12
Wednesday, October 20, 1999
t ORtWTO CMT
oumtnmts about
'XU
Contact the
omKhismon at
buUnvuMitK.edu
or call #OS-2790.
Scott Hicks
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR
Katie Abel
UNIVERSITY EDITOR
Jacob McConnico
CITY EDITOR
Board Editorials
Overpaid Whiners
As the most recent round of how-much
t an we-raise-tuition talks have shown, some
of UNO’s best and brightest -and we’re not
talking students here - could use a crash
course in how to say no to greed.
What began, innocently enough, as a way
to bring professors’ salaries more in-line with
their colleagues nationwide has sadly degen
erated into a Hungry, Hungry Hippos game
of who can grab the most cash.
Provost Dick Richardson originally pro
posed raising tuition SSOO for in-state under
graduates, $1,350 for out-of-state undergrad
uates, $ 1,500 for in state graduate students
and $2,550 for out-of-state graduate students.
As Monday’s meeting of the Chancellor’s
Committee on Faculty Salaries and Benefits
showed, that’s not enough for some faculty.
Economics Professor David Guilkey and
chemistry Professor Edward Samulski put
their thoughts on paper in a letter to the com
mittee on Oct. 15. “The plan raises the tuition
so marginally as to be almost pointless,” they
wrote. “Students and parents must assume
more responsibility for the cost of a Carolina
Education (sic).”
For the record, neither Guilkey nor
Samulski are hurting for money. Guilkey,
who came to UNC in July 1977, currently
makes $ 117,689. Last year, he earned a
$4,074 raise. Samulski makes more. He
raked in $117,994 last year, taking home a
$3,735 raise. He came to UNC in 1988.
There’s nothing like a filthy rich professor
bitching arid moaning for more dough to get
the sympathy juices flowing - especially
when the money’s going to come out of
yours and your parents’ pockets.
Sadly, their whiny attitude might be gain
ing a foothold with their colleagues.
Jackhammered Logic
Is keeping that small town charm the only
thing that matters in this town? Once again,
the Chapel Hill Town Council has decided
an issue based on what’s best for the quaint
atmosphere, not what’s best for residents.
Chapel Hill keeps a tight leash on con
struction to prevent sprawl from destroying
the “village.” Because owners of Britthaven
Health Care failed to apply properly for per
mission to expand a parking lot, the Town
Council decided last week to force the nurs
ing home to tear up the extra parking spaces.
This act should prompt residents to ask a
few questions of their town leaders:
1. Does tax money actually pay the salary
of someone who drives around counting
parking spaces in the many lots in Chapel
Hill? If so, is this really the way we want our
money to be spent?
2. What’s worse: Allowing a few
unplanned parking'spaces or causing resi
dents an unavoidable hassle when they visit
ailing loved ones? Now, in addition to allot
ting extra time to find a parking space, visi
tors will have to battle work crews, all while
the cookies they baked for Grandma are
growing mold because it’s taking so long.
Readers' Forum
Historian Defends Powell
From Racist Implications
In Oct 13 Column
TO THE EDITOR:
1 write to protest your guest column
titled “Powell Turns Blacks Into
‘Nobodies,appearing in the Oct. 13 Daily
Tar Heel, which misrepresents a friend and
colleague.
Its <rly inflammatory intent does not
speak -■'} for responsible journalism on
this campus. Although in justice to its
author the representation of history
Professor William Powell as a voice of
white supremacy is affirmed to be only
implicit and unintended so far as being the
actual view held by the professor, the total
impact of the article serves to daub him
with some form of racism. <
If it is correct to understand the
provocative title as the work of the editor,
and much to be regretted, the author is
nevertheless not entirely blameless. The
bracketed word “racism” in his apparent
ly direct quotation from the interview with
Professor Powell conceals a whole world of
possible qualifications and elaborations
that are now being reduced to a single,
highly loaded term.
But worse is the author’s opening sen
tence, which is not simply politically
Rob Nelson
editor
Office Houn Friday 3 p.m. - 4 p.m.
