Sex doesn’t always have to be graphic

I am an avid reader of <em>Imprint</em> and enjoy keeping up with UW news as well as news events that occur within the Waterloo&nbsp;regional area. The content of <em>Imprint</em> is generally non-offensive, &nbsp;however, for the Nov. 21, 2014 issue there was a very graphic &nbsp;image that accompanied the article, &ldquo;Your Anaconda Don&rsquo;t When My Back &nbsp;Hurts.&rdquo; It was highly graphic and I felt that it was really &nbsp;inappropriate. I am a very open-minded person and I think that &nbsp;discussing sexual health is a very important topic that should be less&nbsp;taboo. The image displayed with the article didn&rsquo;t convey any more &nbsp;insight into the topic discussed than say another image done with just&nbsp;silhouettes. I understand that <em>Imprint</em> is a university newspaper, but that does not mean that it will solely be read on campus. I was &nbsp;fortunate enough to be on campus while reading the article, but I&nbsp;could have just as easily been on the bus or any other scenario that&nbsp;makes viewing that picture in public inappropriate. If you are going &nbsp;to include an image with an article, it should provide a better &nbsp;understanding of the material rather than detract from the message.&nbsp;Just to reiterate, the picture is not offensive because of its &nbsp;relation to an article about sexual health, it is offensive because it &nbsp;is unnecessarily graphic. It goes against the point of making people &nbsp;feel comfortable talking about their sexual health issues.


Mary Jo David
2A Civil Engineering