last year), but I was outraged to read her ill-informed and quite frankly, prejudicial piece. The shirts are meant to show a positive message: the ability for all people to love and their right to have a meaningful relationship with someone, no matter his or her sexual preference. It is not propaganda; it is the beliefs of some that have their right to share it. Robinson has her forum each week to vocalize her platforms, why shouldn't the LGBT have the same right to vocalize their ideals? How ridiculous is it to compare gay rights to the Communist movement? How on earth is the Bolshevik Party's Communist Revolution of 1917 at all the same as the LGBT's message for gay rights? Because they have catchy slogans? In that case, basically anything that has ever existed in American culture could be considered propaganda. By this train of thought, Robinson has never voted for any politician or eaten at a McDonald's. Well, just so you know, when it comes to your ideas, I'm NOT Lovin' It.
Perhaps the widespread popularity of the shirts was not because the student body was "tricked" by the LGBT and Dean of Students Office, but because we are finally moving in a direction that welcomes a diverse and equal atmosphere here at the University. Her diluted attempt to claim that the majority of people didn't understand the campaign because of her interaction with one student at Newcomb is not compelling, but rather weak and ineffectual, much like the rest of Robinson's hateful and patronizing diatribe. Students do not lack the ability to think critically; perhaps the author just lacks the ability to think beyond her own narrow-minded views of the world around her.
Michaela Ottenberg\nCLAS IV