4
Wednesday, September 22, 1993
OPINION
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
VIEWPOINT
THE ISSUE
U. N. and U.S. troops are attempting to rebuild Somalia but have failed to capture Mohamed Farah Aidid, the warlord responsible for much of the violence occurring daily in Mogadishu.
THE BACKGROUND
Since the successful humanitarian relief effort in Somalia, the U.S. mission has changed to involve the implementation of a democratic government in Somalia and the capture of Aidid. So far, the effort to capture Aidid has failed. Many in the United States, including a large number of senators, are urging President Clinton to withdraw troops from Somalia.
THE OPINION
U.S. troops no longer necessary in Somalia
The time has come to pull American troops out of Somalia. The current mission of "government building" is failing and is far from the original mission of feeding the hungry people of Somalia.
The mission has turned into a failure with U.S. troops getting ambushed at every turn. Instead of a government-building mission, it appears to be a "get Aidid" mission. The search for Aidid has been fruitless and appears to have made little progress.
When President Bush sent U.S. troops into Somalia there was a need to see that humanitarian relief successfully reach the starving people of Somalia. That mission has succeeded, but in the process we have acquired a new mission that is different from any we have involved our troops in before.
It is time to cut our losses and pull out of Somalia. If the situation changes in the future, it might become acceptable to send U.S. troops back to Somalia. At this time, it is dangerous and painful not to withdraw.
TOM GRELINGER FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Wage increases display abuse of Senate power
Student Senate passed a bill on Sept. 8 that increased the hourly wages of five of the eight Senate executives to $4.25 an hour. The bill, effective immediately, increases the hourly pay of the administrative assistant, the Student Senate Executive Commission chair, the executive secretary, the Community Outreach chair and the Associated Students of Kansas director.
Senate members are in a unique position because they have the power to set their own executives' salaries. Discretion must accompany this power.
Senate voted to increase student fees by $3 last spring. Senators claimed the increase was imperative to finance adequately Senate projects. Now, Senate executives are utilizing additional funds to increase their own executives' salaries.
The salaries of Senate executives are stipends. The law does not require that executives be paid minimum wage. Offering some compensation to executives for their time and effort is reasonable. But paying executives, whose wage is based on a 20-hour work week over 12 months, up to $368 a month is exorbitant.
Senate executives work hard, as do executives of innumerable other campus organizations. But almost without exception, executives of other organizations are not paid for their efforts.
Senate executives are fortunate to receive monthly stipends. However, these stipends must remain at a reasonable level.
COLLEEN MCCAIN FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Censorship hinders constructive debate
It's nearing the end of September, which means crisp fall days, football and censorship.
I mention censorship because of Banned Books Week. The week, which lasts from Sept. 26 to Oct. 2, is a project of many organizations including the American Booksellers Association and the American Library Association. Its purpose is to increase awareness of censorship in this country. Bookstores and libraries will feature displays with books about censorship as well as examples of censorship in the past and present.
Censorship has traditionally been practiced by the religious right. The Catcher in the Rye is a frequent target of censorship because of "bad" language. (My high school English teacher gave me his personal copy of the novel but wouldn't teach it to the class because of the language issue). The first problem occurs with defining bad language. The word "screw" has many connotations, at least one of which can be considered obscene. Do we censor the word in "Penthouse" but not in "Handy Andy"? Second, we must look at the context. Though Holden Caulfield arguably swears too much, isn't that part of the point of the novel? Hateful words don't mean much without a context in which to place them.
What's more disturbing to me is the rise of censorship by liberals in the name of political correctness. These
STAFF COLUMNIST
liberals advocate a form of censorship when, for example, the material in question is considered "hate speech." A case in point is Bret Easton Ellis' American Psycho. The novel is a first-person account of an investment banker whose nightly diversions include dismembering people. The murders are related in nonchantily gruesome details, and most of the victims are women. When the novel was published, women's groups were appalled; here was an openly misogynistic, hateful novel that should not have been published.
Others read the novel differently. Norman Mailer, for example, saw it as a metaphor for the 1980s: the logical conclusion of greed and manipulation is murder. While both interpretations can exist simultaneously — the novel can be a grand metaphor as well as misogynistic — what is important is that they are different interpretations. One person's interpretations of a novel aren't the same as another's.
So who will decide which interpretations are valid and which aren't? A number of years ago, when I was an undergraduate at Northwestern University, a former leader of the Nicaraguan Contras did not speak because a campus communist group threw an animal's blood on him. The blood symbolized the blood he had caused to spill. He was furious and wouldn't speak; the group went around chanting "No free speech to Contras." The hypocrisy astounded me: the right to speak extended only to them, not to those they opposed. Debate was not possible. Only one interpretation mattered to them—theirs.
I'm not condoning American Psycho or the Contras. American Psycho is a hateful and poorly written novel, and the Contras were responsible for hundreds of deaths. But the most effective way of dealing with those things isn't by censoring them but by bringing them out in the open. It's by discussing ideas which may be hateful, not by sweeping them under a carpet where they grow until they are so large we trip over them.
