The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current, November 24, 1997, Image 9
inted I 1 Sales SeofJ lescorresp. ms, ] " with skills am) j lAWMonday • November 24, 1997 The Battalion I '•-1-8650 IrainnjJ |ailable, conditoj] Looking foTi^j re- lo the Plas-| nonth donatinji, 11 si two weeks 11 I ask for inapii-J f required, taikal Igate Biologtas^ lellbom Ra. Bir, lloge Station, 2 Jvam to have v Immediate job Ins, Custodiia lob Line at 26;j| PINION ooby-trapped J ew Barbie doll makeover bridges gap to modern women, young girls fter 38 years of resem bling a Playboy Play mate, Barbie is getting |iakeover. That’s right, the com plastic beauty is ring up for a new destina- b: modern America. [Barbie is easily one of the st popular toys in history, e have Put fording to The Wall Street Irna *' since her debut in is. 7oo-um: 59, more than one billion i Corral) S' Flexible howl le of Unix Con I (Judge Bars; nmercial oik Itment 823-50! and evanrg Ixible scheduv Mandy Cater assistant opinion editor Imtenance Otei people am) Pickup for Sales ta' [T rips and an rbies have been snatched by children, collectors and istalgia buffs. In the almost four decades of Barbie’s impres- erun, the doll has undergone only three previ- :s makeovers. The premiere Barbie was a pouty-lipped siren. M.G. Lord’s Forever Barbie: An Unauthorized )graphy of a Real Doll, the author notes the mf siiginal had an "averted submissive gaze that aracterized female nudes ... from the Renais- »' erS futoTJ nce unt ^ t ^ ie 19th century.” Tlhe sexual revolution of the late 1960s saw Irbie emerge with a bright-eyed forward stare Icompanied by doe-like lashes. [The current model made its first appearance Il977. This familiar version was that of a super jauty: shock-blond locks, a gleaming smile and light eyes. According to Mattel execs, this look l“conquering, friendly, approachable — the ‘we In do anything’ look.” [Despite sporting new coiffures and keeping up pog» m ith evolving mascara trends, Barbie has kept y 755 lething constant: her gravity-defying curves. l sho,sJ200 f * For decades, Barbie has been a plastic repre- : ntation of an American ideal: unattainability, irbie’s frightening hourglass figure pushes the ids DupMiifiundaries of reality. Her voluptuous bosom, mcil-thin waist and curvy hips have long been a mbol of impossible beauty. In fact, calculations indicate that, if translated lan actual woman, Barbie’s dimensions would eequivalent to approximately 38-18-34. CLE Today: 1 ' • be ISyrs $250 Pieis- After years of complaints from many camps, Mattel has decided it is time for Barbie to go under the knife. The new Barbie will have a smaller chest and hips and a fuller, more normal waist. Mattel claims this decision is independent of any negative comments directed toward the doll, but instead says it is attempting to accom modate "children’s desire for greater realism.” In addition to the new figure, the new Barbie line is planned to also include various ethnicities and hair colors. Although the decision is probably driven more by revenues than some higher social desire to raise the self-esteem of young girls, the corpora tion is to be commended for the decision. The accolades should be directed at new Mattel chief executive Jill Barad, whom The Wall Street Journal calls “the most prominent CEO in corporate America." Under Barad, a great deal of growth, both financially and in product diversity, came about. Barad helped introduce the line of career Barbies, and even the sometimes-heckled wheelchair Becky has been a positive addition to the Barbie family. Many grumble Barbie is an American icon and should remain in her current centerfold-like form. They warn that kids will not want Barbie if she is like them. If Barbie is the icon they claim, her popularity will endure the downsizing on the horizon. In fact, if girls see a Barbie that better reflects some one to whom they can relate, it is difficult to be lieve they will not embrace the toy. Today’s America is a diverse population, in cluding people from all walks of life. Instead of complaining about defacing an American symbol, people should look to what Barbie could symbolize with the new additions. Young girls and women are blasted with enough unattainable images every day without having toys reinforce the same idea. Barbie’s metamorphosis should be viewed as a change for the positive, sending the message women really do get better with age. Mandy Cater is a senior psychology major. m JUTt P»'J > n H TrWPf7 | "tastei skD W-D & Tipus tL -t O/malrt [till alteai) roommates k3-0052 n house B [nth !e nt |h Call As'' bilh, w/d [rTiesle , . 