100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

September 29, 1992 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1992-09-29

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Page 4-The Michigan Daily - Tuesday, September 29, 1992

G E S iligan ailt

420 Maynard Street
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109
764-0552

Editor in Chief
MATTHEW D. RENNIE
Opinion Editors
YAEL CITRO
GEOFFREY EAR ilE
AMITAVA MAZUMDAR

Edited and Managed
by Students at the
University of Michigan

Unsigned editorials represent a mnajority of the Daily's Editorial Board.
All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily.
Code is just a piece of a puzzle

GEE...V1 $uEHEjHEEH...y-
irGRAY0)-YOU SAI T**
BAC IN-SC-- OL-
SAS 17~i ~C
p E--7
r 1i'.,:
:: hs ~ -

Judging by the turnout at the two hearings that
Vice President for Student Affairs Maureen
Hartord convened, the general student body seems
to have little interest in the controversial new
"Statement on Students' Rights and Responsibili-
ties." The apparent lack of interest may be a result
of the high turn-over rate of students on campus.
New first-year students and sophomores generally
have little idea of what occurred on campus in the
past years and many seniors knowledgeable and
concerned about the administration's activities
graduate and leave campus. All this makes the
administration's attempts to regulate student be-
havior that much easier. A history of the
administration's activities shows that the enact-
ment of the new code is not an unexpected or
unique action. It is only one piece of a large and
disturbing picture that should leave all students
skeptical about the University's intentions.
University President Harold Shapiro, James
Duderstadt's predecessor, tried unsuccessfully to
push through a comprehensive code of nonaca-
demic conduct to set the parameters of student
behavior. Learning from Shapiro's mistake,
Duderstadt maintained the same policy goal, but
used a different tactic. Rather than enacting an all-
encompassing code, he systematically adopted
independent polices - all meant to restrict student
behavior.
Among the highest priorities was changing the
stretch from Rackham to the Graduate Library into
a quiet, green mall. In 1990, the administration
enacted a policy that allowed loud-speaker dem-
onstrations only between 12 and 1 p.m., and only
with the permission of the University. And for
those demonstrations that brought on bad press -
like the annual Hash Bash - the administration
tried to crack down, prohibiting the assembly and
fighting legal challenges in court.
Couple that with the administrations no-shanty
policy, and the Diag area becomes uncharacteris-
tically apolitical, considering the University's ac-
tivist past. Shanties are wooden structures which
are spray-painted with political slogans. Two years
ago, only three of a collection of shanties remained
standing, and in 1991 these last relics were hauled
away. Now University policy prohibits this form
of peaceful expression, and the Diag is little more
than a pretty place to sit down between classes.
But the administration was not content to regu-
late student behavior on the Diag - its influence
had to extend into their homes. In 1988 the Univer-
sity enacted its drug and alcohol policy, which
punished students who used illegal substances in
their ownhomes and sanctioned under-aged drink-
ing. Simultaneously, the administration was work-
ing on an overbroad sexual harassment and sexual
assault policy.
Since then, the federal government passed leg-
islation requiring the enactment of the drug and

alcohol and sexual assaultlharrassment policies,
and the new comprehensive code has eliminated
the need of the two separate policies.
In addition, the University made an effort to ban
hateful and hurtful speech by enacting a speech
code in 1988. A federal court wisely struck down
the speech code as a violation of the First Amend-
ment in 1989, but the administration quickly fol-
lowed with an interim code. When the Supreme
Court ruled a similar Minnesota speech code un-
constitutional, the administration backed down
and rescinded the interim code.
During the summer of 1990, the administration
deputized its first armed police officers (who car-
ried 9mm semi-automatic weapons) under the
Washtenaw County Sheriff. But the administration
preferred full control over the police and pro-
ceeded to deputize them under the University Board
of Regents. It held two hearings to consider public
concerns, as required by law. The hearings were
poorly advertised and scheduled on the Thursday
and Friday before spring break, when many stu-
dents were out of town. Moreover, when the hear-
ings began, the regents responded to protestors by
barring them from the hearings. In the end, less
than 20 Ann Arbor residents and students had the
opportunity to speak to the regents.
The "Statement on Students' Rights and Re-
sponsibilities" may mark the final battle of the
administration's war on student rights. One need
not be sympathetic to conspiracy theories to ques-
tion the administration's motives. Only by putting
the University's most recent action into context,
can students recognize the persistent attack on
students' rights.

