4 - The Michigan Daily - Wednesday, December 8, 1993 1~e rdt' mraw tilg - - -------------- Jim Lasser: 420 Maynard Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan JOSH Dueow Editor in Chief ANDREw LEVY Editorial Page Editor Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the majority opinion of the Daily editorial board. All other cartoons, articles and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily. Affirmative action remains necessary* By EUGENE BOWEN For many years now, the concepts of equal opportunity hiring and affirmative action have come under scrutiny and attack. Many claim these particular programs are elaborate forms of "reverse racism." These people say that because of these programs, and others like them, African Americans, women, Native Americans and other minority groups are being given unfair advantages over white males. Many courts have begun to denounce equal opportunity programs (especially those with an affirmative action base) as discriminatory against white males. I've thought about these arguments. I abhor discrimination; as a Black male I obviously would. However, I'm forced to concede that equal opportunity programs, even if they could be considered somewhat discriminatory, are necessary at this time, and their existence must continue. Perhaps the first formal setback against equal opportunity came in the form of a court case filed by Jim Bakke -- who was denied entrance into the University of California at Berkeley Medical School because a certain number of seats were reserved for minorities only. He claimed that choosing minorities for medical school seats instead of him based, in part, on their differences, is discriminatory. I both laugh and cry at Bakke's hypocritical stance. We live in a world infused with discrimination used to the benefit of Anglo- European men. The purpose of equal opportunity programs is to combat discrimination. Now, men like Bakke cite equal opportunity programs as proof that they are "victims" of discrimination. But the question to be asked is whether or not the discrimination suffered by white men as a result of Equal Opportunity programs (if any such discrimination exists at all) is comparable to the true Bowen is an LSA first-year student and member of the Daily's Editorial Staff discrimination suffered by Blacks, women and all others for centuries past and present. Let's see. White men aren't being raped by their female dates because she paid for dinner and feels he owes her something in return. White men aren't being pulled over by the police to have their cars randomly searched under suspicion of drug possession, based solely on their skin color. White men weren't lynched, enslaved and made to live in fear because they were considered inferior. White men weren't on the Trail of Tears. White men didn't have an entire generation killed in concentration camps. Now, I ask you; is the "discrimination" suffered by white males comparable? Perhaps the strongest argument made by white males who support the abolishment of equal opportunity programs goes like this: "White men today didn't enslave blacks. We didn't kill entire communities of Native Americans. We should not have to suffer as a result of what our ancestors did." Whether or not white men today are being discriminatory or racist (and believe me, many are), white men have better chances of making it in the world today because of their ancestors' centuries-old histories of mass oppression of minority groups. Many whites in the past and today attained their positions of power on the backs of the oppressed, subsequently crushing these minorities in their ascent. The only way historically oppressed groups can gain their fair share of "the pie" is by replacing some of the white males in positions of power. Many white men do support the right of minority groups to get their share of power and prestige. Butj look at our society. Who holds an disproportionate share of the world's power and money? White men do. For minority groups to get their fair share of this power and money, much of which white men have no claim to, as their ancestors stole it from minorities, white men will have to give up some of their power. Of course, white men don't want to let go of their dirty money made, both historically and currently, through oppression and racism. So, as a last resort, they argue that equal opportunity programs, whose expressed purpose is to reverse the many centuries of unfair hardship and loss by minorities, is racist and discriminatory. Equal opportunity is a far cry from equality in the workplace. For every business that would hire me over a white male as a result of my race, there are hundreds of businesses which would hire white males, however underqualified, over me for the same reason. The only way white males could redress the centuries of oppression their race is guilty of committing would be to subject themselves to being slaves of blacks for a few centuries. Then they would have to be made second-class citizens to women for a couple