I


OPINION


Page 4

Tuesday, November 25, 1980

Oh, Brooke
My lust for you has abated

'.4

It must have something to do with
Thanksgiving and the memories of our Puritan
forefathers who came over in the Nina, the Pin-
ta, and the Santa Domingo.
Some noble Pilgrim censors in network TV
land have decided that a Calvin Klein jeans
commercial starring Brooke Shields is too
suggestive fo American audiences. So

Witticisms
By Howard Witt
television stations across the

country (in-

Shields junkie - but I kicked the habit.
IT WAS ROUGH for awhile, let me tell you. I
saw Pretty Baby five times and almost ran
away to New Orleans. I bought every magazine
with Brooke's incredibly adult visage peering
from the cover. I sat through Tilt, a real box of-
fice smash in which Brooke was cast as a pin-
ball whiz. I was insanely jealous of Scott Baio,
the boy actor of "Happy Days" fame with
whom Brooke was rumored to have had a
romance.
I dreamed every night of rescuing Brooke
from her bedroom, where I imagined her
chained by her evil mother Terri, who ex-
ploited the poor thing's beauty and innocence.
How could I help it? have always been the
incredibly romantic type; infatuation is my
middle name. Movie stars ]'m especially
susceptible to - I had a painful crush on
Jacqueline Bisset when I first saw*her in Air-(
port. I kept thinking of Dean Martin's
inebriated paws all over her - they had an af-
fair in the movie - and I just wanted to hug her
and tell her everything would be all right.
CLAUDINE LONGET so distracted me that I
bought dozens of Andy Williams records just to
pretend to be closeto her (she was married at
one time to the famed crooner).
But just as my flaming desire for Claudine
dimmed somewhat when she blew out Spider
Sabich's brains, so too did my lust for Brooke
gradually abate.
I started to question my allegiance to her
when I learned that she played her "nude"

scene in Pretty Baby clothed in a flesh-colored
Danskin. I felt betrayed.
THEN, IN PARIS a few years ago, I hap-
-pened across some dramatic photos of the
young queen in a bubble bath. Her face was un-
cannily grown-up, to be sure, but her body was
decidedly that of a child. I felt tricked.
The final blow, however, was The Blue
Lagoon. Only after I thought I had seen my now-
pubescent nymphet in all stages of undress on
the big screen did I learn that the whole movie
was a hoax - Brooke had a stand-in do all the
good parts.
I have to admit I was slightly suspicious
during the film ,what was supposed to be
Brooke's chestjklctuated markedly in size
throughout several scenes. Nevertheless, lear-
ning the truth was an incredible disappoin-
tment. I was humiliated; I felt Brooke was
laughing at my foolish naivete.
NOW I READ of Brooke and look at pictures
of her with only a passing interest. Like an old
lover turned enemy, she arouses my interest,
but not much else.
I see her laughing, and hugging Christopher
Atkins (her co-star in The Blue Lagoon, who,
by the way, did his own nude scenes) or Franco
Zeffirelli (her latest director) or Martin Hewitt
(her latest co-star). Sure, a little jealousy bur-
ns within me. But I let it pass.
I suppose it's better for both of us that way.
Howard Witt is the co-editor of the
Daily's Opinion page. His column appears
every Tuesday.

cluding those in Sin City itself New York)
have banned the ad.
APPARENTLY BROOKE - that nubile sex
goddess undulates her shapely bottom and
says something like "Nothing comes between
me and my Calvin Kleins" (I haven't actually
seen the commercial). The suggestion that she
might not be wearing underwear was just too
much for the public to handle, I guess.
A few months ago, I would have been very
upset at this latest frustration (the banning of
the commercial, I mean). The thought of
missing Brooke in a sensuous pose would have
sent me into an agonizing depression.
But not anymore. You see, I was a Brooke

4

r roto
BROOKE SHIELDS, A NUBILE young sex goddess, stands between director Franco Zeffirelli
(left) and actor Martin Hewitt. Because she has shied away from any nude scenes in her movies,
many of Brooke's former admirers have abandoned her.


Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan

Vol. XCI, No. 71

420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, M1 48109

Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board

No privilege for PIRGIM

F OR SEVERAL years, the Regents.
of the University have extended a
special privilege to a certain campus
organization-the Public Interest
Research Group in Michigan. The
group gets the bulk of its financial sup-
port through students, who can add a
PIRGIM donation to their tuition bills
simply by checking the appropriate
spot on the student verification forms
at CRISP. The ease and painlessness
with which it is possible to contribute
undoubtedly keep the'revenues of the
group fairly high-some 19 percent of
the student body has taken advantage
of the check-off system in each of the
last two terms.
In the 19-month-old contract gran-
ting PIRGIM the right to use CRISP
for fundraising purposes, the Regents
specified that the group would have to
win financial support from 25 percent
of the students to guarantee the con-
tinuation of the privilege. Though
PIRGIM has fallen below that mark,
the Board voted Friday to let the fun-
draising system stand, at least for the
time being.
We can see no reason PIRGIM
should be granted the convenience of

using CRISP for fundraising when
other, equally worthy organizations
have never had the option extended to
them. Furthermore, we feel the 25 per-
cent figure is too low a requirement for,
student support. Donations for pur-
poses that are not directly University-
related should only be made part of the
registration process if the group in
question can win the support of a
significant number of students-say,
50 percent. A group could prove its
popularity among the students by cir-
culating petitions among the prospec-
tive contributors.
No one denies that PIRGIM has em-
barked on many projects that deserve
commendation: The group's efforts on
behalf of the Michigan bottle bill,
against federal draft registration, and
in'production of a consumers' guide to
local grocery stores are just a few that
come to mind. But *the plusses and
minuses of a group's philosophy should
not be the determining factor in
whether it is, granted aid-even
clerical aid-by the University. A
majority of the students should make'
that decision by whatever criteria they
deem proper.

The Daily and the Maize, our
daily and bi-monthly student
newspapers, face an excep-
tionally difficult task in their at-
tempts to provide the University
community with accurate reports
of University news. They usually
manage to do a fair job-except
in the general area of athletics,
where just about everyone kisses
accuracy goodbye.
Take, for example, two recent
articles that appeared in the two
publications-"Palmer Field
Track Renovation Possible"
(Maize, November 3) and "In
Defense of Don Canham" (Daily,
November'19). Both reports con-
tained misrepresentations.
A FAIRLY COMPLETE un-
derstanding of the history of the
recreational sports departme'nt is
necessary to understand why
some of the statements made in
the two articles are not totally
accurate. The history can be
broken down into two major
segments: pre-fiscal year 1974-75
and post-fiscal year 1974-75. Prior
to 1974, the rec sports department
was part of the physical
education department, which
was a division of the athletic
department. Thus, the athletic
department was obligated to pay
all the bills for maintenance of all
sports facilities, while operating
expenses of the PE department
and for rec sports were supplied
by the General Fund. After 1974-
75, however, things changed
drastically. The PE department
was moved to the School of
Educationand rec sports was
made a major sub-division of the
athletic department.
Note the following quotation
from theh"Implementation Plan
for Recommendations Dealing
with Women's Intercollegiate
Athletics and Recreation, In-
tramurals, and Club Sports,"
from Vice President Richard
Kennedy to the executive of-
ficers, dated April 19, 1974.
"Recommendation 3. That main-
tenance, utility, and other costs
associated with facilities used
primarily for recreation, in-

Whtt-athletic dept.
do es not
pay for
By Tom Hogsten

tramurals, and club sports will be
removedfrom the intercollegiate
athletics fund budget and
changed to other Universitydof'
Michigan sources in an amount
which would total approximately
$80,000 for 1974-75: These funding
transfers would not exceed the
costs which the Intercollegiate
Athletics Department will
assume in connection with
women's intercollegiate
athletics."
THIS IS VERY important
to understand: In 1974, when the
athletic department picked up
financial responsibility
for women's athletics, they drop-
ped financial responsibility for
recreational sports. Since that
time the financial ties between
these two divisions of the same
department have been, at best,
minimal.
It is because of documented
facts like this one, and also the
current budget of the rec sports
department (which clearly shows
none of its revenue is coming
from the athletic department)
that the following statements are
not completely fair. The
statement from the Maize, "In
the past, intercollegiate athletics

