Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTimes-Advocate, 1986-05-14, Page 4Poe* . Times-Advocat*, voca *1q Serving South Huron; North Middlesex & North. Lambton Since 1873 Published by J.W. [edy Publications Limited Published is h Wednesday Morning at Exeter, Posta 'f ctond Class Mail Registration Ni+nnber Q Phone 51l235.133,;it�. .., t) ,C� ISO LORNE EEDY Publisher NM BECKETT Advertising Manager BILE BATTEN Editor HARRY DEVRIES Composition Manager ROSS HAUGH Assistant Editor DICK JONGKIND Business Manager SUBSCRIPTION RATES: Canada: $25.00 Per year, U.S.A. $65.00 C.W.N.A., O.C.N,A. CLASS 'A' HERR THE NEWS? NO FREE VOTE OH OCTAL PUNISMENT! re Need some guidelines In Russia, people are not allowed to question government decisions; in fact, they are not even cognizant of most or those decisions. Their process does not provide for the type of introspective ex-. '. amination that designers in this country have had to meet to satisfy the critics that the hazards have been reduced to the lowest factor possible. The Russian accident should lead to a re-examiniation of the safety and ac- cident contingency plans of nuclear plants in this country and it is certainly appropriate that civic officials in this area get some answers on what steps the residents of their municipalities shouldk take if a major problem -arises at the;. Bruce Nuclear plant. There's no reason to doubt that safe- ty measures are stricter in Ontario than Russia, or that the populance would be more quickly advised of any accident. But people in this area are no better in- formed of what steps to take in case of an accident than those living near Chernobyl: Do we too find out 36 hours after the ' fact that a lack of information and preparedness subjected us to radiation risks that could have been avoided -or at least minimized'? Despite the assurances that "it couldn't happen here", the nuclear plant disaster in Chernobyl has given op- ponents of nuclear power plants some new ammunition in their battle against the space-age technology. Ontario Hydro officials have clear- ly been put on the spot in trying to calm an uneasy publicus reports of the Rus- sian disaster slowly become known. It may be small consolation, but On- tario residents can certainly rest assured that any such accident in this province would be handled in an extremely dif- ferent manner and to some extent, the democratic process ensures more safe- ty than that which is obviously afforded to Russians. Russian officials have now confirm- ed that officials at Chernobyl were unaware of the dangers the accident pos ed for people in the immediate area and evacuation did not take place for almost 36 hours after the radio active clouds started to spew their deadly cargo. It is apparent that workers at the site werenot trained in emergency pro- cedures and there is a suggestion that many of the safety measures taken at On- tario nuclear plants to contain radiation levels are non-existent in the U.S.S.R. .. Nice guys finish last! That sporting axiom has been discredited by many, but now a Univer- sity of Western Ontario professor has come up with a theory that may indicate why fans support the "bad guys" in such attractions as wrestling. Jim Freedman suggests that profes- sional wrestling is as much a parody of democracy as it is a series of ham- merlocks and half-nelsons. Wrestlers act out in the ring what many of their fans believe are the "phoney promises of liberal. democracy". In life, hard work and clean living are not always rewarded with pro- motions and acceptance, even though that's what a liberal democracy is sup- posed to be about. in practice, however, Rules Yhave__changed �s it's more likely the "good guy ' who winds up face first on the mat. Freedman, ' who came to know wrestling and its fans through a two-year stint as a ring announcer, claims the sport is a "severe critique of liberal democracy as practiced, not as ideologized". That's a rather stinging indictment of the system, but it may be closer to the truth than most would care to admit. There's a certain strength and dedication needed to make it to the top, but just as many get there using brutal tactics, whether it be in athletic endeavours or the many others humans pursue. The new version of the golden rule appears to be "do unto others before they do it to you." • Great time Followers of the comic strip Peanuts will know that Lucy's plan to be named Queen of the May dance was thwarted when the event had to be cancelled because the school couldn't get liability insurance to protect the participants from accident. After the smile fades, the realization starts to sink in that society is slowly, but apparently just as surely, turning itself into a domain where its members will become hermits; fearful of any relationship with the other hermit members due to the