|
Volume CXXXII, Number 5 |
 |
When the rainbow is enough: Act II
To the Editors:
After perusing around campus and through Smith Union this past week during daily routines, my eyes required several minutes of adjustment. At every corner, I encountered rainbow streamers and signs exclaiming "Gay Friendly Space" in honor of this week's national theme: coming out of the closet and embracing one's gay identity. Why such a feat is funneled into one heightened week of primary colors, I am still trying to decipher.
As an openly gay individual, these screaming proclamations of my sexual identity caused waves of slight agitation. I have been constantly thinking to myself over the past week, "Isn't Bowdoin already supposed to be a place of acceptance and friendliness towards gays? If we are trying to change something, then what is currently wrong?" In my opinion, such extreme visible actions do not succeed in unifying this campus, but rather divide the student body. Vulgar chalk images merely propagate stereotypes about gays being overly sexual and perverse. For those among us in the Bowdoin community who do not accept or embrace homosexuality, these visuals only serve to reinforce dangerous binarisms and increasingly portray gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered individuals as "foreign," "other-worldly," or "sick," and as people that requires forced acceptance. My rewarding experiences and friendships with many diverse people at Bowdoin, though challenging at times, have been anything but forced.
I am, and will continue to be, an avid supporter of gay rights and gay equality. After all, many aspects of my life are dependent on such social phenomena. Sexual preference, though highly cultural, is also a personal identity. It need not be the first thing that you introduce about yourself, especially in an intellectual or professional environment. My ideals have always encouraged me to get to know people first and foremost and then to celebrate their individuality. I believe that most people at this school conduct their relationships in a similar fashion. Although I commend such groups as the Gay-Straight Alliance and other cultural organizations for their accomplishments and support, we are all far more than images of the rainbow or resentful sex-driven statements and need not restrict ourselves to the community as such. In fact, to do so in such a contrived manner is counterproductive and entirely unnecessary at Bowdoin College. Of course sexuality is an issue to be discussed, but do we really need to revert back to the employment of simple childlike images in order to establish a unifying discourse? I certainly hope not.
Sincerely,
Ryan A. Malloy '04
Finding the unexpected right here
To the Editors:
Upon reading "Experiencing the Unexpected," a feature in a recent issue of the Orient, I found myself wondering why Todd Johnston, along with many other curious Bowdoin students, seek these unique experiences in such geographically remote places. While I agree that traveling to other countries provides an important opportunity to gain a better understanding of other cultures and ourselves, what is wrong with looking for these unexpected experiences in our own backyard? Why can't we, as members of the Brunswick community take a vacation, or in this case a brief walk, into the neighborhood and simply initiate a dialogue with people? Let me assure you that in many cases you will discover the unexpected in a way that hits home in a more direct manner than learning that many people don't speak English in China.
It has always struck me as an odd irony that Bowdoin students are very interested in understanding and actively participating in issues pertaining to the world's problems, yet the complexities and tensions of our local community go unnoticed. I will admit that I myself fall victim to this irony. I don't have any clear solutions, but I merely wish to address this phenomenon and challenge myself and the Bowdoin community to learn about the lives of our neighbors, which in many cases prove to be very different from our own.
On a campus that seems to pride itself on seeking out diversity and understanding other cultures, I find it interesting to note how this effort affects our conception of community involvement and service. I would argue that many of the more visible forms of community service on this campus involve actively helping out individuals of geographically distant cultures. While I admire and encourage the efforts of those involved in these activities, I can't help but be weary of some of the underlying thoughts behind these acts of compassion. I fear that some may view these cultures as exotic, or put another way, that which encompasses the "other". This manner of thinking serves to distance us from these cultures, creating a dangerous binarism in which we establish a relationship in which it is "us" helping "them". In terms of comfort zones, we find it easier to help these people who retain a certain degree of separation.
But what about the diverse group of people living in Brunswick who have the same color skin and shop in the same stores as we do? Why the hesitation to expose ourselves to the unexpected that manifests itself in our daily lives? How is it that our comfort zone can extend to a group of people thousands of miles away and not to the person that just walked past you on Maine Street? In terms of the formulation of binarisms, are the residents of Brunswick "us", "them", or do they occupy a gray area in between? I don't have answers to these questions, but by the sheer virtue of thinking about these issues, perhaps we can begin to realize the great and direct opportunity the community has to offer us, and reciprocally, acknowledge our obligation to contribute to our own neighborhood.
All things said, I would like to applaud the many Bowdoin students who have already taken this critical step and have actively contributed to realizing the benefits of local interaction and service. Also, I don't want to take anything away from those who have discovered the joys of embracing the unexpected at a more global scale, as this also addresses important issues. Action is always superior to inaction. I merely want to challenge myself (a relatively non-active proponent of community service) and others to think about the virtues of community involvement at the local and global levels.
Hopefully, these thoughts will help lead to more enriching active participation that will benefit both the Brunswick and world community.
Sincerely,
Jordan Parman '04
Barroom tactics in funded research?
To the Editors:
In January 2002, an Op Ed written by Bowdoin Professor David Page appeared in the Anchorage Daily News.
The piece criticized new research that showed that the 1989 Exxon Valdex (sic.) oil spill continues to plague the Prince William Sound ecosystem.
In a common industry strategy used when science won't suffice, Dr. Page attacked the credibility of the study's author, and questioned the veracity of his research. Dr. Page's serious allegations led to an inquiry. Now, however, an independent review of the study by the National Academy of Sciences, among others, has vindicated the research, describing it as "rigorous, well designed and executed."
While there should always be room for open and honest scientific debate, legitimate concerns arise as industry-funded scientists resort to barroom tactics to discredit research with which they disagree. A review of Professor Page's site provides a laundry list of oil companies that have funded his work, including Exxon, Amoco Transport, Mobil Foundation, Texaco, Chevron, Olympic Petroleum and the American Petroleum Institute.
Just like we don't want Enron making national energy policy, so too should we give careful consideration to oil industry-funded research when assessing oil spill effects.
Academic freedom and rigorous scientific debate are cornerstones of our American education system. For this very reason, students, faculty and administrators alike have a duty to ask hard questions about oil industry-funded research at Bowdoin College.
Sincerely,
Bob Shavelson
Homer, Alaska
Bob Shavelson is a public interest advocate who has worked on clean water and pollution issues for the past 15 years.
EDITOR'S NOTE: Professor David Page replies: (T)he letter from this person...contains numerous inaccuracies and is misleading. For example, the National Academy of Science (sic.) declined to review the work that I rightly criticized. Our work has also been supported over the years by many non-industry sources, including the State of Maine--hardly an industry group. I don't think the Orient does its readership a service by providing a platform for those engaging in eco-politics. It is unfortunate that you're publishing this.