Letters to the Editor

Brutality article not complete with details

The author of the letter from a few days ago raised the interesting point that as an engaged woman the author was not entitled to domestic partner benefits. My question is this: What exactly is a domestic partner? When it a relationship is called a "caring, committed union," what kind of relationship is it? Well, the first assumption is that it is like a marriage, a man and a woman who are in love and promise to only love each other and this includes sexual fidelity, and this is stated in writing in a certificate. I believe that this is perfectly possible for homosexual couples as well.

The only problem is that this can also describe a heterosexual relationship between two unmarried people, because the fidelity doesn’t require a certificate of marriage. For the domestic partner benefits, I think the question should also be asked, who will not be allowed to have benefits?

If a homosexual couple is allowed these benefits because they are committed to each other, even though they are not married, why shouldn’t an unmarried heterosexual couple get these benefits if they are committed to each other? Do they not have a caring, committed relationship? We could extend this further, if the commitment doesn’t include sex. After all, it’s possible for two friends to love each other non-sexually, why shouldn’t they get benefits as well? Perhaps this is going too far, but my point is this: Where do you draw the line?

Stephen Halperin
graduate-plant physiology

Sorry folks, no one ever said that learning should be easy or that you as a student have no responsibility here. I’ve had perfect English-speaking instructors who wouldn’t talk to me because I was female or because I was a returning adult student older than they were. I’ve had full professors who couldn’t explain the simplest areas of their field to a non-major and some who assumed that there is only one learning style as they read off their dusty notes. And I’ve been a foreign student in another country and absurdly grateful to anyone who took the time to try to understand me.

What I learned from these experiences is that it is my responsibility to figure out how I can learn new material and in spite of the obstacles you complain about. In other words, I learned how to be a learner and, when necessary, a self-teacher. That’s called "education." Just wait until you hit the corporate world where new material comes at you thick and fast. No one will be impressed with your excuses that the instructor was no good.

Karen Wynn
university staff

At a university with an incredible athletic program, it is evident that student athletes are often put in the limelight for their accolades. Although they are often praised for their outstanding accomplishments, they are also under a scrutinizing public eye for every mistake that they make.

In the case of Jamarr Billman, the publicity went way too far. In the past few days, I have been disappointed in the lack of integrity shown by Collegian writers. By plastering Billman’s face on the front page of the Collegian with negative headlines, the Collegian has proven to me that they are just out for a story no matter whose reputation they hurt.

There are probably a number of students on this campus who have run into the same trouble as Jamarr, but their pride and reputability are not shattered due to front-page headlines. As a woman, I feel that the allegations brought against Jamarr are very serious. Never, in any case, is it acceptable for a man to mistreat a woman, either physically or mentally. However, I do not know what kind of relationship Jamarr had with his former girlfriend, nor do I care. In defense of Jamarr Billman, regardless of his private life, and other Penn State athletes, I challenge The Daily Collegian to regain some sense of journalistic integrity and treat all students fairly, athlete or not.

Bobbie Albanese
junior-nutrition