OPINION & EDITORIAL
LGBT opposes proposal
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Letters to the Editor:
- SSFC stipend appropriate (December 11, 2007)
- Poor plowing cuts off handicapped access (December 10, 2007)
- Cars that actually help the environment (December 10, 2007)
- Organic food: Deliciously safe (December 10, 2007)
- Diversity deserves attention at UW (December 7, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Dean of Students needs to be accessible; Hong best candidate (August 30, 2002)
- Trick or treat (September 1, 2005)
- Chime in, students (January 25, 2007)
- Redirecting control (April 23, 2003)
by Letters to the Editor
Wednesday, April 13, 2005
Recently, Dean of Students Luoluo Hong introduced a proposal to restructure and reorganize the many organizations connected with the Offices of the Dean of Students. One such organization that would be significantly affected by this proposal is the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Campus Center.
We appreciate and support Dean Hong’s goal of more effectively addressing social justice issues in a meaningful and substantial way. However, we do not feel this proposal can actually meet that goal. Additionally, we are concerned about the process through which this proposal was created because students have been completely excluded from the creation of this plan.
Unlike most substantial changes to university policy and student life, there has been very little student involvement in this process, though clearly students will be heavily impacted by this potential reorganization. Contrary to a prior press release by ODOS, no evidence has been presented to demonstrate that the proposal’s priorities actually originated in student feedback or concerns. In fact, students just found out about the proposal — which is scheduled to be implemented July 1 — though the discussions leading to its inception began several months ago and have been needlessly shrouded in secrecy.
Also, it is unclear as to why the reorganization is necessary and what problems or obstacles it will attempt to overcome. ODOS has tried to make it seem as though student feedback about this process has been completely positive, yet there has been no official feedback given. Furthermore, students began to express grave concerns with this proposal immediately after finding out about it. We as the student staff of the LGBTCC do not believe this process has been legitimate, fair or respectful to us, our organization or our constituents.
With respect to the content of the proposal itself, one of the goals is to splice the LGBTCC with the Multicultural Student Center, the Diversity Education Program and other social justice organizations on campus. We are dismayed that we could potentially lose our autonomy and internal structure as an organization, two things that were promised to us two years ago when our resource center became affiliated with the Dean of Students Office. If these promises are broken, what faith can we have that future commitments made to us by ODOS will be upheld?
A previous decision made by Dean Hong eliminated our Graduate Assistant Position, and this proposal will essentially demote our current professional director. We as the student staff had no input in these drastic alterations to our organization, and we do not support them at all.
One priority of the proposal is to address an “identity schism” students face by making several distinct offices into a single organization that somehow addresses all aspects of all oppressed populations. While it is a challenge to integrate race and class into a center whose focus is on sexuality and gender identity, no evidence has been provided to show that this plan is the solution. Have any of these constituencies actually asked for this merger between the LGBTCC and these other organizations? To our knowledge the answer is a resounding “NO.”
If all of these offices are combined, the safe spaces offered by each are all compromised. A safe space exists for people of a shared identity to come together and this crucial function will be destroyed if these unique spaces are made into one.
On a campus that struggles daily with retention and recruitment of marginalized populations, lumping our already scarce resources together into a single unit in the hopes of trimming the budget is unthinkable. This action sends the message that one office is sufficient to meet the needs of all oppressed peoples.
Clearly, we as the student staff of the LGBTCC are angry and disturbed by the actions taken by Dean Hong to create and implement this proposal. We are frustrated for being excluded from discussions which led to its creation and as a student staff we have identified numerous problems with its outcomes. We believe this proposal and the process used to create it is a drastic abuse of power by the dean of students, and we are currently exploring equally drastic options in order to protect our organization.
Sincerely,
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Campus Center Student Staff
lgbtcc@rso.wisc.edu
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 5:52am):
As soon as y'all figure out that nobody but your tiny band of whiners gives a fuck about your "social justice" issues, the sooner you'll get a life.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 7:14am):
"As soon as y'all figure out that nobody but your tiny band of whiners gives a fuck about your "social justice" issues, the sooner you'll get a life."
