LSU NAACP calls for bar boycott
As of May 1, we are now calling a BOYCOTT of all Tigerland Bars, such as Reggie’s and Tiger Bar, that post and implement openly racist dress code signs. For years we have been patrons of these establishments and they continue to discourage our patronage. Therefore, we should no longer give them our money. We should no longer just talk about how hideous it is to be discriminated against. It is now time that we be proactive and take action!! These dress code statements are their way of saying “NO COLORED ALLOWED.” Are we not in 2003? It is as though we are living in the 1950s with these attitudes toward African Americans. These dress codes are ridiculous and offensive. If they do not want us there, we should not give them the pleasure of accepting our money.
Again, we ask that ALL STUDENTS, OF ALL BACKGROUNDS, RACES, RELIGIONS, ETC., no longer patron these bars. These practices are ridiculous and uncalled for. Let your voice be heard!!
Melody R. Robinson
President, LSU NAACP
Senior — Business Administration
‘Prejudiced’ article lacked balance
Those who believe that dress code policies in Tigerland are prejudiced are missing the point. An establishment’s reputation is based upon the types of people who visit that [business]. Therefore, it is the right of that establishment to ban clothing they do not believe is conducive to the image that establishment is attempting to portray. Would anyone wear a jersey and baggy jeans to a country club?
Essentially, when you enter a bar, you are admitted to a “club” for the evening. This is hardly a black/white issue; the issue is the bar’s right to portray a certain image. As a person who frequents Tigerland, I can attest to the fact that many African Americans choose to adhere to the dress codes and are allowed to enter the establishments there.
As a mass communication student, I also take deep offense to the bias of the reporter who wrote this story. Nowhere in the article was an objecting argument given. I realize that the owners of these establishments were not cooperative, but the reporter could have easily gone to Tigerland on any night and interviewed patrons, doormen, bartenders, etc … Also, why single out Tigerland? I hear no such allegations of prejudice in discussing the dress codes of public schools. Are they not equally prejudiced?
Mathew Sanders
Freshman — Mass Communication
Bars have the right to post dress codes
This letter is in response to Walter Gabriel and Mark Bonner’s article titled “Prejudiced policies.” The first thing I noticed in this article is neither author had encountered a person who could say that the doorman or bar owner specifically came out and told them they could not get into the bar because they were African American or that they had made a racial comment toward them. Until you have a witness that claims this happened, you have no right to accuse someone of being prejudiced. The only right you have is to say that someone does not like the way you dress, which, as far as I know, is not against the law.
The authors also interviewed people who say bar owners make up this policy to keep out African Americans. I challenge anyone to sit outside of any Tigerland bar and see if a white person were allowed in with those clothes. The purpose of the dress code is not to keep out a race but to keep out people who wish to expose their underwear to the world with “pants that are too baggy.”
Another thing you should have thought about when you said these bars are trying to exclude African Americans through the dress code is that another one of the things mentioned on the dress code poster is that no mullets are allowed. I don’t know about you but last time I checked African Americans did not wear mullets. Everyone knows what the dress code is before you get there because it is very boldy presented over the doorway so there is no excuse. If you don’t like a particular dress code, don’t go to that bar.
Please find something else to complain about and accuse people of, because if Tigerland bars are predjudiced toward African Americans then why are African Americans present in every bar I go to?
Rachel Galarza
Sophomore — Dairy Science
Student ‘astonished’ by small mindedness
After reading the comments on The Reveille Web site from the “Prejudiced Policies” article yesterday, I am astonished at the gall of small-minded individuals who would stand for the supposed “rights” of an establishment that supports blatant discrimination. While I agree it is the right of any bar or business owner to exercise discretion with regard to its patrons, I disagree with the notion that a person’s attire can disrupt the normal business of a bar sitting across from a pasture and next to a railroad track with a raised plywood dance floor and hand-me-down pool tables.
I feel almost obsolete when I say I can remember a time when I actually looked forward to going to Tigerland on weekends … jeans, T-shirt and the occasional flip flop. However, after being denied entry to Tiger Bar based on my attire, an Old Navy track suit, I felt the same way Mr. Thomas and many “other” people have felt: discriminated against.
So, for those of you who consider it justifiable to never be subject to discrimination, and for those of you who don’t even realize what “other issues at door man’s discretion” means … I pity the day that you’re introduced to the real world. I’m just glad that I was smart enough to make friends with the doorman, because had I ever paid my hard-earned $3 to get in … I’d feel that much more disgusted.
Aaron Bastian
Senior — Sociology
‘Prejudiced’ story just a plea for pity
The “Prejudiced Policies” article printed on Thursday was a miserable plea for a pity party. While racial discrimination is illegal and dispicable, private businesses have every right to refuse service to any customer they please. Dress codes in businesses are employed to maintain a level of respectability concerning their staff and customers.
