No Men's Resource Center

Letter to the editor: Response to Honegger '15

To the Editors:Jean-Paul Honegger’s column on the proposed Amtrak layover facility in Brunswick repeats the misinformation of the train authority building the project (NNEPRA).
1. Trains would not be “switched off” once in the facility, because large diesel engines take too long to warm up from cold starts. NNEPRA has thus far failed to provide required operating plans documenting exactly how the engines would be run.
2. The facility is not “essential to preserving Amtrak service to Brunswick.” NNEPRA offers no evidence to support this statement. The facility is something NNEPRA wants, not something it needs.
3. The claim that “ridership numbers aren’t low” is unsubstantiated. Most reporters never question NNEPRA’s own figures, which regulators have claimed are unreliable and inconsistent. Industry think tanks actually report reduced ridership from last year to this.
4. The facility will not benefit Brunswick’s economy. It will generate no new runs to Brunswick, for that requires new tracks, which NNEPRA has not proposed. The building will offer no new employment opportunities. It will not bring more consumers to town, and it will not bring in new tax dollars, since it operates at taxpayer expense.
Senator Angus King, Governor Paul LePage and a host of state legislators have all raised serious questions about this project.
So too has the state Department of Environmental Protection, which rejected two of NNEPRA’s attempts to secure stormwater management permits. See, NNEPRA failed to offer any plan for the management of wastewater proven to contain toxic chemicals and heavy metals, which threaten to pollute local drinking wells and ultimately Brunswick’s watersheds. Given its established record of “railroading” neighbors, NNEPRA’s “trust us” response to these concerns is of little solace.
NNEPRA misinforms the public, neglects local laws and ordinances, and evades required regulation. Journalists have a responsibility to investigate, rather than echo, its claims.I am all for the growth of greener transportation networks, even at taxpayer expense. I am not for a process contemptuous of laws designed to protect residents and the environment from irresponsible development.
Patrick RaelBrunswickThough he is a professor of history at Bowdoin, Patrick Rael writes to the editors as a citizen of Brunswick.

Letter to the editor: Politics of climate change

To the Editors:
All of us should be concerned about climate change and it heartens me to see students expressing their concern. There is consensus on the science and consensus on the broad policy solution: we need to use carbon taxes or a cap and trade system to make the price of carbon-based fuels reflect their true cost including environmental costs. Revenues from such measures can be used to offset increased costs for low-income households. A proper price for carbon fuels makes renewables easily viable. The problem, then, is a political one. Even though the current state of politics has disillusioned many students, the political process is the only way to accomplish the scale of changes necessary. I urge all of us to get politically involved, vote, and work to support candidates and elected leaders that are willing to move forward on climate issues.
John FitzgeraldProfessor of Economics

Letter to the editor

October 3, 2014

To the Editors:

Many women at Bowdoin are active in exploring and affirming what it means to identify as women because we are invested in gender issues, not because we have a living room to do it in. While I, too, want more of my male classmates to get involved in dismantling the patriarchy, I would call for a cultural change rather than an institutional change. I don’t see many Bowdoin men involved in existing programs that confront issues around gender and sexuality. Why are there so few men in Safe Space? And where are all the guys in my gender and women’s studies and gay and lesbian studies classes?

I don’t want a separate Men’s Resource Center. Not because “everything is your resource,” but because no one should conceive of topics around masculinity as distinct from (or worse, not implicated in) women’s issues or LGBT issues or sexual and gender violence. If it feels uncomfortable to enter 24 College because it has signs for the Women’s Resource Center and the Resource Center for Sexual and Gender Diversity, know that it’s not because you’re not welcome. I would encourage you to examine and confront that uncomfortable feeling of privilege before you start tackling the patriarchy.

Oriana Farnham ’15

Comments are permanently closed.