Oh I see. See I thought you guys were the "moral" people. But now I realize you don't give a fuck about anyone besides yourself, no matter how immoral you act.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 7:19am):
Here's a deal: If you poor, oppressed minorities stop taking cheap shots at innocent heterosexuals, men and white people in general, we'll stop trying to back you all into a corner where you can do no more harm.
Madison has been a liberal, tolerant city for more than forty years. Apart from the occasional hate crime once or twice every year, this is one place where you should all feel safe. The rest of us, especially those of us who supported you over the years, would also like to feel safe.
We'd like to be able to go places and do things without having to worry about being accosted by some politically correct moron who has a perpetual need to accuse everyone he/she runs into of being racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, whatever!
Madison should be a place for anyone and everyone. So far it has yet to happen. Shall we?
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 7:21am):
"On a campus that struggles daily with retention and recruitment of marginalized populations, lumping our already scarce resources together into a single unit in the hopes of trimming the budget is unthinkable."
Is retention and recruitment of LGBT retention and recruiment even tracked? Anybody? Bueller?
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 7:27am):
I'm a straight white male and I don't see anyone taking "cheap shots" at me or any "politically correct" accusing me of being racist. What the hell does that even mean?
I admit I know nothing about this porposal and don't even care-all for tlgbc rights just its not my cause- but I do know that there is hardly the culture of presecution of straight people in this city that you insist.
When was the last time you were called "cunt-pirate" when out around town? Never. There is no persecution of the straight whites in this town. Get a life.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 7:57am):
Homosexuals in Madison and in general are persecuted approximately .006% as much as they think they are.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 8:02am):
"Homosexuals in Madison and in general are persecuted approximately .006% as much as they think they are."
Except for the fact that we have protestors telling them they are immoral evil sinners on street corners and a president and Republican congress and senate that ran on a platform of homophobia.
As I recall Republicans were against civil rights for blacks as well. Why doesn't it surprise me that they are against them for the TLBGBC community?
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 8:21am):
If you're thinking of the 1960s, then you've got your parties confused - it was the Democrats that were opposed to civil rights.
But then I assume you think set-asides are rights, so maybe the present is what you're talking about.
Remember, those bible-thumpers have you morons out there protesting their existence as well. So that makes them oppressed by your logic as well.
Both sides should tie cinderblocks around their necks and go for a swim in Lake Mendota for all I care. Life would be so much easier if the .25% of Americans who think they're "oppressed" or feel the need to comment on the bedroom activities of others would just off themselves.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 8:21am):
Maybe if everyone stopped whining that they are oppressed and damaged they might find that that is very untrue. Just because some idiot says something to you doesn't mean you have to take it as the population. In an area with so many people, you would be hard pressed not to find a few dozen jerks and what not. But to claim that you are being wronged for being straight/gay/black/white is asinine. People like to bitch about everything and never just get over it and realize that nothing wrong has happened.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 8:23am):
If they just got over it, they wouldn't get to "protest" and get their picture in the paper.
Mommy and daddy didn't listen to them, so I guess we damn well better.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 8:24am):
Well technically the democrats that were against civil rights were the dixie-crats. All of whom went on to join the republican party in the following years. If you think Strom Thurmond is a liberal then you need to read your history book.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 8:28am):
"Except for the fact that we have protestors telling them they are immoral evil sinners on street corners ..."
That's oppression?
"... and a president and Republican congress and senate that ran on a platform of homophobia."
what
LGBTCC ODOS LOL OMG WTF
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 8:29am):
I got $5 says I know more about history than you, friend.
So you admit this quote: "As I recall Republicans were against civil rights for blacks as well. " is wrong then.
Dixiecrats sure as hell weren't voting Republican before the 1970s.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 9:37am):
"Well technically the democrats that were against civil rights were the dixie-crats."
Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd, past Grand Klegal (recruitment officer) for the KKK and former advocate of racial segregation who obstructed the confirmation of the first African-American woman to be nominated to be Secretary of State.
And if you don't think that's exactly how CBS and the rest of the MSM would have played the story if Byrd were a Republican and Rice a Democratic nominee, I have some genuine Bush National Guard documents to sell you.
