Wednesday November 15, 1995 ^The Battalion Opinion The Battalion Editorials Board Established in 1893 Editorials appearing in The IJattalion reflect the views of the editorials board. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of other Battalion staff members, the Texas A&M student body, regents, administration, faculty or staff. Columns, guest columns, cartoons and letters express the opinions of the authors. Contact the opinion editor for information on submitting guest columns. Rob Clark Editor in Chief Sterling Hayman Managing Editor Kyle Littlefield Opinion Editor Elizabeth Preston Assistant Opinion Editor Tasteless Talk R.C. Slocum's Chalk Talk underestimates women. Thanks to R.C. Slocum, head coach of the A&M football team, local women can turn off the soap operas and turn on a football game, and understand it almost as much as men. Last night’s “Ladies’ Chalk Talk with R.C.” dinner offered women a chance to hear A&M football players and coaches give a lesson about football. The purpose was for women, naturally ignorant compared to men on football’s difficult intricacies, could learn a little and share an important com ponent of a man’s life — weekend football. Slocum addressed crucial is sues, such as how many play ers take the field for each team (11) and who the man in the white hat is (the referee). In sensing the women’s ig norance, he openly assumed they knew little or nothing about the sport. To put it on a level they could under stand, he related it to powder puff football. Women all over Aggieland should be grateful that Slocum is willing to take the time to correct their mental defi ciencies. The players and coaches, es pecially Slocum, should have exercised better judgment in their remarks. Although a gathering for women to discuss football is not insulting itself, the condescending and sexist attitude displayed at the din ner is. To see Slocum express this sentiment is particularly dis appointing, considering that women fill Kyle Field during home games and cheer on his team with the same knowledge as men. Perhaps Slocum should do less to educate women on the basics of football and do more to educate his football team on the basics of offense. Aggies can learn a lot from Loupot I f the final question on Heaven’s entrance exam was “What does it mean to be an Aggie?”— would you be able to an swer it definitively? I don’t know if I could. Aggie-ness is a rather mercurial quality. Every time one tries to pin it down, it moves. Historically, being an Aggie meant one thing. Currently, it could very well mean something different. It depends on how you define it. Consequently, A&M struggles to figure out how it can be both a large, world class university and a small, cozy Texas-flavored college at the same time. The juxtaposition of the state of Texas (a diverse and heavily populated state) and Texas A&M (an old- fashioned university with strong ties to the past) has caused more than a little discom fort in Aggieland. A lot of what it means to be an Aggie is per sonal. The perception is that there seem to be fewer experiences that bring the student body together than existed in OT Army days. Midnight Yell tries, but so many of the students there are drunk that I would hard ly call all of that unison yelling ‘unity.’ The same could be said about Bonfire, except even more students are drunk, and we don’t even yell in unison. Reveille is cute, but you don’t have to be an Aggie to appreciate a darling dog, so she can’t exactly be called our rallying point. Occasionally, however, something will re mind you what it means to be an Aggie. Maybe not definitively, but generally. Such is the case with Judson Loupot, class of ’32, better known round these parts as Ql’ Army Lou. With Loupot’s passing, we have an opportunity to reflect on the life of a good Ag and figure out how we can be better Aggies. His life is an illustration of what it means to be an Aggie, and by following his exam ple, we could all end up a little or a lot better than we started. Loupot started school here in 1928, just a couple years before the depression hit. He and his roommate started a business out of their dorm room during their junior year. Who hasn’t wanted to make some money out of their dorm room or apartment? If I had a nickel for every scheme I had thought up to make an extra buck, I’d have that extra buck. But Loupot did it, which is rare. He displayed a go-get-em attitude, a com mendable Aggie trait. After he had established himself as a lo cal business owner, Loupot still helped out around Aggieland. He often tried to work out new schemes to help the cadets. On hot days, Loupot would provide the Corps with ice. Loupot tr 'd to help other studems too, by lending out merchandise and even money, based only on Agg e word, when the need arose. He was helpful, a trait not just for boy scouts anymore. All Ag gies might