Bar inappropriate for Ackerman

I feel like the campus is already swimming in it. Fraternity
houses, apartment parties, dorm rooms, and now potentially Ackerman
Union are dripping with alcohol.

While I understand how having a bar on campus may be convenient
for the 21-and-over population on campus, I have to wonder, why
must it be convenient? And why must it be convenient in a place
that was created for students of all ages?

Having a bar in Ackerman Union is only going to create further
dichotomy between upper and lower classmen on campus. Those who are
not 21 are not likely to go into the bar to sip a Shirley Temple as
their fellow classmates play beer-pong.

More importantly, student representatives on the Associated
Students of UCLA Board of Directors have claimed that having a pub
in Ackerman will create a social gathering space for students and
will bring energy to Ackerman after students are finished with
classes. So the North Campus quad, Bruin Walk, the rest of
Ackerman, the John Wooden Center, the four residence halls, De Neve
Plaza, other areas on the Hill and almost everywhere else on campus
do not provide enough of a social atmosphere? At these places,
students can coexist with their peers of all ages without feeling
subordinate.

Pubs and bars have always been places that offer a social
environment where friends can meet for a drink during the evening
hours. In England, for example, where the drinking age is 18, many
college students may frequent pubs at night to catch up with
friends. Here in the United States where the drinking age is 21,
that is not the case.

Even though the bar will potentially be open to students of all
ages, the administration will take extra precautions to avoid
serving those underage. For example, following the model of other
“all-ages” clubs, the administration could decide to
brand people who are underage with black Xs on both hands. No
20-year-old wants to be marked with the equivalent of the Scarlet
Letter.

But the real issue is whether we really need a pub. Alcohol is
relatively easy to obtain on campus anyway. I do not think it is
necessary for our student union, a place meant to promote the
academic and social well-being of the student body as a whole, to
serve alcohol. Students who want to drink can always drive to
Westwood for a case or walk to apartments.

I understand some people might benefit from having a bar on
campus. It will undoubtedly provide great revenue for the
university, will create yet another social environment, and some
may argue it will be an oasis in an academic desert. But why should
it be up to the university to provide alcohol to relieve
students’ tension? That was the reason we established the
Center for Women and Men, the Arthur Ashe Center and various other
psychological counseling programs.

The argument that the bar will provide some sort of relaxation
for busy students is saying that knocking back a few beers is the
only way to relieve tension. It’s a quiet form of the
ever-present peer-pressure line, “Come on, you’ll be
less uptight if you drink.”

If UCLA students feel there is a lack of social gathering places
that involve alcohol, they should petition for another bar in
Westwood or some other place where alcohol belongs. There is no
reason that alcohol should be present in our student union.
I’m sure that if the proposal passes and the pub is built,
there will be no sudden rise in the number of alcohol-related
offenses. Those who want to drink will do so whether or not the bar
is built, and those who do not want to drink will not frequent it.
This is not an issue of preventing alcohol abuse on campus. This is
an issue of appropriateness.

Alcohol does not belong in Ackerman. It is not called the
21-and-Over Union. Installing a place that by definition is meant
to exclude a certain age group will destroy the spirit of the
union.

Jensen is a first-year English student. E-mail her at
[email protected].