***
EX-KLANSMAN Robert Byrd, the senior senator from West Virginia, casually used the phrase "white nigger" twice on national TV this weekend. Enraged civil rights groups organized a protest campaign against Sen. Byrd and demanded that he undergo sensitivity training ... not. The ex-Klansman, you see, is a Democrat. Democrats can join hate groups and utter the ugliest racial slurs and get away with it because they are Democrats. They belong to the party of racial tolerance and understanding. They're paragons of virtue, and the rest of us are bigoted rubes.
The ex-Klansman's admirers praise his historical knowledge, mastery of procedural rules, and outspokenness. They refer to the Senate's senior Democrat as the "conscience of the Senate." They downplay his white-sheet-wearing days as a "brief mistake" -- as if joining the Klan were like knocking over a glass of water.
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/michelle/malkin030801.asp
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 9:52am):
"Except for the fact that we have protestors telling them they are immoral evil sinners on street corners and a president and Republican congress and senate that ran on a platform of homophobia."
I have a solution: don't be gay.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 10:05am):
"I have a solution: don't be gay."
Amazing how someone can be so utterly stupid.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 10:25am):
What the hell does "transgendered" mean? I liked it better when they were just the 10 Percent Society.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 10:28am):
"But to claim that you are being wronged for being straight/gay/black/white is asinine. People like to bitch about everything and never just get over it and realize that nothing wrong has happened."
Nothing wrong has happened?
How about the guy who's brutally beaten in a high school locker room for being gay? Or the woman who can't get hired because she's a lesbian? Or a state legislature trying to pass and an amendment to deny marriage or anything similar along with the more than 11,000 legal rights that go with it to LGBT people, or the university not even giving domestic partner benefits? (I could go on.)
This isn't about people just liking to "bitch about everything." Maybe we don't like to admit it and or maybe these aren't things you've experienced, but that doesn't mean that oppression simply does not exist. These are very real and very daunting issues for many people and that is why places like the LGBT Campus Center exist. To enact major changes that would harm this and similar organizations that serve marginalized populations without even asking for student input is unacceptable -- and that is the issue at hand.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 10:34am):
My new favorite word...heteronormative. Here's the Harvard Crimson article if you haven't read it.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=506104
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 10:48am):
If someone is beaten because of their skin color, gender, sexual orientation, or because they took a weedwhacker to their pecker, then we can talk.
I agree marriage benefits should apply to gays.
On the other hand, if you're getting upset about "heteronormativity" like those morons in the Harvard Crimson article, then you should be executed because you serve no purpose on this planet other than to complain. End of argument.
You don't have a right to not be offended, so get over it.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 11:10am):
"I have a solution: don't be gay."
And I have a solution for you: grow a brain.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 11:13am):
Go away fags.
Emily (April 13, 2005 @ 11:28am):
In response to "Go away fags."
The Badger Herald states clearly, "We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted."
I find your comment offensive and an attack on a whole group of people who are simply trying to stand up for themselves. If you cannot communicate about the subject matter (the ODOS proposal) in a respectful way, please do not comment at all.
Emily (April 13, 2005 @ 11:32am):
I would also like to mention that today is the Day of Silence, a day protesting the silence faced by LGBT people which is caused by harassment, prejudice and discrimination. Many of the comments that I have read here today belittle my identity and silence my voice by blatently belittling LGBT people. Please be aware that we are people too, and we have feelings and deserve to fight for what we believe in.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 11:33am):
THIS is "liberal" Madison? This is the place that people of all sexual orietation are supposedly welcomed and accepted? How dense are you people, that you could ever actually believe that prejudice against the LGBT community does not exist? For once, step outside of yourself and think!
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 11:35am):
"A previous decision made by Dean Hong eliminated our Graduate Assistant Position, and this proposal will essentially demote our current professional director."
AHA... Now, I understand why they are objecting to this decision. It's all about getting the most cushy jobs (free money) for the most people.
