Opinion Net?raskan Tuesday, March 8,1884 Nebraskan Editorial Board University of Nebraska-Lincoln Jeremy Fitzpatrick Rainbow Rowell. .. Adeana Leftin. Todd Cooper. Jeff Zeleny. Sarah Duey...... William Lauer.... .Editor. 472-1766 .Opinion Page Editor .Managing Editor .Sports Editor .Associate News Editor Arts & Entertainment Editor .Senior Photographer H)l I OKI vl. Buying votes Election s key should be ideas, not money Two thousand dollars isn’t a fortune, but it’s still quite a chunk of cash for most college students. Before spending this much money, most students would think long and hard. Some things should cost S2.000: a good used car, a personal computer, tuition. And some things shouldn’t: ASUN campaigns, for example. VISION presidential candidate Andrew Loudon estimates his party will spend about this much on its campaign. That’s a lot of buttons. Although this amount is about S500 less than last year’s victori ous VOICE party spent, it’s still too much. Individuals running with the VISION party were asked to give a certain amount of money. Those running for senate were asked to give S35, and those running for advisory board were asked to give S25. Some advertising is helpful in a campaign. There is nothing wrong with making your names and ideas known to voters. But should that cost S2.000? RESUME presidential candidate J.B. Howell said his party had spent only SI 5. Brian Fitzgerald, first vice-presidential candidate for the LETTUCE party, claims it spent only $35. If nothing else, this party has shown that creativity catches attention that money can’t buy. It’s good to see the VISION party spend less money than VOICE did last year, but next year’s parties should try to spend far less. Considering low voter turnouts in the past, the VISION party may spend almost a dollar for every student who votes this year. If a party has good ideas and good candidates, it shouldn’t need to spend this much. Enthusiasm and sincerity win more votes than stickers and mailers. <)lIII kv \ II \n Once shunned and ridiculed, homosexuals arc now becom ing an accepted part of our society. However, homosexual couples still are denied a fundamental right enjoyed by other couples — marriage. Pope John Paul II recently presented a 100-page letter denounc ing same-sex marriages. Although this attitude prevails in the Roman Catholic Church, society has become more accepting of homosexual couples. States should act accordingly and legally recognize same-sex marriages. Some states recently have begun to afford homosexuals many of the privileges of marriage, and certain religious groups recognize homosexual couples with ceremonies similar to marriage. These changes represent increased awareness and acceptance of homosexual couples, but they arc not enough. Pseudo-marriages arc mere tokens of tolerance. Only by allowing homosexuals to be legally married can homosexual couples officially be recognized. Homosexuals' love for each other is no less strong or true than the love of heterosexuals. Many homosexuals are committed to spending their lives with their partners. Allowing homosexuals to be legally married formalizes their commitments. Although many churches do not recognize or accept homosexual couples, church and state arc separate. Religious tenets should not dictate state policy. States now should include homosexual couples in the ancient tradition of marriage. — University Daily Kansan * — University of Kansas I 1)11< IUI M IN >1 l< \ SUifTeditorials represent the official policy of the Spring 1994 Daily Nebraskan. Policy is set by the Daily Nebraskan Hditorial Board Lditorials do not necessarily reflect the views of the university, its employees, the students or the NU Board of Regents liditorial 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 Accordi ng to policy set by the regents, responsibility for the editorial content of the newspaper lies solely in the hands of its students l.l III l< l'nl It \ The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief letters to the editor from all readers and interested others. Letters will be selected for publication on the hasis of clarity, originality, timeliness and space available. The Daily Nebraskan retains the right to edit or reject all material submitted. Readers also are 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 be published Letters should included the author's name, year in school, major and group affiliation, if any. Requests to withhold names will not be granted Submit material to tbe Daily Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R St., Lincoln, Neb 68588-0448. Aoorv^©94 ItS\SSOCCWT*K so wm&. \ vm. u. , \ IMS \STWEMQSTCDWM ^ \ 03KNSAUS C |\in I. \\(;i kl BI( K Dirty home promotes equality My philosophy of housework is one of benign neglect. I can wal k right by that bloody booger on the dining room wall