4
Wednesday, June 24, 1987
---
Opinions and Editorials Yes, women really can have it all in life
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN SUMMER WEEKLY EDITION
Mall needed in Lawrence
Statistics don't lie, but they may not tell the whole story.
1986 sales figures compiled by Standard Rate and Data Service show that Lawrence is doing about an average job of keeping its citizens' dollars circulating at home.
Compared to Lawrence, the cities of Salina, Emporia, Manhattan and Hutchinson have "captive audiences." That is, the drive to alternate shopping sources in larger neighboring cities is further than the drive from Lawrence to either Topeka or Overland Park.
That is, statistics show that 56 percent of the income earned by Lawrence residents is spent right here in town. Compared to other Kansas towns, this figure seems just about right. For example, Hutchinson also captures 56 percent of its citizens' income, and Emporia and Salina keep about 54 percent. Manhattan manages to retain 58 percent of its households' spending income.
Some Lawrence residents have cited these statistics as reasons why the city does not need a shopping mall. On the surface, this may seem reasonable, but closer inspection shows it is not.
Therefore, for Lawrence residents to spend 56 percent of their income in town despite our two nearby mall magnets seems impressive.
However, Salina, Emporia,
Manhattan and Hutchinson have shopping malls to draw business into town from their respective metropolitan areas.
For Lawrence to draw a similar percentage of business from out-of-towners is a testimony to the success of its downtown. But, who says average is good?
A mall in town would help to combat the lure of the improved Kansas Highway 10 as a shortcut to Overland Park. Two mall projects have recently been proposed for Olathe, making a day trip to the east even more tempting.
A shopping mall in Lawrence would help the city capture more of its citizens' income, increase county sales tax collection and add jobs. It is time to stop watching this city's income go to support other towns that were able to act in concert and with decisiveness to improve themselves.
A shopping mall in Lawrence would draw even more money from surrounding towns whose residents often travel right past Lawrence on their way to malls.
Why should Lawrence continue to stand still and watch the parade of dollars flow to the Topeka and Kansas City shopping malls? Why can't Lawrence retain more of its own income than our sister cities to the west who suffer more during this time of agricultural depression?
Lawrence no-smoking law
On June 20, the Lawrence nos smoking ordinance went into effect. This new measure bans smoking in enclosed areas open to the public and in enclosed places of employment. The ordinance created three categories: non-smoking areas, locations where smoking areas may be established, and public smoking areas.
Smoke should be the smoker's problem and nobody else's. Consequently, smoking is completely banned in areas such as elevators, public restrooms, polling places,
But most importantly this ordinance strikes "a reasonable balance between the needs of smokers and the needs of non-smokers to breathe smoke-free air, recognizing that, where these needs conflict, the need to breathe smoke-free air shall have priority."
This compromise is the best for everyone. Its intent is "to protect the public health, safety and welfare; to prohibit smoking in public places, except in designated areas; to regulate smoking . . . in places of employment."
checkout and service lines, child care and health care facilities, and buses. Limited smoking is allowed in some areas. Examples include retail tobacco stores, bars or taverns, restaurants with an occupancy of 29 or less people, and many other public places. However, areas exempted in the city ordinance may not be exempted in statewide smoking regulations, which go into effect July 1.
The dangers of smoking cannot be ignored. And secondhand smoke many times risks the health of people who do not smoke. Smoke causes eyes to water, clothes to smell, and general discomfort.
Lawrence finally has adopted a specific ordinance that protects the non-smoker and yet gives the smoker the privilege to smoke in designated areas. This ordinance is beneficial to the sick, those allergic to cigarette smoke, and non-smokers who want their share of clean air. The ordinance is reasonable because it does not cause undue hardship on anyone.
News staff
John Benner ... Editor
Dawn O'Malley ... Managing editor
Jane Zachman ... News editor
Pam Miller ... Campus editor
Tim Hamilton ... Sports editor
Darry Chang ... Photo editor
Cortney Sheldon ... Grapher
Tom Eblen ... General manager, news adviser
Business staff
Guest shots should be typed, double-spaced and less than 700 words. The writer will be photographed.