Even though Mr. Thomas may have felt more comfortable in his jersey and baggy pants, his dress is subject to employee discretion. Should I be guaranteed entry into a bar if I wear boxers and a T-shirt just because I am comfortable? Do you also believe slacks and a polo shirt would be acceptable for dinner at Commander’s Palace? I should hope not.
Most students will agree that the Tiger Bar is the most diverse bar in the university area. If FUBU and “all-white shoes” can be so closely related to black people, shouldn’t sunglasses and flip-flops be associated with white people? The far-fetched claim of racial discrimination is his way to compensate for his inability to dress appropriately for this particular bar. Let’s face it, playing the race card went out of style a long time ago just like the “visible beepers” Reggie’s strictly prohibits. Next time, wear a collared shirt and pants that fit you or find another place to spend your money.
Nick Arnold
Junior — Business Administration
Safety, not racism, bar owners’ concern
After reading your article about dress code discrimination, I was disheartened by the conclusions your writers came to. I want to start by saying I think the specific reference to FUBU clothing is unnecessary and definately targeted at the black community and the “Mr. T” comment is in very poor taste.
However, not once in the article did anyone happen to mention that perhaps there are other motivations behind these rules. Safety is the biggest concern for any bar owner. A lot of people in a confined area makes for a nightmare if something tragic were to happen, as was seen not too long ago when two nightclubs caught on fire, causing the deaths of more than 30 people. Rules not allowing baggy jeans that hang down to your ankles, large bulky chains and jewlery and flip flops are put in place for safety. The same goes for just about every grade school in this and many other states.
As for others, the owners of the club no doubt want to create a somewhat clean atmosphere, and asking their patrons to dress nicely is not too much to ask or in any way racist. If a black guy or girl walks up dressed very nicely and is turned away or a white guy or girl gets in dressed like a slob, then I would have a major problem.
The thing that bothered me the most is Robert Perry’s claim that the bars use music to discriminate. I have been in the DJ buisness for almost 5 years and I can assure you that no matter what I play, I will never please everyone. As a DJ, you have to play to the crowd. My advice to anyone who has a problem with the music: Learn to dance to more than just rap. I can assure you that it is possible, because I see the bars packed and lines at the doors every weekend.
James P. Hickman
Junior — Mechanical Engineering
Racist bars should not be tolerated
Yesterday’s article on the “Prejudiced Policies” couldn’t have been more right. I have gone to Tiger Bar several times with my African-American friends and they have been denied about three-fourths of the times. Tiger claimed the pants were too baggy. I didn’t think this was too much of a racist deal until I went with the same pair of pants on as my friend. I wore the same size and style and all, had an untucked shirt and backwards hat and I still got in. (They did tell me to turn my hat around.)
My friend, on the other hand, had no hat (no chains, rings, etc.), his shirt tucked in, and was denied right behind me. I turned and told the bouncer that I had the same pair of pants on and he told me, “Do you want to go in or not?” I have tried this scenario several different times and have gotten the same result. Do they want everyone to wear cowboy ass-tight pants and boots. I think not!
Yep it’s 2003 and we still can’t cope with the idea that people are different and have different styles. I know racism will reside in certain people’s views, but especially when it’s a business, why should it be allowed or condoned at that!
Stephen Laudun
Senior — General Business
Student recounts denied entry at Dublin’s
I am writing in response to the article that discussed unfair policies at the bars in Tigerland. This is a true story about an experience my friends and I had at one of the bars in Tigerland last semester.
My friends and I went out to Tigerland for some drinks. We started the night off at Fred’s and eventually made our way to Dublin’s. The doorman collected the $5 cover charge from the first half of my friends that entered the bar. The next friend was denied because he was wearing carpenter jeans. We thought he has joking so he laughed. The doorman said that we should have looked at the sign before we tried to come in. The sign is a piece of paper with small type taped to the front door with a list of unacceptable clothing not allowed into Dublin’s. The doorman refused to give my friends their money back because their hands were already stamped. The doorman said that my friend should just go home and change his clothes. We asked to see a manger who also did not want to give my friends their money back even after it was suggested to wash the stamp off. The manager also did not want to let my friend in because he was sorry but no carpenter jeans is one of their many policies. The manager then left because he decided that there was nothing more he could do that it was a strict Dublin’s policy that could not be overlooked.
The friends that had paid waited in the parking lot until we decided where we wanted to go. Not two minutes later, two guys walked up to Dublin’s. One of them was wearing carpenter jeans. We told him that he would be denied because of what he was wearing, and that they will probably tell him to go home and change. The guy wearing the carpenter jeans was let in without any questions. This enraged all of us. The doorman noticed this and yelled at us, “That’s different, he is a friend of one of my frat brothers.”
