Monday, Dcccrr.b-r 5, 1C33
Psgo 4
Dtily Ncbrsskan
'V'o A
O
- v
1
.
.V'.
. 1 ... ,
(
.-.-4 .
.V "
Thank men behind tlie Huslcers
For Nebraska football fans, last week
end was a time for celebrating a long
list of accomplishments.
Friday, more than 3,000 people
gathered at Pershing Auditorium to
honor two Nebraska coaches Bob
Devaney and Tom Osborne who
each have more than 100 victories to -their
name.
Saturday, to no one's surprise, Husk
er I-back Mike Rozier was named the
winner of college football's most presti
gious award, the Heisman Trophy.
The accomplishments of the three
men honored during the weekend are
phenomenal. They go beyond the world
of sports and are a source of pride for
many Nebraskans. .
Rozier's record as a Cornhusker is
staggering. In three years, he has
broken countless school, conference
and national records. He has helped
lead the team to three straight confer
ence championships and, this year,
has played a large role in the team's
12-0 record and No. 1 ranking.
Rozier has had a season most play
ers can only dream about, but through
it all he has maintained his poise and
kept things in perspective.
Even more impressive is the impact
these two coaches have had on their
players. Former wingback Johnny Rod
gers, also a Heisman Trophy winner,
had some run-ins with the law in the
early part of his career.
But Devaney did not succumb to
public pressure to release him from
the team. Rodgers, who now is a success
ful publisher in San Diego, said being
able to remain on the team probably
set his life straight
Osborne, too, has gained a nation
wide reputation for much more than
his winning football teams. He is known
for his integrity and honesty, attributes
that seem to be a rarity in sports these
days.'' '"
Nebraska football fans have a lot to
be thankful for. Like it or not, the
Cornhuskers are the state's biggest
source of pride. But without men like
Mike Rozier, Bob Devaney and Tom
Osborne, you can bet the record over
theJast 22 years wouldn't be nearly as
impressive.
GO? abando
onD
emocratic
.1
But t the r.r.3 t;r:?,,0V h about
to support a D:r..vr;rr:t!a candidate.
Indeed, when tzlizd iJ hr.d to
choose which mzs mere Important for
women, dcf:-:-t;r l:c;ir.:.l Il:c-n or
passing the EHA, Gc'.ir;.lth replied,
"There's littb qucctbn b my rind that
it's more important to (!::, :! Ronald
- & Ellen
X I Goodmnn
Judy Goldsmith isnt keen on the
suggestion that NOW may be turning
into N0DV: The National Organization
for Democratic Women. Equal rights b
the sort of idealistic all-American no
tion that is supposed to be above party
labels.
Tint thi hpad of the largest
woman's rights organization in the Rern. I doutt tlt the EIIAcsn pass
countryGoldsmith is at the center of while he's predicr.t. It wodd take a
nniiHrni mows destined to bitetl loni time to repair the domsr.e he
we had to cheese cne cf the two, I
would choose the dcfr.at of Ronald
Reagan. Tlie ERA can wdt one more
year."
So the question b whether NOW has
already turned Into NODW. Are
women's rights advocates la the 1934
Democratic beg? From what I can see,
the answer is a qualified "yea."
But before we wring cur hand3 wor
rying about the evils of turning
equality into a partisan Issue, take a
moment of calm. If women's rights
have become basically a one-party is
sue, it's because the other party has
turned them down.
Consider the ERA for a moment. It
would be lovely if the ERA crossed
party lines in a great surge of justice. It
began life supported by Republicans.
But in 1 930, the Republicans took it off
the platform. In the recent House vote,
85 percent of the Democrats were for
the amendment while two-thirds of
the Republicans were against it.
Then there is the No. 1 Republican,
Ronald Reagan, who has personally
opened a gsnder ip the size of a
canyon. As Goldsmith concludes, "It
would be naive to pretend that there is
genuine bipartisan support for wo
men's issues. Are there Republicans
who support women? Of course.
It is one thing to use party politics to
support women's issues and quite
another to use the issues for party
politics. We dont kno.v whether the
House ERA vote would have changed if
O'Neill had played the rules diTTerenth.
But we do know that the amendment
would never have left Congress in one
piece. -
It would be nice to be wooed by
competing suitors. It would be nice if
both parties were dueling for the
honor of equality. But the reality is
that women haven't left the Re
publican Party, the Republican Party
has left women. It's up to the GOP to
come baclv
18S3, T&e Ccttsa Clt-e newspaper
Cs:
joy to the hearts of Democratic Party
regulars and questions to the minds of
women's rights activities.
The first occurred Nov. 15 when the
ERA failed to get a two-thirds majority
in the House and went down by six
votes. The second will occur Sunday
when NOW plans to endorse a Demo
cratic candidate for president, pro
bably Walter Mondale.
In the ERA fandango, Majority
Leader Tip O'Neill, with the support of
NOW and other women's groups, call
ed for a suspension of the rules in
order to bring the amendment up for a
floor vote. His tactic cut off debate and
stopped a raft of crippling changes
that opponents wanted to attach to
the ERA. But it also may have affected
passage. Seven Democrats and sewn
Republicans who previously had co
sponsored the legislation voted
against it
In the process, O'Neill got what he
may have wanted most: a campaign
issue for the Democratic Party. He now
has almost all members of the House
on record on equal rights. In these
gender gap days, the ERA will be a
good litmus test for voters who want to
know simply: Were you with us or
against us?
It isnt entirely paranoid to suspect
that O'Neill would rather have the ERA
as an campaign issue than as a con
stitutional amendment. But it is
harder to swallow the suspicious that
women's rights groups also might have
sacrificed the ERA to Democratic
Party politics.
Goldsmith disputes this roundly.
"We didn't lose votes; they weren't ours
to begin with " she insists. "I am fam
iliar with the phenomenon of alleged
supporters: 'I would have been with
you if only ... Those people are not
truly with us."
(DE
I have a friend named . Holly. I
havent changed her name becauseshe
would figure out whom I was writing
about anyway, and there is no one to
protect or criticise in this article.
I love Holly. One cf the great assets
toj being human is being able to love
many people in many ways.
IHolly and I get in big arguments at
. president, if she were qualified. And I
would like to see everyone vote for her
t because she is iualiSed. Not a case of
-women voting for her because she b a
-- woman, and men voting against her'
because she is a woman. , f-
I would like to see a culture where
men and women take an equal part in
raising a child. I would like to see them
:"7-; llz2 that child according to its needs
j -3 interests and not impose societ:J
it , i cultural stereotaxes on him rr
t
: tix. ever (SJL.kt 'z,2ozZj in cur
: sc :ty.HorcaUi5 herself ah Uuianbt,
thagh I stO say she if a feministShe
i is cauHtJup. in this idedistic . ewthat-.
" with - jr. :3.,ll,Ij :cnt hepca' sooiC It
wont happen in 50 years.
I would love for things to be as HoDy
visualizes therrf fccjf.g.1 ' ;" " -" " -:
1 would 11-2 .to. know that every
person, be they man, sroman, black or
white, could strive for whst they went
without handicaps like social rcstric-
AVfcnWiS V. j"4 . v-, -v
I rrczU I2z2 to see a woman be
' - I would fjt:i li ce'eiety" where
- L'j nr. l!i peh strive fcr: their .
jCTa-carr-rrirbd within, ."the -frame-
" " , ii cf a v.-erkhg, grolT.g marriage.
- j itscTticdly, I see thmgj aren't that
. vjt I per" "-": "y trh3 to rtzkt people
cthitk olL!igs in there terms, but I
3 ritllzs ttzt zotizty prciatlyr. sver wl
X-be thu rcy,:;u "bz: ? ;r.ct fer several
As a whole,' husbands make the
( . mcr.ey ar.d wives raise the kids and
"stay home. When women do work it is
XA&tA.'&AbJ Ug- 0Ltb irltC kite. i 3
imffvs - - . '
The first woman ' r reciter.! will
ah-Yeys te the Jlrtl
will te tl;ev':t cf n r5" th2 r
sident in the eyes cf the press and in
the minds of the people,
, : Attitudes change slowly. - f . . .1 '-,
I occasionally make a comment to
Holly that goes totally against my own
personal wants or beliefs.
I might say that a woman, because of
society, can't be as aggressive as a man
in the business world. I might
stereotype women by saying things lie'
ah women want irom men 13 money
5 ana security,"
I.want Holly to know why I bait her
' with this kind of stagnant thinking. It's
, certainly not because I feel those
; things are intrinsically true.
: I do it because I want to challenge
; Holly. I went her to tx what I say and '
; prove me wrong.
1 Realistically, she cant" Reality " b"'
: society and the attitudes sheped by a '
: thousand years. But on another level
."en al',?ap beat me. That's the
thmldng hveL I Iovb to lcze cn this bxl
; when I make statments Lies the pre
vious cr.es. ...
In 10 years I can see IlsHy carina me
to er.y she- is frustrated bscauaa i cha
lmoT.s a woman who hr.'i hni .-
by her hpband repeatedly ar.d etn
gees ,t"ek to him. Cha h frurtrated
because gome man with an equal
decree b makmn twiee o misch money
.0 she because he hrs awlTe and kids :
to support. . -. ' .
And if this heppens I hope with all
that's inside cf me I have the strength
to say something L!:e "Well, Ke"y, you
know a. woman needs to depend on a
I dont believe that. It vzll hurt me to
have to say that to HcUyJust as it does
item, .'.-.
But I hope she gets so mad at what I
say that she redediectea herself to the
ideeb she believes b, L-eecue some
one, anyone, who thinks Ll:e she does
can make a d.lTercr.ce. ;
' ; Where would the civil rights move
ment he new if Martin Lcther King Jr.
had Ibea that n K 23 tliela irould
still be second no, third-class
citizens, ar.d because cf his fctrMedge
he hid seii "I 73 upT
Kfcg.lenrr thr,t r:- ce man he
cculint char-2cwhe'.2 culture and a '
who! 3 wry cf tl-.i-llr " :i 15 yens. As
bt;l'. r::.;i I; 5 L::r.7t,iJ.
D: .3 t!v.T! I--" 2 1 -" 7 !T.eT;sthat a
let cf :.y r. :r -' ; . ..; : : - 1 fcur.ded.
I he.-2 the L:j a t':: -
