Page 4 Opinion University Daily Kansan, April 13, 1983 ASK poll a bright omen The KU branch of the Associated Students of Kansas is giving itself a huge boost in credibility with its telephone survey begun yesterday and continuing tonight. In fact, if the survey is any indication of things to come, it signals a welcome turnabout in ASK's relations with the students whose money supports the lobbying group and whose interests it claims to represent. About 2 percent of KU students will be surveyed at random about their views on ASK in general and on specific issues being looked at by ASK, including the University's proposed $15 academic services fee, tuition, the Equal Rights Amendment and the drinking age. Credit for organizing the survey belongs in good measure to Scott Swenson, campus director of ASK. Swenson has taken heat in recent months for a variety of shortcomings seen in the local and state organizations. Unlike others who have been associated with ASK, he is responding. And, abandoning the paranoid defensiveness that has come to characterize ASK's dealing with critical students, Swenson doesn't seem overly concerned about the outcome of the poll. If it is negative, he said, "it would just show us we have to do a better job." No matter what the results of the poll, ASK comes out ahead, simply by showing interest in the opinions of those they are supposed to represent. Of course, Swenson cannot turn the entire state association around single-handedly. There are still those who insist college students do not know enough to form rational opinions. But perhaps this survey will reinforce the idea among ASK leaders on other campuses that the stands they take on issues are not as important as whether those stands honestly represent students' views. That phone call in the night could be a curious computer I was alone in the apartment. Snow-like rain beat on the awning and Springsteen beat on the stereo. An occasional footstep or the cry of a tired child could be heard, but all else was silent. I had just settled on the couch to investigate the impact of the French Revolution on the writings of Mary Wollstonecraft. Then it happened. The phone rang. I picked it up quickly, thinking some last-minute party was forming without me. I heard his voice. "Hi. My name is Hal. I'm a telecomputer." "Hi. My name is Hal. I'm a telecomputer." Wonderful, I thought. A new twist to the old obscene phone call — pretend you're a computer. The usual thoughts rushed through "I'd like to ask you a few questions," Hal drowned on. TRACEE HAMILTON Oh, no. I thought. I know your type. You ask. "Is your roommate home?" or "Has your boyfriend left?" then you break through my sliding glass door and slit my throat with the broken stem of an Annie Green Springs bottle. I remained silent, still assuming it was some freshman pretending to be a machine. Ha ha. my head — the sudden impulse to slam the receiver down couples with the slightly sadistic side. Of course! That old dodge! The first question will probably be something like, "Is your refrigerator running?" and then he'll howl, "You'd better run after it." or worse, "say some disgusting thing to me," "I'd like to get drunk," or "maybe, in Hal's case," "I'd like to sell you my etchings." "I'm not asking you for any money." Hal went on, as if reading my mind. My God, I thought, I know what he wants. By this time the receiver was slipping from my swenty hand. I wondered whether I'd locked the door when Karen left. "Please answer two brief questions after the tone," Hal said slyly. The nerve of this guy, or thing, I thought. I should just hang up. I really should. Because after I answer the questions, he'll want my address, just to mail me a brochure or call me in person or come into my apartment and short-circuit me. Still, I couldn't put down that receiver. "If you found you could take two additional tax deductions on your return, would you want to do that?" So that's what it is all about! Those clever IRS people are still harassing me over the silly misunderstanding concerning my 1980 return. They're the ones that mistakenly credited my sister with my earnings, and then hounded me. Oklahoma, for God's sake. They have no shame. "You can't fool me, Hall!" I screamed into the receiver, the tension cracking my voice. "You'll never find me. Never!" I slammed the phone down. Springsteen had stopped singing, almost as if he sensed he was serenading someone wanted by Hal, the talking computer. The silence filled my imagination. The curtain rustled, and I fancied I saw someone peeking through the crack where it doesn't quite cover the doorway. I considered playing some disco, so that whatever was out there would go away, but I didn't have any. Besides, a computer like Hal