Lisa Weems ... Business manager
Lisa Osment ... Retail sales manager
Sally Depew ... Campus sales manager
Dan Pennington ... Classified manager
Greg Killey ... Production manager
Chuck Rotblut ... National sales manager
Jeanne Hines ... Sales and marketing adviser
The Kansan reserves the right to reject or edit letters and guest shots. They can be mailed or brought to the Kansan newsroom. 111 Stauffer/Flint Hall.
Letters should be typed, double-spaced and less than 200 words and must include the writer's signature, name, address and telephone number. If the writer is affiliated with the University of Kansas, please include class and hometown, or faculty or staff position.
Letters, guest shots and columns are the opinion of the writer and do not reflect the majority Dalkey Kansan. Editorials are the opinion of the Kansas editorial board.
The University Daily Kansan (USPS 650-640) is published at the University of Kansas, 118 Stauffer-Flint Halt, Lawrence, Kan. 60045, daily during the regular school year, excluding Saturday, Sunday, holidays and final periods, and Wednesday during the summer session. Second-class postage paid at Lawrence, Kan. 60044. Subscriptions by mail are $15 for six months or $27 a year in Douglas County and $18 for six months and $35 a year outside the county. Student subscriptions are $3 and are paid through the student activity fee.
POSTMASTER. Send address changes to the University Daily Kansan, 118 Stauffer-Flint Hall, Lawrence, Kan. 66045.
If you were to accuse me of saying that I want to have my cake and eat it, too. I'd have to say you're absolutely right.
As a young, intelligent woman close to receiving her degree, I have a great deal of confidence in my skills.
I don't buy the idea that women who have high career aspirations must sacrifice the personal side of their lives to reach their full career potential.
But latey, I've been encountering a faction, mostly male, which thinks that a woman who wants to go as far as a man in the professional world has many glimmering spark of a personal relationship.
This faction seems to say, "You've strived for equality, you've got equality, so no way am I going to treat you."
A couple of times in relationships, I've been told by a man that he would resent me if I made any concession in my professional, or rather future-professional, world for our relationship.
So, of course, my professional aspirations win. But do I win?
In my opinion, the ability to care for another person is an innate part of surviving; a part, if healthy nurtured, that can only enhance the other parts of my world.
But do I will:
Only in part.
My faith in my potential to succeed professionally isn't hindered by my desire to devote myself to other passions as well.
And no, I don't think I have to be superwoman to do it. Just human.
"Hello, employment services of the sexually liberated world? I'm a young, talented and ambitious young woman, recently graduated from college, and I'm looking for a job."
Is this phone conversation in the future for women?
The voice at the other end sighs. "I mean, do you want to go all the way to the top, or do you just plan to waver somewhere in the middle, in that mean-
"Certainly, we'll be glad to help. First, please answer some questions. How ambitious are you? How far do you want to go?"
"How ambitious?" I ask "Uh, well . . . I want to go as far as I can, with the considerable talents I honed after four years at the University."
--ingles realm of frustrated mediocre job opportunity . ?"
"To the top," I answer. "The meaningless realm sounds pretty depressing."
"Good," the voice says. "We have your job. It's on the East Coast. Within a year, you'll be in upper management, making $50,000 plus, with your own BMW, a $100,000 home and a health spa membership. We can even throw in your own therapist."
"Well, I say, 'That's pretty heavy stuff. Any app that works like that close to home?' Kind of like a hypothetical game."
"What? You didn't mention that you had other commitments. Let me look again in the meaningless realm category."
"Hey, just because I have a relationship outside of my career doesn't mean I can't go to the top anywhere, here or on the East Coast. It's what I make of it. 'I' say.
"Oh, you are so naive. Either you say 'I do' to your career, or you say I 'do' to your boyfriend. It's one or the other. Until you realize that, I can't help you. Goodbye."
