4A
Friday, January 26, 1996
OPINION
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
VIEWPOINT
Chancellor prevents layoffs
When the University of Kansas, an institution that
institution that has been criticized for unnecessary spending in the past, is forced by state legislators to cut $3 million from its 1997 budget, some people would have to expect to lose their jobs or so it would seem.
However, Chancellor Robert Hemenway made sure no layoffs would be made.
Instead, Hemenway eliminated 64 positions, which already were vacant or will be vacant by July 1.
The University is in a hiring freeze. Eliminating the vacant positions will protect the employees from losing their jobs.
Certain librarian, electrician and custodial positions have been cut from the budget.
The fact that these jobs no longer exist doesn't mean that the duties belonging to these positions also are eliminated.
The responsibilities will be shared among those left.
Although these positions are important to the University, there are enough employees to take on the duties of the eliminated
THE ISSUE:
Budget cuts
By eliminating vacant positions, Chancellor Hemenway has helped the budget and prevented faculty layoffs.
positions.
Even the chancellor's office is working together to fill the gap left by its assistant comptroller, who retired in November.
Yes, that does mean more work for some people, but these employees should accept that if it weren't for the elimination of these vacancies, they could have been without jobs.
It is too bad that some professor and assistant professor positions left open will not be filled because of the budget cuts. These positions have demands that the faculty may have difficulty meeting
Hemenway has shown legislators that the University depends on its staff by eliminating vacant positions instead of making layoffs.
Having to make any more cuts would be a terrible blow to the University.
CRAIG LANG FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD.
Evaluations should be available
As students flip through the timetable of classes, they play detective, searching for clues to piece together a schedule. Although descriptions of classes are published in catalogs by the University, they uncover only half the mystery. A faculty name is attached to most listings, some of which are known to students through word of mouth, but others are included in the guessing game. Who is "staff," anyway? Well, you have a right to know.
Too many students are handing the University a check without being fully informed of what they are paying for. You can do research before choosing a doctor or a lawyer. You can even preview a movie. Shouldn't you be able to do a little research on your education?
Harvard, Michigan State University and the University of Texas release descriptions of their faculty to the student body. This policy limits guesswork and lets a student take more responsibility for his education.
Under the Kansas Freedom of Information Laws, the University of Kansas has a legal responsibility to release this information to any inquiring citizen. A Student Senate bill, encouraging the administration to release information accumulated through instructor evaluations to the student body, is working its way up the legislative ladder.
THE ISSUE:
Faculty evaluations
Students have the right to see instructor critiques before making enrollment decisions they might regret.
The bill has been passed by the University Affairs committee, the Student Rights committee, and it will be addressed by the full Senate on Jan. 31.
The element of surprise is only pertinent to certain situations.
Playing "Eenie Meanie Minee Mo" with line numbers in the timetable is no solution. These evaluations represent the students' voice, and their release enables the students to be heard.
ERIN KRIST FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Jeff MacNelly / CHICAGO TRIBUNE
KANSAN STAFF
First lady must be honest to get public on her side
It takes more than a village for Hillary Rodham Clinton to win over the public these days.
Her book, It Takes A Village, is about raising children. Ironically, the public and the media are so wrapped up in the controversy surrounding Hillary that they don't have time to talk about the book. The controversy is the result of a two-year struggle to find the missing links to the Whitewater investigation. Hillary is scheduled to testify in front of a grand jury today, along with other White House officials.
The controversy developed from the Savings & Loan scandal that cost the tax payers of Little Rock, Ark, a mere $60 million. Hillary was working for the Rose Law Firm that was handling the account at the time. When asked if she had any involvement in the dealings of the account, she said she had very little, if nothing, to do with it.
