Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online: www.dailyemerald.com
Monday, October 6, 2003
Oregon Daily Emerald
COMMENTARY
Editor in Chief:
Brad Schmidt
Managing Editor
Jan Tobias Montry
Editorial Editor:
Travis Willse
EDITORIAL
The Captain
is the choice
for California
Attention Californians: While nobody on the Emerald Edi
torial Board can vote in your state (and hence in Tuesday's re
call election), we still find merit in weighing in on which of
the (many) clowns is qualified to mn your three-ring circus.
Since announcing his campaign, Ah-nold has received a
crash course in American politics: As an actor, you can have
your way with barnyard animals and nobody cares. But as a
politician, even that gnat you squashed last Saturday will
haunt you on the front of the New York Post. Soon after,
aliens will abduct your wife and have her love child aboard
their starships, which is sure to be reported on the cover of
the Weekly World News.
Just days after polls said Ah-nold would likely become
the next leader to drive California further into the
ground, women came out of the woodwork to accuse
him of "groping" and "humiliating" them. Just think: If
he's elected, he'll be guilty of groping and humiliating
the state of California, too.
But never fear, the woman-ator is sure to bounce back —
even with allegations that he's sexually harassed everybody be
tween California and the lush, rolling fields of Oz. And hey,
at least his wife, Maria Shriver, went on C-SPAN to plug his
keen ability to work with children, which will surely come in
handy when he starts working with the California Legislature
Cruz Bustamante's campaign — just as bizarre as Ah
nold's ingenious "get sued* strategy — is doomed for fail
ure. Mis platform: Don't vote for me! Gee that's effective
Arianna Huffington tried it too, but she couldn't take the
heat of trying to lose; she dropped out in late September.
As Fox has promised, we'll all learn in their latest traves
ty that "Skin" pornos and politics don't mix. But one
would think the California recall election was the best
thing to happen to Larry Flynt — who is also running for
governor — since the evolution of sex organs. We fear,
however, that Flynt would probably rule the land with all
the brilliance of a dim lightbulb. One possible perk: wild
orgies inside the governor's mansion. As America has al
ready learned several times, sex is good for the economy.
Speaking of bodily ftmctions, has anybody seen Gray
Davis make any kind of facial expression? We know that
Botox is popular in The Golden State, but this is ridiculous.
Happy, sad, frustrated, excited, mortally wounded — it's
all a blank stare to the "Weekend at Bemie's"-like Davis!
But wait, let's not forget Oregon's own contribution to The
Recall. Brooke Adams, a 25-year-old Independent and for
mer student of the University's School of Journalism and
Communication, is running on the ever-popular "I'm-way
better-looking-than-Arianna Huffington" platform. Oh, did
we mention she is a former Emerald freelancer? Said Adams
on her Web site (http://www.brookeforgovemor.com): "Tak
ing bold action, I'll rollback car taxes, fix worker's compensa
tion, encourage business investment, reduce spending and
set our state on the right course' Go get 'em, Brooke!
Beyond all the "traditional" candidates and somewhere
in the brouhaha of California politics, one up-and-comer
appeared, and we're positive he'll be the best for California:
Captain Morgan.
The Captain, if you don't already know, is responsible
for the drunken debauchery of millions, Ah-nold proba
bly included. He can kill the pain, lower taxes and pro
long the unhindered Californian breeding capacity —
and that's good enough for us.
Of course you have to be of legal drinking
age to enter the Web site (http://www.californians4cap
tainmorgan.org), but no word yet on whether you have to
be 21 to vote for him.
So if you're registered, vote Captain Morgan for Califor
nia governor. We'll drink to that!
EDITORIAL POLICY
This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald
editorial board. Responses can be sent to letters
@dailyemerald.com. Letters to the editor and guest
commentaries are encouraged. Letters are limited
to 250 words and guest commentaries to 550 words.
Authors are limited to one submission per calendar
month. Submission must include phone number and
address for verification. The Emerald reserves the right
to edit for space, grammar and style.
Evolving terminology
Don t tell anyone — and I'll deny it if
you ask me — but I confess that I like be
ing a Duck. Even before Oregon stomped
Michigan, I would occasionally tell people
of the pride I take in my Duckdom. And,
while I may occasionally get a quizzical
look, no one flinches, and no one is of
fended. It would seem that being a Duck
is harmless.
But what if we weren't Ducks?
Certainly there are lots of other options.
Were they not already taken, we could be
nasty and tenacious Wolverines; we could
be fierce Cougars; we could be militant
Trojans. Or, we could be Redskins.