Also speaking of Badger Herald policies why isn't this article signed by an actual person? I thought the Herald didn't publish unsigned letters.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 11:50am):
The opposition to this proposal has nothing to do with money, and everything to do with having the same resources as other student organizations on campus: a director and paid staff who represent the needs of the constituent students. Also, this letter is signed by the wonderful staff of the LGBT Campus Center, who throughout the letter clearly stated that the STUDENT STAFF authored the letter.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 12:17pm):
Emily, getting worked up over an anonymous three-word post on a website does you no good. While there are real attacks that should be acknowledged, there are other ones (like this) that should just be ignored.
That said, while you have a right to not be discriminated against in governmental and judicial matters (apart from gay marraige for the moment), as well as in employment, you cannot limit what people as private citizens can think or say about your lifestyle. It is their first ammendment right to disagree with it and call it "wrong" if they want to. It is their right to call you names. It may not be tasteful, but it is not illegal.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 12:19pm):
this is sooooooo hetero-normative...it's disgusting!
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 12:47pm):
Whats with all the insecurity surrounding comments like "get over it" or "it's not really a problem".
On racism, for example. I hope that all of you critics do understand that admitting that we are still (after a whole 40 years) a very racist society is not a sign of weakness. It doesn't mean you have to give back the money you've earned by being on the inside looking out. It doesn't mean that your accomplishments mean less because you've succeeded because of, rather than inspite of, society. It's just an acknowledgement that we have a ways to go.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 1:01pm):
What the hell is TLBGBC anyway? Or Transgender for that matter?
I've never understood groups like this that band together and shout at the world "Accept me! Accept me!" Why would anyone care what anyone else thinks of them? Be yourself; have confidence in yourself, and be proud of who you are. When you do that, suddenly what other people think doesn't matter.
As for the issue in this article, I have a difficult time believing that this came up with zero input from those who have a vested interest in it. Don't blame the fact that "students never had input" for this going forward. That students didn't have input may mean they had no input to give, or aren't concerned.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 1:10pm):
This goes to show you that Madison isn't the open and accpeting haven everyone thinks it is. Automatically people rant about lgbt and minority rights when most of the article has to do with the consolidation of many offices by the administrative offices created to protect students. The lgbtcc is the only office that is making public statements about a proposal that effects all students..not just lgbtq students. We are getting LESS for our rising tuition costs because of the ODOS's proposal and all people want to talk about is whether the lgbtcc has a right to complain about being downsized. Would it be ok if our religious campus groups were forced into one 'religious' center? Or our political groups forced into one 'political' center? Or sports? Wait, they produce tons of revenue so we won't touch them. They're all related. And if you have any answer to that at all, it doesn't matter because the ODOS doesn't ask students about their lives and what they need in the first place.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 1:25pm):
Why would anyone care what anyone else thinks of them? See, the humans, they have these things call feelings.
I'm not a crier. I'm not a promise-keeper, I don't go into the woods and beat a drum and scream about how repressed I am. I am not a stereotypical "liberal" (meaning I drink beer and play football and hunt and chase girls and do all of these things with people who feel the same way about these issues as I do).
I am a white dude who has lived as a minority in other parts of the world. I am also someone who has been the victim of racism ranging from blatant hiring discrimination (with accompanying snide, offensive comments) to getting jumped. For those of you who haven't been discriminated against by the majority based on something that you can't control, here's a newsflash - it sucks. It hurt the very same feelings that apologists tend to dismiss as weak. It made me sad, and angry, and suspicous and sensitive. It affected my confidence in all areas of my life and generally made most aspects of my day more difficult. Even at the time I knew these feelings were irrational, that not all of the majority was out to get me, that those who hurt me were the minority of the majority. It still sucked. All of this and I was still fortunate to know that I could come back to the good old USA and, as a reasonably well-off white male, be top dog again.
I write all this knowing that most of those who attack sensitivity in general will disregard it. I do hope that it will get at least one person out there thinking about how impossible it is to criticize someone else's response to such despicable prejudice based on something that one cannot control. I feel that a person's perception of prejudice is based on their experiences, and as much as I hate to do it, I hope that every single negative poster above someday experiences true, vile, painful prejudice (and that doesn't include affirmative action or forced political correctness, sorry chump).
