4 - The Michigan Daily - Friday, March 17, 1995 ',bi lsrbti3uu ?W rn~g MICHAEL RosENBERG RosEs ARE WAD 420 Maynard Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan ---, MICHAEL ROSENBERG Editor in Chief JULIE BECKER JAMES NASH Editorial Page Editors Cynicism takes 'U' over 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. Neither code nor amendments satisfactor R egent Deane Baker (R-Ann Arbor) said it best: "I have long believed in no code at all. Failing that, I think it should be as simple as it can be, and it doesn't appear that it is as simple as it was before." Legally, the Univer- sity should have some sort of sexual harass- ment policy in place, as well as an alcohol and drug policy. However, a policy does not madate a document as restrictive as the State- ment of Student Rights and Responsibilities, otherwise known as the code. Nor should it be included in regental bylaws. The Univer- sity needs to scrap the existing code and start over. It could adopt a method of dealing with sexual harassment complaints and discour- aging alcohol and drug use, without invading the private lives of the students or binding students to unnecessary regulation. On Jan. 31 amendments to the code were voted on by a student panelists. The final results produced few improvements and added complications. Finally released last week, the amendments will now go to the Board of Regents, which will vote on them at its April meeting. One positive amendment revokes the duty of the judicial adviser to determine whether testimony at a code hearing "would be irrel- evant, immaterial, or redundant." In its origi- nal form, the documentplaces adisproportion- ate amount of interpretive and decision-mak- ing power solely into the hands of the judicial adviser, a position currently held by Mary Lou Antieau. However, while this individual amendment is a step in the right direction, later amendments add to the power of the judicial adviser, virtually erasing any gains made. Another amendment provides for cross- examination of eyewitness statements against the accused, a distinct advance. Students must not be helpless victims of the code and this will help to ensure the fairness of the hearing pro- cess. Despite this second small achievement, students still may nothave legal representation -only an adviser-at hearings, afundamen- talprincipleofAmerica'sjudicialsystemwhich the University would do well to emulate. However, the University inflates its judi- Wanted: An effective Preposterous - that is the only word to describe the ordeal the administration has put students through in allowing them to amend the code. Students who care about how the policy affects them are faced with vague an- swers, bureaucracy and half-hearted efforts on the part of the administration. The student panelists who attended the amendment hearing are to be commended. They made it possible to reach a quorum of 26 out of 50, and put the amendment process underway. However, it must be remembered that the hearing attempts failed three times before even getting off the ground because 26 jurors could not be found. On the fourth try, the 26 were barely gathered together after an hour of phone calls and delays. Once proposals began, groups had one minute per amendment to present. Then any- one wishing to speak for or against the amend- ment was allowed 30 seconds, and speakers were limited to two pro and two con. The person presiding over the event seemed con- fused at times, and was at best unfriendly, cutting people offin mid-sentence. It is beyond imagination how the panelists learned any of the reasoning behind proposals, despite their careful questions and deliberation. The atmo- sphere more closely resembled a circus than an amendment hearing. cial authority. Originally the code could fol- low one as far as parts of Ypsilanti because of the 30-mile radius provision. It also placed students in double jeopardy by duplicating legal trials so that students could be tried on two levels for the same crime. With the new amendments the jurisdiction of the code has been extended to apply to offenses that "would fall under the scope of this statement and would clearly threaten the safety of the Uni- versity community to fulfill its academic mis- sion." Two offenses have also been added: murder and breach of hearing confidentiality. The good intentions ofthe student panelists are apparent, but the amendments render the Uni- versity as an all-powerful force in students' lives - an unwanted force. Everyone is inno- cent until proven guilty, including those en- rolled as students. The University does not have the right to be legislature, police, judge and jury. In its zeal to be a law-abiding, yet dictato- rial entity, the University insists that under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act it must keep all code proceedings a secret. The section of the code that deals with this issue has been amended to strengthen that resolution when it must be loosened, for the law does not apply to non-academic information-and this is a "code of non-academic conduct." Hear- ings and records must be opened to keep the process above board at all times. The lone change that stands out as a plus is the AdvisorCorps amendment, which provides for a group of 10 or more students specially trained in the intricacies of the code to act as peer advisers. Any measure to involve stu- dents