, OPINION Wednesday, November 4, 1987 Page 4 The Michigan Daily te maebtna ne r Michigan Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Vol. XCVIII, No.40 420 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. Look into Ginsberg HEN THE NOMINATION OF Robert Bork to the Supreme Court was in its death throes, President Reagan indig- nantly vowed to choose another 'nominee who would upset the major- fity of the Senate just as much as Bork had. With the nomination of Judge Douglas Ginsberg last week, the question remains: has the Presi- dent made good on his promise by nominating another conservative in Bork's mold? Not enough information is available to determine Judge Ginsberg's stands on the key constitutional issues * which played so crucial a role in the defeat of Judge Bork. Indeed, there is a paucity of information as to what Judge Ginsberg's views are on most contentious social issues, from abor- .tion to minority rights. Ginsberg's 'legal writings concentrate almost ex- lusively on regulatory and antitrust jssues. In his short tenure on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, he has accumulated "only a brief judicial record. There is nothing which indicates Ginsberg's positions on civil liberties issues.. In light of Reagan's pledge to ap- :point another conservative justice, :Ginsberg's sparse judicial record : does little to dispel the fear that he :may in fact be the ideological equiva- lent of Bork. Bork may well have been confirmed had he not carried the political baggage contained of his ul- tra-conservative academic writings which cast serious doubt on the verity of the more moderate positions he professed during the confirmation hearings. The fact that Ginsberg was the first choice of Attorney General Edwin Meese and is known to have been heavily favored by the most conser- vative administration officials also concerns many who desire a moderate justice to replace Justice Lewis Pow- ell. As disturbing are revelations that Ginsberg handled a Justice depart- ment effort to extend First Amend- ment protections to cable operators that would benefit a corporation in which he had $140,000 invested. Such indications are by no means conclusive, and should not be taken as a justification to prejudge Ginsberg before all of the facts come to light. But they are sufficient to warrant a great deal of care on the part of the Senate during the confirmation hear- ings. President Reagan has repeatedly criticized the Senate for what he calls the "delayed" and "politicized" confirmation hearings of Judge Bork, and has urged that there be "no delays to gear up opposition or support for this [Ginsberg's] nomination." Nonetheless, a rushed and per- functory hearing is exactly what the Senate should avoid, even more so in the case of the enigmatic Ginsberg than with Bork, whose beliefs were well documented. Only by careful re- search and thorough questioning can the senators determine where this latest nominee really stands. The Ju- diciary Committee must be even more methodical than before, for as Senator Kennedy said, Judge Ginsberg may very well be an "ideological clone of Judge Bork - a Judge Bork with- out a paper trail." 0 Logie resl I am constantly amazed by the fact that whenever the Daily prints an article in any way critical of the Greek system, this criti- cism seems to generate more letters to the editor than any other single topic on cam- pus. More than racism, sexism, the Code, more than virtually anything this side of Mark Borowsky's full-court slam of New Yorkers. JOH N LOG IE Greeks suspect, I think correctly, that many "outsiders" do not hold them, collec- tively, in the highest regard. In my case, this is certainly true. While there are a few Greeks I like and respect, like Ms. Stokes for example, I have, over the years devel- oped an increasing distaste for the system as a whole. One reason for this distaste, as I stated in my column, is the propensity for these private organizations to, from time to time, take over public throughfares for their own private enjoyment. If these gatherings are meant to entertain me, they do not. I have chosen, I think wisely, not to partake of the many delights that lurk within the Greek system. But many people within the system do not respect that. They wonder how anyone could possibly not want to do the things they do. So they feel obliged to let others know that they are missing something. Something great. There has been a great deal of misunder- standing over the other criticism in my column, which is partially my fault, and partially the fault of insecure people reading with their hearts rather than their heads. Nowhere in my article do I say that organi- zations like the American Heart Associa- tion, the the Muscular Dystrophy Association, and Children's Hospital are in any way unworthy organizations. On the contrary. To the best of my knowledge they are fine, deserving organizations, and I am delighted by most efforts to aid them. My frustration stems from the fact that the Greek community on