Letters to the Editor

Brooks was given a fair punishment

To the Daily:

This is in response to "Suspension shows double standard," (1/20/99).

This article struck me because it made me think about the actions that were taken by the Athletic Department and Michigan football coach Lloyd Carr in dealing with football player Jason Brooks.

I believe that Brooks was dealt with in the correct manner. After being accused of the sexual harassment, he was put on probation. It didn't matter what he did next to provoke his suspension. In this case, he allegedly stole something and started a fight. If he were to allegedly assault another woman, then he would have received the same punishment.

I really found it hard to see the message of sexism coming out of the disciplinary actions of the Athletic Department. I find it very disturbing that the football player in question is involved with such crimes, but perhaps we do not know the full story. Brooks said he is currently in mediations dealing with this case. This by no means makes his actions right, but maybe we do not know the full story.

Brooks did have to go to some behavioral classes and other self-improving sessions that I find to be more helpful than a suspension. If, in fact, it was a borderline situation, then Brooks has paid for it by going to the informational sessions, so that in the future these mistakes will not be made again. That's what we want, isn't it? Change intervention.

I think that Brooks got the correct sentence. If we were to punish him with a suspension, then he wouldn't learn anything. Sexual harassment is such a "gray" subject that even Brooks could probably learn something about it.

Ultimately, we do not know the full story or what has come out of the sexual harassment investigation. I'm not saying he shouldn't be more severely dealt with, but until we know the situation, perhaps we're making it bigger than it really is.

Don Packard

Kinesiology senior

Daily hockey photos were misleading

To the Daily:

The Daily Sports section is practicing unethical journalism. The photos on pages 1B and 4B on Monday, Jan. 25 of the Michigan vs. Ohio State hockey game were misleading. The captions would lead the reader to believe that these photos were taken of the game described in the story. But these photos were taken earlier this season when Ohio State played Blue at Yost Arena.

This is evident because Michigan is wearing its home white jerseys, and the Buckeyes are wearing their road reds; also, the "M Dekers" logo appears on the boards in the background.

Implying that these photos were of the game in Columbus show just what unethical depths The Michigan Daily sports staff goes to. If there was no photographer at the game, don't try to pass off old photos as current ones. Please give the intelligence of the readers some credit.

David Taub

LSA junior

Daily should continue quality lm reviews

To the Daily:

I constantly wonder how films like "Varsity Blues" are made, much less find an audience. Thankfully, Jeff Ringenberg has provided the answer through his letter to the editor ("Film reviews do not help students," 1/25/99) - people have lost their standards when it comes to movies. People like him don't want to be challenged. They expect and demand bad movies. While this is his decision, it doesn't mean that Daily reviewers should lower themselves to his level of blandness. I don't agree with every review in the Daily, but every reviewer seems to have high standards and they seem to be able to give objective opinions, the key word being "opinions."

To prove to Jeff that I belong in his "normal, targeted-audience," I first have to disclose that I've had a couple of film courses, that I liked "Pulp Fiction" and that I go see films at The Michigan Theater (gosh, who would want to see films like "2001" or "The Godfather" at a classic theater?). But I also love schlock movies. I own all five "Rocky" movies, "Billy Madison," and "The Long Kiss Goodnight." The list goes on. And I paid to see "The Big Hit." With that said, I can still recognize that these movies - which I truly love - are not great movies, and I would expect that a review by anyone would reflect it. Just because something makes you smile doesn't mean that it deserves four stars.

When any mortal man is compared to Harrison Ford, the mortal, however interesting or handsome he is, is obviously the lesser man. When "Patch Adams" is compared to the brilliant "Shakespeare in Love" (or even to Williams's much better doctor film, "Awakenings"), "Patch" should be described as a couple of laughs inside a preachy, repugnant waste of film. If "Shakespeare" can only get four stars, then how could "Patch Adams" or "At First Sight" manage even one?

Please, Daily film staffers, don't let your standards sink because a small minority of schlupps will pay to see "The Avengers," and expect nothing better. Give your honest opinion, and if you think that a hole in the wall represents the void a character feels after the loss of their cat, write it down. We can decide for ourselves if we agree. After all, only a fool would let a review in the paper influence their decision on whether or not to see a movie.

Lance Roberts

LSA senior

Alcohol, not GHB, is a date-rape drug

To the Daily:

In her letter to the editor, ("GHB is a date-rape Drug," 1/19/99), Connie Zvara declares that GHB should be labeled a date-rape drug, and implies that representing GHB as a "regular street drug that kids fool around with hoping for a higher feeling of intoxication" is wrong, and that GHB's "popularity is rapidly growing and is not because people are looking for a better high." She also lists Ketamine and Rohypnol as "date-rape drugs."

If Zvara believes GHB is used as a date-rape drug more often than it is voluntarily ingested to "get a better high," she is simply wrong.

At any club, bar or rave, there are people voluntarily taking controlled amounts of GHB because they like how it feels. Every weekend, if not every day, people do this in their own homes. The same is true for ketamine.

The majority of the time these drugs are used, they are not being used as date-rape drugs.

They are being used voluntarily and safely. But if you want to label any drug that some fool has at some point used to try to get someone into the sack, then all drugs are date-rape drugs.

In fact, Zvara completely fails to condemn the most commonly used date rape drug of all time - alcohol. But then again, just because some sickos use alcohol to try to rape someone doesn't mean that most people don't use alcohol in non-malicious ways, just to have fun.

In fact, most people who use alcohol do it voluntarily and safely, just to have fun. The same is true of GHB. The same is true of ketamine.

Finally, using GHB as a date-rape drug is just plain stupid (I am not implying, here, that it is smart or OK to use other things as date-rape drugs, mind you). Yes, GHB is often sold in a colorless liquid solution, but it tastes bitter and, depending on how it is made, salty. You would notice this unless you're already drunk. And if you are drunk, depending on how much alcohol you have had and what your tolerance levels are, you could spend the next three hours throwing up and peeing your pants, you could go into a coma or you could die.

Interestingly, if you look at sources of information on the recreational usage of GHB they always warn people not to mix it with alcohol.

Greg Stevens

Rackham

01-28-99