879 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(06/08/14 9:18pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>The National Security Agency has gotten a lot of press recently. With the revelation of its metadata collection and its ability to spy on U.S. citizens, it got caught with its hand in the cookie jar.More recently, the Snowden documents have provided the unwelcome news that the NSA has collected even more data.This time it’s photos, and the goal is facial recognition through a program called “Tundra Freeze.” The NSA collects millions of images a day, though most of them are not of high enough quality for facial recognition.The kicker is that the NSA is expanding its spying methods and types of data collected. It’s not just telephone and email. One of the documents says the NSA is taking “a full-arsenal approach that digitally exploits the clues a target leaves behind in their regular activities on the net to compile biographic and biometric information.”In other words, the NSA is increasing invasive practices to build digital dossiers on everyone, no longer limited by Congress or the president. Thankfully, the NSA would have to receive court approval for American imagery just as with wiretapping and email intercepts.But that isn’t much relief with an administration that has taken a rather loose interpretation in respecting Fourth Amendment rights.To the Obama Administration’s credit, it does say many terrorist plots are foiled using these measures, and the NSA expedited the development of Tundra Freeze after the 2009 attempted Underwear bomber and the 2010 Times Square bomber.But when the NSA has the capabilities to intrude on teleconferences, to cross reference spy satellite imagery with personal photos, and to try to gain access to iris scans from foreign governments, the Editorial Board thinks it has gone too far.Programs like Tundra Freeze might pass underneath the notice of many, but the truth is they are infringing upon our civil liberties as outlined by our founding fathers and the Bill of Rights.The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution says we are to be protected from unreasonable searches and seizures.No matter what the legal definition of a search or a seizure is, we think the mining of our digital shadows certainly proves invasive.Though the administration might believe these programs and algorithms are in our best interest, they are far from it.When the advancement of computer technology gives the ability to track and recognize people through a camera, that is too much. Executive powers have limits. Of all people, President Obama should know about the dangers of executive overreach because he warned about the abuses of the PATRIOT Act. We, the Editorial Board, wonder when we will finally give up all our rights in return for promises of stability and security.That does not sound like America.That sounds like serfdom.opinion@idsnews.com@ids_opinion
(06/01/14 10:36pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>As former juveniles ourselves, the Indiana Daily Student Editorial Board feels comfortable saying adolescents don’t generally enjoy the gift of foresight. Not that juveniles aren’t great people. We are totally down with the youths.We’re just saying some teens fail to connect the dots between actions and consequences.But common lapses in young judgment are why the board is thrilled that no one in Indiana younger than 16 will be able to use a tanning bed starting July 1. Sixteen- and 17-year-olds can only use the beds with parental consent.Under this new law, kids can still use sprays and lotions to get the sun-kissed glow they so desire, but they will no longer have access to the beds. Tanning beds are considered Level 1 carcinogens, according to the American Cancer Society.Other Level 1 carcinogens include tobacco products, formaldehyde and plutonium.Because we don’t let kids buy cigarettes, mainline formaldehyde or bask in the nuclear glow of plutonium, it’s nice that lying in a box of cancerous ultraviolet rays for hours is off the table now, too.So now that teens can’t give themselves cancer this way, it’s important that adults don’t, either.Being an adult means more freedom, including more freedom to make bad decisions. When it comes to taking care of our skin, we generally make pretty bad decisions.Skin cancer is something many of us struggle to care about. Multiple applications of sunscreen throughout the day might keep our skin from burning, blistering and peeling off, but it’s such a hassle and it smells weird. And sometimes a sore, bright red back from one sunblock-free afternoon just takes a day or two to turn toasty brown.Toasty brown is more attractive than inflamed orange, but we, the board, would take pale before cancerous any day.And no doctor, ever, in the history of dermatology (probably), has recommended tanning.We all should limit our tanning time, question why we feel the need to tan in the first place and try healthier habits on for size.Doctors recommend everyone regularly wears sunscreen that protects from both UVA and UVB rays and has an SPF of at least 30. Sunscreen should be reapplied every two hours, especially between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m.Hats and sunglasses also provide important sun protection.We know this law, and similar protections, are good for our kids. Now if we could only figure out they’re good for us, too.opinion@idsnews.com@ids_opinion
(05/05/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Every semester, Opinion has plenty to talk about. The spring semester of the 2013-2014 academic school year saw the continuation of changes that have been in motion not only since the fall, but since the beginning of a decade that has continued to bring about changes both on campus and across the country. Here at IU, we saw the continued inaction of a student government so out of touch and so oblivious to what actually matters to the average undergraduate that taking the IU Student Association to task has essentially amounted to one of the outstanding responsibilities of the Indiana Daily Student Editorial Board. The issue of substantive student input and student voice in the University took center stage this semester, including in what eventually amounted to another non-competitive IUSA election. Despite this, the incoming administration is positioned to push for IUSA to actually do what it’s supposed to be doing — represent students. The push will be needed in the face of significant changes being pushed on the campus by the administration, as outlined by another highlight of this semester, the Campus Strategic Plan. The majority of it is little more than feel-good rhetoric and opaque wording. But the reason why it has come to matter and it will continue to do so is because, for better or worse, it presents the direction our University is heading.Some other primary semester highlights for the Editorial Board include the significant donation to Assembly Hall and the necessary revitalization of other more important parts of our campus, IU’s timely and necessary push for gender-blind housing in our dormitories, campus safety after the Purdue shooting, President Michael McRobbie’s unnecessary withdrawal of the University from the American Studies Association, IU’s misguided expansion of its smoking ban, the raising of the University’s minimum wage and the possible deportation of IU junior Qun Sunn for owning a business. In keeping with national trends, this semester we tackled