T EDITORIAL
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF:
Steven Asbury
MANAGING EDITOR:
Thom Schoenbom
NIGHT EDITOR:
Ryan Frank
EDITORIAL EDITORS:
Ashley Bach & Brian Diamond
1(11
_y
editorials, letters, commentary and perspective
NEWSROOM:
(541)346-5511
DISPLAY ADVERTISING:
(541)346-3712
BUSINESS OFFICE:
(541)346-5512
CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING:
(541)346-4343
¥
WOMEN
■ OUR OPINION: The US. Army’s
consideration of resegregating its
trainingfacilities by sex could lead to a
separation that strikes to the heart of
our Armed Forces
Since this country was founded, the
U.S. Army has been a primarily
male institution. In fact, women still
aren’t allowed to serve in units that
have a high probability of ground combat.
But women are increasingly playing a larg
er role. Females now make up 14 percent of
the Army’s 495,000 troops and 20 percent
of the force’s new recruits.
To adapt to this influx of women sol
diers, the Army worked to integrate both
sexes in advanced, and later, basic train
ing. By 1994, men and women trained to
gether at all levels. The Navy and Air
Force also implemented similar programs.
However, this seemingly effective sys
tem was threatened last November when
female recruits accused male superiors at a
Maryland army base of sexual assault and
harassment. Soon, accusations appeared
from bases all over the country, and Army
officials were left in a lurch. In a quick re
sponse to the controversy, Army officials
are now backpedaling away from this in
novative integration policy — and fast.
With a nationwide backlash against the
Army and the Armed Forces in general, of
ficials are considering a return to segrega
tion by sex in basic training. This return to
Men and women
soldiers may soon be living
behind different doors
ancient policies is utterly wrong for the
Army, female soldiers and citizens for
many reasons.
As many women have claimed, this re
turn to segregation would return the Army
to a darker, less aware time — when men
and women were separated by their sex
and not their rank or speciality. Officials
in favor of the new policy say it would re
lieve female recruits of stress from sexual
tension early in their careers. A former
Navy Secretary called it a much-needed
“return to normalcy.”
Normalcy? The proposed policy would
only further misunderstanding and alien
ation among male and female recruits.
This may be normal for the Army, but it is
far from right. How can different parties
ever understand each other if they do not
work together?
Perhaps training programs at all corpo
rations and companies should be segregat
ed to avoid “sexual tension.” We wouldn’t
want males and females to actually learn
from each other. Sexual tension, instead,
is a part of life. Male-female relationships
will always have a special dynamic that
other affiliations lack. This is no different
in the Army, despite its unique problems
with this “tension.”
Sexual segregation would also hurt the
Army, not to mention all of us who count
on its services. Basic training is an integral
step in the preparation of soldiers for war.
By separating the sexes, training deviates
from reality. In war-like conditions, true
CHRIS HUTCHINSON/Emerald
segregation cannot be afforded; everyone
is the Army. Men and women work and
count on each other in extreme, life-and
death situations. “Sexual tension” is not
even considered. Segregated training
could leave soldiers ill-prepared to do
their jobs — and in turn, unable to protect
us.
The new policy could also make co
habitation difficult for soldiers when they
are integrated after basic training. Why
separate recruits in the beginning if they
are to be joined together later anyway? The
possible difficulties in adapting to the op
posite sex down the line are too dangerous
to gamble on.
The Army would seem to prove itself
wrong as well. In the early 1990s, the force
conducted a series of research programs
on gender integration. The conclusion, in
short, was that the program significantly
increased the morale of female soldiers
and improved general cohesion and team
work among recruits as well. In other
words, it helped everyone involved.
The accusations of sexual harassment
and assault among Army officials are in
deed serious and should be dealt with ac
cordingly. A solution will not come, how
ever, from rekindling tired, forgotten
policies. Progress was hard enough to
achieve in itself. A regression to the past
could make that progress nearly impossi
ble.