in the process is worth consideration. None of the amendments are final until the regents vote on them. When examining the amendment proposals, regents must keep in mind the students' best interests. While many of the amendments are undesirable, the regents must know that they were voted on by 26 students, and merit serious consider- ation based on the source. The final product must reflect both what the students have asked for and what is best for all students. amendment process If the any progress is to be made by amend- ing the code, it must be done in an environment conducive to careful consideration. Students voting on changes must be well-informed and willing to participate. The administration's treatment of the issue is insulting-its attitude points to a general lack of faith in the intelli- gence of the students. At every turn the Uni- versity tries to stall the process as if it believes that students will be pacified with mere token gestures. Proposed amendments should have gone through a two-part process before reaching the regents' table. Put the responsibility in the hands of the Michigan Student Assem- bly, which the students elect as their collec- tive voice. First, MSA would vote on reason- able code amendments proposed, then put it to a Universitywide student referendum. This method would ensure the efficiency of the amendment process, as well as an opportunity for all students to approve amendments to the code. Unless an amendment is required to conform with the law, it should go through MSA and the student body before regents are allowed to vote on it. Furthermore, the admin- istration should consider the feelings of MSA and the majority of the student body - and both overwhelmingly believe that the code, must be abolished. Michigan has one of the most diverse student bodies in the nation, but it seems that every student shares one opin- ion: We suck. It's true. Everything here sucks, if you listen to the students. Walk around campus and listen in on everyone's conversations. In one day, you are likely to hear all of the following: The University itself, consistently ranked among the top 20 in the country, is entirely "overrated," basically just plain "lousy," full of "difficult" classes which are "too easy," taught by professors who "don't care about students" and "give too much work" but still "don't teach anything." It doesn't really matter, though, because the students are "not real smart" and, despite belonging to what must be a couple hundred student groups, are "apathetic." Still, there manage to be enough "geeks" to "screw up the curve" and make the school "too com- petitive." And what can students do with their free time? Certainly nothing in Ann Arborwhich has concerts and art exhibits and festivals of all kinds, but nonetheless is a "dead town" with "nothing fun to do." Besides, the apa- thetic students "never take advantage of the culture." The Athletic Department, too, is over- rated. The football team, 16-8 over the past two years, is "terrible," an "embarrassment" to the University. In fact, the football team is so bad it might as well be coached by men's basketball coach Steve Fisher, who has been in three national championship games in six seasons yet "can't coach," has "no control over his players" and, in gen- eral, is "lucky." Even if you do want to find out about these teams, you are reading the wrong publication. The Daily, winner of numerous national awards over the past five years, is a "liberal" "sexist" "overly feminist" "rac- ist" "communist" "rag." The weather is "terrible," even though ... well, OK, the weather really is terrible. But not everything is terrible. In fact, most things here are outstanding, the envy of almost every university in the country. Nobody here believes it, though. A Cul- ture of Cynicism hangs over the University like the steel-gray January clouds. Nothing, it seems, is quite good enough. Really? How many schools would turn down an exchange of faculties with Michi- gan? Or football teams? Or basketball coaches? Or student newspapers? Or stu- dent bodies? Or cultural environments? Why, there are people out there who would swap anything with Michigan. You don't believe it. Of course you don't. Michigan? Good? C'mon. As far as the average student is concerned, Michigan is not good at anything. People call this "A Public Ivy," and everyone responds, "Yeah, emphasis on the public," like it was some kind of insult. Students act like "Public Ivy" is the collegiate equivalent of"Sour Caviar" - one adjective ruins the whole phrase, Even where there is spirit-and, despite the cynicism, there is plenty of spirit - everyone denies its existence. Over 100,000 people pack Michigan Stadium on fall Saturdays. But noblqy here talks about the size of the crowd. They talk about how the fans are too quiet. Everything sucks, huh? Fine then. Ev- erything sucks. And in 20 years, when you think back on your college years, don't fool yourself with memories of friends or tales of good times. Just keep telling yourself col- lege sucked. By then, maybe we'll all realize that it's just not true. S S JMii LASSER SHARP A$ TOAST MARK" 1k)HRMAN.4 DC You S E RK - TSLST rricF9 t~y u~T H . TH WNOLei TRUTH', . ANT.)NoTHI-fN ~rTH-E TgLT.., / j- 7741 NOTABLE QUOTABLE "He ate his birthday cakes - four were bought by friends. It was sugar city. Marble Is his favorite." -- Vilma