Maybe this won't become reality. But enough of us must stick up for our potential in both the business and the civic spheres.
Some months ago, a writer named Jill Scott wrote a column in the Denver Post titled, "Does a woman need a man?" In it she said:
"The need for an intimate partner is omnipresent and natural for a woman. Judith Vierst says . . . 'Female dependence appears to be less a wish to be protected than a wish to be part of a web of human relationship, a wish not only to get but to give loving care.'"
Scott continues, "I'd like to eliminate the kind of
question that labels women unhealthy if they feel 'less' without a man. In this way, women can stop this ludicrous charade of pretending that partnership with a man isn't really important to their well-being without also carrying the stigma of being failed feminists."
Valid points. I think in today's world, a woman can still be a 'me' as well as part of an 'us'.
Let's tell the men.
My fear is that the faction's "all or nothing" attitude will make capable women choose one thing or the other.
I've been told that two female students, friends of mine, who both possess large amounts of talent and ambition, say that they want nothing more than to get married and have children.
But is that really what they want, or are they just answering a multiple-choice quiz that gives no answer?
A recent University of Illinois study found that female college students were more likely to lower their career goals than male students. The lowered career goals were attributed to "juggling career and family."
But the study also said that the male college students' aspirations have remained the same. I don't doubt it. How many women are telling the men, "I'll resent you if you make any sacrifices in your career for me?" Maybe some do, but I'll bet the number is smaller.
So I'd like to tell this faction that if men, as well as women, can accept the nurturing, mutual benefits of devotion to both career and relation life, whose role is "held back" from going as far as he or she can.
And if the real reason a man tells me not to make any concession on behalf of our relationship is because he simply is looking for a noble excuse to get out of the relationship, then I wish he would just tell me the truth. I will respect an honest man much more than a man who underestimates my ability to make it without — or with — a man by my side.
At least I do know that I don't want to be married to my career. I won't be able to talk my career into taking out the trash or washing my BMW.
I guess that means I'll have to get through life without the therapist threw in.
Some library fines are too small to collect
If the U.S. government wasted money like the University of Kansas library system does, we would double our national deficit. And if KU is under such a budget crunch that parking fines have to be raised, and the libraries have to cut magazine subscriptions as well as book-buying power, why don't they stop funneling useless money into postage and processing fees to get students to pay overdue library fines. Sometimes the school isn't able to break even.
I was in the art library in Spencer Museum of Art, reading a book checked out on reserve. With an art history final the next morning, I had 15 minutes before the book was due, and I still had three more chapters to study. Being a lazy student who owns remote controls for every household appliance, I decided not to check the book out again and avoid a 20-cent-an-hour fine but to continue reading in my plush chair. An hour and 15 minutes later, seeing no librarian in sight, I tipped to the desk and quietly returned the book. Sneaking away like a thief, I thought I had fooled them.
Needless to say, I didn't. Two weeks later, I received a bill from the library for an overdue fine of 40 cents. Later, I found out they spent 22 cents on
Michael Carolan
Guest Columnist
a bill, which I tossed into the trash. I thought the bill was a joke. After the library couldn't collect, it was the infamous Carruth O'Leary Collection that we found. The students were mailed to me at a cost of 13.5 cents each.
If spending a total of 49 cents to collect a 40 cent fine isn't enough, excluding paper and processing costs, I later discovered that the system does one of two things when a student doesn't pay a fine. A hold is put on the student's fee card, or the charge is turned over to a real collection agency. I can just see the collection man at my door, threatening to
take my remote control television set and my microwave if I didn't pay the 40 cents.
The bureaucracy didn't even break even. They wasted at least nine cents on a bill that most students toss in the trash, especially when the fine is under a dollar. And if you multiply a wasted nine cents by, let's say 2,000, the library just spent $18. This meager amount could surely be put back into magazine subscriptions and book-buying. It could even help fund parking services.