Steven Bache
Senior — ISDS
Racism in Tigerland could be imagined
The article in today’s paper made a number of points regarding the “Prejudiced Policies” of Tigerland. However, I feel that it left a few untouched.
For instance, the railroad tracks at the entrance of Tigerland are very steep, and the parking lots of all of the bars are torn up and have steep curbs to their entrances. This problem could present a tremendous hazard to both blacks and whites that pride themselves in their lowriders. I personally believe that it is a conspiracy created by the bar owners to prevent the “lowered” from entering.
Many of the local bars only serve one type of Mexican imported beer and no beers larger than the standard 12 ounces; therefore, driving away truckloads of hyphenated Americans.
Clearly, the racism problem runs deeper than anyone imagined; however, it could be that is just that, IMAGINED. Here are a few guidelines for you that have trouble in the fashion department: Jerseys are for people that play sports when they are playing that sport, men’s jewelry if for no one, size 38″ pants are for people with a 38″ waist, and all white shoes are for nurses.
Bryson Person
Senior — Industrial Engineering
‘Morning after’ pill less harmful than Adderall
After reading Ms. DeVries’ article discussing Adderall and the morning after pill, I still fail to see her connection in regard to their availability to the public.
First of all, in a best-case scenario, the morning-after pill is not meant to be taken. It is insurance against pregnancy through rape or prophylactic failure. In the article, the reporter specifically stated that one of the benefits of over-the-counter availability is that women can purchase it in advance in case of an emergency.
Adderall, on the other hand, is a medication prescribed to correct a physiological problem. Only a certified doctor can diagnosis a person’s authentic need for stimulants. Ms. DeVries’ arguments that it should be made accessible over-the-counter because students take it anyway and it is in high demand are completely illogical. Their unauthorized use doesn’t mean that everyone’s bodies need them or can handle them. If she had done even a minimal amount of Internet research, she would have found that taking stimulants without a doctor’s instruction or supervision increases the risk of addiction. Not only can high doses lead to paranoia and feelings of hostility, but they can also result in dangerously high body temperatures, an irregular heartbeat, cardiovascular failure or lethal seizures. I’m glad Ms. DeVries isn’t my doctor.
Ms. DeVries’ other argument for making Adderall available over-the counter is that it would allow students to use it to get better grades and easier access to studying and all-around make everyone’s life easier. It sounds to me that Ms. DeVries is advocating the use of stimulants as a performance enhancer. I love to watch the Olympics, and if I’ve learned one thing from them, it is that performance-enhancers equal cheating. As I showed earlier, I think it is pretty safe to say that it would be impractical to stay on Adderall for the rest of one’s life. That said, I suggest it would be beneficial to anyone who feels that they are in trouble to start studying earlier or reconsider their choice of majors.
Amanda L. Gustavson
Senior — English and Women’s and Gender Studies
‘Morning after’ pill should require a prescription
I was writing in response to the article published about possibly making the morning-after pill an over-the-counter drug. It is unbelievable that a pill that can kill is available to anyone willing to purchase it. This gives the individual a convenient way to solve the burden of getting pregnant by popping a pill. By making this over-the-counter, it doesn’t address the importance of this life-changing decision. It is important to know what you are doing to your body, and more importantly, what you are doing to the potential life inside of you. It is unfortunate that so many people believe that a baby isn’t a baby from day one.
Virginia Allen
Junior — Marketing
Support bill requiring insurance to cover birth control
As women in Louisiana with daughters we love, we have the opportunity to do something historic for them.
Now moving through the Louisiana Senate is a bill which requires insurance companies to cover prescription contraceptives the same way they cover other prescriptions.
Women in this state spend 68 percent more in out-of-pocket costs for health care than their husbands. Not only do most health insurance plans in this state not pay for birth control pills, less than half offer coverage for the most commonly-used prescription contraceptives.
Not only is this unfair to women who are planning their families,it is bad public health policy. That is what this state is on the verge of correcting, if you will help me.
I need you to call your legislators right now. Leave a message for your Senator at (225) 342-2040 or your Representative at (225) 342-6945. Tell them it is about time that women are treated fairly by the health insurance companies. If Senate Bill 958 is enacted, the unacceptable gender-based gap in insurance coverage for prescriptions would begin to close.
For many years, health care services like prenatal care, mammography and even childhood immunizations were considered non-essential. Now these services are universally accepted as necessary care; they too are fully covered by insurance — saving countless lives everyday. Coverage for family planning is the natural next step.
Senate Bill 958 is about fairness. It’s about equity. And it’s about time.
Paulette Irons
State Senator — New Orleans
Student wants Digital Copyright Act clarified
I am writing in response to the “Digital Copyright Act now enforced” article. The Office of Computing Services sent out e-mails to all students who subscribe to the RESNET service informing of the stricter enforcement of the DCA. I searched on the Internet for a copy of the DCA to find out exactly what this law implied. However, the DCA does not specifically explain what you can and can’t do. The basic breakdown of the law is that the illegal use of copyrighted material is illegal.
