Posters for ex-Playboy Playmate Rebekka Armstrong’s speech about being HIV-positive
depicted her nude (her private parts were covered) with an IV pole attached to her. After the poster was displayed in the Idaho Commons, the photo was obscured by stickers stating, “This insults women.” One struggles with the question of what’s worse: possibly degrading women or vandalizing property? Whether or not the image was degrading to women, there is no reason to vandalize someone’s property. Twice this semester, a secular humanist billboard was vandalized. The standard way to get one’s point across is to bring the possibly offending material to the attention of someone with the capability of changing it/Kelsey Samuels, UI Argonaut. More here. And: Argonaut news story by Kelcie Moseley here.
Question: Is there ever a good excuse to vandalize someone else’s property in the name of protest?
simpleton on December 11 at 4:27 p.m.
Does anyone else see the irony in an Idaho Vandal complaining about vandalism?
saraeanderson on December 13 at 4:48 p.m.
Someone STRUGGLES with the question of whether or not degrading women is worse than messing with some sexist PR campaign? Two wrongs don’t make a right, but it’s absurd to act like all transgressions are equally bad.
I think that’s one of the things that Islam got right: some acts are Forbidden and others are really really discouraged, but can be fudged when necessary.