Contact Information
The Spectator
Letters to the Editor
To the Editor:
In last week's Spectator, I found the Spectator Between the Sheets' response to a question highly offensive, dead-wrong, and anti-feminist. A non-virgin student felt pressure from his/her current boyfriend to have sex, feeling that he/she was "not really ready yet," and asked "Should I just give it up and stop being a prude?" The columnist answered that while both students had reasonable wishes, probably the best solution was finding a comfortable stopping point before "humping." I have three main areas of concern with the columnist's response.
First, she dismissed the idea that "if he doesn't respect you and your wishes then he doesn't deserve you" as impractical in the real world. What!?!?!?! If a person doesn't want to have sex, then they shouldn't have sex! End of story. When someone doesn't respect your wishes on such a personal issue, then that person is clearly not a true friend or romantic partner. With all the pressure people receive from popular culture, they can't afford to surround themselves with friends and boyfriends/girlfriends who can't accept them for who they are. It's hard to end these relationships, but eventually people are better off.
The columnist also said that "there's nothing wrong with withholding sex," a phrase that denigrates abstinence as a valid lifestyle choice. "Withholding" implies that sex in a relationship is the correct or appropriate state of affairs, and when you refrain from sex you are unnatural. While clearly sex is acceptable between consenting adults, it is not a requirement for a relationship. Isn't feminism about empowering women? Many of the Between the Sheets' articles lead readers to the conclusion that a modern woman should behave like a stereotypical caricature of a sex-crazed man. A true feminist supports any person, female or not, in their choices.
Finally, it was disturbing when the columnist claimed that blowjobs and handjobs are examples of "sex-free" or "sex-lite" activities. While a handjob is questionable to some, I think everyone would agree that placing your mouth over a penis or vagina constitutes a true sex act. Hence the name oral SEX. The idea that oral sex is not sex is disturbing when found among under-educated adolescents (or a U.S. President), but when a Hamilton senior makes these claims I start to worry about the quality education we're receiving. Aren't we supposed to be learning how to think intelligently?
Concerned, non-Womyn's Center, student:
Patrick Landers '12
To the Editor:
I'm not totally sure about the rest of the Hamilton community, professors and students alike, but I am extremely weary of hearing discussion go on and on regarding the racist nature of our campus and the pretentious discourse that accompanies it. To begin, I suppose I should clarify. Yes, racial issues are present here, but they are mostly limited to an accidental word or phrase, and maybe even just different concepts of what is acceptable and what is not. There is nothing extreme, nothing concerning, and definitely nothing dangerous about race relations on campus. If anything, the most counterproductive action we can take here at Hamilton is already being done by the "community building meeting" and other events like it, where a relatively nonexistent issue is boiled and stewed over so furiously that it is the very cause of tension and discord. The root of this issue is at the hands of those trying to "solve" it, alarmists who create racial tension where it is not even present.
The very fact that this is such a big issue on campus right now is embarrassing, and even a little offensive. Why doesn't everyone take a step back and actually see what is going on? There is a campus full of highly educated students who have nothing else to do in a small town in upstate New York, and the solution to their ennui seems to be taking up the banner of anti-racism. It is just a continuation of the White Man's Burden; on our overwhelmingly white campus many seem to believe it is our responsibility to take care of and speak for minorities because they are otherwise unable to do so. How many people really care? How many people just enjoy the culture, and feeling like they're actually accomplishing something.
Which brings me to my next point; most people don't actually care. A lot of the discourse is just self gratifying masturbatory talk, so elitist students can feel more enlightened and educated than other people, that they understand race relations and are leading the community, and the common folk are below them because of it. Why not buy indulgences, it works just as well. So why not actually solve the problem? All this discourse is an enormous excuse. People who are involved with this "community building" just took the easy way out, the definition of inaction. We've sat around for weeks talking, doing nothing. As a result, the students involved feel as though they've done their job and fought racism without actually accomplishing anything. As far as I'm concerned, a bunch of students idly discussing how superior their conceptualizations of abstract ideas about race are, while actually doing nothing to address the issue is nothing but pretentious. Why don't we actually take some responsibility? Be respectful, and demand respect from others. Problem solved.
- Steven Saurbier 2012
In response to the article "Does Facebook Affect Your GPA?" by Yinghan Ding '12, I'd like to say one thing. Correlations do not imply causation.
Thank you,
Rebecca Ashby '09