some of the more troubling parts of greek life both on and off IU’s campus. The dangerous cultures that exist in some chapters are issues that are increasingly receiving national attention. But likewise, greek chapters are also addressing these issues and leading the charge in how we talk about fraternities and sororities, which we hope will lead to more progressive greek systems that college students deserve.Sexual assault also finally became a national conversation during the course of this semester. From the White House to our campus, we’ve witnessed the transformation of rape from a hushed conversation in public discourse to a roaring national campaign demanding action. IU currently a faces a probe from the Department of Education in how it handles sexual assaults. Unwittingly or not, we’ve become part of that conversation, which we hope can lead our University to even better ways to address one of the most perverse issues on college campuses. Nationally, we continued to see and be part of the ongoing social change the country is undergoing. From the inevitability of marriage equality to the beginning of the end of marijuana prohibition to setbacks for affirmative action, 2014 is turning out to be quite the year for some of the biggest issues we care about. This semester might be ending, but we’re bound to continue to see and feel the aftermath of what’s happened during its course. opinion@idsnews.com@ids_opinion
(05/02/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Last week, the men of the Sigma Alpha Epsilon chapter at Gettysburg College each donned a pair of tall high heels before going out. No, it wasn’t for a dare or a tasteless party — instead, it was part of an effort to raise awareness about sexual assault on campus.Clad in red and orange pumps and stilettos, the group of more than 100 men embarked on Walk a Mile, an event to spread vital information about the statistics concerning rape and harassment women face in college.As the student-led Walk a Mile reminds us, an average of one in five women across America will experience the terror and trauma of sexual assault by the time they have graduated. Even IU is not immune to this threat, as demonstrated by the frequent reports of rape printed by the Indiana Daily Student and the knowledge that many rapes go unreported.So the fact that a fraternity has taken an active stand against sexual assault in such a bold manner is fantastic news. Though it surely raised some eyebrows, we say, “Keep it up, boys.” The Editorial Board believes it is incredibly refreshing to see such a proactive, supportive stance taken by a fraternity. Our campus could definitely benefit from something similar. Though many schools, including IU, support similar assault awareness events such as SlutWalk, their inclusion of more male-focused events like Walk a Mile would be especially important as they have the possibility to reach an even broader audience. By encouraging IU’s fraternities to participate in a hands-on learning experience rather than a “don’t rape” lecture, the message behind sexual assault awareness might garner less eyerolls and actually stick. Males encouraging sexual assault awareness in such a way is also beneficial because it highlights the dichotomous way in which we view it. In American culture, heterosexual rape is sometimes regarded merely as a “feminist” or a “woman’s” issue, while male-male rape is scoffed at or ridiculed. Both of these issues are entirely problematic, as sexual assault is everyone’s problem, and it is never something to be taken lightly. The Editorial Board believes encouragement of male organization and participation in events such as Walk a Mile will dispel the harmful idea that rape is a predominantly female concern and that we must work together in order to make our communities aware and safe.Though watching grown men try to hold their composure while traveling in heels for the first time is admittedly hilarious, it serves as a sobering reminder of the realities many women face right here on our campus. After SAE’s roaring success with the Walk a Mile march, maybe we’ll see some of our own fraternity brothers careening down the sidewalks of Third Street in a pair of strappy slingbacks next spring.opinion@idsnews.com@ids_opinion
(05/01/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>A guest speaker recently visited my journalism class and said something that surprised me. She stressed that in this modern age, it is important, even necessary, to have an online presence. If people don’t have an online presence, it actually hurts their potential to be hired at a company. The primary reason was not to show if a candidate has the ability to function normally in this technology-inundated time, but because social media accounts brand a person so a company actually knows a candidate is human. I find this concept absolutely remarkable, not because companies want people to fall into nice and easy categories branded as this or that, but because people are expected to reduce themselves into a simplified version of who they are. Let’s say, in order to get hired at a sporting goods company, a person decides to brand himself as a snowboarder. He becomes the snowboarder. Not only is it disturbing that, with enough time and effort, people can pass themselves as whoever they want to be, but the branding reduces his level of humanness. He becomes this one-sided construct: the snowboarder. Of course, he will naturally throw in more intriguing details about himself such as, “I have toured the world looking for the best gyro” or “I’m a huge fan of Breaking Bad” so he stands out among the masses of other faceless applicants. However, he becomes known solely by these interesting, though ultimately paltry, details. That is not to say he himself believes he is a sum of his accomplishments or that his closest friends believe him to be the snowboarder, but he portrays himself to the business world through this superficial persona. Businesses begin looking for the most interesting people who might indeed be the most accomplished and proficient for the job, because the interesting people stand out.This is extraordinary stress placed on having interesting facets of someone’s character. Someone’s potential career relies on an anecdote that makes some recruiting agent laugh for a few seconds. I believe this stress places far too much emphasis on the immediate differences between people. I did X and he did Y, this is how we are different, and you should hire me because I’ve had the ability to experience more than he has. Not defining people based on their accomplishments but on character quirks does not take into account the enormous complexity of the human life — the joys, struggles and trials which make us human. These intriguing details ignore everything that makes us what we are. Perhaps it is just me, but if I meet people planning to build a professional relationship, I would not want them to introduce themselves by saying, “Yeah, we raise pet guinea pigs as a hobby.” Sure, it’s interesting, but that doesn’t define their character. I would rather them tell me about themselves, interesting parts and not, and be entirely genuine because getting a true scope of their character would make me want to hire them.allenjo@indiana.edu@IAmJoshAllen
