University of Virginia Library

Letters

'Water—Wings' Needed On Field

On Sunday afternoon, Varsity
Soccer had a rather disappointing
match with Clemson. I want to
stress that our loss cannot be
blamed entirely on the field
conditions due to the weekend's
massive rainfall, but I would like to
take several moments to suggest
that perhaps there is more here
than first "muds" the eye.

Soccer is a fantastic sport, and I
am forever surprised that a team as
talented and successful as ours has
not drawn more support from the
University community...students
and administration alike. I want to
deal here, however, not with the
lack of student support, but with
the attitude and unfair treatment
handed out to the soccer squad by
our administrative officials.

First of all, I was interested to
note that a club sport (i.e., rugby)
would be given field preference
over a varsity sport. If any of you
readers were at the match with
Clemson, you could not have
helped noticing the appalling
condition of the University Hall
field, which has been assigned to
Varsity Soccer by some mysterious
being. I feel (that our players were
used to Carrs Hill field and thus lost
a chance at having home-field
advantage; but in addition to this
observation, I feel that if the
Athletic Department cannot or will
not make an effort to drain the
University Hall field or provide
Varsity Soccer with a better
alternate, then they might well
consider supplying them with
water-wings!

My last note with regard to this
field, is that I shudder to think of
what the surface condition will be
for our next game when we find
that the effort has not even been
made to roll the field this will not
only provide for a poor match, but
will also make it possible for the
observer to see how broken bones
and sprained ankles result from
running up and down a cratered
field.

As a member of the University
community and an irate soccer fan,
I am tired of seeing the manner in
which one varsity sport is consigned
to an inferior position in favor of
another, such as football, which has
shown us through the years what
sort of spectacles it can provide.

Precious Sex

I could answer Ms. Phillip's
questions about the male
chauvinistic nature of
Charlottesville Right to Life rather
pointedly, but that would be
avoiding (as Ms. Phillips did in her
Oct 14 reply) the essential
question, i.e., is the unborn child
human life or not? As in any
situation there are circumstances to
consider, many of them
extenuating. However, no matter
how extenuating one cannot justify
taking a human life to relieve the
problem. The life in question is
totally innocent and defenseless,
and to call murdering the child "a
very reasonable remedy," as Ms.
Phillips does, is to open the way to
a myriad of "reasonable remedies"
such as eliminating blacks so there
would be no race problem,
eliminating the poor so there would
be no welfare problem, and maybe
forbidding Ms. Phillip's very
precious sex act so there would be
no population problem.

As far as the man's
responsibility for a child he has
fathered, it is just as great as the
mother's. The fact that he doesn't
accept this responsibility and
furthermore gets away with
means that the laws are sexist and
unjust. This is a related and very
important problem, but if society
continues to offer abortion as an
"out", moral responsibilities of any
nature will disappear and set the
tone for relaxation in other areas.