Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (March 27, 1991)
//Armies <^wi -mg REccpo MEW JEP66Y Editorials Editorials expressed in The Battalion are those of the editorial board and do not nec essarily represent the opinions of Texas A&M administrators, faculty or the Board of Regents.. Battalion endorses Stephen Ruth The Battalion endorses Stephen Ruth for Texas A&M Student Body President. His experience within Student Government, and his commitment to the University led us to this decision. Ruth's involvement in the Corps of Cadets, Ross Volunteers, Student Government and Class Council make him the best representative of this diverse student body. All three candidates impressed us with their ideas, and we hope they will collaborate after the elections making sure all the students' needs are met. The Battalion Editorial Board G Mu: sha: in a Popejoh was 25 ar soon-to-t movie at His mo only reas him. Mel gift. Mail Call The Battalion is interested in hearing from its readers and welcomes all letters to the editor, ease include name, classification, address and phone number on all letters. The editor reserves he right to edit letters for style and length. Because of limited space, shorter letters have a better * n°* jPP ear * n 8- There is, however, no guarantee letters will appear. Letters may be brought to 216 Reed McDonald or sent to Campus Mail Stop 1111. What is a feminist? EDITOR: Imagine an article by a white columnist telling African- American activists what they should want. The basic pro posal of this article is "stop your complaining and learn to appreciate what you have." The way in which Truesdale misinterpreted the bra burners in his article perfectly illustrates the way in which he has misunderstood the feminist movement as a whole. Truesdale patronizingly assures us that "no matter what they verbalized," he knows what these women meant, and that they weTe completely wrong. The logic here reminds me of men who believe that it doesn't matter if a woman says "no" because that's not really what she means. Despite Truesdale's magically obtained knowledge of what their actions were saying — that their bodies were as good as male bodies — what these women thought they were saying was quite different. You see Tim, for centuries, women's bodies, like their minds and activities, have been forced to conform to an abstracted and unnatural standard to be considered accep table. This standard can be not only uncomfortable (bras, hose), but also damaging (high heels, waist-constraining devices). What these women were saying, both in their ac tion and in what they verbalized, was that woman is beau tiful in her natural state. Truesdale has missed the point of feminism. Much more than trying to negotiate in a world which they did not have an equal role in creating, feminist women are re fusing to conform to a definition of themselves and their roles which they did not create. Our culture has, for thousands of years, completely de fined a woman in terms of her relations with a man, as if she had no inherent worth of her own. Feminists are intent on breaking up those false limita tions on the aspirations and abilities of half the human race. A true feminist does not devalue those women (or men) who devote their time and energy to the improvement of future generations. The belief that feminists look down their noses at moth ers who choose to maximize their positive effect on their children over maximizing their income has not been pro moted by feminists, but by those who wish to undermine the feminist movement by alienating many women from it. Rather, feminism seeks to offer a woman the ability to choose her roles instead of having them prescribed for her. Maybe I need to take another logic class, but I fail to see how feminists emphasizing equal pay for equal work "proves they now advocate a system of determining worth based on income." It seems to me evidence that they intend to stop unjus tifiable discrimination against male-created values such as aggression and materialism, as was evidenced by their lack of support for recent military actions. But whether our sisters choose to or must earn wages in the present system, it is and must be the purpose of femi nists to stop material discrimination against them. Cara Shannon Clark '89 Is the death penalty wrong? EDITOR: I write this letter in regard to the recent reader's opin ion by Michael Worsham: "Ask yourself: Does death stop death?" I hope I can help Michael open his eyes a bit. First, I would like to talk about his implications about the views of our President. He implied that because Bush condemned the use of the death penalty, as used by Iraq, he might be changing his views. Did it ever dawn on you that he might have felt the killings were senseless and un justified? Of course, we all know that Iraq would only use the death penalty after a fair jury trial — yeah, right. Next, Worsham claims that the death penalty discrimi nates against non-whites, the poor and even the mentally handicapped. I suppose you think sickle-cell anemia "dis criminates" against black people. Do you think maybe the majority of the people who commit these heinous crimes, which have a just calling for the death penalty, comes from these poor, "discriminated-against" groups. Maybe your solution would be to come up with some kind of quota. For every black on death row, we get a white or for every "mentally handicapped" (the good old insanity plea), we kill a genius. It seems like the same group of people always screaming for equal rights are quick to label themselves when it is time to pay their dues to society. Last, I would like to comment on the death penalty be ing extremely expensive. This fact cannot be argued, but does that make the death penalty wrong or does it call for a major overhaul in