Daily Nebraskan
Tuesday, November 16, 1982
ditoria
Page 4
Vets need more
than granite walls
to block nightmare
The Vietnam Veterans Memorial is officially dedicated.
The memorial, two gleaming black granite walls
inscribed with the names of the 57,939 Americans who
did not return home, was dedicated Saturday after
thousands of Vietnam vets paraded triumphantly down
Constitution Avenue in Washington, D.C.
For many of the veterans, it was a long-awaited
welcome home. They had come home not to ticker-tape
parades but to embarrassed silence or taunts of "baby
killer." It x was as if by not talking about the war,
Americans could pretend it had never happened.
The veterans found in Saturday's parade what they had
been denied - the ceremonial gratitude for their service.
The dedication was a time of both joy and sorrow,
triumph and tears. Some of the former soldiers wept
openly as they found comfort in a buddy's embrace.
People at the memorial searched silently for the name
of a fallen friend, a commander, a husband, a father.
Flowers and flags, burning candles and photographs
were left at the base of the monument in tribute to those
who died.
Although the dedication is finished, the legacy of
Vietnam remains. The country still has the responsibility
to help those who came home.
Psychiatrists have found a condition they call "post
traumatic stress disorder" in many Vietman vets. The
condition is characterized by nightmares, flashbacks,
rages, panics and a sense of guilt. The smell of diesel
fuel or the "pop" of firecrackers is enough to send some
vets back in their minds to the jungles of 'Nam.
John Wilson, a psychologist who has studied more than
500 cases of post-traumatic stress, believes the occurrence
of these symptoms among Vietnam veterans will increase,
peaking in 1990.
Veterans also have expressed concern about the effects
of the defoliant Agent Orange, an herbicide sprayed on
jungles and farmland to destroy the enemy's cover. Agent
Orange has been said to be the cause of disorders ranging
from acne to headaches, birth defects in veterans' children
to cancer. The Veterans Administration says more
research is needed before it can link Agent Orange to any
disorder except choracne, a skin condition.
At an informal forum Friday in Washington, Glenn
Sinclair, a former Marine corporal, squared off against the
VA official in charge of research into Agent Orange.
Sinclair told the VA's Dr. Barclay Shepard that all five
of his children were born with birth defects and attributed
the defects to his being exposed to the toxic herbicide.
Shepard said research may produce answers in three or
four years.
But veterans with health problems, both physical and
mental, need help now. Studies and research are neces
sary, but telling veterans to wait for three or four years
does little to help them while they wait. Why not help
them while the studies are being conducted instead of
waiting until they are finished?
This is not to imply that all Vietnam veterans are
scarred forever by the experience. Many veterans came
home strengthened, not weakened. But providing treat
ment at VA hospitals and providing counseling centers to
those who need them would help pay back in part the
debt Americans have to those who served.
A monument to honor the 2.7 million who served in
Vietnam is a needed memorial, but it does not mean
Americans now can relax, thinking the war is finally
over. For some, it will never be.
Lori Siewert
"f i ni K-v -vr
62 Dptona Btfth taningSurnsI
"Now that 8 states have voted for a nuclear freeze, It's time for us to
vote for a Russian nuclear freeze!" wcs
Churches take stand in battle
Before the 1982 elections were decided, two of the
nation's major mainline church denominations took to
the ramparts and fired opening volleys in what likely will
be the major battle in the 1984 electoral wars.
In New Orleans in September, the Episcopal Church's
House of Bishops issued a pastoral letter appealing in
effect for unilateral nuclear disarmament by the United
States. It terms our "undiminished production and
deployment of nuclear weapons" and "the squandering"
of our resources on them as "immoral and unjust." It
terms the "American fever to match the Soviet Union
weapon for weapon" as "damaging the personality struct
ure of a whole generation."
Ross Mackenzie
A month later a five-man committee of Catholic
bishops issued a draft letter exhibiting an equally massive
unconcern about the Soviet Union and giving only the
most grudging nod to the concept of deterrence. The
National Conference of Catholic Bishops is scheduled to
debate the letter this week in Washington and to vote
next spring on whether it should be adopted as the basis
for the American church's teachings on nuclear war.
