My apologies to Amy Margolies ’04, Professor Aldemaro Romero, and the students and faculty in the Environmental Studies department. I was wrong, and I am sorry.

It is hard to come to grips with the realization that something you have written is erroneous. It is a blow to both your credibility and your ego, and a level of embarrassment inevitably follows. I was presumptuous and, I realize, a little pretentious (however unintended). Margolies is at least partially correct in hypothesizing that the reason for both is my status as a senior. Indeed, I thought I had been at Macalester long enough to accurately gauge the educational and political climate of the whole campus, and I also thought my experiences here could prepare me for any and all reactions and criticisms to my article “Four things your Macalester professors will never tell you,” which I knew would be unpopular.

I was dead wrong. I was humbled, and I was shocked.

I was humbled, but pleasantly surprised, to learn that I was wrong regarding an assumption I made. I made a flippant, sarcastic remark regarding the Environmental Studies department in my final point (“Somehow I doubt Lomborg’s book will be assigned reading in any Environmental Studies classes”). I made the statement without ever having been to an Environmental Studies class, or even having interviewed an ES student. That I was making an assumption based on my experiences in all of my sociology/humanities/etc. classes is not an excuse. It was just plain negligence masked in a disclaimer, and it’s something I have been taught to avoid since my first journalism class. Professor Romero and Margolies set me straight; both pointed out in their letters to the editor that the department does indeed study more than one point of view, and while it was much to my chagrin that I was wrong, I was heartened to know that not every department “teaches” the liberal propaganda I feel I have been subjugated to in my classes.

It was a hard lesson to learn, but a lesson learned nonetheless. I do not regret informing the campus (those of us who have not learned this in an Environmental Studies class) that another line of environmental theory exists. I do regret my uninformed remark about the environmental studies department. I apologized to Professor Romero in person, and am apologizing to the rest of the department now, along with offering the assurance that I will strive to eliminate these sorts of mistakes and attitudes from my writing.

I also assumed that I could not be shocked by any reactions to my writing. andré carrington ’02 proved me wrong once again.

I read with increasing astonishment the vicious personal attacks carrington directed towards me in his Quietly and Mostly to Myself piece. In case you missed it, let me recap: I am cruel, misogynistic, ignorant, irresponsible and vitriolic, with a pathetic disregard for human life and an editorial reign of terror that inflicts psychic violence. And most disturbingly, I am a racist.

At first, all I could do was laugh. It seemed somehow tragically comic to see the hateful and malicious words spewing forth across the page as a description of me, and by somebody who has never met me and knows nothing about me personally. I kept waiting for the punch line, something to let me know carrington was being satirical or sarcastic.

My mirth turned to a deep sadness, however, as I realized he was serious.

Arguing that all crimes should be considered hate crimes or acknowledging evidence of Mumia Abu-Jamal’s guilt does not make me a racist. Pointing out a statistical “fact” is fallacious does not make me a misogynist. Calling me these names out of spite is just as demeaning and hurtful as calling a black person a “nigger” or a gay person a “faggot.” I guess I should be offended, but I realize carrington is just as misinformed and prejudiced as the real “racists.” Therefore, I’m not going to waste my time dwelling on this unfortunate incident. I’ve just learned there exists a real academia here at Mac-at least in one department.