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 1:46pm):
Sure, discrimination is wrong, that's why there are laws against it. And if you go out and beat someone based on race, gender, or orientation, you get punished.
So while I understand the "feelings" of oppression, or whatever you call it, I still do not understand why you have to respond to it. Outside of discrimination or physical attack, it's really up to you to decide whether you are going to let someone's opinion of you hurt you or not. Everyone has different opinions, and if you go through life trying to convince everyone of your point of view it's going to be a long, lonely life indeed.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 1:50pm):
Go away republicans.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 1:58pm):
I think the point is that until you experience you wont understand how bad it hurts. easy to say get over it when you've never gotten over anything yourself.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 2:31pm):
No, no. You know who was right all along? The Mongolians. They knew that you just can't wall yourself off from the outside world. Putting walls up never helps anything. Tearing them down brings us together.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 2:41pm):
stupid mongolians
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 3:07pm):
Ah yes, the discussion is quite civilized over here.
To all the racist, homophobes out there ("go away fags") I say, have a big black man have sex with you today, get over your latent homosexuality, and leave the rest of us alone.
To the undoubtedly numerous "straight" men getting pissed in here...we know you love the Thursday night circle jerk over at Sig Ep...hell I was there with you the other night! (You're hot Derek, but for god's sake, get that hood cut!).
Anyhoo...if people here think that discrimination doesn't take place...then their head is further up their ass than they're in the closet.
Have fun, boys!
Sarah Stumpf (April 13, 2005 @ 5:34pm):
As a person who considers themselves fairly up on issues concerning her community, I'm completely shocked that this has all been going on and that I have heard nothing about it until now. I'm extremely involved in 10% Society and I haven't even heard that there was any kind of proposal like this on the table until now. The LGBTCC is an invaluable resource for gay people on this campus, who dispite what some might think do actually face harassment here. That the Deans Office would be doing all this behind our backs shocks and hurts me. When were the actual LGTB people on this campus going to have a say about what happens to us? I would love to work with various diversity and social justice groups on campus as part of a larger coalition, but not because we've had our funding slashed, our positions and space taken, and have all been corralled together. That won't build community, it will build hurt feelings, resentment, inadequate services being provided to students, and bickering. I implore Luoluo Hong to reconsider this plan or to at least schedule some public meetings where our future can be discussed with us included.
Sarah Stumpf
History/Women's Studies Majors
Senior
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 6:54pm):
"For those of you who haven't been discriminated against by the majority based on something that you can't control, here's a newsflash - it sucks. It hurt the very same feelings that apologists tend to dismiss as weak. It made me sad, and angry, and suspicous and sensitive. It affected my confidence in all areas of my life and generally made most aspects of my day more difficult."
As a white male being a minority in a different country.. and not being able to handle it without your 'feelings' being hurt.. it shows you are weak. Let's hope to god that Political correctness doesn't stop darwin's theory of making you disappear..
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 7:50pm):
wow..so the only problem with discrimination is that people are too weak to handle it?!
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 8:13pm):
Thinking is for liberals!
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 9:05pm):
Since it is a day of silence you should shut up, fag.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 9:41pm):
I know you think it's funny to throw around words like "fag", but it's really not you fucking mindless asshole. They may just be words, but they are words that people have been killed over before.
I'm a white straight male and I'm sick and fucking tired of other white straight males acting like it's so hard to be in their position in America. The fact of the matter is that it is still far easier to be a white straight man in America than it is to be anything else. I know this because unlike most of you I am already working in the "real world" and I have been told by many coworkers that the company I work for is known for hiring only conservative looking white males. Not because they are racist, but because it makes their clients feel better. It's fucking sick and I am still seriously considering leaving the company because of it. Stop bitching and moaning till the you are making less per dollar than blacks or females.
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 9:49pm):
"When was the last time you were called "cunt-pirate" when out around town? Never. There is no persecution of the straight whites in this town. Get a life."
Who do you think made up the term "cunt pirate"? Not straights, I'll tell ya that! So obviously there is prejudice against straights here. How can you deny that?