1764-27 1 ' tbatiTtt' tw Ills. ftmenls ■' Ikii'i'' f$25t" 1’ Army Days help Irive Tom Short ut of Aggieland .M. Chris Huffines columnist hat’s right, boys and girls. Once again, Tom Short, everyone’s favorite conduit of the Mmighty, has come and gone. The An- _ tonic Banderas of evangelists ea ^! was here, doing his best to 1 Ro spread the faith through the ^gun-toting mariachi rhetoric Aggieland has come to know and love. And as usual, the angry mob was right at Short’s heels, |ha,f Egging his every word. It was such a beautiful sight it brought a tear to my eye, a song to my heart and a smile to my face. Yes, it just swells my heart with pride to see Aggies help- ng Aggies run a preacher out of town. Not since the good Of Army days of Salem and McCarthy has such de votion to a cause and such won- |h ^| derful blind hatred spewed forth from anyone, anywhere. Oddly enough, peo ple who have seen and heard Short occa sionally hate him, but those who have only heard about him third- and fourth-hand hate him even more. This is In something special. Short’s sermons, however, are still missing something. No, it is not a calm, rational crowd, not a series of informed innocent questions, not the calm respect a man of God is due, and no, it is not an after noon free of interruption and hypocritical religious posturing hy others. What Short’s sermons need is the Inquisition. In a matter of minutes, Short could be strapped to the rack, teceiving an interactive lesson °n the consequences of heresy. I Sadly, religious persecu^ tion has, for the most part, faded away in the United States. It is a good thing A&M is doing everything it can to keep the tradition alive. The spectacle should keep the people happy. They do not want the truth; they want entertainment. Just to make things perfect, throw in a cir cus, a bakery and some lions. Aggieland can get back to the classics, the way religion is supposed to be. Sully would smile with pride to see how far Texas A&M has come from the days when seg regation was the worst Aggies could use to oppress someone. Who needs to listen to Short anyway? He is just one man who stands alone in public and talks about religion. He volun teers his time to do something he thinks is the will of God. He unflinchingly takes the hours of abuse hurled at him by the hostile crowds. Selfless be lievers such as Short should be dragged out into the cold, shot and left to die. Stalinesque jus tice is always the best justice. Sadly, religious persecution has, for the most part, faded away in the United States. It is a good thing A&M is doing every thing it can to keep the tradi tion alive. Young men and women are standing up for what they be lieve by goose stepping across everyone who believes differently, and are not afraid to say so. This is exactly what A&M needs: more hate, more preju dice and more fear among the classes. Nothing else will keep the dissidents in line. To those who have been abusing and ruining Short’s sermons, I say, “Good job ... keep up the fine work,” and of course, “Keep those jack boots polished.” To those who have support ed Short and his lonely cru sade to rescue us from our selves, I say, “Good luck.” Chris Huffines is a sophomore speech communications major. Bio-environmental groups pollute America John Burton columnist H undreds of groups exist with eco- friendly names like “Citizens for the Environ ment” and “America the Beautiful.” These names, however, are only fronts for mining, logging and packaging industries. Most of these organiza tions are part of the Wise Use Movement, which de veloped in response to the timber conflicts on the northeast United States. The Wise Use Move ment was founded in 1988 during a conference in Nevada. Among the attendees were the Exxon “oil improves wildlife viscosity” Corpora tion and “Citizens for Equal Rights Alliance,” a national alliance of anti-Indian groups. The phrase “Wise Use” is great — who would be against wise use? When you pull off the false face, however, you find a powerful organization of resource exploiting industries benefitting from the weakening of environmental laws. Ron Arnold, leader of the Wise Use Move ment, said, “Our goal is to destroy environ mentalism once and for all.” Four hundred delegates — most of them Republicans — attended the Wise Use confer ence to “share ideas.” One idea was the Wise Use agenda: opening public lands to more grazing, mining, logging and oil exploration. At stake were environmental laws designed to protect air, water and land. Of course, one would think Republicans would attack every scrap of government waste and abuse they found, but they have not. In fact, in the issue of cattle grazing in the west, they encourage government waste at the expense of Americans. Most western ranchers do not like “big gov’mint” coming into their lives and telling them not to pollute the environment. Howev er, “big gov’mint” looks lovely when it subsi dizes their operations. The federal govern ment only charges them about a quarter of what private landowners charge for grazing rights, and the Republicans refuse to change this policy. So much for the “free market.” This is government welfare for cattle. Pro viding environmentally destructive opera tions access to ruin federal land — our land — at a subsidized price is ridiculous in the age of cutting wasteful spending. The Heartland Institute, a right-wing political organization, has its own newsletter called Envi ronmental News. It sounds great. What could be so bad about an organization whose newsletter is called “Environmental News?” Plenty. For instance, its “scientists” say ground- level ozone pollution is actually good for us, because it screens out ultraviolet radiation. The problem with this rationalization is the fundamental differences between ozone pol lution and the naturally occurring ozone layer in the stratosphere. Confusing ozone pollu tion with the ozone layer is like confusing Jesse Helms with Jesse Jackson. Another issue of Environmental News