Opinion
Kansan
Published daily since 1912
Lindsey Henry, Editor
Dave Morantz, Managing editor
Kristie Blasi, Managing editor
Tom Eblen, General manager, news adviser
4A
Marc Harrell, Business manager
Colleen Eager, Retail sales manager
Dan Simon, Sales and marketing adviser
Justin Knupp, Technology coordinator
Monday, April 27, 1998
ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL
Feedback
Skateboards, rollerblades are unsafe on campus
Skateboarding and rollerblading aren't just alternative forms of transportation. There is a crucial difference between them and bicycles and cars. There is no safe designated pathway for skateboards and rollerblades on campus.
I don't blame skateboarders and rollerbladers for not wanting to cruise down Jayhawk Boulevard. It's dangerous enough for bicyclists, who at least are operating a machine that's more resistant to bumps and holes and better able to keep up with the speed of traffic. On the other hand, the other paved surface on campus is called a sidewalk. This implies that a walking speed is the appropriate speed. It is dangerous for pedestrians to have people who are moving at three or four times their speed weaving in and out between walkers. If a walker stops, or drifts to the side, or in any way fails to maintain an even, forward momentum, there may not be time to avoid a collision. It's particularly frightening to be closely brushed by a wheeled person as they overtake you from behind, before you have any chance to know they're there.
The question is not whether skateboards and rollerblades are legitimate forms of transportation. We don't land helicopters or airplanes on campus, but no one would say that this is because the University doesn't consider them legitimate forms of transportation. The real question is whether there is room on campus to add skateboards and rollerblades into the complex transportation mix, without threatening the safety of all. Before rollerblading and skateboarding are approved, the safety issues need to be resolved.
Jocelyn S. Martin Lawrence graduate student
Race equality upheld with affirmative action
I have been disturbed by some of the letters to the editor in opposition to affirmative action. In response, I offer this argument in support of affirmative action policies.
The issue, I believe, comes down to whether one believes America is a racist society. And the point is not just whether America has a history of racism. This focus on history allows the opposition to argue, as Erik Roesh did in his April 9 letter, "When (affirmative action) was first introduced, there was a need for it, but not now." Roesh apparently thinks that America miraculously has forsaken its racism in a mere 30 years — a position with which I certainly cannot agree. As long as racism exists in America, there is a moral imperative for affirmative action.
Affirmative action is not about preferential treatment or quotas. Affirmative action is not about hiring someone based on skin color, as Andrew Marino argued in his April 9 column. He said that minorities "must wonder if they got the job or received admission to the school because of the color of their skin or their talent and hard work." Affirmative action is exactly about talent and hard work. Affirmative action is about debunking the myth of meritocracy in a classist, classist, sexist society bent on preserving its monolithic hold on privilege and history.
Affirmative action does not fracture society. Americans are not one people, but many different peoples. Affirmative action embraces our cultural diversity so that everyone may contribute to the shaping of a just American society.
Furthermore, the notion of color-blindness is itself a racist construct. Why should we be blind to race? Our races, ethnic identities and heritages reflect part of who we are as people, as members of cultural groups. A person's race should not only matter, but be valued. Affirmative action is about abandoning white privilege and opening our ears to the worthy contributions of someone with a different point of view.
What are the opponents of affirmative action so afraid off I believe that your strong opposition reveals your fear of losing your privilege — which is precisely why we do need affirmative action.
Megan Miller Lawrence graduate student
Megan Miller
Same-sex marriages should be legalized
Thank you so much for the editorial and sentiment in the April 23 issue of The University Daily Kansan on same-sex marriage, written by Emily Hughey for the editorial board. Every day I am reminded in some way or another that my partnership is not valued as equally (socially, politically, and economically) as other-sex partnerships, simply because my partner and I are both female. The editorial was very affirming to me as a human being, and I want to thank you for expressing support for same-sex marriages.
In a recent Kansan article, staff writer Marcelo Vilela wrote an excellent report on the domestic partnership proposal which was written by the Domestic Partnership Task Force of Gay and Lesbian Academic and Staff Advocates This proposal recently was submitted to the KU administration, and seeks to make available to unmarried students, faculty and staff (and their same- or other-sex partners) who wish to register as domestic partners the same benefits and access to University centers which are routinely extended to married students, faculty and staff members. Because the University's non-discrimination policy forbids discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation and marital status, it should implement a domestic partnership policy. A domestic partnership policy would not conflict with state law, but would put into practice the University's policy of non-discrimination that it already has in place.
