Staff editorial stereotypes Greek groups on campus
Although I was once a first-year PNM (potential new member) who joined a sorority her first year, I tried to read the staff editorial with an open mind by accepting someone’s opinion that had not gone through recruitment or had a horrible recruitment experience. Those were the plausible explanations for the blatantly bitter editorial regarding sororities.
You likened the unfair business interview process to the sorority selection process. Who among us has not tried to dress in a nice suit, comb our hair, shower and make sure we were at the top of our game during a business interview? I’ll tell you what; the person who didn’t try to put her best foot forward probably did not get the job. Was the interviewer discriminating? Perhaps. But a more likely reason for the selection is that the interviewer did not find the interviewee to be professional enough for the job. We go through life making first impressions; once you get passed the introductions, you’re able to really get to the meat of a person.
While this seems difficult to achieve in the five-day recruitment process, the people who search out sororities as being something they’re into, normally fall into the right place. A recommendation? Besides only naming the “diverse” groups on campus like Black Student Union or Latino Student Association, why not reach middle ground and recommend first years to wait on trying to join a sorority? They can see what each group is really like through their annual activities and come rush time in fall of their sophomore year (unless they go overseas) they’re able to have a better handle on which group best fits them.
I was a first-year PNM, and I found the sorority I was supposed to belong in. Alpha Phi is a diverse group of individuals that pride themselves on their social habits as well as their scholastic, sisterhood and service facets. They make sure to cover all the bases, and I feel they represent a high-quality group of esteemed, well-rounded women.
You sure forgot to mention them in your editorial. But alas, stereotypes from the ‘90s continue to plague these groups. We’ve all heard of the party sororities — once a party sorority always a party sorority. Oh you don’t want to join them, they only take the rich girls. How many years will this continue? I guess if you buy into the “PepperVine” then you are guilty of continuing these stereotypes.
Why not put a more positive spin on it and welcome the fact that there are numerous groups on campus and a new student is bound to find a home away from home in one of them, sororities included?
Melani Bruce
Seaver Graduate ‘04
Perspectives Editor should appear with Bill O’Reilly
What do Keanu Reeve’s performance in “Constantine,” Chris Segal’s editorial from the Oct. 6 issue of the Graphic and global warming all have in common? They all suck.
After describing briefly the theories behind anthropogenic causes of global warming, Segal writes, “There will be no pro/cons written about global warming. No one supports global warming. That doesn’t mean there isn’t opposition to global warming. One fact remains, there is no overwhelming proof that global warming can be attributed to greenhouse gases, or that it will be catastrophic.”
The article indicates reasons why GHGs don’t cause global warming. Each of his arguments is a fallacious attempt to debunk the “hype” of GW. There are good advocates disputing anthropogenic causes of global warming, notably Professor Mike Balling of Arizona State University. Even though he has his own flaws (like being paid off by Exxon-Mobile), he has reasonable arguments.
Segal concluded his article by writing “Is it important to bring about an end to global warming? Not really. No one can prove there is such a thing.”
Segal’s article even concedes that GHG emissions have a part in global warming. A recent article by Ronald P. Jackson, someone with more than 20 years experience as an Environmental Project manager says “Power plants also account for 40 percent of our nation’s CO2 emissions and about 10 percent of the worldwide CO2 emissions … it is a principal contributor to the problem of global warming. It also contributes to the depletion of the atmosphere’s ozone layer, which filters out ultraviolet light from the sun.”
Segal also points out the political issues. He is right — the honorable crusade to debunk the “theoretical dangers” of global warming is political. Just look at where Segal writes “U.S. greenhouse emissions were 14 percent higher than the 1990 level when Clinton left office in 2001,” or even his blip that Kyoto was “a bad treaty that the previous administration knew was bad but left it on the table for the next guy,” even though that “next guy” could have very well been Al Gore.
If Segal keeps this up, maybe he’ll show up on the O’Reilly Factor. Now, where are the keys to my Prius?
Michael Wang
Sophomore
10-27-2005