INDEX
AIU 12
Spona 20
EdHorlllla __ 28
Comlca 29
Cleaaltled Ada _30
Vol. 67 N:). 1 August 22, 1994 30P~ An Iroepeoclent StlDmt Newspaper
Report: Sexism alive and well
Taskforce finds women are often
discriminated against at U of L
Dy Mlchoet A. Lindenberger
S~affWriter
Just a year after many labeled
1993 The Year of the Woman in
recognition of the many gains
women made in seeking political
offices, a report recently released at
the University ofLouisvilleaucmpts
to remove the blinders from people
who think sexism is a problem for
the history books.
The Report on the Status of
Women said in its introduction that
"many men, and some women, be­lieve
that discriminatory treatment
of women has ended. h has noL The
task force learned that work experi­encesof
women at the University of
Louisville are very different from
the experiences of male peers .... "
In fact, women form a smaller
percentage of university faculty
nationwide than they did more than
I 00 years ago, the
report said.
"The pcrcent­ageofwomen
fac­ulty,
currently 27
percent nation­wide,
has not actu­ally
increased
since the late 19th
Century," accord-ing
10 the report. "It is in fact lower
than in I 880, when women comprised
36percentoffacultypositions in higher
education. The recent increase merely
represents an improvement over the
all -time low that existed in the post-GI
Bill period; 28 percent offacully posi­tions
were held by women in 1940,
dropping to 23 percent in 1960."
Nevertheless, the primary focus of
the report was not statistical imbal­ances,
rather members found that
subtle, institutionalized attitudes make
women's "work experiences" less re­warding
than that of their male col­leagues.
And that means there are no easy
answers, said Linda Shapiro, a task
forceco-chairandan associate univer­sity
provost.
"Since the fundamental, underly­ing
problems identified by the task
force relate to organizational climate .
.. implemenJation of the recommenda­tions
wi II take a long-term, consistent,
concerted effort by the University com­munity
," Shapiro said.
ImplemenJation will require a per­manemCommissionon
Women, which
will report directly to the president, she
said.
"This is especially important at this
See TRUSTEES, Page 2
Women at work ...
Top: Greek affairs coordinator Jonl Burke
oversees the Induction of new sorority members
August 19. Below: Student Lite's Joyce Britt (left)
takes a break to talk to SGA's Sheryl Meier (right)
during a recent work day.
Staff photos by Harry Sanders
Some question feminist claims, say victim-approach is suspect
By Jodi Heintz
Staff Writer
What was clear about gender inequality
30 years ago is not so clear !Oday. As
enlightened as we think we are, women's
issues are still very complex and debat­able.
Within the last year, two new books
haverockedthewomen's movement'sboat
by suggesting women are not nearly as
powerless as they might think.
Warren Farrell, author ofT~ Myth of
Male Powtr, and Naomi Wolf, author of
Fire with Fire: T~ New Female Power
and How It Will Change 1~ 21st Century,
have turned the gender tables and theorize
that women are the more powerful sex.
The two authors discuss the progress women
have made, female voting power, the role of
victims and reverse discrimination.
Wolrs book has been widely accepted by a
mainstream audience, but called elitist by femi­nists.
She contends women must build their own
networks (the old girls' network), must take
responsibility for their own bodies (to avoid
abortion, rape and sexual harassment), and real­ize
they are not the puritanical, do-gooders many
feminists portray.
Farrell also disputes the male-only violence
covered by the media by citing numerous female
murderers and their victims (all men and chil­dren).
He argues women have far more choices
available to them (to work or stay home, to have
an abortion or have the child and "sue" for
support), and equates the stress men face
from being the "money-makingmachine"
to the trauma a woman faces from rape
(and says at least a woman has national
hot lines and shelters for support).
PROGRESS
Farrell's and Wolrs arguments seem
simplistically cut-and-dry, but realities
such as the recent University of Louis­ville
task force findings on gender equity
show the issue is far from being solved
(See story on this page).
Judi Jennings, directorofthe Women's
Center, said that while women are being
taken more seriously,they are not signifi­cantly
better off than they were 20 to 30
See THE MYTH, Page 2
U of L Stadium : Dead or Alive?
