4 - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com E E Midc4anJa40y Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 413 E. Huron St. *tAnn Arbor, MI 48104 tothedaily@umich.edu 4 There are huge, huge health risks and people should rightly be concerned about this." - Researcher Becky Price of GeneWatch UK on genetically-modified rice produced in America that contains human proteins similar to those in breast milk and saliva, as reported yesterday by the Daily Mail. KARL STAMPFL EDITOR IN CHIEF IMRAN SYED EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR JEFFREY BLOOMER MANAGING EDITOR Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors. Thoroughly researched Research universities deserve extra funding from state Given Michigan's economic woes, now might not seem like the best time for the state's three research universi- ties to ask the legislature for special treatment. Yet the presidents of the University of Michigan, Michigan State Univer- sity and Wayne State University did just that last week. They made their case to the state House appropriations subcommittee for funding the state's three research universities separately from its other 12 public universities. Their research plays a unique role in the economic future of our state, and though it may seem unfair, they deserve to be treated accordingly. We're smarter than this The state's legislators, many of whom lack experience thanks to term limits, are bound by the state constitution to pass a balanced budget every year. Crippled by a weak state economy and a structural bud- get deficit, the state's budget in four of the past five years has included cuts to higher education appropriations. Gov. Jennifer Granholm's proposed budget contains such a funding mechanism which might shield these three universities from these kinds of appropriations cuts. Cutting higher education funding inevi- tably leads universities to make up the difference with tuition and fee increases, hurting students across the state. But slic- ing away state support for universities particularly hurts the research institu- tions. These three universities receive 95 percent of the state's spending on research and development and are the only schools in the state that grant medical degrees and nursing doctorates. The environment these schools cre- ate is essential to attracting the knowl- edge-based and high-tech jobs that will make Michigan competitive in the global economy, even as its manufacturing base continues to erode. University President Mary Sue Coleman made an apt analogy before the subcommittee to North Car- olina's famed research triangle, where a long-term commitment by that state to its research universities eventually grew into an economic base far more reliable than textile mills - or auto plants. Funding the state's research universi- ties separately would not guarantee that they're spared from further funding cuts. It would, however, ensure that the gover- nor and the state legislature would have to think about what they were doing before settling on future cuts. Separate funding would also protect the state's research institutions against more harebrained funding schemes. One such flawed propos- al includes making the core of state appro- priations an equal per-pupil grant to each state university. That would likely benefit schools like Central Michigan University and Grand Valley State University at the expense of the research universities. The state of Michigan is facing a bud- get deficit for the next year of more than $900 million, and Granholm's proposal to offset cuts with a service tax has received a cool reception in the legislature. The state doesn't face many easy choices these days, but providing separate funding for the research universities is a simple one. At worst, doingso would add alayer of account- ability to further cuts to these vital institu- tions. At best, a separate funding stream might be the start of a greater commitment by the state to the research universities that are crucial to its economic future. Did you know that cirrus clouds are found at higher altitudes than stratus clouds? No? Then you're an idiot. Sorry, I just need to calm down. Watching a couple of episodes of Fox's newgame show "Are You Smarter than a 5th Grader?" has made me in aggres- sively competitive and more than a little bratty - kind of like I was in, well, fifth grade. The point of the show, which pre- miered last week to an unprecedented IMRAN ratingsrout,issimple enough - one adult SYED contestant must- answer questions taken from first- to fifth-grade classes for a chance to win up to $1 million. Not bad, right? I mean what sort of UCLA history major with a law degree wouldn't know that Andrew Johnson was the first American president ever to be impeached? The show's firstcon- testant, for one. Go ahead, snicker and mock - that's what Fox wants you to do. That's what