I’d like to respond to yesterday’s column by Jazon Abbruzzese (“Debunking the condom controversy,” April 19, p .3). First of all, I never filed a complaint, nor do I ever intend to pursue one of any nature. I never claimed that I personally was sexually harassed. I only have expressed my concern that this unsolicited distribution may violate standards of decency and Boston University’s official policy. I never actively contacted The Daily Free Press. My concerns originally became public when Free Press reporter Christina Crapanzano discovered I sent an instant message during the WTBU radio show “Chicken in a Cup,” in which Brooke Feldman responded that she was unaware that campaign staffers were distributing condoms without consent. I did not pursue any press coverage but rather was contacted by Crapanzano for an interview. Finally, some people wrongly believe I oppose contraception, even though I have never said I was anti-condoms or anti-contraceptives.
With these issues briefly addressed, I want to explain my feelings clearly. I was, still am, and never will be against the free distribution of welcomed condoms. My concern is about consent: It is wrong to force condoms onto others and their property without consent. Campaign staffers should ask people whether or not they want a condom. If the room is vacant, then they should leave or return later. For those who don’t think a door is private property, consider that your door and room is your personal property you obtain and rent when paying thousands of dollars for room rates.
Some people simply don’t understand my concern. I want you to understand how an unwelcome condom creates problems for many with religious or moral beliefs about remaining abstinent until marriage. With so much pressure to have sex in college already, the unsolicited condom adds even more. I’m not saying that one condom will make abstinent students sexually active. But think of the reaction this particular individual receives because his or her peers see on the door this condom saying “Make the safe choice.” Although I do agree with Abbruzzese’s basic assessment that no one realistically should feel sexually harassed by a condom’s existence in itself, he didn’t understand the repercussions of this unsolicited and unwelcome condom. Imagine — no, visualize as it has happened already to some — an abstinent student hearing the barrage of one or more of the following from peers: “So how was your first time?” “Who did you do it with?” “I saw that condom telling you to ‘make the safe choice,’ so how come you don’t use protection?” Although the condom itself may not offend the recipient, it’s the source of these harassing comments. I know that not everyone agrees with me, but many people do agree and therefore I feel expressing my concern is not only justified, but demanded.
I want to conclude by examining some of Abbruzzese’s statements. I agree that “being offended and being sexually harassed are extremely different.” But once again, I never said I was sexually harassed, which many people wrongly have believed and assumed; instead, all I did was express my concern that this unsolicited distribution may offend others, so Feldman and DiCristofaro should reconsider their campaign. Concluding his column, Abbruzzese says it’s “preposterous that we’re even talking about this.” Although I believe there are other important matters, we should not ignore this issue. Feldman and DiCristofaro could be president and vice-president. They are supposed to represent my voice, as well as others’, to not only the administration but the entire student body. I only have expressed a concern that many more people share. Is it wrong to expect leaders to represent me and my peers accurately? I think not.
Joel Kosh CAS ’09