I’m writing this article in reaction to the SigSuit article published in last week’s The Charger Bulletin. Or, more specifically, the comments published online about the article.

It is cult-like reactions such as these, which include verbally attacking and insulting anybody who expresses an opinion that differentiates from yours, that causes people to publish articles under the protection of anonymity. Cowardice, as many of you suggested, has nothing to do with it; or rather, not the way in which you imply. If you can have such over-the-top, inherently rude reactions to an opinion that isn’t supposed to be bolstered by factual information, because it is an opinion article (you can look it up in the dictionary if that word is foreign to you), and doesn’t even mention the character of Greeks or Greek life, can you really expect the person to use their name?

Why would anybody associate their name with an opinion that would elicit such a strong, negative reaction? Should they choose to do so, they can most certainly expect to be harassed in person in the same way that you “gentlemen” and women do behind your own keyboards in the safety of your own rooms. (By the way, maybe you all should pay attention to the ways in which you conduct yourselves online just as much as you do in public, because, in my opinion–although that in and of itself may cause it to be completely invalid—that matters just as much as trying to hide any alcohol in pictures posted on social media. But I digress.)

Whether it’s “frat” or “fraternity,” it’s not the way in which the organization is referred to that gives it the bad rap—it’s the way you behave when somebody expresses a negative opinion about an event affiliated with your organization. When you’re out in the real world, you may very well come across a situation in which somebody says something bad about something pertaining to your company. And, if and when this happens, you are not going to get anywhere by badmouthing the expresser—it looks immature and unprofessional.

I do not know whether the writer of the SigSuit article was trying to use the event as an example to point out a common problem, as some commenters hypothesized, or whether he or she was commenting specifically on their reasoning for not attending and supporting SigSuit (which was the premise of her article, if you read it with an open mind and weren’t so quick to attack because the writer had an opinion different than yours).

However, I do know that this person had every right to express their opinion, whether you agree with it or not. Attacking people for expressing their opinions, or the newspaper in which those opinions are published, does nothing but wholly disprove your constant arguments that you’re kind, respectful, approachable people.

But if you don’t like that person’s opinion, then go ahead and put your name on an article and have it published instead of anonymously bashing one, unnamed person for his or her opinion.