4 Tuesday, September 18, 1990/ University Daily Kansan Opinion THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN Rape awareness Acquaintance rape rising on college campuses; many women, men fail to report violent crime At a recent University of Kansas workshop on acquaintance rape, a frightening statistic was revealed: One of every four women and one of every 10 men will be raped during her or his lifetime. Fifty to 75 percent of these sexual assaults, meaning the victim knows the assailant. Sadly enough, many of these violent crimes go unreported. Sometimes the person who was attacked may not realize the actions constituted rape. Often a rape is not reported because the victim feels guilty, responsible for what happened or believes he or she asked for it. No one asks to be raped. In any situation, no means no. Sex that is forced, manipulated or coerced is rape. College students especially need to be aware of the problem because most acquaintance rapes happen to women between the ages of 15 and 24, and the crimes appear to be increasing on college campuses. The Emily Taylor Women's Resource Center, 118 Strong Hall, suggests some ways to avoid becoming involved in a situation that could lead to rape; Communicate what you really want, and saw what you are really thinking. - set clear limits for acceptable behavior - do not place yourself in vulnerable situations - Know what constitutes verbs - Take assertiveness training and self-defense courses. - ■ Know what constitutes rape. ■ Be aware of the situation you are in because you do not know who has the potential for rape. - Most importantly, everyone must assume that no means no. No one has the right to violate another person's body against that person's wishes, no matter the circumstances If you have been raped, the following places can offer help: Police/Campus Patrol, 91 Headquarters, 841 925 University Information Center. 864-3506 Carol B. Shiney for the editorial board Removing ROTC credit detrimental find myself in the challenging and exciting position of being an Army officer in the University of Kansas My primary responsibility is to contribute to Department of Defense missions by educating young men and women who may become the future officer leadership of the U.S. Army. At the same time, I am responsible for being a contributing member of the University community. Although the KU Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) is only one small cog in the Department of Defense machinery, we are an important one. Today, KU has officer representation in an outgoing Department of Defense mission in Saudi Arabia — deterrence. In Saudi Arabia, KU Army ROTC graduates, such as Lt. Bill Sheedy and Lt. John Jones, serve with the mission of deterring Iraq from further aggression. If their efforts fail, then they will be involved in two other Defense missions. We have also worked on letting it to a conclusion that supports the vital interests of the United States. They are there as your representatives. At KU, the importance of the Army and ROTC' s role in supporting the Department of Defense in its mission to deter conflict has been overshadowed by our enforcement of the department's policy that "homosexuality is incompatible with military service". Although the Army as an institution is aware of the social issues of homosexuality, it does not know or concern the Army does not change a policy or directive from the Department of Defense. Therefore, the current activities aimed at removing academic credit for ROTC classes, activities which will only serve to penalize future William R McGaha Guest columnist 'Therefore, the current activities aimed at removing academic credit for ROTC classes, activities which will only serve to penalize future KU students, are misdirected.' KU students, are misdirected. To a point, the campus debate, while eliciting strong emotions on both sides, has been conducted in an open and respectful manner. The recent use of derogatory slang by three KU students in reference to homosexuals during the three students show of support for the department's policy was clearly inappropriate, and I do want to remind each individual student have the right to express their opinions without burden for the ROTC, the Army or the Department of Defense. Here at KU, the issue remains whether future KU students will be denied an opportunity to serve as leaders in this nations army because some on campus disagree with a department of defense policy. I hope not. > William R. McGaha is a L.t. Colonel in the U.S. Army and a KU professor of military science. Budig tolerating discrimination Should the University allow an academic program to discriminate against a minority group contrary to University policy simply because the program benefits other students? The University Council, of which I am a member, has voted to ban ROTC commissioning ceremonies from campus and deny graduation credit for ROTC courses beginning in fall 2014, by our antidiscrimination policy. The chancellor has declined to run the commissioning ceremonies; meanwhile, a binding vote of the University Serate will determine whether ROTC courses will count toward the completion of 124-hour bachelor's degrees if the program continues to violate KU policy. That's what Chancellor Gene A. Budig seems to be saying when he refuses to apply KU's anti-discrimination policy to the ROTC program, which explicitly