The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 78, No. 31, Ed. 1 Friday, April 12, 1991 Page: 4 of 16
sixteen pages : ill. ; page 19 x 15 in.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
4 FRIDAY, APRIL 12, 1991 THE RICE THRESHER
GOOP, GOOP NEWS, FOLKS1 YOURS
TRULY HAS JUST ACQUIRED THE
FIRST BROADCAST SERIAL RIGHTS
TO "NANCY RBA6AN: THE UN-
AUTHORIZED BIOGRAPHY, "W
KITTY KEUEY, ANP
DUE OUT TOP AY!
IT'S ALL HERB, 6AN6 - THE
SCANDALS, THE MOBSTERS, THE
HAIRDRESSERS, THE CLOSETS,
THE POLYPS, THE HAIRDRESSERS,
THE SINATRAS, THE SPREADSHEETS,
\ THE HAIR-
ITS ALL SO EXPLOSIVE, fVEASKBP
MY GOOP FRIENP ZONKER HARRIS
TO BE HERE AS TASTE REFEREE ■
HE HAS SELECTED OUR FIRST EX-
CERPT. LET'S START 'EM OFF
"JULIUS DYEP
THE PRESIPENfe
GRAY ROOTS, WHICH
HE'P BEEN DOING
. I * — //
5A5Y!
ISAtP,
EASY!
%
fw
IF YOCrVE JUST JOINED US, WERE
REAPING EXCERPTS FROM THE
UNAUTHORIZED BIO, "NANCY
REAGAN."ZONK, I'M TROUBLEP
ABOUT PISCUSSING HER HOLLY-
WOOD YEARS. TASTE RULING 2
^ PROCEED'
THERE'S ABSOLUTELY
NOTHING WRONG
WITH A 28-YEAR.-0U?
SINGLE GAP KICKING
UP HER HEELS NOIAJ
ANP THEN! EVEN
BACK IN THE '405!
WELL, OKAY. HER
FIRST HOLLYIMOOP
BOYFRJENP WAS
BENNY THAU. "SHE
MAS ALWAYS GO-
ING UP TO HIS OF
FICE BECAUSE..."
HIS OFFICE?
WHAT MAS
BENNY'S
LINE OF WORK?.
LAWYER*
PENTIST?
SALESMAN?
NO! ANP
SHE MAS
AN ACTRESS!
WHAT LUCK/
\
GET THIS—
HEAD OF
CASTING!
/
[^ORE EXCLUSIVE EXCERPTS FROM
KITTY KELLEY'S "NANCY REAGAN"..
"WHEN CAMERON, THE SON OF MI-
CHAEL REAGAN, VISITEP IHEWHrTE
HOUSE, THE TODDLER WAS CLUTCH -
INGHISTEPPYBEAR. SEVERAL
MOUTHS LATER...
CAMERON RECEIVEPA PACKAGE,
&FTWRAPPEP. THE CARD REAP-
\HAPPY BIRTHPAY TO OUR GRANDSON.
LOVE, GRANPMA ANP GRANDPA'."
AHA!SO "THE GIFT:
THEY PIP CAMERON'S
CARE... OWN LOST
/ TEPPY BEAR,
i \
"5L - ^
ALTHOUGH NANCY ANP THE PRESIDENT
HAP YET TO SEE THEIR NEW GRANP
CHI CP, WHO WAS SIXTEEN MONTHS
OCP, SHE RESENTED CRITICISM THAT
THEY WERE COLPANP UNCARING
ABOUT THEIR FAMILY.
UNDERSTANDABLY'
"FT WAS DISHEART-
ENING TO HAVE
V ADMIT HOW THE
HRST LADY POMI-
| NATEPHI5 PRESI-
DENCY,'SAIP A
[WHITE HOUSE AIDE!i
"ITWASNANC/
MHO DICTATED
THE PRESIDENT^
SCHEDULE, SU-
PERVISED HIS
SPEECHES, AND
CONTROLLED
ACCESS.
%
"WHEN HIS AIPES PRESENTED HIM
WITH A DETAILED AGENDA FORHIS
FIRST MEETING WITH GORBACHEV, THE
PRESIDENTSAIP,1HAVE YOU SHOWN
THIS TO NANCY?' NO, SIR'. 'HJELC,
GET BACK TOME AFTERSHt'SPASSED
ON IT." , ,
SHE INSTRUCTED AIPES TO PREPARE
COMPLETE SCRIPTS. WHEN HE MET CD BORINQ,
WITH ROBERT BYRD AND OTHER SEN- MARK. (2)
AWRS, HIS CUE CARP REAP: (1)1 LETS SKIP
WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOURIN- AHEAD TO
PUT. (2) CAN YOU TELE ME MORE THE GOOP
CO PARTY ON,
ZONK. (CUP
HANDS ANP
MAKE BARN-
YARD NOISES.)
PARTS!