Matthew B. Dees
STATE & NATIONAL EDITOR
Brian Murphy
SPORTS EDITOR
T. Nolan Hayes
SPORTSATURDAY EDITOR
Professor Pete Andrews, a member of the
committee who also serves as chairman of
the Faculty Council, originally believed the
SSOO increase was sufficient.
After Monday’s meeting, he said he under
stood the importance of a higher boost on
tuition. “The tuition increase will help to
decide the quality of education we provide to
North Carolina,” Andrews said.
There’s no doubt about that: The more
money that goes into education, the better
the end result. But taking that money from
students and their parents is the wrong way
to go about doing it.
As an “expert” in economics, Guilkey
should know there are other ways of raising
the money that neither he nor the committee
has taken time to explore.
“North Carolina has experienced several
consecutive years of unparalleled economic
growth,” he and Samulski wrote. “During
this same period faculty have been treated to
3 percent raises.”
You might have missed all those history
classes, Dave, but it’s the N.C. General
Assembly’s constitutional duty to keep
tuition low. With all that “unparalleled eco
nomic growth,” it’s the state, not students,
who have kept your paychecks so measly.
“Carolina can not (sic) continue this inter
state ‘price war’ wherein significant numbers
of parents within our state are (or should be)
‘embarrassed by Carolina’s low tuition’ and
those from out of state vie to win the
Carolina tuition lottery,” they wrote.
If you or your parents are “embarrassed”
by paying taxes year in and year out to help
pay for UNC, let Guilkey and Samulski
know. They’ll be happy for the help paying
their country club dues.
3. Is it worth the noise and environmental
pollution of removing spaces just to teach
Britthaven a lesson? After the owners tear up
the spaces, work will start over again, noise
and pollution in tow.
The Town Council was simply following
standard procedure. Instead of thinking
about what would be best for the communi
ty, they kept precedent without question.
A more productive solution would have
been to slap a hefty fine on the business.
Imposing a fine - equal to the cost of demol
ishing the additional spaces - would be an
equally effective punishment and deterrent.
Britthaven’s owners should have been
more thorough in getting the needed permits
before expanding. Nevertheless, their short
sightedness does not warrant this hoopla.
It seems that Town Council members have
one priority: ensuring that Chapel Hill looks
quaint. But who are they really helping?
Sure, residents love Chapel Hill for its village
atmosphere, but at what cost?
Residents should come first. The Town
Council ought to reconsider what - or, more
appropriately, whom - they are working for.
But rest assured - if they don’t, voters will.
inflammatory, it does not auger well for his
presumed emerging sensitivity as a future,
professional historian.
Rather than “Are we ‘nobody,’” it
should have read “Were we ‘nobody,’”
thereby lifting the issue from the pit of
exhortation to the register of reasoned con
sideration. The tense, the time frame, the
historical context needs here to be re-estab
lished.
Only then can we begin to appreciate
the probable import of Professor Powell’s
response and the bitter truth of his position
that, alas, yes, rings historically true for a
then white dominated, political communi
ty in all its awful prejudice.
John Headley
Professor
Department of History
It’s Definitely Fair to Ask
If Halls Should Be Named
For Slavery Supporters
TO THE EDITOR:
The debate over the names of some
campus buildings requires a distinction
usually taught in introductory ethics cours
es. This is the distinction between some
thing being morally right (or wrong) and
being regarded as morally right (or wrong).
Editorial
ulh? lath} MM
Established 1893 • 106 Years of Editorial Freedom
www.unc.edu/dth
Leigh Davis
FEATURES EDITOR
Robin Clemow
ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT EDITOR
Carolyn Haynes
COPY DESK EDITOR
& Sk.
■ttp.
Hey Baby, You Wanna Go Out?
Hugh Grant got caught doing it with
Divine Brown. Eugene Robinson got
caught doing it the night before the
biggest game of his life. Darryl Strawberry got
caught doing it less than six months after
being diagnosed with colon cancer.
What did these three famous men get
caught doing? Paying for sex.
I’m not sure what shocks me most: that
these rich and famous men felt the need to go
out and get some action from some stranger
hanging around a dimly lit street comer or
that they were willing to pay so little to get it.