This editorial represents the opinion of
the Emerald editorial board.
LETTERS
Fight for Footnotes
Sending Footnotes packing would be a
sin. Several times a term I find myself at
Footnotes, glad they exist. Without a copy
shop on East 13th Avenue anymore, making
the decision to remove Footnotes from the
EMU and the vicinity of the student popu
lace would be negligence on the part of the
EMU Board of Directors.
I hope that it would also prompt (harsh)
action by much of the student body (im
peachments anyone?). Local copy shops do
more for the average student than the MCC,
the EMU Board of Directors, or anyone else
who desires the space. This is my fourth
2 Oregon Daily Emerald Tuesday, February 11
year on this campus, and I hope you take
this seriously.
Stefan Baratto
Instructor Mathematics
Support women too
Pathetic. That is what the student support
for the Oregon women’s basketball team is.
Saturday against the Stanford Cardinal, the
students were sparse. Why is this? The
women are doing a lot better then the men
as far as the Pac-10 Conference is concerned.
The student section sells out almost every
game for the guys. Why not support the
women, too? Saturday afternoon, when the
I 1SQ7
women took on Stanford, was one of the
most intense games I’ve attended here at the
University.
The Oregon women fought hard to battle
the No. 3 team in the country. They deserve
more support from the same students who
go to the men’s games and go wild for a
team that continues to find a way not to
win.
Who knows, maybe some of that noise the
guys get could have helped the women to
floor the mighty Cardinal. Even if it hadn't,
at least they would have had some support.
Mike Ross
Psychology
“I’m not a political figure, nor do I want
to be one. I come with my heart, and I
want to bring an awareness of people in
distress.”
Princess Diana explaining her role in
calling for a ban on land mines.
“Its hard because there are so many
women out there who go through this,
and now I know how they feel.”
Tonya Harding after reporting an
alleged kidnapping attempt.
“I like and respect people who are truly
liberal and truly conservative. The people
who trouble me are the moderates who
have no real convictions, who are blown
by every passing wind.”
Bill Sizemore on politics, as quoted in
the Feb. 16 The Register-Guard.
“No matter how much money I am
offered, I would never confess to a crime
which I did not commit.”
O.J. Simpson's reaction to Fred
Goldman’s proposal to drop all charges
if he signed a detailed confession
that he is a murderer.
“And suddenly, I’m in the show-me hell
of entertainment.”
Cuba Gooding Jr. on the popularity of
his catch phrase, “Show me the money” j
in the film “Jerry Maguire.”
“To adopt term limits is to play Russian
Roulette with the future."
House Judiciary Committee Chairman
Henry Hyde on the defeat of a term-limit
amendment in the House.
“If we only put out pleasant films,
nothing would really stop, except that
people would stop going to the movies."
Director David Lynch on violence in
films.
“It would be like Paris without the Eiffel
Tower.”
Clog manufacturer Eeike Scheron’s
reflection on a Dutch proposal to ban
clogs in the workplace.
“I don't think it’s worth fighting, and I
don't think we can get out.”
Lyndon B. Johnson on Vietnam, taken
from the recently released tape of his
phone conversations on May 27,1964.
“I study the market comedically.”
Comedian Chris Rock's approach to
the competitive comedy field.
“I am proposing that there is a specific
circuitry in the brain that lights up to
make you feel attracted to and focus on
one mate as opposed to others."
Anthropologist Helen E. Fisher with a
scientifically romantic view of love.
letters policy j
The Oregon Daily Emerald will attempt to
print all letters containing comments on top
ics of interest to the University community.
Letters to the editor must be typed, dou
ble spaced and include the author’s name,
signature, and phone number. The identifi
cation of the writer must be verified when
the letter is submitted. Submissions signed
by more than three people must include at
least one and no more than three names
designated to represent the group.
Letters must be limited to 250 words or
less. The Emerald reserves the right to edit
any letter for length, clarity, grammar and
style.