Letters to the Editor

Nudity at 'Mile' should not be treated as a crime

To the Daily:

The Naked Mile is one of those Ann Arbor traditions that's not likely to go away any time soon. In fact, it only grows in popularity each and every year. It's one of those great college experiences that students love to tell their parents, but most likely will never, ever, tell their kids.

I understand the University's concern for students' safety, and I also understand why University President Lee Bollinger is writing a letter to seniors discouraging their participation. The Naked Mile has lost popularity with local University and government officials, due primarily to its sheer size and safety concerns. Ineffective as his letter might be, at the very least, Bollinger needs to save face. At best, he's concerned for the safety of the students. I respect that.

What I fail to see is the reasoning behind threats to convict students participating in the Naked Mile on sex crimes. The article on the front page of Tuesday's Daily ("Bollinger to send letters against Mile," 4/13/99) states that "if convicted of state indecent exposure laws, students could face up to a year of jail time, in addition to having to register as a lifetime sex offender." I will argue with anyone who tries to tell me that college students seen naked at the Naked Mile (god forbid) should be thrown in jail and brandished as lifetime sex offenders along with the rapists and pedophiles of the state of Michigan. I don't see the point.

I'm not usually one to protest, but this Tuesday, April 20, if I see one naked student walking away from the Mile in handcuffs, I just may have to stage my own great big rally in the Diag. Nude, if need be.

Heck, I might just sit in Bollinger's office for days. Nude, if need be.

Well, maybe not.

Mike MacFerrin

Engineering junior

'U' administration should not discourage running in Naked Mile

To the Daily:

I am disappointed by the University administration's radical change in policy regarding the Naked Mile in comparison to last year. I find it almost hypocritical that, in one year, policy can change from an active effort to keep the runners safe with police and T-shirts to a feeble and ineffective policy of sending out letters from University President Lee Bollinger condemning the mile.

To those who say that the runners are in danger of assault, I say: of course they are; they're running naked in public. But a well-prepared runner can minimize that danger by being prepared. Active protection measures such as squirt guns or even pepper spray are a prudent idea, as well as having a friend meet you at a preset spot with your clothes or a ride home.

I realize that some Naked Mile runners are intoxicated, and that they might not be rational enough to think of these options when the last day of class finally comes. But like the underage drinking that occurs on campus, the naked mile will continue to be run despite threats of legal action or the disapproval of the administration. The University's only hope to keep its students safe is not to discourage the Naked Mile, but to embrace it, possibly setting guidelines that regulate the number of spectators or the path of the run. This is what the University attempted last year, and I think that just because the plan didn't work perfectly the first time, this is no reason to abandon it so prematurely.

Carolyn Jones

Education sophomore

04-15-99