Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 13, 1973)
Viewpoint r Leo recall is foolish and hysterical By JOYCE BOLES Patricia Schwindt claims that she knows “first hand” about the Leo ad ministration’s misuse of ASUO funds because she watched “every requisition of the ASUO go through the comptroller’s office” when she worked there as assistant comptroller. Apparently she didn’t read those requisitions very closely. Her com mentary of Nov. 1, which generally maligns the Leo administration and then states “Leo and Barnett should be recalled,” has at least one major error in it. Under a heading, “Other questionable requisitions,” Schwindt lists “over $70 for a weekend in Bend for the Administrative Assistant and his friends to attend the Demo-Forum staying at the resort it was held in.” V. While the room rent did amount to $70 for two nights, the pertinent facts missing from Schwindt’s allegation are that there were six people the first night, and eight the second night, packed into that $35 per night suite. I was there. The suite was available for the use of any ASUO student who wanted to use it, as 1 understood it. The only fault I found with the arrangement was the ad hoc way the students attending were signed up for the trip. Many who might have at tended had no way of knowing about it. But there was really no good way to get the word out, because the whole thing came up the week of Sept. 10 (Demo Forum was Sept. 14-16). School was not in session and the Emerald was not publishing. Further, the students present did not buy the expensive meals provided by the resort for the people at Demo Forum. We went to Bend and bought groceries and cooked them in the little kitchenette. As for Schwindt’s contention that the ASUO group was “the Administrative Assistant and his friends,” this is wholly false. The Administrative Assistant stayed in another room en tirely, and the students packed into that ASUO suite didn’t know each other at all beforehand, for the most part. They were all new to me. I attended representing the Emerald. Hopefully, the stories I wrote about Demo-Forum for the Emerald did something to enlighten somebody about the working of the democratic process, whatever that is, and if it can be un derstood. I know I learned a lot from the experience, and my only regret is the $15 or so I spent out of my own pocket. I couldn’t even get the Emerald to pay for the film I used, although the photo editor was happy to use one of the pictures. I cannot understand how Schwindt could make a mistake like that after claiming she’s in a position to know the facts. Her mistake makes all the allegations against the Leo ad ministration by the Eugene Coalition suspect, in my opinion. To me, Schwindt’s making a hash out of something she’s supposed to know about smells of the ugliest kind of smear tactics. In fact, I believe the Eugene Coalition’s recall movement is ill-conceived, foolish, hysterical, and dishonest. Although valid criticisms can be leveled at the Leo administration, I hope those people leveling them try, in the future, to adhere to better stan dards of truth. Boles is an Emerald staff writer. Letters Cheerful yo-yo’s After looking over Mark Tanchuck’s letter advocating the abolishment of the cheerleaders, I remembered something I picked up at the Washington game: a list of cheers. While I don’t necessarily ad vocate their abolishment, 1 thought those who don’t attend the games might be in terested in the cheers with which the current bunch of yo-yo’s expects us to scream our guts out. David Clark Senior-Business Note: Herewith one of the cheers: KNOCK EMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM MMMM DEAD. Peggy and Robert I didn’t at first feel it necessary to reply to the several letters addressed to my rebuttal of ‘I am Joe’s Penis” because I thought that my letter stood well on its own merits. Considering, however, the level of awareness of most people with regard to sexism and in view of the fact that my existence has been questioned, I think that a reply is in order First of all, let me make it perfectly clear that I do exist, although it is just as well that Robert (I am sure he doesn’t mind me calling him Robert since he has already taken the liberty of calling me by my first name) couldn’t get in touch with me because he really can’t teach me much where the Women’s Movement is concerned. Secondly, I don’t feel that I over-generalized in stating that men inevitably style themselves the aggressive achievers and the final authorities on any subject. Perhaps you don’t read much, Robert, but if you look in any number of books (fiction or non-fiction, con temporary or classic) you will discover that women are consistently characterized as brainless and indecisive. And if you do attend an occasional movie, you will see the same sort of prejudice rampant on the screen as is prevalent in our literature. Now, concerning your placement of priorities in the eradication of sexism in this country, I believe that working through the legislature and the courts is effective and necessary. It is even more important, however, for women to take the initiative in alerting people to sexist at titudes where they exist (no matter how innocuous these attitudes may seem to the oppressor). Unless we are all made aware of the insidious oppression of women through attitudes which stereotype and demean them, working through the courts will prove ultimately ineffectual. The Women’s Movement can do very nicely without your support, Robert (we’ve already been patronized nearly to death) and we still continue to complain about sexism wherever it exists. I am all for freedom of the press, but sexism is no less offensive in print than racism. Peggy McCormick Good point! When I read Monday’s Emerald, I was startled to find in an article on the Middle East teach-in the following sentence: “The only American troops that landed in the Middle East in this century were to protect Christian Moslems from Lebanese Moslems.” Precisely what is a “Christian Moslem?” Moslems and Christians are terms used to describe members of two completely different religions. It is possible to speak of Christian Arabs, but to talk of Christian Moslems is as ridiculous as to talk of Catholic Mormons. Mary A. Cor Graduate Teaching Fellow Department of Romance Languages Laser-wit Kudos to neophyte newsman Bruce McDonald for the heaviest bit of satire (Wed. 11-7, p.S) this side of the Offal Of fice. His laser-wit pares so keenly that one might initially miss the bloody sarcasm, but he swiftly steers the reader into the unmistakable style of National Lampoon at its best. In fact, he baits the reader with such masterful irony that one could truly say, “here is a master baiter.” It may be argued (by certain invidious Grub Streets) that any writer could parody a topic as puerile as cheerleading—but our lad obviously isn’t any writer; his rare talent lies elsewhere: in the stunning ability to make an absolutely cretinous subject appear superficially important enough to warrant several inches of editorial newsprint (with heads and byline, yet). McDonald m’boy, your chosen pre profession was well-chosen. You’re ready for the big-time. How about a piece on bed time prayers in the dormitories? Ron Dare Teaching Fellow A Tight Tull In Greg B. Lee’s review of Robin Trower’s album “Twice Removed From Yesterday,” he states, “Tull reportedly ended the tour earlier than expected due to the fact that his band wasn’t tight enough to follow Trower and company, and that “Passion Play” was indeed a superflop.” I respectfully ask Mr. Lee to get his shit together. First of all Jethro Tull is not a person as Mr. Lee seems to think. Jethro Tull is the name of the band, which anyone who claims to be a rock and roll critic ought to know. Secondly, I saw the Jethro Tull-Robin Trower tour perform in Portland and I think I can honestly say that Trower couldn’t hold a candle to the Tull. I admit that Trower is a good guitarist, if you like imitations. I prefer the original myself (Mr. Jimi Hendrix). The Tull performance was one of the tightest I have ever seen. Lastly, the Tull tour to the best of my knowledge ended in Boston, where they played for four hours with the audience demanding more. Donald Taylor More sexist disgust! I found your letter to the editor written by Ms. McCormick disgustingly sexist and appallingly inaccurate. I realize her letter was meant to be serious, but I have had about as much as I can take of men being maligned, debased, and ignored all at the same time. Regardless of the topic, women think they are finer just because they have a vagina—a subject I will be willing to discuss with any woman who can get a faster orgasm than I can. Now, as should be clear, my argument is not with the main point of her letter, which is that a woman is only as big as her cunt (rhymes with blunt). I know she is simply upset just because men can leap over tall buildings. Not only that, but thanks to this typewriter I’ve written this letter without the aid of a penis. It is enough to say that I am greatly disappointed and disturbed by her letter. In a free and open society like ours such a letter should never have been printed. Edward F. Glennon alias ‘joe’