the five kids in the "classroom" on the set (who contestants can cheat from, of course) did. See those grown-ups squirm when asked grade school ques- tions and laugh it up. The show is the latest in Fox's never- ending quest to exploit the insecurities of unwitting good sports for gargan- tuan profits and ratings (see "American Idol"). The only thing worse than not knowing that Columbus Day is in Octo- ber (veryuseful life information, by the way), is not knowing it on TV. Sure, the premise of the show, one that succeeds only by filtering out the adults who could answer those ques- tions, is mind-numbingly banal. Yet it pains me to know that the show pre- miered last Tuesday with the high- est ratings of any series premiere in the past nine years and even almost matched the viewership of ratings behemoth "American Idol." No, I'm not bitter. As a fiend for use- less facts, I have crammed more knowl- edge non sequiturs in my mind than anyone can imagine. Even the cold, exploitive motive behind the show isn't the main concern. What truly bothers me is that some- thing like knowing what REM stands for is being passed off as an indica- tor of intelligence. And one viable enough that those who fail are subject to humiliation by a groaning audience and tittering pre-teens. I'm glad that chubby little Kyle can regurgitate the answers pounded into his head by the abrasive gurgling char- acteristic of an American grade-school education. I'm just not sure he or any- one else should be so thrilled about it. Could Kyle tell me what parts of the brain are especially active in REM sleep and what the physiological impli- cations are of this activity? No, but he did scribble "rapid eye movement" with a smug gleam in his eye before the question was even out of host Jeff Foxworthy's mouth. Yes, it does look pretty bad when an adult American doesn'tknow that Mer- cury is the planet closest to the sun. But the reaction to this gaffe misses the point. The average fifth-grader knows the answer because it was on his last exam and his mom made him memo- rize it by dangling an Xbox in exchange for acing his science quiz. Two months from now - let alone two decades - he'll be just as clueless as that poor woman viewers laughed at during the show. The state of the adult American intellect is indeed troubling. A far cry from being able to find places like Iraq or Afghanistan on a map, about 50 per- cent of Americans can't even locate the state of New York. But the reason for these shortcomings is actually rooted in the same meaningless knowledge the kids on the show flaunt before the adult contestants. Our parents were also made to memorize things like the workings of the Dewey decimal system, but such pointless information is easily forgot- ten, because it serves no purpose. No wonder so many kids and adults have lost faith in American schools: How is knowing what constellation the Big Dipper belongs to ever going to help anyone? While being well-read in the con- structs that surround us is preferable, and indeed the mark of a vested intel- lect, let's not for a moment confuse knowledge with intelligence. It is important to teach facts that consti- tute common knowledge, but we must always ensurethatsuch teachingserves Would you be outsmarted by a rugrat? a purpose in further, more advanced learning: This country's grade schools continue to occupy kids with a per- petual game of Trivial Pursuit, leaving relevant, meaningful learning to high school or college. But by that time, it's often too late: kids are left unwilling or unable to engage sophisticated intel- lectual content. But perhaps we can take some solace inknowingthatevenifourhighschool- ers can't match third graders from some other nations in math and read- ing proficiency, they'll always be able to tellyou that the ship the Pilgrims sailed on was called the Mayflower. What more could an employer pos- sibly want? Imran Syed is the editorial page editor. He can be reached at galad@umich.edu. 0 6 6 JAMES DICKSON Don't be afraid to challenge feminism 0 THE SWEATFREE COALITION U' should go sweatfree The University Board of Regents will con- vene for its monthly meeting on March 15. Many student organizations will be present to ask the regents to take steps that reaffirm the University's position as the "leader and best." These groups, calling themselves Campus Unite!, are disenchanted with the University's unproven commitment to its own principles. They are disappointed with its lackluster use of renewable energy, flimsy commitment to diversity, investment in military contractors, unfair treatment of campus workers and pos- sible removal of same-sex partner benefits. These are all important issues related to the manner in which the student body is involved in the University's structure. March 15 also happens to be the deadline for adoption of the Designated Suppliers Pro-. gram presented to the administration