In response to “Group gives Mall presentation on history of Thanksgiving, offends some students” (by Stephanie Casanova and Kyle Wasson, Nov. 21):
The only person that decides whether or not you get offended by something is you. It is childish to whine about how historical presentations might offend someone. Grow up.
Focus on what the holiday is about, gratitude and being thankful for freedom and family and the ability to disagree with others and not be imprisoned for it. That’s what we should be thankful for.
Asking for cultural competency is not “childish” or “whining.” If one’s intent really is to honor a group of people that have been marginalized and oppressed, a basic first step would be to include them in the conversation. Thanksgiving does not have the same meaning for everyone attending the University of Arizona.
Freedom includes the freedom to speak out about things that are offensive to other cultures and discriminatory. I applaud Nazune Menka’s courage in doing so.
In response to “Students aim for tobacco-free campus with petition” (by Rachel McCluskey, Nov. 21):
Regardless of one study, many students hate the smell and pollution caused by second-hand smoke. Even if you believe that it will not affect your health substantially, it is an unpleasant experience to breathe in second-hand smoke and makes your clothes rank.
You would not go into a non-smokers house and start smoking as that would be rude; therefore, since we all share this campus as our home and the majority of students on campus do not smoke, smoking should be banned. If I was standing on the sidewalk you had to walk on to get to class with an aerosol filled with 4,000 harmful, industrial chemicals inside and sprayed you in the face as you walked by, how would you feel?
You can light up somewhere else. I do not spend $40,000 a year to be negatively affected by other people’s addictions, thank you.
— Nursing Student
I was shocked to read this and see smoking on campus was even allowed now. The students should not have to be pushing for this, the Governor should. It’s legal to drink at 21 but can they stand outside and drink a beer on campus?
I’m a smoker and there are just places I would not dream of having a cigarette. This is a stinking habit that belongs to me, not everyone around me.
In response to “UAMC offers new communication services to aid hearing impaired and limited English speakers” (by Sarah-Jayne Simon, Nov. 20):
Please be advised that the term, “hearing impaired” is unacceptable. Here is the explanation:
The term “hearing impaired” is a technically accurate term much preferred by hearing people, largely because they view it as politically correct. In the mainstream society, to boldly state one’s disability (e.g., deaf, blind, etc.) is somewhat rude and impolite. To their way of thinking, it is far better to soften the harsh reality by using the word “impaired” along with “visual,” “hearing,” and so on.
“Hearing-impaired” is a well-meaning word that is much-resented by deaf and hard of hearing people. This term was popular in the ’70s and ’80s, however, now is used mostly by doctors, audiologists and other people who are mainly interested in our ears “not working.”
While it’s true that their hearing is not perfect, that doesn’t make them impaired as people. Most would prefer to be called Deaf, Hard of Hearing or deaf when the need arises to refer to their hearing status, but not as a primary way to identify them as people (where their hearing status is not significant).
We are deaf, and not people with impairments (obstacles) in life!
Hope that you and your people respect by refusing to use the outdated and offensive term. Hearing loss is more acceptable for everyone who is not just deaf.
— Louis Schwarz