Jordan River Forum

I have tried to be a nice guy over the past few years, but there is one thing about IU that has really gotten under my skin. It seems like everywhere you go people are taking cheap shots at Carrot Top. As a huge fan, I find this to be so aggravating. I have heard everyone from Indiana Daily Student writers, to random people walking around campus, to professors taking cheap shots at Carrot Top at one time or another. And they are usually so inappropriate. When describing how popular one of Russia's czars was back in the 16th century, my history professor said something to the effect of: "He was very tall, had red, wavy hair and a very light complexion. He was also a very charismatic man with a sharp wit and all around just a funny guy … so I guess, of course, the latter is the one thing he and Carrot Top didn't have in common." I found this not only offensive but highly inappropriate. And then I will often overhear people criticizing comedians with the usual: "Oh that comedian was bad, not quite Carrot Top-bad but still pretty bad." Look, I will admit that sometimes Carrot Top is annoying, but we should still respect his comedic sensibilities. Even if you don't think he is funny, I think you still have to admit that he is very creative. It is a little known fact that through his 15-year comedy career he has come up with more than 600 inventions that somehow incorporate a whoopee cushion. I think that fact alone is a testament to his creative genius. Many people argue that Carrot Top's bit is childish, and worse, inane. To all of the Carrot Top critics I say: Let's see your prop comedy routine! It's not so easy, is it? Need I remind everyone of 1960s London when comedians were running around in their underpants and hitting each other with giant rubber chickens? At the time we scoffed at this as being crude and sophomoric. Yet, decades later we fondly remember this era as the Golden Age of British Comedy. John O'Brien
Senior

My blood's as good as yours

Despite what Scott Tibbs may ask us to believe in his letter to the IDS, one does not have to be a "leftist" to oppose the irrationally homophobic rhetoric that is loaded into the Red Cross' refusal to accept blood from gay men. Nor does one have to be a "leftist" to advocate tolerance, acceptance and fairness. What Tibbs fails to understand is that the Red Cross is a well-respected and well-known organization, which is influential in forming our culture's popular conceptions. As such, it has an obligation to be more responsible than this. Until the Red Cross publicly recants its position that all gay men should not give blood due to being at-risk for HIV, it legitimizes the cultural idea that HIV is a "gay disease." Worse, it actually helps fuel the "God sent AIDS to kill the fags" protests that we've seen on campus recently from fundamentalist religious groups. I realize that boycotting the Red Cross will hurt others. Perhaps the best outcome is that the threat of boycotting itself is enough to make them see their errors. It is very likely that many gay men have less sexual partners and safer sex than a great number of straight men who can give blood anytime they please. HIV screenings for donated blood almost make this a moot point. In the big picture, the Red Cross would have access to a larger blood supply by permitting gay men to donate, even if it took a short boycott to make them change their policy. Tibbs ends his letter saying, "To critics of the Red Cross: it is not about you." I say to Scott Tibbs: When I am singled out as being an unacceptable donor for what I am, not for what I have done, it is certainly about me. Andy Lewis
Associate Instructor

Scalito judged unfairly

Amanda Dorman, in her Nov. 10 column "Finito to Scalito," tried to stir unwarranted fear in those who support women's rights by suggesting that Alito would help overturn Roe v. Wade. Yes, Alito found it constitutional to require women to inform their husbands prior to having an abortion. However, Dorman ignored other abortion rights cases Alito heard and statements he made. In three other cases, Alito ruled in favor of women's right to choice. More importantly, he stated to senators that even if he disagrees with abortion personally, he gives great respect to the precedent which has repeatedly been upheld by the Supreme Court. According to Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, in reference to Roe v. Wade, Alito told her that he would not seek to overturn a Supreme Court precedent, even if he disagreed with the original ruling. Second, accusing Alito of trying to enslave women to their husbands is ignorant and belittles the hardships of those who have actually faced slavery. I agree that a woman should not have to inform her husband before getting an abortion; I think Alito was wrong on that issue. However, it is ignorant to think that his intention was to turn women into property. Dorman then warned the GLBT community and other minorities. Alito wrote that GLBT citizens should not face discrimination in the workplace or the bedroom. Accordingly, he has upheld the rights of minority religions in court and he believes in the right to privacy. Trevor Alexander
Junior