by the Sweatfree Coalition. The Sweatfree Coalition is an amalgam of student groups that wish to see the University take a firm and definite stance against the sweatshop production of apparel bearing the University logo. The University has stalled adoption of the DSP for almost two years. University Presi- dent Mary Sue Coleman was introduced to the program in the fall of 2005, but she promptly sent it to a committee where it has remained ever since. However, while the DSP has been tied up at the University, more than 30 other major universities have joined the program, including Duke, Georgetown, Columbia and Wisconsin. These admirable institutions are changing and molding the DSP so that it addresses concerns brought forth by admin- istrations and apparel producers. Our university deserves to have input in this process, and we have a responsibility to share the expertise of our talent-rich insti- tution. Yet the committee here has still not offered any alternative to more successfully enforce our code of conduct. While students have spent precious time being patient, there is already a national program that is doing just that. Failing to take a stand against sweatshops is not the only consequence of Coleman's inaction. Since the proposal has been pre- sented to her, several factories have been shut down, workers have been fired, unions disbanded and rights squelched. Examples of unfair treatment can be found in factories such as Rising Sun in Kenya, Gildan Active- ware in Honduras, Hermosa in El Salvador and Chong Won in the Philippines. The Uni- versity could have prevented all these things by adopting the DSP several semesters ago. For instance, less than two weeks ago, a factory in the Dominican Republic called BJ&B was forced to close down. This was one of the few apparel factories allowed to unionize, thanks to the University's Code of Conduct. Unfortunately, after the work- ers formed a union, Nike decided that BJ&B lacked the resources to compete globally. The corporation moved its orders to Asia, where labor is considerably cheaper because workers have no unions. This situation illus- trates the need for a program that rewards, not punishes, unionization and the guaran- tee of worker's rights. If we are to fight the race to the bottom, we must first compensate factories that give human life priority. This is the goal of the DSP. On March 15, we will ask the University why it continues to shirk its responsibilities to workers who produce apparel bearing the Block M. We intend to inform the regents of the problems workers are facing under the status quo. We will then requestthat Coleman endorse the DSP. In this way, our university will prove to students, alumni and the rest of the campus community that it is willing to work to end the horrors of sweatshop labor. Joining the DSP means joining a national coalition of universities willing to take a stand against unethical labor practices. The University must support and sign onto the DSP, the only solution to the problem of sweatshop production of collegiate apparel. We ask that the students of this university - those who care about how and where their team apparel is made - join Campus Unite! on March 15. Change is possible only with our insistence. Aria Everts is an LSA junior and member of Students Organizing for Labor and Economic Equality. Kelly Simmons is an LSA junior and member of Students for a Democratic Society. Art Reyes is an LSA junior and member of the MSA Peace and Justice Commission. The authors are all members of the Sweatfree Coalition. As Angell Hall first grants me escape from the harsh Ann Arbor wind, Iam immediately subjected to a barrage of flyers that are extreme even by collegiate standards of political correctness. They read: "If you do one or more of the fol- lowing things: ... use words like 'pimp' and 'play- er' to praise sexually exploitative men ... blame women who have experi- enced sexual assault for indecency, stupidityfor 'askingfor it' ... think 'no' means 'yes' ... excuse sexual violence because 'men can't control themselves' YOU ARE CONTRIBUTING TO RAPE CULTURE." The F-Word is the campus group responsible for these green flyers that have violated our vision. Its motto - "Feminism: don't be afraid to use it!" - tells you all need to know about its world view. From its extreme rhetoric consisting of strawman arguments to its will- ingness to place women in a victim role, the group really hasn't accom- plished anything exceptional or revolutionary. The F-Word's green flyer cam- paign was more shocking for its reliance on classic feminist tropes than for anything actually writ- ten on them. Although the group claims to be ideologically neutral and to focus on "having open dia- logues about issues of gender, race, class and sexuality," its propaganda BasementArts doesn't deserve prof"s criticism TO THE DAILY: I was recently made aware of