Baker, mother of LSA sopho- more Jake Baker, describing the Internet sex author's homecom- ing after nearly a month in federal prison LErERS Sexism by any other name is still sexism To the Daily: In her letter in the March 6 edition of the Daily, Sandy Eriksen attacks James Cho for his supposed "misinterpretation of gender issues." She could not be more wrong. Ms. Eriksen cites a column in which Mr. Cho had written about the use of unfair hiring practices to attract women. Mr. Cho had stated, "Open all the doors, yes, and let men and women compete on the same, level playing field wher- ever they so desire." With this, James Cho reveals his intellect. And with her attack, Ms. Eriksen demonstrates her lack of rea- son. Why not open the doors? Why not allow fair competi- tion? Is she afraid of fair competi- tion? No.I think that Ms. Eriksen perceives some sort of vague, historical injustice, and wants the system to favor her - to pay her back. Call it years of op- pression, call it whatever you wish. The facts are plain and true - sexism is when sex is used as a basis for deciding who gets a job or position, no matter what the justification. That's just about as plain and as simple as it gets. Any time sex is used as a deciding factor, it's sexism, and it is wrong. What Ms. Eriksen is supporting, namely those unfair and sexist hiring practices, is sexism, clear and true. You, Ms. Eriksen, are a sexist. "But men have been hired efited from their maligned hiring practices. And don't go and tell me that I am oppressing and disempowering women. I have never(norhas Mr. Cho, I'm sure), oppressed a woman. So please don't presume that all men are misogynistic oppressors, because that's wrong. We just want the system to treat us fairly, and not discriminate on the basis of sex. The fact of the matter is that women and men are fundamen- tally different. Yes, different. Not better, not worse, just dif- ferent. Men are better than women at some things, and women are better than men at some things. When the world realizes that ability - and noth- ing else - should be the deter- mining factor in decision mak- ing, the best person for the job - male orfemale-will bechosen. Now isn't that the right thing to do? Randall A. Julp President, Michigan Men's Club LSA sophomore Shed no tears for Jake Baker To the Daily: I am grievously disappointed at the outpouring of sympathy for the man arrested for posting a rape/torture story about a Uni- versity student. Why is there so much identi- fication with men who concoct specific, disgusting scenarios of the torture and rape of women? Where is the sympathy for the woman who was named? Where is our identification with her anger and fear? How would reign of terror in Ann Arbor. The focus about the rapist has totally shifted. No one is talking about the survivors of his vicious beat- ings and horrible sexual assaults. Perhaps that's too painful to think about. No, the focus seems to solely be on the civil rights of men. It is possible that the police engaged in racist practices. Those experiencing that should come forward with specifics for investigation. Racism exists in all corners of our society. However, I have no sympa- thy for men who have prior con- victions of rape who were asked to give blood. All I can think of is the woman lay in Eberwhite Woods all night having been left for dead by the serial rapist. All I can think about is the woman brutally attacked at Community High School. All I can think about is Christine Gailbreath - beaten, murdered and raped. Many of these crimes hap- pened at the University -where is the outrage and disgust and outcry? Susan McGee Ann Arbor resident Kiss-In debate about rights To the DaIly: I have been following the Queer Kiss-In/Mr. John Yob discussion and feel that a few main points have been over- looked. Homosexuality is a lifestyle. It may be different, but it is a way of life, for some people. The Queer Kiss-In is simply a is a "progressive and liberal" school. The University prides itself on being culturally and ethnically diverse. However, there are other reasons for at. tending this school. The main goal of a college education is to help us understand the world, and in so understanding also develop the skills that will help us to survive in society. It en- ables us to think for ourselves in new and different ways. The reason I chose University of Michigan was to ensure that I got the best possible education I could. I would hope that Mr. John Yob also had that idea in mind when he applied to the University. Let us not forget that we are here to get an educa- tion. Whether that education con- sists of pure classes or also has elements of experience, such as the Queer Kiss-In, is up to the* individual. Erica Bell LSA sophomore E. Engineering construction has oversight To the Daily: The newly restored part of East Engineering is nicely done, and I'm sure the millions of dollars spent on it by the admin- istration were -well spent, but I think an error was made. If you face the main entrance of the building, the wheelchair ramp comes up the left side, but the only automatic door (presum-0 ably for people in wheelchairs) is all the way on the right side of the entrance. So, during class changing ,;P C ,, in n ,hi- 'ai, HOw TO CONTACT THEM University President James J. Duderstadt Office of the President 2068 Fleming Administration Building 764-6270 I