When I read the thread last night, I was wondering whether the post in question included the entire bio, including the woman's athletic, academic and possibly other accomplishments. I infer from your posts today that the original post was just the photo, which would seem to exclude the possibility that a (presumably -- I don't know who we're talking about) physically attractive woman would have been welcome as a student for multiple reasons from the perspective of the original poster.
I've never met the original poster, but I share the view of many here that he seems thoughtful and considerate. But as I said, I'm not here to defend a post that I never read.
I do have a couple of observations.
One, this board is a much better place than it was 10 years ago and as others have already noted, that is in large part due to the persistence and the voices of female contributors. At the risk of excluding people, you and Angel definitely get a lot of credit for that. No doubt it would have been easy many times to walk away, but we all should be grateful that you didn't.
Two, I'm somewhat fascinated by how we deal with physical appearance/beauty in our society. My 30-year-old daughter, who is physically attractive in my biased view, seems determined to try raise her daughter (now 4-1/2) in a way to make her almost oblivious to beauty -- her own, or anyone else's.
On one hand, I understand her rationale and find it admirable. She doesn't want her daughter (or her younger sons) to base her value (or value others) based upon physical appearance or how others perceive physical appearance. She and I are 100% in agreement about that (not that her parenting is subject to my approval).
On the other hand, such an approach seems to ignore reality, to a certain extent. I'm not smart enough to understand the biology or other factors behind it, but humans seem hard-wired to appreciate things they (subjectively) view as pleasing to the eye -- whether it's nature, art or the human form.
It's easy -- and right -- to say that we shouldn't value people based upon their physical appearance. But if we're really honest, what does that mean? How many of us didn't find our partners/spouses physically attractive in some way, or disregarded entirely physical appearance in our dating decisions?
I promise, I'm not trying to be glib here. But beyond the obvious objectifying statements and behavior, are we to try to pretend that we don't make subjective determinations about physical beauty? Hell, I'm as straight as they come, but there are times I wished I looked like Mike Coffey!
Moving in a slightly different direction, I can appreciate the sentiment that Notre Dame would have been a better place with women enrolled as undergrads. I enrolled in 1977, and to a 17-year-old, 1972 may as well have been 50 years ago. At the same time, the passage of time has made it even more clear to me that Notre Dame was very much in transition five years after women were first admitted as undergraduates.
I'm sure my numbers aren't precise, but female classmates recently confirmed that our class ('81) was approximately 20% women. That had all kinds of implications, many of them less than ideal for both men and women. I will note that one of the ramifications was that the women in general had a much more impressive academic profile than the men did -- they were chasing roughly 1,000 fewer spots to gain admission!
But the idea that women made Notre Dame a better place -- not just in terms of macro ideals of equality, opportunity, etc., but also in terms of day-to-day life -- also logically means that it was a lesser place prior to their arrival as undergrads.
To me, it follows pretty easily that an ND alum who graduated before that time might understandably wish that his undergraduate experience included female students and all they brought/bring to the table -- intelligence, perspective and yes, a welcome change of pace from a classroom or dining hall full of unshaven, smelly men.
Again, I don't mean to defend the original post. And I once again thank you for your perseverance and contributions to this board -- certainly not limited to enlightening us cave men.
But I also hope we can celebrate exactly that -- the change for the better we have experienced -- while still wanting and demanding even more change.