(04/30/14 8:15pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>The Supreme Court recently made headlines when it decided, in a 6-2 vote, that an attempt by Michigan voters to ban affirmative action in the state was and is constitutional. Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, in the majority opinion, stated, “This case is not how the debate about racial preferences should be resolved. It is about who may resolve it.” Affirmative action itself isn’t why the Court ruled the way it did, Kennedy said.Rather, it’s because a majority of Michigan citizens voted for the amendment. The Editorial Board finds it disconcerting that our nation’s highest court chooses again and again to simply ignore the idea that race is still an issue in this country. The reason affirmative action was created in the first place is because it was widely believed and agreed that people of color were afforded fewer opportunities than white people. Unfortunately, it seems members of the Supreme Court, the supposed créme de la créme of intellectual Americans, have simply chosen to put their fingers in their ears when it comes to racial inequality. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, about 29 percent of Americans older than 25 had a four-year college degree in 2009.Meanwhile, only 17 percent of African-Americans and 13 percent of Hispanics had four-year degrees. The real question remains, however, as to what exactly causes this gap in higher education.Conservative justices on the Supreme Court would prefer not to talk about that, but in reality it’s because there’s a huge monetary gap between races as well.As of 2009, the median household net worth for white Americans was $113,149. Black Americans had a median household net worth of only $5,677, and Hispanics didn’t fare much better at $6,325. Now, that isn’t to say affirmative action is a perfect program in any stretch of the imagination.Rather, the Editorial Board finds it disconcerting that the Court deemed it acceptable for a majority of citizens to theoretically limit the opportunities of the minority.In her dissenting opinion, Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor said, “Without checks, democratically approved legislation can oppress minority groups.” At IU, there’s obviously a racial gap between students. For the freshmen class this year, only 19 percent of students were not white, and an additional 8 percent of students were international.The Editorial Board firmly believes affirmative action, when applied correctly, can give those who are less fortunate in Indianapolis or Gary a shot at getting an education and bettering themselves. Justice Sotomayor is absolutely correct in her dissent. The people of Michigan have voted to limit the opportunities of the less fortunate.Is there a better solution than affirmative action? There might be. The point, however, is that we are still unsure of what that better solution really is.Meanwhile, the high court seems to be more comfortable with doing nothing than at least attempting to address racial inequality.The answer to solving racial inequality is not going to be found by burying our heads in the sand and hoping the issue solves itself.Society has shackled people of color with unnecessary wage, employment and education gaps. And now the Supreme Court wants to only tighten the cuffs. opinion@idsnews.com@ids_opinion
(04/29/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>We do not live in a post-racial age. We don’t even live in an age where cultural sensitivity is prevalent enough to avoid nasty episodes of racially-based offensiveness. Whether by watching Paula Deen, Donald Sterling or Cliven Bundy, we’ve got a pretty good idea of what racism looks like in 2014. But there are lesser, more contrived forms of it.And if we needed a reminder, Avril Lavigne delivered it. Recently, the “Sk8r Boi” singer released a catchy new song called “Hello Kitty.” Seemingly harmless, the song is bouncy and fluffy and declares that behind the “good girl” image of Hello Kitty is a bad girl. Nothing we haven’t seen from Katy Perry before.The music video, on the other hand, is a different story.Lavigne flounces around a candy shop in a cupcake skirt, backed up by robotic Asian women in a Tokyo-esque setting.Asian images and stereotypes are played up to such an extent that Billboard called the video “an embarrassment in any language.” Lavigne herself is claiming a pass for her Hello Kitty-themed music video by arguing she loves Japan and Japanese culture. For us, that hints at a bigger problem.It is entirely possible to be racist toward a culture you love. Even if you feel absolutely no ill will toward Japan, fetishizing a culture as Lavigne has done is problematic. Racism is about result, not intention. If it were the other way around, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.Lavigne argues her video isn’t racist, because she went to Japan to film it using Japanese producers, dancers and other elements. Lavigne’s intentions were clearly not racist. Unfortunately, her result was. Simply because you went to Japan and used Japanese people to develop your concept doesn’t mean the result avoids causing real, racially-charged harm to the cultures involved. Context is also important. If a Japanese pop artist had created this video, we wouldn’t be having this conversation, either. But watching a blonde Western woman dance among stereotypical trappings of Japan necessarily evokes memories of colonialism and the accompanying oppression and racial fetishes. Saying that blonde Western women should not treat Asian cultures in fetishizing ways does not oppress white cultures; it acknowledges the historical realities that inform all of our perceptions of race. Race is not removed from history any more than we today are post-racial. Regardless of your intention, ignorance can lead to racism, even if you profess a love of Japan.On a shallower note, it just makes us look bad.Many Japanese fans did not react as strongly to the video, saying that it’s not really racist, just funny in its inaccuracies. Even if the idea is funny, celebrities should know better.Many base their impressions of North American culture on celebrities. Even if we took race out of the picture, Lavigne made a bad impression.The next time Lavigne decides to make a music video, we hope she thinks it through. opinion@idsnews.com@IDS_Opinion
(04/28/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>There’s a difference between recognizing history and glorifying it.Since 1937, the United States has officially recognized Columbus Day as a quasi-official federal holiday. The day, meant to commemorate Columbus’ 1492 arrival in the Americas, has been touted by many as a major historical occurrence given the “discovery of the Americas.” Meanwhile, others have condemned it as a holiday commemorating a man whose actions would set in motion the eventual genocide and destruction of countless existing cultures across the Western hemisphere. Recently, the city of Minneapolis decided to take a stand in how it “celebrates” the arrival of Columbus. The Minneapolis city council, in a unanimous vote, moved to recognize Indigenous Peoples Day on the same day as Columbus Day starting next year. Indigenous People’s Day will now be celebrated on the second Monday of every October. And the Editorial Board applauds the city’s move. Despite the fact that the city’s decision will likely be seen as an escalation in our country’s continuing culture wars, the symbolic recognition of indigenous peoples is a necessary and justified step in reconciling the white-washed narrative of history we’ve been taught since elementary school and the reality of what actually happened. What