Don’t can ‘The Bag’

Freedom of speech. Where is the line drawn? At what point does controversial content become dangerous? This debate has raged for years, and two college students in Colorado have entered the ring.\nAfter seeing a feminist and gender studies newsletter called “The Monthly Rag” lying around campus, Colorado College student Chris Robinson and a fellow student decided to make a newsletter of their own. “The Monthly Bag,” as they named it, was created as what the Denver Post called a “satirical response to a feminist publication.” Surely they were expecting the newsletter to cause a stir, but Robinson and his colleague got more heat than they were probably looking for. \nCollege staff members removed “The Monthly Bag” from its various locations on campus after getting complaints that the newsletter was “threatening.” The students behind the publication were also found guilty in March of violating the campus conduct code and were forced to host a public forum about the issues the publication raised. Mike Edmonds, vice president for student life at Colorado College, wrote Robinson a letter on March 25, explaining that, although Robinson violated the code of conduct, he would not be facing serious sanctions or punishments. But Robinson said this “ideological witch hunt” was a punishment in itself. \nSo what made this satirical newsletter so threatening? What incited Edmonds to write in his letter to Robinson that the problem with the publication was its “juxtaposition of weaponry and sexuality”? \nWell, “The Monthly Bag” did include some content that many could deem inappropriate – and apparently many people did see it as such, given the degree of outrage in response. The flier included tips on chain saw etiquette and an in-depth description of a sexual position from Men’s Health magazine. It even gave readers trivia about sniper rifles. All this, Robinson told the Denver Post, was helpful information for macho men.\nNow, we haven’t read the publication ourselves, and it’s likely that it included content that we wouldn’t find appealing. But it seems hypocritical that this newsletter was killed quickly after its first issue when the publication it parodied, which includes controversial content of its own, has been published for about three years now. The feminist newsletter included an announcement for a lecture on feminist pornography, information about gender-bending practices and a piece about a myth involving male castration.\nIf the makers of “The Monthly Rag” have a right to include information about gender-bending practices, a newsletter targeting “macho men” – whether it’s a parody or not – should be able to include tips on chain saw etiquette. After all, a description of a sexual position seems to be no more “dangerous” than a public lecture about feminist pornography, or any pornography, for that matter. If the feminist and gender studies program can print material that is probably offensive to some, Robinson has every right to make a newsletter of his own.