LET TERS
PRIVILEGE & RESPONSIBILITY
SCHOLARSHIPS RANT
Jim Stauffer [“Biological Disaster”
letter, 6/5] offers a valuable male viewpoint
on the issue of sexual miscommunication
and victimization. I agree with his call
for education of young people with a goal
of helping them form respectful sexual
relationships. But his criticism of me
comes across as self-defensive.
As a white woman, I have a
responsibility to work to end oppressive
cultural practices that give me unasked-for
privilege at the expense of people of color.
As I am the recipient of institutionalized
power in this dynamic, I am also given the
power to make this benefi cial change.
On the other hand, as a woman (on
the victim end of sexism), I can speak
up about how this oppressive institution
affects me and my sisters, but the men
hold the responsibility for making the
change. I know many men who accept this
responsibility and work on all fronts to end
the victimization of women — including
my husband.
Let’s leave the blame and defensiveness
behind. We can call it like it is, place
responsibility where it belongs and work
together to make this a better world for
ourselves and our children.
Kara Huntermoon
Eugene
It’s hard to imagine a more pompous
rant than Christopher Eidemiller’s
Viewpoint [6/5] directed at the UO athletic
department because it offers scholarships
to out-of-state athletes.
For your information Mr. Eidemiller,
the money for those scholarships comes
from ticket sales to ball games and private
donations, and no one is going to pony up
the big bucks to watch a bunch of third-
string athletes play simply because they
are all Oregonians. Furthermore, with the
possible exception of co-ed softball, the
point of any game from chess to soccer
is to win — which is why every school in
the country offers scholarships to the best
athletes they can fi nd, regardless of where
they live.
And there’s something else. Your
attitude toward 18-year-old kids from
out of state isn’t all that different from
the attitude others have toward illegal
immigrants. Goddamn foreigners! I don’t
want them in my community. American
jobs for Americans, that’s what I say.
Oregon scholarships for Oregonians, that’s
what I say. Harrumph!
Oh, and one more thing. You tell us
that you will be boycotting certain teams
at the UO because they offer scholarships
to out-of-staters. FYI sir, all 18 UO athletic
programs offer scholarships to out-of-
staters. And fi nally, do you really think
anyone cares if you boycott? Jeez, guy!
Chuck Hale
Eugene
TWO-EYE-PATCH SOLUTION
Now under way on the steep slopes of
a watershed and/or scenic byway near you
is the fi rst of fi ve years of “fuel reduction”
logging brought to you, by of all things,
The Healthy Forests Restoration Act. The
obvious fi rst casualty, other than the truth
in this legislation, is the intact forest and its
soil- and water-holding capabilities.
All the 60- to 100-year-old Douglas fi r
second-growth trees along the Aufderheide
scenic byway will be gone when Face Thin
Timber Sale (TS) is complete. The third
and forth casualties are the cool shade
and clean water of the North Fork of the
Middle Fork of the Willamette River,
fl owing fresh, cool and clear from Waldo
Lake.
How Oregon and the agencies of
jurisdiction continue logging without
thought to soil and water after having
contributed to the extinction of the North
American temperate rainforest is easy. It
only required 165 years of “reductionism”
and
“compartmentalization,”
which
compare favorably with our country’s
short history of other “double blind” tested
grand delusions.
Hundreds of millions of board feet of
the oldest, healthiest trees in Oregon’s
watersheds and scenic byways are going
to be stumps by 2018 under the Healthy
Forest Restoration Act.
Are we “all in” for the “two-eye-patch
solution” of chainsawing our way to “what
nature can sustainably provide”? Hello?
Anyone home?
P.S.: Credit to British comedian
Eddie Izzard for unveiling the challenge
of looking cool while wearing two eye
patches.
Dick Shearer
Westfi r
MAKE A SAFER NATION
The tragic shooting in Troutdale,
Ore., is at least the fourth mass shooting in
4
June 19, 2014 • eugeneweekly.com
our nation in the last few weeks, the third
involving a school. Seventy-four school
shootings have now taken place in the
approximately 18 months since the Dec.
14, 2012, Newtown, Conn., shooting.
