Letter Submission

To submit a letter to the editor, please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Letters must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published. We do not run anonymous letters. Local issues get priority, as do local writers. We encourage writers to keep letters to no more than 400 words, but will accept longer letters to be run on a space-available basis. Letters may be edited for spelling, grammar, punctuation and legal concerns.

 

Free the Nipple movement wants it all; they are selfish & greedy

To The Daily Sun,

Growing up I was always reminded about being a respectful and modest young lady. "Sweetheart you are wearing a dress, you really ought not to be sitting like that," my mother would gently remind my young mind, many times within a single day. I couldn't imagine growing up without my mother teaching me how to be modest and respectful. Would I have been deprived of this upbringing, I would probably be a blind supporter of this movement to create equality by exposing private parts of my body. I ask myself and others how this is suppose to accomplish equality between genders, feeling there are more effective means of working towards this equality, more constructive and important, for example working towards creating equal wages for both men and women for equal work.

Given women's lower wages and the expense of clothing I can see why these supporters believe it is morally right to only clothe half their bodies. This is not a valid point however, as I have always been able to afford to buy a complete outfit even if it was only from Salvation Army. I find it morally wrong to expose your breasts in public aside from breast feeding, and if you are biblically-inclined, wrong in this respect as well. Just as it would be wrong of me to be shoving a bible in your face telling you that you aren't living your life correctly and that you should be obligated or forced to adopt how Christians approach the world. That's exactly what this movement is doing, imposing their beliefs upon the rest of a varied people.

Whether one believes the nipple of a woman should or should not be sexualized, the fact is that it is sexualized in the U.S., and simply stripping is not going to alleviate this deep-seeded perception. As there are places for me to gather with other Christians, there are also places for people who wish to expose their body parts. The world coexists with all sorts of religions because we understand that not everyone is going to possess the same set of values, morals and beliefs and that's okay, we respect and understand the lines that should not be crossed, and adhere to the idea that these conflicting ideals can coexist, as long as they do not interfere with the rights of others. This movement wants it all, they are selfish and greedy in their desires and are oblivious to others feelings and beliefs. There needs to be a level of respect, a line that should not be crossed. I do not believe that they will set this line on there own and do believe a ban on public female toplessness needs to be put in place at designated places throughout the state. We need there to be beaches that do not allow bareness for the sake of not crossing this line, and to avoid imposing their misdirected intentions and beliefs on the rest of us.
Chelsea Davis

Tilton

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 942

'Old Guard' has never quite gotten used to the idea of settling for less

To The Daily Sun,

Great Britain almost made it into the 21st Century. Joining the European Union seemed to be the final step. Things seemed to be moving along smoothly until the heat-up in the Middle East and North Africa. Following the U.S. into various military operations cost them a bit more than they were comfortable paying, but trade with the EU partners was going along nicely. Then the westward migration of the Syrians and others fleeing the caliphate filled the English with cold fear. They visualized Britain as they liked to remember it slipping away. It was being replaced by a completely foreign element guided by the Koran.

Growing numbers of Brits blamed those decision makers in Brussels. The EU planners became the whipping boys simply because of the efforts to respond with a plan. The plan was conceived to help Greece, Turkey and some other members deal with their debt and the processing of the horde of refugees landing on their shores. The English reaction was predictable but very short-sighted. The younger Brits and the Scots tried to hold the line, but were ever-so-slightly outnumbered by the remaining members of the "old guard."

Those who study history can find a place in time when those same attitudes caused the fall of the British Empire. It all started in the 18th Century, when colonial America decided they had had enough and rebelled successfully wit a little help from the French. There was a time in the early 19th Century when the British tried to take back their favorite colony but, alas, had other ideas. Fast-forward a few decades and the other colonies of the empire began to feel restless and resentful. Some were allowed to become commonwealth nations. The so-called "ruling class" who controlled the banks and therefore, commerce, continued to lord over all. They saw America expand, have a Civil War. That war, a real threat to national unity, was about trade versus the states of the south clinging to slavery to make the cotton and tobacco culture work for the plantation owners.

The British failed to see any lesson in the outcome of our Civil War. Democracy was almost destroyed by the rich wanting to hang on to wealth and the privileged way of life. Even today, American attitudes about what was solved by the Civil War depend on where you live in our great country.

As the Industrial Revolution began, the continent of Europe started fighting for supremacy based on industrial strength. It was a very restless period. So-called world wars were fought. The British and their former colony, the United States were pitted against those in European mainland. Central European nations were bent on acquiring resources and the wealth of their neighbors. Asians were drawn into the second conflict and, during the aftermath of that war, Britain lost control of their empire.

The "old guard," like the southern aristocracy in the U.S., have not quite gotten over the trauma of having to settle for less. They still have their rank, but not such a great store of riches. Most live comfortably and want to continue that way of life. So, what they saw put them in panic mode. With their thin majority, they have managed to place a stick in the wheel of progress as conceived by the European Union. We can almost predict how their separation will play out. The story to follow is not a mystery. It is more like a Shakespearean tragedy where no one is allowed to live happily ever after.

Bill Dawson

Northfield

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 383