Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

L Student society determines extent of programs' success MR. FARRELL: I should like to respond to the recent letter in The Gamecock (Nov. 17) concerning the Spanish major's dismay at the "total lack of interest exhibited both inside and outside of the language department." The ex pression of this inquietude was apparently prompted specifically by the unsuccess of the' newly formed Spanish Club which the anonymous writer found "on the verge of extinction." Certain educational principles were ac curately recognized by this student, but the suggested apathy of the foreign languages faculty may be somewhat erroneous for reasons which the student may rightly not yet know. We have all worked with language clubs at times, here and elsewhere, and we have all ex perienced more or less the same results: a club of this kind may function well for a meeting or two, but gradually the students disappear. Why? When a elub tries to conduct its programs in the language the students at the elementary levels inevitably complain of not understanding, and subsequently find that their time can be more interestingly spent elsewhere. Concerning the implication that the professors are perhaps not meeting the educational objectives by not making the programs stimulating, my personal experience, which parallels that of other previous club sponsors, has shown that students do not want to attend meetings where their professors are active participants in the programs because they see enough of them in classes. We have all found that unless a club has very capable and creative officers who will persist in arranging programs composed of students themselves as well as of outside' sources (foreign students, speakers, films, discussants, etc.) , a club will disintegrate. Too much direction from the faculty has proved to be unappealing.' The inspiration and sustained initiative must come from the students. I think that I speak for all of my colleagues in saying that we are all eager to make a club as interesting as possible--and we can contribute much--but a serious student in terest, in this as in any other discipline, must be the prime motivation. The most successful clubs of this nature have proved to be the honoraries because the members have the very Important foundation of accomplishment and purpose in the discipline and the effort. Even today not everything can be managed through some easy pill. The student is correct, however, in regretting this apathy that is generally manifested by students, and perhaps by some faculty. I do not know whether it happened by chance or design, but a very meaningful letter by Mr. Anderson appeared in the column beside the one in question, and it should flurnish our writer with an in valuable insight to the problem. Apparently gone are the days when student bodies had a unifying etters a competitive optimism that was perceptible in educational aspirations as well as in "school spirit." The loss of such an esprit de corps has produced perhaps regrettably, a disorganized if not disoriented student body that forces the student to depend on himself alone rather than on group participation and improvement. Fortunately the same educational means and values still remain in the university today, and every student is earnestly encouraged to find in them the means to the full realization of his own individual capacities. The faculty are here to lead, to teach, to help, to discuss, to chat-in English or in a foreign language-to the extent that this individualized student society may desire. A. MAYNOR HARDEE PROFESSOR OF FRENCH Health Center could solve transportation MR. FARRLL: On October 27, 1971, a letter to the editor that I authored ap peared in The Gamecock criticizing the policies of the Student Health Center concerning the dipension of birth control devices. A letter expressing a view opposite that of mine appeared in the November 3 Gamecock. The writer of that letter, whose name was withheld by his own request, chose to attack not only my views, but me in addition. I stated what I felt was the real issue involved, i.e., the Student Health Center is denying full health care to tudents by refising to dispense birth control devices after prescribing them. The writer suggested that I "grow up" because I stated that it is both expensive and inconvenient for many students to consult a private physician, especially for out-of-town and out-of-state students. The implication here, as anyone with a reasonable amount of intelligence could see, is that many students do not have a means of transportation and even if they did, it would be much more convenient for most to use the services of their own student Health Center. The anonymous writer also disagreed with me when I wrote, "LUke the private physician the Health Center physician should be expected to fulfill needs (within the Center's potential.)" Then "Mr. X" stated that "a private physician is paid by the patient and not by a state agency." The astounding thing is that this writer actually believes that who a doctor is paid by should make a difference in the type of care one receives. Besides, according to Dr. Sally McCants, acting director of the Student Health Center, any student who pays the activity fee is (knowingly or not) appropriating approximately $7.00 to the center. The vendetta continues and announces that "it is the University's responsibility to educate, not control student abortion rates." It should be pointed out to my critic, the anonymous writer, that the whole idea behind the wide distribution of birth control devices is that of education- the education of in dividuals in preventing unwanted births. This , of course, applies tc the married as well as the single. I mnd lett reiterate that I believe it to be unfortunate that "no" Carolina student can be dispensed birth control devices under present policy, but absolutely shameful that those students 21 years of age and older (even if married) are not dispensed such devices! Finally, the writer 1) claimed that there is doubt as to the safety of the birth control pill 2) cited an unfortunate personal experience with "the pill" and 3) concluded that because of "the pill's" danger the Health Center should not dispense it. In January , 1971, Wyeth Laboratories of Philadelphia, Pa., made it's findings public on the combined use of the drugs norgestrel and ethinyl estradiol for the purpose of contraception. "Oral contraceptives, when taken as directed, are drugs of ex traordinary effectiveness. As with other medicine, side effects are possible. The fact is that serious problems are relatively rare, and the majority of women who would like to use the pill can do so safely and effectively." (The anonymous writer reminds me of the man who, when his son was injured on a bicycle, wanted all bicycles done away with.) The Population Control Bill sent to Congress in October, 1971, says that "organized birth control programs now serve about 2.2 million women. Services for 3.7 million more will be