To whom it may concern (and it should concern all of you):


It seems you have among you, masquerading as news writers with researched opinions, juveniles with an axe to grind. First I’d like to direct your attention to Clay Neville, the one claiming responsibility for the “No sexual safety on campus” article. A few things concern me about the article, aside from the obviously sensationally misleading title. The first is the obvious failure to properly research the article. Yes, regular condom distribution stopped as of March 1st.


Two seconds after walking in the door of the Student Health Services office I was able to learn from the staff present that regular condom distribution had stopped but the center had ordered more condoms to be made available behind the counter. I was told they were set to arrive within a week. I also learned that, despite the article claiming that the SHS office “stopped offering its students contraceptives” (not condoms, contraceptives) the center actually has a process by which birth control is available.


I was also concerned about several statements from the second article, “The great condom caper.” First I’d like to mention the photo caption, “Abstinence is now the prevailing suggestion for our randy wolverines.” Is it? Did someone tell the reporter that? Or is it a false assumption made by someone with an axe to grind because condoms are no longer free? Or because they blame the local religious environment BECAUSE condoms are no longer free?


Citing Clay Neville’s inadequate research as basis for his claims Cameron Simek proceeds to textually lambaste the SHS office and the student body in fifteen paragraphs of immature angsty rage. I would note I find it amusing that he decides to claim to “be a little bit honest” (implying the SHS center is not) before leveling allegations at the SHS and student body. Allow me to work off his figures and anecdotal “evidence” to debunk his claims.


Given an average age of twenty-six for the student body and that most are married or engaged that leaves a minority of twenty-six year old students (just based on the average) to be examined by his, soon to be spewed forth, rhetoric. Putting aside his obvious chide of the LDS church  he claims that the SHS removed condoms “just for funsies”. Yes, because as a twenty-six year old, or even as an eighteen year old, we are far too irresponsible to buy protection for our “recreational activities” and must have all knowing, all protecting big brother buy it for us. Maybe I should demand a free motorcycle helmet too? Just think about it, its something I choose to do, that isn’t necessary to maintain my health, which is in fact “risky” behavior given the medical problems it could cause through no fault of my own (for myself and others). Does the Health and Wellness center not have the responsibility to provide me with protection for this risky activity? The Health and Wellness center is not responsible for our behavior, or the behavior of any other student/adult on campus.


The very notion that removing free condoms from circulation will cause those, formerly responsible and respected (by the author based on previous lack of disparaging comments) sexually active students, to become derelict in their attention to their own health and that of their partner is ridiculous in the extreme and basing an argument that a third party is responsible for these supposed personal indiscretions is intellectual fraud.


How dare a member of your staff allow this to be written, let alone be published, and call it journalism. I’ve already pointed out what I learned about contraceptive distribution earlier in this email and yes Cameron, behind the counter distribution was obviously, “considered”.



As far as a debate goes about student fees being used to distribute contraceptives to the student body that will have to wait for another time. As far as your journalistic integrity goes, it has hit rock bottom as far as this reader is concerned. I know you probably don’t care, why should you? “Professionals” don’t seem to care, and they write for major publications.


I admit, the staff at the Health and Wellness center may not actually be aware of a policy change which permanently removes free condoms from their list of student services. I may have also been misinformed.


But shouldn’t Clay and Cameron, being “writers” sort out conflicting statements BEFORE going to press? Isn’t that part of their job? Clay even points out the contradicting statements himself, IN THE ARTICLE! So it is not as though he didn’t know they were there.


I don’t expect any action will be taken regarding this journalistic treason against people who provide non-profit healthcare to students for more important things than genitalia. I don’t expect action will be taken to correct this story or to get the facts straight. But everyone who was party to this farce should be ashamed of themselves.
Matthew VanUitert
UVU-Biology, Senior
P.S. Condoms cost between sixty-two cents and a dollar twenty a pop at Walgreens. If you can’t get your finances in order to purchase your own protection for your recreation you probably have bigger problems with which to deal. Like a problem with your brain being missing?