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


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.

April 08, 1994 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1994-04-08

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

4 - The Michigan Daily - Friday, April 8, 1994

U e £diga tdg

420 Maynard
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Edited and managed
by students at the
University of Michigan

Editor in Chief
Editorial Page Editors

'The film has been denounced in Indonesia by a prominent
organization of Muslim clerics, who said it was too
sympathetic in its treatment of Jews.'
-as quoted in The New York Times, concerning the banning
of the film "Schindler's List" in several Islamic nations

Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of a majority of the Daily's editorial board.
All other articles, letters, and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily.


,'191011 1'i0I: t


I 1l -.I I '-l4


If MSU can do it, so can we

Tuition cuts are viable, and
"S tudents at the University of Michig-
an, as well as other Michigan institu-
tions, have experienced tuition hikes well
above the rate of inflation for the last
several years. In the last two years, there
have been tuition increases of 10 percent
or more at both Michigan and Michigan
State University (MSU). In contrast, the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) has stayed
constant at around 4 percent during this
$time. This trend of the last few years has
finally been broken at MSU. Next year,
tuition will rise only 3 percent for our
friends in East Lansing. Other Michigan
institutions such as Central Michigan
University and Western Michigan Uni-
versity are considering increases of 5 or
6 percent. In July, the University Board
of Regents will set the tuition rate for the
1994-1995 school year. It should pay
:.special attention to several factors in
snaking a decision.
First, the Senate Advisory Committee
on University Affairs' (SACUA) Budget
Study Committee report should be con-
sidered. This committee has studied why
there is a trend of rising budgets. When
this rate is compared to other institutions,
it appears that the University has one of
the highest cost increases per year. The
reasons for this are not totally clear -
however, the rapid growth of the adminis-
tration is suspect. The recommendation of
the Budget Study Committee with respect
-to administration is twofold: first, the ad-
ministration should be streamlined in or-
der to cut costs as much as possible,

the 'U' must realize this
second, salary increases should be close
to the growth of the CPI.
In order to maintain student diversity,
especially diversity of socio-economic
status, tuition cannot continue to rise at a
rate near 10 percent -- as it has for the
past several years. If this trend continues
much longer, many qualified students
will not be able to attend the University
simply because the costs are too high.
Losing these students would seriously
impair the University's commitment to
diversity. Therefore, to maintain diver-
sity, the University would have to pro-
vide more and larger scholarships. In
turn, these would require more funds
that can only be obtained through higher
tuition. This vicious cycle can only spi-
ral upwards, putting a quality education
out of reach for most students.
Perhaps it will be argued that the Uni-
versity needs such an increase in tuition in
order to support the high level of educa-
tion available to so many students here.
However, other sources of funding must
be found or the expansive growth of the
University must be checked. President
billion dollars within the next 25 years.
Instead of this rapid expansion, the Uni-
versity should realize that so much plan-
ning for the future actually impairs the
Tuition, as well as expenditures, should
be kept as near as possible to the CPI. Any
increases above this should be explained
and verified.

1'MI FL.G~ O 17f US


I m ro





- _-_

TGays in the military
The courts have spoken, now the military must act

arlier this week, a Federal district
judge in New York delivered yet an-
other condemnation of the U.S. military's
policy of excluding gays and lesbians. In
the first legal challenge to the new "don't
-ask, don't tell, don't pursue" policy, the
-judge barred the Defense Department from
-investigating or dismissing six service
members who filed suit against the policy
-until their case was resolved. This ruling
comes in the wake of several other recent
cases, all filed under the old policy - in
which recruiters routinely asked about a
candidate's sexual preference -in all of
which Federal courts declared the policy
unconstitutional. Now, as the new policy
is being struck down by the courts, the
military and the American public must
realize that this policy of exclusion is
outdated, unconstitutional and must be
There are several reasons why the
"don't ask, don't tell" policy cannot hold
up under constitutional scrutiny. First,
like the earlier policy, it violates the prin-
ciple of equal protection of the law, target-
ing one specific group for exclusion with-
out proving that there is a compelling
national interest to do so. In addition, it
goes against the guarantee of free speech,
% since even a verbal declaration of one's
homosexuality-unaccompanied by any
proofofhomosexual activity-is grounds
for dismissal. Furthermore, the policy calls
: for dismissal if proof is found of off-base
homosexual activity - a clear violation
of service members' right to privacy.
Supporters of the military's exclusion-
ary policy argue that the policy is neces-
sary, since homosexuality is "incompat-
ible"with military service. This argument
is blatantly ridiculous. If this were true,
there would be an obvious, clear-cut dif-
ference between the performance of ho-