should also make us take pause is that there are people who would rather not present this untold — or purposely forgotten — side of history. One of those people is Purdue’s current president and former Indiana governor Mitch Daniels. In July of last year, emails obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request revealed Daniels attempted to stop the works of historian Howard Zinn from being taught in Indiana schools.Zinn, the author of a “A People’s History of the United States,” has been both credited and criticized for authoring historical records from the viewpoint of those whose plights have been marginalized, if not completely ignored, in the majority of texts taught in school. The attempted revisionism by one of our governors should make us weary of the history we’re sold, while also making us appreciative of IU’s commitment to diversity of thought. After all, it was IU using Zinn’s texts in a course on feminism, civil rights and the labor movement in the School of Education that prompted Daniels to write, “This crap should not be accepted for any credit by the state. No student will be better taught because someone sat through this session.”The Editorial Board disagrees. It’s this sort of mindset that continues to blind a lot of people to the historical disenfranchisement that continues to affect indigenous Americans within and outside the Untied States. Additionally, the ignorance surrounding indigenous peoples inside our own country had led us to have embarrassing debates that should not longer be the debates, like the Redskins’ refusal to change their name despite it being a racial epithet or the use of Native American headdresses as fashion accessories. This is why Minneapolis recognizing Indigenous Peoples Day is so important. Though it might only be a symbolic gesture, it’s an important one nonetheless. opinion@idsnews.com@ids_opinion
(04/25/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Whether you drink or not, Little 500 is the party weekend of the school year. One way or another, we all eventually hear about the metaphorical river of booze that flows through Bloomington during this weekend. But though we might be quick to associate Little 500 with alcohol, we can’t forget that drinking is not the only way some students at IU party during “the world’s greatest college weekend.” Marijuana, the second most often used drug following alcohol, no doubt partially plays into how we party this weekend. But the student that gets cited for alcohol related reasons and a student that gets cited for possession of marijuana will face systematically different consequences.While one has mechanisms that often result in a slap on the wrist, the other, in theory, can pull the rug under the college education of students for no better reasons than because at one point in our history we made a misguided attempt at legislating morality, with very little to no knowledge on the drug itself. But that’s changing. And fast. Colorado and Washington approved the legalization of cannabis through voter initiatives in 2012. The District of Columbia is in its final stages of doing so itself. Meanwhile Alaska, Arizona, California, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New York, Oregon and Rhode Island are all vying to be included in the next round of legalization. And that’s not even counting the 21 states that currently have medical marijuana laws. Obviously momentum is there to change the discourse about pot and punitive marijuana laws. But when it comes to Indiana, the timeframe to get on the same path might be a little different given how “Honest-to-Goodness” our state sees itself as. But despite it, the Editorial Board believes it’s not too soon — even in Indiana — to start talking about seriously changing marijuana policy in the state. Though definitely not in the same league, Indiana has taken a baby step. Earlier this month Indiana petitioned the federal government for permission to start growing hemp, marijuana’s non-intoxicating cousin. Gov. Mike Pence signed off on the bill earlier in March. Meanwhile, Indiana has its own champion for decriminalization. State Sen. Karen Tallian, D-Portage, has previously introduced decriminalization bills that unfortunately so far been defeated. But it’s important to note even opponents like Sen. Carlin Yoder, R-Middlebury, realize it’s only a matter of time. “I think it probably is inevitable,” Yoder said. “But that doesn’t mean I’m going to step aside and let it happen.” Legalization opponents have also pointed to questionable studies suggesting marijuana might actually have adverse effects on the brain and the heart. But until the federal ban on cannabis is overturned, research will remain inconclusive. Legislation proponents, however, should also not overlook the fact that marijuana is not a miracle drug. It is after all a drug, and can still — like any other drug — be abused. Hoosiers should be able to make decisions for themselves. So while you enjoy this Little 500 — partaking or not — know you might just be witnessing the quiet beginning of the end of another sort of prohibition. opinion@idsnews.com@ids_opinion
(04/24/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Today, the Indiana Daily Student published a story regarding the work of Mark Houlemarde, a Ph.D. student whose work involves speaking to men on campus about preventing sexual assault.The story brings attention to alarming statistic — 46 percent of rapes on campus last year were committed by members of a fraternity, according to the Office of Student Ethics. There were at least 35 sexual assaults reported in 2012 that occurred on IU property. The problem is that any sexual assaults that don’t happen on IU property do not have to be publicly disclosed. This means we’re getting only a fraction of the entire picture. And though not all of these crimes are exclusive to the greek system, we cannot ignore its part in this problem. Each year, the Student Organization Ethics Board provides a list of campus organizations on probation, suspended or expelled. Every organization on the current list is a fraternity. Yet on that list, an important piece of information is missing — the reason for the disciplinary action.Leaving people unaware of what offenses certain fraternities have committed in order to find themselves on judicial watch not only does a disservice to our greek system, but also to our campus at large.It’s important to note that when something as atrocious as a rape is committed, it is committed by individuals, not an organization. But we cannot ignore the existing culture in some chapters on our campus and the role it ultimately has on the actual perpetrating of sexual violence.This is why the Editorial Board — composed of both greek and independent students — believes the Student Organization Ethics Board should make this knowledge public. If a fraternity is on probation because its members were found responsible for a sexual assault, students should be able to access this information so they can make an informed decision whether to attend events where they are at risk of predators. Perhaps the Ethics Board thinks by not releasing the cause of the disciplinary actions, they are protecting victims. But the organizations, which would have the most motivation to antagonize victims that get them into trouble, already know why they have been chastised. They know what and who got them in trouble, so further secrecy in the name of the victim is moot. We aren’t asking for