^OPINION
minism leaves
spectochivalrous males
heads
Collateral damage
Government should allocate more money to pay soldiers’ wages
) \ VTIONS ; Ar I Ihe male is completely
the retired chit I egocentric, trapped inside
ar watchdog JL himself... heisahalf-
. nne the new ead. unresponsive lump, incapable
pcctor lor Irac f gj N j n g or receiving pleasure or
tnunem appmess. Consequently, he is at best
edncuiay eve „ mxcx bore, an inoffensive blob.
/cd. ^ ^^». ncss j s a deficiency disease, and
urity i oun,: arc emotional cripples.”
approval w®Jpbese are the kind words ofVa-
ir °u s ' Irie Solanas, author ofthe Society for Cutting Up Men
" 1 >Cl M) Manifesto.
^Hold on a second, ladies. Before the eheers of approval
, ^ et to a fever pitch, please reflect on the unfairness of
olanas* statements. Granted, most women do not always
8Ve these extreme feminist sentiments against men.
. 'lowever, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out
' . tat most women harbor a a great deal of latent animosity
i in's ,ntfn - Consider the popular phrase "All men are pigs."
KMdcd the lira*? male gender is not composed entirely
until he K- ^^•4'C‘nsitive, pig-headed jerks. In a study published last
itbassadix m : uniar > 1,1 The Backlash, it was found that less than 3 per-
roposed Bln of adult males in the United States fit the feminist
and the I tst^W^yP 0 of men in general. That means the vast majority
went a!ons>fr f men oul there are unfairly accused of being chauvinists
s. diplomi^ n a regular basis.
io was vaca: - Considering this, it is no surprise that chivalry and
rd unavadaK; sntlemanly behavior among men has been overwhelm-
ad the U.Y M ‘gb crushed by “femi-nazi” pretenses. Should a man
.nul Invjxo eat a lady as "one ofthe guys,” even in social situations?
iiv.li was crcjs. *r should he follow the traditional approach and be com-
k il ;n Dar lewly chivalrous to every female? The baffling thing is
o eial C onr- tat men today are expected to be able to do both at the
Logic dictates that if women
wish to be treated as equals in
today's society, they should
bear the same costs as men in
all aspects of
society, including socializing.
AOUATES
tme time with relative ease and few mistakes.
For goodness' sake, ladies, please be reasonable. Give
ie Y-chromosome a break for a change. Men are right-
jy
Jisc ipl ned Enginee J ^> , f9- r0W * n fi frustrated with having to tlip-llop between
te wildly unpredictable and irrational social sensitiv ities
'-•mi * or campip w | men jjy j m p OS i n g these contradicting expectations
0. We are look^T all men without exercising patience and understanding,
eld specializing in: omen are putting at risk the very thing they desire:
eetlng a thoughtful and caring partner vvith whom they
in spend the rest of their life.
Thankfully, the archaic notion ofthe woman’s place
;ing in the home has been rightfully destroyed in the past
mturv. Previously, men were viewed as the dominant
:nder — the wage earners. Accordingly, men bore the re-
ew betwff lonsibility of "courting” and sheltering a female.
Today, women have ventured out ofthe household to
ork alongside men in places of equal power and influ-
ice This advancement has succeeded in erasing many of
e gender lines that unfairly shackled women.
But wait — logic dictates that if women wish to be
"" "jated as equals in today’s society, they should bear the
me costs as men in all aspects of society, including so-
Journal!
0
ifaliiing. For some insane reason, that is not the case.
Men are still expected to do most, if not all, ofthe
ork For instance, it is extremely rare for a female to
k a guy out, offer to pick him up, plan the entire
ening and pick up the entire cost. Meanwhile, men are
;pepted to carry out all of these duties on a regular ba-
^ without any objection.
Today men are sometimes confused and apprehensive
ceHain social situations with females because they do
>t know to which set of social rules they should con-
rml The fear of being misunderstood is all too real. A
an’s good intentions can be twisted and manipulated
to an arrogant display of chauvinism easily by an op-
•rtiinistic female.
For instance. Fish Jones finally works up the nerve to
k his lab partner to dinner. Unknown to him, his lab
rtner is a militant feminist with an ax to grind. At the
in. 27 ic staurant, Jones graciously offers to take his date’s coat
d help her into her seat. What is Jones’ reward for this
t of sincerity? His date emits a rude laugh, tosses him
r coat and seats herself.
After a painfully quiet meal, the check rolls around.
.6 DrOS ^ oes •l° ncs d 0 ? Does he do the equitable thing and pay
. r his half, or does he do the traditional thing and pick up
fessionals wil^ entire bill? Either way, Jonis is in a no-win situation. He
as the risk of being labeled as either cheap or arrogant.
How the female mind can come to either conclusion in
Jay’s society is downright frustrating for any level-
|r aded guy. On one hand, females demand to be given the
me opportunities and face the same adversities as men.
line with that philosophy, what is wrong with Jones ex-
cting his date to pa> her half of the bill? It is how he
aukl treat any other guy.
