Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
Email: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online Edition:
www.dailyemerald.com
Oregon Daily Emerald
Commentary
Editor in Chief:
Michael J. Kleckner
Managing Editor
Jessica Richelderfer
Editorial Editor
Pat Payne
Monday, February 24,2003
Three cheers for cheerleaders
Julie
Lauderbaugh
Judge Julie
I never thought I’d be defending cheerleaders.
My history with cheerleaders is a bit preco
cious. In high school, I wrote a little column
about how I thought our cheerleaders were
hardly pepping up our apathetic, Kurt Cobain
mouming crowd.
As a result, I got a curt
letter from a cheerleader’s
mom and an anonymous
letter from a girl who said I
was “obviously jealous of
someone prettier or more
popular” than I was.
It was signed “Pissed
with Pom-Poms.” No
kidding.
But when I got a for
warded e-mail petition
last week from Lezlie
Frye asking me to sign my name in order to
end “repeated hip gyrations and pelvic
thrusts” by University cheerleaders, I felt a lit
tle “De-fense!” was in order.
In the e-mail, Frye said she wanted to or
ganize a group of women to approach the
coach and the cheer team to beg them to “re
place the strip tease style movements” with
more suitable choreography.
I had to wonder which vague strip tease
movements the petition was specifically target
ing. Certainly anyone strolling down the street
probably has “repeated hip gyrations,” just from
the act of walking. And “pelvic thrusts,” in some
circles, such as modem or hip-hop dance, are
part of choreography — a form of art.
However, the point of the petition is to specif
ically get women’s basketball cheerleaders to
stop acting like strippers (read: prostitutes) be
cause their movements are negatively influenc
ing little girls. Well, duh. But influencing them
to do what exactly? I can think of worse things
kids can do than aspire to be cheerleaders —
say drug addicts or murderers?
The very idea is so vague that it’s just plain
silly. Where’s the petition to get the Oregon
Marching Band to stop playing the “stick it in,
stick it in — ugh!” jingle at football games?
Where’s the petition to stop signature collec
tion for other petitions? I don’t have a minute
for Greenpeace, I don’t want to save the
Uzbekistan Geoduck and I’m not interested in
asking the Radical Cheerleaders to use six
inch voices during rallies.
But where do I sign to stop our athletic
coaches from rewarding convicted felons
with football stardom? I’d say this instance
is more pressing than cheerleaders grinding
up a dose of “Elvis Pelvis.”
I don’t want to discount the athleticism of
nude dancers; moving up and down that pole
probably takes some strength training and en
durance. And I’d beg to argue that some of the
characteristics the e-mail praises female bas
ketball stars for possessing can also be found in
the stripping profession: “athleticism, speed,
skills and a willingness to face any challenge.”
That being said, I’d hardly group cheerlead
ers in the same category as strippers. After all,
cheerleaders don’t take their clothes off, they
aren’t taking money from eager onlookers and
they’re participating in an actual sport.
If Frye and her supporters were so concerned
Peter Utsey Emerald
with the impressionable minds of youngsters
watching the halftime show, perhaps they would
fare better talking to litde girls about how they
think the cheerleaders are objectifying their bod
ies and why that’s bad.
Tell them when they grow up, they don’t
have to bump and grind to get attention. Be
sides, if kids don’t see booty shaking at bas
ketball games, they’ll find it on MTV, VH1 or
Fox. Opening the dialogue will do more for
young girls than sheltering them from the
subject altogether.
Contact the columnist
atjulielauderbaugh@dailyemerald.com.
Her views do not necessarily represent those
of the Emerald.
Editor's note: The following is the text of the resolution
prepared for Friday's University Assembly meeting.
A Resolution Against Invasion of Iraq
Whereas the United States (US) government has made
dear preparation to take military action against Iraq;
Whereas through such a war University of Oregon
(UO) faculty, staff and students will have their careers,
work and education interrupted and lives put in jeop
ardy;
Whereas innocent Iraqi civilians, who have suffered
enormously under the rule of Saddam Hussein and
UN sanctions, will be injured and killed;
Whereas the high cost of this war may further deepen
the US economic crisis which continues to damage the
UO's fiscal condition;
Whereas a war with Iraq would threaten to further
destabilize the Middle East, possibly leading to wider
regional war and increased support for groups dedi
cated to terrorism, endangering the citizens of the US
including members of the UO community as they per
form their work both within and outside the US;
Whereas Iraq has not been proven, through disclosed
documents, to have committed acts of aggression
against the US that might justify a response of war;
Whereas the US government has presented no credi
ble evidence that Iraq has intentions of harming the
citizens of this country or that Iraq presents a threat to
the US;
Whereas diplomatic solutions do not appear to have
been exhausted, and therefore the fundamental intel
lectual responsibility of the US leadership to provide
justification of war showing proof that all other means
have failed has not been satisfied;
Whereas the vast majority of the international commu
nity hastiot lent its support for war against Iraq;
Whereas the United Nations (UN) Security Council
unanimously adopted Resolution 1441 enforcing the
return of weapons inspectors to Iraq where it asserts
that the Security Council alone has the authority to de
termine what action to take regarding current or fu
ture Iraqi violations of their resolutions (Article 14);
Whereas the UN Charter declares unequivocally in Ar
ticles 41 and 42 that the UN Security Council alone has
the power to authorize the use of military force against
any nation in noncompliance of its resolutions;
Whereas a preemptive war waged by our government
without UN authorization would be in clear violation
of the UN Charter;
Whereas the UN Charter was entered into as a treaty
with necessary congressional approval with the U.N.