names or dates. We aren’t asking for descriptions. A simple box labeled “sexual assault” with a check beside it would serve our campus well. Adding some public accountability would work as a preventative method. Fraternities and individuals don’t want to be labeled as sexual predators. So if the simple moral obligation doesn’t prevent attacks, perhaps the public shame and threat to their image will. Many students are already aware of the different reputations different greek organizations have in regard to sexual assault and other illegal activities. But incoming freshmen, who some might argue are already the most vulnerable because of their unfamiliarity with the college lifestyle, aren’t in the loop. They are sometimes left to learn where not to go the hard way.In order to prevent these situations, everyone should be aware of the infractions made by fraternities that are severe enough to result in probation. The Editorial Board absolutely acknowledges not all fraternities, and certainly not all fraternity brothers, are guilty of sexual assault. But it would be naïve to think it isn’t a problem on this campus.If the Student Organization Ethics Board were to be more transparent in regards to the specific infractions of fraternities on probation, the student body would be better able to know which chapters to avoid, instead of casting a wide net of suspicion over our entire greek system. opinion@idsnews.com@IDS_opinion
(04/23/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Mayor Mark Kruzan showed his soft spot for all things furry when he vetoed Bloomington’s deer sharpshooting ordinance, preventing a proposal that would allow professional sharpshooters to control the deer population at the Griffy Lake Nature Preserve. Kruzan rejected the ordinance, which was backed by research and proposed to protect the preserve’s environment, “as a matter of conscience.”The Editorial Board thinks it’s sweet our mayor has a soft spot for animals. We just wish he showed the same sensitivity toward people. Kruzan has repeatedly voiced his opposition to extending the season of the Interfaith Winter Shelter, Bloomington’s only low-barrier homeless shelter, into the summer months.Interfaith was forced to close its doors April 1, leaving its residents on the hard pavement until the shelter opens again in the winter. He refused to work with Interfaith to let it shelter residents in places under the city’s jurisdiction, such as vacant lots or empty city-owned buildings. Kruzan said he opposes Interfaith because its services entice people experiencing homelessness from other communities to come to Bloomington, encouraging the migration of people from around the country. However, this is just an excuse to hide what the real problem is — Kruzan does not want people experiencing homelessness to give the city a bad image. The problem is more cosmetic than logistic. Kruzan does not want to sponsor a low-barrier shelter because he does not want Bloomington to be known to outsiders as a homeless Mecca or for an influx of people experiencing homelessness.People in our own city have been denied a chance to survive under relatively safe and stable conditions. And yet Kruzan’s real moral dilemma is saving deer. We would like to know where the mayor’s “conscience” was when he threw nearly 60 of Interfaith’s residents out on the streets.In his letter to the City Council, Kruzan said he sees the ordinance’s proposal to kill deer as outweighing the environmental benefits.Using this same logic, we see human survival as outweighing the cosmetic problem that comes with a large population of people experiencing homelessness.Bloomington likes to think of itself as progressive. In this community, we all deserve a chance to succeed, regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation or, theoretically, economic status. The mayor’s lack of action to save Interfaith reflects his refusal to address that last category. He is ignoring real problems that face real people in our community and instead is apparently mounting an animal rights campaign. The Editorial Board would much rather the mayor confront the issue of homelessness instead of hoping it goes away on its own or becomes another city’s problem. If Kruzan wants to summon his sentimentality and sense of values for a city ordinance, he should direct it toward a proposal that allows Interfaith to stay open year-round. Or support any proposal to help the poor and homeless in the Bloomington community. The mayor needs to get his priorities straight. People trump deer, always. opinion@idsnews.com@ids_opinion
(04/21/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>The next president of the College of Charleston in South Carolina is a Confederate sympathizer and an advocate for the use of the Confederate flag.Republican Lt. Gov. Glenn McConnell has championed the use of Confederate flags, particularly the well-known battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia. He has furiously led the fight to keep the flag flying above the state’s capitol building. In 2010, a photo of him in the uniform of a Confederate general flanked by two black men dressed to resemble slaves went viral. No matter what your motivation, the use of the Confederate flag is an egregious idea.McConnell and others have defended the flag variously as a connection to their ancestors and a valuable symbol of a struggle for autonomy. They claim the flag doesn’t represent hate, but heritage.The Editorial Board thinks otherwise. They are wrong. And their ideas belong nowhere near institutions of education. Calling the Civil War a struggle for autonomy is a poor characterization. There is inherent hypocrisy in the idea of struggling for the autonomy to deny other humans their autonomy. The Civil War is and always will be a symbol of that goal of oppression, no matter what it may mean to you personally.Defending your use of a symbol by claiming it means something different to you than to society at large confuses the idea of a symbol. Symbols, by definition, are not purely personal. They are used to communicate ideas, thoughts and opinions quickly and efficiently. When you use a symbol, you are indicating that you wish to be associated with what that symbol represents to those who see it. If that represents something else to those who see your symbol, it doesn’t mean your culture is suffering from a genocide, as McConnell has claimed. It means you’ve simply chosen a poor symbol. And the Confederate flag has consistently been used as a symbol of hate.During the 1950s and ’60s, Southern governors would display the flag as an act of defiance in the face of integration efforts, the very same flag proudly displayed at lynchings and cross burnings across the South. That symbol hasn’t lost its meaning, even in 2014.In February, three University of Mississippi fraternity members were found responsible for hanging a noose and a pre-2003 Georgia state flag with a Confederate emblem on the statue of civil rights hero James Meredith. Meredith, the university’s first black student, was admitted only after President John F. Kennedy ordered hundreds of federal marshals to escort him onto its campus.If Southerners like McConnell feel such a need to connect with their equally problematic heritage without endorsing hate, they have chosen the wrong symbol. They don’t have a right to choose whatever symbol they want and simultaneously redefine its entire historical context.Despite unanimous votes of no confidence by both the student government and the faculty council of the College of Charleston, the board of trustees — who appointed McConnell — has stood behind its decision so far. Moving forward, we can only hope they reconsider.opinion@idsnews.com@ids_opinion