On the other hand, men today are also expected to
• gentlemen, to be chivalrous and gracious during the
wse of a date and relationship. So in line with that
. iilosophy, what is wrong with letting Jones pick up
about the nslfwhoie bin?
furnalism
m
with business
Aumacher
i@hotmail.c
5
IfpUiis scenario is a microcosm ofthe problem as a
lole. Women are being too arrogant if they expect the
ale gender to be able to perform this endless juggling act
thout making an occasional mistake.
It must be accepted that men are unable to accurately
uge the feminist sensitivities of every individual female
ithout a few growing pains. Considering this, females as
Colle$S er >der need to exercise a little more patience and reason
ith men. Is that asking for too much? Definitely not.
David Lee is a junior economics and
journalism major.
T he en
listed
person
nel ofthe
United States
Armed Forces
are facing a
crisis the likes
of which have
not been seen
since the Vietnam War. Enlistment
totals are below desired levels, and
those that are in the military are
very unhappy. It is not because
they lack the confidence ofthe na
tion. In fact, recent polls show that
three-fourths of those polled sup
port them very' strongly. In spite of
the support they receive from the
public, many enlisted personnel
are dismayed at the lack of support
they receive from their employer,
the federal government.
Most of America’s enlisted sol
diers are woefully underpaid. Pri
vates in the Army make so little
money (less than SI8,000 yearly,
or about $9 per hour) that they are
eligible to collect welfare and food
stamps while on active duty. This
is a disgrace to the nation and a
searing indictment ofthe Clinton
administration’s lack of concern
for those who have the courage to
wear a uniform. During Clinton's
tenure, American forces have been
dispatched to such exotic locales
as Haiti, Macedonia, Bosnia, and
Kosovo. This is not to mention
Clinton’s decision to change Pres
ident Bush’s humanitarian mis
sion to Somalia into “nation
building,” which cost the lives of
over two dozen soldiers. Interven
ing in such areas means that sol
diers run the risk of paying the ul
timate price in the line of duty. It
is only fair that they, in turn, are
paid a respectable wage.
83y
MARK
PASS WATERS
It is little wonder people are not
interested in joining the armed
forces. The military used to be a
solution for those who had little
chance of improving their lives by
staying where the) were. Why
would people want to risk their
lives for less money then they
would make bagging groceries?
This situation is not only em
barrassing, but it also puts our na
tion at risk. The problem is not
just that there are not enough peo
ple to run our sophisticated
weapons systems, but that those
who have the needed experience
are leaving the service in droves.
With the skills that they have
learned during their enlist
ments, these men and
women can
make much
more money in
the civilian sec
tor than by stay
ing in the service.
An individ
ual can enlist in
the armed forces
for as little as
two years. It
now takes al
most a full year to train a sol
dier not only in the fundamentals,
but also in a specific skill area.
Armed with a viable skill but still
being paid horribly, many do not
re-enlist. As a result, the turnover
in certain areas is almost continu
ous. Such a lack of experience is
potentially disastrous considering
that these areas include missile
maintenance, Patriot air defense
systems and radar operators on
naval vessels.
Defense Secretary William Co
hen has ordered the creation of
several committees to discuss how
to increase enlistments. The Navy
has hired Spike Lee to make
snazzy new commercials, and the
Army is considering scrapping
their “Be all you can be” catch
phrase. If Cohen wants to ad
dress the problem, he should tell
his boss that these people should
be paid a decent wage.
In recent years, the military
has significantly down
sized, and defense
RUBEN DELUNA/The Battalion
budgets have increased. The Air
Force gets new planes, the Army
new tanks and the Navy new sub
marines - yet the people that would
service and operate these systems
get pay raises that do little but off
set inflation. Considering that in
flation has risen at an average rate
of 2.2 percent in the past three
years and the enlistee's pay has in
creased 3 percent for the lowest
ranks, this is a staggering insult.
Many of these weapons sys
tems are ones that have not been
asked for by the anned forces but
have been put in the budget by the
president and Congress in order to
gain votes in crucial political areas.
If defense spending was done
more prudently, there would be
enough money for the weapons
and the warriors.
Much has been made of Bill
Clinton not serving in the mili
tary during a major conflict. Per
haps if he had, he would not have
been so quick to sign budgets that
neglect enlisted military person
nel. If Clinton and members of
Congress do not understand that
these men and women are not
simply working-class individuals,
but also people who run the risk
of losing their lives, they should
be ashamed of themselves.
When the president looks to
the military, he should be certain
he commands a group that will
successfully defend the nation and
provide comfort where it is need
ed. The military should be able to
look to its commander in chief and
know that he, in turn, will make
sure that they can provide for
themselves financially.
It is good to know that at least
one side is getting a bargain.
Mark Passwaters is a senior
electrical engineering major.
N\\1(e Uckcsiich msm. cemmvvm*™
MAIL CALL
Student defends passing
out Bibles on campus
In response to Elizabeth Kohl's Jan. 25 column.
“Howdy, I’m out here telling others about
my faith in Christ and was wondering if I
might have a few minutes of your time.”
