Comments by
Page 1 of 1
Posted on October 18 at 3:28 p.m.Suggest removal
This initiative is crucial - the people who are being so dreadfully underpaid are the backbone of the university and that should recognized.
Posted on October 6 at 10:04 p.m.Suggest removal
@WalkingMan "What about those Eat-ins you organized last semester? I was there ready to swipe some homeless people and no one but a bunch of your Students for a Democratic Society people showed up. So I just swiped one of them in, helping you all but not the homeless."
The Eat-In was a pilot event to try to figure out new ways of improving food access to the Norman community. It didn't work out quite as well as planned - we did have six people (from the Salvation Army, a few churches, and the like) attend. Volunteers bought dinner for them, and SDS members who showed up to donate meals did swipe in other SDSers and members of Food Not Bombs. *To my knowledge*, no non-SDS volunteer donated a meal to an SDSer.
The event was not as a successful as we hoped because we failed to foresee that it could be an uncomfortable situation for the attendees, and we have since begun working on strategies to bring food to the people (rather than people to the food).
Posted on April 12 at 6:27 p.m.Suggest removal
SoonerDutch,
Uh, it may have escaped your limited intellectual capacity but the election fraud pertains to the presidential race, not the ballot initiatives.
Posted on April 1 at 1:55 a.m.Suggest removal
This made me smile! I applaud you for talking about gentlemanly behaviour without being misogynist or homophobic. Have to say, though, that steampunks would really disagree with the technology section ;)
Posted on March 4 at 9:52 a.m.Suggest removal
Mustafa, among the 34 universities that have such an option are Yale, Stanford, Harvard, Haverford, Princeton, and several public universities (University of California-Riverside, University of Michigan, University of Colorado at Boulder, among others).
I would like to say that most of Maranon's "quotes" are mostly more or less accurate paraphrases of what was actually said, but what else do we expect from the Daily these days?
Furthermore, gender neutral housing is centered on the needs of *transgendered* students, though the LGB and straight/cis-gendered community also benefits.
Posted on November 2 at 1:54 p.m.Suggest removal
"Myrick said in the matter of domestic violence, she thinks it is the responsibility of the mother to get herself out of that situation because it is harmful for anyone to be in."
This person completely fails to understand the complexities of abusive situations - what if the abuser threatens to kill the victim if they leave? What if the victim is financially dependent on their abuser? Abuse is not a cut-and-dry situation.
Also, this entire piece completely diverts the issue - Reproductive Rights week is a direct response to HB 1595, and this article barely addresses - and does not explain - what that is.
HB 1595 is a law that, if allowed to take effect, would require a woman seeking an abortion to fill out a 10 page questionnaire including questions about their relationship to the father, the county the abortion is performed in, etc. Then all this information would be placed on a publicly viewable database that would cost taxpayers well over $300,000 to maintain over the next two years alone.
This is an attack on reproductive rights because it creates busywork for doctors and violates women's privacy by posting details (that in many counties in Oklahoma) would make it possible to identify the woman having the abortion.
Posted on September 23 at 12:45 a.m.Suggest removal
This article is extremely biased against OSDS - I was at the meeting, and Matt Bruenig was recognized during a period when the chair asked for questions.
The point of Bruenig's criticism of Jennings was to highlight much of superficiality displayed at UOSA meetings. Furthermore, though UOSA had been invited to Davenport's several days before the meeting, members of UOSA and SDS were only notified today, after all the planning had been done.
UOSA is an important student organization, but due to internal factors it has failed to be representative of the student body and thus has little direction, resulting in waste of student money.
What about the absurdity of the fact that a STUDENT organization was shut out of a body that is supposed to represent students?
The point of OSDS' campaign is to get students involved in their government by running for representative positions (rather than being appointed) and voting on issues. http://www.takebackuosa.org
Page 1 of 1
Posted on November 3 at 9:10 p.m.Suggest removal
What I think all three men who wrote for these columns missed is pretty fundamental: WGSSA's loud, obnoxious counterdemonstration is one of the few comparable responses to JFA's gore carnival. Those non-profit status, $1,000, 20-foot signs are hard to come by for an underfunded student association but kuzoos and spray paint are pretty cheap. JFA is not interested in a fair dialogue - they are about shock and awe, emotionalism, and religion.
Why do Coker and Cross expect WGSSA - and the women who took part in that organisation's demonstration - to remain stoically academic in the face of such a truly ridiculous display? It was unclear from Coker/Cross's column, but did either of them actually try and talk to members and allies of WGSSA? As I was hovering around the display much of Tuesday (and a bit on Monday), I noticed that near the WGSSA literature table and behind it there was much less noise and a lot more conversation.
WGSSA provided a pamphlet that debunks the claims made by JFA, information on deceitful crisis pregnancy centres, and adverts for a movie showing and picnic. JFA is interested in creating a moral panic, WGSSA is interested in talking about women's *reality*, which - for about 1/3 of us - will include abortion at some point.
On