(04/18/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>By 21 years old, most young adults are just hoping for a better-paying job and the end of acne. After a feature published in the Indiana Daily Student, IU junior Qun Sun might be praying just not to be deported. Last August, Sun opened a restaurant with a few other students, the Lotus Garden. He invested thousands of dollars into his business and his hard work paid off. He is able to cover his tuition costs, relieving his parents of the financial burden, a goal that will take many students years if not decades to achieve. Bloom magazine praised his restaurant in a review last month. Then, a feature in the IDS gained the attention of the Office of International Services. Now, Sun and his business partners might face deportation for violating the regulations of their statuses as international students.When international students come to IU they must apply for either F-1 or J-1 nonimmigrant status. Students with F-1 status can work on-campus jobs. They may not have off-campus jobs without permission. The job must pertain to the student’s field of study or the student must be experiencing severe economic hardship.With a J-1 status, IU issues students a DS-2019 to work on campus and they may only work up to 20 hours a week. DS-2019 is a document used by exchange visitor programs’ administrations to provide basic information of the exchange student. To work off campus, the student must be authorized and the job must be in the student’s field of study and pertain to his or her academic objective.The IDS article says Sun will graduate in 2015, which we will assume means he has an F-1 status because he has been at IU for longer than a year. Homeland Security considers starting your own business working, and so permission must be acquired. To own a business, the student must apply for optional practical training — which, again, must relate to the student’s field of study. The catch is, this must occur before or after the completion of a program of study, not during.We don’t know if Sun blatantly disregarded the rules or didn’t understand the restrictions. But the true fault of this situation lies with the Office of International Services. It is supposed to look after international students. It is supposed to make sure international students understand the rules and conditions of their visas and U.S. residence.To start his business, Sun would have had to jump through several legal and government hoops. He had to get a tax identification number from the IRS, register for state and local taxes and obtain a series of licenses and permits on federal, state and local levels. That no one noticed his international status while he went about this is sadly reflective of the competency of our administration and our government.Sun is in violation of his international status by operating a business while in school, but he does not deserve to be punished for it. He is a prime example of someone chasing the American dream. He shouldn’t be punished for going above and beyond to get the most out of his experience in America. opinion@idsnews.com@ids_opinion
(04/17/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>It took a terminal ovarian cancer diagnosis for the state of Indiana to recognize a same-sex couple’s marriage. To say “better late than never” would be tactless, but it’s also tactless that Indiana state legislators are still actively attempting to constitutionally ban same-sex marriage in our state. Amy Sandler and Niki Quasney are a same-sex couple from Munster, Ind. They have been together for 13 years, and they have two children. Quasney was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2009. Thankfully, United States District Judge Richard Young ruled in favor of the couple last Thursday. Now, Indiana must recognize the couple’s marriage before Quasney passes away. Though this notion is cosmetic in the sense that it legally makes these four individuals a family before a parent dies, it also makes the legal proceedings that follow a death much smoother than if Sandler and Quasney’s marriage was not recognized by the state.Sandler and Quasney are part of a larger lawsuit looking to overturn Indiana’s marriage ban. Their personal fight is coming to a close, buttheir cause and their ultimate dream will continue on as same-sex Hoosier couples fight for their relationships to be recognized by their state and their country.It’s unfortunate it came down to this, but it does seem like a small victory in a state where laws regarding homosexuality and same-sex couples are quite less than even subpar. Because, remember, the state of Indiana has no laws against hate crimes. It’s no secret the Indiana Daily Student Editorial Board has many members who support marriage equality and lean left, and many identify as queer. You probably already guessed the tone of this editorial before you read it. You also probably know you’d be hard pressed to find a staff editorial in the recent past that wasn’t overwhelmingly pro-LGBT in some way. So we, the IDS Editorial Board, are begging our state representatives to stop making us write this editorial. There are only so many ways we can point out that it is now 2014, and we only have so much longer to legalize same-sex marriage in our state before we look like total idiots in history books years from now. Sandler and Quasney’s victory is a beautiful outcome of a horrendous situation. Let’s hope their struggle wakes up our representatives to the fact that equality shouldn’t come in somebody’s final moments, but should be spread over their entire lifetime.opinion@idsnews.com@ids_opinion
(04/16/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Recently, the Bloomington City Council voted 6-2-1 to approve an ordinance that allows government-hired sharpshooters to hunt deer at the Griffy Lake Nature Preserve. The sharpshooting amendment to the ordinance, presented by council member Dave Rollo, overrides Bloomington’s ban on the use of any firearm in city limits that isn’t used by law enforcement or for self-defense. Rollo explained that the deer population at the Griffy Lake Nature Preserve had grown too large and park commissioners were worried that the deer would damage the ecosystem. The Editorial Board, shockingly enough, supports the passage of this ordinance. As we see it, there are a limited number of options of how to deal with the deer problem at Griffy Lake. The first option is sterilizing the deer, which is costly and impossible to do in an open system. The second option is to poison the deer, which is inhumane. The third option consists of allowing hunting in the nature reserve, which the Editorial Board is anxious about. We aren’t too keen on having multiple hunters at Griffy Lake shooting indiscriminately at anything that moves. That just leaves hiring sharpshooters. These sharpshooters, as we understand, are hired by the city based on their credentials as shooters who are trained in safety and effective killing. These sharpshooters will be able to eliminate the deer overpopulation quietly and quickly, which is another benefit of sharpshooters over hunters. Hunters tend to either hunt with loud weapons, such as shotguns, or weapons that don’t always kill instantly, such as bows. Either