Arizona Daily Wildcat Online
sections
Front Page
News
Opinions
· Columnists
Sports
· Men's Hoops
Go Wild
Live Culture
Police Beat
Datebook
Comics
Crossword
Special Sections
Photo Spreads
Classifieds
The Wildcat
Letter to the Editor
Wildcat Staff
Search
Archives
Job Openings
Advertising Info
Student Media
Arizona Student Media Info
UATV -
Student TV
 
KAMP -
Student Radio
The Desert Yearbook
Daily Wildcat Staff Alumni

Mailbag


Arizona Daily Wildcat
Thursday, March 31, 2005
Print this

Big sunglasses bad for women

Big sunglasses are detrimental to society and to the equal treatment of women and men. Really, they are; I can only hope that they are banned.

Why, you might ask? Well, they do two things for women: They make it socially acceptable to hide "ugliness" and they also promote the idea of keeping women from being individuals.

Most girls either wear them under the guise of "fashion" or to cover up their faces on days they don't put on make up (yes, I have been told this is why by some women).

What's so terrible with this is the fact that it makes it socially acceptable for people to think that without makeup all women are ugly. We certainly know this isn't true. These large sunglasses state that if your face isn't pretty it shouldn't be shown.

If women are influenced negatively by their portrayal in the media then they are also influenced negatively by their fashion statements. Middle Eastern countries cover up their women to take away their power as individual human beings, and our women take away their individuality in the name of fashion. That's a pretty scary thought.

To all the women in America: Embrace your beauty, embrace your individuality and please throw out your oversized sunglasses.

Doug McConville
media arts freshman

Spousal rape should be vigorously prosecuted

Just because some legislators refused to support a state bill does not in any way mean that the entire Republican Party is for spousal rape. I am a Republican actively involved in politics and believe that rape, no matter what your relation to the victim, should be vigorously prosecuted. I probably advocate even harsher penalties than most Democrats would like for rapists of any kind.

It is unfair to make a sweeping statement about all members of the GOP when only a few state legislators simply did not take a stand on the issue. What were their reasons for their stance? More importantly, how many Republicans voted yes to the issue? Obviously there is more to this issue, but the writer is using this issue to demonize all Republicans for the opinions of a few. By this rationale, all Republicans must agree with John McCain, and all Democrats must be like Al Sharpton, just because they have a certain letter after their name.

I support the rape law because there is no such thing as spousal homicide, etc. Rape is the only crime where a distinction is based on the person's relationship to the victim. Scott Peterson was not given a slap on the wrist because he was married to the person he killed. The same should be true in rape cases.

Kara Karlson
journalism senior

Beer drinkers should not disturb classes

In response to the two boys who decided to disturb classes on March 24 by running in and drinking beers: I was in another class that you interrupted, Religious Studies 335. I didn't find it humorous, and actually I was quite upset. Students get up early, study hard and pay good money to listen to lectures, not to watch two idiots pull pranks.

I am tired of people in all my classes who talk over the teachers, constantly text message or only attend on test days. If you can't respect the professors at this school maybe you should leave. I wish your parents could see how you act and what a waste of space you are here.

My only regret was that I wasn't close enough to the aisle on March 24 to tackle one of these "bad boys" and beat some sense into them.

Ben Kramer
regional development senior

UAPD cares only about MIPs, marijuana

In response to Chris Gabe's letter about the UAPD not doing anything aside from writing MIPs and citations for weed, he is 100 percent correct. I read the Wildcat on a fairly regular basis. I can't remember even one paragraph in the police beat that didn't end with "Police have no suspects or witnesses" unless they write an MIP or weed citation.

It really is ridiculous. The other night, I was in the ILC, and a woman cop was patrolling the ramp. Were all the 85-year-old security guards armed with flashlights unavailable? Needless to say, order was maintained in the usually volatile ILC. Way to go, lady!

Seriously though, the lame UAPD taints the reputation of actual crime-stopping cops. Can't we just abolish the UAPD and have two or three Tucson police officers assigned to the UA in varying shifts?

Time for a change.

Rob Monteleone
media arts junior

Criminals do get more help than Schiavo

In response to Paul Frawley's letter, "Criminals in America are treated better, more humanely than Terri Schiavo" I must commend him for hitting the nail on the head. If Mrs. Schiavo were a convicted cop killer or child molester, the bleeding hearts like Mike Farrell and Tim Robbins would be screaming for help and assistance. Also, if Terri were an illegal alien, you would have the ACLU or other organizations screaming for help.

Gabriel M. Bustamante
family studies junior

Facts on Schiavo case confused, unfounded

My sincere thanks to Paul Wrawley for providing the UA community with his unfounded and factually incorrect theories regarding the Terri Shiavo case. I make no claim to know all of the facts regarding Ms. Schiavo, and Mr. Wrawley cannot make this claim either. What I can say is that his assertion that the government has "sentenced her to death" is simply wrong; Michael Schiavo is the legal guardian in this case, and it follows from this status that he gets to make any and all decisions regarding her healthcare. Despite all of the efforts of government officials, the decision ultimately falls on Mr. Schiavo's lap.

The only reason this case has even garnered national attention is because Mrs. Schiavo's parents think that they still have control over their daughter, when legally they do not. How many courts will turn them down before they face reality? Mrs. Schiavo's parents are subjecting their daughter to further suffering in a state from which she will never escape. Their continued legal battles have turned their daughter's last days of life into a grand media production, and Americans are eating it up. Shame on us for objectifying this poor woman, and shame on Congressmen such as Rep. Tom DeLay for using Terri Schiavo's sad state to further their political careers.