this campus rou- tinely trumpets its dedication to philan- thropy, yet several Greek organizations persist in presenting fundraisers which rep- resent only the bare minimum that an or- ganization could do without surrendering John Logie is Weekend magazine's columnist. the right to justify its existence by citing public service. I don't think either point can really be disputed. Grab an Ensian and read the Greek pages. (This can be fun. My favorite was the sorority which mentions its dinner promoting Alcohol Awareness Week next to a photo of "a thirsty (sorority member) at Derby Days Beer Chug.") The Panhel- lenic Organization describes Philanthropic and community wide services as an "integral part" of the organization. Over 60 percent of the Greek organizations in the 1987 Ensian yearbook list various philan- thropic efforts prominently as part of their accomplishments for the year. If anyone out there is wondering why outsiders feel that the Greek community advertises its charity, they need look no further than the nearest Ensian. If that isn't enough, I can certainly prove that we, at the Daily, often receive calls sometimes requesting and sometimes demanding publicity for Greek fundraisers. Now to.the important issue, the minimal effort behind the maximum advertisement. I do recognize that many Greek-sponsored events are wholly commendable. Those members of the Greek system who have taken the term service organization to heart and earned it, deserve praise. Bravo! You are part of the solution, and not part of the problem. And to the degree that you have been willing to do so without calling attention to your sacrifices, I add a special "hurrah!" This is the hallmark of true char- ity. You have earned the right to call your- selves "philanthropic," now show some class and don't. But organizations which bounce basket- balls, or see-saw, and complain when passersby don't kick in, saying things like, "Sure... go off and have a good time at the bar, while I'm standing out here on the Diag, freezing my ass off" are charitable, just barely, but they are a far cry from what should be expected, and I would like to suggest demanded, from self-proclaimed philanthropic organizations. To these groups I say, go get your feet wet. Go par- ticipate directly in charity. Or stop pro- claiming the glory of your minimal sacri- fices to everyone within earshot. Take a hint from the men's basketball team, or from Pi Beta Phi, both of whom threw Halloween parties for underprivileged chil- dren. Most non-Greek bucketeers are in fact members of the organizations solicited for. When one donates to a Latin American Solidarity Committee bucket on the Diag, no one else claims the money as part of "their" philanthropy. The charity belongs to the donor, and LASC, and this is as it should be. Simply soliciting money from pedestrians is not an overhwelmingly noble form of charity, but it becomes intolerable when a tangentially involved third party uses the donations to toot their own horn. I am already growing very tired of the ar- gument that Greeks do more for charity than anyone else on campus. I am con- vinced that many members of the campus community are involved in many charitable concerns, but don't feel the need to adver- tise. In the case of Greek bucket drives, a significant percentage of the credit belongs to the students and passerby who are filling the buckets, though this is rarely acknowl- edged. And the Greek system, in addition to citing philanthropy, also cites the quality, talent, and dedication of its membership, suggesting to me that its members are em- inently capable of doing more than the rest of us. I write this in hopes of steering the im- pending debate to the really important is- sues raised by my column. Should private organizations have the right to overrun significant portions of the campus area with private activities? What level of in- volvement and dedication can be fairly ex- pected from self-proclaimed philanthropic organizations? Consider that if the sixty- three members of the basketball bouncing fraternity each donated twenty-four hours of their talents as office workers, organizers, writers, and able bodies, to the American Heart Association, rather than staging a twenty-four hour bounce-a-thon, they would generate $5,065 worth of work, cal- culating the value of their hours conserva- tively, at minimum wage.hAnd this would be real charity, beyond the criticisms of tired outsiders whose prejudices about the Greek system are often borne out by Diag activities. Many times over the past five years my all-too obvious prejudices about the Greek system have been confirmed. My apprecia- tion of efforts like the Pi Beta Phi party has been jaundiced by my disapproval for so many other activities. I call upon the members of the Greek community who stop at the minimum to press further, or drop the pretense. The services provided are being vitiated by the disservices to the community as a whole. I i ponds to his critics I 4 4 4 LETTERS Greeks sling mud at Logie's column { H T hKE!