OPINION Monday, December 1, 1986 Page 4 The Michigan Daily Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Vol. XCVII, No. 61 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Unsigned editorials represent a majority of the Daily's Editorial Board All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily. No sabe lo que quiere Lucas ,rl- 00001 - --~1 / / ACCORDING TO THIS COlPUTER ,YOUR ENTI DURING THE NEXT TER/ /.7 ,,I i. '. ; CRISP It's f rtAND 'y A1N DATORY.1 m ,Wft - mm OWN A I/ rp% ON NOVEMBER 4, CALIFORNIA'S English-Only movement succeeded in passing Proposition 61, a bill requiring all business, schooling, and public services to take place in English and abolishing bilingual education or public services, such as a drivers test given in Spanish. Restricting foreign languages is an overt form of racism which tells non-English speaking people- immigrants or otherwise-that they are second class citizens. The English-Only movement is now hoping the California bill will set a precedent and has launched a national campaign. Its proponents claim that allowing people to apply for a job, open a bank account, eat in a restaurant, take a drivers test, and go to school, all in a foreign language, gives the wrong impres - sion to non-English speaking immigrants. They believe em phasis must be placed on mastery of English first and all essential services must be conducted in English to provide an incentive to learn the language. English proficiency is already a requirement for U.S. citizenship. Restricting use of other languages not only makes life more difficult for incoming immigrants, but it is a check on freedom of expression. First amendment rights are violated in the law's provisions for legal action against people or business which continue to provide bilingual services such as public signs and job.applications. Obviously, it is easier for the individual to survive in the United States if she or he can speak English, but this does not mean other languages are less legitimate forms of expression. Bilingual education should continue as a means of proceeding with the schooling of non-English speaking students while emphasizing the usefulness of English. Aiding foreign minorities in retaining their native language is also a mechan - ism to retain other cultures which enrich the United States and the American version of the English language. Though some essential services such as bilingual police officers and some health care would remain under the legislation, the curtailing of social services, education, and private sector expression is culturally intolerable and economic - ally ignorant. If foreign language speakers are unable to apply for a job (even while gaining English facility) because they cannot read the application and, at the same time, are unable to apply for subsistence welfare to support their families because bilingual councilors have been removed from public service agencies, they will have nowhere to turn except crime or self-exile to a country with a better understanding of democracy. Foreign languages and cultures have a tremendous amount to offer. Preventing the assimilation of non- English speakers into American society is a move away from diversity. The English-Only move - ment is a racist organization intent on founding the sort of nationalistic supremacy found in Nazi Germany. Their victory in California must be overturned; their national campaign, stopped. IilL GM6iCHIGN DALY Letters: Analogy doesn' t work, women do 4 I Don't purge PIRGIM THE PUBLIC INTEREST Research Group in Michigan (PIRGIM) must obtain funding through the Student Verification Form (SVF) to survive. Because the regents probably will not accept PIRGIM's request for a refusable fee box on the SVF, it is incumbent upon the Michigan Student Assembly (MSA) to aid PIRGIM's attempts to receive funding. MSA President Kurt Muenchow used the last regents meeting, however, as a forum to criticize PIRGIM. Muenchow opined that PIRGIM had violated MSA's autonomy by sending a letter to the regents describing a plan to fund student groups through MSA. Muenchow is right that MSA should be involved in providing funding; the issue has been brought up repeatedly at their meetings. The regents will make the real decision-whether or not PIRGIM will appear of the SVF-not MSA. The funding proposal PIRGIM submitted to the regents was reasonable. It asked that organizat - ions which receive petition signatures from a majority of students, get majority support in MSA elections, and comply with regental policies regarding student organizations get funding. If adopted, these requirements would seventies by University law students, the group has taken important stands on local and statewide issues. PIRGIM has worked on a myriad of environ - mental issues with a recent focus on toxic waste. It has fought for consumers rights. It opposed increases in utility rates and surveyed local bank fees and bar prices, distributing the results among students. This month, PIRGIM put out an election flyer informing students where to vote and what the candidates' positions were. Despite PIRGIM's advocacy of the public interest, it faces an uncertain future. Regent James Waters (D-Muskegon) has indicated that a funding proposal involving PIRGIM is unlikely to win support unless it is through MSA. Without Muenchow's active support it seems unlikely that PIRGIM will gain needed funding. As the student body's highest representative Muenchow should support PIRGIM because its funding petition was signed by a majority of students. Muenchow's alligation that PIRGIM is working behind MSA's back is false: it has worked with both the regents and the MSA. A strong PIRGIM enhances the political power of To the Daily: Mark Kulkis' letter ("New feminists attack men too much," Daily, 11/19/86) undermines the real exploitation that women are fighting against. He shows no sympathy toward these deeply ingrained problems faced by women in our society. He generalizes feminism, discredits the problems with our rape culture, and equates women's images with dildos. These are incorrect analogies of the enormous inequalities we are all facing. Basically, most people have realized that equality is the right ideal for all, (U.S. Constitution), but Mr. Kulkis seems to believe this will occursovernight without action. In his argument, Mr. Kulkis creates some interesting, yet imaginary, terms; "New Feminism" and "Old