01

MINISTRATION
t t 11
fly
'K, ,,..may *- eta ,
" .1 f
ITSj(sj
ST E01

Life, death, abortion?
To the Daily:.'
As a pro-life Republican
opposing capital punishment, I
agree with the gist of the Sept. 16
political cartoon. But if you think
it's hypocritical to be pro-life and
pro-death-penalty, what are you
implying about abortion? Think
about it...
David Hansen
Second-year law student
Letter offends
sorority women
To the Daily:
If Mr. Chapman was trying to
make a diplomatic point about
noise violations in his Sept. 28
letter to the Daily, "Greek Brats,"
it was completely lost in his
offensive, slanderous piece of
propaganda. Mr. Chapman, your
sterotypical, pretentious judge-
mnents of sorority women engag-
ing in "fake friendships" obvi-
ously stem from a deep insecurity
within yourself, possibly that of
.being a senior and clearly having
never spoken with one sorority
woman.
As a matter of fact, Kappa
Kappa Gamma didn't even drive
convertibles on Bid Day. Were
your eyes closed as tightly as
your mind?
I sense a twinge of envy in
your arrogant, self-righteous
statements, Mr. Chapman, for
how many true friendships could
you possibly have based on the
closed-minded beliefs displayed
in your letter? Lord help how
racist and homophobic you must
be, in addition to anti-female.
Cori Jakubiak
Pledge Trainer, Kappa Kappa
Gamma Sorority, LSA junior
The Daily encourages its readers
to write. All letters should be 150
words or less. All op-ed pieces
should be 3,000 characters.
Submissions should be typed and
sent to: the Michigan Daily, 420
Maynard, Ann Arbor, MI 48109;
or via MTS to: the Michigan
Daily, Letters to the Editor.

To the Daily:
It is unfortunate to see the
Daily criticize one of the few
democratic student-run organiza-
tions on campus ("Does the ICC
have your money" 9/24/92).
While it may be true that the
Inter-Cooperative Council (ICC)
could handle share returns in a
more timely fashion, state
legislation would be the worst
possible solution to such a
complex problem. The writer of
the editorial failed to mention the
many internal recourses that ICC
members have, such as talking to
their house president, presenting
a proposal to the Finance
Committee, speaking at the Board
of Directors meeting or just plain
raising hell.
Landlords do not rebate your
rent at the end of the year, as the
ICC does. The $200 in shares are
a member's stake in the co-
operative and may be sacrificed
to pay off a member's debt. If the
security deposit law were applied

to ICC shares as the Daily
proposed, the ICC in turn could
raise the required share purchase
to $500. This would go against
our stated purpose of providing
low-cost housing. I urge dissatis-
fied members to talk to their
elected representatives so that we
may effect a democratic solution
from within the ICC.
The Daily editorial page
should turn its unwarranted
attention to the large elitist and
sexist student organizations on
campus that receive University
and Alumni support while the Co-
ops remain 99 percent self-
supporting. Student dollars
support the ICC, unlike the
Michigan Daily, and the ICC does
not have any Duderstadt appoin-
tees on its board.
Harley Savage
ICC member
Editors' note: the Michigan Daily
recieves no University funding.

Criticism of ICC undeserved

01

A letter to a tall, blond guy

0
S
0
S
0
_cc

To the tall, blond guy who was
walking down State St. last
Friday afternoon:
I am pretty angry at you. You
probably don't remember why,
you probably don't even remem-
ber who I am. I'll attempt to
refresh your memory but I have a
feeling that you, like a lot of
other guys in this world will still
be clueless. Here goes nothing.
After finishing a few errands
on a very nice Friday afternoon I
was walking back to my dorm
thinking of my weekend plans.
Two University-employed men
walked by me going the opposite
direction, looked me up and
down and commented, "Mmm-
hmm they's is some nice lookin'
shorts you have on!"
You were right behind them
and didn't make matters any
better by looking me up and
down as well and then laughing!
Looking down I noticed that I
had received that "lovely compli-
ment" because my very normal
looking shorts had been showing
a few inches more leg than
normal because my book bag had

latched itself on to them. I turned
around and the first two men were
out of sight but I could see you
sauntering along the way.
"What was so funny!" I yelled
at your retreating back but you
didn't hear me. It's not like I have
a very loud voice, and you weren't
exactly waiting around to receive
my reaction.
Well, if you had I would have
liked to tell you how totally rude,
and out of line you were. I may
pass you any number of times
during my remaining years here
and will never recognize you but
if I did I would criticize your
inadequate physique, incredibly
geeky style of dress, sickly
complexion and any other thing
that doesn't make you any less of
a person but which would humili-
ate you and make you feel pretty
insecure about yourself.
Unfortunately, every female in
the world and I deal with street
harassment daily, and we are
getting pretty tired of it!
Julie Robinson
LSA junior