" * SOMEONE IN THE FAMILY CALLED
NANCY TO ASK IF SHE CMP CONTRI-
BUTE SO WE COULD BUY A HEADSTONE
FORfHER GRANDMOTHER'S) GRAVE,
BUT NANCY SAIP SHE COULDNT AF ~
FORD IT. RONNIE WAS MAKING
*150,000A YEAR THEN. '"\
" THE PAVISES 'PHYSICIAN PHONED
NANCY TO SAY HER PARENTS NEEDED
A NURSE FOR. WEEKENDS. 'NANCY
SAID, "ARE YOU MILLING TO PAY FOR
FTf IF YOU WANT TO PUT A NURSE ON,
THEN yOUlO HAVE TO MY FOR IT"'"
" THE WIFE OF AN AGENT RECALLED
TRYING TO GIVE HER A REPORT ON
VARIOUS NURSING HOMES, BUT NANCY
CUT HEROFF.1JUST TELLMEMHICH
IS THE CHEAPEST. AFTER ALL, IT'SA
JUST RONNIE'S MOTHER
COULD YOU
HOLD THE
FORT? I
GOTTA CALL
HOME...
NO! PONT
LEAVE ME
HERE ALONE
MJ/TH THIS!
ANPNOW
FOR AN
EDITORIAL.
COMMENT.
MARK?
THANKS, ZONK,
BY NOW, EVERYONE
IN THE WORLD MUST
KNOW ABOUT NANCY
REAGAN'S MHITE
HOUSE"LUNCHES."
EVEN WHEN IT RELATES TO
A GUEST WHOSE INVOLVEMENT
COMPROMISED NOT JUST THE
DIGNITY BUT THE SECURITYOF
THE PRESIDENCY, MUCH AS IT
HAD DURING A PREVIOUS AD-
MINISTRATION! THANK YOU
ANP GOOP NIGHT.
OUR OWN VIEW IS
THAT WHAT A GROMN
WOMAN-EVEN A FIRST
LADY- DOES BEH/NP
CLOSED POORS IS HER
OWN MMN BUSINESS..
ABIT WE ARE NOT.
CONFLICTED, BUT WE DO
ARE MS?
NEEPA
SHOIAIER.
\
h
Math professor
disagrees with
dating proposal
To the Editor
As reported in the Thresher (March 22), Rice
faculty have been considering a proposed state-
ment on professional ethics concerning the inad-
visability of amorous relationships between stu-
dents and faculty. No such statement currently
exists, and it is widely felt that given the exist-
ence of student-faculty dating, a clarification of
faculty policy is necessary. A draft statement
passed easily at a faculty meeting March 19, and
it appears likely that the statement, essentially in
its current form, will be approved by a second and
final vote at the next meeting.
I am very strongly opposed to the draft state-
ment. It is morally overbearing and legally con-
fusing; it is condescending to students; it com-
bines too wide a spectrum of situations under one
label; it exaggerates the power of faculty and the
powerlessness of students; and it pretends that
universal issues of human relationships are prob-
lems unique to student-faculty dating. I do not
believe that making this statement will improve
the relationships between students and faculty.
The central premise of the statement is that
an amorous relationship between a student and a
faculty member is necessarily "unwise" and pos-
sibly unethical, irrespective of whether the fac-
ulty member has any professional jurisdiction
over the student or is likely to have such jurisdic-
tion in the future. (What one would assume is a
much more serious and problematic situation,
the case where such jurisdiction exists, is only
covered at the end of the second paragraph as a
I do not doubt that there are
instances at Rice of students
being coerced into damaging
sexual relationships, and by
opposing the faculty statement,
I do not mean to trivialize such
concerns. However, I do not
believe the proposed statement
will diminish these dangers.
special case of the general issue.) Quoting from
the statement, "Positions as faculty . . . confer
power that underlies all associations with stu-
dents, who are acutely aware of their vulnerability
in face of such institutionally sanctioned author-
ity." In the same vein, there is Carol Quillen's
comment (quoted in the Thresher) that profes-
sors are made mystical at Rice, giving any pro-
fessor power over any student
I believe this view is highly inaccurate. First of
all, Rice does not merely have a 2-tier pecking
order: we have freshmen, seniors, undergradu-
ate advisers, undergraduate TA's, graduate stu-
dents, graduate TA's, post-does, junior faculty,
senior faculty, chairs, deans and a president
Despite the faculty council's attempts, there is no
simple categoration of the Rice academic com-
munity into the powerful and the powerless. (An
odd implication of the statement is that for a
Math grad TA and an English grad TA to date is
unwise because of their great power over each
other.)
Presumably the cause of greatest concern are
relationships between undergraduates and pro-
fessors, though if this is the focus of the state-
ment then it should be made explicit However,
even in this case, I do not agree that this power is
as universal as suggested.
I am unaware of any authority, officially sanc-
tioned or otherwise, that I have over students not
in my class. And though there are students who
appear able to see me only as a figure of power,
there are others who seem to have no such
problem—with some of these students I have
genuine, deep friendships. An implication of the
faculty point of view is that these friendships are
fundamentally limited by my mystical power:
this is insulting to both the students and myself.
I do not doubt that there are instances at Rice
of students being coerced into damaging sexual
relationships, and by opposing the faculty state-
ment, I do not mean to trivialize such concerns.
However, I do not believe the proposed state-
ment will diminish these dangers. Finally, I be-
lieve that successful romantic relationships be-
tween formally unassociated students and fac-
ulty pose a much smaller threat to the general
teaching environment than is claimed in the
faculty statement.
Marty Ross
Mathematics
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Zitterkopf, Ann & Howe, Harlan. The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 78, No. 31, Ed. 1 Friday, April 12, 1991, newspaper, April 12, 1991; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth245783/m1/4/: accessed June 20, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.