Editorial
Time stereotype doesn’t fit
If you’re twentysomc years old,
like myself, you have problems.
You can’t make decisions, and
you have no one to look up to, no style
and no attention span, to name just a
few.
You, like myself, are lost. But now,
thanks to Time magazine, we arc found.
In the July 16 issue, our saviors
explained all our problems in seven
neat pages with spiffy, informative
graphics and photos at no extra cost.
Everything is spelled out in this seven
page biography of the twentysomc
million people labeled the “twenty
something generation.’’
Brian
Shellito
Since I was one of the lucky few lo
have picked up the issue between
MTV videos, it is now my duty to
spread the word to all my ignorant
brethren. Allow me now to explain in
a nutshell what we come to under
stand as our destiny.
First, we must postpone growing
up as long as possible and partake of
such frivolous things ps world travel
and extended schooling. Although the
most important thing to us eventually
will be a marriage that shall last for
eternity, we must postpone it until our
wanderlust has been satisfied. Also,
we must detach ourselves from any
form of strong commitment, because
it is imperative that we not get hurt in
any of our relationships.
Some of us are contemplating what
lo include in our resumes. STOP NOW!
Any sort of gainful employment should
be the second-to-last item on your
list--the last being a mate, of course.
We must be very careful because our
generation is especially pione to the
dreaded "bum out” syndrome.
Those of us who arc near gradu
ation must find a suitable place to
keep a diploma. The best options are
to carefully place one in the bottom of
a parakeet’s cage, or for those who
don’t own a bird, throw it in a re
cycled paper bin. It really doesn’t
matter, as long as it goes to some
useful purpose. No one at the gas
station graduates will work at will
ever care to sec a diploma anyway.
I mentioned recycling. This is also
import as a peripheral concept We
know that we will not achieve the
amount of world change that our
ancestors, the hippies, did. However,
it is important to mention such things
as recycling occasionally, so we ap
pear to be concerned. Actually, it is a
fact that somewhere down the evolu
tionary road, we have lost the knowl
edge of how to make a difference. But
this is not as serious as it sounds,
because we have no clear issues in
our society to focus on anyway.
One last thing we must understand
is that we have not made and likely
will not ever establish a culture of our
own. We should be content to know
that all our fashion and music has
been handed down to us. For us,
imagination has no relevance or
importance because all we need al
ready has been given to us.
There it is. This is our destiny in
hie. bveryonc that is willing to 101
low it please stand up. Now, all of you
that have guns handy, please shoot
the people who are standing.
Those who fell the need to put on
knee-high bools while reading this,
you can safely take them off now.
What I really want to know' from
all the thirtysomething and lortysom
clhing and other old farts is: Haven’t
you learned anything yet? You can
not stereotype an entire generation.
Some of the babbling I just did may
be closer to the truth than we like to
admit, but no one can possibly be
lieve it is the rule rather than the
exception. From this article. Time
seems to think it is the rule.
I look around me at my peers, and
I see a diverse group of people. They
dress differently, act differently and
value differently.
Maybe it’s time for psychologists
to realize that people cannot be lumped
into an orderly column graph to File
into some neat icport on human na
ture. If anything should deFine our
generation, let it be the loss of a need
to categorize those around us. If we
could realize this, then maybe, just
maybe, we would be a lot closer to
eliminating bigotry and finding that
intrinsically we arc all frailly human.
Shdlito is a junior biology major and the
Daily Nebradtan art director and editorial
cartoonist.
Nebraskan
Editor
NewvNSE Editor
Copy Desk Editor
Sports Editor
Arts & Entertainment Editor
Feature Editor
Photo Chief
Art & Graphics Director
General Manager
Production Manager
Advertising Manager
Sales Manager
Publications Board Chairman
Professional Adviser
Jana Pedersen, 472-1766
Matt Harak
Stephanie Nelli
Darran Fowler
John Payne
Robin Trlmarchl
Michelle Paulman
Brian Shelltto
Daniel Shattll
Katharine Pollcky
Loren Melrose
Todd Sears
Bill Vobe|da, 436-9993
Don Walton, 473-7301
The Daily Nebraskan (USPS 144-080) is published by the UNI Publications Board,
Nebraska Union 34,1400 R St, Lincoln, Neb 68588 0448 weekdays during the academic
year (except holidays), weekly during the summer session
Readers are encouraged to submit story ideas and comments to the Daily Nebraskan
by phoning 472-1763 between 9 a m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday The public also
has access to the Publications Board For information, contact Bin Vobejda, 436 9993
Subscription price is $45 for one year
Postmaster Send address changes to the Daily Neoraskan, Nebraska Union 34,1400
RS: Lincoln Neb 68588-0448 Seconddass postage paid at Lincoln, Neb
ALL MATERIAL COPYRIGHT 1990 DAILY NEBRASKAN
Music labels offer tool, not responsibility
Jana Pedersen’s editorial in the
July 19, 1990, Daily Nebraskan
demands a response. Her logic is so
flawed that one wonders whether she
has taken the lime to seriously con
sider her position.