HEATHER NIEAHUS
Business manager
KONAN HAUSER
Retail sales manager
JAY STEINER
Sales and marketing adviser
JUSTIN KNAPP
*technology coordinator
When the investigation began, the files of the billing records seemed to be missing. They were missing for two years, until earlier this month when White House correspondent Carolyn Huber realized that she had mistakenly picked them up last August and had unknowingly been holding them in her office. Huber reportedly picked them up from a desk right outside Hillary's office in White House residential quarters.
ASHLEY MILLER
Editor
VIRGINIA MARGHEIM
Managing editor
ROBERT ALLEN
News editor
TOM EBLEN
General manager, news adviser
Business Staff
Campus mgr ... Karen Gersch
Regional mgr ... Kelly Connelys
Regional mgr ... Mark Qiinek
Special Sections mgr ... Rachel Cahill
Production mgrs ... Rachel Cahill
Heather Valler
Marketing director ... Angle Adamson
Public Relations dir ... Angle Adamson
Creative director ... Ed Kowalek
Management team ... Walt Weaver
Internship/o-op mgr ... T.J. Clark
Campus           Joann Birk
            Phillip Brownlee
Editorial        Paul Todd
Associate editorial Craig Lang
Features        Mia Hood
Hibernation      Tom Ricketts
Associate sports Bill Petula
Photo          Andy Rulletkeer
Matt Flecker
Graphics       Nosh Musser
Special sessions Novella Bommesmith
Amphitheatre
Wire          Tara Trenary
Oline coordinator Tina Fassett
billing records that report Hilary Rodham Clinton completing legal work for the Madison Guaranty Savings & Loan for a total of 60 hours during a 15-month period. When asked about this new discovery, Hillary explained that 60 hours is not a lot of attention to give a case
These files contain the missing
The public does have the right to some concrete answers. Hillary repeatedly has told us that she is more than willing to answer any questions concerning this issue. Let us hope her testimony will bring some truths, and finally put an end to this investigation.
But, wait... there's more.
under investigation for criminal activity. Once again, Hillary claims to know nothing. Due to federal rules, Hillary will not be allowed to have a lawyer present for the grand jury. Only the prosecutor, the witness, the jury and a court reporter are permitted to attend. As Bill Maher, from the TV show Politically Incorrect said, she'll have to resort to Sharon Stone's technique during the hearing.
Editors
Republicans say the newfound records contradict some of her earlier answers about her role in the Whitewater affair. The records show that the first lady worked on one of the Savings & Loan's real estate deals, which happen to be
STAFF COLUMNIST
Maybe we are too eager to condemn an easy target. That's not to say that there isn't some questionable activity that has occurred over the past couple of years. There is enough evidence to show that Hillary did have minimal involvement in the S & L account, but she never denied that. She does deny any knowledge of how the files wound up on a desk in White House quarters.
Perhaps all we are asking for is whole truths. It insults our intelligence to know that we are being told half of a story, and are expected to settle for that. Instead of brushing off our questions by giving us half-answers, Hillary should be up-front and direct — that is, if she has nothing to hide.
She can have the public on her side if she wants.
in a law practice. She insisted that the proof wasn't a valid reason to discredit her. So, why do we still feel the urge to question her credibility? We are our job.
It's our job.
Sarah Preston is a Wilmette, Ill., senior in English.
Media makes creating own personal drama a difficult task
I'm afraid of communication. I don't want to know what Howard Stern thinks about his sexuality. I don't care why O.J. did what he did
Privacy is a thing of the past. Turn on the television anytime, day or
— pardon me, didn't do. And I still can't believe millions of Americans wanted to know what Millie the dog thought about the White House
can learn the sordid details of illicit love affairs between people you wouldn't talk to in line at Taco Bell unless they were taking your order. So what's the fascination with strangers in the media? I can only theorize that it stems from the same kind of perverse, slightly shameful, but not
Article about Internet degrades issue of sex
enough to stop, kind of emotion elicited by a postcard lying face-up in an empty room, or a temporarily abandoned computer screen with writing still in progress.