of these methods run the risk of having deer flee the reserve, ending up in the roads, where they pose an even bigger hazard to drivers. Many people who oppose this ordinance feel it’s inhumane and overly violent, but we don’t have another choice. If the deer population goes unchecked, the deer will eventually outgrow Griffy Lake. They will eat all the vegetation they will find. They will continue to breed in high numbers. And they will move on. Once the ecosystem in Griffy Lake is destroyed, we could one day run the risk of having the deer problem move toward campus. The last thing any of us wants to see is a herd of deer bathing in Showalter Fountain or eating the tulips by the Sample Gates. Deer aren’t cute animals like kittens or puppies. They aren’t Bambi. Deer are creatures that mimic viruses — they move in, destroy an area, and move on. Deer serve an important role of our ecosystem; however, the Editorial Board recognizes the threat they post to Griffy Lake. Thus, Councilman Rollo’s solution of allowing only the most professional, talented hunters to control the deer population is likely the best option. The deer may be cute to look at now in the nature preserve, but they won’t be so cute when they’re jumping out in front of your car.Opinion@idsnews.com@IDS_Opinion
(04/15/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Last week, the Editorial Board discussed the ousting of Mozilla Firefox CEO Brendan Eich by OKCupid for his contributions to anti-gay marriage groups. Immediately after our editorial was published, there was a new development in the story.Apparently, OKCupid CEO Sam Yagan donated about $500 to anti-gay politicians in 2004. And oh, how the plot thickens.In fairness, Yagan’s donation was a smaller amount and less recent than Eich’s. Yagan said he was not aware the politician he was supporting was anti-gay rights.However, if Yagan was going to make a fuss about Eich’s minimal contributions to a California law eight years ago, he needed to have made sure he had all his bases covered.Coming out with excuses after the information was leaked was not the way to go. Now it looks like OKCupid was trying to capitalize on a movement without doing any real work. Let’s all just be honest, the pop-up message about Eich’s views was a little passive aggressive. Since Yagan’s own skeletons have come out of the closet, it invalidates the work OKCupid was trying to do. It’s good to keep in mind all of these donations to laws and politicians happened years ago and were extremely small contributions. But turnaround is fair play, and hypocrisy never looks good on anyone.Lesson learned here is, don’t start a witch hunt. Yagan wanted to do some good, so he dug. In digging, he came up with a non-scandalous donation made years ago. Instead of ousting an awful person from a public position, he made Eich a martyr. He also gave people a reason to look into his past.If you give people a reason to dig, they will. More often than not, they will find something.The same debate comes up again. If the CEO is a bigot, but doesn’t let his bigotry inform his professional decisions or company policy, it doesn’t really matter what his personal views are. People can recognize what is appropriate and what isn’t. They know how to keep their personal and professional spheres separate.And at the end of the day, the fact OKCupid was the crux of this scandal speaks volumes. Maybe we shouldn’t rely on a dating website for our political views.opinion@idsnews.comIDS_Opinion
(04/14/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>IU announced last week that in an effort to increase “student affordability and accessibility,” the University would be raising minimum wage for all employees from $7.25 to $8.25.This change will go into effect starting at the beginning of the next fiscal year — July 1 — and it is expected to affect the pay of about 8,750 IU employees across the state. The increase is the first since 2009, when minimum wage was federally increased to $7.25.It comes as a pleasant surprise, as Indiana Republicans recently shot down a Democratic bid to increase minimum wage to $8.25 statewide in January. Though the Editorial Board understands the necessity to base compensation on the value and quality of services performed, we believe that this pay increase is an overdue step in the right direction.We believe the wage hike will be an excellent way for students to increase livability while attending classes.With a Washington Post story last week underscoring the fact that many college students are increasingly facing food insecurity in one of the richest countries on Earth, IU’s pay increase could be a godsend for employees who need to heavily budget their spending.This is important given that a large portion of the employees affected will be student workers, such as those under the employment of IU’s Residential Programs and Services, among other campus departments. The wage increase will also be highly beneficial for non-student employees. Though IU students make up a great deal of the minimum-wage staff, many of the positions are filled by adult members of the Bloomington community to support themselves or their families. This dollar increase may aid them in providing, or at least in living slightly more comfortably.The money for the pay increase will come from IU’s budget plan for next year and will cost about $900,000. Though this might seem a significant amount, the Editorial Board maintains that $900,000 is not too hefty a price.In comparison, Assembly Hall renovations, paid for by a donation, will cost a staggering sum of $40 million. Critics of this decision to increase minimum wage maintain that higher pay for non-specialized work is an overestimation of overall employee value. But the Editorial Board believes that since this is a benefit to the people cooking and serving our food as well as maintaining our campuses, it is a worthwhile expenditure. The increase in minimum wage is certainly a decision carefully constructed with the best interests of students and the Bloomington community in mind. And if it provides the chance to help a cash-strapped person have the option to choose a healthier meal instead of a pack of Ramen, we are all for it.opinion@idsnews.com@ids_opinion
(04/11/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Celebrities — they really are just like us.It turns out, James Franco is just as likely to make false assumptions on social media as we are. Franco first briefly met who he thought was a cute 18-year-old at an autograph signing and went on to correspond with her via text message and social media. This prompted James Franco, ever the master of subtlety, to ask, “You’re single? Should I rent a room?” The girl said something along the lines of “LOL jk I’m only 17” and promptly uploaded the photos. Now anyone can Google the exchange and see Franco hitting on an underage girl in a bizarre online encounter. Since then, Franco has acted appropriately embarrassed on talk shows such as “Live with Kelly and Michael.” He tweeted a warning to all parents to “keep their teens away” from him. And overall, he’s tried to laugh with the media storm. We feel second-hand embarrassment for Franco, similar to when he hosted the Oscars. After that, you’d think he would know better than to get himself in situations where he’s going to look stupid. He has found himself asking two things you never want to think in life — How did I end up on a talk show talking about seducing a minor? And, how did I end