Letters

Not everyone is laughing

Editor:

This weekend, Samahang Pilipino held their annual Pilipino
Cultural Night (PCN) at Ackerman Grand Ballroom. After the first
performance on Saturday night, a couple of the performers and I,
all females, were on our way to the Cooperage when we read a very
disturbing sign at the entrance to the arcade. It read, "Today, all
Filipino women play for Free from 7 p.m.-10 p.m. Must be over 5’0
tall."

I looked into the arcade to see who was working at the desk and
saw two males, both Asian (and I only refer to their ethnicity
because of the irony of the situation). I walked in and asked the
guy who was sitting on a stool in front of the desk if the sign
outside was a joke, and he said yes. I thanked him sarcastically
and walked out.

Though I was fuming inside, I proceeded to walk away from the
arcade with my friends. But before I had taken 10 steps, I stopped
and marched back to the arcade and erased the sign. My friends said
that while I was erasing the sign, the attendants were
smirking.

The next morning, I relayed the incident to my fellow
Samahangers and found out that there was more to the story.
Apparently, after I had erased the sign, one of the attendants took
the liberty of writing a new one. It read, "Sorry, no more PCN
dancers today." One of the older performers, also female, saw this,
and she too erased it after exchanging a few words with an
attendant. But afterward, the attendants had the nerve to write yet
another sign which read, "Sorry you guys aren’t over 5’0 tall."

First of all, I would like to say to the guys who were working
that night, that those signs were sexist and racist, and they were
foolish to think that they could get away with it. The guys
probably thought that they were being funny, but in light of what
Pilipino Cultural Night means to us, they are dead wrong.

All of us put in a lot of time, effort and dedication to give
UCLA and the Pilipino American community a show that not only
expresses the beauty of our culture through dance, but educates the
audience about the various facets of Pilipino culture, such as the
exploitation of Pinays and the history of our revolutions.

Those ignorant signs were a slap in the face to everything that
we worked for these past few months. Not only did those guys
ridicule and disrespect Pinays by mocking our height, they degraded
us by thinking that any of us would actually take them up on their
offer.

I asked the manager of the arcade to find out who was working on
Saturday night and reprimand these employees. And I ask everyone to
be aware of these kinds of subtle acts of racism. I know that some
Pilipinos saw the first sign and laughed, but it wasn’t funny at
all.

Bernadette Agaton

First-year

Asian American studies and English

Let it be heard!

Editor:

Here I sit, all brokenhearted, listening to some of your songs
that left me fainthearted. I speak on behalf of scores of alumni
such as myself wanting to understand … why?

When we were favored with one of the most beautiful songs ever
written by one of the greatest American songwriters as a gift years
ago – you play it so sparingly. I believe I’ve heard it a few times
in the last two basketball seasons! I’m talking about "Strike Up
the Band"!

Are you against Gershwin? Any college would die to have that
majestic piece. By the way, whoever rearranged it did a super job.
It leaves all of us old-timers reliving our youth.

So, let’s hear it- it beats the stuff you play over and over
again by a big margin. Also, wait until we’re all seated prior to
the start of the game or during a time out, because by then, we’re
all present.

I hope I haven’t offended you or your group, but as a history
musical buff I recall George Gershwin willed it to all of us on
condition it be played once during home games.

Stanley Zimmelman

UCLA alumnus

Class of 1950

Proposition 200 facts

Editor:

I’m writing this letter to inform my fellow Bruins about the
inherent danger and underlying purpose behind Proposition 200.
Endorsed and funded by insurance companies, we are led to believe
that this proposition is intended to reduce the legal fees, frauds
and payments to uninsured motorists.

At first glance, this sounds great. Who wouldn’t want to save
money on insurance and not pay for those who don’t carry it? I sure
could use a few bucks, especially living in Los Angeles. Besides,
why should I pay for those who are dumb enough to drive in
California without insurance?

However, it’s important to look at why insurance companies are
so supportive of this measure. They argue that by not having to
negotiate with attorneys, they are able to cut their expenses and
in turn, pass the savings on to the consumers.

But where does that leave the average consumers – you and me –
when we’re in an accident? We will have to play attorney with the
insurance company’s attorney. Their attorney will know every step
and stone of avoiding to pay the claim or worst yet, convince us
that our claim is worth less than it really is.

For those who are unfortunate enough to know the hassle and
headache of post-accidents, did the insurance company call you up
and offer you a fair settlement? Hell, no. If anything, they called
you up wanting to pay you off before you realized the extent of
your damages. Remember that waiver of rights you signed before they
could issue your money? That was the insurance escape clause for
you to sue them.

Another thing to keep in mind is that this proposition only
specifies uninsured motorists and NOT UNDERinsured motorists. I
don’t know about you, but I only carry the minimum insurance,
making myself an underinsured motorist if bodily damages exceed
$20,000. I’m pretty safe in saying most students carry the minimum
insurance required.

This means, if you or I are in an accident, we would have to
come up with the difference between the medical bill and $20,000.
As you are well aware, a one-night stay in a hospital can cost up
to $5,000. So if we had a concussion, a fractured skull and broken
ribs, we had better heal in four days. Or else, not only will we
need to pay back the student loans, but also medical bills.

For students, Proposition 200 is bad. It would leave us in the
dark if we were in an accident. And you know how Californians
drive. Good grief. Anyway, we must not be shortsighted in thinking
we can save a few bucks today. Eventually, we will have to pay the
ultimate price, whether in having to handle all the paperwork and
hassle with the insurance company, or in paying outrageous medical
bills and other expenses. This measure aims at the little people,
you and me. Vote "No" on Prop. 200.

Minh Tri Nguyen

Second-year

Business economics

Good luck team!

Editor:

I’d like to wish Coach Harrick and the entire basketball team
the best of luck for the remaining Pac-10 season and the upcoming
NCAA tournament. I sincerely hope that the Bruins come together as
a TEAM and play up to their potential – like the defending champs
they are.

As an alumnus living in the Northwest, I’m among the great
minority who cheer for the Bruins, and I get tired of listening to
the Cougars complain about UCLA and the fact that Washington State
deserves to get an NCAA bid. I hope you show them what REAL
basketball is Saturday when they visit Pauley.

Again, coach, best of luck! I know you’ve done your best this
year. Now it’s the team’s turn.

Larry Lengyel

UCLA alumnus

Class of 1964

Not using their heads

Editor:

As the University of California – and the state educational
system as a whole – faces remarkable cuts, which not only threaten
current college students but also our younger brothers and sisters,
our state legislative bodies are making choices which force us as
taxpayers to shell out millions of dollars for so-called personal
freedoms to which all should be entitled.

One such example is that of the current proposed repeal of the
mandatory helmet law. The argument in support of the repeal cites
personal freedom on the part of the biker to ride as he/she wishes
and suffer the consequences.

However, it is not only the biker who suffers. Unhelmeted bikers
often have more severe injuries and consequently have more
expensive medical expenses that the state is obligated to pick up.
Additionally, the wages lost from injured bikers, as well as the
support services for the families of the bikers, are expenses which
the state has no choice but to cover.

While this bill is only one which will cost the taxpayers dearly
– without their consent and often without their knowledge – it is a
good, clear example of the things going on in Sacramento which will
ultimately affect us, whether through an increase in taxes or a
decrease in services. And all in the name of personal freedom? Do I
then have the personal freedom to refuse to pay for someone else’s
fun?

Celina Gorre

Graduate student

Public health

ANDREW SCHOLER/Daily Bruin

Jeremy Weurtz drums at a women’s basketball game.

Comments to [email protected]