Ultimately, censorship is about power. It's about the ability to control what is accessible and what is not. No one — not governments, not churches, not school boards — should have that power. It should belong to the people.
Nathan Olsen is a Chicago graduate student in English.
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Sexual harassment definition distorted
In response to the Sept. 15 editorial concerning the sexual harassment speak-out, I would like to make a few points. I agree that the issue of sexual harassment is a terrible and dehumanizing crime that has no place in our community. But to truly raise awareness and alleviate misconceptions about this crime, a few distinctions should be made.
Second, the Kansan believes it is difficult to detect how many times this crime occurs. Indeed it is as long as the definition of sexual harassment is as flexible and changing as the prevailing opinion of editorial staffs.
First, sexual comments alone, no matter how dehumanizing, are not covered by the legal definition of sexual harassment. I quote the 1994
edition of "Money Magazine's Best College Buys," page 34, which defines harassment as "Sexual attention that is unwanted, offensive, usually repeated, and interferes with your ability to work." The article continues by stating that an action, such as being called a '10' as you walk, probably does not constitute sexual harassment.
Third, including the horrific crime
of rape in the definition of sexual harassment is a great injustice to rape survivors. This is the equivalent of defining murder as an assault.
I am in resounding agreement with the need to end sexual harassment and all other crimes against individuals. I feel that the editorial board is doing a great disservice to the men and women of this country by bumbling the definition of sexual harassment. Few could find fault with the women's studies program for wishing to end this crime, so let's at least get its definition straight.
Randall Reitz
Salina senior
Last weekend Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition met for one of its political pep rallies. The list of speakers included the usual group of Republicans rumored to be considering a run for the presidency in 1996. Pat Buchanan renewed his call for a cultural war in America with a speech that made you wonder if he was hiding an arm band under his coat. The crowd cheered its approval at almost every line. It was enough to bring a tear to Ronald Reagan's eye.
Persecution has no place in democracy or religions
In this den of rabid Republicanism one lone Democrat had to deliver a speech. David Wilhelm, Democratic national committee chairman, had been invited by Robertson as the only democratic speaker. The majority of his address was received politely, if sedately, until he made one mistake.
Wilhelm told them that it wasn't fair to characterize someone as unChristian, simply because he did not agree with them on political issues. Disagreeing with a person but respecting his right to his opinion is the basis of democracy, isn't it? Well, apparently not. For that statement the Christian Coalition nearly booed him off the stage. Apparently God has registered as a Republican. I had the mistaken belief that God was an independent.
KANSAN STAFF
It seems that Pat Robertson has a unique gift that he shares with the Coalition. He knows what God's political wishes are. In fact he will share them with you every day on his television show, "The 700 Club." It seems that God was against the president's budget package approved by Congress last summer. No wonder it had so much trouble passing. It seemed that God was against raising taxes, especially on wealthy television evangelists.
Of course God hates gays. We don't even have to take Pat's word for that. We have a local in Topeka who is God's expert on that issue.
When I was a small child going to Sunday school we used to sing a song called "Jesus Loves Me." I don't remember any exceptions. I can't help wonder if someone has undated the lyrics.
God can't seem to make up his mind on the North American Free Trade Agreement. At first he was all for it, but once Pat, I mean God, discovered that it threatened U.S. sovereignty he decided it wasn't such a good idea.
God is also sure that he wants a Republican to be the next president, although he hasn't decided which one yet. The only real requirement, however, seems to be a willingness to do exactly what his messenger, Pat, wishes.
Every time Pat Robertson implies that those with different political views are unChristian, he is doing more that just political name-calling. He is really denying his opposition's right to participate in the process. He uses religious and patriotic rhetoric to invalidate his opposition's existence, not just its position.
When you deny your political opponents' right to exist, then you deny the basis of democratic government, which gives a voice to everyone, not just a chosen few.
Jim Kimnel is a McLouth junior majoring in history and sociology.
KC TRAUER, Editor
TOM EBLEN General manager, news adviser
JOE HARDER, CHRISTINE LAUE
Managing editors
Editors
Assistant to the editor ... J.R. Clairborne
News ... Stacy Friedman
Editorial ... Terrilyn McCormick
Campus ... Ben Grove
Sports ... Kristi Fogler
Photo ... Klip Chin, Renee Kneeber
Features ... Exe Worte
Graphics ... John Paul Fogel
BILL SKEET, Systems coordinator
STAFF COLUMNIST
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 class and hometown, or faculty or staff position. Guest columns should be typed, double spaced and fewer than 700 words. The writer will be pleased if you provide details. The Kanaan reserves the right to reject or edit letters, guest columns and cartoons. They can be mailed or brought to the Kanaan newsroom, 111 Stauffer Flint Hall.
University of Mars (unplugged)
by Joel Francke