Category Archives: Letter to the editor

A Letter to the Editor

Yellow Fever For All

Letter to the editor

To the Editor

Re: The Non-Viral Yellow Fever

Most of my experiences of being approached in a flirtatious manner, as an East Asian woman, have been from East Asian men.  The setting is commonly a college party in the Boston area.  These men seem to single me out as the only Asian woman in the room and thus make one of several assumptions:  They often assume that I would be the most likely to have something in common with them, such as the struggle of being a racial minority or a shared cultural history.  They think that because I appear Asian I have traits that they find desirable in a partner.  I have to say, as someone who grew up in a white household in white suburbia, this automatic attention is off-putting, largely because it is so presumptuous.  By distilling my experience and identity down to just my race, which they read in one look, these Asian men are just as insulting as white men who have yellow fever.  The way I understand yellow fever, and have experienced it, is when someone dates or flirts with exclusively East Asian women despite exposure to women of a variety of races and ethnicities.  The complexity of making assumptions about the people within your own race can be just as problematic and detrimental.  The stereotypical views about Asian women are just as pervasive in Western culture as they are outside of it.  Even if we are limiting the scope of yellow fever to Western culture, I have a hard time believing that only white men are complicit in perpetuating the stereotypes portrayed by the media and institutionalized throughout history.

Sincerely,

Virginia White

In Response to “Syria Explained”

Letter to the editor

In the wake of chemical attacks by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and the resulting missile attacks by the United States, articles and videos attempting to explain the complex Syrian Civil War have surfaced on social media.  Most of these sources identify the beginning of the crisis in Syria as the popular protests in Deraa. They then work their way through the emergence of ISIS, the overt military intervention of Russia, and conclude with the most recent chemical attacks.  In the process, many reduce the war to a religious conflict or to its three main players (ISIS, Assad, and the rebels).  Though these articles can be helpful in gleaning a basic understanding of the war and its origins, the vast majority fail to include a significant factor in the initial uprisings: climate change. The year 2006 marked the beginning of a severe drought in Syria (a result of climate change) which led to increased levels of poverty and internal displacement.  As people from the country moved into increasingly crowded cities, water shortages became common.  More than two million Syrians plunged into extreme poverty as a result of the drought and many were quick to criticize a regime which did little to alleviate the situation.  When the Arab Spring swept over the region in 2011, the country was already primed for protest.  In addition to the political, social, and religious aspects of the conflict, we must also acknowledge the environmental problems which are embedded in the ongoing humanitarian crisis and its cause. While establishing political stability is crucial to the short-term easing of violence, long-term solutions must address the problems stemming from a lack of natural resources such as water and arable land.

In Response to: “Will London Fall?”

Letter to the editor

To the Editor:

Sarah Lyall paints a mesmerizing portrait of London in her recent article: a vibrant city, filled with people unconstrained by ethnicity or socioeconomic background. While the portrait is beautiful, I take issue with the frame. Lyall refers to London as, “the metropolis that globalization created” in the article’s description, but London has been a multicultural metropolis for much longer than the recent phenomenon we refer to today as globalization. If Lyall is, in fact, referring to processes that were in motion long before the rise of the internet and free trade agreements, then she should call them what they are: colonialism and imperialism. I agree with Lyall’s claim that London may fall as a result of Brexit and the anti-globalization sentiments that motivated it, but she frames London’s fall with watered-down language and simplifies the issues. She writes that Brexit will be harmful to London as the city changes and immigrants who form integral parts of the community leave or are forced to abandon their cultural heritage. The full implication of these changes, which she never addresses, is that London’s history and the composition of its current population are reflective of the UK’s economy: built and dependent on foreign cultures and markets, and vulnerable when faced with isolationist policies. London is a great city, yes. As Lyall says, when you walk through the financial district, you can “listen to the plumbing system of international capitalism.” But that hum of international capitalism comes at a steep cost, and Lyall does herself and her reader a disservice by pretending otherwise.

Sincerely,

Molly Hoyer

Wellesley, MA

April 22, 2017

In Response to Articles on the Pepsi Commercial

Letter to the editor

“If only Daddy would have known about the power of Pepsi.”

