Dear Editor:
Kevin Keane, the Senior VP of the American Beverage Association, misses the point the Think Outside the Bottle campaign is trying to make: We don't want corporate control of water.
The fact of the matter is that water is becoming increasingly scarce. (The United Nations estimates that by 2025 two-thirds of the world's population will lack potable water.)
Water isn't a high-priced commodity; it's a fundamental human right.
The bottled water industry has been hard at work over the past couple decades changing the public's perception of water. Aggressive marketing has undermined our confidence in tap water, causing us to think that the only place to get clean, safe water is from the store.
That's not true though; tap water is just as good as bottled water.
The message of the campaign against bottled water here on campus is simple: We shouldn't support corporate control of water by buying something we can get for free.
So the next time you're thirsty, save your money for something else and fill up a Nalgene.
In closing, I would just like to point out the fact that the Senior Vice President of a large company that represents a major national industry is writing to the Tufts Daily to assure us that we should keep buying their product. That says something, doesn't it?
Choose to drink tap water only and let corporations know that it is not OK to profit off of the fundamental and essential ingredient for life.
Sincerely,David WestwoodClass of 2010Intern, Think Outside the Bottle
Dear Editor:
I am completely appalled by the column "Just the Tip" published by the Tufts Daily Sept. 25. My objection to it is not about the content but the overt message that all women are expected to give head and "master [the] talents" of this overly sexual patriarchal society.
Performing oral sex on a person is a big deal in that it can result in contracting various sexually transmitted infections and HIV/AIDS. The fact that a Tufts publication would allow a columnist to openly sanction unprotected sex is absolutely astonishing to me.
There are 17-year-old women who go to this school that, I'm sure, feel enough pressure every single day to conform to a sex-kitten ideal that has infested this nation's society and, apparently, this campus as well.
I'm not promoting censorship or saying that sex columns don't have their place in college newspapers, but printing an article where performing fellatio is listed as an expected norm for young women with no mention of consent, condoms or cunnilingus is offensive and dangerous.
The assertion that there is an expectation of oral sex for kissing someone is a defense commonly used by perpetrators of sexual assault, and I absolutely refuse to believe that this paper would want to sanction the internalization of this misogynistic view of sex.
Unless Ms. Levi's next column will provide step-by-step instructions on how to perform oral sex on a female and includes the same message from her last column - that this is what men should expect to do and practice to make their women happy - I suggest she consider writing one about the importance of realizing the tremendous weight that comes with deciding to do any sex act with any person, be they random "booty call" or dedicated partner.
What kind of message are we sending to the record number of adolescents that lose their virginity younger and younger on average or to pre-teenage girls? To perform oral sex as casually as they would hold hands, contracting syphilis and chlamydia at record numbers?
Yes, sex is fun and enjoyable, and oral sex can be a part of that - if you want it to be - and if your goal is to make your "Big Guy" happy, that's fine.
But let's make sure that women know they have a choice to refrain if desired and that giving head is not a prerequisite of coming to college.
Bosede OpetuboClass of 2009
Dear Editor:
I'm really disappointed in the Daily right now. Of course, there's probably already a buzz on campus about Lara Levi's recent "Just The Tip" column describing fellatio.
Of course, I wouldn't know. I'm a 2007 graduate currently working/studying in Beijing, far away from the political and social grumblings from the hill. But what I do know is that, today, I got back from a long bike ride to an e-mail inbox littered with "Disgusting Article: Please Read" messages.
I have to say, nothing really disgusts me. I was in the Bubs, we traveled a lot, and I've seen a lot of really crazy stuff all over the country.
However accepting and liberal minded I am, one thing that really gets on my nerves is the abuse of power. And my nerves have been touched in a very sensitive place, because today's letter is due to such abuse employed by the staff of this very news publication.
I applaud The Primary Source for having the decency to be a blatantly, on the cover, "conservative publication." They let you know it before you even pick it up. I mean, I understand that there is an 85 to 95 percent chance that the Daily's editorial staff will be liberal-minded, thus mirroring our school.
But can we keep such columns in campus "liberal publications" far out of reach of our visiting parents, little brothers and sisters and grandparents? Can we respect each other, but not allow the Daily to become so unapologetically and undeniably liberal?
I agree that Tufts is an institution where free thought and speech should be implemented. Last year I even backed the Primary Source's stand in the controversial Christmas issue.
However, this article went over the line in a whole new way. The Daily is not akin to The Primary Source. The Daily is a major, DAILY news source for so many students, including the libertarians, the liberals and the conservatives.
Editors and staff, please don't become Rupert Murdochs or Larry Flynts: Send such columns over to Radix where they belong and where I hope many girls would then read that article, because it has some valuable information.
Pretty please with sugar on top.
Andrew Savini (LA '07)Tsinghua University, Beijing
