<p>please. there is a difference between athletes and nonathletes and there always will be. is it a matter of intellectual abilitity? absolutely not. it’s just a matter of social division.</p>
<p>now this isn’t your jock-beats-up-on-nerd high school sitcom crap. it’s just a matter of who “rolls” with whom and who’s at which parties. nothing big. generally speaking, more jocks will be at drinker parties and more hipsters will be at lunt gallery openings. period. who was the last fine arts major to attend a soccer game? or how many athletes saw animal collective last year? yep. there is a definite difference in social distibution and to deny it is just quintessential haverfordian idealism (cf. most posts). but remember this isn’t a caste system.</p>
<p>the thing about haverford, at least from my own observations is that people tend to lack genuine originality. i mean, frankly in my 3+ years here, i’ve met maybe 2 or 3 people whom i would consider to be really special. everyone else tends to be a cookie-cutter [sic] “closet nerd” who likes to run, listen to dave mathews, and play guitar. hence, the
reasoning for the lack difference: simply put, everyone at haverford is by and large the same. but you can’t just throw this blanket over the fact that generally speaking jocks tend to hang with jocks, hipsters tend to hang with hipsters, computer guys tend to hang with computer guys, etc. </p>
<p>am i an athlete? no.
do i have athelete friends? yes.
do i hate some athletes? yes.
do i hate some non-athletes? yes.
do i wish we had more arts space? yes.
do i think the new gym is unneccessary? yes.
do i care enough to complain? no.</p>
<p>the fact is: the divide between athletes and non-athletes EXISTS but it DOESN’T MATTER. it doesn’t create a horrible living environment, it doesn’t result in unruly social behavior, it doesn’t debase the intellectual atmosphere of the school; it’s irrelevant and shouldn’t be brought up at all.</p>