Maybe they could really teach me a lesson to insure that I turn in my books on time and at the same time make some money. Perhaps a $10-minute fine would encourage me and other lazy students to return books on time. But then, with my luck, there's the possibility that they would accidentally mail separate bills for every minute late.
Of course, the system won in the end, putting a hold on my fee card. Luckily, I avoided the collection man.
"That'll be 40 cents," she said.
That if he no coins,
I'd forgotten about the fine by then, and as usual,
I had no money. I asked if she'd take a check.
There went another 10 cents.
Mentioning: a trend of imprecise thought
There is a term for the most common form of pseudo-education that mars so many with it textbooks. It is called Mentioning. That is, a great many topics are mentioned superficially but few if any are treated in any depth, which leaves the student with the extensive vocabulary of names and phrases but little understanding of them. Perhaps the worst offenders are history textbooks, as in, "Among the more prominent members of the Constitutional Convention were Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and Gouverneur Morris." Or, "The philosophers of the progressive movement were Henry George, who wrote Progress and Poverty, and Edward Bellamy author of Looking Backward."
Why do textbook editors do that? Largely for commercial reasons. Thanks to Mentionsing, no one's special hero or field is left out when the time
PAUL
GREENBERG
Columnist
comes to circulate texts among potential buyers. They can regurgitate the information on multiple-choice or identification tests, and they sound educated if you don't talk to them too long.
Now the practice of Mentoning has been raised to a working definition of literacy. A professor of English at the University of Virginia at Charlottesville has compiled a checklist of 4,500 names, places, phrases, books, events and miscellaneous items (roughly from Astaire, Fred, to Zurich,
Switzerland) that he says culturally literate Americans know, Or, to be more precise, it is a list of what they are able to identify. The title of his book is *Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know* — which must be the latest debasement of the term Literacy. Spiro Agnew makes the list of knowables; Fyodor Dostoevsky doesn't. The list is mildly interesting — not for what it includes, but for what it omits. The whole exercise amounts to a trivial pursuit.
This list is not so much a remedy as an aggregation of the spotty information and crossword-puzzle phrases that now pass for literate intercourse in American society.
It's clear enough what has inspired this urge to create lists of definite bytes of information: the vagueness and imprecision that has overtaken the country's language and therefore its thought.
Letters to the editor
No-drip Dads' Dav
A few days ago while reading the University Daily Kansan, I came across your Father's Day editorial. Knowing how infrequently one gets positive feedback on such editorials, I am writing to tell you I think you did a great job on it. It takes a great deal of skill to make the reader empathize with the writer even though she or he may not have the same experience to read. You might need training when it comes to Fathers' Day was refreshing to see something other than the usual "drippy" piece to commemorate the occasion. Thanks!
Debi Gilley Lawrence resident
'Yes' to downzoning
As a former homeowner in the Oread neighborhood with many friends who still own homes and live there, I must object to your editorial "No Oread Downonzong" in the June 17 Kansas. The potential financial loss to real estate speculators who buy rental property, fail to maintain it, and then raize it to replace it with cheaply built housing designed to self-destruct in a few years, cannot begin to compare to the financial loss suffered by a family who
suddenly discovers that the desirability of their home has been destroyed by an apartment complex, complete with parking lot, which has sprung up next door. Their property values are at risk right now, and both they and the community at large need protection from the naked, unadulterated greed which is encouraged by the current zoning laws.
And, no, fighting the battle a house at a time is not the answer. If the property has the right curb cuts or alley access, a clever developer can build something that, under current zoning regulations, the city simply has no power over. Much as the city would have no power should you choose to paint your house in purple and yellow strips and paint Garbage Pail Kids' faces on all your windows.
We are not talking about vacant land bought on speculation. We are talking about real homes lived in by real people who need protection. Renters need the protection of knowing that it is in their landlord's financial interest to fix things when they break. Owners need the protection of knowing that the biggest thing they own isn't going to bankrupt them when it's time to move on.
Judith Roitman professor in mathematics