mosexual service members and that of
heterosexual ones. This is not the case-
on the contrary, many gay service mem-
bers have held exemplary records, with
absolutely no cause for dismissal outside
of their sexual preference.
Other supporters of the military's policy
claim that to allow homosexuals to serve
alongside heterosexuals would disrupt the
camaraderie found in the military unit.
They argue that to serve with a homo-
sexual would make heterosexuals "un-
comfortable" -an unacceptable risk in a
profession where trust and cooperation
are so essential to smooth operation. This
argument sounds eerily like that of a half-
century ago, when many made the same
points regarding the racial integration of
the military. Opponents of that action
claimed that integration would cause dis-
comfort for white servicemen and would
lead to the destruction of trust and com-
radeship within the unit. However, 46
years after the executive order mandating
integration, it is clear that these fears have
not come to pass, and most recognize
these old arguments as the racist relics of
another time.
It is time to view the current debate in
the same light. Admittedly, the military is
not a testing ground for social experimen-
tation - but it has an obligation, legally
and morally, to not accept blatant and
pointless discriminatign. For far too long
the military has targeted, tormented and
excluded people based on their sexual
orientation. At long last, the courts are
coming to reject that exclusion, condemn-
ing the new policy as strongly as they
have the old. It is time for the military, the
Clinton administration and the American
public to take heed of this, and abolish
what may be the most blatant form of
official discrimination left in our society.

Dean Edie Goldenberg
contradicts herself
To the Daily:
Dean Edie Goldenberg's
April 6 letter properly pointed
out the achievements of
former LS&A
commencement speakers,
alums Lawrence Kaskan
(B.A. English '70, M.A.
Education '72), Carole
Simpson (B.A. Journalism
'62) and Cathy Guisewite
(B.A. English '72) and their
"mark on our society."
But she fails to note that
all three are professionals in
the field of qualitative
communication, namely film,
journalism and graphic arts
and commentary. This is
curiously ironic. Qualitative
communication -
particularly film, journalism
and cultural description and
interpretation - is precisely
the area of study that Dean
Goldenberg is aggressively
purging from the
Communication department
she has taken over. Kasdan,
Simpson and Guisewite have
distinguished themselves and
brought honor to this
University in fields that
Goldenberg is essentially
trying to destroy at the
Goldenberg copiously
lauds these qualitative
communication professionals.
But how many of their
potential successors will be
prevented from making
similar "marks on our
society" because of the dean's
autocratic and politically
charged destruction of
scholarship in their fields here
at the University.
In terms of the value and
worth of qualitative
communication and its
practitioners and scholars, one
wonders about the hypocrisy
of the dean's letter.
Rackham Graduate Student
Review responds to
To the Daily:
In light of Dr. Thomas
Landefeld's letter to The
Daily, we at the Michigan
Review feel compelled to
offer a response to his
criticism of our publication. In
our February 16 issue we ran
a front page story detailing the
controversy surrounding a
professor within the
Department of Pharmacology,
Dr. William Pratt, who stands
accused of racism by two
sources in the department, Dr.
Peggie Hollingsworth and Dr.
Landefeld. In his letter, Dr.
Landefeld claims that the
Review printed confidential
and incorrect material in our
article. Landefeld, however,

the article before publication.
He denied this request except
to confirm that he had
testified in a grievance
hearing formed in response to
Dr. Hollingsworth's
accusation of Dr. Pratt's
racism. Other than that brief
comment, he declined to
speak to the Review further.
Only now, nearly two months
after our story broke, does he
criticize the Review with
unfounded claims of
As to claims of
confidential material being
used in the article, our
information was obtained
from various sources in the
department. Nothing was
obtained through confidential
or coercive channels. Nor was
any attempt made to breach
the integrity of the closed
hearings that the Medical
School was conducting.
Our only hope in bringing
this story to light was to
publicize the closed-door
meetings that the Medical
School was conducting as a
result of the accused Dr.
Pratt's purported racism.
Furthermore, we hope to open
up discussion of racial politics
on this campus by offering a
voice for the accused, a voice
that many ignore as soon as
someone cries wolf at this
esteemed university.
Editorial Staff, The Michigan
The Ramones are a
To the Daily:
Gather around boys and
girls and let us tell you a story
about a music reviewer with
the intelligence of lint, Matt
Carlson. In his recent article
on The Ramones, Carlson
attempts to praise this no-
talent band of British punk
wannabes by discrediting
such influential artists as Led
Zeppelin. Well Mr. Carlson,
let us explain a few things to
you. The Ramones entered the
rock'n'roll world in the
heyday of such great bands as
Zeppelin, Pink Floyd and the
many up and coming British
punk bands. Aware of their
obvious talent deficiency,
these four middle-class
suburban New Yorkers
combined inane lyrics with
three-chord guitar playing and
a single variated drum beat.
Sure, this sound was popular
for a little while, but then
again so were the New Kids
on the Block. Jimmy Page
was an accomplished artist
and successful session
guitarist even before the
founding of Led Zeppelin.
Further, while Carlson bashes
the classic rock greats, he fails
to pay attention to the words
of the very band he praises. In