up along on a stage with Anne Hathaway? Franco has now had to consider both. We believe we can make several conclusions about this entire situation. Franco, despite his talent for comedy, acted creepily to the point of impropriety. When you meet someone at an autograph signing, she probably doesn’t like you for any reason other than the fact that you are James Franco. If Franco needs to capitalize on his celebrity to get laid, it’s clear he’s not afraid to do so. The girl deserves some credit for taking control of the situation. Although maybe posting their conversation on the Internet was not the most ethical thing to do, she proved to the world that a thirsty celebrity tried to pursue her. It’s the natural reaction of a fan flattered that someone in movies and television thinks she’s hot. But more importantly, what we can take from this situation is that nothing on social media, or even texts, are truly private, and even less so for a celebrity. Franco is learning what most millennials are constantly told — don’t text, tweet, Facebook or Instagram anything you wouldn’t want your future employer to see. Or, in Franco’s case, anything you wouldn’t want the entire world to see. This could just be an elaborate hoax. Franco could be duping us to drum up publicity for his new movie “Palo Alto,” in which his character has a relationship with an underage girl. Sounds familiar.Regardless, the main message from this is don’t be creepy and, most of all, don’t be creepy on social media. For Franco, it means he gets to be a headline and a punchline. One way or the other, people will always find out about it. That’s the magic of the Internet. opinion@idsnews.com@ids_opinion
(04/10/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>American Eagle has launched an ad campaign called Aerie Real, which features models without airbrushing. It claims this is in an attempt to foster healthier body image among its teenaged market. Though the Editorial Board is cynical about the sincerity of Aerie’s motives, we do appreciate that it’s a step in the right direction. Airbrushing and photoshopping have become high-profile problems in the advertising industry, especially when talking about products marketed toward women. Models are thinned, stretched and perfected under a computer mouse, and women in the real world are expected to meet those standards of beauty in their everyday lives.These expectations and inevitable failures understandably lead to serious problems like body shaming and eating disorders. Aerie’s 2014 underwear campaign is an attempt to dispel the illusion of the perfect-looking woman. The models are not airbrushed, meaning their tattoos, cellulite, freckles and any other minute imperfections are left visible to the casual viewer. This is definitely a step in a better direction. The truth is, it still isn’t enough. The Editorial Board, however, hopes this will lead to more serious marketing shifts in the advertising industry. Even with these progressive campaign, criticisms can still be made. The models used in the advertisements are not photoshopped, but are still so heavily stylized — and, of course, naturally beautiful — that it is almost ridiculous to think that they would need to be. The imperfections Aerie wants credit for displaying are still barely visible, because the women they have chosen are all still slim, streamlined and traditionally beautiful. These are professionally beautiful women that the public is being told represent every woman. Of course it needs to be said this is, after all, an advertisement. The clothes in the photo are being sold, so it is beneficial to the company to present them in their most attractive light — which means makeup and flattering lighting. That reasoning is, after all, how this image of the “perfect woman” began. We understand the likelihood of Aerie starting this campaign simply to be a good influence on young girls is doubtful at best. It’s much more likely companies like American Eagle are recognizing the trend in advertising towards promoting acceptance and natural beauty, which is likely why they’ve jumped on the bandwagon hoping to earn a buck. Though this might be ethically questionable, it’s something we’ve come to expect from corporations. Despite these hang-ups, advertisements that celebrate the bodies of average women are still better than what we’ve seen in the past. Perhaps they will serve as a catalyst for stronger, more effective and genuine reform in the future. If the effect of the body-positivity advertising bandwagon is actually better body positivity for young girls and women, then perhaps dealing with Aerie’s profit-driven motives is the lesser of two evils. opinion@idsnews.com@ids_opinion
(04/09/14 4:00am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Mozilla Firefox CEO Brendan Eich finally stepped down amid a wave of backlash and threats after it was made public that he had made a $1,000 donation to support California’s Proposition 8, which would have eliminated rights for same-sex couples to marry in that state. OKCupid, a popular online dating site, started the firestorm with a pop-up that would detect which users were using the Firefox browser and explain why they should stop using Firefox.The pop-up did not block Firefox users from accessing OkCupid, but instead informed them of Eich’s donation and other information regarding his anti-gay marriage views.This, of course, brought on an outcry from all social justice advocates who were trying to access the dating website.While Eich’s personal views may not have been the most politically correct, he went on his own website to say he wanted to be held responsible for his beliefs, and that if the public wanted him to step down, he would.He also explained the totality of his views on gay marriage. He said he believes in equality in everything but religious unions. He has protected his gay employees and defended many gay rights arguments, and he does not let his personal beliefs inform his professional actions.He stepped down, it seems, to protect his company and his family.That he felt threatened by the same groups that advocate tolerance, peace and equality speaks volumes for increasingly extreme nature of many social justice debates and the “social justice warriors” who sometimes misguidedly conduct them. Many people in professional fields have politically incorrect views about gay marriage. However, it is possible to keep the personal and professional separate without bringing bigotry into the workplace.In fact, it is appropriate that any working adult does and would do so.The fact that Eich does not support gay marriage does not mean he should be automatically demonized. He still supports many gay rights issues. He was willing to explain his views to anyone who asked and wanted to engage in meaningful debate about the issue. At the same time, he, like any mature adult, knew it would be highly inappropriate to let his views in any way affect the way he treated his gay employees and inform his professional life.On top of that, a $1,000 donation to support Prop 8 in 2008 isn’t terribly scandalous.Rather than win another battle against the oppression of the heteronormative system, gay rights advocates have created a martyr.They have pushed the conservative groups they seek to convert even farther away. They have made themselves look extremist and have closed several viable channels for meaningful debate and discussion.Maybe next time, we can all talk it out. opinion@idsnews.com@ids_opinion