Professor Edward Domino's letter to the editor (With obscenity, Wal- green Center play fails to live up to its potential, 02/23/07) by a fellow theatre student. There are many words I could chose to describe Professor Domino's reaction to the play "Shopping & F**king," but I believe ignorant is the most appro- priate one. There are two facts that.Domi- does anything but that. The big story on this campus is the apathy among the student body, not its extremism. I thought we'd moved past the point of shock-and-awe and self-righteous finger-wagging. I thought wrong. Ideally, college is the time when we learn how to think, picking up practical skills. Ideally. But the F- Word seems far more concerned with telling us all what to think and what we can and cannot say. Much like the boy who cried wolf, feminist thought-police and alarm- ist rhetoric only drive people away from understanding the occasional good points feminists make. In their laudable desire to elimi- nate rape, campus feminists have' created a climate of fear that doesn't acknowledge that no one supports rape besides rapists. To, shift the blame fromrapists tosome supposed rape culture is an act of magic, not logic. The word "rape" bespeaks that we are not talking about normal, consensual intercourse. Our legal system punishes rape - and its statutory cousin - severely, as it should. Rapists are reviled and sexual offenders are required to identify themselves to local authori- ties whenever they move to a new neighborhood. Simply put, there is no amen corner for rape or rapists anywhere, yet some feminists still try to convince us otherwise. Even if all the components of the F-Word's Michigan Against Vio- lence campaign were enacted, they would do little to eliminate sexual violence. "Inspiring the entire campus to actively stand against violence against women" by pur- chasing white ribbons, convenient- ly sold by the F-Word, is one thing. Creating an outlet for men to volun- teer their time and energy to walk- ing or driving endangered students home late at night is another. "Envisioning a campus where women can walk freely, safely, and confidently" is different from peti- tioning Ann Arbor to install more lighting - not just near campus, but all over the city. "Demanding that sexual harassment, assault, rape, relationship violence must end now" is something mostofus agree onbut that agreement means little without concrete steps we can take. It takes sacrifice to turn atti- tudes into action. Wearing a ribbon doesn't make you any more com- mitted to stopping rape than wear- ing a cross makes you a Christian. Let's hope that the F-Word's worthy cause will be coupled with practical guidance rather than fear. It's in our interest to live free of sexual or any other violence. Sadly, it seems the F-Word would rather scare us into wearing ribbons than educate us as to the constructive roles we can all play in creating a safer campus. For that reason, the green flyers and the guilt trip they're supposed to inspire should be ignored. James Dickson is an LSA senior and a Daily columnist. I I SEND LETTERS TO: TOTHEDAILY@UMICH.EDU no ought to know. First, Basement Arts is an entirely student run group. The faculty of the Theatre and Drama Department is not asso- ciated with any production put on by Basement Arts - unless the play is also a senior directing thesis like "Life is a Dream," which performed the weekend before "Shopping & F**king." "Shopping and F**king" was not a senior directing thesis. To be per- fectly clear, the most professors involve themselves with a Basement Arts production is by simply attend- ing. Second, it is a general rule in theatre not to alter the playwright's words. Whether or not it is for the purpose of censorship, editing a script alters the author's meaning. Not only is editing a script illegal, but also it is disrespectful. Domino has the right to speak his mind. It is fine if he did not enjoy this production of "Shopping and F**king." That is his opinion. But by encouraging censorship and blaming the faculty of the Theatre and Drama Department, he steps beyond mere criticism. By placing blame and furthermore sending a letter to The Michigan Daily, he is making an attack. Liam White Theater and Drama sophomore A ERIN RUSSELL | WIMPLETON'S BLOG. I'M SURE MOST OF YOU INTERNET JUNKIES OUT THERE ARE TIRED OF READING BLOGS. THAT'S BECAUSE MOST OF THEM ARE MINDLESS RANTS ABOUT NOTHING. t R. IT'S TIME FOR SOMEONE TO WRITE AN INTELLIGENT BLOG! / BUT UNTIL THAT SOMEONE COMES. READ? MY BLOG ON WHY I THINK SQUIRRELS ARE TERRORISTS. s i I Editorial Board Members: Emily Beam, Kevin Bunkley, Amanda Burns, Sam Butler, Ben Caleca, Brian Flaherty, Mara Gay, Jared Goldberg, Emmarie Huetteman, Toby Mitchell, Rajiv Prabhakar, David Russell, Gavin Stern, John Stiglich, Jennifer Sussex, Neil Tambe, Radhika Upadhyaya, Rachel Wagner, Christopher Zbrozek . . . . . . . . . .