prospect of become entangled in a law suit. Your first reaction is that the editqr is obviously over-stating the situation! Perhaps in the pre- sent tense, but one wonders if it is an accurate prognostication in the future. Charles Schulz drew a laugh with i,ucy's claim to fame being denied, but the reality is that there are a number of school pro- grams that have cancelled or cur- tailed because education officials can not pay for the insurance coverage required to protect them from suits that may arise from an unfortunate accident. Even a maypole dance has its pit- falls, as evidenced by the fact that Charlie Brown became en- tangled in the ribbons shortly after Lucy and her friends wondered aloud who could be clumsy enough to get tangled around a maypole. Almost daily, it appears, there are stories about organizations which have to suspend planned for hermits activities because they are unable to get the necessary in- surance to protect themselves. Although it's a slightly dif- ferent situation, there was the re- cent news that more and more active and potential foster parents in Ontario are deciding Batt'n Around ...with The Editor it's just not worth the legal has- sle to gel involved in that needed service. The president of the Foster Parents Association of Ontario reported that some foster parents are so unnerved by potential legal problems that they are refusing to touch their children while others are simply quitting in frustration over the fact children wield a weighty legal stick now that children's rights are entrenched in legislation. Restrictive child welfare laws have so frightened some foster parents that they refuse to hold or cuddle a child because they might end up charged with sex- ual or physical abuse. in general, we have become so concerned about protecting rights, properties and humans that there has been an almost NO NOOSE 13 GOOD NOOSE' • total neglect of the fact that peo- ple have responsibilities. That surely includes the responsibility to assume some risks for their own actions and misadventures. A clumsy Charlie Brown can get tangled up in maypole; but does that suggest that he should have legal recourse for his clumsiness or that the school.board should sus- pend the event or face the high liability insurance cost to protect themselves against the clumsy Charlie Browns of the world? it's apparent that many foster parents have concluded it is no longer worth the risk of helping children because the rights of the latter seem to take precedence over the rights of those parents to apply reasonable discipline or other parental dictates. And in case you hadn't noticed, there are a growing number of people .who are afraid to com- municate either verbally or physically with children because they fear being hauled beforr the courts on sexual abuse charges. Following closely on the heels of that nonsense is the fact that terrorists have managed to pur- suade most people to stay home and the Russians and other air polluters have forced us to stay inside when we are home. So, how close are we assuming that the pitfalls of life make a hermit's existence preferable? The pendulum is swinging ever more .precariously in that direction! Color me pink 1 guess it was inevitable. It had,, to come sooner or later. Women have been wearing three-piece suits and striped ties for quite some time. We've all become ac- customed to seeing our wives, daughters, sisters and mothers wearing anything from camouflage -coloured battle fatigues to blazers and grey flan- nels, from baseball. caps to bowlers hats. So why shouldn't men have a go •at pink VIM' ro3e-Mlittr t t digans and flowery undervWear? There is no reason why we shouldn't. There is nothing.par- ticularly feminine about the col- our pink. it's all in our heads. We wrap our infants in pink receiving blankets on the day they're born - if they're born with one set of genitals - and we put them in light blue swaddling clothes if they're born* with the other. Baby's clothes and toys and greeting cards and rattles and soothers and bottles and wallpaper and pottie seats all teach him or her whether he or she is a member of the masculine or feminine gender. As if without this colour coding the kid would be confused. What a lot of nonsense! As our children get older, this colour obs ssion continues. Girls must have frilly, pretty, dainty, femininelittle things in pink and rose and pale purple and lily white. Boys? Let them he rough and tough and dressed in grey, brown and dull -blue, so they can get used to the drab clothes they wear later in life? At least, that was the pattern until now. But they tell us male fashions are changing, undergo- ing a revolution. Women have already broken the barriers of convention. They are no longer afraid of being called mannish or unfeminine when they wear men's clothing. Are men on the verge of being liberated, too? Are we going to becomes° sure of our manhood that we will actually wear soft, frilly, pink and fluffy "women's clothes'"? I don't know whether we're ready for so much liberation just e • Peter -1 4. Hesse! Column yet. 1 went to the local haber- dashery last week, just to see for myself what all the fuss was about. At first 1 thought that the store had switched to women's apparel. I stepped back on the sidewalk to check whether it was still the same firm. Sure enough, men's and boys' clothing, it said. And then I recognized the colour ful merchandise in the Window: these pinks, bright yellows, pastel purples, these splashy spring hues were meant for us. it's a revolution, alright. 