//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