This was a tweet by Bernice King, the daughter of the late Martin Luther King Jr., in response to a commercial promoting Pepsi as a solution to anti-black police brutality. The commercial showed a generic protest that ended with Kendall Jenner handing a Pepsi to a police officer. Within hours, there were calls for a boycott of Pepsi products. As a result, the commercial was taken down and the company issued a formal apology. While Pepsi is the most notable example of faulty corporate activism as of late, they’re not the only company to use social justice to sell more than equality.

A month earlier, Nike revealed that they were releasing a line of athletic hijabs, their first foray into modest sportswear for Muslim women. This action was widely applauded by numerous media outlets and viewed as an act in defiance of Islamophobia worldwide. Many saw this move as a glowing example of corporate activism.

Though the business decisions of Pepsi and Nike seem unrelated, they’re both examples of corporate activism gone awry. Pepsi tried to piggyback on the popularity of social activism among young adults, while Nike waited to make this decision until the potential benefits outweighed the costs. Now that catering to the needs of Muslim consumers is more socially acceptable, Nike can increase profits while marketing itself as “woke.” This is crucial at a time when consumers expect companies to do more than just provide a product – they also expect companies to be socially conscious. It’s important to situate marketing disasters such as the infamous Pepsi commercial within the larger context of corporations coopting social movements for profit.

A Response To: “Is Russia Testing Trump?”

Letter to the editor

Dear Editor,

I find Morell and Farkas’ judgement that Russia is testing Trump to be too lenient. I agree Putin has tested the boundaries of what the Trump administration will accept in the last few months. Russia is indeed taking advantage of what the authors call his “infatuation” with the Russian leader. It has been clear for a long time that President Putin’s end goal is to have uncontested political control of his surrounding countries as well as to become a main player on the global political stage as one of the great powers.

The article, however, barely mentions the continuously unraveling scandal of Russian hackers and their involvement in the 2016 Presidential Election. This may have less to do with Russia’s support of the Syrian dictator, or their push for control in eastern Ukraine, and more to do with the relationship between the two leaders – the power dynamic that was created when President Putin favored the election of Donald Trump.

Which brings me to my point: Russia is not simply testing Trump and his administration by pushing the limits of what is acceptable, they are taking advantage of a puppet.

The article discusses the lack of action on the part of the US government in the face of Russian expansionism. The authors mention strong wording from multiple members of the Trump administration condemning Russia’s actions that never spark any real movement to stop it.

Trump owes Putin. He owes him his post as commander in chief. Putin has come to collect on that debt.

Julia Tazartes

Wellesley, MA

April 11th, 2017

In Response to: “We Might Soon Resurrect Extinct Species. Is It Worth The Cost?”

Letter to the editor

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/20/science/revive-restore-extinct-species-dna-mammoth-passenger-pigeon.html?_r=1&mtrref=undefined&gwh=17EB1E6F90C17FB4504AC325AEE9118E&gwt=pay

To the Editor:

I agree that we shouldn’t resurrect extinct species as money is better spent on the conservation of existing species. I also believe that extinctions are not always our responsibility or the “past wrongs” of human history since they can occur naturally.

Species’ extinction can be an expected and possible consequence of the survival of the fittest. We may feel responsible for the disappearance of the dodo bird or the woolly mammoth because we have become the most dominant species on Earth. But in truth, species extinction has been occurring for thousands of years, long before humans took over the world. One of the main causes is climate change, the gradual warming and cooling of the Earth, which has already naturally occurred at least four times in history. Many species die out as they cannot adapt fast enough or at all to survive their changing environments.

However, we are responsible for the acceleration of climate change and hence, a more rapid rate of species’ extinction. Our money is better spent alleviating the effects of climate change on existing species, rather than funding de-extinction, especially since the Trump administration has cut back on environmental funds. We should continue to invest in he development of novel ecosystems, where features of the old, pre-human habitats are combined with the new and current human-altered habitats. This allows us to work with the effects of climate change while protecting the greatest number of species possible.

Just as we cannot stop climate change, we cannot stop extinctions. We have to let go of the past and understand that species’ extinctions are not always the responsibility of humans. This way, we can progress and focus on the conservation of existing species and our futures.

Amy Tso
Wellesley, MA
April 18, 2017