Mike Silverman and I currently are organizing a conference which will be held at the University the first weekend in November and will discuss in detail how University policies and local, state and federal legislation affect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people in colleges and universities in the Kansas and across the Midwest. More information about the conference may be found at our conference homepage at http://www.turnleft.com/conference.
Thank you again and happy Pride Week!
Christine Robinson Lawrence graduate student
Kansan staff
News editors
Paul Eakins ... Editorial
Ann Premer ... Editorial
Andrea Albright ... News
Jodie Chester ... News
Julie King ... News
Charity Jeffries ... Online
Eric Weslander ... Sports
Harley Ratliff ... Associate sports
Ryan Koerner ... Campus
Mike Perryman ... Campus
Bryan Volk ... Features
Tim Harrington ... Associate features
Steve Puppe ... Photo
Angie Kuhn ... Design, graphics
Mitch Lucas ... Illustrations
Corrie Moore ... Wire
Gwen Olson ... Special sections
Lachel Rhoades ... News clerk
Advertising managers
Kriatti Bisel . Assistant retail, PR
Leigh Bottiger . Campus
Brett Clifton . Regional
Nicole Lauderdale . National
Matt Fisher . Marketing
Chris Haghrian . Internet
Brian Allers . Production
Ashley Bonner . Production
Andee Tomlin . Promotions
Dan Kim . Creative
Rachel O'Neill . Classified
Tyler Cook . Zone
Steve Grant. Zone
Jamie Holman . Zone
Brian LeFevre . Zone
Matt York . Zone
"I saw my evil day at hand. The sun rose dim on us in the morning, and at night it sank in a dark cloud and looked like a ball of fire. That was the last sun that shone on Black Hawk. His heart is dead... He is now a prisoner to the white man." — Black Hawk, speech upon surrender, Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin
How to submit letters and guest columns
Letters: Should be double-spaced typed and fewer than 200 words. Letters must include the author's signature, name, address and telephone number plus class and home-town if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
Guest columns Should be double-
spaced typed with fewer than 700 words. The writer must be willing to be photographed for the column to run.
All letters and guest columns should be submitted to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Stuffer-Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right to edit, cut to length or reject all submissions. For any questions, call Paul Eakins (eakins@kansan.com) or Ann Premer (apremer@kansan.com) at 864-4810. If you have general questions or comments, e-mail the staff page (opinion@kansan.com) or call 864-4810.
Perspective
Endorsing Nike means more than free shoes
last semester the University of Kansas Athletic Department signed a multimillion dollar endorsement deal with Nike, Inc., which will last through the 2001-
Kyle Browning
02 school year. The contract, among other things, gives the KU Athletic Department large amounts of money and Nike apparel in return for the University endorsing Nike, primarily by putting Nike's trademark swoosh on all athletic uniforms. But by doing business with Nike, what is the University really representing and endorsing?
During the last few
opinion@kansan.com
years, many independent organizations and media groups such as The New York Times, Business Week, Newsweek and Life Magazine, among others, have accused Nike of unfair and many times illegal labor practices and grave human rights abuses in its factories. Nike shoe factories are mostly in Asia, and 70 to 80 percent of its shoes are produced in Vietnam, Indonesia and China because of the cheap labor and lack of strong governmental regulations. But abuses much worse than the low wages the company's workers are paid have been reported. Some of these abuses include child labor, forced and unpaid overtime work, environmental abuses, lack of safety regulations, which results in grave health risks to the workers, and discouraging workers to unionize by punishing workers who unionize or demand better conditions.
On April 2, ESPN's Outside the Lines ran an hour-long program about Nike and Reebok sweatshop abuses in Vietnam. This program offered powerful documentation that Nike has many problems in its factories. The entire workforce, including managers, were alerted the day before that ESPN would be filming in the factory. Even in the presence of ESPN crews, managers twice physically abused workers. Just before the end of the day's shift, a female Vietnamese supervisor was observed slapping an employee sharply across the forearm for not spreading glue slowly enough. When asked about the incident, the supervisor, Tran My Linh said, "I was just reminding her that, you know, she did something wrong, that's all... That's just the way we Vietnamese do it."
In the stitching department, a supervisor was seen angrily throwing a stitched upper portion of a sneaker at a worker. The special also showed many of the health risks that the workers faced from breathing the toxic mix of chemicals used to make the shoes, with only a useless cotton mask for protection. Reebok also was criticized during the show for many of the same abuses as Nike, but it is important to remember that Nike is by far the leader in reported abuses. Nike is also the shoe industry leader in terms of sales, so it only makes sense to target Nike first in the fight to end these abuses. At the same time these horrible working conditions exist in Nike factories, Nike continues to pay its endorsers, like Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, and our own Roy Williams to wear the swoosh. Nike also spent about $800 million in advertising last year. Couldn't some of this money go to the workers on the assembly line?