The Catholic letter says, for instances "We do not
perceive any situation in which the deliberate initiation of
nuclear warfare, on however restricted a scale, can be
morally justified," and "No Christian can rightfully carry
out orders or policies deliberately aimed at killing non
combatants." Perhaps because the American Catholic Hock (51
million and rising) is about 20 times bigger than the Lpis
copal flock (2.7 million and declining), the Catholic
letter elicited the bigger response - notably from the
Reagan administration. Comrade Leonid earlier made
some timely statements pledging to accelerate the pace
of Soviet nuclear armaments and routinely deploring
the "imperialistic adventurism" of American "hotheads."
About these letters, let us note first the nation's
long tradition of churchmen making statements on politi
cal questions a tradition three centuries long. If the
churchmen seek to initiate a debate on nuclear weapons,
then very well. But let them not be conceded the high
moral ground without a fight.
As with opposition to the death penalty, pacifism
inherently contains no greater degree of morality than
anti-pacifism does. These mainline churchmen should be
accorded no more standing on questions of nuclear
policy - no more moral authority - than is accorded
Jerry Falwell.
And as the debate proceeds, let a number of points be
kept in mind:
- The reality of the Soviet Union. The United States
is rebuilding its defenses in response to the Kremlin's
persistence in the most staggering military buildup that
history has seen. To deny the Soviet reality is to deny the
need for deterrence; to accept the one is to accept the
other.
The morality of self-defense and the morality of
defending not merely life (which can be lived in slavery)
but life lived in liberty.
The institutional pacifism of the mainline clergy,
(iiven the recent radicaliation within many church
hierarchies, these letters are thoroughly predictable.
Inasmuch as they deal with matters clearly beyond
the clergy's experitise. they also are thoroughly wrong.
So let the debate the battle begin. It likely will be
decided in the presidentila election of 1984.
(c) 1982, Tribune Co. Syndicate, Inc.
Big-busted woman flattered by ogling, whistling
Last week, I wrote about a woman who
for 14 of her 28 years had attracted
whistles, catcalls, and lewd comments from
men because she was large-busted.
Karen Downs got fed up with that kind
Roger Simon
of treatment and had, in three cases, gotten
men punished for what they said.
Downs admitted that other women
might think she was nuts. She was right.
The woman in today's column is similar
to Downs, except for one big difference:
She thinks such comments are flattering.
She gave me her name but asked me not
to use it. She said her husband would kill
her if he found out she was talking about
such things. She is 27.
"Right off the bat, you can say I look
like the woman you wrote about," she
said.
Large busted? I said.
"Yeah, but 1 can't say that out loud be
cause I'm calling from the office."
How old were you when men on the
street first began making comments to
you? I asked.
"Old enough to know what I was doing
to them," she said.
And such comments aren't an insult?
"Positively not," she said. "I love it.
When men make remarks to me, I don't
consider it catcalls or being rude."
But Karen Downs said men shouted
things like "Get a load of those knockers!"
Isn't that rude? I asked.
"It's a compliment," she said. "It's a
fact of life. It happens to everybody. And
those women it doesn't happen to, they
wish it happened to them."
But how about when creeps say it to
you, total strangers, construction workers,
people like that.
"Hey, construction workers are the best
ones," she said. "There is real scum out
there, real creeps out there who make
comments. Construction workers are the
admirable ones."
But how about when they make really
obscene remarks or shout invitations to
have sex?
"I say: 'Drop dead,' " she said. "And I
don't walk on that street anymore."
And have you always handled men this
way?
"I should say right here that my father
is a general contractor, and so I grew up
around construction workers. My mother
has the same physique and personality I do
and so I learned how to deal with it from
her."
But those construction workers
wouldn't have made such comments to the
boss' wife, your mother, would they?
"Of course they would," she said. "And
they did. My mother knew how to deal
with it. And so do I."
But these men who make comments to
you, they don't know if you're intelligent
or a dope or anything about you. All they
know is that you have a body.
"That's right, and it flatters me," she
said. "It's not derogatory or catcalling. If a
guy whistles at you, you smile at him. It
makes the guy feel good. It makes you feel
good. And next time, you know what he
does? He says 'Good morning.' "
Do you ever talk to these guys after the
initial whistle or comment?
She laughed. "Don't go into a lot of
detail on this part, OK? Because that is
exactly how I met my husband," she said.
He ogled you on the street? And you
married him?
Continued on Page 5
