I am very disappointed with The Daily Campus forsupporting Howie Abram’s campaign to discredit one individualfor doing his job. Two weeks ago, Mr. Abram had an unsettlingexperience at the Cinco Center. By his own admission, he reactedwith such resistance that the manager called the SMU police and theSMU police were forced to call for backup. Feeling that the managerof the Cinco Center and the police had conspired against him, hethen contacted the head of recreation, Judith Banes, who providedhim with an apology.
Apparently, the apology from Judith Banes didn’t produceenough satisfaction to allow Mr. Abram to move on. He rushed to histypewriter to prepare a half page editorial highlighting themessenger that conveyed the unwanted information rather than thereal issue – health facilities do not allow unaffiliated personaltrainers – gee, dude, don’t you have any studying to do?
An inherent rule of most health facilities is “no personaltrainers.”‘ Local facilities such as Premier Club andBally’s also subscribe to this rule. The rule is so commonthat these facilities are not compelled to post signs and neitheris the Cinco Center. If you remove all of the rhetoric from Mr.Abram’s editorial, you will find that Buona Diop, CincoCenter manager, first asked Mr. Abram if his friend, a non-SMUstudent, was his trainer to which Mr. Abram replied,”Yes.” Then Buona identified himself as the manager,communicated the rule and the unfortunate consequences (leaving thefacility). It was then that Mr. Abram discovered that hemisunderstood the original question and now referred to his friendas his “training partner.”
As a former employee of the Dedman/Cinco Centers, this situationis all too familiar. It is a common occurrence for students to goback on their statements and/or become belligerent when employeesattempt to enforce the rules because they feel “my parentspay exorbitant amounts of money.”
Parents are paying for an education, not the Cinco Center. TheCinco Center is an amenity with rules and regulations that are inthe best interest of all who use the facility. Mr. Abram was not”treated with disrespect”; he received the sametreatment as would any other student not in compliance.
Mr. Abram clearly disregarded Buona’s authority. Whenasked by the police to “step outside to discuss.” heresisted. Outside the facility, after filing a report, he continuedto resist the police officer’s request to leave the premises.Finally, he decided to comply when additional police arrived.I’m exhausted just thinking about all that wasted energy.
In the editorial, Mr. Abram states, “I politely,”and “I repeated again, respectfully,” followed by”our incompliance,” “defying his request,””reluctantly complied,” “Buona and Iargued,” “I argued with the officer.” I findnothing polite or respectful in any of the above actions.Furthermore, based on these actions and the disrespectfulinferences made in the editorial, I find it hard to believe Mr.Abram was ever polite or respectful.
I feel that this editorial was a deliberate personal attack onBuona Diop by a writer of The Daily Campus. (I guess membershipdoes have its privileges.) It contains a number of falseconclusions drawn by Mr. Abram aimed at Buona’s character. ASenegalese (Buona’s native land) friend once told me with theutmost sincerity, “In my country, when you don’t haveanything nice to say, then you don’t speak it.”
I “strongly insist that [Mr. Abram] be reprimanded”for abusing his position at The Daily Campus to continue avendetta, or in the alternative, publish a written apology. Mr.Abram, you should be ashamed of yourself. Most guys I know on thiscampus prefer to be called men, not “kid.”
If you agree that this article was misdirected, feel that TheDaily Campus should publish a written apology or simply prefer tocomment on your interactions with Buona, [email protected].