The buzz around campus is that the DCA allows for downloading of music, movies, etc., but you cannot allow others to download these files off your computer. I’m asking for clarification on this issue because I don’t want to lose my freedom of downloading music, nor do I want to break the law.
Westley Bayas III
Sophomore — Political Science
College Republican Alliance got to see things from the other side
Though I’m not 100 percent sure the members of the College Republican Alliance were explicitly invited to Earth Day, I am sure of what their intentions were in showing up. The CRA was there to be antagonistic, not to celebrate the Earth. They showed up with flyers asserting “Environmentalists Lie, Too,” which I believe clearly shows their intent AND how they view themselves in relation to the environment. Styrofoam, meaty jambalaya and free market economics aside, these guys showed up to bring negativity to the event. If they wanted to debate the Republicans’ alleged affinity for all things environmental, then the CRA should host a panel debate. Don’t show up at Earth Day with a bunch of flyers talking s–t about the organizers’ views on the environment. Granted, the CRA removed the heading “Environmentalists Lie, Too” because they were receiving so much flack. To me, besides stating clearly that they do not consider themselves environmentalists, it was an admission of guilt.
What’s outrageous to me is that when the organizers of Earth Day asked the CRA to leave, they refused. Wait, wait — let me repeat that statement. WHEN THE ORGANIZERS OF EARTH DAY ASKED THE CRA TO LEAVE, THEY REFUSED! It took the LSUPD to remove the antagonistic upstarts.
I am not saying they should be stripped of the right to protest. I commend their political participation. However, the CRA shouldn’t expect a seat at the table. Having protested outside the centers of power for years, it’s funny that the CRA should now be the ones who have to move to the sidewalk to hand out their minority opinions. When they organize their annual environmental event, “SELL THE EARTH DAY,” I would expect SEAC and other organizations to protest the same way.
Okay, CRA. Welcome to the wonderful world of non-traditional political participation. It is not always fun. I would like to say, “Get used to it!” But you’re Republicans. You’re the ones with all the resources; so don’t expect much sympathy from me.
Chesley Clay Calloway
LSU Alumnus
‘Off the Cuff’ a waste of space, money, paper
When I open up The Reveille and sit down with my daily Frappuccino from the Union Starbucks, I expect to be informed, updated or, at the very least, entertained. But I’m tired of opening it to find useless, meaningless crap, like that found in “Off the Cuff,” The Reveille’s version of comic relief in the unsure world of today.
The April 29 installment was the last straw for me. Next time I see that pair of chattering teeth, I plan on just turning the page. Reading the last article was the biggest waste of my time. I began reading, foolishly believing that this article would be leading somewhere. It was like an informercial gone totally berserk. It was neither informative nor humorous. Tell me editor, why do you insist on printing this and wasting precious timber that could be put to better use? I understand that it is a semi-weekly column and you have an obligation to run it, but could you please make sure someone would want to read it before you print it? Could you make sure it would not make the reader want to chuck the paper into the garbage like I did? “Off the Cuff” is supposed to be “semi-weekly, semi-funny,” but if it is isn’t the latter, it shouldn’t be the former.
Lisa Nguyen
Senior — Mass Communication
Fans should be respectful
Wednesday night, my boyfriend and I attended the baseball game against UNO because, of course, we love LSU baseball and games at Alex Box. We are familiar with the heckling and teasing the guys in Coon’s Corner do to the opposing team’s right fielder. We also know that it is all done in good natured fun. Nothing dirty is ever yelled out over the noise of the crowd from that corner, and this behavior generally typifies the behaviors of the other fans there.
At this game, there was a lot of heckling, except it wasn’t from Coon’s Corner. Among the thin crowd in the right field corner, a group of fraternity guys was sitting a few rows down from us. After having a little bit of alcohol in them (we saw the bottle they snuck in), some of them became comfortable and very loose to the point of being obnoxious, and the yelling began. However, it was not all good-natured and “cute.”
Several inappropriate exclamations were shouted to the right fielder that mostly dealt with sexual situations. Most of it was disgusting to hear, and being that there were not a lot of people there to create crowd noise, I am positive that almost everyone on the field and in the adjacent section of the stands had to have heard them screaming these obscenities. I was really embarrassed that they were representing the same university I attend, and I know that one of the trainers and some players for OUR baseball team were getting angry, giving the group looks from the bullpen as their shouts were heard.
Baseball games are not for this kind of conduct. These guys thought they were funny, but they were just showing how little class they have. Where there are young, impressionable children around who think college kids are “cool” just because they are older, actions like these should be reserved for the fraternity house or football games when you are sitting with all fellow students. I’m not sure a lot of people would want to hear some of what we heard even then.
Tarah Doggett
Junior — General Studies