1 live in a fairly small community, a conservative place. I wonder what is going on in the big cities. didn't buy anything. This was simply an exploratory trip. I had to see to believe. I'm in favour of this develop- ment. Get rid of sexual stereotyp- ing once and for all. I.et the men wear pink see-through blouses and the women study work shirts. In fact. 1 don't think we should stop at colours and styles. If women can wear pants, men can wear skirts. And dreKsses. And nylons. Why not? Where is it written that an executive who goes to work in a smart Ports dress, -wearing $150 high -heel shoes with"matching purse has to be a man? And why should a male nurse wear different clothes than a female nurse? Why C:fft'I a>;graie °.olive' •offieerisheMtf? a uniform (u•n44-o-r-m - get • it'? ) that resembles his female col- league's in every detail. As 1 said, I'm in favour of all these developments. We won't have equality until we break down these ridiculous, old- fashioned dress codes that divide us. Would 1 he willing to go along with all these changes? Why not? The only trouble is, when it comes to clothing, I'm a follower, not a leader•. I'm prepared to wear pink, dont get me wrong. Pink is a lovely' colour, and would be happy wearing it year round. But I'm not going to .pioneer it where 1 work or where 1 live. When 1 see one deputy minister, two executive assistants and three policy ad- visors - all male - come to meetings in low-cut dresses ;mil neatly matched accessories, when my male neighbours drive their tractors, push their lawn mowers or walk their dogs wear- ing anything al all like the sluff that is being pushed al the men's wear stores these days, then and only then will 1 have the courage of my convictions. 'I'hen and on- ly then will you see me finally liberated, at least as far as clothing is concerned. Something is wrong Maybe you've heard of the man who came into a hardware store and bought two hammers. The next day he came back and bought two more. This went on for six days until finally the owner could restrain his curiosi- ty no longer. "What on earth are you doing with all those hammers?" he asked. "Why I'm taking them out and selling them." "Flow much are you getting for them?" "Four dollars even." "Why that's a dollar less than you're paying for them." "Well maybe so, came back the reply, "but it sure beats farming. Sounds laughable doesn't it but most farmers would not see the humor in it any more fiance many are honestly in that very situa- tion. They are being forced to sell their products for less money than it costs to produce them by a strange set of circumstances which shows no signs of getting better in the immediate future. Farmers around the world (in the countries which are modern and mechanized) have become so efficient at producing food that the world markets are saturated. Many European governments By the -.I Way by Syd Fletcher are heavily subsidizing the farmers because it is politically suicidal to raise the price of a loaf of bread in the marketplace. In the U.S. you have the odd situa- tion in which farmers are paid to not grow crops so that the -piles of unsold grain do not grow even larger. Somehow, somewhere, J something is wrong when we look at the increase in wages for the average person as compared to the rise in the prices of food. Twenty yeras ago you paid about fifty cents a pound for ham- burger. Now you can get it (on sale, mind you) for just over a dollar. The average wage of an auto plant worker then was around $5000 per year and is now over $30000. People are being paid almost six times as much yet grumble about it. Now all of us know that the farmer's costs have increased by at least ten fold over that period of time yet we are unwilling to give him a fair return on his in- vestment. We would rather just sit back and selfishly feast on food which is among the cheapest in the world and let our farmers be destroyed, so that they will soon not be the vital force which they have been since (he beginn- ing of this country's history. Next week 1 will tell you why we will be sorry if we allow this to happen.