The gamecock. (Columbia, S.C.) 1908-2006, January 24, 1992, Page 2, Image 2
Viewpoint
$
Race
Club charges admission p
based on appearance 1
Imagine going to Group on Thursday night for happy hour with c
a crowd of friends. After you get through the door you notice that a
although you were charged a $6 cover, the blond woman behind p
you only paid $1. r
In fact, all the blond women are only paying $1, but all the
. brunettes are paying more. Hmmm. "
At Cracker Jacks, a local nightclub, it seems that the cover
charge keeps fluctuating.
When several African American patrons entered the club they
were charged $6, which seemed rather high. They watched the
door man and found that the other customers were only being |
charged $1 or $2 to get in. When they accused the bar's owner of
racist behavior, his excuse was that the admission rate at the club
was at the door man's discretion.
How can this be legal? Not only is it morally questionable, but
it seems to be in direct violation of Americans' Constitutional
right to be treated equally.
Whether this was a racially motivated incident or not, it is still
unethical to have a cover charge that is subject to the whims of
the MAN sitting at the door.
I suspect there are an awful lot of women who know they can
get in free at such an establishment based on the length of their
skirts.
Discrimination is discrimination whether based on ethnicity, religion,
gender or appearance. One of Cracker Jack's owners said
the bouncers try to discourage suspicious looking-people from entering.
This group of African Americans was working on a political
campaign. No doubt they would have been terrifying to run
into in a dark alley.
Perhaps to that door man, being black is grounds enough for
suspicion. There's something contradictory about that becuase the
owners said this had nothing to do with race. They were just discouraging
people that they "...suspect might cause trouble."
It seems their policies might have them in a whole world of
trouble now.
I /ffEMiPtg WH/rrrH?\ I
/ vi \*u uu i?? u uv?? '' 77 " ' " i
Wf/./- AR? YOUDO/N'?'? YOU KNOW)
A DAMN WELL- YOU AREN'T OLD J
Zt^Mnough to prink Jj /_
*I l\ \
Private Barney Smith: Old enough to die but too young to drink.
I'M AN #
iEtMRoNM&ttAUSr. *f |
C rQrlpC nnll^\7 "taking up" more important causes
VJI ?.LIv^ poverty, homelessness, discrimina
i illiteracy and so forth. Personally,
20OC1 enough not believe that grading policies, d
mas beine given before or after gra
T . .. tion and Coke vs. Pepsi are issues
o e ecu or: demand great attention. The futui
In response to Mr Justin Kahn s let- our ca[i* and sociel as we knc
ter concerning the USC Law School malters' whlch we, as citizens,
grading policy, w.sh to say that not d and nej hborSi should con
everyone in the law school agrees with . ?
him As a first-year law student, I rsi;ves David Rand
would like to have my grades before First-year law stu
paying my bill, I would like to be able J
to tell summer employers I have done a x* 1
well, and I would like not to have the ^DOltS ?HllCi0
pressure of wondering whether I passed , #
or failed. But I realize that professors UIllITlOrCSSlVC
are busy people, much like all of us.
They arc not magicians, nor gods.
Things do take time, especially when lo the editor:
you are grading several hundred ^ attended the Lady Gamecock
lengthy essays. skctball game against Tennessee
Give professors a break. Truly, I be- ^ an(* was v^fy unimpressed
lieve that concerned individuals could reading the article appearing in
spend their time more effectively by Gamecock the very same day coi
Question: Do you 1
/lonica Perrin Kevin Ki
Early Childhood major French r
It should be lowered be- "it shot
:ause younger kids get it all the n
inyway and that's something along v
>eople are going to have to that sho
ealize goes on."
Attendance poli
Since I was a freshman at the university,
I have felt there has been a grave injustice
put upon myself and other students by certain
professors. It was my choice to enter
this university. It was my choice to pursue
a certain major, and most importantly, it
was my choice to spend thousands of dollars
a year to receive a higher education
and a college degree. Because it is my
choice to get a higher education, why am I
forced to follow an attendance policy that,
if abused, lowers a grade I clearly deserved
in a class.
I feel that you should have the choice to
attend or not attend a class. If it wasn't for
the students, how would a professor make a
living? Are professors afraid their lectures
are so drab that students won't come? Are
professors worried that their class is so
easy, students don't have to come?