While the circumstances of the
senseless attack at Reynolds High School
remain under investigation, the fact is that
we lose another 86 people to bullets on an
average day and there are real things we
can do to prevent most of these tragedies
— from passing commonsense legislation
to inspiring safer attitudes and behaviors
around guns. It is imperative that we come
together as a nation to make our voices
heard above the money and infl uence of
the corporate gun lobby to make this the
safer nation every sane American wants it
to be.
Curtis Taylor
Eugene
DEAL WITH THE CAUSES
Having gone through the tragedy at
Thurston High School in 1998, I understand
what UC Santa Barbara is going through.
But even I think Ken Barnhart’s letter in
the June 5 issue is misguided. Guns are
simply tools. While I am not a gun person,
nor will I ever own one, even I know that
they simply are items of convenience for
mass shooters. If not with guns, people
like Elliot Rodger, Kip Kinkle and the
assailant that attacked Seattle Pacifi c last
week would fi nd other ways to harm or kill
people.
But is a single death any less tragic than
a mass homicide? Instead of focusing on
the tools by which these people commit
murder, why not address the reason why
these people feel that there is no other
response left but to kill? Why not address
the mindset of a killer instead of an
inanimate object? If a cop picks up a gun,
it’s a tool. If someone like Kinkle picks it
up, it’s a weapon.
How many more mass shootings must
take place before an honest, hard look is
taken at the state of the mental health in
this country? It’s like with rape: Instead of
reaction, be proactive and correct the belief
that it is OK to rape women. Whereas
with incidents like Paducah, Columbine,
Thurston, UCSB, Virginia Tech and Seattle
Pacifi c: Get rid of the idea that getting
help is a taboo. Show these teens/kids that
murder is not the answer, by whatever
means.
James Ready
Springfi eld
EWEB ‘WHAT IF’
First was last Sunday’s R-G editorial
about four possible developers for the
EWEB riverfront property with a great
bird’s-eye view of the site — decision
time soon? Then the announcement that
there couldn’t be a Eugene Celebration
— Eugene hasn’t enough underutilized
property any more!? But here’s the EWEB
riverfront, newly underutilized property,
20-plus acres of it! Look at that picture!
Why not invite the community down to the
river and have the Eugene Celebration on
the EWEB land?
It’s been recently tidied, some
structures that didn’t seem to fi t the
vision have been removed and frankly,
we, the current owners of that riverfront,
are about to be given perhaps our last
opportunity to decide who will own it (us
or the developer), and how we’d like it to
develop. Up till now, most Eugeneans have
been unable to even set foot on this historic
bit of Eugene’s industrial past save for the
narrow bike path on the edge of the river
bank, the Steam Plant hidden behind the
ivy-clad fence.
Reconfi gure the fencing to support
whatever control is needed and include
some well-considered temporary lighting.
Give the community the opportunity to
better understand what’s at stake here when
it’s deciding time, and to walk around the
steam plant, the operations barrel-roofed
warehouse, the meter shop and feel the
river’s presence. We could try laying
out some street locations, set up some
proposal displays from the four developers
at strategic locations, suggesting “What if
...?”
Tom Snyder
Eugene
STANDING FOR PRINCIPLES
Regarding my Viewpoint June 5
discussing the state of athletic affairs at
UO, and a letter from John Carlson June
12 in response: My article on recruitment
of out-of-state athletes was somewhat of
a “rant,” but I am still trying to come to
terms with my alma mater selling out and
going pro. My standpoint is certainly not
“self-serving.” I am essentially making
a personal sacrifi ce by withdrawing my
support for UO athletics in order to make
a stand. I am advocating for academics to
come fi rst, with sports to be a supplement to
formal education, and making my position
known for public social commentary.
I realize our state has only one
professional sports team and that citizens
without a profound social perspective
(which comes only from a university
degree completed in its entirety) need
something greater than themselves to fi ll
their free time and detail their identity. But,
for those of us who have been formally
educated in the fi ner points of humanity,
we are concerned with the collective well-
being of our local community more than
our own self-centered needs. We stand up
for our principles and applaud academic
accomplishment; in contrast to spectators
like Mr. Carlson, who probably prefer to
stand for touchdowns and applaud only
three-pointers.
In order to further our understanding of
this matter and to protect the educational
rights of our local students, I challenge
EW to fulfi ll its social commitment by
producing the facts in the case rather than
just promoting the opinions of its readers.
I request that the editors at EW do the
necessary research in order to determine
university policy, and print the actual