Misguided athletics department

Our athletics department is looking in the wrong places to raise money. Rather than gouging the students, why not just sell alcohol at basketball and football games? This would not only increase revenue but get people to the games. Selling beer would get rid of the athletics department's debt within one or two years. For example, USC is expected to sell $1.8 million less in concessions this year after they stopped selling alcohol. People would come into the games instead of tailgating outside. The University of Cincinnati, a Big East school, manages to give students free tickets to games because they sell alcohol at games. Another way to increase student interest in Olympic sports would be to broadcast the tapes of games on IU television. Students could see the games on the television and gain interest in the sport. Since it would be a tape, it would not hurt game attendance either. We could also give our sport communication majors quality experience by letting them broadcast the games. Students at Purdue and Ball State can view games online through their wireless network, and there is no reason we should not be able to either. The athletics department complains that they cannot find volunteers to work in areas such as media relations, yet they never come ask the students. There is a whole major of sport marketing and management students that would love to help if they could. There is no reason why our athletics department and sport marketing and management department should not be working together. The athletics department is ignoring its biggest resource, the students. Except, of course, for the student's money. Kevin Klocke
Sophomore

Herbert and diversity

In a recent series of speeches, articles and e-mail messages, some faculty members have asserted that if we criticize President Herbert we will limit our University's ability to attract a diverse faculty and student body. More specifically, their argument seems to be that criticism of Herbert will make prospective African-American students and professors think twice before coming to IU. On this point I think they could be right. But since when did "diversity" come to be an issue of black vs. white? In the last two years I have been blessed to have students who are Jewish, Muslim, Catholic and Evangelical Christian. Some grew up in small towns around Bloomington, while others grew up in Chicago or Long Island, or even in other countries like Brazil, Indonesia and South Korea. I've had men and women, gays and heterosexuals, students who were the first person in their family to attend college and others whose parents are well-educated doctors, lawyers and professors. I've had students with learning disabilities, some rich (any many not so rich) and a few who were already married. Is my experience unusual? I hope not! IU could certainly be more welcoming to African-American students and faculty, but I hope that in our assessment of President Herbert's performance we will not ignore the range of diversity that exists on this campus. Heather Akou
Assistant Instructor

Sexism in vending machines

A colleague of mine just mentioned to me that she noticed a new item in our campus vending machines, "Hooters Hot Wings" Flavored Potato Chips. Frankly, I am offended that IU, an institution that supposedly supports gender equality and diversity, would allow a product produced by such a blatantly sexist company to be sold on campus. In fact, the Mission statement for the Office of Academic Support and Diversity states that, "Indiana University Bloomington will be a leader among research universities in creating and sustaining a campus climate that promotes cultural, ethnic, and gender diversity, equity, and excellence." Among their goals: "Work with campus deans and administration to increase the number of minorities and senior women hired in faculty positions." Yet, this product is being offered in the building that houses both the Office for Women's Affairs and the Department of Gender Studies. How's that for irony? While I realize that the vending company responsible for stocking machines may supply products without seeking any type of administrative approval, shouldn't the University be concerned about the messages that are being sent? IU has taken an active stance against supporting products that violate fair trade, so what about products that promote the objectification of women? Kimberly R. McBride
Doctoral Candidate

Discussing AIDS

I want to compliment Amy Obermeyer for her column about the way the setting of the movie "Rent" has been framed ("'Rent' reflections," Nov. 28). It reminds me that there are reasons to read the IDS. The problem of HIV and AIDS in Africa and its increasing spread in Asia has finally been receiving some of the notice in the United States that it should have. It would be, however, unfortunate if we, and I include myself, then forget that people continue to be affected by, and infected with, HIV in the United States. Obermeyer makes the good point that discussion of this movie in some ways implies this. At the same time, it is true that the place given to HIV and AIDS in U.S. culture has changed since 1989. The epidemiology of the virus has also changed. The major modes of transmission have shifted, with drug use playing a larger role. Who it affects is changing, rates are rising among black Americans, and transmission rates are higher among heterosexuals and lower among homosexuals; and its treatment has both changed radically for the better and met up with broader limitations of the U.S. health system. Medicines that prolong and improve life with HIV are available, but many get no treatment. So is HIV and AIDS in "Rent" date-specific? Yes: HIV and AIDS had a different cultural meaning and personal health impact than it does now. However, thanks for the reminder that its inclusion of HIV and AIDS as part of life in the United States isn't nearly as dated as we like to think. Suzanna M. Crage
Ph.D. Candidate

Herman B Claus

Thank you for your editorial suggesting that our current president would do well to emulate Herman B Wells and dress up in a Santa suit to deliver some holiday cheer in person. Were Herman Wells alive today, he would send his own personal note of thanks to you as well. I know this because I once wrote an IDS editorial thanking him for his holiday visit to the newsroom (many years ago!) and received a warm thank-you note in return. Of course, that was in the days when all IDS "opinions" were signed by the author. It is yet another example of the personal touch that defined Wells' career and his life. But you guys should have done a little more research -- Wells was famous for delivering bright red, crunchy, delicious apples around campus at holiday time, not candy! Jocelyn Bowie
COAS Director of Communications and Recruiting