Greg West reminded me that some people on this campus still believe that Hooters has not become part of the local culinary landscape because concerned citizens and members of groups like Womyn's Concerns, who "risk(ed) losing state funding because of an event like Sex Faire," were upset and launched some civil action to protest Hooters' potential presence in town.

Has anyone considered that it is also entirely likely that the business venture lost its funding regardless of the actions of an organized group of young women and concerned residents?

I'm sure that a group of middle-aged wealthy men are fully prepared to take the flack for a little while in order to make capital from Hooters. Many business and industry owners are full willing to operate at the expense of human beings every day. Why wouldn't investors here disregard the reactions of a minority viewpoint?

Scapegoats are convenient. Before we point fingers, we should consider the potential contained in the broader scope of things.

Too often I hear many of us, conservative and liberal alike, claiming that this or that group bullied the other and that's why this is that didn't happen. We ought not to oversimplify just because we're angry that we didn't get what we wanted.