would probably be attracted to disco. I assumed it was just a flake. He probably doesn't remember whose number he dialed. Bill a few nights later, the phone rang. "HI! I'm Pete. I'm taking a survey. Please don't hang up. I’m with Fidelity Union Good Hands Independent Mutual Life, Home, Auto, Health, Car and Accident Insurance Co. Incorporated." Hal apparently has friends, I thought. Great. "Listen, you, do you know what I like to do?" I said. "I'd like to off your back panel and fondle your tubes, you great big giant hunk of a computer. I'd like to blow in your receiver and do unspeakable things to your transmitter." Pete was silent for a moment, and then an awful popping sizzling sound came over the "That does not compute. That does not compute. Incomplete response. Incomplete response. Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr . . ." I grinned and hung up. If only that method worked with real obscene callers. The University Daily KANSAN Kansan Telephone Numbers Newsroom--684-4810 Business Office--684-4358 The University Daily Kaman (USFS 650-649) is published at the University of Kansas, 118 Flint Hall, Lawrence, Kan. 6004, daily during the regular school year and Thursday during the summer sessions, excluding Saturday, Sunday, holidays, and final periods. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kan. 6004. Subscriptions by mail are $4 for six counties and $18 for six municipalities. Student subscriptions are $4 to the student activity fee. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to the University Daily Kaman, 118 Flint Hall, Lawrence, Kan. 6004 Rebecca Chaney Managing Editor Mark Zeman Edwardian Editor Michael Robinson Campaign Editor Michael Robinson Associate Campus Editor Catherine Behun Associate Campus Editor Sharon Appellio, Doug Comingham Assignment Editor Anne Calvish Art Director Boothe Maginere Sport Director Jan Lovett Entertainment Editor Jan Lovett Makeup Editors Mike Ardua, Deanna Miles, Jane Murphy Wear Designer Steve Cunicik, Brian Lewyn, Leby Roberts Staff Photographers Delra Bates, John George Head Chief Chef Debbie Bale, Don Knox Columnis Jon Barren, Bernard J. Howard Columnis Kate Duffy, Jeanne Foy, Tracey Hamilton, Dan Parelman, Malini, Bonar Meeninger Mart Schofield Sports Writers Jeff Craven, Bill Horner, Bob Luder. Staff Writers Colin Hermick, Evelyn Sedlocke Staff Writers Kiana Acwalt, Hanierina Vinee Hoe, Darrrell Preston, Vicky Wilt Artists Brian Barting, Mike Larnica, Darrell Riche, Bill Wylie Business Manager Matthew P. Langan Retail Sales Manger Anna Horberger National Sales Manager Campaign Sales Manager Production Manager Advertising Artist Photographer Advertising Manager Classified Manager Classified Manager Campaign Representatives Retail Sales Representative Janie弗莱德, Cameron Grace William Maher, Adrian Moncrie, Melly McGovern Mark Means, Daniel Miller, Jill Mitchell, Susan Owalt Advertising Adviser General Manager and News Adviser Mark Sehulé, Dave Wannakew John Oberzan Paul Jean Soviet arms control options difficult RS ROBERT SHEPARD WASHINGTON — President Reagan, as did his predecessors, has had to formulate an arms control policy in the midst of a continuing and spirited public debate about what the right course may be. Leaders of the Soviet Union are in a much different position, of course, but that does not mean they are spared equally difficult decisions. High on their list must be the question of how to deal with Ronald Reagan. United Press International The Soviets can negotiate with him seriously on arms control, or delay in the hope that political forces will make Reagan change his stance, or they can try to wait until Reagan is out of the White House. "The Soviets have a very difficult decision to make in terms of strategy," Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., a member of the Senate Foreign Relations and Intelligence committees, observed last week. The United States and its NATO allies are preparing to deploy 572 nuclear armed missiles in Europe beginning late this year. Reagan has said that deployment could be delayed or limited if the Soviets agreed to some reduction in their existing missile forces. Opponents of the U.S. missile deployment are vociferous both in the United States and in Europe, giving the Soviets hope that the West can be talked or bluffed out of the deployment. The Soviets could decide to bank heavily on that possibility. "They can do it that way and find that resolve may be there to deploy." Biden noted. In that case they could "lose out on any prospect of getting arms control." They would then have to deal with the accomplished fact of NATO missiles pointed at the Soviet Union. "Or what they could do is decide it is more advantageous for them to move now with