touts the “land reclamation efforts” of coal mining companies. It basically portrays these companies in a happy, trustworthy-enough- to-date-your-sister kind of way. They want to “protect the environment for future genera tions to enjoy,” according to the newsletter. Yet it fails to mention how the mining in dustry exploits resources due to the outdated 1872 mining law— a law they fight to keep in place. This law allows corporations to pay only $5 per acre of land mined. Under this program, over $272 billion of the public’s re sources have been extracted while the Ameri can public only received $5 per acre. Further, there are no environmental provi sions in the 1872 law. As a result, over 12,000 miles of streams are polluted with acids and toxic chemicals. Another problem is 56 aban doned mine sites are now listed among the nation’s worst hazardous-waste sites. It is estimated taxpayers will have to pay up to $72 billion to clean up these areas. Of tentimes, mining companies will mine a site, abandon it and declare bankruptcy, thus leav ing the public with the cleanup bill. This behavior does not sound like protect ing the environment “for future generations to enjoy” — yet this is what groups in the Wise Use Movement want us to believe. One of the strongest Wise Use groups is “People for the West!” a Colorado-based orga nization. Members describe it as a “grass roots” group, yet in 1992, 12 of the 13 mem bers of their board of directors were mining industry executives. People for the West! was created by financial support of mining interests — such as Chevron and Hecla — which donated over $1.7 million. If this is “grassroots,” then McDonalds is a mom-and-pop cafe'. People for the West! also claims support for “science-based” environmental legislation and policy. By explicitly stating it supports “science-based” policy, it implies other envi ronmental groups do not. Thus, the truth is twisted even more. These wise-use groups portray themselves as seeking balance in the environment debate. They attempt to establish enemies to di vert people’s attention from the real issues. They label environmentalists as radical ex tremists who are hurting the economy and costing taxpayers millions of dollars, even though their own industry costs taxpayers bil lions of dollars in cleanup costs. But money and the environment is not the only problem here. As Ron Arnold, founder of the Wise Use Movement said, “Facts don’t real ly matter — in politics, perception is reality.” John Burton is a junior bioenvironmental science major. . m Mail Call Campus preacher provides good show For all those who didn’t catch Tom Short’s preaching perfor mances last week, you missed out on one of the most enter taining shows of the semester. Short was hilarious, a regular “Seinfeld,” if you will. He should seriously consider a career in stand-up comedy. For four days he did his car nival span, the main attraction being himself. His preachings made some sense, but they also contained many inconsis tent and erroneous statements. This is what I found to be so humorous about him. I am sure he is overqualified when it comes to talking about Christianity, but it seemed he did not have a clue when it came to debating other topics, such as science and other forms of religions. Of course the supporting acts were just as good as the head lining one, in the comedic sense that is. There were the serious debaters, whose solid argu ments made Short squirm. The ever relentless hecklers were at hand. Their witty interjections made it all worthwhile. Guest appearances also were made by the C.A.T.S. (Christians Against Tom Short), and by a group who offered to mediate the sale of souls to Satan. In short, no pun intended, I hope Short comes back at least once a semester. You may find him to be a re spectable man of God, or an of fensive hypocrite. To me it is all just sinfully good fun. Majed Azouqah Class of’00 Tradition of Bonfire overlooks the trees As November 27 draws near, I feel compelled to make some rational comments regarding the Bonfire tradition. I cannot help but feel opposed to any activity that exemplifies waste and degradation of the natural environment to the ex tent that Bonfire does. As our world’s air quality gets more polluted, how can people stand behind an event that not only dumps unneeded pollution into the environ ment, but also destroys thou sands of trees? Trees that are the planet’s only defense against ever in creasing concentrations of car bon dioxide gas. “But all those trees are re placed,” is the refrain I have grown used to hearing. It would clearly be more eco logically responsible if Texas A&M would supplant Bonfire with two massive tree plantings every year, in an effort to make our world more livable. I would suggest the thou sands of hours devoted to building Bonfire would be bet ter spent helping the commu nity through service projects. How many houses could be built for the homeless in that same time? How many young children tutored? How many thousands of pounds of litter cleaned of the street? Instead of continuing the decadent and selfish ritual of Bonfire, I encourage everyone wishing to show Aggie pride to participate in selfless and giv ing acts that truly show the breadth of our spirit and love of our community. Erik Stock Min Park graduate students