has made various contributions
to finance recreational and in-
tramural projects," should really
read, "Prior to 1974 when it was
obligated to do so by the ad-
ministration, intercollegiate
athletics made various con-
tributions to finance recreational
and intramural projects."
There is a difference in the
meanings of these statements.
The first would lead the general
reader, who is unaware of the
budgets, to believe that athletics
had given rec sports money last
month or last year;, which is cer-
tainly not the case.
AND FROM THE Daily,
"Studenits benefit more than
anyone from Canham's revenues.
The number and quality of our in-
tramural facilities is surpassed
by none." It is true Don Canham
did spearhead the effort to obtain
extensive rec sports facilities;
however, Don Canham's
revenues have nothing to do with
the fact that we have. extensive
facilities. Canham's plan has
benefitted the general student,
but his bucks certainly have not.
These statements, are basically
what athletics would like
everyone to believe, though.

Another fact that apparently
escaped the writer of the Daily
article is that the North Campus
Recreational Building and the
Central Campus Recreational
Building were built from a 1976
bond issue for $6,170,000. Athletic
department revenues had ab-
solutely nothing to do with the
construction of these facilities.
There are a few other
statements in these two articles 4
whose validity might be
rigorously examined, but they
are not within the scope of this
report. Also, the very nature of
the athletic "dynasty" here at
Michigan may be questioned, but
that is not included in my purpose
here, which is to clarify certain
inaccurate reports of recsports
revenues. For the record, about
32 percent of rec revenue is from
the general. fund and the rest is
self-generated.
THE LAST POINT to be
made, though, is far removed
from any personality conflicts
which may have developed here
over the years between certain
individuals and the campus
media. This concerns the
statement in the Daily,
"Michigansports are a lifeline to
our growing respect as an
academic institution." If I
believed this to be true, I would
immediately kiss the University
goodbye, as would-I trust-a
good deal of the research-orien-
ted faculty and that small
minority of the student body that
chose Michigan over other
schools, not for sports, but
because of the belief that it is one
of the nation's most highly regar-
ded academic institutions.
I am here .to receive ab
education, the faculty is here t
insure I receive that education.
Please explain the role of the
athletic department in this
process.
Tom Hogsten is a Michigan
Student Assembly appointe?
to the University Advisory
Committee on Recreationgi
Sports.

yr

OUR NEUROLOGICA L SCANNER IS
LOCKED INTO tNE COLLECTIVE
BRAINWAVE PATTERNS OF tHE MOST
ADVANCEP 6ClETh ON tAT PLANET!

,A
.T-

LETTERS TO THE DAILY:
Coverage of women's safety rally hit

To the Daily:
I must take issue with your
coverage of PIRGIM's Women's
Safety Awareness Rally which
was held November 14 on the
Diag. It is anything but an objec-
tive, accurate, or complete ac-
count of what occurred. To begin
with, you say that the speakers
"delivered rhetoric that has
become the standard script at
such rallies." To what other
rallies is this one being com-
pared? Surely it could not be

majority of its article on Mr.
Okun's speech, opting to ignore
mention of all but one of the seven
speakers and one singer
represented at the rally.
To clarify a point, Rape
Speaker's Bureau spokeswoman
Maureen O'Rourke did not speak
of "establishing" a University-
sponsored Rape Speaker's
Bureau. As Ms. O'Rourke stated,
this was done three years ago out
of student need and interest, and
has since been operating out of

Force is now pursuing and which
the Daily failed to mention in-
include: Organizing late night
employees;/ organizing apar-
tment complexes, blocks, and
dorms; and establishing a home
for the Rape Speaker's bureau.
I hope that in future coverage

of PIRGIM Women's Safety For-
ce activities, the Daily will report
the facts'and issues in a more
professional manner.e
--Heidi Baruch
PIRGIM Women's
Safety Force
November 19

Today he 's an economist

To the Daily:
During the Ohio Valley flood in

His analysis was as follows: "The
reason there's a flood is that the