Gothamist: Attempts to Rate Columbia U. Ladies Fails

Katherine

Mon, 09 May 2005 17:30:43 -0500

As a contestant in Ms. Columbia, I have to say that I am rather disgusted with the pathetic job of investigative reporting (and proofreading) done here. Please, before you judge people, at least TRY to find out more facts. Had you even glanced at the now-infamous "Site B," which you ostensibly claim is simply a place to look at smutty pictures, you would find eight statements from intelligent women explaining that they were not, in fact, objectified, and that the community's respone was truly quite inappropriate.

Lulamae

Mon, 09 May 2005 12:03:09 -0500

It is beyond hypocrisy that the week before ms. columbia was shut down, Columbia was papered with fliers for "Take Back the Night" bearing slogans to the effect of "March because women should be allowed to wear whatever they want." (The ones I saw were written in Spanish so I can't remember exactly, but this was the message.) Who exactly gets to determine the "feminist" agenda nowadays? Moreover, when did feminism (and liberalism, ostensibly) become about a select few pre-determining choice of identity and expression for the rest? Who are these people and how did they get this job? I feel like if I proved myself to get into an Ivy league school, I have at least a couple brains to decide for myself whether or not I'm offended by something; I don't need high and mighty feminists censoring for me. Also, your article is very poorly written.

MrColumbia

Thu, 05 May 2005 18:56:57 -0500

Oh. By the way. We ARE doing Mr. Columbia next year.

MsColumbia

Thu, 05 May 2005 18:53:20 -0500

Look. If your only source is another article, at least quote the right article. The full Spectator article is here: http://www.columbiaspectator.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/05/02/4275e105bf2bd For the record, Site_B was not a 'perk'. It was a public site anyone can view. All girls on Site_B wanted to be there, and believes strongly in the project. You can READ their personal statements at http://www.mscusiteb.com The Ms. Columbia project had a 5 person selection panel (2 male, 3 female. 2 seas, 2 cc, 1 barnard). They determined the 15 finalists. The final decision was to be made through an CAMPUS WIDE election. We did not kill the project because of 15 negative remarks. We stopped the project because our models were being HARASSED by other people on campus. Ms. Columbia was open to all Columbia schools. We had 3 Barnard women, 3 SEAS. The purpose of the Ms. Columbia project is not to "judge pretty girls". You should read AT LEAST the MISSION STATEMENT. Do your homework next time. See www.mscusiteb.com to read statements from the creators and models involved.

cutty mcratsluts

Thu, 05 May 2005 18:45:44 -0500

You have to wonder if they'd have gotten as much flak for this if they'd put up a matching Mr. Columbia contest. Here's a followup article with corrections: http://www.columbiaspectator.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/05/02/4275e105bf2bd

anonymous

Thu, 05 May 2005 12:36:44 -0500

The best part is the unintended name for the second site; mscusiteb.com, which can be read as: Ms. "Cusite" B.com "Cusite", if anyone here knows arabic or hebrew, is slang for "slut", and literally means vagina.

tien

Thu, 05 May 2005 11:01:49 -0500

fools! they should have made up a name for the school! like hudson university or something.

JP

Thu, 05 May 2005 10:42:34 -0500

What, no Ms. Barnard? ;)

Ryan

Thu, 05 May 2005 10:42:11 -0500

They just need to balance it out with a Mr. Columbia. I'll volunteer. C'mon ladies, don't be shy. … ladies? hello? Sigh…

hijiki

Thu, 05 May 2005 10:25:31 -0500

aw, those poor, objectified ms. pretties.