refuses scholarships and jobs to our gay and lesbian students. That policy states: "A student may not be denied the rights of access to and participation in any University-sponsored or University approved college degree of race, religion, sex color, disability, ancestry and sexual preference." The chancellor says that he opposes the ROTC discrimination but argues that KU should work with other colleges to try to change the culture and risk thanking the loss of an ROTC program that benefits some students. The chancellor should be applauded for working with other colleges to change the Department of Defense's discriminatory policies. But it is my rationale and logically inconsistent to say that our policy against women should go unenforced while we plead with the military to change its policy. By focusing on the value of an ROTC program that could be jeopardized, the chancellor suggests the University is willing to compromise one of its most basic moral values — equal opportunity — when it is to our Ted Frederickson Guest columnist benefit That reasoning also suggests that current ROTC students stand to be the victims in this controversy. Rather, they are the beneficiaries of discrimination that excludes others from competition for scholarships and jobs. The real victims are students who are inelegible for scholarships and jobs as military officers simply because of their sexual preference In fact, none of our current ROTC students would suffer if the University withdrew graduation credit from ROTC because the amendment University Senate members are voting on would not take effect until 1995. It is puzzling why the chancellor won't enforce the anti-discrimination policy as it applies to sexual preference when he has stood firm behind the policy when it involved race or religion. If ROTC or any other program denied scholarships or jobs to Blacks or Jews, I doubt the chancellor would cite the benefits to other students as a reason for not enforcing the anti-discrimination policy. Nor should he. But discrimination against gays seems to be tolerated to a greater degree. Yet gays are everywhere in society — as many as one out of 10 people is homosexual, according to some national surveys. By that measure, more than 2,000 of our students share that sexual orientation. Many fear discrimination against themselves by sexual preference; they could face even more discrimination. In recent years, some members of Student Senate have tried to withdraw recognition and financing from gay organizations. One year, the student senate secretly sold T-shirts emblazoned with an emfittee figure, a diagonal red slash through it, and the word. "Fagbusters." Officers in gay organizations have had tires slashed and have received threatening phone calls. Then are there dehumanized and about "fags" and "ouwers" that were stolen. During the University Council debate, several faculty justified the ROTC policy by citing sodomy statutes and Christian doctrine that homosexuality is a sin against the Church. Christian upbringing tells me that Jesus would accept gays as He would want to be accepted, that He would welcome them as He did the lepers — an analogy that seems apt when an audience faces a fueled discrimination against gays and made them the modern lepers. Last week, two ROTC students picked a table where students were collecting signatures on a petition urging the chancellor to reverse his decision on ROTC commissioning. The signs they carried said: "No Fags in my foxhole" and "The A in army is not for Analist." Isn't such crude discrimination encouraged when the University allows an academic program to exclude one group of students consenting to a course of policy "Those who are excluded become approved targets for biography The University needs to reach out to all students, to tell them that we accept them as they are — White, Black, Yellow, Red or Brown; Christian, Jesu or Muslim; male or female; American or Iranian, straight or gay. Chancellor Budig said it best in a 1983 statement: "Clearly, there can be no place in this University for bigotry, intolerance, racial or sexual discrimination, anti-Semitism, and the like." I hope that University Senate will vote to have the University's deeds live up to the mobile words of the country in our own anti-discrimination policy. Ted Frederickson is a University Council member and an associate professor of journalism. Cadets offend student LETTERS to the EDITOR College offered student Finally, I have signed the petition because ROTC is in direct violation of the University's policy. That can be denied because it is too obvious. As I read Wednesday's Kansan, I wondered to myself, "Were the students responding to the debate of whether ROTC was in violation of the University's anti-discrimination policy?" I answered no. The signs the students demonstrated did not address the debate at hand. Jon Ramirez, Derby junior Amending KU regulations would set dangerous precedent Although I am not gay, I find offense that cadets representing our future military would hold such views of gays because they will protect all people, including gays. As a former cadet, I question the screening processes for determining who is accepted into the ROTC program. I am writing to present arguments against I May 13 motion by the University Council to amend Article 3.1.1 of the University Senate Rules and Regulations. This amendment