Faculty to assemble
August 26 to vote on
governance changes
By Paul Fultz
Staff Writer
Members of the U of L faculty will assemble
Friday, August 26 to vote on administration
proposals concerning governance, post-tenure
review and the redefinition of faculty members'
roles. If passed by the Board of Trustees, these
proposals would significantly change orne basic
operating principles of the University.
This vote is only thelatestchaptcr ina struggle
between the faculty and administraJ.ion that daJ.Cs
back to at least May 1993, when the faculty
overwhelmingly rejected different versions of
the same proposals. Over a year of negotiations
have produced the versions that will go before
the assembly Friday.
Rick Stremel is chair of the Faculty Senai.C,
which requested the faculty assembly. Stremel
said he could not overemphasize the assembly's
importance to the faculty.
"The importance of the assembly is that it is
the voice of the faculty," Stremel said. "The
senate has negotiatcd long and hard with the
administration, and the outcome ultimaJ.Ciy rests
with the faculty ."
One of the major issues under consideration is
periodic career review, also known as post-ten­ure
review. The administration initially wanted
to review Jcnured and certain non-tenured pro­fessors
every five years. Ifthcirperformance was
deemed unacceptable, they were to come up with
a plan for improvement which had to be imple­mented
within one year. Failure to successfully
"The importance of the
assembly Is that it is the
voice of the faculty. The
senate has negotiated long
and hard with the adminis­tration,
and the outcome
ultimately rests with the
faculty."
- Rick Stremel
Faculty Senate Chair
execute the plan would be cause for dismissal.
The faculty counJ.Cred with a plan to make the
reviews every eight years and to give faculty
lhrec years to show improvement. The compro­mise
version still calls for reviews every five
years but gives two years for improvement.
But Stremel said he still thinks this policy
change is unwise and impractical.
"I find that a lot of administrators think thi is
a big mistake," said Stremcl, who is also a profes­sor
at U ofL's medical school. "It is going to take
up a lot of time and energy. Here at the medical
school we will need one full-time person justiO
deal with the paperwork. It 's going to be a
Sec FACULTY, Page 10
Trustees chair stacks presidential
search committee with trustees
By Amy Hurrman
Staff Writer
Of the 13 members of the com mince charged
with finding a replacement for out-going presi­dent
Donald Swain, just one will be a student,
two are faculty members and one is a staff mem­ber.
Of the 13 members, II are current trustees,
and one, Woodford Porter, is a former board
chair.
The lone student, student government Presi­dent
Todd Schmiedeler, said so many trustees
were picked for the committee because they
already are bound by oaths of confidentiality.
"Jones said he selected the people he did
because the most important factor for the com­mittee
is confidentiality," Schmiedeler said.
Trustees are bound by stale law to keep some
things they hear in closed meetings confidential,
he said.
"As trustee members weare sworn, we take an
oath, promising 10 beconfidential," Schmiedeler
says. "There are things we aren't allowed to
discuss, for a lot of reasons."
Schmiedeler will represent about22,000 fel­low
students while searching for a su cessor 10
Swain, who will slepdown next summer, despite
requests from students, faculty, staff and alumni,
for the search committee to be representative of
the entire University community.
The sole non-trustee member of the commit­tee,
which will report its recommendations to the
full board after a search committee comes up
with a list of candidaJ.Cs, is law school professor
Linda Ewald. Trustees George Fischer and Gene
Gardner will chair the search committee. Other
committee members (besides Gardner, Fischer,
Jones and Schmiedeler) include:
• Trustees Minx Auberach, SJ.Cve Bing, Mike
Harreld, Mike Livingston and Olga Peers.
• Faculty senate chair Richard Strcmel.
• Staff senate chair Susan Rhodes.
• Associate dean and law school staff mem­ber,
Linda Ewald.
• Former U of L trustee, Woodford Porter.
Jones asked facuhy ,staff, students and alumni
See SEARCH, Page 10
Stadium backers say deal is just a matter of time; others question need for stadium, availability of funds
By Ann Kalayil
Staff Writer
With football season fast approaching, uncer­tainty
about the proposed 50,000-seat stadium
looms overhead. But the stadium's main sup­porter,
banker Malcolm Chancey, says the project
still has a green light
"The stadium is not dead by any means,"
Chancey said. "We the comm iuee are very hope­ful
about it and we will work very hard to do our
part."
When the General Assembly denied the
University's requestS? million in state fund and
increasing intcrest rates drove projcctc<l costs
much higher than anticipated, the future of the
stadium darkened considerably.
However, Chancey said that new issues have
changed those outlooks.
''The intcrest rates don't seem now like they
are much of a factor because now they are going
back down," Chancey said. "And as for the S7
million in bonds,the government has a surplus in
revenues, so we are being reviewed."
However, an Aug. 16 Courier·Journal story
Indicated many state politicians think those
urplusfunds will go10 le controversial projects
like the expansion of the Louisville Convention
Center and a similar project in
Covington, Ky. In fact, the article said
several stadium backers are investi­gating
the possibility of creating a
local, Louisville-only lottery game to
create the revenue to pay the bond
payments.
Chancey said he still expects the
revenue to come from the more tradi­tional
sources, but that he is willing to
consider new ideas if necessary.
The Liberty National Bank chair­man
was especially optimistic since
Gov. Brereton Jones is taking a per­sonal
intcrcst in the project.
"You can quote me because I'm
quoting him (Jones) - he wants it to
happen," Chancey said. "It's on the governor's
plai.C."
Franklin Jelsmn, chief of staff of external
affairs for the governor, said Jones is personally
interc ted in the stadium because of the benefits
for the school as well as the Louisville area.
"The governor think the stadium is good for
the city," Jclsma id. "He feels it' a needed
project for the Loua ville football program ns
well."
Dan Hall, a istantto U of L President Donald
Swain, said Swain asked the trustees 10 wait until
January to decide on the fate of the project. Hall
agreed with Chancey, saying the major factor
involved is the governor, but said funding is still
a problem.
"The key lies with the governor and the fund­ing,"
Hall said. "ll's hard to assess the odds.
We've already a ed the fans for SIS million in
ticket ales and Mr. Chancey is exploring other
option ."
One viable option is a CSX Corp. land swap.
Land owned by the CSX Corp. is
the proposed sill: of the stadium.
"Land swaps have been done
before, but the environmental is­sues
must be resolved in the state
of the land," Hall said. "CSX has
already said they will resolve this
on their own and take the respon­sibility."
Chanceysaidthegovemorhas
people working with the CSX
Corp on the environmental is­sues
regarding the possible land
swap, which would trade some
other, tate-owned land for the
land needed for the stadium.
Other alternative must be sought
"It's frustrating because it's impacting other
funding such as the Medical Research Building,"
Hall said. "But we're hopeful that before the '96
session the stadium issue will be resolved."
Petcr Hasselbacher, former faculty represen­tative
of the Board of Directors of the U of L
Athletic Association said funding a stadium now
is not in the best interest of the university.
"I'm not against the stadium; I think the
timing is not right," Hasselbacher said. "I think
that if we want to do something for our Athletic
Department then we should fund our university
sports parlc which is a higher priority in my
opinion as well as other faculty member's opin­ions."
The sports park, of which the Bass-Rudd
Tennis Center is the first phase, will encompass
the area between the ceni.Cr and Cardinal Boule­vard.
Along with the tennis center, plans include
a swimming pool and other facilities.
Hasselbacher thinks the wrong message is
being sent to thecommunity and students, saying
that there is only so much money in the commu­nity
and that means that there is competition
between academics and the stadium.
"I think that it is wise 10 plan for a stadium,
like putting aside the land," Hasselbacher said.
"I hope we have a more convenient stadium
someday, but not now."
Phil Laemmle,current memberofthestadium
commiuee believes the stadium is also compet­ing
with other projects outside of the University.
"One of the projects is the Convention Center
which has a lot of business support and those are
a lot if the same people that upportthestadium,"
Laemmle said. "I don 'tthink you can get both."