“Distorted depiction of Japanese TV programming”
I was disappointed that the Voice printed such a poorly written article with no apparent point besides insulting Japanese people and all with an interest in Japanese society (Nov. 20, Japanese basic cable round-up). Nearly half the TV programs I had watched until now were from Japan, and Scott Matthews described shows from the fringe as the norm. Running the piece in the Leisure section gave the article a veil of legitimacy as a source of cultural information rather than what it truly was: either a joke not worth printing, or one guy expressing his anger indirectly through a distorted depiction of Japanese TV programming. Matthews only succeeded in continuing the age-old tradition of orientalism, reinforcing the image of Asians as utterly bizarre and simple-minded, trapped in childish and sadistic rituals that “normal people” could observe from afar with a certain sense of disgust and superiority.
However, the article did not end only with stereotyping the Japanese. Just in case the reader might mistake the article as one bad joke, Matthews concluded, “The spectacle is almost worth the trouble of learning this stupid language.” If there was any justification for running the piece before, then it became invalid with that single remark (perhaps the author’s real point?) It was not enough for him to denigrate contemporary Japanese culture, but he went further and declared worthless one of the means through which I express myself and communicate with others, including my parents. With a broad brush, he tried to white out an entire language with its concomitant culture, perhaps hoping that no Japanese person would protest.
I truly hope that Matthews actually has a more serious claim and is simply too immature to put it forth directly for an open and fruitful discussion. If not, then I lament the fact that an individual, obviously having had the opportunity to experience another country’s culture, has decided to use ignorance to get attention and a few cheap laughs for himself.
Sho J. Morimoto (SFS ‘04)
“Colombian Clarification”
The Georgetown University Knights of Columbus would like to correct the false implication that it does not support the commencement address delivered last May by His Eminence Francis Cardinal Arinze.
It seems that much of the controversy stems from Cardinal Arinze’s assertion that the human family is “mocked by homosexuality.” Indeed, Catholic doctrine distinguishes between “homosexual acts” which are “intrinsically disordered” because they “close the sexual act to the gift of life,” and “homosexual persons,” who, through the virtue of chastity, “can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.” Although the Cardinal did not draw this distinction, his remarks were not inconsistent with the Church teaching on homosexuality-which entails respect, compassion, and sensitivity as much as it entails restraint and self-control.
We acknowledge that some may consider the Cardinal’s articulation of Church teaching to be incomplete and therefore offensive in some way. We have seen, however, that a startling number of professors and concerned students have changed the face of this debate from one of semantics and style to one that questions the appropriateness of including Catholic doctrine in the commencement address of a major Catholic university. This attempt to undermine Church teaching only exposes the duplicity of those who worship “diversity” and “freedom of speech,” but seek to silence speech that does not advance their interests.
The Georgetown University Knights of Columbus reaffirms its defense of Cardinal Arinze against any misguided initiatives that aim to deprive him of the dignity and respect that he deserves. We proudly and unambiguously embrace the teachings of the Catholic Church, including those elements of the faith that, although unpopular, preserve the authentic well-being of society and of every human person.
Council Officers
Georgetown University Knights of Columbus
