Jordan River Forum

I'm writing this letter in response to the column "Mr. Greenspan, Stop Shafting the Students" by Ryan Phillips (Tuesday). In his column, Phillips stated, "During a great rally, all the students will be standing and cheering while the older fans, who take up the best seats right on center court, have their rear ends stapled to their seats. Like Adam Ahlfeld, there's no hope of ever getting them up and involved in the game." I (and many, many other people including the IU players themselves) thought this statement was extremely offensive and unnecessary. Adam Ahlfeld continues to make countless contributions to the IU basketball program, including organizing charity events and volunteering his time to help kids. I have also been told by various IU basketball players that Adam workes harder and gives more effort in practice than any other player. He is there every day supporting his teammates and giving 100 percent in practice. In fact, this column was brought to my attention today by one of the players saying that the team couldn't believe how offensive it was. One specific comment was, "If you are going to write a (column) about our athletic department, that is fine, but don't put down our players. If you want to put down someone, put down other teams' players because the IDS is supposed to support the players, not humiliate and bring them down with no just cause." In my opinion, there was no need to include Adam's name in this sentence, and I think Mr. Phillips owes him an apology. I have never met someone as devoted to IU as Adam Ahlfeld, and after this column, I must say the IDS has really disappointed a lot of people. Jana Doyle
Sophomore

Donors deserve good basketball seats

I don't think Mr. Rick Greenspan should change (or try to influence a change of) the seating at Assembly Hall to get more students on the court level. Firstly, IU athletics can't afford to offend its donors right now considering its financial condition. This would be a nightmare. Secondly, something the column ("Mr. Greenspan, Stop Shafting the Students," Tuesday) doesn't state is that donors have been hit pretty hard the last few years, being asked by the Varsity Club to substantially raise their contribution level in order to keep their seats. It would not be right to reward those who have stuck with IU Athletics through these tough times by taking away their seats. Thirdly, I disagree that Assembly Hall does not present a great home court advantage. The record speaks for itself. As far as the enthusiasm of the older fans goes, they are very vocal and supportive when it comes to the big games. They are a bit reserved when a North Texas or Northwestern comes to town, but the students are, too. I think because IU has had so much success over the years it is hard for the fans to get real excited when it isn't a big game. I've heard the case for moving more students closer to the court before. Mr. Phillips does a good job of stating his case in the column, and I understand where he is coming from. I just happen to disagree. The students do have a lot seats on the court level behind the basket and a lot of good seats on the main level. Maybe in the future if IU builds a new arena that is configured differently there can be something done to get more students on the court level while keeping the donors in as many good seats as they have now. Until then, I think the seating should remain the same. Rick Snyder
IU fan

True ethical accountability

In response to Amanda Dorman's column "Scandalous Display" (Thursday), I would like to point out that many of the Virginians who are upset about the Victoria's Secret display are more upset by the lesbianism implied by the mannequins' positions than the fact that the scantily clad plastic women reinforce unattainable feminine ideals. Let's be honest here. There have been half naked, super-skinny models in the Victoria's Secret windows for years, and they do not cause anywhere near the scandal brought on by the Virginia display. While Dorman would like "not to mention the two females laying side-by-side in a bed," it is the main issue at hand. Instead of glossing over yet another example of good old American homophobia, let's consider the display from the perspective of another minority that is being exploited by the lingerie giant. The column addressed the outrage of the women who feel they are unfairly represented, but what about the representation of the lesbian community? Victoria's Secret markets bras and underwear to straight women who are looking to please the men in their lives. If the models in their windows are indeed positioned in a way that suggests lesbianism, the display simultaneously implies that a purpose of lesbian sexual behavior is to please men. As a lesbian, I am outraged that my sexuality is being reduced to a turn-on for sexually bored 40-year-old men and a marketing strategy for a prominent corporation. The concerns lesbians have over the media's manipulation of their sexual culture will be largely discounted. As Dorman pointed out, the display was altered in response to the complaints of the Traditional Values Coalition and other conservative groups, and yet the complaints of the gay community were written off, demonstrating that Victoria's Secret feels it can exploit some minorities more than others. I, personally, am tired of being used as a marketing tool by corporations, a soapbox for conservatives and a fantasy for the straight public. If we're going to address ethical accountability, let's look at all the groups it affects, instead of just the loudest and most visible. Kat Novotny
Senior

Credible excuses

Although it is not surprising that students make up excuses constantly, I have to say that it's frustrating when something bad does happen to a good student. One morning this semester, my dog got sick, and I woke up to vomit and diarrhea all over the floor. I had two choices. I could leave it to soak for a couple hours, or clean it up and miss class. When I decided to clean it up, I was left with another problem: Do I try to explain my disgusting dilemma to my professor or give a generic excuse (i.e. "My dog was sick")? Either way, it feels like you lose. If your excuse is either too colorful or too plain, professors might not believe you. The problem is that students make up "emergency situations" all the time, so professors don't know when excuses are true or not. The article mentioned proof, but should I have had to take a picture of my soiled room to prove it really happened? Angela Proto
Senior

