What is perhaps most absurd about Patrick Gibbons' letter ("Feminist Tactics Use Fear to Move Agenda," Jan. 20) is how he feels entitled to speak for everyone other than himself.

He tells us what feminists think and feel, and what women think and feel. He represents an all-too-common mindset that doesn't want "all men" lumped into the category of those who commit sexual assault, yet easily generalizes women, feminists, and "those liberals" into one static group.

First, it might be helpful for Mr. Gibbons to learn that women are not all the same. Neither are feminists. I'm sorry he missed that nugget of information in his undergraduate studies. It also might be helpful if he stopped naming women's experiences and feelings for them.

Why not listen to women speak for themselves? Second, to Gibbons and anyone else who gets defensive when women and men speak out about the importance of men stopping sexual assault and rape: What exactly are you afraid of?

Instead of denying that men's violence against women exists, why not examine your own views. Why do so many people avoid admitting the existence of male violence? That is not to say that women are never violent or that men are never victimized. Why would we not want to stop men's violence against women? Are violent men attractive? Does resorting to violence define what it means to be a man? What also contributes to resisting proactive solutions to men's violence against women is uneven, misleading coverage by the Collegian.

Tuesday's article ("Decrease Seen in Sexual Assaults," Jan. 18) is no exception, with its misleading headline and convoluted discussion of the severity of this problem. It is not surprising that Gibbons doesn't believe that 'that many' women are assaulted. Survivors of sexual violence typically are not going to turn to a scared, defensive, ignorant man to tell their story or look for support.