Robinson wanted a blow job for S4O! This
guy makes a couple of million a year - or
about 50,000 b.j.s at today’s market rate -and
all he’s willing to lay out is S4O!
Strawberry, on the other hand, was a big
spender. He offered SSO, although mmor has
it he wanted a lot more for his money.
And Grant, who, by the way, presumably is
also getting some from Elizabeth Hurley (at
least prior to Divine Brown - unless that’s the
reason Grant went looking), paid a whopping
S6O for a b.j. from Brown.
However, that is Hollywood money and we
all know the exchange rate is a little different
out in Los Angeles.
Now I know that there is a segment of this
campus’ community that is doing some quick
math. Let’s see, SSO for dinner at 411, another
S4O for drinks at Top of the Hill, then maybe
another S2O at Players - hell, I’m up to $ 110
and I’m not guaranteed nothin’!
But before the cries of “male chauvinism
fosters a culture that tolerates date rape”
drown out the message, let me state my posi
tion: prostitution should be legal, but date
rape should be illegal.
Prostitution is a victimless crime, much like
small-time drug possession. Prostitution is
simply two (or more, I suppose, if you have
the money) consenting adults having sex, and
somebody paying for it.
We all know prostitution as “the oldest pro
fession.” Well if it is, it ought to be a legal pro-
Neglect of the distinction leads to a sim
plistic relativism according to which some
thing is right (or wrong) in a particular
social or cultural context if and only if it is
(or was) regarded as right (or wrong) in that
context.
Many people think moral values are
subjective and then mistakenly conclude
that this sort of relativism follows from
their subjectivism.
Another reason some people are rela
tivists is that they think it is always wrong
to apply values to a society or culture that
does not accept those values.
Many anthropologists went through a
phase of this sort, although this has given
way upon reflection on cases such as the
ritual genital mutilation practiced in some
cultures.
The considered view is that sometimes
it is wrong to apply foreign values (e.g.,
when Columbus invaded Hispaniola) and
sometimes not (e.g., when the culture of
the Third Reich was defeated).
It was the neglect of these reflections
that led history Professor William Powell to
make the unfortunate statement in The
Daily Tar Heel on Oct. 8 that the Students
Seeking Historical Truth is putting “today’s
standards on yesterday.”
Pray tell, what is wrong with that?
And the DTH editorial of Oct. 12, titled
“Unfair Judgment,” shows a lack of atten-
Miller Pearsall
PHOTOGRAPHY EDITOR
Thomas Ausman
DESIGN EDITOR
Megan Sharkey
GRAPHICS EDITOR
CHRIS HARRISON
SHOOTING FROM THE HIP
fession.
But wait, I hear you scream, there are vic
tims. What about the spouses and children of
these men - after all, they are almost all men
- aren’t they hurt when marriages break up?
Of course, but do you really want to argue
that having daddy in jail for solicitation
improves the odds of a more amicable solu
tion?
Surely the prostitutes themselves are vic
tims. I don’t disagree. It strains credulity to
believe that every prostitute’s life mirrors Julia
Robert’s “Pretty Woman” hooker-with-the
heart-of-gold story who rides off into the sun
set with the rich, adoringjohn.
But again, the question becomes whether
placing a prostitute who is renting her body
for SSO a pop (pun intended) in jail solves
either her or society’s larger problem. I would
argue that it does not.
Remember, Brown got 90 days in jail while
Grant paid a SI,OOO fine.
You decide who got off easier (pun intend
ed again).
How about Hollywood madam Heidi
Fleiss? She got three years, and Charlie Sheen
got to be a witness for the prosecution.
It’s always the prostitute who comes out on
the bad end of the deal.
Neither the men who solicit prostitutes nor
the women (and to a less frequent extent,
men) who sell sex for money deserve to be in
prison. Remember, your tax dollars pay for
the police who arrested them, the courts that
tion to this simple distinction. Although
qualified by subsequent passages, the edi
torial includes the claim that, in the past,
“having slaves or being a Klansman was
acceptable.”