Stop newspaper subscriptions

In his column Friday, Brian Stewart suggested replacing the "nauseatingly populist" USA Today with The Wall Street Journal in order to balance the "excessively leftist" New York Times ("Diversity in Print"). I have an alternative suggestion: Why doesn't IUSA get out of the business of buying our newspapers for us altogether and let those who want to read a daily commercial paper either buy it for themselves or read it online? In my view, Stewart's column further highlights the folly of subscribing to a marketing gimmick that charges all students for newspapers that will be read by a fraction of the student body. Elizabeth Rytting
Graduate student

A call for genuine print diversity

While reading Brian Stewart's "Diversity in Print" column (Friday), my curious delight at the promise of discussing "dialectic reasoning" and "diversity on campus" quickly melted into reprehensible alarm. Alas, another hackneyed regurgitation of American political detritus onto the high-minded pages of America's newspapers! Stewart chastised the administration and student body for being "strangely silent about diversity in the print press." My mind rejoiced at this bold introduction. What would he discuss next? A public-access television broadcast of a Texas hold'em showdown between Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Clarence Thomas and William Safire? A comparative literature class drawing unlikely analogies between "The Analects" of Confucius and Nietzsche's "On the Genealogy of Morals"? No. Instead, I received a flimsy and unimaginative attack on the "excessively leftist New York Times" and an imploration for the University to resurrect and protect campus conservatism with Stewart's tabernacle of truth and justice: The Wall Street Journal. And, thus, the detritus poured forth, including snippets of evidence from an Oct. 19 New York Times editorial about the trial of Saddam Hussein and sweeping claims about the paper's failure to preemptively rebuke the "plunder" of Iraq. Suddenly, our promising dialectic about diversity in the media has turned into the quotidian pettifogging of Republican versus Democrat drivel. Let's be honest: The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal are both conservative. Assuredly, many sources have certain "Republican" and "Democrat" persuasions pursuant to the demographics of their circulation, but I challenge Stewart to bring to my attention a major publication that is "liberal" in the tradition of Western intellectual thought. Casting aside silly comparisons involving Little 500, Leninists, frat boys, philosophers and the like, I will suggest to Stewart a reasonable path toward his "Diversity in Print." Read. Read around the world. Start with Britain's Guardian -- moderate by European standards, perhaps "super double excessively leftist" by Stewart standards. Read Harper's Weekly and The American Scholar. Don't confuse systems of thought with systems of politics. And, for pete's sake, you're in college -- don't read The Wall Street Journal. K. William Staser
Bloomington resident

Criticizing smokers unfairly

I, as an ardent smoker, take some issue to Mark Taracuk's characterization of my subset of the population ("Cigarette's Not Trendy," letter to the editor, Oct. 27) He classifies us as lurkers and, as I read the piece again, regards us as dirty or unintelligent for not heeding the warnings emblazoned upon our packs. I understand his dislike of secondhand smoke. I sympathize with him from time to time as well. The smell can be atrocious, and the health effects are less than advantageous. However, I like to consider myself a considerate smoker, I do not blow my smoke in the face of nonsmokers. When smoking around a group of nonsmokers, which I rarely do, I try to exhale in a direction where it will not offend my friends. I enjoy the time smoking allows me to reflect on my day, converse with others and relax outdoors. Taracuk seems to think that I smoke only to annoy nonsmokers, to incense them with my disgusting habit. I agree when he says the IDS should not glorify smoking because there are adverse effects, but to say that there should be no representation of it in a university publication is just outrageous. We, smokers, are a rather large minority in the U.S. at about 22 percent of the adult population. If he does not enjoy simply looking at us, let alone smelling us, he should understand that we have as much a right to smoke as he does to drive a car, which, depending on the type, can expel even more poisonous gases and liquids than our timid cigarettes do. I don't enjoy car exhaust, nor do I enjoy the loud whine and sometimes exorbitant bass that issues forth from them. But I understand and cope, I don't complain and belittle a student news organization for glorifying those modes of transport, nor do I belittle those driving them. I do apologize if I have read too far into Mr. Taracuk's remarks, but I feel that it is insensitive for him to treat smokers as some sort of barbarian that is to be shunned. We can no longer smoke in many public places and have designated smoking areas and rules regarding the distance from a building that we must be before we start smoking so we take advantage of the areas in which we can smoke, some of the outdoor areas on campus. Evan Keever
Freshman

Mature audience wants mature columnist

Reading the IDS on an almost daily basis, I am consistently surprised in the publication of the writing of Colin Dugdale. This weekly "Rough Draft" opinion is of such low quality that I must question the judgment of the editors. Despite the serious topics Mr. Dugdale chooses to address, his work is consistently amateurish and blatantly poor. Whether Mr. Dugdale's writing is intended to be laughed at, or taken seriously, he misses the mark. Upon reading "Simply put, if football was a pasta, it would be called testosteroni," it seems like Mr. Dugdale's writing would be more appropriate in a middle school's monthly newspaper. If he wishes to address serious topics, such as opera or the gender issues apparent in football, in a humorous tone, I suggest that he realize his audience. However, if humor is not his goal, I am even further disappointed with both his writing and the publication of it in the IDS. Glen Allman
Student