Pressure on Nike to improve its business practices and working conditions has been increasing for many years, and Nike has responded, albeit weakly. Nike officials reportedly have made their Code of Conduct available to all their workers and have hired independent monitors to inspect and report on the conditions in their factories. Even though these monitors were not independent because Nike was paying them, they still reported that Nike could improve its working conditions. Most of the reports were criticized for their lack of research and/or scrutiny, and their use of interpreters supplied by Nike. So, the various Nike-sponsored monitors and reports, which were supposed to clear Nike of these charges, have only produced more evidence to prove the charges of human rights violations in Nike shoe factories.
I must point out that the goal of the various anti-Nike campaigns is not to get Nike out of these third-world countries and back to America where the labor conditions may be better. Nike does provide needed jobs and money to these people and countries, especially since the Indonesian economy has virtually fallen apart in recent months. But Nike needs to improve the conditions in its factories. Because Nike is the self-proclaimed leader in the sports apparel industry, it should act like one by improving its business practices above and beyond the competition, who also are not spotless in terms of their human rights records.
In an effort to put more pressure on Nike, April 18 was declared the day for the second International Nike Mobilization. On and around this day various actions took place in more than 35 states and 10 Canadian cities. Many organizations endorsed this day and its purpose, including the Campaign for Labor Rights and the East Timor Action Network. I urge you to write to Nike and express your concern about the abuses and try to raise awareness about this important issue, which involves a lot more than Nike shoes.
Browning is a Leawood freshman in political science.
Earth Day continues with non-motor week
Earth Day is finished. April 22 was a day of reflection and celebration. Many of us at the University of Kansas may soon be tempted to resume our old
habits of thoughtless consumption. You may have heard the phrase "Make every day Earth Day." KU Environs encourages every member of the University community to follow this wise advice. One way to carry on the principles of Earth Day is to participate in Motor-Free Lawrence week.
Mark
Frederick
oinion@oxansan.com
KU Environs calls upon students, staff and faculty to leave their automobiles at home this week.
Instead of driving to campus, try walking or riding a bicycle. If you are tired of looking for a place to park your car, or if you have had your full share of parking tickets, here is your chance to leave the hassles behind. If you fear the imminent collapse of your automobile, a week of rest will delay its inevitable demise. If you live on campus but have gotten into the habit of riding the bus to class, here is a chance to use your legs to ascend the hill.
A week of walking and cycling may prove to be easier, cheaper and even faster than using a motor-driven vehicle. Seven days of freedom from the internal-combustion engine will certainly prove healthier for you and for others. Air pollution threatens the health of 182 million Americans. In fact, one study concluded that 25,000 Americans die each year from the pollution produced by automobiles alone.
suburban sprawl — a direct result of the proliferation of cars in our culture — threatens prairies, woods, wetlands, and farms throughout the Kansas River Valley. Although few people think much about it while they are sitting in the driver's seat, the process of extracting and refining it for gasoline imperils many of our precious ecosystems. Moreover, most scientists now
agree that the burning of fossil fuels increases the levels of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere, leading to a slow but steady rise in global temperatures. The resulting floods, droughts and heat waves may become a way of life for our grandchildren. If these facts fail to convince you, keep in mind that our dependence on foreign oil grows every year. We now import about 40 percent. Another oil embargo like the one in 1973 potentially could cripple our country. Let us not forget that the American love affair with the automobile has local, national, and global repercussions for present and future generations.
Fresh air and physical exertion lead to a clearer, sharper mind, a truly valuable possession at the end of the semester. Lastly, when more of us at the University decide to use our legs to get around, the administration and the city of Lawrence will be compelled to make our community a better place for pedestrians and cyclists.
On a more positive note, staying out of your car allows you to enjoy the beauties of nature, appreciate the blossoming of spring, and give yourself more time to reflect on the important things in life. The exercise gained by walking or pedaling will move you one step closer to that sleek body that seems so important with the arrival of summer.
Other schools possess excellent systems of alternative transportation. The University can too, but we must take strides in the right direction.
Hats off to those students, faculty, and staff who already cycle or walk to school and work. Some, because of age or disability, must drive to get around. Others live outside of Lawrence, so it remains impractical to do anything but use a car. Nevertheless, you can still invite friends, co-workers and fellow students to take a week off from their automobiles. The rest of us, however, have a chance to extend Earth Day into this week by leaving our cars at home.
Frederick is a Lawrence graduate student in history and a member of KU Environs.
---