She clainls that the Louisiana
Legislature’s attempt to give parents
a tool to assist them in their responsi
bility to monitor the albums their
children purchase “only lakes their
responsibility away and gives it to
record shop owners.’’ She fails to
explain exactly how warning labels
on potentially offensive material will
transfer such responsibil ity. Her logic
is like saying that adding a radar
receiver to a jet fighter to warn the
pilot of incoming enemy missiles will
take away his responsibility to pro
tect his aircraft.
Further, she says that “the deci
sion of what is and is not offensive is
also taken away from parents and put
in the hands of the slate.” Excuse ine,
but I thought that the purpose of the
labels was to warn of “potentially
offensive material.” I fail to sec how
the presence or absence of such a
label dictates to the customer whether
the material is or is not offensive. It is
a tool, similar to the tool which rales
motion pictures according to their
potential to offend. Such a tool could
be very helpful not only to parents,
but also to youth who have moral
standards of their own.
She concludes with an observation
that “warnings won’t stop kids from
borrowing labeled items.” While this
is undoubtedly true, it is irrelevant.
Docs she also think we should do
away with motion picture ratings
because some kids borrow R-ralcd
video tapes? Should we do away with
warning labels on cigarette packages
and laws agaiast selling them to minors
because some kids still smoke? I’m
sorry, but I don’t sec what that has to
do with the issue.
It is obvious that Ms. Pedersen has
little appreciation of at least two
important considerations: the diffi
culty of the task facing parents, and
the magnitude of the “offensive lyr
ics” problem. With hundreds upon
hundreds of bands and albums, ex
actly how does she propose that par
ents fill this responsibility she cor
rectly says is theirs? Are they sup
posed to purchase every album in the
store, listen to each song, make a
iran sen pi oi me woras ana men juugc
them one by one? I believe that pur
chasers of music deserve advance
warning of what it contains before
they fork out $16 for the CD. We
require manufacturers of foods to
display the contents on the package
so we can make an informed decision
at the point of purchase. Do our cars
deserve less than our mouths?
This is not merely some insignifi
cant issue to be scoffed at and shrugged
off. There are albums being sold to
minors which not only graphically
portray but actively promote Satan
ism, suicide, rape, gang rape, incest,
torture, murder, inavs murder and every
other imaginable and unimaginable
crime and perversion ....
I personally believe that propa
ganda of such a nature docs noi fall
under the protection of the First
Amendment. Freedom of speech is
not, has never been and cannot be
absolute. For example, it is against
the law to yell “fire” in a crowded
theater. It is not lawful to joke about
having a gun at an airport security
check. It is not a constitutional right
to lie in a court of law. Such speech is
prohibited because freedom of ex
pression must be carefully weighed
against the potential harm to society
of certain forms of speech. (It is more
than slightly ironic that my freedom
of speech does not extend to prayer in
school because it might offend some
one else, while certain rock stars’
prayers to Satan at a school dance are
apparently protected, regardless of
how they offend me or my children.)
I believe that audio pornography is
as much a threat to young minds as is
visual pornography. If it is not out
lawed, at the very least is should be
regulated. The purchase of visual
pornography is restricted to adults
over the age of 21; why not verbal
pornography? And certain types of
visual pornography are prohibited
altogether (“kiddie” porn, violent
porn, etc.). Why are there no such
restrictions on music?
While the motion picture industry
can hardly be called a bastion of
morality, at least they have seen fit to
voluntarily offer parents a tool to warn
them of potentially offensive mate
rial (“no one under 17 admitted with
out parent,” “parents strongly cau
tioned,” etc.). The G, PG, PG-13, R
and X ratings hardly take away any
one’s right to judge what is or is not
offensive, nor does it take away par
ents’ responsibility to monitor the
shows their children sec. IT is a tool;
an imperfect one, to be sure, but a
useful one, nonetheless. If the music
industry is unwilling to provide such
a tool voluntarily, it should be forced
to do so by legislation. As a parent
who docs take his responsibility seri
ously, 1 applaud die efforts of the
Louisiana Legislature.
Irvin Tom Nelson
graduate student
accounting