Feminism." He defines the latter, "that a-woman is just as good as a man," and the former, "men just want to rape women" with u-g's 2ific and untrue generali itirns. He does not explain wihy these agreeable "old feminists" were not able to prevent women from earning 59 cents to every dollar a man earns. Old feminists and new feminists are the same people, they are just fed up with oppression. Mr. Kulkis ridicules the idea of our "supposed" rape culture. The fact that one out of every four women is raped makes one question whether this is an imaginary problem. Perhaps the term "rape culture" is offensive to Mr. Kulkis but if something does not have a name it does not exist. We must call attention to the problems in our societal attitudes. All men are not being punished for a few sex criminals as Mr. Kulkis implies. The Malamuth survey done in 1981 found that 60 percent of the male college students interviewed, in the United States and Canada, said they might rape or "force sex" under the right circumstances. Thirty-five percent said they would indeed try to rape a woman who had rejected them. (Carol Tarvis and Carol Wade, The Longest War: Sex Differences in Perspective) This rape culture is definitely a product of TV advertising, Administrators must speak against rape These myths devalue women's integrity in society. Neither Mr. Kulkis' discussion of using a woman's image as a beach ball, nor his preposterous equation of a female "sex" doll with a vibrator, is amusing. A doll is a parody of a woman's body, face and mind. A vibrator is representative of a man's sexual organ which has no human being behind it. It is just an object. He implies that men are separated from their sexuality but a woman's sexuality is her entire being. Therefore, a woman's whole self is being exploited by using the doll for humor. Does Mr. Kulkis feel that penises are completely, representative of men? To the Daily:* Rape is a major problem in Ann Arbor, as I am sure everyone is aware of by now. Incoming freshmen at orientat - ion are exposed to this problem through various movies, pamphlets and speakers. The Sexual Assault Awareness Center has installed numerous emergency phones in an effort to combat rape. The Michigan Daily has printed numerous articles on the awareness of rape. The administrators of Michigan, however, have not followed up on other students' efforts to help prevent rape. There has been a systematic suppression of the topic of rape from the administrators which may lead to damaging side effects on rape victims. Rape victims must realize rape is a serious crime that unfortunately happens to many people. By not speaking out against rape, the administrators are indirectly approving it, thereby encouraging the rapist, and making victims more vulnerable to being raped again. The reassurance a victim so desperately needs from the administrators, sort of "father figures" to many students, is not given, leading to two major consequences: the rapist will not be caught, but, more importantly, the victim will not be inclined to seek help. Under group pressure, or pressure from a higher -authority, people tend to be obedient and conform to pressure. Are these adminis - trators receiving pressure from an outside or inside source to not print rape articles? Are they afraid to tarnish the "good image" of Ann Arbor? Believe me, many students at Michigan are at least somewhat aware of the problems of Ann Arbor, rape being one of them. Students will think worse of administrators who do not speak out against rape and it will only hurt these administrators in the long run. Many students will not respect these administrators and respect is an essential component of an administrator's job. I realize that printing rape cases may offend some people; however, admnistrators, being in position of high authority, are not in position to not speak out against rape. This is one issue that administrators can not afford to avoid: people's lives are at stake. Clearly, rape should not be hidden. Only by continuing to speak out against rape and by emphasizing again and again that rape is wrong can the victims of rape feel confident enough to turn the rapist in and also get the necessary help for him/herself. The adminis trators have not to date helped the victims of rape. Adminis - trators are supposed to be here for the students: why don't they start by helping them? 4 -Jeff Seifman November 20 If he also argues that a male doll passed around would have- been just as amusing as a female doll, he misses the threat involved in the activity of "passing up." Women are grabbed and put in dangerous situations against their wills and many real women have suffered real injuries (broken bones, bruises, etc.). The torture and humiliation of a life-sized female doll is not humorous. Mr. Kulkis' final quote, "Women should sympathize with us men," draws attention away from the real problem. In a world where women control one-hundreth of the world's property, earn one- tenth of the world's income, and perform two-thirds of the world's working hours, it becomes quite' apparent that men need to change their attitudes toward the treatment, of women.(Leslie Adams, Christian Feminists) Women, are not beachballs or sexual victims. We should sympathize with. the socialization of males, but, this does not excuse them from their actions. Mr. Kulkis, I am not one to say whether or not you are an evil rapist, but 1 can state that your letter shows a great lack of knowledge about the problems women face living in our society. You demand sympathy without giving any. -Carol Wyman -November 21 Feminists must open their minds To the Daily: In response to Mark Kulkis' letter ("New feminists attack men too much," Daily, 11/19/86), I praise him on his stance. Also, viewing this movement, provokes me to label those feminists as very "hypocritical, insecure people." I don't want to appear as if I don't respect the plight of females in our society, but I strongly support, on moral grounds, the "old feminist" Movement. Females aligned themselves with intellectuals - MALES and FEMALES - 4 of their society and have gained, their rightful place in Japanese Society. What revolts me about the "new feminists" is their "close-mindedness" in not being able to take constructive criticisms. If they can do thi and adapt to the society, instead of separation from it, they will get their supposedly "lost" resnect back again. 4