Opinion
Neljraskan
Thursday, March S, 1994
Jeremy Fitzpatrick
Rainbow Rowell. ..
Adeana Leftin . . .
Todd Cooper.
JeffZeleny.
Sarah Duey ......
WilHan Lauer . .
Nebraskan
Editorial Board
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
.Editor, 472-1766
.Opinion Page Editor
.Managing Editor
.Sports Editor
.Associate News Editor
. ,.Arts & Entertainment Editor
. .Senior Photographer
Km ioui \i
Time to talk
CBA climate should be dealt with openly
Memo to Gary Schwcndiman, dean of the College ol
Business Administratration: Put away your memo pad.
The UNL chapter of the American Association of Univer
sity Professors issued a report in January describing the climate in
CBA as chilly for women. Schwcndiman responded to the report
with internal CBA memos, which have not helped to solve the
problem.
There arc conflicting reports about the atmosphere in the college.
Female faculty members have been unwilling to come forward and
publicly complain about the college.
But, the AAUP cited women from CBA in its report. Helen
Moore, chairwoman of the Sociology Department, conducted the
report. Moore said female faculty members and students made
complaints, but did not disclose their names “for fear of retribution."
Schwcndiman responded with an internal memo that said the
report was “the result of a strategy developed by an off-campus
group called the Nebraska Women’s Political Network."
Schwcndiman said the plot to disrupt the college was designed
several months ago.
Sue Ellen Wall, a member of the Nebraska Women’s Political
Network, called the charges ludicrous.
Only the women in CBA can say for sure what the climate in
CBA is like for them. But the fact that any woman is upset about the
environment she works in is a problem.
The answer to the AAUP report is not writing memos that attempt
to ignore the issue. Schwendiman should put away his memo pad
and deal with the issue openly, so it can be resolved.
Providing a friendly atmosphere where the AAUP report can be
discussed cannot hurt CBA. It might encourage women, who were
reluctant to speak before, to come forward.
Social Insecurity
Cap would punish children, not offenders
Because of suspected fraud, the Social Security Administra
tion may cap cash assistance to children with disabilities.
The administration believes that families may be coaching
children to misbehave or act “crazy.” The cap would limit the
amount of Supplemental Security Income one family could receive.
This sort of cap would punish the people SSI is supposed to
help. Although there may be some fraud since the Supreme Court
made it easier to qualify for assistance in 1990, the children who
qualify for assistance do so for a reason. Their families need help.
If there is fraud, then the administration should concentrate on
punishing offenders or making more accurate tests for qualifica
tion.
If a family has two children with disabilities, then the family
should receive more assistance. Because many disabilities run in
families, this is possible. Children with disabilities often need
expensive medical treatment their families may not be able to
afford.
Children of these families should not suffer because of someone
else’s dishonesty.
We must expect any welfare program to be abused to some
extent. But we shouldn’t allow our frustration with this dishonesty
to cloud the purpose of these programs.
Capping SSI to children with disabilities won’t save much
money. It may end fraud, but it will hurt children who already face
far too many challenges.
I III I < »l<I \l IN >1 W \
Staff editorials represent the official policy of the Spring 1994 Daily Nebraskan. Policy is set
by the Daily Nebraskan Hditorial Board fuiitorials do not necessarily reflect the views of the
university, its employees, the students or the NU Board of Regents. I£ditorial columns represent
the opinion of the author. The regents publish the Daily Nebraskan They establish the UNL
Publications Board to supervise the daily production of the paper According to policy set by
the regents, responsibility for the editorial content of the newspaper lies solely in the hands of
its students
I I NIK IN l| It \
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief letters to the editor from all readers and interested others
Letters will be selected for publication on the basis of clarity, originality, timeliness and space
available. The Daily Nebraskan retains the right to edit or reject all material submitted. Readers
also arc welcome to submit material as guest opinions. The editor decides whether material
should run as a guest opinion. Letters and guest opinions sent to the newspaper become the
property of the Daily Nebraskan and cannot be returned. Anonymous submissions will not he
published Letters should included the author s name, year in school, major and group
affiliation, ifany Requests to withhold names will not be granted Submit material to the Daily
Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R St., Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448
WE. GOTTA STITCH'
HER FOR ALL SUES
\U0RTU 6oY5 !
1
Business
discrimination
While gathering my books to study
the other day, I glanced down at the
front page of the Feb. 21 DN. The
headline read, “Spanier: CBA sexism
charges questionable.”
Spanier said letters from women
telling of positive experiences in the
College of Business Administration
led him to this evaluation.
“I can only conclude from these
letters that the majority of women in
the college were not consulted in the
preparation of the report and do not
feel the report accurately reflects their
sentiments,” he said.
Hmmmm 1 mused. I’m a CBA
student, an* nobody asked me what I
thought.