Oh, and Paul, next time you choose to plagiarize a conservative columnist (I reference your "why don't they just shoot her" comment), please pick someone a bit more credible than Ann Coulter. I read her column last week, and it is apparent that you did too!

Andy Gaona
junior majoring in Spanish and political science

Sides need to come together on religion

OK, enough with the Bible bashing and praising. Josh, the UA does allow anyone to speak their peace on the Mall, as seen in the tolerance of Jed Smock and the swastikas that appeared on the Wall of Expression back in 2001 along with other hate speech. Anyone who wants to pass out literature is allowed to do so as long as they are not littering the university grounds.

Now as for all of you either claiming that the Bible is evil or the greatest thing since sliced bread: The Bible is just a book, and it can be read by anyone. So you can either use it to start the Spanish Inquisition and perform great evil, or you can hold it over the head of medieval kings and tell them that while they have the power to rape and pillage their own lands as they see fit, it's not nice to do so. Religion has done many things for this planet but you must remember that it is a human institution. Therefore, it is very prone to error and abuse, while also being capable of amazing feats of generosity and kindness.

Phillip Denton
UA alumnus

Removing feeding tube mercy, not murder

I am writing in response to yesterday letter to the editor by Paul Frawley. I'm quite impressed by Mr. Frawley's clear and unabashed analysis of the situation, although I suppose that as a politic science major, that's what he does. I first of all find it laughable that one could equate refusing an artificial means of life support to murder. Is it murder to refuse a lung transplant if you have cancer? Of course not. Here's just a bit of enlightenment for you. After which, I hope Mr. Frawley will see how this particular "bleeding-heart liberal" can support the removal of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube.

My mother is a nurse who works with end-stage Alzheimer's patients. Thus, she sees about 50 tube-feeders a day. Every time she comes home from work when a family has decided to put their loved one on a feeding tube she makes me and my stepfather promise never to do that to her. Why you ask? Because once you need a tube to feed you, your life is over. Feeding tubes often get infected, not to mention that they kill the nerve endings in your body, causing you to no longer feel hunger or thirst. Because of the nature of Ms. Schiavo's illness, she is unable to move, to express herself, to use the restroom, or to even control her bodily functions. She very likely has pressure ulcers all over her body. Mr. Frawley, would you consider living in your own urine and feces with your own body rotting while you lay in it a more humane way to treat a person than to simply let them die? You say starving to death is a terrible way to die, but I assure you, Ms. Schiavo lost the ability to feel hunger a long time ago. She will die an incredibly dignified death as opposed to waiting until her limbs are severed due to infection and her tube collapses and kills her. She's going to die, but she shouldn't have to die in this horribly undignified manner.

Katie Mann
English sophomore

Gender Ball not covered prior to cancellation

I think it was inappropriate for the Daily Wildcat to write an article about the cancellation of the Gender Bender Ball. They did not show any support in writing an article to help promote this event a month ago, but it's OK to write an article now? I was not aware that I was being interviewed and misinformed about being quoted. There was a lot of interest from people and the community, but not a lot of people RSVP in time, which led to an emergency E-Board meeting. The reason for Gender Bender Ball is not just to entertain students, faculty, and community members; but to bring together people who believe in gender equality and support LGBT peoples rights. This event was suppose to be a fundraiser to give students a scholarship to send them to a conference in Washington, D.C., to learn about different ways on how to fight discrimination, breaking labels, and how to bring awareness to their campus by going through workshops, watching speakers, and lobbying. I have to say I am disappointed in the Daily Wildcat for any support this year.

Angel Nguyen
Pride Alliance co-director

Tsunami victims used as marketing tools

The other day I was reading an article in the Wildcat on how some sorority and fraternity houses are going to donate 10 cents per vote for the tsunami victims (voting to chose who looks good half naked while holding or wearing an iPod Shuffle). I must say that it is a sleazy and unethical act to use such horrific disaster as a marketing tool to increase the sales of the Apple iPod and, at the same time, get some personal publicity with it. The idea came to promote the new iPod Shuffle This is what the coordinator of this immoral event has said, who is also the Apple representative at the UA.

Instead of using those poor victims as a vehicle for Apple company to increase their sales and for you to increase your sexual marketability, you could have utilized several other sensible methods if you want to be generous and really helpful. For example, the members of those sorority and fraternity houses can donate an equivalent amount to one month's cable bill. Or may be stop using their cars for, let's say, two weeks. And donate the gas money that was saved, and at the same time give the air in Tucson a break for while. Or may be they can stop drinking for a month. This for sure would save a lot of money to be donated and will certainly save some of them a DUI or two.

Aren't such methods sound more respectful than using such tragic disaster to market the iPod while at the same time trying to look good half-naked and pretend to help the tsunami victims!

May be I am wrong! After all 10 cents is a lot of money when converted to, let's say, the Indonesian rupiah. Hmm, I never thought of this!

Tawfik Maudah
interdisciplinary studies student



Write a Letter to the Editor
articles
The Steven Gerner Incident
divider
Editorial: Thumbs up, thumbs down
divider
Mailbag
divider
Restaurant and Bar Guide
Housing Guide
Search for:
advanced search Archives

NEWS | SPORTS | OPINIONS | GO WILD
CLASSIFIEDS | ARCHIVES | CONTACT US | SEARCH



Webmaster - webmaster@wildcat.arizona.edu
© Copyright 2005 - The Arizona Daily Wildcat - Arizona Student Media