To the Daily:
Jeff Eldridge's Jan. 21 column "Fear and loathing in the streets of Ann Arbor" was possibly the best article the Daily will ever see grace its pages. The University community is overreacting to the highly touted wave of college drinking deaths over the past few years.
I wish that University officials would take a look at the front page of the Jan. 20 Detroit Free Press. At the bottom of the page, below all of the riff-raff about Slick Willy, you can read the headline "College-age drinking is down although publicity is up." In 1979, there were nearly three times the number of alcohol related deaths on college campuses as there were in 1996. This fact alone should tell college officials all over the country that students are becoming more aware of the dangers of binge drinking and are curbing those activities.
All of the hype in the world is not going to drive students away from drinking, but growing common sense and senses of responsibility will. The overzealous '90s press is once again blowing a small issue out of proportion.
Another point Eldridge states is that the University is not even a party school. Ann Arbor as a whole is much more tame than about 90 percent of other campuses around the country and this is not because of the level of intelligence of its students. The simple fact is that the University's students are more laid back about drinking. Students here know how to have a good time without liquor.
Another high-ranking academic school, Williams College in Williamstown, Mass., is the polar opposite of the University. Williamstown is a drinking town with a college problem. How do I know this, you ask? I have several friends who have attended this school and every time I visited Williams during my high school years, every party had a keg present. The College allows its of-age students to register kegs for parties in their dorm rooms. The problem is so bad that the school's Rugby Club made the New York Times for their infamous boozing, and no one even died.
In conclusion, the University and the AAPD should not be crucifying University students, in particular the Phi Delta Theta Fraternity. The University is being hypocritical in doing this. Just take a walk down to the Michigan Union Bookstore. It seems to me as if the University sold the rights for their name to be printed on shot glasses and beer steins. What kind of message is this sending to University students?
Jason Shane
LSA sophomore
To the Daily:
I would like to thank the Daily on its extensive coverage of the 26th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade. The Daily ran an editorial on Friday, Jan. 22 supporting the Roe v. Wade decision, and also included two articles during that week - one on the anniversary itself and another covering the panel discussion on the vanishing right to abortion that was held last Wednesday night.
While I commend the Daily for its coverage and its pro-choice stance, I would like to remind everyone that activism in the pro-choice movement is necessary everyday, and not just on Jan. 22.
The Roe v. Wade decision had been undermined in the past 26 years by pro-life legislation and violent acts against pro-choice supporters, doctors and clinics. This is not the time for apathy, and we can no longer believe that the Roe decision is indestructible.
I urge all pro-choice supporters to join me in making our voices heard. We can no longer stand silent while our reproductive rights are being stolen away from us.
Jennifer Anderson
LSA sophomore
To the Daily:
Once again, a Daily writer has decided to focus on the negative aspect of a situation. For what reason I do not know. To say that Michael Jordan was "socially irresponsible" is absurd ("Jordan left a legacy of legends, stories and social irresponsibility," 11/21/99). Too often in this society, we focus on the good things people didn't do. But what about the bad things that they stayed away from. True, Jordan did not actively participate in promoting his race (whether that is his job or not is very questionable), but he was not like many other athletes. He did not have a drug problem or drinking problem. He did not have six children out of wedlock like many other NBA players. Instead, he was a proud family man.
He was not spoiled and got along with his teamates. He was not afraid to take control when he had to and showed excellent leadership. He never denied that he was not a role model. And he is involved in many charitable organizations aside from his own.
Jordan showed what a lot of hard work and determination could do. Let us remember that he was at one time cut from his high school team. Did he give up, no he kept at it and became truly great.
In conclusion, as a huge Jordan fan, I find it offensive that people need to find something wrong with him. Michael Jordan was a great player who led by example and made the NBA what it is today. And he has to answer to no one, especially to a Daily writer who is bored and looking for a topic to write about (stick to college sports if you don't know what your talking about).
Ifty Ahmad
LSA senior
To the Daily:
I was sitting in my 9 a.m. lecture this morning reading the Daily and realized something. The paper that I have been reading for the past three or so years had just become more than a way to pass the limbo period of five minutes before class starts. It had become an assault on my views of movies. In other words, the Daily's movie critics can't critique. They have nearly prevented me from seeing movies that are both highly entertaining and leave a smile on my face long after I leave the theater.
The reason that I enjoy these shows is the simple fact that I am a normal, target-audience member for whom these movies are made. I have never had any film classes and don't intend to. I do not enjoy movies at The Michigan Theater and never will. I don't see "Pulp Fiction" as a masterpiece or Quentin Tarantino as a saint. I go to see movies like "Patch Adams," "Rush Hour" and "At First Sight," and I enjoy them. I don't take the film strip, look at each individual frame, and then wonder if an abnormal proliferation of cracks on a sidewalk that I saw symbolizes the many divisions of society. So I ask you, the Daily Film Staff, please look through the eyes of the "deaf and dumb" viewers before making your rating.
Otherwise, your reviews could be labeled "blind" just as easily.
Jeff Ringenberg
Engineering senior
To the Daily:
I could not help but laugh aloud, but then spit with distaste upon reading Richard Eckert's letter to the editor today condemning Bryan Lark's benign, if misguided, language in his review of the movie "At First Sight" ("Language was offensive to deaf community," 1/22/99).
Mr. Eckert, please shut the hell up. I hope you do not speak for Ann Arbor's deaf community, for such widespread self-pity would surely keep a capable population markedly underprivileged and scorned. As a minority, I have always believed that identity and achievement are about self-respect. It is not the comment that some half-wit reporter types as an afterthought that will keep us from contributing equally in society, it is the belief that we need special treatment and help to do so. Mr. Eckert, go about your business, and if you find some attitude in the future that displeases you as "stereotyp(ical)," do not demand an empty apology - resolve to work harder, and do your part to "shoulder responsibility" in changing those attitudes. Whining is never the answer.
Dale Winling
LSA junior
01-25-99
| Previous Article | Next Article |
should be sent to: daily.letters@umich.edu | should be sent to: online.daily@umich.edu |