Some people may find this introduction a
nuisance. But there exist clear Biblical man
dates and precedents behind this evangelis
tic behavior. Any offense taken from such en
counters may not be the fault of the initiator
ofthe conversation. Simply put, is it the act
of having a friendly Aggie wanting to walk
and talk with you on your way to class that
outrages you, or is it simply the topic they
wish to discuss? Be wary ofthe latter be
cause it lies perilously close to censorship.
As a Christian, I seek to passively share my
faith by how I live.
Yet, it is less likely that anyone will learn
about the free gift of salvation provided by
Christ’s death, burial and resurrection if I
never actually tell them. Therefore, I share
my beliefs not simply because Jesus told me
to be His witness even to the ends of the
earth, but because it is a longing, even a
need, to “love away” some ofthe love and
joy that spills out from God’s heart. The
apostle Peter encouraged Christians to “al
ways be prepared to give an answer to
everyone who asks you to give the reason
for the hope that you have. But to do this
with gentleness and respect... so that
those who speak maliciously against your
good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of
their slander” (1 Peter 3:15 -16).
Tommy Medina
Class of ’01
Space exploration
worth continuing
In response to Brieanne Porter’s Jan. 25 column.
Space exploration is worth pursuing for
many reasons. First, the economic payoff is
very real. For example, the integrated circuit,
the basis of every microchip, was a spinoff
from the Apollo project. Who could have pre
dicted the profound impact computers would
have on our lives? Yes, it can be difficult to see
the value of space missions, but there is clear
pattern of unforseen benefits that make space
an excellent return on investment.
Besides, NASA doesn’t exist to put more
money in our pockets, or niftier gadgets in our
kitchens. NASA’s business is discovery, whose
treasure of knowledge enriches all our lives in
ways beyond the measure of money.
The exploration of Mars is worthwhile, and
the recent probe failures don’t change that.
We need to demand that NASA get its act to
gether and continue.
I understand claims that we should solve
our pressing social problems first. But hu
manity’s problems stem not from a lack of gov
ernmental funding, but from our own very hu
man failings.
As such, they can never be completely
solved by any level of funding. It therefore
makes no sense to slash a program that has
an economic payoff, inspires the next genera
tion, and opens up the next frontier.
We are in the longest economic expansion
in this nation’s history. We are not in the mid
dle of a war or any other crisis. Now is the time
to invest in humanity’s next great challenge. If
we are not willing now, when will we be?
Mark Smith
Class of '00
Corrupt police set
off too easily
T he
crime
scene
is typical: it
is 2 a.m., and
a driver with
twice the le
gal blood al
cohol level
veers out of
his lane and crashes into oncom
ing traffic. The police and ambu
lances arrive, the victims are
rushed to the hospital and the
drunken driver is taken to jail. But
what if, when asked for license
and registration, the driver hands
over something much more pow
erful — a police badge? Then, all
of a sudden the routine is altered
and the rules that are black and
white are now streaked with blue.
On Nov. 28, 1999 Houston po
lice officer Matthew Michna’s ve
hicle crossed the center line on
FM 2978,
crashing into
another c&r.
The car, dri
ven by
Leonard Foyt
Jr., contained
three other
passengers
who each
suffered seri
ous injuries in
the accident.
Foyt
claims that upon arrival at the
scene, the police treated him and
his friends with a complete lack
of respect.
The problem of drunken dri
ving should not be overlooked,
but the fact that this case is being
taken so lightly is equally inex
cusable. Why has there been hard
ly any action taken in the investi
gation of this crime? Most likely,
for the same reason that cars with
“Backing the Blue” or “100 Club”
bumper stickers are rarely seen
pulled over on the side of the road.
Both of these are organizations
that benefit police departments and
provide annual stickers for the sup
porter’s donation. The stickers serve
as a small but distinct expectation
for special favors. Police officers
are putting themselves, and
their donating friends, above
the laws that they are in no way
exempt from.
These men and women go
through a great deal of training and
receive a badge symbolizing their
promise to protect citizens. But
somewhere along the line, they
seem to receive a “Get Out of Jail
Free” card to protect themselves.
Officer Michna was not issued
any tickets, has not served any jail
time, and has been relieved of
duty with pay from the Houston
Police Department. It must be nice
to sit at home waiting for the pay-
checks to roll in. That kind of pun
ishment is hardly justifiable for
the endangerment of four innocent
lives, as well as setting an inex
cusable example to the citizens he
vowed to serve and protect.
It is one thing to get out of a
speeding
ticket, or to
cleverly talk
one’s way out
of a traffic
fine, but it is
another to
knowingly dri
ve drunk, near
ly kill four hu
man beings,
and walk away
with hardly a
slap on the
wrist. Not only
should police officers be repri
manded for committing crimes the
same way as ordinary citizens, but
their role as an officer should defi
nitely be re-evaluated — if not
terminated — for such behavior.
. When the rule-makers become
the rule-breakers, they do not de
serve to have any sense of authori
ty or special treatment — they de
serve to be punished like any
ordinary citizen.
In the United States, Monopoly
is just a game, every crime has its
punishment, and no badge gets any
one out of jail free.
Melissa Bedsole is a sophomore
general studies major.
Police officers are
putting themselves,
and their donating
friends, above the
laws that they are
in no way
exempt from.