Oregon daily emerald., October 18, 1978, Section A, Page 4, Image 4

■
opinion
AD ticket sales
should change
Lotteries, like bingo parties and the mumps,
usually suggest an element of chance. But virtually
everyone who participated in last week's athletic tic
ket lottery had the opportunity to win.
Even after the lottery had run its course, the
athletic department had 450 student passes left un
sold. And it took the rest of the week for the depart
ment to unload them.
We don’t know what caused the decline in ticket
demand, but see the change as an opportunity for the
ASUO and the University to scrap a system that
never worked well anyway.
With the lottery, 16,000 students subsidize a
system from which only 4,000 students can possibly
benefit. Of the 4,000 student passes distributed, an
unknown number are sold for up to $60 profit to those
who have the right mix of money and mania.
A fairer system would be to sell the tickets on an
individual-game basis rather than by the season.
The athletic department could divide the total
tickets available for student sales by the number of
applicants. Individual tickets for particular games
might be sold and traded, but at least every student
would have a dozen or so chances to scramble up to
the fourth balcony, get dizzy and turn a little crazy.
Unused and returned tickets could be sold only
to students at a general admission price the day of
the game.
yours
GTFs need their union
Repeatedly during the past few weeks, i have been
confronted with one rather-strange reaction to the GTFF
negotiation impasse. This is the opinion that, though the
GTFs “deserve" a fair contract, they should not use the
strength of a union to get it.
These people have not denied the justice of the de
mands of the GTFF, they have simply objected to or
ganized labor in principle.
This is an idea that could only be taken seriously in an
isolated academic fairyland, far removed from the world of
wages and profits. It is an idea that only makes sense in a
world in which employers never try to take advantage of
workers and workers never have to band together to fight
such exploitation.
Obviously, the world we live in is not such a world.
I can see no other way one could rationally object to
organized labor in principle. One can dislike one union or
another for some reason, but this has no bearing on the
GTFF unless one wants to accuse them specifically. I have
heard no such accusations, because there are none to be
made.
The GTFs need the GTFF to get that fair contract. I
urge all students to support them in their efforts.
Scott Meyers
Sophomore, Linguistics
Support GTFF struggle
The University's failure to bargain in good faith has
forced the Graduate Teaching Fellows to prepare to strike.
They have been used as a cheap source of labor: Their
wages are at the pre-1969 level due to the rise in cost of
living, and they work 20 hours for 6 hours of pay.
Many students may be afraid that if GTFs get a salary
increase, the University will retaliate by increasing tuition
costs. The University has never been able to use the GTFs
as an excuse when raising our tuition — while our tuition
goes up, GTF salaries remain at a substandard level. We
should remember, too, that GTFs have supported us in the
past in our efforts against tuition increases.
Their struggle today over decent working conditions
and wages is not just one of them looking out for their own
self-interests, but is to ensure that there is a strong union to
represent future GTFs as well. Some of us may become
GTFs one day. How would we like to be overworked and
underpaid? This could happen unless we force the Univer
sity to change its present refusal to agree to a fair settle
ment.
In fact, the University is prepared to use scabs to teach
GTF classes should they strike. We should protest this so
they don’t get away with it. Let's get out to the pre-strike
vote rally today at 12:30 in the EMU Breezeway.
Page 4 Section A
greg wesson
tabled indefinitely
You got your oi boy Jesus hanging up on the cross in
Galilee looking down on all those damn Romans and he
was thinking up to heaven.
As Jeffrey Frederick, songwriter and front man for
the Clamtones. tells it. Jesus was confused. He felt
forsaken and couldn't understand why his Father had
forgotten him. Sudeenly the clouds rolled back and he
was enlightened.
Tell 'em all their sins will be in good shape if they crucify
you.
A heavy decision.
Is the good of some faceless mass more important
than an individual s suffering? Jesus thought so and has
been the role-model for all martyrs since. Self-sacrifice
is a recurring thead in Western thought and Jesus made
the supreme sacrifice: He gave his life that you and I
might bridge the gap between this world and God's.
But is self-sacrifice necessary?