* kIrD LIKE. SIX "GRE S ?BOTTLE of "Sf oQUIZZE-S 0 I II PL IfOUBLEAS .4 .4 f .y "4 y4 .4 a h 'r r4 I. '.4 ie " . r ~ t w 1\ CAS-E "fEST Logie stereotypes To the Daily: I'm sure this is not the only letter you will receive i n response to the column in the Weekend Magazine, "Mudbowl is Good, Clean Fun," (Daily, 10/30/87) but I hope you will not dismiss this out of hand as just another pissed-off greek letting off steam. The column, even if only half-serious, and not intended to cause offense, was irres- ponsible. In it you presented an image of greeks as rich, superficial snobs. This seems to be the stereotype of greeks held by non-greeks. As with all stereotypes, it has only a loose connection with reality. It does not accurately describe the greek community and being rather negative, does injury to that community. By presenting this stereotype, you both reinforce it in the minds of those who already hold it, and propagate it by presenting it to people who may have not formed an impression of greeks. The only potentially positive result that might be derived from the printing of the column (on this occasion) is that this stereotype, having been brought out in the open, can be directly challenged and, hopefully, at least partially disproven. The image of greeks as rich, superficial snobs is commun- icated in the article by the Rather than defending such forms of charity fundraising, and trying to explain or deny the fact that many greeks do come from wealthy back- grounds, as has.been done in the past, I would like to point out that thse activities or characteristics are not the only activities or characteristics which describe greeks. The reason that people do not recognize the diversity that exists in the greek community is that they are conditioned by the sterotype. They expect and perceive only such aspects of the greek community as are entitled in that stereotype. Greeks who are not wealthy or superficial or snobbish are either not seen as greeks, or when they are recognized as such, are dismissed as exceptions. I think that if, and I hope when, you open your eyes and mind and look around you, you will find a lot of people who are members of sororities or fraternities, who are dedicated and sincere in their efforts to further ideals and causes in which they believe, and who enjoy socializing with people who are not members of their house. There are obviously times when parties are for "members only" but it's wrong to attribute this to snobbery, for most parties are for a limited group of people: the friends of the people who are putting the effort and money into throwing the stereotype. However, these aspects are only part of a much larger whole which is the greek system, and it is wrong to judge the whole on a basis of a fraction of it. When any stereotype is taken as accur- ately describing a group it is the first act of prejudice. The principle is the same in this case, for greeks, as in the case of prejudice against minorities or women, although the consequences are not nearly as severe or disastrous in this case as in the others. Please, be a little more thoughtful. If you wish to point out the faults in the greek system write about them in such a way as to incline greeks to thoughtfully con- sider, and come to terms with, those faults. Flip criticism in the form of stereotying will get you nowhere. As a parting thought, let me ask whether you think such an article, focusing on stereotypes of minorities or women, would have been appropriate? Please show us the same consideration you show for such other communities on this campus. -Steve Hathaway October 30 Commend Greeks To the Daily: John Logie's column, "Mudbowl is Good, Clean Fun," (Daily, 10/30/87) pres- ented a faulty, incoherent argument. Logie's sordid (sex- ist) views on the merits of the Mudbowl serve only as a 4 smokescreen for the pernicious underlying argument condem- ning Greek charity drives. Specifically, Logie allows his contempt for the Greek system to color his views on certain fund-raising practices (i.e. bucketing). Logie neglected to mention the other campus org- anizations (LASC, SAPAC, Take Back the Night, etc.) who jlso employ this method of soliciting funds. Rather than dwelling on the dress, dem- eanor, or social affiliation of the solicitors, Logie should focus upon the purpose and end result of the solicitors' efforts: helping the needy. If Logie gives, as he says, "grudgingly" to bucketeers, perhaps he should not give at all. His public condemnations of, and de facto call to boycott these types of drives, harm the needy recipients more than witholding his spare change might. Without solicitation of some sort or another, most charities would founder under public apathy. Those who give of their time and effort, 4 regardless of their social orien- tation, should be commended, not reproached. Logie callously abuses his journalistic power by his pompous condem- nations, and insults his read- ership with prejudiced, long- winded commentaries. -Suzanne E. Stokes November 1 A