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 9:55pm):
"I'm a white straight male and I'm sick and fucking tired of other white straight males acting like it's so hard to be in their position in America."
How do we know that you're really a straight white male?! Who are you? What's your name?
Anonymous (April 13, 2005 @ 10:08pm):
The plain and simple fact of the matter is that no one has to care about you. You can shove it up your ass sideways if you have a problem with it. You and all your bitching is what created all the apathy toward your own issues. Instead of taking your own causes seriously, you just went out on the street and fucked with every innocent passerby you could get your hands on.
THAT is why you're getting the shit end of the stick nowadays. You claimed you wanted equal rights and you wound up pissing people off instead.
Anonymous (April 14, 2005 @ 12:24am):
Yes.. Weak people dwell on their emotions.. gay or straight.. if you're weak.. you deserve to go..
Anonymous (April 14, 2005 @ 12:29am):
MMMMMMMMMmmmmm... Cock.. Cumming All in My Mouth.. If anyone wants some.. I'm the gayest gay in LGB.. (T's are freakin wierd so I don't acknowledge them.. Some have 3 penises)
Anonymous (April 14, 2005 @ 12:35am):
If your child draws things like this.. they're probably homosexual-american
http://maddox.xmission.com/c.cgi?u=irule
Anonymous (April 14, 2005 @ 9:13am):
"As I recall Republicans were against civil rights for blacks as well."
Civil War.
Too long ago?
1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Over eighty percent of Republicans voted for both.
Look up the percetnages of Democrats who voted in favor of those.
Anonymous (April 14, 2005 @ 11:30am):
Sarah:
Nobody gives a fuck whether or not you're "hurt" and "shocked".
We don't need to spend tax dollars to make sure you don't feel "hurt" or "shocked".
If Americans were mostly like you in 1941, we'd be speaking Japanese or German right now and you sure as hell wouldn't be posting complaints on a message board.
Anonymous (April 14, 2005 @ 12:31pm):
'Instead of taking your own causes seriously, you just went out on the street and fucked with every innocent passerby you could get your hands on'.
It's amazing how our mere silent physical presence on the street is a threat.
Anonymous (April 14, 2005 @ 12:34pm):
"If Americans were mostly like you in 1941, we'd be speaking Japanese or German right now and you sure as hell wouldn't be posting complaints on a message board."
that doesn't make any fuckin sense! If Americans were mostly like her we'd be a more inclusive country instead of filled with morons like you.
Anonymous (April 14, 2005 @ 2:32pm):
"It's amazing how our mere silent physical presence on the street is a threat."
Wrong, kiddo. When you're silent, we don't even notice you. When you shoot your mouth off at us is when we decide to be less sympathetic. When you take it a step further and start fucking with us is when we decide that you could use a little leaning on. and finally it's when you attack one of us that wedecide that it's open season on your sorry ass.
Get the idea now?
Anonymous (April 14, 2005 @ 6:20pm):
>>
"If Americans were mostly like you in 1941, we'd be speaking Japanese or German right now and you sure as hell wouldn't be posting complaints on a message board."
that doesn't make any fuckin sense! If Americans were mostly like her we'd be a more inclusive country instead of filled with morons like you.
<<
Yeah, the Nazis were really inclusive - they'd have included your arse right into the ovens! LGBTs were all sent to the camps.
The Japanese were really inclusive - as long as you were a pure-bred Japanese - otherwise it was slave labor or death-march time (or maybe "comfort woman" time) for you!
Anonymous (April 14, 2005 @ 11:17pm):
You're gay.. so what?
build a bridge and get over it..
Become a scientist (useful) instead of an activist (waste of space)..
Anonymous (April 15, 2005 @ 6:42pm):
Does it seem insensitive to not only drastically change our university structure without student inclusion, but to make the deadline so close to finals? I'm trying to decide if I should devote time to giving an appropriate response or study for tests. Why would a university punish students for wanting to partake in this momentous change to our academic institution?!? How could we not benefit from thinking these changes through a little more?
...and regarding student input, SOMETHING must be wrong if so much student input was taken just to generate such a negative reaction from the students themselves. Just something to ponder.
