Graduation plan doesn’t account for Dec. grads

Dear Editor:

I have to say I am very upset by President Lefton’s decision to move to a single commencement, especially because it will adversely affect me and my class first. I am an intended graduate of December 2007.

As a student since 2001, I have worked hard to get to the point where I am preparing for graduation. College is not without its trials and tribulations, and I know that better than anyone, having to have taken two years off from school in the past. Now that I’ve had a chance to come back and complete my education, my joy of graduating has be trampled by the fact that I will not have the ceremony I had wished for all these years. I will have to wait five months before my efforts are recognized and I’m given the formal recognition deserved.

To simply be handed a diploma in December and have no other recognition is like a slap in the face after all the hard work I’ve put forth to get to graduation. The fact that I was given no choice in the matter angers me more than anything. Why haven’t the students collectively been given the opportunity to vote for or against this single ceremony? Our tuition is what is funding the graduation ceremony – why can’t we make the decision?

I have to question how much money it will actually save by eliminating the fall and summer ceremonies. Also, how much of that money is going to this “grand celebration,” and how much more will be spent after that? Students have a right to know exactly where their tuition money is going, and in this case should have a right to decide how it is spent.

Will you count my vote President Lefton? My vote is NO. I want to complete my college experience like all my peers that graduated before me and not have my graduation be put on hold till May.

Brandi Slick

Junior Gerontology Major

Understand context before using words

Dear Editor:

I am writing in response to Brian Thornton’s article “I can have the f-word” in the Nov. 21 edition of the Stater. I am not writing because I disagree with Mr. Thornton’s view. Quite the contrary, I think it was well written.

I do, however, wish to elaborate on some of the things he said. He said that the person who sent him the letter was wrong for using the word “fag” because he hadn’t lived the experience.

I would say that this person is wrong for another reason, as well. When the word “fag” is used within the homosexual community, it holds a different meaning than it does in the straight community. In the gay community, calling someone a “fag” just means, “Hey, you’re gay – literally.” In the straight community, calling someone a “fag” means that the person is stupid, weak, enraging, wrong and generally just an awful person. In this sense, you are equating the word to all of these meanings, and thus you are saying that gay people are bad, stupid, weak, enraging, etc.

I personally try to never use the word “fag.” This is because the word literally means “object to be burned,” and I don’t feel right calling people as such. I can’t stand here and tell people what to say or what to think, but I can ask you to think before you speak.

Shawn Szymecki

Senior biology major

Vice President, PRIDE!Kent