Maybe it's my youth, general optimism or sheltered
life, but I don't think so. People are basically good and
hardly needed for someone to be tortured on the cross
that the world might be a pleasant place. But the self
sacrificial concept's still strong. People often assume
unasked burdens and make self-denials no one ex
pects.
At this point, it may be germane to recall an impor
tant word of the late '60s: communication. Communica
tion is a must for interpersonal goings-on. One shouldn t
storm ahead ignoring signals from others. On the other
hand, we can reasonably expect those signals to be
loud enough to be comprehensible.
Communication relates to self-sacrifice in that
knowledge helps set a realistic living style. Knowing
what others expect keeps us from continuing when addi
tional efforts are unncecessary. Don't turn down the
stereo because your roommate might think it’s too loud.
Expect him or her to tell you if it is. It’s not selfish to boost
the power if you’ve never had the intolerable volume
level identified.
Too often people hold themselves back in fear of
going beyond some accepted limit. One can’t be ex
pected to know what all those limits are and it’s fair to
assume people will speak up when they feel infringed
upon. Your responsibility is to listen to them and pay
attention to their needs.
Limits breed resentment and cramp one’s style.
Unneeded limits produce senseless restrictions. The
emphasis should be on allowing as much room for ac
tion as possible.
As the Clamstones would sing:
Take these nails outa my hands;
I swear you’ll get to the promised land
All your sins are forgiven; now let me down.
This act of solidarity on our part now for the GTFs will
be an assurance that we'll get their support the next time
the University wants to raise our tuition.
Colette Postol
Junior, Sociology
Union value overlooked
In reference to Douglas Zuercher’s (the pseudo
architecture major) letter concerning organized labor, we'd
like to remind Doug that it is organized labor that built the
roof over his head, put food on his table and made the
paper upon which he writes his pseudo letters.
Admittedly, unions aren’t perfect; however, they are
the worker’s only means of bargaining with management
on an even basis. Unions have been responsible for more
humane working conditions, however, if Doug had his way
we’d all be working for 75 cents/hour, 12 hours/day, 7
days /week.
As for his insinuation that college professors are more
deserving than Chicago garbagemen, we’d like to quote
Woody Allen’s prophetic statement: “Those who can’t do
— teach.”
This attitude of Doug’s is exactly what big business
would like to see. We suggest he switch majors to man
agement. This way he can spend his “lengthy hours of work
and study" learning how to exploit workers instead of play
ing with crayons and pencils in Lawrence Hall.
Paul Hanson
Junior, Computer Science
Alan Levine
Junior, pre-Journalism
Sexpert ‘fact’ doubted
I would like to point out what I consider to be a serious
error made by your “Sexpert” in her column of Oct. 13,
1978 issue of the ODE. In her discussion of transsex
ualism, she states that the ratio of male-to-female trans
sexuals compared to female-to-male transsexuals in the
U.S. is about 10 to 1.
She then goes on to “explain" this “fact” with a refer
ence to the difficulty of adjusting to the male role in our
society. I consider thie “explanation” to be uncalled for,
since the “fact” is not accurate.
As of 1969, Johns Hopkins University has received
several hundred requests for sex change operations. Of
the first 500, 79 percent were male, 21 percent female, a
ratio of about 4:1. Somewhat later, at Stanford University,
in the period 1967-1974, there were 74 sex change opera
tions, 50 male to female and 24 female to male, a ratio of
about 2:1.
Since it is well known among all concerned that the
successful transformation of the genitals is much easier for
the male-to-female transsexual, relatively few female-to
male transsexuals apply for or undergo this conversion
operation. Estimates of the actual incidence of transsex
ualism in the general population vary somewhat widely
from a 3:1 ratio to a 2:1 ratio (Reference, Green, R. &
Money, J. Eds., “Transsexualism and sex reassignment,"
Johns Hopkins Press, 1969).
A ratio of 10:1 is highly unlikely. There is at pesent no
adequate explanation of transsexualism, and premature
conclusions based on faulty data are not particularly help
ful.
Daniel P. Kimble,
Professor, psychology
Wednesday, October 18,1978