On occasion I have had grades lowered
from A's to C's or B's to C's. I clearly deserved
my "A" or "B." I clearly took tests
well and learned the material necessary to
receive an honorable grade. How do you
justify this? If I was being paid to come to
school, I would have an obligation to attend
classes daily. But I'm not!
Attendance par
When I was asked to do this Cross Fire, I
wasn't quite sure which angle to take. So, I
decided to present what I knew about the
university attendance policy, good or bad.
Like any other policy at USC, there are exceptions
to every rule. Right or wrong, my
purpose here is to write in defense of the
policy. Maybe if I'm lucky, a few of you
will see it my way.
The purpose of the university attendance
policy is to ensure a top quality education
for all students. It is not aimed at impeding
anyone's right to attend or not to attend a
class.
Many students feel that an attendance
policy takes away from the rights they associate
with going away to school and growing
up. What they do not realize is that this
policy is all part of growing up and assuming
a little responsibility for ourselves.
When an instructor distributes a syllabus,
it becomes the contract between the student
and the instructor. Students should accept
the terms of the syllabus and what it obligates
them to do. Any student who doesn't
like the attendance policy of the class has
the same right to drop the class, much like
a student who doesn't like the course load.
Many professors are pretty lenient. How- ever,
if students don't live up to their end
of the bargain, they should expect to be
If you have an Is:
you would like to see addressed in C
drop it in a Suggestion Box or Call The <
like ing them with the USC men's team,
tion, think the article was immature, i]
I do timed and in bad taste to gain fan su
iplo- port. I believe the article only inspir<
dua- the men's team and fired them up
that play their best game of the seaso
e of soundly defeating Tennessee for the
>w it first SEC win and then sock it to Gee
5LU- gia. 1 llallKS VJlilo.
cern R.C. Willian
Army (retirei
olph
Marijuana use
society ritual
To the editor:
This letter is in rcferenee to Mr. Ti
Watts' article on marijuana. If yc
:s ba- facts are accurate, using marijuana a:
: Jan. replacement for trees in paper produ
after would be very beneficial to the Unii
i The States. Where your statements bccoi
mpar- skeptical is in the second third of y(
:hink the drinking age shoul
Ml *"** JP
'"' . x-' mmmm M mfi
Don Eddie Wahdai
riajor Biology/Pre^
ild be eighteen. With "I believe the
ssponsibilities that go at twenty one
vith being eighteen people out thi
uld be your right." are too youni
to be more m;
5 Firc^
cy not sensible
Most of the classes I have found to contain
"Mandatory Attendance or Else" policies
are classes that have uninteresting professors
that spend all their time lecturing
straight out of the book. I see no purpose in
attending a lecture that only reviews the
book and wasting an hour of my time.
I did not come to college to be spoon
fed. I think students deserve the common
respect to be able to make independent decisions
on whether to attend class. This
quite possibly could insure more interesting,
thought provoking lectures by professors
that grab students' interest and inspire
students to eagerly participate in that class.
I feel there are many students that share
my position on this issue. This in no way is
an attack on the education system, but I feel
this injustice should be recognized by the
university and action taken to either educate
students on why the mandatory policy was
drafted or evaluate the possibility of terminating
this policy.
?Dean A. Sinatra
Dean Sinatra is a senior majoring in
psychology.
t of education
penalized.
I think another aspect of the problem has
to do with professors who don't follow the
university policy for attendance. When professors
let attendance go unnoticed, which
is their choice, it becomes harder for those
professors who do take attendance to enforce
the rules. This poses a problem for
the student who does not understand why a
professor would decide to lower a grade because
of low attendance.
On the other hand, these same professors
are often the same instructors who reward
students for high attendance and class
participation.
Another argument some students use in
defense of their right to decide whether
they will attend class is that it's their money
paying tuition as well as the professors'
salaries. The only way to refute this is to
say that in a deeper sense, the student is the
one losing out. Regardless of whether we
decide to attend class, the professor is still
going to get paid, and class will still be
held. So why not take advantage of the opportunity
to learn? I know this sounds idealistic,
but why not? I'm an idealist, and
that's the way I see it.
Sam Sammataro
o___n . -
oam aammataro is a political science and
English major and a student senator.
sue or question
"ross Fire or USC Voices, Please
Samecock Newsroom at 777-7726.
I article.
U- Each culture goes through certain ri
p- tuals of rebellion in order to let of
id steam. This not only benefits the indi
to vidual but also the government becausi
n> the activities people perform do not at
dr tack the government outright.