It was not, of course, acceptable to have
slaves; it was merely thought to be by some
(though by no means all) of our ancestors.
It is quite reasonable, and not in the
least unfair, to ask whether those among
our ancestors who supported slavery
should be honored, by way of the names
on some of our buildings, rather than those
who opposed it.
James Coley
Deputy Secretary of the Faculty
Office of Faculty Governance
Student Raids Piggy Bank
To Get Rid of Bills, Coins
With Slaveholders’ Faces
TO THE EDITOR:
Thank you, Students Seeking Historical
Truth, for enlightening us with your shock
ing discovery of the blatantly obvious.
After reading the articles concerning
this group of patriots, I immediately sprang
forth to my wallet to dispense of all of my
$1 and S2O bills. I also raided my piggy
bank to weed out all of the heinous nickels
Vicky Eckenrode & Courtney Weill
MANAGING EDITORS
William Hill
ONLINE EDITOR
Whitney Moore
WRITING COACH
Terry Wimmer
OMBUDSMAN
convicted them and the jails that housed
them.
Wouldn’t that money be better spent else
where -1 mean, anywhere else!
I’m not saying we need government regula
tion of prostitution - only government could
figure out a way to ruin sex! I’m suggesting
that we simply announce that we’re not going
to arrest you anymore if you want to pay
another consenting adult to have sex with
you.
Let me be very clear -1 said consenting
adult. Kids should be protected to the fullest
extent of the law.
And maybe, if we spent less money getting
big nasties like Hugh Grant, Eugene
Robinson, Darryl Strawberry and Divine
Brown off the streets, we’d have more
resources to get these kids who turn to prosti
tution - many of them runaways - the help
they need.
One of the greatest ironies in all of this is
that it is perfectly legal for me to pay two
strangers to have sex with each other while
filming them and then sell that film to other
people.
In fact, I could hire myself to star in such a
movie. Then I’d pay myself to have sex with
someone else, whom I’d also be paying to
have sex with me, and that would be legal! If
that doesn’t make sense to you, you’re not
alone.
It seems to me that if I can pay other peo
ple to have sex for the purpose of watching,
or if I can pay myself to have sex, I ought to
be able to eliminate the middle man (pun
intended yet again) and just pay someone else
to have sex with me.
Plus, you know those union guys running
the cameras are charging an arm and a leg
(pun intended for the last time).
Chris Harrison is a second-year law student
and doctoral candidate in political science
from Chapel Hill. Reach him with questions
and comments at barkley@email.unc.edu.
with the disgusting, slave-owning face of
Thomas Jefferson staring at me coldly.
That bastard!
SSHT needs to perform a reality check.
I would dare say that most prominent fig
ures of colonial and pre-Civil War days
owned slaves, and being the wealthy peo
ple they were, it is not a stretch to assume
that many buildings and other landmarks
up and down the East Coast can be traced
to these people. What’s your point, SSHT?
You have pointed out the obvious in a
degrading, ignorant fashion. Why prod
through closets to dig up skeletons that
have been buried for over a century?
These buildings are nothing but metal
and wood, slapped with a name to differ
entiate one from all the rest.
My advice is to stop creating more un
needed arguments and turn your attention
to a more constructive endeavor. Slavery
and racism are unjust, but in this case I
have to say, “Let sleeping dogs lie.”
Brantley Partin
Senior
History
Candidates’ Forum
The Daily Tar Heel welcomes letters of
endorsement for candidates running for
town office. Endorsement letters will
appear in the DTH’s Nov. ! issue.
(Sljr Daily sor
F
The Daily Tar Heel wel
comes reader comments
and criticism. Letters to the
editor should be no longer
than 400 words and must
be typed, double-spaced,
dated and signed by no
more than two people.
Students should include
their year, major and phone
number. Faculty and staff
should include their title,
department and phone
number. The DTH reserves
the right to edit letters for
space, clarity and vulgarity.
Publication is not guaran
teed. Bring letters to the
DTH office at Suite 104,
Carolina Union, mail them
to P.O. Box 3257, Chapel
Hill, NC 27515 or e-mail
forum to: dth@unc.edu.