Non-traditionals a strange breed

In response to David Schultz's piece regarding non-traditional students, I feel it is my duty to inform the UA student body about them, so they can make educated choices.

The NTS, or discipulus errabundus, is a mostly nomadic breed famous for its ability to devour learning opportunities with speech. Often this is manifested as uncomfortable personal accounts or stories only tangentially related to the topic that provoked said manifest.

They are mostly solitary hunters but may ally against larger numbers of enemies if threatened. Some advanced NTS research suggests that they gain their power from the unmistakable "T" formation that they gather in (across front rows, down center aisles), which serves to both maximize their voices as well as intimidate predators.

When one discovers themselves in close confines with an aggressive NTS, there are three basic courses of actions: 1) Flight: Drop all belongings and the course itself, hoping it is offered again in safer times; 2) Fight: Either secretly approach the instructor to express your fear and dismay, or let it ball up into a Charles Foster Kane style superfreakout released on the NTS itself, or; 3) Connect: By successfully taming an NTS with an outlet for their conversation, you save the group from their oppressive grip. Your fellow students and will praise your selfless actions done in the spirit of Carl Rogers.

An uncertain future whirls about the student's: it is fairly certain that they would not be a good choice for a Neo-Hestonian foodstuff market economy as vitamin deficiencies are common to the group. Grimmer still, some posit that, given the trend of increased education becoming more mandatory and less optional, NTS's will go the way of the Mastodon, freezing to death in the cold winter of graduate-level education.

John Moeller
philosophy senior

Non-smokers should get off high horse and develop some maturity

I'm writing in response to the recent slew of anti-smoking letters being posted. I'll say first that I do hold a certain respect for non-smokers as they most likely do have good judgment and strong will power, but many of you are sounding so snooty that I'm embarrassed for you just by reading some of your statements.

Saying, "eventually you will be joining your fellow smokers out by the dumpster in the alley, off campus where you belong"? It shows pretension of the worst kind.

Your own personal belief seems to be that smoking is so awful that those who do it should be among trash. Fine, that's your opinion. I personally believe that such obviously invalid remarks only discredit those who say them, but again that's only opinion.

But, aside from thinking you're superior to smokers, you also wish to just push them off campus and make them someone else's problem. Did you think about people off campus who might share your strong aversion to smoking? Guess not. Complaining about second-hand smoke in an enclosed, poorly ventilated area is one thing, but complaining about it in open air is ridiculous. Being non-smokers, perhaps you've overlooked a basic characteristic of smoke - it rises! So, if you see a cloud of the awful stuff coming your way use those nice healthy lungs of yours, hold your breath for three or even four seconds.

I think certain non-smokers are letting the mere fact that they don't smoke go to their heads. Well, to the non-smokers I say, "Great job!" We're all very, very proud of you, but now the time has come to continue in your own moral advancement and practice a little something called tolerance.

Just like tolerance of race, religion, and appearance you should try to tolerate the personal decisions of other people, within reasonable bounds. Nobody smokes intentionally to harm those around them, so grow up and deal with it.

Eric Savelli
psychology freshman

Repetitive commentary doesn't address issue

This letter is in response to Mike Morefield's column ("True rewards go to those who stay") in Friday's Wildcat. First, thank you Mr. Morefield for reiterating everything that Mr. Huston wrote in his commentary earlier in the week. And second, I'd like to thank you both for giving the public your white male, middle-class perspective of the reasons behind college drop-out rates.

This isn't to say that there aren't people who leave college for reasons such as not finding their niche within a huge campus, but please don't lead the Wildcat readers to assume that the issue is as easy as joining a club or walking out of your dorm room to find someone to join you at the Rec.

One of the biggest issues facing college students today is not that they aren't joining the right clubs but that lack of funding and resources to high schools across the country are preventing students from being well-equipped to join the ranks with those of whom attended better high schools.

None of us have walked onto the UA campus on a level playing field with one another and joining TriCats won't resolve the reasons behind this. While I would love to believe that there is a quick fix to the problem of college or even high school dropout rates, neither you nor Mr. Huston have hit the nail on the head on this one.

Ashley Furey
UA alumna

Tucsonan's diversity claims unsupportable

The recent letter from Larry Toledo ("UA's commitment to diversity rings hollow") demands rebuttal.

The letter has at its center this assertion: "The university's commitment to diversity in its student makeup and faculty rings rather hollow when outstanding prospective minority faculty are actively recruited but seldom employed."

