Please give us answers, not just complaints
Dear Editor:
I found myself disappointed after reading Adrienna Huffman’s special in the Feb. 13 Forum (“Conspicuous consumption on campus”). Her piece began with an interesting point, mentioning her apparent disgust with the social pressures and competitive consumerism she finds at Washington University; this perked my interest. But what could have been a powerfully thought-provoking piece on some of these social issues suddenly lost its direction after an interesting introduction. I don’t understand how the body weight of various girls on campus has anything to do with student consumerism or any way to cure or change it. I am not writing to critique her writing or argumentation skills; I had been hoping while reading her piece, however, that she would offer some kind of alternative social behavior or make a suggestion about how to change the way she and everyone else goes about their social business. While I have never personally observed any of this material-based competition of which she speaks, I would have like to have been presented with some kind of ‘answer’ or resolution. Perhaps we as a student body don’t have as much money as we feign to have; what we do possess is still far more than most have, especially some who live right next to us. Have you seen the men and women on the streets of St. Louis? Disagreeing with the way social groups are spending their money and using their possessions as elitist leverage over others is fine; I share those sentiments. It’s great that Ms. Huffman refuses to be disrespected for what she does or does not own and that she knows not to spend money on unaffordable things, but at any rate, it should be noted that we can do something better-something productive or useful-with our time and money. Time spent railing against brand names and grievous on-campus social injustices could probably be better spent using that money for good causes. Ms. Huffman could have given the following impetus for change for the better with her piece in Forum: instead of spending our money on things we can’t afford and for the purposes of our own comfort and social status, why not use that money for the betterment of others?
Henry B. Tsay
Class of 2007
Vaseline not for condoms
Dear Editor:
I enjoy the privilege of writing a weekly health column for Student Life, but I worry that the graphic that Student Life artists attached to last week’s column could be damaging. Last Friday’s column dealt with lubricant information and options. A male latex condom (or any latex product) should not be used with anything other than a water-based (such as KY) or silicone-based lubricant. Oil-based products, such as Vaseline, break down latex and can cause a condom to develop small holes, tears, or rip altogether. The picture of Vaseline that accompanied my column was a potentially harmful choice, since Vaseline is oil-based and is never recommended for use with latex condoms or dental dams.
Jill Ringold
Office of Health Promotion and Wellness
‘Electability’ is foolish
Dear Editor:
Shawn Redden makes some great points in his editorial “How to beat Bush: talk about issues” (Feb. 6, 2004). He is certainly correct that the Democratic candidates cannot expect success by making the evils of Bush their rallying point. The concept of “electability” is foolish, and I don’t honestly believe that all of a sudden millions of Americans discovered Kerry. Don’t just jump on Kerry’s wagon because it looks like he might win. While it is mildly heartwarming to see so many interested people come together to try to push the Bush administration out, we can’t forget that every presidency has its ups and downs. They all have good points and bad. Kerry helped Bush slap the U.N. in the face with the Iraq war. Dean locked up tons of documents. How long has Clark been a Democrat? Does this stuff matter? Decide for yourself. But the main reason I am writing is to follow up a few of Redden’s statements and to plug a very interesting candidate who shouldn’t slip between the cracks. Redden writes, “Each [Democrat] decries Bush’s policy in Iraq,…none has a plan to get out.” Dennis Kucinich clearly lays out a 10-point plan to get the U.S. out of Iraq. Redden writes, “[The Democrats] decry the health care crisis, yet none advocate the only sensible solution…single payer.” The last sentence of the first paragraph of Kucinich’s proposal is: “My plan would remove that waste by making the government the single payer for health care.” This is also Number One of his 10 Key Issues. “[The Democrats] decry unemployment, yet not one has a plan to cancel NAFTA,” writes Redden. Again, misleading, since Kucinich’s platform calls for a withdrawal from NAFTA and the WTO. This is Key Issue Number Three. “[The Democrats] decry Ashcroft’s PATRIOT ACT…but none have a plan to repeal it.” The repeal of the PATRIOT ACT is actually point Number Four of Kucinich’s 10 Key Issues. Maybe you’d be interested in Kucinich. Maybe you wouldn’t be. With so much online information, it doesn’t take a huge commitment to look around and find a candidate in which you are interested. Find one and vote (especially if you find someone who has a bill to make Ashcroft just be nice).
Aaron Hock
Class of 2001