In your 11/14 article about the sexual libeling of Kate James, a Georgetown Hoya columnist, by Micah Sachs, a garden-variety cretin (“Boystown University”), I noticed a few things.

First, I noticed that Sachs is not a satirist but a relic of privilege and its cluelessness. His sort used to get their kicks sitting around caricaturing blacks as bug-eyed idiots, before it started getting their asses kicked. Today they gravitate to what few safe targets remain, such as the odd bitch needing to be humiliated into shutting up. (Since pre-Biblical times, here’s how: Drag her to the figurative public square, strip her naked, and violate her sexually for all to witness. It’s the basic instructive assault on the Other—and, in the pornographizing of a female against her will, a deeply held ritual with no male-victim equivalent.)

Second, I noticed that James has chosen not to continue pursuing a civil lawsuit against Sachs. I hope she reconsiders. And I hope some appropriate firm offers its assistance. Such gratuitous malice and genuine injury to one’s personal, social, and professional life should be legally actionable—as should the university’s role in allowing them to be perpetrated on a student with such astounding impunity.

Third, I noticed that between James and Sachs, your article allowed only the writing of Sachs to speak for itself. Whatever James might have written to provoke such calculated viciousness on the part of Sachs, we can only guess, for the City Paper, like him, seems compelled to render her substance mute, and only her sex-related victimhood audible.

Takoma Park, Md.

via the Internet