This contention doubtlessly will come as a surprise to President Likins, Provost Davis, and the college deans and department heads, who, I'm confident, have never had the benefit of the participation of Larry Toledo in any of their searches for new faculty.

In other words, where is any shred of evidence supporting this claim by Larry Toledo? The answer is that he doesn't have any evidence, because no such evidence exists. Mr. Toledo's claim is nothing more than a totally unsupported - and unsupportable - accusation of institutional racial bias and is therefore completely irresponsible.

Thomas Sanders
executive director
Campaign Planning and Special Projects
UA Foundation

Student union needs better management

I am appalled to read that the student unions keeps considering additional fees that will be levied onto students to support their operations.

The student unions, while a part of the university, are a business entity and as such should operate like one. This means that if they aren't making money and aren't being competitive in the marketplace, then they need to think up of a new strategy where they would be able to make money.

Students already pay through the nose at the union-run convenience stores, such as the Highland Market and U-Mart, and most union eateries charge higher prices and offer lower quality foods then those found just off campus.

In this way, students already give the union more than they need and this calls into question whether or not the union can effectively manage the $20 check that they'd be receiving from students.

As for the fact that all other Pac-10 schools have some sort of mandatory fee or meal plan that keeps being brought up, so what? The UA is a unique entity that should look at creative ways to fix the problem before deciding to keep up with the Joneses.

Also, some of the other Pac-10 schools, such as ASU, actually had some special program or service that was outlined that they were financing before the mandatory meal plan was levied. Mr. Adams says that the fee will expand services, cover maintenance costs, and finance the debt and bonds the Student Union Memorial Center was constructed with, among other intentions.

The expanding of services sounds nice, but what services are they going to expand? All of the other expenses, again, should be accounted for with competent management and without additional fees, but I guess the students need to pay for the union management's mistakes. Oh well, I guess it's just another testament to the fact that if you work for a university organization, you can get away with making poor decisions and still get students to pay for them.

Anthony Genovese
public management and policy junior

Non-traditional students hard workers

I would like to thank David Shultz for his column ("Don't stereotype non-traditional students") in Thursday's Wildcat.

It is nice to hear that a "traditional" student has his own sympathetic opinion about older/non-traditional/returning students that seem to be more commonly present in classrooms at the UA in the past few years.

The reason this issue is so close to my heart is because my mother is a senior here too. For seven years now my mother has worked her way through the harsh opinions of younger students and increasingly tougher prerequisite classes. She juggles at least 50 hours a week at work, two classes in her major and will soon begin research for the soil, water and environmental science department.

What you all should know is that she never gives her opinion in class unless asked by the TA or professor, she does not tell endless personal tales in class and she does not ask for special treatment because she has more "life experience" than most of us put together.

I, for one, am glad that non-traditional students are here sharing the college experience with the rest of us. Try not to pigeonhole these students that are rich with life experience but never had the chance to soar like the rest of us. Try not to pigeonhole these students that are rich with life experience but never had the chance to soar like the rest of us. So the next time you see an older/returning/non-traditional student in any of your classes, pay attention and study hard!

Andrea Perez
pre-pharmacy senior

No excuse for second-hand smoke

I would just like to say a few things in response to Tom Mosby's letter to the editor. Firstly, Tom, just because you personally don't know any people that have not died from lung cancer from secondhand smoke does not mean that they do not exist.

Your fourth-grade D.A.R.E. officer was telling you the truth. According to the American Lung Association, 3,000 people die every year from lung cancer caused by secondhand smoke. Also, 35,000 people every year die due to heart disease caused by secondhand smoke.

Children that are exposed to secondhand smoke are also more likely to develop problems such as asthma. For those of us who occasionally pay attention to the news, we learned just last week that Christopher Reeve's widow, also a nonsmoker, was recently diagnosed with lung cancer.

And for the people that are concerned with "unreleased stress," a short walk or jog is much better at releasing stress than a cigarette. It is healthier for yourself and for those around you. "Unreleased stress" is hardly an excuse for smoking in a highly people-concentrated area. That's like me saying that I have to urinate in a crowded pool because if I hold it I could hurt myself.

If you can't go for a couple of classes without smoking a cigarette, maybe you should take a nicotine patch. Why even start smoking? The only reason I can think of is that people want to look cool.

Angelica Hancock
studio art senior