Humans get bored easily. Humans also are into self-gratification. Why bother living our own lives if we can spy on someone else's? Granted, curiosity is inherent to human nature. The New World still would be wrapped in cellophane, and what would the 1970s have been without polyester?
I want to create my own sordid dramas. I want to be my own soap opera, talk show and weather station. Interaction with the real world isn't outlawed in my little utopia; it's actively encouraged. But if I start taping *Ricki* and subscribing to *The Enquirer*, may I bleed to death from a paper cut.
On behalf of the Feminist Collective Force, this letter refers to the article written by Craig Lang in the Dec. 7 issue of the University Daily Kansan. Although the story conveys many important and informative points, we fell that it also overlooks other points which appear subtle on the surface but have a very real and sometimes severe impact on the lives of real people.
From deliberate prying, to e-mails gone awry, to intercepted phone messages, to hearing another conversation on the cordless, people find out things that they just don't need to know for their peace of mind. I'm not advocating dire secrecy, especially in this disease-ridden age, but a little bit of mystery creates allure. Like I said, some information just isn't necessary for the world to run smoothly. Do Hugh Grant's sexual exploits change whether or not I have fruit with my Cheerios?
In general, we believe that drawing attention to the issue of sex and pornography on the Internet is important and we in no way advocate censorship. We are at the same time disappointed that the article misrepresents resources on the Internet, regarding sexuality as well as other topics, and the broader issues about the possible abuses of free information dispersal generally.
Alisha Arora is an Overland Park senior in English and biology.
Moreover, the article treats sexuality and pornography as casual issues and therefore fails to accurately portray the uses and abuses of the Internet regarding this issue specifically. Indeed, the tone and style of the written text, in combination with the particular style and use of photographs, imitates the style of pornographic publications and other literature that objectifies women and men. Therefore, the article presents a message far from educational information or neutral reporting, but in fact conveys a powerful subtext of objectification and exploitation.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
The writing style seems less about presenting facts than conforming to existing and degrading attitudes towards women. The article conveniently provides the reader with a list of explicit sites, as a sort of shopping list, with only superficial consideration of the issues involved with pornography and exploitation for profit.
Similarly, we hold that the article fails to distinguish sex from pornography, and even presents them as interchangeable. If pornography, defined as the depiction of sexual objectification and abuse corresponds to the depiction of sex, then by extension, actual sex corresponds to actual sexual abuse, with no distinction between the two. We find this to be a very dangerous confusion, yet confusion that predominates in contemporary American culture and to which the article — purposely or not — conforms.
Thus, the photo layouts display a particular message beyond factual representation of the subject. That is, the prominent use of a scantily-clad woman on the front page in a supposedly alluring pose does not innocently illustrate the issue of pornography or sexuality on the Internet. Instead, this photo reinforces the perception of women as objects and nothing more than sexual fantasies by imitating the style of pornographic magazines.
If the point is education, then the article discounts the full range of healthy human relationships, whether homosexuality, or lesbian, gay and bisexual relationships. The near total focus on heterosexual pornography does not freely celebrate human sexuality as the article suggests, but degrades sexual relationships and the people involved to
We would like to point out the diversity of resources on the Internet and the many positive sites related to sexuality. We encourage everyone to develop an informed opinion on this and other important issues.
the level of objects devoid of intimate emotional content. Much of the phrasing describes even the most crude and brutal forms of pornography as nothing more than a particular choice among many, with no attention to the abuse of children, for example, in the production of pedophilic pornography.
For starters, check out:
Women's Resources.
Queer Resources:
http://www.tcp.com:8000/qrd/
Safer Sex Page:
http://www.cmpharm.ucsf.edu/
-troyer/safesex.html
http://women-online.com/women/
Sex Onine
The Feminist Collective Force welcomes your thoughts:
fef@ukanax.ccukans.edu
OUT FROM THE CRACKS
George Lundskow Lawrence graduate student
By Jeremy Patnoi