MIA families: casualties of war

Many Americans believe U.S. intervention in
the Vietnamese civil war went on too long;
now there is evidence that the peace may have
been concluded too soon. Ongoing hearings on
Capitol Hill last week elicited disturbing acknowl-
edgments from former secretaries of defense that
American servicemen were possibly left behind in
Southeast Asia after the Paris peace accords, de-
spite President Richard Nixon's assurances to the
contrary. Deception by the Nixon administration
is nothing new, yet it is appalling that POWs may
have been abandoned for domestic political expe-
diency.
In separate testimony before the Select Senate
Committee on POW/MIA Affairs, Melvin Laird,
secretary of defense through 1973, and James
Schlesinger, CIA director and Laird's successor at
the Pentagon, stated that they had information at
the time of the peace accords suggesting that
POWs were alive in Vietnam. Nixon withheld this
information from the U.S. public and worse, from
the families involved.
Further, Nixon's secretary of state, Henry
Kissinger, continues to duck the accusation that he
swept information under the rug in order to con-
clude the peace negotiations quickly. He blames
anti-war efforts for his inability to press for a fuller
accounting of the information. Rather than pass-
ing the buck to anti-war demonstrators, Kissinger
should accept responsibility for his mistakes and
cooperate fully with the Committee.
With 2,266 Americans listed as missing from
the Indochina war, Nixon said in March 1973 that
"all of our American POWs are on their way
home." That was true only in the sense that all of
the POWs whose identities and locations were

But newly-revealed documents show that as
many as 350 U.S. personnel were missing or cap-
tured in Laos. The Pentagon had solid information
on 20 pilots who were downed in Laos, but only 10
were released from captivity.
Part of the problem, perhaps, was that the Lao-
tian government was not included in the peace
process. A recalcitrant Vietnamese government
may have resolved to conceal information on POWs
held in Viet Cong camps in Laos.
For many years, U.S. authorities continued to
receive reports of sightings of persons presumed to
be Americans. The Pentagon believed that the
Vietnamese government wanted ransom for these
individuals - a theory that has since been discred-
ited. U.S. missions to Southeast Asia have investi-
gated this charge, but the results - at least accord-
ing to unclassified information - have been in-
conclusive. Still, in the hopes of pressuring the
Vietnamese government to provide information on
the whereabouts or fate of MIAs, Washington has
wisely withheld diplomatic recognition and for-
eign aid.
Many now believe that POWs are being held in
Laos or Vietnam by groups outside the govern-
ment. However, the U.S. is correct in holding the
Vietnamese government responsible for the ac-
counting of personnel, since it may have informa-
tion inaccessible to U.S. intelligence efforts; some
areas of Vietnam have never been opened to U.S.
inspectors.
The POW/MIA debacle is one more ugly legacy
of a brutal war and a duplicitous administration.
Whether U.S. servicemen are at to date being held
against their will in SoutheastAsia is debatable, but
the government owes it to their families to do

University needs code to stem assault

by Sue Kaufmann
In any community of 35,000
people, there are inevitably in-
stances of behavior that hurts oth-
ers, sometimes seriously. Student
communities are no exception. Stu-
dents, staff
and faculty at
theUniversity
currently have
very limited
protection
from violent, . -
assaultive, ha-
rassing or discriminatory behavior
by students. The University is re-
quired by law to proscribe some
kinds of behavior by students and to
offer protection and relief to vic-
tims of some of those proscribed
behaviors.
For 10 vears. a the women's

most others at that time, I assumed
that students would come forward
primarily to tell of being harassed
by faculty members. Over time, I
learned that women students were
in at least as much danger from
their male peers as they were from
staff and faculty.
Sexual assaultisan all-too-com-
mon experience on any university
campus, including this one. Inci-
dents described by women students
at the University as sexual harass-
ment perpetrated by fellow students
include: acquaintance rape, stalk-
ing, publicly biting women's but-
tocks, persistent, graphically ob-
scene comments about women's
bodies, and personally humiliating
cartoons or drawings posted on
bulletin boards or included on fly-
ers. Women faculty members also
:-rr-- inl: cae~.:ka .CAV ~. h rne

The legal system cannot do the
whole job. Most complaints that are
likely to be brought forward under
the proposed statement are not likely
to be prosecuted. Environments hos-
tile to women cannot be changed
through the courts alone. Universi-
ties have the obligation and the re-
sponsibility to use many creative
means to foster environments that
are inclusive and supportive for all.
The S tatementof Student Rights
and Responsibilities providesafoun-
dation - enabling the University to
protect its members in cases of vio-
lent, assaultive, or threatening be-
havior and promoting educational
remedies and mediation in the much
more frequent cases of demeaning
or discriminatory behavior.Experi-
ence on this campus and others indi-
cates that formal procedures are
lilc. a .tohA er roha..-n-ac.'n

0

1

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan