(04/29/14 4:00am)
After a seven-year career at Brandeis, Dean of Career Services Joseph DuPont at the Hiatt Career Center is leaving the University to assume the position of associate vice president for student affairs at Boston College, beginning in the fall. "I am delighted about the opportunity at Boston College but will miss the amazing colleagues, staff and students that I have had the good fortune to work with in the past 7 years," DuPont wrote in an email to the Justice. "They are truly special, as is Brandeis." At Boston College, DuPont continued, he would have the opportunity to oversee "career initiatives for undergraduate, graduate and professional students in several different schools," including the College of Arts and Sciences, Carroll School of Management, Lynch School of Education, Connell School of Nursing and Woods College of Advancing Studies. DuPont wrote that he hopes to "create a united cross divisional school approach," which would "maximize career opportunities" for all of Boston College's students. The system would, as DuPont went on to say, draw upon "the expertise and strengths of many different departments and members" of the university. DuPont wrote that he is excited about being part of this "new venture to serve student career needs," and wrote that his time at the Hiatt working with both students and alumni has been "wonderful." According to DuPont, University administration is putting together a search committee to replace him. The last search for the position, which ended with DuPont's appointment in 2007, lasted almost a year before finding a suitable candidate. -Kathryn Brody
(04/29/14 4:00am)
In the first round of Student Union elections, Student Union Secretary Sneha Walia '15 was elected as the next Union president. Walia, who won 62 percent of the vote, wrote in an email to the Justice that she is "unbelievably excited." Walia wrote that she plans to focus on increasing transparency about "major Union initiatives" and work with student groups on campus on diversity related initiatives. The other presidential candidates, Terrell Gilkey '15 and Class of 2015 Senator Anna Bessendorf, received 12 and 19 percent of the votes, respectively. In a close race, Sofia Muhlmann '16, was elected Student Union vice president, winning over Senator-at-Large Naomi DePina '16, with 42 percent of the votes going to Muhlmann and 40 percent to DePina. "[O]ne of the first things that I believe we as the Student Union need to think about is setting goals at the beginning of our terms, making reasonable deadlines to accomplish these goals, keeping all undergraduates in the know, and informing our constituency about how it is we are collectively working to represent and support our undergraduate community," wrote Muhlmann in an email to the Justice. Muhlmann also wrote that she is "looking forward" to tackling issues such as improving residence halls and meal plans, "increasing awareness" arround sexual assault and its advocacy as well as pushing for increased transparency regarding the University's administrative and financial affairs. Current Union Vice President Charlotte Franco '15 was elected secretary with 56 percent of the votes. Franco wrote in an email to the Justice that her top priorities will be "the club system as a whole," as well as the structure of the Union. She wrote that she hopes to collaborate with Student Activities to examine and look for ways to improve the support and resources provided for clubs. Assistant Treasurer Andrew Miller '16, the sole candidate for the office of the treasurer, was elected with 70 percent of the vote. Miller could not be reached for comment by press time. Class of 2016 Senator and Director of Communications Jonathan Jacob, Judy Nam '16, Elad Ohayon '17 and Ari Ben-Elazar '17 were elected to the Allocations Board. Jacob wrote in an email to the Justice that he aims to work with the Senate to de-charter "defunct or inactive clubs" and look for ways to provide funding for performance clubs, which currently do not receive money from the Union. Nam wrote in an email to the Justice that she will work to increase transparency between the A-Board and club leaders. "Increasing transparency will help students be assured that their money is being put to use efficiently to benefit not just select members of the campus, but the Brandeis community as a whole," she added. Nam's other goals include helping clubs on campus find ways to maximize funding for their events, building communication between the A-Board and clubs leaders and "smoothing out some procedural kinks in the financial process." In an email to the Justice, Ben-Elazar wrote that he will work with clubs to focus on "smarter spending. "I see that there is potential to reform the allocations process and promote more sustainable spending so we can make the absolute best of the [Student Activities Fee]," he wrote. Xinyu Annie Li '17 was elected the racial minority representative to the Allocations Board. Li, the only candidate running for the seat, received 63 percent of the votes. Li could not be reached for comment by press time. Grady Ward '16, who was elected the junior representative to the Board of Trustees with 49 percent of the votes, wrote in an email to the Justice that his top priority will be getting a "better picture" of the University's finances. "I will be setting up meetings with administrators to better understand how the allocation process works and formulating plans as to how to insert student input into that process," he wrote. "At the same time, I am going to be contacting and organizing community leaders to begin strategizing about ways that we can bring our concerns to the administration," he added. Class of 2016 Senator Kathy Nguyen was elected the junior representative to the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee with 41 percent of the votes. Nguyen could not be reached for comment by press time. The two seats for representative to the Brandeis Sustainability Fund remain unfilled, as no candidates ran for those positions.
(04/28/14 4:00am)
For a technology start-up, the prospects of wild success are low and the prospects of complete failure are high. Why would a group of bright, well-trained engineers, who have the world of job prospects in research and technology at their feet, choose instead to start an iPhone application For the team of Farseer Inc., Han Wang M.S. '12, Zhaoming Deng M.A. '12, Tong Shen M.A. '12, David Deng M.A. '12, Yeifi Chen M.A. '12 and Karen Hu '12, the answer comes in two parts-passion and challenge. Farseer, Inc. is the team behind the Boston based mobile application FotoDish, which works directly with restaurant owners to provide app-users with professional quality photographs of local restaurant's most popular dishes. They recently reached the milestone of $100,000 in funds raised. The company's professional brief describes the goal of FotoDish as making "the dining experience more enjoyable, by providing [the customer] the most accurate information straight from the source." Wang, the CEO and co-founder, worked for an Information and Technology company in Boston before quitting his job in search of the challenge that working independently would offer. "We only have two modes: sleeping and working. That's the reason all of us are here-because we want to be challenged," Wang said in an interview with the Justice. Co-founders Zhaoming Deng and Shen primarily work on the web application and partially on the mobile application. The original Farseer Inc. team was brought together by a passion for computer science entrepreneurship and a desire for a bigger challenge than what a conventional post-graduate job would offer. They met as Computer Science masters students at Brandeis and were inspired by classes in the department that focused on computer science entrepreneurship. While their mutual interest in entrepreneurship was cultivated in the classroom, their friendship was formed on the basketball court. Their weekly pick-up games brought them closer together as friends and future business partners. Hu, public relations manager for Farseer Inc., met the rest of the team in a different way. Hu was an Economics and Business major, and was introduced to the team by her close friend Deng. Her passion for public relations was born out of the marketing classes and clubs she participated in while a student at Brandeis. "I loved doing event planning at Brandeis. I did event planning for the Asian American Student Association, Chinese Student Association and Culture X for two years in a row. All this led me to want to work for Farseer Inc. in public relations, and help them to coordinate and connect with restaurants," Hu said. Although each member of the team pursued other job opportunities after graduating, their friendship and mutual desire for a challenge brought them back together to make Farseer Inc. a reality in August of 2012. Zhaoming Deng, for example, worked for a year in lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology pursuing diabetes research before joining the team. "I realized that in my personality I was not very passionate about working in a lab. I preferred to interact with people. I really enjoy working with friends," Zhaoming Deng said. The excitement of being part of a constantly evolving enterprise is another factor that motivated these recent graduates to form a start-up. They felt that the stagnancy of working for a large well-established firm presents a lack of challenge and imagination, as well as the feeling that an individual cannot have a real influence over the course of the company's future. "A lot of large companies are completely established in their structure. In a new company, there are always fresh challenges," Zhaoming Deng said. The beginning stages of the company's evolution, as the co-founders remember it, seemed discouraging and impossible. "When we first started recruiting owners, we didn't have an app and we didn't have users, so it was hard to just walk into restaurants and convince restaurant owners. At the beginning it's very tough," Shen said. Zhaoming Deng remembers walking into the first restaurant he ever pitched, Lizzy's Ice Cream in Waltham, and being terrified at the prospect of rejection. The owner, Miriam Benitez, expressed excitement at the idea of the app, boosting Deng's confidence in the viability of the app's future. The idea for FotoDish happened by accident. "We are food lovers, and we always wanted to try all the restaurants in Waltham. That's what drew us to the restaurant industry," Wang said. He personally loves fried rice, and his co-founders joked that they made a channel on the app exclusively so that Wang could find the best fried rice in Boston. The application is unique because of the source of the information, which is not from the consumer, but the restaurant owners themselves. This allows restaurant owners direct influence over how they present their restaurant, which allows them to portray the reality of what the consumer will receive through photography. They contrasted FotoDish with the hugely popular app and website Yelp, which allows users to rate restaurants and view other's ratings of restaurants throughout the United States. "FotoDish is local. It's more accurate, and a lot closer to the restaurant owners. It's not just user-generated content, everything is professional," Hu said. As young people working for a start-up, delineation between work and life ceases to exist. Their colleagues are their closest friends, and they are working in a high-risk, high-reward environment every day to create something unique. "I personally love this kind of status," Wang said. "I know I am learning and growing stronger. I know the company is growing stronger." When asked about where he hopes to see Farseer, Inc. in five years, Wang said, "we don't know. In a start-up, everything could change five months from now."
(04/08/14 4:00am)
This week, JustArts spoke with John Schnorrenberg '14 who wrote and directed a play that premiered on Friday and ran to Sunday in the Shapiro Campus Center Theater. JustArts: Can you discuss the inspiration for your show? John Schnorrenberg: I was procrastinating (that seems to be how a lot of things start for me)... on a project I had for a playwriting class and I was supposed to be writing a monologue. I saw this Charles Manson video ... he said something that really drew me in, and that got me [thinking about] Ted Bundy. I did a lot of research on Ted Bundy. And something about it really captured me. It wasn't so much about Ted Bundy as the women in his life-one in particular who he was dating for a long time, a co-worker of his. [She] had been working with him at the Seattle Police Department and he got married to [her] during his trial for murder. That screamed to me "this would be a great drama, this would be fantastic as a drama." So I had my final project for this class in mind ... and I wrote a monologue about Ted Bundy murdering a woman. I was excited to see all the gasps and horrors in class. Instead ... people laughed. And that was off-putting at first but the more I thought about it the more I thought that this is where I should go with it. So it went away from Ted Bundy and just to the generalized idea of a romantic comedy about a serial killer and a police detective. JA: How did you balance the comedic and heavy aspects of the play? JS: I think the heavy topic is more in the subtext. There are a couple of times where [the heavy topics come] out in a very obvious way such as some of the murders-to really reinforce the point that "this is not a good person, this is not the way it should be," but for me, I wanted to tell the audience, "this is a bad thing" and then make them forget with light comedy and make them fall in love with the characters and maybe root for the relationship. It has been interesting to see how people respond to that. I've gotten a variety of responses-some people "ooing and ahhing" when they kiss and others laughing because of the absurdity. But I really wanted to bookend it between the comedy with the more intense ending ... showing how this is horrible. Showing [that] at the end, she's happy but how ridiculous it is for her to be happy. JA: What was your biggest challenge in both writing and directing this play? JS: Some characters came to me really easily. Some of them, though, were much harder. It was tricky because a lot of my characters are stereotypes- [part of] the whole [romantic comedy] tropes ... and some of those, it was hard to [think about] how much is a stereotype and how much is the real person and also how to make it unique and originally funny and also working to help those actors to find something that I wasn't quite sure how to do myself, that was a bit of a challenge. But I'm happy with the way it came out and I am excited to keep working on it more and also brood more now that I have those voices in my head. JA: Do you have plans for the play after Brandeis? JS: I'm going to take a little bit of time back now ... These past two months have been a lot of focusing on [the play]. I'm going to take a breather. But I'm going to return to it. It's been very helpful to have people working very hard, really turning themselves into the characters for a couple hours every night. And with that in mind, maybe bring some of their [improvised] lines in, maybe even ask them for some of their opinions, workshop it more. What I haven't decided is if I want to keep it a play and submit it to different playhouses or if I want to turn it into a screenplay and maybe try to submit it to various film production companies. JA: Can you put into a few words the message that you hope the audience will get out of this play? JS: First and foremost, I just want people to be entertained. But, ultimately after that, make sure you always think about what you're watching instead of taking it at blank-face. *
(04/08/14 4:00am)
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court eliminated restrictions on how much money individuals can donate to election campaigns during two-year cycles. While it is still illegal to donate over $5,200 to a single politician's campaign, potential donors can now give money to unlimited numbers of campaigns across the country. The maximum amount had previously been capped at $48,000 in total donations. Conservatives have hailed the ruling as a victory for free speech, but critics are concerned that extremely wealthy contributors may now have even more political sway during elections than they already do. What do you think about this ruling? * David Clements '14 The Supreme Court's decision marks a step in the wrong direction for America and the democratization of the electoral process. The court's understanding that money equals speech is not only dumbfounded, but is also misguided and counterproductive to free speech. By equating money with speech, the court essentially establishes that those with more money have more speech. This decision not only empowers the super-wealthy to continue to dominate national politics, but also marginalizes those who cannot afford to give thousands-and even millions-of dollars to campaigns. The issue of free speech must be understood with the pretense that one's influence should be determined by the merit of one's ideas alone. While wealth can certainly amplify a message, it by no means shall be the determinant of the merit of one's ideas. Consequently, by equating money with speech, the court legitimizes a practice that is not only full of corruption, but also marginalizes the input and influence of a majority of Americans. After all, money doesn't equal speech; money equals money. David Clements '14 is the Student Union chief of staff. * Nelson Gilliat '14 Campaign finance would be neither a moral nor legal problem-if we had a proper government, strictly limited to the protection of individual rights (life, liberty, property) via the courts, police and military. That way, individual rights could not be voted away by the tyranny of the majority, or sold to the highest bidder. The existence of lobbyists and special interests who buy influence, presupposes a government that sells individual rights for some unspecified collective goal, be it the public interest, public safety, or the common good. Since nobody's rights are safe under such a system, special interests, both to protect themselves and to get benefits they could not otherwise achieve voluntarily, lobby politicians in order to influence legislation and attain some special favor, privilege, exemption, contract, or subsidy. Nelson Gilliat '14 is the president of Brandeis Libertarians. * Daniel Koas '16 Money continues to be poured into American elections at astronomical rates, and the recent decision by the Supreme Court to loosen limitations on big political donors has paved the path for even more monetary influence in our political system. By allowing a tiny sliver of the nation's wealthiest citizens to have even more sway than they did before, the Supreme Court is both potentially corrupting campaigns and silencing the voices of the other 99 percent of the country. While the argument that money is equivalent to speech is tempting, the fact of the matter is that money is merely a way to fund and amplify speech; it helps individuals express themselves, but does not carry the same power as a vote. In fact, by allowing billionaires to drown out the voices of other Americans, the Supreme Court is actually undermining the intentions that the framers expressed in the First Amendment of allowing all voices to be heard and establishing America as an open marketplace for ideas to be shared. Though the playing field can never be truly level, our government should be taking steps to protect the voices and rights of the people, not giving them away to the wealthiest few. Daniel Koas '16 is an American Studies major. * Catherine Rosch '16 While I can't say that I'm surprised by the Roberts Court's decision in McCutcheon v. FEC, I am very disappointed by the ruling. By getting rid of maximum donations an individual can give to a party, the Supreme Court is essentially equating money and speech as being the same thing. This dangerous precedent not only favors wealthier Americans over the rest of the population but could also potentially be used to justify getting rid of any campaign finance limits. Money and speech are not equivalent and should not be treated as such. There is already way too much money in politics. This ruling will only allow money to play a bigger role and does not benefit the majority of Americans. I do not support McCutcheon and I hope Congress is able to pass legislation to limit money in politics. Catherine Rosch '16 is the legislative affairs coordinator in Brandeis Democrats.
(04/08/14 4:00am)
Numerous members of the University community have expressed outrage at the selection of Ayaan Hirsi Ali as an honorary degree recipient for its 63rd annual commencement ceremony, which was announced last Monday along with the names of the other recipients and the individual who will deliver the commencement address. Hirsi Ali is a Somali-born women's rights activist who has campaigned against female genital mutilation but is also well known for her critical view of Islam; she has at various times called Islam a "backwards religion" and a "destructive, nihilistic cult of death" that legitimizes murder. She formerly lived in the Netherlands and was a member of Dutch Parliament until it was discovered that she had provided false information on an asylum application to gain entry into the country. In response to this, Hirsi Ali claimed that she lied on her asylum application because she was fleeing a forced marriage. She had also previously disclosed inaccurate information through several sources before the controversy, including through her book The Son Factory. After resigning from her position due to the ensuing scandal, she moved to the United States to join the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute-an organization dedicated to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity and strengthening free enterprise according to its website-where she is now a visiting fellow. The decision to award her an honorary degree has drawn strong reactions from many members of the Brandeis community, especially faculty and students. Prof. Mary Baine Campbell (ENG) said in an interview with the Justice that she believes this decision is not in the University's best interest. "Hirsi Ali represents values that Brandeis, in naming itself after Justice [Louis] Brandeis, ... was founded in noble opposition to," said Campbell. Campbell also said that she was concerned about the awarding of the degree because of a lack of consultation with the faculty during the selection process. In an email to the Justice, she wrote that she was "astonished to find out that this choice, to honor Ms. Hirsi Ali for her contributions to 'women's rights,' had been made without consulting the WGS Core Faculty." s=She noted that the core faculty in the Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies program had not been contacted either. In a statement issued on behalf of the administration, Senior Vice President for Communications Ellen de Graffenreid wrote that University President Frederick Lawrence "is aware of concerns that have been expressed following the announcement of the selection of Ayaan Hirsi Ali as an honorary degree recipient." She also added that Lawrence was reaching out to members of the Brandeis community to discuss the controversy, but did not respond to requests for comment on which individuals have been contacted by press time. In addition to vocal opposition to Hirsi Ali, there have been more tangible measures to oppose her presence at commencement. A student petition at www.change.org, started by Sarah Fahmy '14, calls on Lawrence to rescind the offer of an honorary degree. As of Monday evening at 11 p.m., the petition had over 600 signatures. Faculty members also organized to protest the decision through a letter to Lawrence. The letter calls on Lawrence to rescind the offer because of her "virulently anti-Muslim sentiments," as well as re-institute a faculty committee to review potential candidates before honorary degrees are awarded, since such a committee could have "warned [Lawrence] about the horrible message that this [decision] sends to the Muslim and non-Muslim comminutes at Brandeis and beyond." The letter was sent to the faculty on Sunday evening, and by late Monday had received over 75 signatures from various faculty members. Prof. Jytte Klausen (POL) wrote in an email to the Justice that giving Hirsi Ali a degree "undermines years of careful work to show that Brandeis University promotes the ideals of shared learning, religious toleration and coexistence, irrespective of religion." She further wrote that Hirsi Ali should be invited to speak on campus since the University allows individuals of all views the opportunity to express them but that honorary degrees should only be given to "people who promote our mission of learning and toleration." Klausen also expressed concern that Hirsi Ali's presence would detract from the overall experience of commencement, which is "not a hard-edged talk show or forum for confrontational endorsement of extreme views," but rather "a celebration where all should feel welcome." She also called into question Hirsi Ali's political career, saying that it had been built on "complaining about refugees and immigrants" and calling for harsher measures to be directed at these groups. Klausen also noted that Hirsi Ali's false statements on her Dutch refugee application and citizenship request was an offense "severe enough for the Minister of the Interior ... to annul Hirsi Ali's [Dutch] citizenship." In addition to condemnation, the announcement has prompted Prof. Susan Lanser (ENG) to call not only for the award to be rescinded, but for a public apology issued by Lawrence to the greater Brandeis community. In an email to the Justice, Lanser wrote that she believes Hirsi Ali "is not worthy of a doctorate of humane letters from a university that claims to be committed to justice, respect, diversity and truth to its innermost parts." She added that her outspoken views on Islam "foment an intolerance that is wholly antithetical to Brandeisian values." While many faculty members and students are decrying Hirsi Ali's being offered the honorary degree, some are coming to her defense. Bernard Macy '79, an alumnus who came forward to defend the selection of Hirsi Ali as an honorary degree recipient, sent an email to Lawrence, numerous faculty members and the Justice expressing his support. Macy wrote that he was very impressed that Hirsi Ali "had the courage to speak and act out against an extremely vicious form of violence toward women, which, until recently, had been a topic that had not been politically correct to discuss." Macy further expressed hope that "protection of women from this insidious form of mental, emotional and physical abuse" would be in line with the values of the University and firmly stated that Hirsi Ali is very deserving of an honorary degree. Students have also expressed concern about the University's selection. Alina Cheema '15, co-president of the Muslim Students Association, said in an interview with the Justice that she and the MSA perceive Hirsi Ali's receiving a degree as alarming. "[Hirs Ali] is well-known for her [anti-Islamic] beliefs ... and this is a slap in the face by the administration. Are they saying that we don't belong on this campus?" Cheema said. "How can the University claim to be so focused on social justice when they award a degree to someone with such radical views?" Cheema also added that this situation has made her personally feel very uncomfortable as a Muslim on campus. "How am I supposed to tell a prospective Muslim student that [he or she] will be accepted on this campus ... when the administration condones this?" When asked if the MSA was preparing a response to the announcement, Cheema said that the MSA had been talking about the issue since the news broke on Monday. "We will not be quiet about this," said Cheema. "Any opportunity we have to work against this, we will take advantage of." In addition to the perceived disconnect between Hirsi Ali's values and the University's, some have criticized the decision for damaging the University's reputation. Campbell wrote that she is worried this will be a "[public relations] disaster, and a step down a road we cannot take without losing our identity [as a university]." Prof. Mitra Shavarini (WGS) also told the Justice in an email that the offer is not in line with the University's mission, unless it wishes to "incite hate, mistrust and division among its community." She further stated that Hirsi Ali's approach to discourse "collapses thought in obscure, non-contextualized allegations that have no intellectual merit"-something Shavarini believes is radically opposed to the University's values of "intellectual exchange and the challenging of one's ideas."
(04/08/14 4:00am)
For the fall 2014 semester, students can expect to see several changes and new course offerings. In addition to the Women's and Gender Studies program changing its name to Women's, Gender and Sexuality Studies, introductory courses will be offered in both Religious Studies and History. As well, the History of Ideas program will be offering a seminar in critical theory that will function as a core course for the program. In an interview with the Justice, Prof. Wendy Cadge (SOC), who chairs the Women's and Gender Studies program, said that the push to include sexuality in the program's name came from its faculty. Prof. Thomas King (ENG), who chairs the Sexuality and Queer Studies program, was supportive of the inclusion of sexuality in WGS' name, saying in an interview with the Justice that the program "should have made that move a long time ago." Cadge said that WGS faculty members are hoping that the name change will help to strengthen its relationship with SQS, which became a minor four years ago. As to whether Cadge sees the two programs combining in the future, she said that "we need to wait and see." King said that the WGS faculty was concerned about keeping the integrity of the minor despite this change, and that SQS will be a "sustained track within WGS." He said that he does not see these programs combining, but said that "any program over time has to decide if it's still meeting student needs." King also added that he does not foresee numbers of SQS minors decreasing due to the inclusion of sexuality in the WGS curriculum, but rather that more students would enroll in Women's and Gender Studies due to the inclusion of "non-normative genders or queer sexualities."SQS, he said, "gives students a more concentrated focus on sexuality" and "tends to raise more theoretical questions about what sexuality is." Although he said a "small number" of students declare the minor, "the enrollments in the courses are fairly substantial. Cadge said that the program had considered several other names for the recent change. Gender and Sexuality Studies is a common name for such programs, she said, but many students and faculty "felt very strongly that 'women' should remain in the name." "Historically, women have been understudied and underrepresented in a lot of scholarly discourse as well as public life, and a number of people feel that if women are removed from the title of the programs, from the titles of names of courses, it's very easy for them to continue to be ignored or to not have the appropriate amount of attention paid," said Cadge. Women's and Gender Studies was originally titled Women's Studies, but was changed and voted on by the program faculty in spring 2005, according to Prof. Susan Lanser (ENG). The new program name will appear on students' diplomas starting in 2015. According to Cadge, one requirement to major in the program did change-students must now take one elective course that focuses largely on sexuality. The minor requirements, however, did not change, according to the program's proposal to the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee. The History of Ideas program will offer a new course titled "Introduction to Critical Theory," which will be taught by lecturer in the History of Ideas Patrick Gamsby this fall. According to Prof. David Engerman (HIST), who chairs the program, despite what the course title implies, it is not intended as an introductory class within the program. In response to questions about whether or not such courses would be offered in the future, Engerman wrote that "[w]e may offer other courses in the future in circumstances such as those for [f]all 2014." However, he wrote that there are no current plans for Gamsby to offer this particular course again. The introduction of the course follows accusations of alleged misuse of funds donated for the History of Ideas program, which were chronicled in a Nov. 26 Justice article. The conditions of the donations, given to the University in 1995 and 1999 by the Hannah Oberman Trust as two separate installments, stated that if the program were to be discontinued, the money would have to be redirected to the Cambridge Public Library. According to the article, in the past 10 years, the History of Ideas program has not offered any of its own courses; it has only offered courses that are cross-listed in other departments. The last time the core course "HOID 127A: Seminar: History of Ideas" was offered was in spring 2003, the article states. The Religious Studies program will also offer a core course this fall, titled "REL 107A: Introduction to World Religions." According to the program chair, Prof. Marc Brettler (NEJS), the Religious Studies program is "reinstituting [sic] this-we had offered it in the past, but not in the last few years." Brettler wrote in an email to the Justice that the program stopped offering the course because it "was hard to find the right person to offer it." However, the current demand for the course contributed to its reinstitution, specifically from students and faculty of the International and Global Studies program. According to Prof. Chandler Rosenberger (IGS) in an interview with the Justice, the request for this course to be offered was "based on strong student interest in the relationship between religion and world affairs. According to Rosenberger, IGS will fund the adjunct professor who will be teaching this reinstated course, Kristen Lucken. Brettler wrote that he hopes the course will continue to be offered in the future. "I am very excited that this will happen, and that it will foster greater interest among Brandeis students of the importance of religion to contemporary society and to societies past," he wrote. The History department will offer an introductory course titled "HIST 10A: Not Even Past" during the fall 2014 semester. Prof. Jane Kamensky (HIST), who chairs the department, described the course in an email to the Justice as an "exciting introduction to the historical roots of modern dilemmas, and to historical thinking more broadly." Kamensky wrote that the department expects to offer the course annually. Although she wrote that this course will not be required, she wrote that "it will be a good gateway for potential History majors, and for a wide range of other students who want to understand the present and the future by thinking more deeply about the past." According to Kamensky, the department has offered several introductory surveys of particular times and places, including East Asian history, Latin American history, United States history, world history and a two-term European History sequence. However, the department has not featured an introduction to history "as a way of problem solving and thinking about the world," she wrote. "We thought such an option would serve a diverse array of history-curious students, especially but not only first-years." The course will be taught by a team consisting of Profs. Govind Sreenivasan (HIST) and Abigail Cooper (HIST), according to Kamensky. Other faculty members will rotate into the course in future years. According to Kamensky, offering the course was made possible through a grant from the Mandel Center for the Humanities. "The grant from Mandel is small and directed at the team-teaching of this particular course but we have several other new courses debuting in the fall, as we do virtually every semester," she wrote.
(04/08/14 4:00am)
On Feb. 26 the Brandeis Alumni & Friends Network announced that Rabbi Eric Yoffie '69, Prof. Eve Marder '69 (BIOL) and Wakako Hironaka M.A. '64, Honorary '87 are the recipients of this year's Alumni Achievement Award. The award, which is the highest honor reserved for alumni, is given by the Brandeis Alumni Association to alumni who have significantly impacted their fields of work. The three join the list of winners including Robert J. Zimmer '68, Bonnie Berger '83 and Jon Landau '68, who won last year's award. University President Frederick Lawrence will formally present the three with the award at the 2014 alumni reunion on June 7. Hironaka is a prominent political leader in Japan. She served in the Japanese House of Councilors, which, along with the House of Representatives, forms the Japanese Diet, Japan's legislative body, from 1986 to 2010. She has also served as vice chair of the Democratic Party of Japan, state minister and director-general of the Environmental Agency in Japan. After benefiting from the Wien International Scholarship Program, which funds the studies of international students with significant financial need and academic achievement during their first years, Hironaka served on the Brandeis Board of Trustees from 1992 to 1997. Due to travel, Hironaka was unavailable to comment by press time. Yoffie, who was the president of the Union for Reform Judaism from 1996 to 2012, now lectures about Jewish, religious and Israel-related issues at universities, synagogues and Jewish organizations. He writes for the Jerusalem Post and Haaretz about Judaism and Israel and for the Huffington Post about religion in America. Yoffie wrote in an email to the Justice that he "was a bit surprised, but of course delighted and honored" when he received a letter from Lawrence informing him that he had received the award. This will only be Yoffie's second reunion, since he has had to miss past dates due to conflicts with the Union for Reform Judaism's national conference. "I will enjoy receiving the award, but reconnecting with classmates that I have seen rarely or not at all in the almost 50 years since I entered Brandeis is what I am looking forward to the most," Yoffie wrote. Yoffie was president of the student council during the infamous student occupation of Brandeis' Ford Hall in January 1969 and spoke at then-University President Morris Abram's inauguration, but wrote that his most memorable moment from his time at Brandeis is meeting his wife, Amy. Yoffie also mentioned other highlights of his Brandeis experience. "Being a Brandeis alumnus means many things to me: At Brandeis, there was a certain intensity about politics and social justice that influenced me throughout my life," Yoffie wrote. "In addition, Brandeis was the place where I was inspired by great teachers of Judaism and Jewish history." Marder is currently the Victor and Gwendolyn Beinfield Professor of Neuroscience at Brandeis and was appointed to President Barack Obama's Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies Initiative in April 2013. Marder wrote in an email to the Justice that she became interested in neurology during her junior year at Brandeis, when she took a course in abnormal psychology. "I ended up doing a research paper on inhibition in the nervous system and its potential relevance to schizophrenia. It was the reading I did for that course that made me decide I wanted to be a neuroscientist," Marder wrote. Marder, who also served as president of the Society for Neuroscience in 2008, wrote that during her time as an undergraduate, she did not anticipate someday teaching at Brandeis. "The idea never crossed my mind," Marder wrote. Marder also met her husband at Brandeis, and wrote that she is looking forward to "seeing old friends and classmates" at the reunion. Her advice for current students is to "follow the dreams that come from unexpected moments." -Ilana Kruger
(04/07/14 4:00am)
The men's and women's track and field teams took part in the Yellow Jacket Invitational hosted by American International College under cold and windy conditions on Saturday. The squads came away with some impressive solo finishes, even though overall the teams had mixed results. The men finished with just 0.5 points earned in the high jump. Mark Franklin '17 tied for ninth place with a jump of 1.73 meters. The women fared slightly better, finishing in 14th place with a total of 18 points. The 18 points all came in the 1500-meter run as the Judges took first and second in the race. Kelsey Whitaker '16 and Amelia Lundkvist '14 took the top two spots with times of four minutes, 41.39 seconds and 4:45.98 respectively. Maggie Hensel '16 and Maddie Dolins '17 also managed to finish in the top 25. Hensel placed 19th overall in the race with a time of 5:03.40, a drop behind her time of 4:55.00 she recording during the seeding race. Dolins finished the race in 22nd out of the 91 competitors with a time of 5:04.76 in the finals. Whitaker felt that it was important to get her first race of the spring season out of the way and she tempered her expectations coming into the race. "Since it was the first race of the season, the main goal was to just get the first outdoor race out of the way and to establish a starting point for the season," she said. "The plan was to just run with the top pack and finish strong. I knew I could stay with the front runners but I did not go into the race expecting to win." The women only competed in one other event on the day-the javelin throw. Ashley Klein '16 finished in 13th place with a throw of 28.55 meters while Selena Livas '17 was right behind her in 20th place with a throw of 19.73 meters. Whitaker said that she hopes to continue her success as the spring season moves on. "I'm excited for the rest of this season," she continued. "I am hoping that we can perform well as a team at [the University Athletic Association Championships]. "Individually, I hope to continue improving my performances and hopefully qualify for NCAA's again with my teammates." The men came into the day with more competitors than the women but finished with some mixed results. Much like the women, the men's best event was the 1500 -meter run. Grady Ward '16 finished in 16th place overall out of 84 competitors with a time of 4:06.59, and Quinton Hoey '17 snuck right behind him and into the top 20 with a time of 4:07.88. Matt Doran '17 also competed in the event, finishing in 42nd place with a time of 4:16.95. Both Ward and Hoey ran the prelimanry round in 4:05:00 flat, though the pair could not match their time in the final round. In the 200 and 400-meter dashes, a promising pair of first-year sprinters represented the Judges. In the 200-meter dash, Nick Wactor '17 had a strong showing with his 21st place finish in 23.26 seconds while Jeremy Wilson '17 came in at 39th with a time of 24.42 seconds. Wactor improved on his time of 23.88 seconds he recorded in the prelimanry round. Wactor followed his 200-meter race with a time of 53.30 in the 400-meter dash, putting him at 32nd for the event. Wilson, meanwhile, finished in 52nd with a time of 54.55. The men also had a strong overall showing in the long jump, despite the inability of Mohamed Sidique '15 to place in the top 10 and earn any points in the event. Sidique came up .08 meters short of his seed distance of 6.48 meters, putting him in 11th place in the finals for the event. Sidique came two-tenths of a meter from finishing in 10th place for the event. Adam Berger '16 and Franklin also competed in the long jump, finishing with distances of 5.95 and 5.62 meters respectively. Both the men and women will travel to Brown University on Saturday afternoon to take part in the Brown University Springtime Collegiate Invitational.
(04/07/14 4:00am)
Composting is just one method to help preserve and protect the environment, but it is a method many students rarely take part in. Knowing this, several students decided to host a week-long event called "Weigh Your Waste Week", which took place at Sherman Dining Hall during dinner time from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. every day from Monday, March 31 to Thursday, April 3. The week is a partnership between the Eco-Reps and the Senate Sustainability Committee. The premise of Weigh Your Waste Week centers on composting, the process of decomposing wastes, particularly food waste, into soil and fertilizer. The goal of the project was both to educate students about composting as well as motivate students to produce less waste. "We still want to make students aware and try to reduce waste," Deanna Heller '15 said. The week is Heller's project through the Eco-Reps program. Eco-Reps are a group of paid students hired by Brandeis Facilities to promote and coordinate campus sustainability improvements. Heller is part of an Eco-Rep program called Green Corps, a program in which students work 10 hours a week to implement a specific sustainability project of their choice. Initial plans for this project began when Heller and student representative for Sodexo and Chair of the Senate Sustainability Committee Anna Bessendorf '15 collaborated after finding out about the impending changes in the composting system. The duo also teamed up with registered campus dietician Kate Moran as well as student volunteers from Students for Environmental Action and Green Corps. Waste Week volunteers set up a table in Sherman with containers to collect people's waste and a scale to weigh their refuse in pounds. The table supervisors requested that diners dump all that was remaining on their dinner plates, including napkins, into the waste bins to be weighed. The project coincides with the University's recent switch to Casella, Brandeis' new waste disposal company. They emerged on campus this semester. With Casella as our full-time waste contractor, the University is able to manage food waste through composting on a comprehensive scale. So far, according to Heller, "Casella has started composting in the kitchens" and in the future, there are plans to expand this system throughout campus." Casella has the intetnion of expanding to include dining locations on campus and residence halls. Previously, any composted waste from Usdan Student Center and Sherman has traditionally gone to the WeCare commercial composting site in Marlborough, Mass. The food wastes collected from Weigh Your Waste Week will instead now be going to smaller farm-based facilities. The waste from the week will be going to Brick Ends Farm in South Hamilton, Mass. At these compost sites, the waste is sorted and composted, and since the facilities are larger, meat and dairy products may be composted as well. This is usually not possible at a smaller home or private composting system. This switch of waste disposal providers coincides with a statute passed recently by Massachusetts requiring all cafeterias and dining halls of a certain size to implement a compost system. The statute will go into effect in July. They were using the "Weigh Your Waste Week" to "test the waters," Bessendorf said. Elizabeth Casella, Waste Systems business development manager stated in an email to the Justice that logically, Rocky Hill is preferable to the WeCare facility. "Rocky Hill is a farm based site that creates high quality compost that can be applied to fields for the growth of produce, used as a soil amendment, turf dressing, erosion control or potted plants," she wrote. Because of the new statute, the Campus Sustainability Initiative at Brandeis will also be implementing a new three-bin system. The three bins will be for trash, compost and recycling and will have different colors to designate each kind. "The system will standardize what happens with waste throughout campus," Heller said. The total weight of the waste collected on Monday, March 31 amounted to 51.1 pounds, 8.5 pounds on Tuesday for half an hour, 33.7 pounds on Wednesday and 58.6 pounds on Thursday. Heller noted that part of the project's success stemmed from strong student response. "Many students who saw the compost table the night before and how much food was being wasted decided to reduce their food waste the following night," Heller said. Haley Orlofsky '14, a student who helped supervise the table, witnessed a similar student response. "People ask what it is and once they know more about it, they appreciate it," she said. For Heller, the project works toward more than one goal. "I am very passionate about this because it is very multi-layered," she said. It's not just about saving the planet, there are people starving and here we are wasting so much food." Heller noted that composting was part of her upbringing. "Compost makes sense, to use waste to make food rather than just dumping it in a landfill," she said. "The fundamental reality is that we all share this planet with other people."
(04/01/14 4:00am)
This week, JustArts spoke with Gabby Lamm '17, the producer of Brandeis Players' production of 1984, written by Michael Gene Sullivan and adapted from the novel by George Orwell. JustArts: Is this your first show at Brandeis? Gabby Lamm: It's one of the first shows that I've had such a leadership role in. I assistant stage-managed a show last semester and assistant produced a show last semester but this semester was the first time I had a real role as a producer. JA: What goes into producing a show? GL: It's funny that you ask that. Because a lot of people [say to me], "Oh, you're a producer. What do you do?" Producers do most of the behind-the-scenes things. We reserve rehearsal spaces, we make sure tickets are working out; we're in charge of the budgets. We organize the coffeehouse (which is a big role), we put together the programs and make sure we have programs and posters and things like that. So we do a lot of the advertising things and a lot of the technical [aspects]. [We deal with] what's necessary for the actors to rehearse. JA: Did you run into any problems with the producing aspects? GL: There are always little things where you have to mediate conflicts. For me it was a little bit hard because I am a first-year. A lot of our [production] staff was first- years so it wasn't too bad. But I had to make sure to balance respecting people who have more experience in theater than I do and who know more than I do [with] making sure that they recognize that there are certain situations where I need to be in charge and I need make sure they're doing their jobs. We also struggled a little bit finding people to fill positions in the [production] staff. JA: What was your favorite part of being a producer? GL: I really liked being able to be involved in everything. I got to sit in rehearsals; I got to be involved in tech week. It really depends on who's producing. For me, I'm really hands-on because I really love theater and I really want to be involved in the production. So I did try to go to rehearsals once a week and I organized meetings with the [production] staff once a week. So my favorite part was being able to do everything. But [I also liked] having the flexibility-not having to be at rehearsal from 7 to 11 [p.m.] every day of the week. I could fit it into my schedule so it would be easier for me to do other things as well. JA: Have you read the book? How do you think it compares? GL: I have read the book. It's actually one of my favorite books so I was really excited when Sarah Waldron ['17], the director, asked me to produce it. The story is the same but the construct is entirely different. So the book walks you through the story, it goes chronologically.... where as [in] the play, all of it takes place in the interrogation room that you only see at the end of the novel. And the party members re-enact all of Winston's experiences and his dreams and so it's much more immediate (I think) and as one of the [assistant stage managers] put it, "psychologically thrilling." So while the story is the same it's entirely two different things. JA: Where do you plan on going after this in terms of doing other shows and trying out other aspects of theater? GL: I'm already on a couple proposals for next semester that people are proposing to different groups. I am definitely going to stay involved in theater. I am already over committed for next semester. But I just love it so much and I love the people and I love being able to see a production from start to finish and literally go from before auditions. [Going] from talking about ideas for the show to today [this Sunday], taking down the set after a week of performances. It's just so cool to see that process and it makes me feel very productive. But just seeing how good people are at what they do, especially at the college level, it's just such a cool thing to be able to witness. I might branch out into other things. I did direct this semester. I might stage manage at some point but right now for next semester the only things people have asked me to do are produce so that's mostly what I'll be doing. -Emily Wishingrad
(04/01/14 4:00am)
The editors of the Justice have received a couple of anonymous notes this semester that echo an attitude expressed in similarly anonymous notes sent to them last semester. The four notes seem to have been written by different people, and this concerns me. I don't think the notes represent a "trend." But they do reveal what I would call an "illiberal tendency" among some members of the Brandeis community-along with a fundamental misunderstanding about what a newspaper is, how its editorial pages are not the same thing as its "news" and what its function is in a free society. I devote my column this week, therefore, to educating what I hope is a handful of readers. A newspaper has not committed a journalistic lapse when it reports on an event that you wish had not happened or runs an editorial that you disagree with. The Justice did not "go far beyond legitimate bounds" or "glorify the terror of civilians" when it reported on Max Blumenthal's visit to our campus last month and then ran two editorials about Blumenthal's work-one that was critical of Blumenthal and another that defended his ideas. It was also not "disgusting" of the editors to run two guest editorials last semester in which Brandeis students offered what I would consider to be flawed, but nevertheless refreshing (and possibly even necessary) alternatives to the understanding of "social justice" that has come to dominate the culture on this campus. The reader who wrote that the Justice should have "refused to publish" those editorials is just plain wrong, and his or her time would have been better spent crafting a response that the editors could have run on the editorial pages of a later issue, rather than anonymously calling for censorship. The first obligation of a newspaper is to inform citizens about their community-who its members are, what they are doing and why, how and when they are doing it. There are students on this campus who believe the Israeli government's treatment of Palestinians in Israel amounts to "apartheid." Because of their belief, these students recently participated in a national, week-long protest that uses the word "apartheid" to describe the Israeli government's policies. That participation involved bringing a controversial journalist to Brandeis who spoke, then, about his book in which, I am told, he compares the situation in modern-day Israel to the situation in Nazi Germany (full disclosure: I have not read Blumenthal's book). There are also students on this campus who believe it is hyperbolic, inaccurate, dangerous and even bigoted to use the word "apartheid" to describe the complex political and cultural situation on the ground in modern-day Israel. These students are well aware of the national movement that uses that word, and they believe the Brandeis students who participated in Israel Apartheid Week are uninformed. These students insist that "all citizens of Israel are fully equal under the law," and that Israel is "the exact opposite of the institutional discriminatory system of actual apartheid that was in effect in South Africa." I know this, because I read those quotes in the Justice's coverage of the Max Blumenthal visit. I have spoken with the editors of the Justice about the article they ran on Blumenthal's talk. One reader wrote with dismay about the "many articles" the Justice's reporters wrote about the activities of Israel Apartheid Week, insisting that "this should be fixed." Actually, there was just one article-in the March 4 edition. And I believe there really should have been two. The editors tell me that because of deadline restraints and a staff shortage, they elected to collapse the coverage of Blumenthal's visit into an article that examined the controversy surrounding the very idea of an "Israel Apartheid Week." I thought their reporter produced a very balanced piece on the national movement and its manifestation on our campus. I would have liked to have read more, however, about the actual reaction to Blumenthal's talk-after the fact. But because the article was already running long, that reaction got short shrift. I believe the reader who lamented the "many articles" in the Justice about Israel Apartheid Week may have been unaware of the difference between news and editorials. He or she spoke of the biased "wording of articles" in the paper and insisted that the Justice had an obligation to be "neutral." While there was only one news article about the protest week-and its language was quite objective-there were two editorials, and understandably, the writers of those editorials did not use disinterested language. This brings me, then, to the second obligation of a newspaper in a free society. A newspaper should stimulate respectful conversation among the members of a community about the ideas that animate that community. To that end, the Justice published an editorial by Associate Editor Glen Chesir '15 (who has a regular column in the paper), criticizing Israel Apartheid Week and the greater Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (March 11). Chesir provoked readers to consider the extent to which the inflammatory language and actions of these movements inhibit the peace process. The following week (March 18), the editors published a guest editorial from Prof. Harry Mairson (COSI), in which Mairson called attention to the numerous centers on our campus that are "devoted to institutionally supporting Israel." He suggested that the contrarian sentiments of Max Blumenthal were a necessary ingredient in any meaningful dialogue about the difficult situation in Israel. To have a productive conversation, in other words, people have to be willing to hear and consider ideas that make them uncomfortable. This is precisely the attitude that a good newspaper tries to cultivate. *
(04/01/14 4:00am)
The editors of the Justice have received a couple of anonymous notes this semester that echo an attitude expressed in similarly anonymous notes sent to them last semester. The four notes seem to have been written by different people, and this concerns me. I don't think the notes represent a "trend." But they do reveal what I would call an "illiberal tendency" among some members of the Brandeis community-along with a fundamental misunderstanding about what a newspaper is, how its editorial pages are not the same thing as its "news" and what its function is in a free society. I devote my column this week, therefore, to educating what I hope is a handful of readers. A newspaper has not committed a journalistic lapse when it reports on an event that you wish had not happened or runs an editorial that you disagree with. The Justice did not "go far beyond legitimate bounds" or "glorify the terror of civilians" when it reported on Max Blumenthal's visit to our campus last month and then ran two editorials about Blumenthal's work-one that was critical of Blumenthal and another that defended his ideas. It was also not "disgusting" of the editors to run two guest editorials last semester in which Brandeis students offered what I would consider to be flawed, but nevertheless refreshing (and possibly even necessary) alternatives to the understanding of "social justice" that has come to dominate the culture on this campus. The reader who wrote that the Justice should have "refused to publish" those editorials is just plain wrong, and his or her time would have been better spent crafting a response that the editors could have run on the editorial pages of a later issue, rather than anonymously calling for censorship. The first obligation of a newspaper is to inform citizens about their community-who its members are, what they are doing and why, how and when they are doing it. There are students on this campus who believe the Israeli government's treatment of Palestinians in Israel amounts to "apartheid." Because of their belief, these students recently participated in a national, week-long protest that uses the word "apartheid" to describe the Israeli government's policies. That participation involved bringing a controversial journalist to Brandeis who spoke, then, about his book in which, I am told, he compares the situation in modern-day Israel to the situation in Nazi Germany (full disclosure: I have not read Blumenthal's book). There are also students on this campus who believe it is hyperbolic, inaccurate, dangerous and even bigoted to use the word "apartheid" to describe the complex political and cultural situation on the ground in modern-day Israel. These students are well aware of the national movement that uses that word, and they believe the Brandeis students who participated in Israel Apartheid Week are uninformed. These students insist that "all citizens of Israel are fully equal under the law," and that Israel is "the exact opposite of the institutional discriminatory system of actual apartheid that was in effect in South Africa." I know this, because I read those quotes in the Justice's coverage of the Max Blumenthal visit. I have spoken with the editors of the Justice about the article they ran on Blumenthal's talk. One reader wrote with dismay about the "many articles" the Justice's reporters wrote about the activities of Israel Apartheid Week, insisting that "this should be fixed." Actually, there was just one article-in the March 4 edition. And I believe there really should have been two. The editors tell me that because of deadline restraints and a staff shortage, they elected to collapse the coverage of Blumenthal's visit into an article that examined the controversy surrounding the very idea of an "Israel Apartheid Week." I thought their reporter produced a very balanced piece on the national movement and its manifestation on our campus. I would have liked to have read more, however, about the actual reaction to Blumenthal's talk-after the fact. But because the article was already running long, that reaction got short shrift. I believe the reader who lamented the "many articles" in the Justice about Israel Apartheid Week may have been unaware of the difference between news and editorials. He or she spoke of the biased "wording of articles" in the paper and insisted that the Justice had an obligation to be "neutral." While there was only one news article about the protest week-and its language was quite objective-there were two editorials, and understandably, the writers of those editorials did not use disinterested language. This brings me, then, to the second obligation of a newspaper in a free society. A newspaper should stimulate respectful conversation among the members of a community about the ideas that animate that community. To that end, the Justice published an editorial by Associate Editor Glen Chesir '15 (who has a regular column in the paper), criticizing Israel Apartheid Week and the greater Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (March 11). Chesir provoked readers to consider the extent to which the inflammatory language and actions of these movements inhibit the peace process. The following week (March 18), the editors published a guest editorial from Prof. Harry Mairson (COSI), in which Mairson called attention to the numerous centers on our campus that are "devoted to institutionally supporting Israel." He suggested that the contrarian sentiments of Max Blumenthal were a necessary ingredient in any meaningful dialogue about the difficult situation in Israel. To have a productive conversation, in other words, people have to be willing to hear and consider ideas that make them uncomfortable. This is precisely the attitude that a good newspaper tries to cultivate. *
(04/01/14 4:00am)
On Monday March 24, the University announced that two faculty members have received fellowships. Prof. Ulka Anjaria (ENG) was awarded the Charles A. Ryskamp Research Fellowship, and Prof. Naghmeh Sohrabi (HIST) was awarded the Mellon New Directions Fellowship. Both fellowships are funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Anjaria applied to the fellowship to fund research for her book on "how new political imaginaries in contemporary India are represented in recent literature, popular Hindi film and television," Anjaria wrote in an email to the Justice. "Although I have access to many of these new texts from the US, I felt I needed a year of research in India to fully put these works into context." After spending two weeks in India in January as a visiting fellow at the University of Delhi in New Delhi Anjaria "saw how much the humanities were flourishing in India." She is looking at India's contemporary culture and how social injustice is still an issue. "I am interested in the ways new political imaginaries are actually emerging in new literature and films, despite what seem like their capitalist story lines. As the nature of politics changes in India, literature and film represent these politics, but also try to imagine new futurities for India, outside of the dominant nationalist discourses," Anjaria wrote. Sohrabi, the Charles Goodman Professor of Middle East History and associate director for research at the Crown Center for Middle East Studies, is one of 10 professors around the United States to receive the New Directions Fellowship. "I'm interested in going beyond the more traditional explanations for the 1979 Iranian Revolution in particular and revolutions in general that focus on political events, ideology, and economic factors," Sohrabi wrote in an email to the Justice. Sohrabi spent parts of her childhood in Iran and the United States during the revolution, and learned about it through school and stories from those around her. Sohrabi is "ecstatic" to have the opportunities that the fellowship will give her. "As an historian, I know well how to read documents and records, and even conduct oral histories. But anthropology, defined very broadly, as the study of culture, allows the historian to bring the intangible, the experience, missing from official records, into the historical narrative," Sohrabi wrote. Sohrabi will use the fellowship to "both get formal training in anthropology while at the same time conducting research." She will miss her students while she is on leave. "I will be taking some courses in anthropology this summer and doing interviews in North America, and then will be in Paris for the Fall semester and at Oxford for much of the Spring, with trips planned to Iran and various European cities where there are sizable Iranian communities." *
(04/01/14 4:00am)
The results of a survey administered by the Justice to students in a large University Chemistry course over the past month indicated that women in the sample appeared to perceive their class performance in a poorer light than men did. Over half of men who responded estimated their current grade to be at an A+, A or A-, compared to 36 percent of women, while a larger percentage of women estimated their grade to be in the B+ to B- range than men. As of press time, 80 students had completed the survey. The respondents received the survey in an email from their professor. Out of those, 58 respondents identified as female, making up 62 percent of the sample. The remaining 35 respondents were male. Only four respondents identified as black or African-American, 33 as Asian or Asian-American, three as two or more races, 42 as white and three identified ethnically as Hispanic or Latino/a, making it difficult to draw conclusions about differences in confidence among racial groups. Confidence: Gender and Race A University event organized by the Women in Science Initiative during the fall 2013 semester drew attention to a newly-emerging phenomenon known as "imposter syndrome," in which students feel insecure and incompetent in their academic abilities despite often being quite successful and capable in their field of study. As the panel specifically focused on an imposter syndrome for women in the sciences, the Justice surveyed students in an undergraduate Chemistry lecture to determine how confident students were about their ability to succeed in a science course, particularly looking at historically underrepresented groups in the sciences: female students and students of color. The survey administered by the Justice inquired what grade the participants received in their previous semester of Chemistry. Those results did not point to any difference in competency in the subject between men and women, although women in the sample did appear to earn slightly lower grades than men. Nearly three-fourths of men in the sample reported that they did not at all feel less academically capable than their peers, compared to slightly under 50 percent of women. Additionally, a much smaller percentage of women than men in the sample indicated that they believed they were definitely smart enough to succeed in this course. Despite these results, women in the sample did not appear to be any less enthusiastic than men about continuing in the sciences. According to the survey results, women were actually slightly more likely than men to enroll in further science and math courses, major in a science, technology, engineering or mathematics field and write a thesis for that major, suggesting that they are committed to studying science despite current feelings of insecurity. As for race, given the very low number of respondents who identified as people of color, differences among racial groups were more difficult to interpret. However, in an interview with the Justice, Afzal Ullah '14, a science Posse scholar majoring in Biology and Psychology, said that while he feels that he is as capable as his classmates, he felt inadequately prepared academically entering college. Ullah, who identifies racially as Bengali, noted that many students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, who are often students of color, face a gap compared to their wealthier, often white, classmates-which can impact their performance and confidence. A professor's perspective Three professors who sat for interviews with the Justice expressed differing views about the current issues that women face in science. Prof. Judith Herzfeld (CHEM), the only female full professor in the Chemistry department, expressed a belief that women today are equally active in science as men. "There are plenty of women who are energetically engaging in the classroom, so I don't see that problem," Herzfeld said in an interview with the Justice. ""In chemistry, the women are doing great straight through to the Ph.D. in proportionate numbers, and that's very different from the way it used to be," she added. Prof. Eve Marder '69 (BIOL), the head of the University's Division of Science, said that in the classes she teaches now, she sees overconfidence and lack of confidence in both men and women, though men, she noted, are somewhat more likely to raise hands to answer questions in class, regardless of whether or not their answers are correct. Prof. Ruth Charney '72 (MATH), the University's first tenured mathematics professor and the current president of the Association for Women in Mathematics, acknowledged that female students may feel like "imposters" but should remember that their mentors had similar experiences. "We all felt that way, but look, we kept going and we were successful and we felt just like you do," said Charney in an interview with the Justice. "So don't let that-don't just be scared away. Don't just assume just because you're unsure of yourself, because somebody else seems better than you, that you're no good. That's the wrong conclusion." Charney and Herzfeld both emphasized that they got through graduate school because they simply weren't very concerned with what others thought of them. Charney recalled that any gender discrimination that was present "went over our heads. We didn't see any of it and that's probably why we were successful. I'm not saying it wasn't there. We were blind. We were doing what we wanted to do." Similarly, Herzfeld noted that she "tended not to compare myself with other people very much." Faculty: Then and Now When Marder eventually returned to the University in 1978 as a faculty member, she was the fifth woman to join the Biology department faculty, which was unusual at the time. "Most of my peers were being hired into department as the first [woman]," she said. Today, Marder said there is relatively little trouble recruiting women for positions in the department. Charney, who returned to the University in 2003 after many years at Ohio State University, explained that the Math department has few opportunities to diversify its faculty. "We don't hire very often-we're a small department. Then there was the financial crash, you know, we haven't done much hiring in the last few years. When we have, we always have female candidates," she said. Charney mentioned that the department is currently hiring a female postdoctoral fellow, who would be at the University for three years. Herzfeld joined the University's Chemistry department in 1985 after teaching at Harvard Medical School and Amherst College, where she was the first female faculty member in the physical sciences. At Brandeis, Herzfeld joined Prof. Emerita Emily Dudek (CHEM), who retired in 2003, and was later joined by Prof. Christine Thomas (CHEM) in 2008, who was awarded tenure last year. The department also includes Prof. Claudia Novack (CHEM), who does not conduct research but regularly teaches the large lecture classes CHEM 11a: "General Chemistry I" and CHEM 11b: "General Chemistry II." Race Brandeis has taken note of the low numbers of minority groups in the sciences and, with support from Prof. Irving Epstein (CHEM), launched the first science program in the nation, bringing in its inaugural class in 2008. As for representation of people of color in faculty, Marder said, "the landscape for minorities and people of color has been very complicated." She said that students from disadvantaged backgrounds have often opted to pursue professional degrees rather than academic ones to achieve financial stability. "There was a real wave of trying to create options for people of color in professional schools and graduate schools. That first wave happened as a consequence of the '60s, so many of the people in that first wave came from relatively disadvantaged backgrounds and therefore they enriched into professional schools where they would be guaranteed financial opportunities," she explained. "So people went to law school. People went to medical school. People went to dental school. People went to engineering school. Relatively few of them had the luxury to just go into academics," she added. Ullah also said that the ability to choose a career based solely on interest is "a luxury." "You have to understand that that's already a statement of privilege," he said. "[People of color] have learned that, because we're of economically disadvantaged backgrounds, we can only achieve so much in life. We should only try to achieve so much for practical reasons," Ullah later added. For undergraduate students of color, race plays a significant role in their experiences at Brandeis. "I was the only black student in my Physics class, my second semester. In my first semester there was only one [other] girl and she dropped," said Bethlehem Seifu Belaineh '16, an International Wien scholar from Ethiopia who is a Biological Physics major, in an interview with the Justice. "I never really realized it until someone pointed it out and by the time I realized it I felt extremely self-conscious to the point where I started to question, 'Am I actually in the right major? Am I setting myself up for failure or something?'" "You don't feel isolated but you feel different, because you are different. You do look different. You have a different cultural background," Belaineh added later. "You just are different but that difference does not mean you are less. It just means you are a different kind of person, but it took me a while to recognize that." Nicholas Medina '14 made a similar point, acknowledging his position as one of a few Hispanic science students. "Because there are so few Hispanic students in the sciences, I feel like I more wholly represent my ethnicity in the sciences and Hispanic science students in general," he said. "It makes me feel like when I achieve higher grades, it's more of an accomplishment." However, said Marder, the number of students from underrepresented groups entering graduate school is now increasing, at Brandeis and across the country. For now, recruiting people of color to the department is a challenge, given how small the pool is, according to both Marder and Herzfeld. "Part of what makes it not easy is when the pool is small and all of us really want that diversity. The big, rich places win out in the recruiting," said Herzfeld. "It's not entirely satisfactory, but that's not for lack of trying or lack of interest," she later added. Conclusion Ullah said he believes that "there is a lack of conversation" about the issues students of color face and that the University should "become more comfortable" discussing them. "It's going to be very important for me to make sure that, whatever field I go into, to make the space more accessible and accommodating for people of color, regardless of their background and preparation," he said. "Once you provide the tools for people of color to actualize their full potential, they are just as likely to be very successful in any career as anyone else," he added. Despite the fact that female students in the sample of the survey seemed to feel less confident in science classes than their peers, they nonetheless showed a commitment to pursuing an education in science. Such an enthusiasm fits well with Charney's goal: "I think the message we need to be getting out there is to tell people that careers in science are great for women. Do it!"
(03/25/14 4:00am)
This week, justArts spoke with the directors of The Vagina Monologues, which was hosted by the Vagina Club and performed in the Shapiro Campus Center Theater on Friday and Sunday. JustArts: How did you get involved in The Vagina Monologues? Krissy Ford: I went to an all-girls Catholic school for high school and when I came to Brandeis I was looking for the same kind of community that I had there, a sisterhood really is what I wanted ... I saw a flyer for The Vagina Monologues and my friends told me "you should do it, you should try it." And I auditioned, fell in love with it, got really used to saying the word "vagina" a lot and then started getting in touch with Women's and Gender Studies and it was all ... uphill [from there]. Cristina Dones: My freshman year I had a really hard time acclimating and I was finding that I wasn't really bonding with [the friends I made] the way I wanted to. ... When the auditions came out for The Vagina Monologues, someone said I would be perfect for a part. So I just auditioned on a whim, just to do it, because someone said that I should. And it was honestly the only reason I didn't transfer from Brandeis, so I got a lot out of the experience. I was in it for two years-I was in it my freshman year, my sophomore year, took a break my third year, and wasn't planning on doing anything this year. But Krissy showed up ... to my job one day when I was working at the [Shapiro Campus Center] [information] booth and was like, "hey are you interested in directing?" and I was like, "oh my god, yes I am." JA: The University does The Vagina Monologues every year, why do you think it's a significant presence on campus? CD: Because it's so relevant still. It was created in the '90s and all the issues that are spoken about are still present in our culture today, so I think a lot of ... women attend the show once, in hopes ... of finding a place, finding a voice, finding people who have had the same experiences as them. KF: The show I think is just a fun, entertaining experience but it's also a way of being part of a movement. Brandeis is a school that's very big on activist movements and being a part of The Vagina Monologues or going to the show is a way to be part of an activist movement here at Brandeis working to end violence against women and I think that's a huge thing here. JA: There is obviously a lot of heavy material in the show. How did you deal with that with your actors' comfort level? CD: Most of the rehearsals actually aren't focused on lines and blocking and things like that. It's more focused on bonding and overcoming the struggles that you might face in the show and the struggles that you might face in life. KF: We work through all our emotions and then channel all those emotions into the parts that the women in our show have. And Cris and I do a lot of one-on-one time with the women in our cast and help them develop themselves and help them develop their characters as well. JA: What do you hope the audience takes away from the show, if you can narrow down a take-away? KF: I hope that audience members, if they didn't already go into the experience or go into the show appreciating vaginas, I hope that that they appreciate them and respect them more. CD: I feel the same way and I hope that women specifically [come out of the show] respecting themselves more but also being more comfortable with themselves, being more comfortable with their vaginas, being more comfortable with their vaginas [and] as women in general. And I hope men ... leave also with that same mentality of "oh my god this entire time I've had this machismo, misogynist agenda and I really need to change the way I think." KF: But also, for people who don't identify as women, I think that there should be some sort of solidarity there for people who have vaginas or lovers of vaginas, friends of vaginas. There should be something bonding us all together at the end of the show. And there's a line from the show: "We ... forget the vagina." There's a "lack of awe" and a "lack of reverence" and I hope when people leave the how they find that awe and they find that reverence. -Emily Wishingrad
(03/18/14 4:00am)
This week, justArts spoke with Miriam Esther Goldman '14 who co-wrote a screenplay that has been chosen as a nominee for the Madrid International Film Festival 2014. JustArts: Congratulations are in order for your screenplay being selected as a nominee for the 2014 Madrid International Film Festival! Would you tell us about the screenplay-what is it called? Miriam Esther Goldman: It's called The Ruins of Oz. In the books following The Wizard of Oz, which is the start of a series of 14 books by the original author and 40 books overall, it's made clear that people can't die in Oz. It's part of the magic. So what became of the Wicked Witch of the West? So my script begins with this mild-mannered archaeology professor who's longing for a bigger, more important job than the one he has at a small Kansas college. He is called on when these strange ruins appear in the middle of a Kansas corn field. As it turns out, the Wicked Witch of the West has returned, and is a threat not only to Oz, but to the Earth as well. Eliot, our hero, teams up with Glinda the Good [Witch] and the Scarecrow and a couple other Oz-zy characters to confront the Witch of the West and restore order. But when romance develops between Eliot and Glinda the Good, complications arise as it turns out that once Oz and the earth are separate, they really will be separate again. JA: Was this a writing endeavor that you went about by yourself? MEG: No, I collaborate on all my scripts with my dad. Actually, the [Film Festival's] website only lists him [as playwright]. They always do that. I'm going to be generous and assume that he actually emails them and submits the applications most of the time, and not that it's some sort of sexism. That happens a lot. It's frustrating. JA: So how many festivals or submissions would you say you guys have done together? MEG: I lost track a while ago. I'd say it's somewhere between 60 and a hundred. We've only written four full-length scripts. We've been writing together since I was in seventh grade, and we won our first award when I was in eighth grade. ... We've never had anything produced, but we're trying to step it up and interest agents and managers and branch out into the international film festival circuit. JA: How long has The Ruins of Oz specifically been in the works? MEG: That was the first one we wrote together, so I thought of the idea I think when I was in sixth or seventh grade. The original basis of it was the idea of Oz appearing as an archaeological ruin. Oz books-not necessarily L. Frank Baum's Oz books, but the books that people have written since the books became public domain-often start with some crazy, wacky way of finding Oz because Glinda made Oz invisible after the sixth book. JA: What was the most difficult part of the process for you? MEG: This particular one we did a little bit differently than most of them in that, since it was the first [we wrote together], my dad did a lot of the groundwork. We plotted it together and he wrote a bare-bones first draft, and I've rewritten it about seven or eight times. I think the most difficult part of the writing process for this one is breaking out from scenes that don't add a lot or aren't interesting, but further the plot. And not being too self-indulgent in the Oz mythos, and trying to relate it to the Oz that people are familiar with from the MGM movie without actually running afoul the copyright holders of the MGM movie. It's complicated because I have a real love-hate relationship with the MGM movie. I didn't see it until I had read I think 10 of the 14 Oz books, because I saw it when I was seven. JA: What was the entry and selection process like for the festival? MEG: Unfortunately, not very dramatic. I think this one was on withoutabox.com, which is what you use to submit to film festivals. It was either that or we emailed in a PDF copy. You used to have to send in physical scripts, but that's changed in the last five or 10 years. ... then we waited. It's usually like three or four months, depending on the contest. That's why we submit to a lot of festivals. This is only the second-most recent festival win, because one of our other scripts actually won outright the Richman Film Festival last week. JA: Is screenwriting something that you'd like to do after graduation? MEG: If you had asked me a year ago, I would have said "definitely"-I love writing screenplays. I love the whole process. But I'm also really invested in theater. I think it all boils down to whether I am willing, able and have the funds to move to California, because I'm based in Texas. There's a great film scene in Austin, but, as this clearly exemplifies, I tend to write things that are a little more expensive. ... I'm also very interested in acting as a career, and classical singing and poetry-although, money. JA: You were saying earlier that, in submitting screenplays to festivals, they would often take your dad's name and not your name. What have you learned about what it means to be a woman trying to come up in the film industry? MEG: Well, I do consider myself a feminist, and two of my four scripts have female protagonists. Three of the four have what I'd consider strong female characters. The last one is a Western that we wrote as an homage to the typical Western adventure of the '40s-'50s-'60s, so the female character is typified by... [being] kind of a background character. ... Sometimes, I feel like that's hurt me, in terms of talking to producers, talking to managers, talking to agents. Because sometimes female characters, especially female characters who break a mold, aren't really saleable. And that frustrates me. And I'm not willing to back down on that. Because I've personally-always, since I was a little kid-found myself to be more invested in strong female characters than [in] even the most compelling male characters. One of the key points that screenwriters and teachers of screenwriters always hit on is "write the movie that you want to see"-and the movie that I want to see, more often than not, at least has a very strong female supporting character, if not a female protagonist who's free of all or most of the stereotypes that plague Hollywood women.
(03/18/14 4:00am)
Each March, a group of seniors finishing up their degrees from in Theater Arts direct, perform in and create pieces for the department's Senior Thesis Festival. Unlike other written theses, playwrights must devise their concept and a large portion of their script before their senior year. They draft a piece that stems from their passions, then, over their last two semesters at Brandeis, they workshop, edit and revise their work. In the winter, the department holds open auditions and after about two months of rehearsal, more revisions and working to coordinate the production of numerous other pieces in one space, the festival finally opens. * This year, there are six seniors participating in the festival. While Jason Dick, Lizzy Benway and Levi Squier decided to direct, act in, and devise pieces already in the theatrical cannon, Justy Kosek, Grace Fosler and Emma Lieberman elected to examine topics they care about by writing original plays. Earlier this week, I sat down with each of them to learn more about their projects. * I asked them how the process has affected them and where they think it may lead. Fosler said, "This has really solidified my decision to pursue play-writing. I'm applying to graduate programs for creative writing with a concentration in script writing. It has taught me a lot about just the writing process in general." In fact, her work is already being produced elsewhere. The Elephant in the Room will be featured at the PortFringe festival, a week-long theater festival in Portland, Maine this June. * Kosek says, "[this process has] definitely affected me. I guess what I've realized is that it's a much bigger thing to translate an idea from one person's head into a lot of people's heads than I ever imagined. That's very different from acting-you have to fit a role when you're acting and find a niche when you're directing. But when you're a playwright and sharing your work and working on your work with people it's a much more intense process than I knew." * "It's given me a new kind confidence in myself," says Lieberman. "I am a published playwright and it's work that I can be proud of and it's work that I can display everyone. Not that I'm not proud of other things I have done, but this is on a whole new level. On top of that it's helped me connect to writing theater on a whole new level that I hadn't quite reached. It's increased my confidence and increased my ability by leaps and bounds. It's something I can take forward with me to the rest of my career." * Catch these pieces and all of the work being showcased at the senior festival Tuesday, March 18, through Saturday, March 23, in the Spingold Theater Center's Laurie Theater. Find the full schedule on Facebook and on the Brandeis Theater Company website. *
* Emma Lieberman '14
Emma Lieberman's '14 play, My Morning, addresses perhaps the most personal topic. "A bit more than three years ago, here at Brandeis there was a girl who took her own life. She was a friend of mine, so this play is technically fictionalized but it's about the experience of dealing with that," Lieberman said in an interview with the Justice. She worked with her director Gabby Lamm '17 to strike a balance between fictionalizing her story and staying true to what actually happened. * Lieberman noted that her biggest challenge as an actress was "separating [herself] from something that is so personal and making it about someone else." If the play was about her, she said, "it would not only be tortuous for me, but also wouldn't work as well for the audience." * Lieberman said her greatest challenge as an actress and writer is separating what she calls "the multiple personalities of me." She said, "ordinarily there is the hierarchy of the playwright, who makes the show, the director, who follows what's in the script and the actor, who follows whatever the director says. But as I am both actor and playwright, those roles get switched around." * Lieberman and Lamm hold separate meetings with "Emma the Actress" and "Emma the Playwright" to create a clear system. "Every other time," explained Lieberman, "'Emma the Playwright' just goes away." * Justy Kosek '14
Justy Kosek's '14 original play, All You Need, tells the story of a family torn apart. It begins with the uncanny image of the son, David, walking into his room in a blood-stained tuxedo. * The rest of the play recounts what led to that moment and traces the history of his parents and friends. The themes focus on how different kinds of love affect a family and an individual, Kosek started writing All You Need for fun when he was a first-year at Brandeis. * "These are themes I'm sort of obsessed with," he said in an interview with the Justice. "Themes of memory and personal history are very interesting to me so I knew right away I wanted to do a piece about memory, and the way that we perceive memory and the way it differs from reality." * For Kosek, the challenging parts of the process have been consolidating his original vision with those of his director (Jonathan Young MFA '14) and design team. However, he told the Justice that this particular challenge was "also the most exciting part" * "[To have] people looking at my work and having opinions on it," he said, "it's honestly been the greatest thrill of my life." * Kosek says, "[this process has] definitely affected me. I guess what I've realized is that it's a much bigger thing to translate and idea from one person's head into a lot of people's heads than I ever imagined." * Grace Fosler '14
Grace Fosler '14, whose project is titled The Elephant in the Room, both wrote and directed her thesis. "My play is a satire on animal cruelty and exploitation in the United States," she said. "I've been interested in animal rights for a very long time. I've felt like an advocate for them and felt that animal rights hadn't been explored in theater as much as I would like them to be. I think comedy and satire are very powerful tools and are a non-aggressive form of activism, which is something I think is very important." * Fosler's play, inspired by George C. Wolfe's 1986 play The Colored Museum, is a series of vignettes depicting different forms of animal abuse. Her concept, she said, is to humanize animals. When asked what challenges she faced, Fosler mentioned that at times she found it difficult to find the right way to portray the situation on stage, and throughout her process she realized how hard it is to write about something so close to your heart. When asked about her experience as both director and writer, she said "I kind of forget that I wrote the play while I'm directing it. At times I forget that if something isn't working I can change it. I have the power to go in and change things." But the most exciting part for Fosler is watching her play come to life. "When I finally put faces to my characters that was really, really exciting. They have come to life to me and that's awesome." *
(03/18/14 4:00am)
Lean In, a group that advocates for women to achieve their career goals and hold positions of power, has partnered with the Girl Scouts in a new campaign to end the use of the word "bossy." The "Ban Bossy" campaign argues that when young girls assert themselves and are called "bossy," it discourages them from pursuing positions of leadership, and may potentially lead to major self-confidence issues. The campaign has earned endorsements from public figures such as Beyonc?(c) and Condoleezza Rice, but critics wonder whether banning "bossy" may lead to the word holding a more negative connotation, making it more hurtful when used. They also question whether the campaign actually addresses the underlying issues of sexism in the workplace. What do you think about the "Ban Bossy" campaign? * Prof. Jane Kamensky (HIST): When my older son was in first grade, the kids used to call him "Teacher Calvin." He was (and is) a smart kid, and he liked to tell his classmates how to improve their work. He was, in a word, bossy. But nobody ever called him that, because his gender didn't match the adjective. I'm bossy too: "Teacher Jane." I set deadlines and I stick to them. I expect my students to show up on time, prepared and ready to work. Bossy means taking my job seriously. Can feminists like me find a way to reclaim "bossy"? Writing in The New Yorker, Margaret Talbot argues that we should appropriate the word, making bossy the new queer: a term of in-group pride, a label for women who embrace leadership. Bosses are bossy. And every day, more women become bosses. How about a T-shirt that says, "Yeah, I'm Bossy, Deal with It!" Prof. Jane Kamensky (HIST) is chair of the History department and the Harry S. Truman professor of American Civilization. * Zuri Gordon '15 I'm sure "Ban Bossy" has the best of intentions but I find it to be problematic. I think Girl Scouts is a cool and radical organization that could create legitimate change for young girls, but Lean In just puts a Venus symbol over capitalism and corporations and calls it feminism, when obviously so many women do not have access to those institutions, or those institutions have failed them. So I think that the kind of feminism that Lean In promotes does more harm than good, and I don't believe that their "Ban Bossy" campaign will be successful. I would be more interested if they pushed for reclaiming words like bossy or at the very least trying to dismantle a cultural inequality that unfairly targets girls and women for being assertive. I definitely understand how "bossy" has negative connotations but I would rather see campaigns allow girls more freedom in how they chose to define themselves rather than restricting them from words. Zuri Gordon '15 is president of the Feminist Majority Leadership Alliance. * Joseph Babeu '15 Most advocates in the feminist movement know that the misogyny embedded in our popular culture runs far more deeply than challenging a single term would fix. After all, what does terminology matter if pay is still not equal across genders? However, it is not feasible to expect the entire country to jump from institutionalized sexism to equal pay overnight. Advocates must start with the lowest common denominator-those who may not understand why using "bossy" may have a negative impact on young women, or even those who agree with its use. To make any substantive progress, it is essential that these people be educated on issues of gender discrimination. Furthermore, this education does not begin with a radical push. It begins with advocates meeting people where they are and taking a first step, together. Lean In is taking this first step with "Ban Bossy". Joseph Babeu '15 works for the Lemberg Children's Center. * Christa Caggiano '17 I love Beyonc?(c). She is an excellent performer and an ultra-successful businesswoman, and I think deep down, all Americans want to be just a bit like her. So, when Beyonc?(c) joins a campaign like Ban Bossy, people pay attention. Average Americans see Beyonc?(c)'s video campaign and then share it on Facebook or email it to their nieces. These are people who have no reason to think about feminist theory in their daily lives, who are now thinking about why there are not that many female leaders, or why they call their daughters "pretty" but not "smart." In my opinion, this discourse is infinitely more important than actually banning the word bossy. I think this campaign is about changing the tide of our culture, forcing people to really think and talk about the role women play in leadership, and not necessarily about altering the modern lexicon. If it takes a sassy Beyonc?(c) in a viral video to make people have those conversations, I am completely okay with that. Christa Caggiano '17 is a student scholarship partner at the Women's Studies Research Center.
(03/18/14 4:00am)
Imagine you are a soldier. You are sexually assaulted by one of your comrades and are able to bring the issue before a military court. The person who attacked you, though, has never committed any sort of offense before. He uses his impeccable record in his defense, as justification for why he should not be punished. And, much to your horror, it works. He gets away scot-free. Since World War I, military tribunals and courts recognized the "good soldier defense." It is, or was, a commonly accepted and used defense. The somewhat oxymoronically named legal precedent allowed for soldiers to cite their lack of past discipline and military record as a defense before the court. This testimony was accepted as legitimate evidence in the same category as DNA or eyewitness testimony. Although, in theory, the "good soldier defense" could be used in any court-martial situation, overwhelmingly it was used during cases of sexual assault, as a way to both prevent the victim from getting justice and keep the attacker in good standing. The "good soldier defense" protects high-ranking officers at a much higher rate than other soldiers, the very officers to whom sexual assault victims often have to report. By and large high-ranking officers are male, and these officers are the ones who are most likely to assault fellow soldiers in the first place. The United States Senate voted 97-0 this week on a military funding bill that included an amendment to prohibit the "good solider defense" from being used in court-martials or legal proceedings. The bill also gives new legal protections to victims and works to end retaliation within the ranks against those who report sexual assault. It's momentous that the Senate, a body that has often proven itself unable to simply keep the government from shutting down, was able to pass a major overhaul of military law, and with no dissent. Clearly, if both political parties in the Senate can agree on working to get rid of the "good soldier defense," then it must be truly abhorrent. I am, of course, horrified that such a law was still on the books, but I cannot say I am especially surprised. Even though women can now hold any combat position in the military, America's armed forces are still very reminiscent of a boys' club. Leadership positions are overwhelmingly held by men. Commanders, like Sergeant Major Gene McKinney, one of the highest ranking officers to be accused of sexual assault, have used the "good soldier defense" and have been completely acquitted, even if a number of victims testified otherwise. This repeal in the Senate is a good start, but it is not enough. Speaker John Boehner has yet to state if he will encourage the appropriate committees to have this bill go up for a vote in the House of Representatives, even though Politico and Slate, among other news outlets, have predicted that the bill will easily pass. Without a vote from the House, the bill is dead. This needs to be dealt with, and unless the House addresses this topic directly, nothing will change. House Republicans have nothing to lose and everything to gain from passing this piece of legislation. After all, the Republican Party has struggled to attract female voters, with women going for President Barack Obama over former Governor Mitt Romney by nearly 10 points in 2012, and passing a bill to help female soldiers would certainly be a boon for them While it is promising that the Senate has repealed the "good soldier defense," there are other pressing bills on the issue of military sexual assault that have been overlooked. Kirsten Gillibrand, the junior senator from New York and a champion of the issue, has been working to move sexual assault cases from the chain of command to civilian courts through a measure of reforms including having military lawyers, not unit commanders, in charge of prosecuting or denying charges. Military officials staunchly oppose this bill, the Military Justice Improvement Act, as they think it would strip officers of their authority and hurt unit cohesion by bringing civilians into military proceedings. I personally do not think there is any validity in this argument against MJIA, since officers and the military have been unable to adequately address the problem. Unfortunately, in the latest Senate vote, the bill was five votes short of the 60 needed to quorum and failed. Gillibrand said she would bring her bill up for a vote again, although it is unclear if it will pass on a second attempt. The "good solider defense" might have been good for the troops who used it to get off without punishment, but I hope the majority of Americans would be disgusted if such a defense was allowed in civilian courts. Some leaders in the military make the argument that civilian interference hurts cohesion and prestige, but I disagree. I respect the men and women who serve to protect the United States, but I don't necessarily respect how the military deals with its flaws. And I certainly don't respect an institution that allows sexual assault criminals to get away with their crimes. If the Pentagon makes serious changes to the way it handles sexual assault, while working with Congress, the military will have prestige. Until then, we must do everything we can to help the victims and hold the perpetrators accountable. *
