To the Editor:

While I applaud last week’s Newtown Bee editorial “Taking Better Care of Newtown’s Hungry, and Ourselves” for bringing awareness to the harsh reality of the hundreds of Newtowners who “regularly go to bed hungry” and the terrific and most necessary work of FAITH Food Pantry, The Victory Garden, and Real Food Share, I found the headline most unfortunate in differentiating between “Newtown’s Hungry” and “Ourselves.”

Are those in Newtown who do not have enough to eat not “ourselves”?

Why is there an assumption that “hungry” Newtowners do not read The Newtown Bee (and therefore the above editorial)?

I also object to the continuous reference in the editorial to those in Newtown who do not have enough food as “our neighbors” or “our hungry neighbors” for the same reason. Are we not all Newtowners?

There is an underlying assumption that “our” and “ourselves” refers to those reading this editorial, the real Newtowners, whereas those who are hungry are those others. While the intention of the editorial was most admirable, the deeply ingrained and systemic othering (a most relevant sociological term first coined by Edward Said and Gayatri Spivak) seriously undercuts and stains the message.

Sadly, such use of language — language that distances us from one another — is so prevalent as to be often subconscious. I would hope that my hometown newspaper would take note, consider this viewpoint and the power of the language we choose, and rise above this — perhaps next time.

Sue Kassirer

Sandy Hook