>r- In our society the main outlet is al
cohol. Our government has not legal
is ized marijuana and other drugs becaus<
d) a balance must be maintained so tha
Ai ** i? _~u~n: J a. A
uiese ruuais ui icuciiiuu uu nui get uu
of hand and decay the social order.
Quickly referring to the issue of tax
ing marijuana, if it is being brough
into this country today underneath th
nose of the government, how then wil
the government regulate and lax th
igc drug when it is made legal? Do you rc
>ur ally think the dealers of drugs or olhc
s a future "legal" distributors will allov
cts the taxing of their product when the
Led can avoid it?
me John S; Pesapan
)ur Political Science junio
Id be lowered to eighteen.
ASK.v> JimI
jhh ||0hhmh"| ^
n Jennifer Nance
led major Political Science
y should leave it "I don't know if they should
. There's a lot of lower it to eighteen, but they
ere drinking who should lower it. It's stupid to
g and they need be able to go to war but not
ature about it." have a beer."
Bigotry excuse
| for ineptitude
- David Bowden
Once again, certain American politicians have
started pandering racism against the Japanese. If one
believed some members of Congress, one would
think that the Japanese are an evil race of conspira
lors mieni on aominaung me nara-womng Amencan
race. Sounds like something out of "Mcin
Kampf."
"Proof' of Japan's wicked ways is the wellpublicized
statement by Yoshio Sakurauchi, the Japanese
government's equivalent to our Speaker of
the House, who criticized American workers as be- .
ing lazy and said that the United States is in danger
of becoming Japan's personal
"sub-contractor."
What Japan-bashers fail to
realize is that Mr. Sakurauchi is
an individual with his own il^NHjn
opinion. Yes, he is an official in
the Japanese government and
yes, what he said was controversial.
However, Mr. Sakur- '
auchi no more represents the ?
feelings of every Japanese citizen than Sen. Jesse
Helms represents every American. This may be a
surprise to many, but Japanese don't all think alike.
The other point to be made is one that few Americans
have been willing to talk about. The fact is that ~
Mr. Sakurauchi is, to a large extent, right. A recent
ot-fiplo from TV?a A aai.a A
aiuv^iv 11 win iiiv^ r\^^uv^iaic/u new says uiat /aiiiciican
companies reject many applicants because "they
can't find good workers." A survey of American
business found that "the average manufacturer rejects
five out of every six applicants and that twothirds
of companies regularly reject applicants as unfit
for the work environment."
Sounds like the truth hurts many of these Japanbashers.
They cannot accept America's failings and
look to blame those nasty, insidious Japs for our
problems. Funny how British and Dutch investors
(who are a little more white than the Japanese) don't
attract this controversy. British Petroleum has gas
stations in every city in America. If B.P. was called
Japanese Petroleum, Americans would be going ballistic.
Japanese imperialism, they would call it.
American politicians need to stop whining and get
our country in order. Sure the Japanese protect their
markets. If anyone thinks the United States doesn't
protect American markets (especially agriculture),
they've been smoking crack.
The best thing I can say about George Bush is
that he is not a Japan-basher. Paul Tsongas, one of
the Democratic candidates, isn't either. Of course,
the way things are going, neither of those guys will
be president in 1993. I hope the guy who does win
sees an ally and partner in Japan, not an enemy.
m ' ^ ^ ^ ' '
IGamecock
f Editor in Chief Eric Ward
Managing Editor Tige Watts
* Copy Desk Chief Kathy Heberger
Asst. Copy Desk Chief Jennifer Jablonski
Viewpoint Editor Shelley Magee
News Editors...Patrick Villegas/Gordon Mantler
Asst. News Editor Kim Everitt
5 Carolina! Editor Greg Rickabaugh
t Asst. Carolina! Editor Lee Clontz
t Graphics Editor Ryan Sims
Photography Editor Virginia Marshall
Asst. Photography Editor Eric Glenn
j Sports Editor Ben Breazeale
0 Asst. Sports Editor Chad Bray
|| Faculty Adviser Erik Collins
c Asst. Advertising Manager Melissa Owenby
Asst. Classified Manager Amy Taylor
r ?
^ The Gamecock will try to print all letters received. Letters should be
200-250 words. Full name and professional title, or year and major
y if a student, must be included along with address and phone number.
The Gamecock reserves the right to edit letters for style, possible
libel or space limitations. The Gamecock will not withhold names
under any circumstances. ' -