needed by 1975. About 90 per cent of the women needing subsidised ser vices can be served 'merely by expanding the services offered by existing hospitals, health depart ments, volunteer agencies and private doctors!' " In conclusion, I can only say that it is no wonder why there is a lack of student confidence in the Student Health Center. Until the centerinitiates policy to reflect modern medical practice in the area of birth control, or if you will, until students are treated like adults, there will continue to be this "lack of student confidence" Dr. McCants speaks of. As for the anonymous writer, with a letter of that caliber, no wonder he requested his name be withheld. The writer suggested that I grow up and "think things over" before I go off half-cocked again. Actually, I believe his letter points up very well just who needs to "grow up and not go off half-cocked again." CECIL M. AMICK, JR. Hempstone column on H.M. Stanley fitting commemoration MR. FARIRELL: Thank you for publishing Smith Hempstone's column about H. M. Stanley in yesterday's paper. It is fitting to commemorate his ac complishments in Africa on this 100th anniversary and Hempstone is to be congratulated for pointing out that Dr. Livingstone was not "lost" when Stanley "found" him at Ujiji. It is only too- bad that space was lacking for additional information and elaboration. May I correct your copy on one point? Stanley's African name was "Bula Matari," 'not "Buta..." as you have printed it in botlh the headline and the story. I doubt ers and very much whether it is Swahili; I believe that the phrase means "Rock-Breaker" in the language of the people of the lower Congo, but I defer to the linguists on that point. It is true that Stanley deserted the Confederacy, but then he was only a resident in the South and never had a deep commitment to the Cause. He was captured in his first battle and imprisoned in frightful conditions in a Union POW camp. Union officers made i regular practice of offering release in return for joining the Northern forces. It is hard to blame Stanley for accepting, but your column failed to mention that he also deserted the Union Navy, after describing the shelling of for tifications on the Outer Banks of North Carolina. Tippoo Tib is often called an Arab, but I think it is more ac curate to call him an African; he was a Moslem and a subject of the Sultan of Zanzibar, but he lived in Africa all his life and grew rich on what is sometimes called "the Arab slave-trade" to distinguish it from the European slave trade. Stanley's voyage down the Congo river, which Hempstone rightly described as "courageous," required exactly 999 days from the starting point in Zanzibar to the mouth of the river. For further details in this fascinating story, I recommend Byron Furwell's THE MAN WHO PRESUMED. B. D. BARGAR, PROFESSOR OF HISTORY Atheist gets facts wrong about religion MR. FARRELL: The three letters to the editor in the Gamecock of Nov. 22 bring together some very fundamental points. One. Our friendly neigh borhood atheist (like many atleists) has his facts wrong. He denies religion without seriously considering the facts or the drawbacks of such a position. I do not, however, deny him the right to express his lack of belief. This person (Mr. Roberts) in his beliefs is a practical rather than a theoretical atheist and probably does not know the difference. This (Idea) is similar to many Christians (not all) who only practice their faith out of fear and or [or Sunday entertainment. But the message he leaves out or ignores is the basic idea of religion or of humanity. That idea is to treat your fellow human being as a human being no better nor no worse than yourself. If he does this-he is following the ideals of religion as well as the ideals of the greatest thinkers and philosophers who have ever lived. Two. The greatest drawback of this university ( in my opinion) is the exploitation of the student unnecessarily. If the student was allowed to not buy football tickets such things as Little USC and Carolina Cares Day could be better supported. If the people of the community would post signs saying Carolina Cares or give to Little USC instead of Beat Wake Forest maybe a sense of priorities could be arrived at by the Com munity at Large as well. The university is welcome to raise money by increasing my tuition or fees anytime It wants to if this money will used for CHARITABLE purposes or research. But if this money is used for foolishness and "games" I am afraid I will have to leave. TOM LeBON Poor attendance insult to Japan, ambassador MR. FARRELL Wednesday night the am bassador from Japan, Nubohika Ushiba, was courteous enough to visit our campus. We were for tunate enough to hear the am bassador, but we were embarassed for our school. Out of an alleged "academic" institution of 21,000 only about fifty people could find the time or interest to go hear the ambassador. This poor attendance was an inexcusable insult to Japan and to the ambassador personally. We are bewildered that amid the cries for academic excellence and relevance in our university, so few administrators, faculty, and students were in attendance. It was especially astounding that faculty and students from departments, such as In ternational Studies, Political Science, History, and Economics, which should have an obvious interest, were not well represented. How long can the University of South Carolina claim to be an academic institution while in cidents as this demonstrate the hypocrisy of such a claim. MIKE WHITE GARRY LATIMER Football tickets distributed equitably MR. FARRELL: In the November 15th issue of THE GAMECOCK, Mr. R. T. W. Meyer raises some questions concerning student football tickets that should be clarified. The Athletic Department distributes football tickets in accordance with Student Government Bill no. 10-15 69, and Mr. Meyer can be assured that all students are dealt with in an equitable manner. No student tickets are ever held back for sale to the public before they are taken to the Coliseum on the designated dJstribution dates. These dates are printed in THE GAMECOCK and also on cards that are handed out by the Athletic Department. Tickets returned to the Athletic Ticket Office from distribution are always the low sideline seats (45 yard line to goal line) and the less desirable end zone seats. These seats continue to be available to students the next day and are also sold to the general public. All of our opponents have returned tickets allotted to them with the exception of Clemson and Georgia. These tickets are sold to the general public and are located anywhere from the 40 yard line to the goal (section 46 to section 51.) One of our opponents sold a total of only 53 tickets. The Athletic Department has always and will continue to cooperate with Student Govern ment with distribution of tickets. Our basic purpose is to maintain our intercollegiate athletics program as an integral part of the educational system here at the University. ROGER K. BOOCO STUDNRT TICEaT MwAsNAGaERan