Notice the lack of adjectives. What do
you associate with the term Redskin? Per
sonally, I don't make any particular asso
ciations with the term.
If asked to define it, I'd say it is syn
onymous with American Indian and Na
tive American. If no one told me other
wise, I'd have no clue that the term
Redskin is offensive to many — particu
larly if they happen to be of Native
American heritage.
If asked to suggest the origin of the term,
I'd guess that the Europeans who took over
this country coined the term in reference to
the tans (or sunburns) sported by the folks
who were here first. That skin would be sin
gled out as an identifying trait isn't surpris
ing, nor is it necessarily an indication of in
herent racism. Skin was one area where the
differing attributes of the two cultures would
be obvious. After all, one culture was not ad
verse to wearing abbreviated outfits and al
lowing nature to have her way with their
melanin. The other wore 57 layers of cloth
ing (give or take a few) and dusted the few
inches of visible skin with powdered lead to
eradicate any trace of said melanin.
Makes sense, right? Wrong.
I've been informed that the term Redskin
originally referred to the use by some Native
Americans of vermilion paint on their faces.
I've also been informed that whatever the
origin, the term went from being a descrip
tive noun to a value-laden racial epithet.
So, if something was an epithet, does that
mean that it must always be an epithet?
Language is a funny thing; it evolves. Once
upon a time, our Anglo-Saxon ancestors
used words like "fuck" and "shit" without
blushing. Why? Because they weren't consid
ered profane Before they moved into the
dreaded four-letter-word category, they were
just words used to describe happenings in
Jessica Cole-Hodgkinson
Huh? What? Really.
the world. Mark Twain freely sprinkled "nig
ger" throughout Huckleberry Finn without
intending it to pass judgment on anyone's
worth as a person. Even more recently—be
fore Gloria Steinem — a man could call a
woman he wasn't dating "honey" or "dear"
without incurring a dirty look or a lawsuit.
Times change. Though "fuck" is still ver
boten in most polite situations, South Park
had an entire episode devoted to seeing
how many times they could say "shit";
"nigger" is not a word any thoughtful per
son would casually toss around; and the
man who calls me "honey" had better be
older than seventy or someone whose
hand I allow on my knee.
So, what brought all this to mind? Last
week, a federal district court in Washington,
D.C. determined that there wasn't enough
evidence to establish that "Redskin'' was dis
paraging to Native Americans. Now, back in
1999, the Washington football franchise us
ing the name had their trademark protec
tion revoked by a three-judge panel of the
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board who de
termined that "Redskin' violated the provi
sion of the Lanham Act prohibiting the pro
tection of trademarks that are "disparaging
scandalous, contemptuous or disreputable"
The ruling last week means that the football
franchise will to have their exclusive rights to
the name protected.
As I mentioned, I find the word "Red
skin" neutral. 1 don't associate it with any
particular positive or negative values. I
learned long ago; however, that the rest of
the world and I don't always see eye to eye.
For some folks out there, when they hear
that word, they associate it with bigotry
and the corresponding hurt, angry and
frustrated feelings.
At the root of all the debate about team
names and mascots is a fundamental
question: Who should bear the burden of
changing their behavior? Should those
who are sensitive to the use of a particular
term realize that times change and a cen
turies-old epithet just hasn't got the punch
it used to have, or should those inclined to
use said epithet and call it harmless put
some effort into being more sensitive to
the feelings of those around them?
I dunno either. I'm just glad I'm a Duck.
Contact the columnist
at jessicacolehodgkinson@dailyemerald.com.
Her opinions do not necessarily represent
those of the Emerald.
ONLINE POLL
Each week, the Emerald publishes
the previous week's poll results and
the coming week’s poll question.
Visit www.dailyemerald.com to vote.
Last question: Where do you get your
textbooks?
Results: 63 votes.
Alternate bookstores: 46 percent
or 29 votes.
The University Bookstore: 38.1 percent
or 24 votes.
I buy them online: 9.5 percent
or six votes.
Don’t buy... don’t read: 4.8 percent
or three votes.
Borrow from friends or the library: 1.6
percent or one vote.
This week: Do you approve of the new
sports arena location at East 18th
Avenue and University Street?
Choices: Yes! It’s the perfect location;
No — Glenwood or Springfield would
have been best; No - Next to Autzen
Stadium would have been best; No -
The new Eugene courthouse location
would have been best; No - The
Williams’ Bakery location would have
been best; None of the above - Things
are fine without a new arena.