our court system? As a Texan, I am proud of our tough legal system because we are the leader in putting hardened criminals "to rest." As for the upcoming march (for the abolition of the death penalty), I expect it to consist of thugs and future thugs. It will be these liberals who will continue to fight for the rights of the criminals in America. Michael (and the rest of you confused liberals), open your eyes and realize that the rights awarded to the honest, law-abiding citizens of America should not be retained should you stray from the law. I thank The Battalion for the forum. John Staton '93 Buckle up Recent accident shows value of safety belts M JL V Jlany of you read in Monday's Battalion about a doctoral student, Debbie Wilks, who was hit by a train while driving home on Friday night. What damage from a train weighing hundreds of tons will do to an S-10 pickup weighing a few hundred pounds became glaringly apparent when her brother (my roommate) showed up at our house yesterday with what was left of her truck in tow. It never ceases to amaze me how much punishment the human body can absorb and manage to recover from. Debbie still is unconscious and suffering from a head wound and a number of broken bones, but the prognosis for a full recovery is encouraging. It still is depressing to know that the worry on the faces of her husband and family could largely have been avoided had she taken the time to buckle her seatbelt. Even though her truck was hit by a train, the driver's side of the cab is almost completely intact, proving that a vehicle can take more punishment than one might imagine and maintain its structural integrity. What really sets my mind in gear is the fact that Debbie is the third of my friends who has been involved in a serious auto accident in the last five years. She's the third one to have received a closed head wound and been unconscious for a long period of time. And she's the third one to be ticketed for not wearing a seatbelt. All three would have been bruised up a bit in their wrecks, but the head wounds and serious damage would almost certainly have been prevented by safety restraints. Both my other friends were fortunate enough to have survived and recovered from their wounds over a period of time, but the worry and high medical costs were very preventable. They all had one thing in common. Larry Cox Columnist and that is that they all had an excuse why they didn't buckle up. Everybody has an excuse. Fashion conscious people don't want to buckle up because their clothes will get wrinkled. Big breasted or portly people don't want to because of the obvious obstacles. Then there are the free- spirited rebel types who "ain't gonna let the government tell me what to do" or risk looking uncool. Okay, fine. Don't buckle up because the law tells you to. I agree, it's a governmental intrusion into your private life. But do it anyway, because the damn things work. They might not be the most comfortable things in the world, but they certainly can save your loved ones the agony of receiving a 2 a.m. phone call from a state trooper or an emergency room clerk. They also are infinitely more comfortable than neck braces, catheter tubes and scores of other unmentionable medical procedures which are inflicted upon hospital patients. I could quote statistics until I dropped dead from exhaustion, and it wouldn't change anyone's mind about seat belt usage. I just wish I could haul that bashed pickup to campus and let everyone look at it for a few days. Better yet, everyone should spend time in a hospital emergency room, watching accident victims come in. If you won't buckle up for your loved ones, do it for yourself because a little inconvenience is more desirable than a life spent injured or paralyzed or worse. Like the commercial says — buckle up for safety. Larry Cox is a graduate student in range science. Born w Melendes playing vi "I saw; tuning hi: home to t guitar," N just mess (playing \ and I've k Now, tl one Texas students z Tony perf 8p.m. Th Theater. Dennis psycholog forMelem because o Melendez "Becaus his wife, I wedding, 1 since I me Mj Anm Thu Fi So 1st pla Prercquisi Math 151 calculus tf IF "Coeryoi not euen differenc COROLl When in best tasl surely ge The Battalion (USPS 045 360) Member of Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Conference The Battalion Editorial Board Lisa Ann Robertson, Editor — 845-2647 Kathy Cox, Managing Editor — 845-2647 Jennifer Jeffus, Opinion Page Editor — 845-3314 Chris Vaughn, City Editor —845-3316 Keith Sartin, Richard Tijerina, News Editors — 845-2665 Alan Lehmann, Sports Editor — 845-2688 Fredrick D. Joe, Art Director — 845-3312 Kristin North, Life Style Editor — 845-3313 Editorial Policy The Battalion is a non-profit, self-sup porting newspaper operated as a community service to Texas A&M and Bryan-College Station. Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the editorial board or the author, and do not necessarily represent the opin ions of Texas A&M administrators, faculty or the Board of Regents. The Battalion is published daily, except Saturday, Sunday, holidays, exam periods, and when school is not in session during fall and spring semesters; publication is Tuesday through Friday during the summer session. Mail subscriptions are $20 per semester, $40 per school year and $50 per full year: 845-2611. Advertising rates furnished on re quest: 845-2696. Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed Mc Donald, Texas A&M University, College Sta tion, TX 77843-1 111. Second class postage paid at College Sta tion, TX 77843. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, College Station TX 77843- 4111. the itch by Nito follow Where qu M additioi now avail. Tuesdayi tryl Special 3:00 Choice Soup E Stee 1. Sweet 2. Sweet 3. Sweet 4 - Peppe 3. Twice