are looking down in disgust
and saying "Why don't these
losers hang up their
instruments, take their
brainwashed groupie Carlson
and beat it!".
LSA sophomore
LSA junior
Skip graduation
To the Daily:
I just finished reading
Dean Goldenberg's letter (4/6/
94) about this year's LS&A
commencement speaker,
Cathy Guisewite, and I don't
know whether to laugh or cry.
If the University's
administrators, speaking
through Dean Goldenberg, are
such simpletons that they
would believe even half of
what was in this letter, then I
have no trouble understanding
why the University's
academic ranking continues to
plummet every year.
If, on the other hand, the
Dean was engaging in the
insulting, two-bit spin
doctorism that I suspect she
was, then the administration
must not think very highly of
its ability to educate, to
assume that anyone would
believe such tripe. I can only
wonder what ludicrous
propaganda next year's
graduating class is going to be
fed ("...by exposing the
foibles of policemen whose
tendencies to break out in
song are like our own, the
producers of Cop Rock have
helped us laugh at ourselves
and our pretensions ... For
any of us prone to self-
aggrandizement, Cop Rock
provides an antidote ...").
As other letter writers have
pointed out, Cathy Guisewite
may be an engaging and
intelligent speaker with a
profound message to help
guide us into our post-
graduate lives. If her so-called
comic is any indication,
however, the graduates can
expect to learn all about the
perils of dating, bathing suits
that are too small and other
such weighty topics. Then
again, maybe she can teach us
all how to become wealthy
and famous through dull
I urge anyone else who is
disappointed by the
University's handling of our
graduation to not bother going
- spend the time getting a
good seat at a restaurant with
your family. It will probably
be time better spent.
LSA Senior

Women 's
As a student at the University,
I have learned many things: beer
can be consumed at virtually any
angle; columns on masturbation
will not necessarily earn you
respect. Most importantly, I have
finally begun to unlock the door
to one of life's great mysteries:
I used to think that women
and men were equal, with a few
basic exceptions, like men are
smarter. But noooo - if nothing
else, my experiences showed me
that there are important
differences between the sexes,
differences which I will relate to
you now. Come, walk with me:
Women are better cooks than
men. This is true because on the
Dick Van Dyke Show, Mary
Tyler Moore always had dinner
ready and waiting for her hubby.
Therefore, by deductive
reasoning, all women must be
able to cook and serve "their
Women are genetically
predisposed to wash dishes. One
need only look at history to prove
this. About 200 years ago, when
man still lived in a cave and
hunted buffalo, women stood by
the kitchen sink and washed the
Tupperware. Over the years, their
fingers evolved so that they could
reach into those little cups. This
also explains why women are
terrible drivers - because back
then there were no cars withwhich
women could practice their
Women are emotional
basketcases. How else can you
explain the success of Ghost and
Sleepless in Seattle? Do you think
men watch this stuff? Our
emotions are securely planted in
the bedrock of stability! Men
watch Movies Where Things
Explode. We are rational,
thinking machines.
Women are bad at sports.
Virtually every sport has some
type of "ball" in it, which
obviously alludes to a man. Ever
play basket-ovum? Didn't think
Women do not have gas. Ever
hear a woman just rip one in
class? Neither have I. Only men
have the complicated
gastronomic physiology
necessary to achieve this feat.
Naturally, this indicates that we
are smarter, too.
(On a side note, I actually
started a small fire once because
I was with a girl for three straight
days without a single opportunity
to pass gas. When I was finally
alone, the Ann Arbor Fire Dept.
received a call about a one alarm
fire at my house. I told them I
dropped a cigarette.)
Women like cuddly shit and
things named "Barbie." Men
like stuff made of steel and things
named "Ferrari." Since things
made of steel are tougher than
cuddly shit, men are tougher than
women (if S > Cs, then M > W.
Have a physics student do it for
you, dumb-ass.)

Women are not allowed to
enjoy sex. This is because they
would be sluts. Butmen can enjoy
sex, because then we would be
studs. This makes perfect sense.
Women like malls. Especially
the ones with clothes in them.
Haven't you ever read those nutty
bumperstickers, "Shop 'till you
drop," "Professional shopper on
board," "When the going gets
tough, the tough go shopping,"
or my personal favorite, #
"Shopaholic?" (Which always
made me wonder: is there a cure
for this? Does your insurance
pay for your treatment? Is it
hereditary?) By the way, you
will hear many of these cute
phrases, some verbatim, by
"Cathy," the crazy cartoonist
speaking at graduation. Better
make your reservations early.
Women do not like it when you
talk aboutyour excrement. I hate
to generalize, but yes, it's true.
No need to go into details.
Women are always on some
sort of a diet. Once again, I will
refer to "Cathy" and her zany





Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan