Letters Logo Correctly Deciphered

"To whom it may concern,

It is sickening to see the blatant double standard your newspaper employs by allowing various perverted opinions of twisted minorities to be published. You seem to endorse these views.

When contrary views such as yours truly (and very little others) are submitted for publication, the biased hand of the censor prevents the real truth from being told. To add insult to injury, when we are libelled by our innumerable adversaries (such as marxists, pseudo-marxixts, neo-marxists, Jewish marxists, black marxists, multi-coloured marxists, ignorant marxists and even more ignorant marxists - please note we are totally unprejudiced in our prejudice against marxists) we are denied our right to defend our superior ideals in writing.

A word on the abortion issue. The practise of abortion is very obviously a crime against the autonomy of the stale and therefore a criminal act.

Meanwhile, back in Northern Ireland, a new phenomenon has entered the power struggle. This

- ends -"

The above is my answer to the "decipher the letter and win a 6 pack of chocky fish" competition. It is a very good letter too.

Registrar Replies to 'Insensitive' Charge

I cannot accept, without comment, the remarks made by Mr D.A. Campbell in his letter (Salient. 25 May 1981) regading "two insensitive, bureaucratic 'administiators".

Let me say at the outset that the decision not to accept Mr Campbell's late application for conferment of his degree at the public graduation ceremony was mine, and mine alone. The Academic Registrat, Mr Perrott, is widely considered by both staff and students to be an efficient administiator who is far from insensitive. In his discussion with Mr Campbell, he merely made clear the policy which has existed for main years with respect to late applications for conferment of degrees.

Mr Campbell has conveniently overlooked in his letter some facts which I believe are pertinent. He received, at an address of his own choosing, his examination results and the form in which to apply to have his degree conferred, in the latter half of December 1980, and thus presumably could have returned the form to the University early in the New Year. The argument that he missed the deadline by one day is of little validity. Would he accept two days, the days, or perhaps a week as being equally acceptable? The fact of the matter is that deadlines are precisely that. The date by which that particular form had to be returned is emphasised by red printing on the form, and the text for the programme for the degree ceremony had in fact been sent to the printers before Mr Campbell spoke to me.

Members of the administrative staff do their best, often under trying conditions, to assist students in any way possible, but we do expect to receive co-operation from those students.

The Paper War

I note from the 1981 VUWSA budget (page 11 of the last Salient) that VUWSA estimates a $500 printing loss, to be paid from Association fees.

Perhaps (I am a humble, unpretentious Arts student and not a BCA financial wizard) if the Association did not print quite so many copies of Salient (which end up littering the Quad. Union Hall and Cafe) and leaflets (which end up as paper dart material), this not, inconsiderable sum could be reduced.

A Letter from a Frog

How cum if you're so smart with the sarcastic captions, you can't even write any clever replies?

Surely real wit lies in subtle after-remarks - or are you only good for sardonic headings?

Yes, But from which Angle?

Do your readers a good turn and get Johnathan Taylor to snap a new photo of Paul Cochrane. Paul's present role is vicarious, I know, and his time with us brief. Such considerations, however, are no justification for his appearing so scruffily attired at the head of Salient's prestigious presidential column. Nice of him, though, to tell us the varsity ties have arrived: yes, I'll pick one up with my sweatshirt. Perhaps Paul could even lead the way and wear his varsity tie in the lovely new photo. Or, at least, if he insists on upholding the illusion of accessible informality, he could adorn himself with a VUW sweatshirt instead of the City of London top in which he presently appears: after all, only a Dick like Whittington would want to proclaim his travels, real or imaginary, in such a way.

A Dismal Affair

I recently attended the "Asian Affair" evening and I was very annoyed with the way in which it was handled. If that evening was in any way typical of the wax the Cultural Affairs dept of the Students Association run this sort of function, then I suggest that they are grossly inept.

I have nothing but praise for the performances of the Asian students but it seemed to me they played a relatively minor part in the evening's entertainment. The rest consisted of an apparently irrelevant fashion show, which displayed nothing, as far as I could see, of Asian culture, religion, tradition or lifestyle, and a lot of standing about after the food was served.

What annoyed me in particular was our Cultural Affairs officer Mary McCallum. For a person who belongs to Christian clubs, and who professes to actually be a Christian, she showed complete insensitivity toward another culture and way of life with her somewhat ponderous, condescending and patronising remarks while compelling the show.

Her rather silly asides brought forth angry glares and shudders from among the audience, not the least being the Indonesian Ambassador.

All in all the evening was badly organised and sloppily run, not really value for the three dollars I had to pay. Ms McCallum appeared to have done no preparation at all. Also, the rather good Gamelan musical group were not given a chance to really show their talent. The film however, was good.

Get Wild

Personally I'm getting sick of the tripe people like our friend "Oscar" are serving up through your column. Amongst his general mumbo-jumbo he makes pointed references to "homosexuals," which supports a negative self-image of gay sexuality. Now gay people have finally had enough - and we aren't going to take it all sitting down!

Oscar feels "susceptible to homosexual assaults". I suggest this reflects a basic insecurity about his sexuality. Rape by men, of men is unheard of on the "gay scene" as far as I know. Pederasty, sexual molestation of little boys, is a perversion all of its own - I don't think you can call this a "homosexual crime." The other only cases of same-gender rape are the 'gang rape' situations that occur in institutions such as prison and the army. We ought to remember these are acts done by heterosexual males who, out of 'sexual desperation' caused by isolation, resort to homosexual acts (they are not homosexuals). Often these situations involve power struggles - the boss asserts his superior strength by forcing fellow inmates to have sex. Often these heterosexual crimes are aimed against known homosexual prisoners to humiliate them. The point I'm making is the "homosexual assaults" Oscar mentions are not by homosexuals at all. Homosexuals are not a threat (something Oscar can't make his mind up on) because they are not involved in the power game - they are rarely interested in exploiting heterosexual males. (I challenge Oscar to give me an instance.)

What I am appealing for is a more informed approach - Oscar's contribution is not appicciated because of his ignorance. Full marks to the women who get fucked off by the Stupidity of such heterosexual males as Oscar.

Who needs Education Anyway?

The other day some geezer comes up to us for a bit of a verbal see, and starts running down Percival St. Now we don't want no unnecessary aggro right, but I mean to say, nobody sez anythin about Percival St. So young Terry gives 'im a right 'ander, and I gives 'im the toe of me daisies on the seat of is strides Well we won't see that geezer around Percival St anymore, that's for sure.

A bit a further news on victimisation of Percival St. How come as everybody is writin' in about what is really nothing more than a load of bleeding cobblers, when us lads from Percival St are fighting for our lives, never mind the bleeding lemons and gingers, what about a go for Percival St, eh! We're not the bleeding louts ya take us for ya know, we got feelings as well ya miserable pack o' bastards.

Highly Strung

In reply to the 'Culture Vulture' who wants Music Department's lunchtime concerts in the (ergh!) Union Hall rather than the "drafty old" (huh!) Memorial Theatre. I'd like to see this funny fellow performing in front of a bunch of rough and rowdies like the crowd in the Union Hall. We musicians are a sensitive bunch, and demand a certain amount of attention from our audience. There are not many Oscar Petersons and George Shearings in the Music Department (ie none) who are willing to play mere background music. I think this is a most reasonable request that musicians make from their audience.

As for the "drafty old" Memorial Theatre; if lazy bums like the so called 'Culture Vulture' would get off their chuffs and get into the theatre, the more people there, the warmer it gets. Incentive. By the way, for your information, Mr Culture Vulture, the chairs in the theatre are just as comfortable as those in the Union Hall.

As for departments and clubs hiding themselves; those interested in them will make the extra effort to get involved, but in general it's true. This is just the will of Allah, I'm afraid, and there's nothing that can be done about it.

Scoop! Soviet Ratbags Direct Paste-Ups

How sick to see on Thursday 4 June workmen removing posters from university walls, then finding the next day "Mobilise" posters stuck up all over campus. Can't somebody tell these sickos enough is enough? To think that Students Association money is wasted on donations supporting this kind of action makes vomit rise in the throat. Piss off you dirty Bolscheviks and go kiss Brezhnev's arse.

Comforting Words

I shall be arriving shortly.

As Ever,

Their Morality'S High; but the Spelling isn't so Good

I'm writting to ask why a scene in the film "Coming home" showing a middle aged American housewife make love to a paraplegic war veteran was omitted in the screening of the film at memorial theater.

Obviously the people involved had something against either paraplegics, middle aged housewives or both.

I'm sure the university audience would have been able to cope with the intense emotion in such a seen, and it may no doult have benefitted their understanding of the movie as a whole.

In seeking to avoid offence you gave it,

Rugby, Yes; Tour, No!

I would like to congratulate the Town and Country Players on their brilliant portrayal of the effect of that peaceful game of rugby we all love to play and love even better to win. The play was entitled "Rugby relations with South Africa." The acting was very good and the plot so realistic that it was almost unreal. It showed the so called typical rugby supporter forcing his son into playing rugby, it showed how winning was of paramount importance and it showed a complete disregard for the liberation fight in South Africa, even at the stage when it was of a pacifist nature.

Sharpeville and Soweto were dismissed as not being important, that nobody whatsoever had the right to try to slop a rugby tour. I am not opposed to rugby, or rugby players, I saw the Scots play at Athletic park and I gained much pleasure from watching a good game. I am still a supporter of my old high school team and take an interest in listening or watching any game that happens to be on the radio, the tale, or a nearby ground. What I do object to is when the game is proposed to be, and is in fact played while basic human rights are being ignored. Playing rugby with representatives of the South African regime would be playing the game while the rights of the majority of South Afriens are being ignored.

Oppose the tour, it is only a game. The rights of twenty million South African Blacks, Coloureds and Indians are at stake.

Is this Tantrum Caused by Ignorance of Anything about Films?

You've done it again! Who is this weed 'S.D.' who reviews these movies, anyway? Why can't he tell us his full name? I'll tell you why! He's afraid some big multinational will come tumbling down on his head if he says one fowl word about a movie. Admittedly, he is a little harder on Breaker Morant (last week's review) than Flash Gordon (two weeks back) but I'm afraid that isn't saying much. Also, Breaker Moranl is Australian, which is closer to home, so he feels a little less intimidated. Why can't you get some film reviewer whose attitude is different from 'Gee, they're all professional film makers and I'm just a dumb student, so it must be a fantastic movie', and one who does not give Salient readers false impressions of shit movies like (Urgh! need I mention it?) Flash Gordon? Why can't he assess a movie on its merits as a cinematic work rather than whether its got lots of nice colours (the logic underlying his conclusion that Flash Gordon was worth forking over good money to see)? He tells us that Breaker Moranl is not a cinematic breakthrough - Flash Gordon was much farther from being one of these than Breaker Moranl - so why does he praise FG so, then? Where are his critical faculties? How can you publish such totally subjective reviews? How? Where? When? Why? Why? Why?

Sharp two-line Struggle Emerges over Strongly Contrasted Positions

In Salient, 8 June 1981 (page 2), Peter asks "will Salient keep its nice two tone effect?"

I would like to ask if Peter intends to alienate the monochromatic amongst us? I bet Peter wants to see Penguins in red and black, or Zebras with blue and white stripes!!

Come on Salient, stand up for your right to be black and white!