of millennia. Next, they would have to have millions of their number killed by strange Native American weapons and diseases. All this, not to mention reparation to Latinos, immigrants, Jews, Catholics and homosexuals. Obviously, white men don't want to suffer this. I don't want them to suffer either. There's been enough suffering. I suggest that white men who are anti-equal opportunity quit wasting their energy screaming racism. Instead, they should put their time and energy into working with oppressed minorities to fight racism and discrimination in the workplace, in education, in the police departments and in the hearts of the ignorant. The true battle is not against equal opportunity or affirmative action. It's against the racism that makes equal opportunity programs necessary. If white males will work to end the discrimination in their race and gender from which equal opportunity programs were born, this will lead to the dismantling of such programs, as they will be no longer necessary. 0 0 College Robandup Tak bak heN " PacePa za Nowhere is the influence of the Brand New Left (as opposed to the old New Left, which has thankfully been completely discredited) more evident than here at IU. The latest campus transgression against the protected class -- that is, anybody that is not a white male - involves IU Student Associa- tion senators and Latino Unidos of IU. LUIU is asking for the resignation of four senators who allegedly made racially derogatory comments at a meeting earlier this month. Those com- ments include: U Central Greek Senator Tonya president) and the words "Latino Unidos." Ricci then reportedly said, "LUIU, you know what I mean." The first charge carries the most weight, but in an understanding society should be read as more of an attack on Taco Bell than on i's Latino popula- tion. The fast food restaurant is clearly not a cultural restaurant - hence the humor. Ifit wasn't an attempt at humor, it is insensitive, though not grounds for expecting resignation. The second is a case of ignorance- Hamm didn't know the name of the restaurant and replaced it with a Span- ish nhrbcP. P ~rvAnaln childarns in Latino Services. In the eyes of the Brand New Left, it is now offensive to not be able to pronounce names. Hear that kids? So next time you're in class and your Asian, French, Southernor, alas, Latino professor or instructor can't pronounce your name to your satisfaction, scream discrimination. Call the P.C. police. Better yet, demand that the class be stopped until the situation can be rem- edied to your content. When Parliamentary procedures dictated the meeting continue, Burgueno wailed "How can they use the exrcp rof narl ia~menta~rv7nrnr .du re Onl4hree statistic Is accurate To the Daily: In response to Abraham Bates' 11/9/93 complaint that SAPAC is using "scare tactics and efforts to create an inflated rape-crisis mentality," SAPAC is right on target. Women still don't report many rapes for various reasons, so the one- in-three figure is far more accurate than one-in-eight. Buried deep in the hearts and minds of many a woman are memories of a rape, sometimes long forgotten, sometimes long remembered. Crimes that never were reported, but nevertheless make the higher numbers of rape no less real in a woman's mind. Sometimes she is able to get on with her life with few scars. Sometimes she is permanently and emotionally damaged. I speak from experience. I was raped once by a former boyfriend women getting the courage and strength to report and emotionally survive rapes. Those who can't do gain some strength from the knowledge that people are working to educate and provide support. We will never know the true figures on rape, but rest assured, they are far higher than what we do know now. SHALANE J. SHELEY Ann Arbor Belie In Jesus doesn't fl"Iht AIDS To the Daily: I am writing in response to the letter that was printed in The Daily on December 2 by Michael Martz concerning AIDS. This letter was printed less than 24 hours after National AIDS Awareness Day had ended. The purpose of this national event was to educate and inform people on how to prevent AIDS. You are still at risk of contracting the HIV nothing to do with whether or not you will contract AIDS. It seems that along with the religious views that are being imposed here, there also comes a lack of understanding as to the significance and reality of AIDS. Ignorance in this sense can be very dangerous. As it is said over and over, AIDS does not discriminate. Whether you "believe in Jesus" or not, AIDS is still a fact of life that every single person should be aware of. It has been medically proven that there are specific methods (regarding sexual practices, intravenous needle usage, etc.) to prevent AIDS. These means of prevention that have been stated over and over by doctors are the only ways to prevent AIDS. AIDS cannot be combated by a belief in God, Jesus Christ or the.Bible. So, you can "pray daily for those ... who are caught up in this web of sin," but I would like to say that ignorance "