Opening my Management 360 text
book, “Organizational Behavior,” I
began to read Chapter 4 on “Personal
ity.” The introduction on Page 83
listed 10 traits of winning managers,
according to recruiters. 1 felt comfort
able until I got to No. 8, which says
w inners arc “willing to pay the price to
get there.”
Yeah, 1 thought, but the prices are
usually set by men who can afford to
invest more than women because they
don’t bear children or iron their own
shirts. Besides, women are less moti
vated by material rewards than men.
I read on, but Item No. 10 stopped
me cold. “They liked competitive
sports."
This is a description of a male, I
thought. These recruiters’ profile of a
winner is a male. Feeling bruised, I
read on. The last sentence on Page 83
reads, “A workaholic who wins loyal
ty and results.”
Don’t these people know that
workaholism, which they hold up as a
desirable trait, is an illness, a disease?
On to Page 84. “Has unbelievable
energy and Boy Scout ethics. Keen
mind, intuitive but also strong num
bers man.”
At this point I was numb, in disbe
lief that I had to pay for the book as a
required course text, and wondering
what year it was written.
Checking the publication date, I
saw it was first published in 1973. My
God, I thought, that was the year
before I first went to college.
Could it be possible that all Univer
sity ofNebraska- Lincol n cl asses s ince
1973 had been spoon-fed this bigotry?
The book I had was the sixth edi
tion, last revised in 1992. This man is
socially unconscious, I thought.
If he had never felt compelled to
remove such offensive material in all
these 21 years since he wrote it, he
must be socially comatose.
Who wrote this book, I wondered,
and where was he from?
There it was on the title page, in
black and white: Fred Luthans, George
1.1 I I I KS in I III I'.DI I<>l<
Holmes Professor of Management,
University of Nebraska.
At this point, totally disillusioned,
I closed the book and put it aside,
thinking that any other useful infor
mation that might be in the textbook
had been nullified. A lovely cup of tea
with only a little arsenic isstill deadly.
My message to Dr. Luthans —
thank you for revising your seventh
edition.
My message to Dr. Spanicr—there
is no room for defensiveness in busi
ness.
My message to women in CBA and
all women everywhere — the fastest
way to end a game is to expose the
players. Every woman on earth pays
for your silence through economic
discrimination and hobbled personal
empowerment.
Remember the gauntlet thrown
down by Susan B. Anthony in 1863:
“Forget conventionalism; forget what
the world will say. whether you are in
your place or out of your place; think
your best thoughts, speak your best
words, do your best works, looking
(only) to your own conscience for
approval.”
Lavonne Juhl
senior
business
James Meshling/DN
‘Little buggers’
Regarding Paul Kocster’s column
on prairie dogs (DN. Feb. 28,1994),
what was his point?
Sure people are killing the little
buggers, out so what? Has hcevcr seen
what a rancher has to put up with?
Does he even care? Probably not. 1
have read several of his articles, and I
know that he sees no need for farming
and ranching.
He thinks it’s barbaric and incon
siderate to our environment—that we
should turn the animals loose and not
touch the land anymore.
There’s a slight problem with this.
How does he plan on feeding the
people on this planet?
He is probably blessed with the
ignorance of not knowing where the
food at Super Saver comes from.
I’ll give him a hint: farms and
ranches. Show me a meal and I’ll
guarantee it came from some type of
farm or ranch.
Please stop trying to put a guilt trip
on farmers and ranchers like me. I
have to work hard enough to put food
on the table for people like you. with
out getting kicked in the teeth for
doing it. When Koester wakes up in
the morning, instead of thinking of
ways to put down farmers and ranch
ers, he should try thinking of ways to
thank them for keeping him alive.
Whether he likes it or not, he would be
worm food if it wasn’t for the farmer
or rancher.
We are doing the best we can to
protect the environment. We strive to
protect our environment because it is
in our best interest to do so.
Before we save the overpopulated
prairie dog, why don’t we start saving
endangered species like the family
farmer?
Unless Kocstcr comes up with some
type of possible solution, I will resort
to shooting the little buggers and pro
tecting my livelihood.
Kerry Malinc
sophomore
agribusiness
assistant manager for Maline Farms
Minority rights
Regarding Matthew Wegener’s
lctter(DN,Feb. 24,1994), what coun
try is Wegener from? He wrote, “in
this country, majority rules... and you
have no so-called minority rights.” He
could not be referring to the United
States, where the Constitution guar
antees the rights of both majority and
minority.
The civil rights battles of the 1950s
and the ’60s were about this. Does
anyone think it was acceptable when
one group, whites, could tell another
E, blacks, that they couldn’ t vote?
ity ruled, didn’t it?
Just because 90 percent ot people
are not of a group — in this case,
homosexuals—does not make the 10
percent “disgusting and animalistic.”
If we used such mathematics to
decide moral issues, we would have to
say that members of celibate religious
orders are equally morally deficient
because they too violate the norm.
Wegener shouldn’t confuse statis
tics with moral arguments, or he may
find himself in a minority without
rights.
Trevor McArthur
senior
teachers college