Participation Act of 1945;
Whereas Article VI of the US Constitution states that
"ail Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the
Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme
Law of the Land", so that any act that violates the UN
Charter will also be in direct violation of the Constitu
tion of the United States of America;
Be it resolved that the University of Oregon opposes
the US engagement in war in Iraq at this time.
Frohnmayer should not veto resolution
Guest commentary
Twin commentaries last week, both unso
licited, set the stage for the Emerald’s gener
ous offer of space for others to react to this
week’s University Assembly to deal with pre
emptive war on Iraq. Thpy were valuable be
cause they were at odds with each other.
One, by a student, Todd Pittman, suggested
why so many faculty members believe a fail
ure to publicly oppose the war indicates gen
eral support for what he feels is an immoral
venture. The other, by ah off-campus reader
(like myself), Scott Austin, claims the Pittman
approach reflects an “inherently evil and un
trustworthy” aspect of democracy.
However Austin might describe it, that
democracy is based on the will of the people,
even when that will chooses actions that may
be immoral or unjust. If there were a national
referendum on the Iraq war issue, I suspect the
vote today still might favor it, although by a
smaller and smaller matgin each day. As a citi
zen, I’d have to accept that decision, no matter
how much I oppose it. That does not mean I’d
have to accept it quietly. It also does not mean
our faculty must be restricted to silence.
At the heart of democracy is the opportunity
for dialogue. Discussions within the University
Assembly represent that opportunity, even if
the University president chooses to veto its de
cision, as University President Dave Frohnmay
er has indicated he may feel impelled to do.
The president’s interpretation of state guide
lines parallels a growing inhibition of dialogue
in broader society. It comes from a system of
news reporting that increasingly reflects the
views of but a tiny segment of the nation: owners
of the press and of radio and TV stations. Like
Austin’s occasional “untrustworthy” aspect of
democracy, freedom of the press must be pro
tected, even though it can be freedom for only
the owners of the press to push their sometimes
extremist views. As for radio and TV—licensed
and regulated by the federal government in the
public interest — the number of owners be
comes smaller and wealthier as the Federal
Communications Commission trashes its man
date, destroying regulations that once prevent
ed monolithic broadcast operations.
So public dialogue is hurting in a nation
once dedicated to open exchange of ideas. The
only element preventing a complete takeover
has been growing use of the Internet. Comput
er-generated exchanges by citizens have built
a worldwide constituency for the idea of free
dom of expression. Its most visible achieve
ment was the motivating by e-mail of a global
response by many millions who demonstrated
against the war on Feb. 15.
Were the demonstrators right, or were they
wrong? That’s for the public to decide. But
they did have the chance to express them
selves on an issue that, universally, strikes
deeper than any since the Vietnam War.
That’s what the University and its assembly
deserve to have. If the vote is in behalf of a res
olution against war, it will be an expression—
not of the University—but of a majority of the
voting faculty. That is meaningful, veto or not.
A university president who is former state at
torney general and one-time dean of the law
school should be respected for his ability to
interpret state regulations. He should not have
the power to silence the voice of the majority.
George Beres is a former University sports
information director, editor of Inside Oregon and
manager of the University Speakers Bureau. He is
retired and is a writer.
War threatens University's truth-seeking mission
Guest commentary
The University Assembly, composed of more
than 2,000 officers of instruction, officers of ad
ministration and librarians, will meet at 3 p.m.
on Friday to debate and vote on a resolution op
posing the war in Iraq.
University President Dave Frohnmayer
called this meeting because a petition circu
lated by Concerned Faculty for Peace and Jus
tice was signed by more than 540 members of
the University Voting Faculty. The large num
ber of signatories qualified to call for the meet
ing (more than 33 percent of the Voting Facul
ty) endows this Assembly with authority to
enact legislation, distinguishing it from the As
sembly that met on Jan. 31,2003, which was
limited to discussion.
In order that that any actions taken at the
meeting represent the views of the University’s
most democratic legislative body, it is impor
tant that all members of the Assembly attend.
This historic and unprecedented meeting
of the Assembly is open to all members of the
University community and the public. Con
cerned Faculty expects an attendance in
keeping with the extreme importance of the
war issue to the University, to the people of
Eugene and to the nation.
The resolution, which was supported by pe
titioners’ signatures, is almost identical to the
one adopted by the Faculty Senate of Oregon
State University on Jan. 10. If events overtake
some aspects of the resolution, it may be ap
propriately amended at the Assembly meeting.
Concerned Faculty for Peace and Justice rec
ognize that the mission of the University of Ore
gon is likely to be dangerously compromised by
the war—war is the enemy of the constitution
al freedoms of speech, assembly and associa
tion, without which the University’s truth-seek
ing mission cannot be fulfilled.
Moreover, the increase in military spending
resulting from the war will reduce the resources
available to our civil society, with further dev
astating effects on the ability of the University
and other educational institutions to function.
These truths have been recognized not only
by Oregon State University but also by the
University of Montana, University of Wiscon
sin and numerous city councils and profes
sional organizations throughout America. The
signatures collected by Concerned Faculty for
Peace and Justice give the University of Ore
gon an opportunity to add its voice to the ever
growing chorus.
Let the University speak and be heard!
This guest commentary was submitted by
Associate Professor Daniel Pope and Project
Coordinator Bo Adan on behalf of Concerned
Faculty for Peace and Justice.