Directive protects students from classroom politics

I recently read the article remarking on President Peter Likins' memo to faculty regarding political activity. For myself, really, I think it's about time. Being a more experienced graduate now and government employee, I have seen the other side of the coin, where professors take advantage of their position claiming to be "open-minded" yet intimidating students who do not agree with them.

Allow me to give you an example. Very early in my collegiate academic career, issues regarding the status of illegal immigrants in Southern California became a hot topic on campus. One morning in my U.S. history class (covering history pre-Civil War) my professor, who was Hispanic and admired, came to class agitated.

He was upset personally over the situation in California and took our class period for the day to "discuss" it rather than the prescribed lesson and material.

He posed a question to the class concerning the debate and desired opinions of the students. They sat silent, intimidated by his obvious agitation.

I worked with him in the department between classes and felt comfortable enough to present my opinion. His "articulate and open-minded" response to my thoughts was, "That's exactly what I would expect a conservative Mormon to say."

I was shocked at the venom in his voice and the blatant bigotry he publicly aimed at me. I got a 'C' in that class and never spoke to him again.

Being young and naïve, I was too intimidated to bring up my experience with the head of the department. Being much older and wiser now, I should have called him on his hypocrisy.

However, who was there to protect my political beliefs against people of authority who used their authority to intimidate and stifle debate? I have seen and heard of a great deal many other professors guilty of the same action as my history professor. I agree and believe that professors have the very right to engage in political debate and every citizen of this country.

However, they too must be careful of how they engage in it so that they will not be guilty of misusing their position as professors to manipulate or intimidate their students to agree with them, lest they be guilty of the very accusation being levied against the university and President Likins.

Darin Lisonbee
UA alumnus

Chinese culture, people misrepresented in column

I do not doubt that Ms. Keren Raz's article describing her experience of her recent trip to China was well intended. However, I was left with a bad taste in my mouth after reading her column ("A Chinese banquet").

I can certainly understand the cultural shock Ms. Raz experienced. But it is not fair to present China as a filthy place, because it is not.

It is more meaningful to compare China today with what it was like 10 or even just five years ago. Living conditions in China, hygiene included, can and should be further improved.

But the hard reality is that for such a populated country, any slight improvement would be no small task. One can only be surprised by and appreciate how much change has occurred on that piece of ancient land. Going back to the "banquet," had Ms. Raz stayed in China for a bit longer, she would have learned that it is a common practice at Chinese banquets to have serving spoons for each dish.

However, it is still not uncommon that people do not use the serving utensils because they feel disconnected emotionally otherwise - another piece of cultural shock for Ms. Raz.

Last but not least, it is highly inappropriate to say that "the Chinese eat everything except the kitchen sink." Ms. Raz, please save your black humor and exercise your cultural sensitivity! After all, the Chinese do not eat medium rare or rare beef, not just "the kitchen sink."

Zhiping Zheng
associate professor of chemistry

UA lacks fine dining, only choices are 'disgusting'

As a freshman I walked through the student union excited about being able to try all these new foods at different restaurants.

By the end of my first semester, I swore to never eat at McDonald's or Panda Express ever again. I began eating Easy Mac at home because the food was so disgusting.

I've heard horror stories about how bad college food is, but this is wore than a high school cafeteria. The food at the union seems to be of a much lower caliber than that of other restaurants off campus.

I began wondering why that was. It took me about 15 seconds to realize maybe it's because these places don't have any competition.

As freshman, we are encouraged to put money on our CatCard and sign up for a meal plan. This looks fine and dandy at first, until you finally start eating at these restaurants. You end the semester by bringing your friends to lunch just to get rid of the money.

At neighboring schools, students are allowed to use their card at restaurants like Chili's and Applebee's. At USC, the students can use their version of the CatCard at a bar.

Since I was a freshman, I have been hearing rumors of the possibility of being able to use the CatCard at the shops on East University Boulevard.

Do you think there might be a reason we aren't allowed to use our CatCard there? Of course there is; it's because the university doesn't own this strip of land and it won't be making these huge profits off of the students.

I would appreciate it greatly if the administration would step up and actually listen to the students' requests.

Yes, we might have the nicest union west of the Mississippi, but personally I'd rather have good food rather than pretty artwork. Sam Louis
regional development junior