this administration." Biden said. If they don't move soon, if there is not some progress soon, there may be no chance for an agreement for some time, probably not until after the 1984 presidential election, Biden said. "And then what do they have? They have to make a guess — Ronald Reagan runs and there is a 50-50 chance he will be re-elected." "I don't think it is as easy for them to wait and see if they can dendr (deployment). They may find themselves in a worse position if they do not work well." He added, "simply as it may seem on the face," Biden said. expect from a different administration. Jimmy Carter signed the SALT II treaty, but conservative critics raised such objections it was never submitted to the Senate for ratification. Other observers suggest a Soviet pact with the conservative Reagan administration would offer the Soviets more certainty than they could It is unlikely that Reagan and his negotiators would ever be accused of giving away too much to the Soviets. If he were to give his assent to an agreement with Russia, Senate ratification would be almost assured. The situation would be similar to Richard Nixon's decision to resume normal relations with China. Had a liberal Democrat — say George McGovern — tried to do the same thing, he would have touched off a political firestorm. Reagan's congressional critics complain he is surrounding himself with arms control advisers of a decidedly hawkish bent. If the Soviets perceive the same situation they might feel the time for an arms agreement is now, before the war came any more entrenched in the administration. And despite congressional objections and efforts to slow the rise in defense spending, Reagan has managed to launch a major rearmament program. Even if Congress makes some cuts this year or next, the weapons building program has the momentum to continue for the next several years. The Soviets will not slow that buildup by refusing to negotiate seriously or acting more belligerent in world trouble spots. Letters to the Editor To the editor: Gay life is not the 'easy way' In regards to Bonar Menninger's column on homosexuality, I have a few comments. A few weeks ago, I spoke to a psychology class on homosexuality. When the students were asked how many had never knowingly spoken to a homosexual, the majority raised their hands. This is not an atypical response, even though in number we probably equal the black population. On the other hand, to get by in this world without knowing a heterosexual would be impossible. Heterosexuality is thrust into our faces with every billboard, movie, television show and advertisement. Heterosexuals can hold hands in public without creating a sensation. This is all a part of a remarkably visible support system which most heterosexuals take for granted. Gays and lesbians cannot take such support for granted. It doesn't exist. It's surprising how little it takes to "faunt" our sexuality. Just knowing a person is homosexual is enough to cause a titter. Would it be flaunting if we held hands? After being told how sick we are from the day we are born, some of us need a little extra help at establishing that healthy self-image so many heterosexuals have not had to think about. I *m sorry you find these statements harassing* Think about that feeling. If you really want to know harassment, we as gays people have a long history. We as gays, queerbashing, verbal hobbing, nothing big In a nutshell, fella, you are out of the ballpark. If an airborne advertisement or our humorous attempt at Blue Jeans Day offends you, it's a good thing I'm the homosexual and not you. It takes a tougher skin than that to take the "easy way out." Christopher Budd, didn't all stay home to rearrange our furniture and listen to disco. Lawrence senior I would like to point out that we, as gay people, do not have some secret communication network. We do not know every existing gay in Lawrence. Many people come to our dance after seeing that airborne sign. Believe it or not, Bonar, some of us really do like football. We The University Daily Kansan welcomes letters to the editor. Letters should be typewritten, double-spaced and should not exceed 500 words. They should include the writer's name, address and phone number. If the writer is affiliated with the University, the letter should include his class and home town or faculty or staff position. The Kansan reserves the right to edit or reject letters. Bob Letters Policy So yes, our airborne signs are statements. Our blue jeans are statements, statements that heterosexuals don't have to make because they are being made every day. These statements, because of their openness, are aimed at fostering pride in our community. If it takes a sign to be visible, what can I say?