would, if sustained, use ROTC course credit as a "weapon" to punish the Department of Defense for its policy of excluding individuals from gaining ROTC commissions on the basis of sexual preference. The commission should be considered by many to be in direct conflict with the University of Kansas policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual preference. Although there were many options available for addressing this problem, the University Council chose to adopt the amendment, which I should be rejected for the following reasons: Academic credit should not be used as an instrument of public policy. Decisions about academic credits that count toward graduation have always been the purview of the individual schools and the college, with the University Senate establishing only broad guidelines. Changing this long-standing policy establishes a dangerous precedent. Discrimination should not be remedied by Dennis Lane Guest columnist action (discrimination) against persons who are not responsible for it. Students in the ROTC program are not responsible for defense department policies and should not be punished for the existence of those policies. Furthermore, the courses and faculty have been dismissed from the advisory committee, and the courses are available to all KU students without discrimination. - Basing course credit on the affiliation of the instructor may be viewed as an intrusion on academic freedom. It also sets an alarming precedent. - One result of this action could be the closing of the ROTC programs at KU. If this occurs, some students, including growing numbers of women and minorities, will lose an important source of financial aid as well as face more limited career opportunities. 'Other faculty members and I do not believe that an adequate effort has yet been made to resolve the ROTC policy issue diplomatically.' ■ ROTC programs provide an important civilian perspective in the core of our military leadership. Students in these programs pursue a regular academic major, as well as their ROTC studies; the breadth of the education they receive is important to them, to the Armed Forces, and to the maintenance of a democratic society. Indeed, many of the graduates who have completed ROTC programs and honor to the University by their achievements as citizens, not as military personnel. ■ The proposed amendment itself is technically flawed. Since the action is proposed for 1995, it will unilily deny credit to freshman ROTC students now enrolled in five-year programs (and perhaps other students who take more years to complete their programs). Other faculty members and I also believe that the underlying motivation of some supporters of this motion is to once again attempt to force the ROTC programs off campus, whether or not they appear to be discriminatory. Individuals have every right to such an opinion, but the University community should not be coerced into hasty action that would mislead a hidden objective at the expense of others. Other faculty members and I do not believe that an adequate effort has yet been made to resolve the ROTC policy diplomatically. It has been only a few short months since the issue became noteworthy on this campus, and it is certainly premature to begin taking action, particularly punitive action, that may infringe on student choices and careers. Clearly, a compromise can be formulated to reconcile the situation. Most would agree that our ORTC programs have been a positive and valuable asset to KU over many decades. They merit our continued support while this policy issue is being resolved. Dennis Lane is a member of University Council and a professor of civil engineering. KANSAN STAFF DEREK SCHMIDT Editor KJERSTIN GABRIELSON Managing editor TOM EBLEN General manager, news adviser Editors News Julie Mottenburg Editorial Mary Neubauer Planning Pam Solliner Campus Holly Lawton Sports Brent Maycock Photo Andrew Morrison Features Stacy Smith MARGARET TOWNSEND Business manager MINDY MORRIS Retail sales manager JEANNE HINES Sales and marketing adviser Business staff Campus sales mgr. Cristal Dool Regional sales mgr. Jackie Schmalzmir National sales mgr. David Price Go-op sales mgr. Deborah Salzer Production mgr. Missy Miller Production assistant Jule Axlan Marketing director Audra Langford Creative director Gail Einbinder Letters should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 200 words. They must include the writer's signature, name, address and telephone number. Writers affiliated with the University of Kansas must include their social security number. By Tom Michaud Guest columns should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 700 words. The writer will be photocopied. The Kansas reserves the right to reject or edit letters, guest columns and cartoons. They can be maligned or brought to the Kansas newsroom, 111 Stauffer-Flint Hall. Letters, columns and cartoons are the opinion of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Kansas. Editorials are the opinion of the Kansas editorial board. Home Remedies 1. Wait, the image shows "until" at the end of the line. 2. I'll use "until" as a separator. 3. The text is likely a heading or title. 4. I will not include any extra spaces or characters. Final check: The image contains a single line of text with the word "until". The background is white. The font is Arial Black. The text is centered. Final output: until