THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, September 2, 1995 TAG: 9508310009
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A10 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Opinion
SOURCE: By ROBERT H. PATTERSON JR.
LENGTH: Medium: 71 lines
I read Guy Friddell's Aug. 19 column concerning The Citadel and Shannon Faulkner. Having admired Mr. Friddell and his writings for many years, I was taken by surprise at the tone and content of his position. Quite obviously Mr. Friddell does not have a comprehensive view of the litigation, and his sole focus was its ending.
As for the conduct of the cadets during Ms. Faulkner's brief stay in the barracks, consider that The Citadel was under a court order that limited her interaction with upperclassmen to her six cadre officers; her young, scared classmates were admonished at court direction not to engage in any form of sexual harassment, which the court refused to define. The cadets' response was not unreasonable.
All of us involved in this case would have much preferred that the demonstrations by The Citadel cadets had not occurred. But Ms. Faulkner had left The Citadel premises before any of the spontaneous outpouring by the cadets took place.
One would also understand more fully the reaction to Ms. Faulkner's withdrawal if he had suffered for 2 1/2 years - as The Citadel and its Corps of Cadets have - the daily barrage of insults and innuendoes from Ms. Faulkner's attorneys and their allies, the National Organization for Women and the American Civil Liberties Union.
The Citadel has always viewed single-gender education, not Ms. Faulkner, as the issue. Her counsel, however, have repeatedly shown disdain for the institution on the one hand, while they fervently advocated their client's desire to attend on the other.
Notwithstanding the initial representation by the Department of Justice and Ms. Faulkner that no changes would be required with her admission, countless days were spent in court dealing with mandated changes after her admission was judicially decreed. These changes are well-documented, and I refer Guy to his colleague, (Richmond Times-Dispatch editorial-page editor) Ross Mackenzie's recent articles on this subject.
The long and short of it is that if Ms. Faulkner had persevered as she stated under oath in court that she would - and in her speech to NOW a few days before her admission - she still would never have fully participated in the Corps of Cadets. That result is not because Faulkner is a female, but because a different standard was being applied to her upon her request and court order. The essence of The Citadel and VMI experience, however, is that all undergo equal treatment. This is possible only with a single-gender program.
Mr. Friddell's statement that ``What The Citadel needs is a woman's touch, some feminization'' was a curious one. There are no schools in America, per capita, whose alumni have shed more blood in the defense of this country than those of The Citadel and VMI. When the casualty lists were being published in World War I, World War II, the Korean War and Vietnam, no one in the press was whimpering that the dead VMI and Citadel men had needed more ``feminization.''
As to the concept of an officer and a gentleman, all of us should be reminded that this concept is heresy in the gender-neutral world of ``persons.''
Having held Mr. Friddell in such high regard through the years, his column left me with a deep feeling of sadness. He has, perhaps, succumbed to the ideology of the extreme feminist movement and its call for gender warfare. The day will come, I believe, when the average American woman will understand that this movement is not a friend - but an enemy. MEMO: Mr. Patterson is a senior partner at the Richmond-based law firm of
McGuire, Woods, Battle & Boothe. He is involved in litigation defending
the all-male policies of Virginia Military Institute and The Citadel. by CNB