try helping each other out more of ten. We share a bond, for better or worse, that might as well work to ward our advantage. Think about the golden rule, then think about how you could apply it, as OT Army Lou did. “For these past 40 or 50 years he’s just been a quintessential cheerleader for Texas A&M. Whenever you meet him, you walk away with a smile. If anyone bled maroon, it was him,” said Don Ganter, owner of the Dixie Chicken, and northgate neighbor of Loupot’s. . While John Raney, owner of the Texas Aggie bookstore, was constructing his store, OT Army Lou would often bring over drinks and conversation. “He was a friendly guy and a good friend,” Raney said,another northgate neighbor and competitor. He was friendly. And furthermore, he was friendly toward people that he wasn’t expected to be friendly to, not always an easy task. Wouldn’t it solve a lot of prob lems around here if we reached out to those who we felt most justified in ignoring or shunning? If we were friendly to each other, we might be more inclined to be tol erant and accepting. OT Army Lou’s generosity was observed by many, especially Shri Parchure, text book manager at Loupot’s at Northgate. “He used to help A&M students in any way that he could. He did so many little things for so many students that you couldn’t even count them.” He was generous, not only with material goods, but also with his energy and time — two extremely precious com modities. Again, we could all benefit from his example of giving without expecting any thing in return. Judson Loupot proved what it truly means to be an Aggie: a go-getter, friendly, help ful and generous. It’s rare that a person becomes an Aggieland tradition, but OT Army Lou, through his kindness and true Aggie spirit, joins the ranks of other larger than life legends, E. King Gill and James Earl Rudder. It was said of Loupot, “He befriended every Aggie that came through the door.” So too should we befriend every Aggie who comes through our door. In doing so, Ag gieland would be a much more tolerant and admirable place. Erin Hill is a graduate pursuing a teaching certificate Loupot Gy VinbXQ -tvO The negative on affirmative action Bi Brian Beckcom Columnist ill Clinton has admitted affirmative action needs some work but is a good program. Phil Gramm has made the elimination of affir mative action a central plank in his platform. Commentator Dinesh D’- Souza feels affirmative ac tion is defeated by its own logic. Stanley Fish, a Duke law professor, offers a serious argument for fighting his torical patterns of discrimination with mod ern forms of discrimination. People on all sides of this controversial is sue have offered sound justifications for both sides of the affirmative action debate. But per haps the most profound quote concerning the legal ramifications of affirmative actions poli cies comes from a little known law professor. Benjamin Cardozo says “In law, there is a tendency for a principle to unfoH to the lim its of its logic.”A few recent incidents con firm this notion. The idea behind affirmative action is no ble. Even though America is a great country full of opportunities, we have a history of withholding opportunities from deserving minorities. Affirmative action is intended to rectify past injustices and to offer minorities a chance to participate in all aspects of the American dream. Likewise, the principle behind affirmative action is sound. In order to level the playing field and create a climate of diversity, mi norities are given preference in graduate school admissions, federal contracts and cor porate positions. While this leads to a re duced amount of positions for otherwise qualified citizens, it is justified in light of our past. The problem with affirmative action is not in motive or principle. The problem comes when the policies are written into ambiguous and poorly worded legislation, and the legal principle be gins to ‘unfold to the limits of its logic’. Specifically, the problem arises when general guidelines become absurd quotas and blind discrimination. A few ex amples will illustrate just where affirmative action has gone sour, and where propo nents of affirmative action should concentrate their energies. The problem, with affirmative action to day is that immigrants and foreign visitors are eligible, and receive preference over American-born minorities, even though they haven’t lived in America. However, accord ing to Larry Hardy, the affirmative action officer for the University of California sys tem, “To make the connection that affirma tive action should only be for native-born Americans seems kind of ludicrous.” As the logic demonstrated by Hardy be gins to unfold to its limits. Pacific Bell rides the slippery slope by not even checking the citizenship of T? applicants, and illegal im migrants are given preference over the in tended recipients of affirmati ve a