with out batting an eye. Mud on the carpel? No problem. Grape juice spills, dust, leaves, grass clippings — all arc wel come here. This is an equal-opportu nity messy house. My cleaning ideology matches that of Phyllis Diller, who said, “Cleaning your house while your kids are still growing is like shoveling the walk before it stops snowing.” It’s not that I don’t care; I just don’t see the point anymore. When you have three kids and a mailbox, clutter takesover your house. Clutter is carnal stuff—always repro ducing i tsel f w hen you ’ re not looki ng. I just try to push it into closets, drawers and the kids’ rooms and hope the doors are shut if company drops by. I try to think about the mountains of laundry and the mammoth dustballs as signs of life, as proof positive that people actually live in this place. i view me spiacr weo sircicmng from the desk to the window as a natural wonder seldom seen indoors. And every day when my son dumps half of the playground out of his shoes and onto the floor, I try to remember that he’s always wanted a sandbox, and now he can have one right in his own room. 1 have not always been this way. It has taken me years to lower my stan dards to this point. When 1 got married 1 kept my name and my subscription to Ms., but 1 was a transvestite feminist — Steinem at work, Betty Crocker at home. Women arc conditioned to 1 ink the state of our homes and the cleanliness of our children with love and self worth. This is our art; this is women’s traditional handiwork: shining fix tures, spotless doors, squeaky clean windows, color-coordinated offspring. We measure our success in Berber carpets and polished woodwork. I have a love-hate relationship w ith housework. I can literally get high on clean lavatory fixtures. A feel mg comes over me after my biannual scrubbing This affliction is passed like a beer can and a TV remote control from father to son and is culturally approved by every major institution. of the bathtub— I want to cordon it off with a brocade rope with tassels like they do in museums and invite every one to a viewing. “And to your left is a spotless white porcelain tub done in BonAmi and pumice by Cindy Langc-Kubick.” I try to be Zen-like in my attitude, to be fully in the moment as I sweep the floor. I attempt to emulate the Amish and keep my home plain and simple, my stovetop shining and grease-free, but what I really want in my heart of hearts is to let the house get really dirty and then move. A lot of women share my frustra tion. Here we arc in the 1990s full of illusions about equality, and we turn around to find that most of the men in our lives are domestically disabled. This affl iction is passed 1 ike a beer can and a TV remote control from father to son and is culturally approved by every major institution. Many men were raised in homes where male children had to be over 21 and in possession of a food handlers permit to use the stove. And although they were deemed perfectly capable of running a lawn mower, somehow op erating a washing machine required something they lacked—presumably female genitals. These are the same men who swear there is an 11th commandment deal ing with clean toilets and gender: Thou shall have a poor aim, but fear not, for your wife shall wield a sturdy brush and lots of Comet. We need to wake up and smell the dirty socks. How can we address ine quality in society if we ignore it at home? If children only see their fa thers flipping channels and their moth ers flipping pancakes, what message are we sending them? And how likely is it they will perpetuate these models in their adult lives? My husband and 1 both secretly wish that the other were more domes tically inclined. But he doesn’t tell me I’m a failure when the smoke alarm goes ofTevery time 1 turn on the oven. I keep my mouth shut when he folds the towels the “wrong” way. I’ll admit sometimes it feels like a sick game of chicken, with both of us waiting the other out to see how long we can go without a clean dish in the house. Right now 1 have my eye on two empty tubes of toothpaste in the med icine chest — will he ever notice them? Will he ever throw them away? Ditto for empty shampoo bottles, half eaten bowls of popcorn, used toilet paper rolls ... they say it’s the little things. Honestly, I figure if 1 stopped pick ing up after everyone, in three months the kids wouldn’t be able to get out of their rooms; in six, we’d all be trapped in the house and they’d have to deliver pizza through the window and within a year, the place would be condemned and we would all be carted away to a home for unrepentant slobs. I hope it doesn’t come to that, but if it does, could you stop by and see us sometime? And could you bring some clean clothes? Laage-Kabick I* a ltaior aaws-adltortal a ad sociology major aad a Dally Nabraikaa coluaiaist. I I I II l