(03/18/14 4:00am)
Do you remember playing hide and seek when you were a child? Remember how you never believed that your parents would suspect your secret hideouts within the clothing racks? Then, they went about their tasks, leaving you behind. They knew they could do this, and in a moment you would find them. Your connection to your parents was-and is-not merely biological. They were your home.Never could you imagine living an instant without your parents. Those few moments apart, believing that you would be lost forever in seemingly endless aisles, likely, struck you with fear. Now, imagine for an instant that this loss was not merely for a few minutes, but for a lifetime. According to UNICEF,, an Nongovernmental Organization tasked with helping children, since the Syrian Civil War began three years ago, at least 8,000 children, presumably fleeing the violence, have traveled to the country's borders without their parents. Children are being forced to grow up much too soon. According to the United Nations, 10,000 children have died as a direct result of the civil war. In the past year, the number of displaced children has tripled, reaching from 920,000 to three million. 1.2 million more have become refugees. But the tragedy isn't just in the statistics, it is in the paradigm shift in the eyes of the children affected. No longer are there games to play and school to attend. Children take odd jobs on farms, in caf?(c)s and car repair shops, in mines, or become beggars on the street. Due to the difficult times, many young girls are being forced into premature marriages in order to provide them with protection or to give parents one less child to provide for. Additionally, lack of resources has created a rise in cases of life-threatening malnutrition along with an inability to treat every child's injuries. Vitamin and mineral deficiencies have become more frequent in recent months as families have become unable to provide enough food for their children due to inflation and rising unemployment. The people are at risk of potentially fatal diseases due to unsanitary and crowded environments. The war has destroyed many healthcare facilities, and oftentimes, doctors and medicines are inaccessible or expensive. However, the emotional and physical effects of the conflict are the most jarring. UNICEF cites that in areas with some of the worse violence-including Aleppo, Homs, and rural Damascus-98 percent of parents report disturbing behavioral changes in their children. Parents speak mournfully of the loss of their children's innocence. Kinana, a mother of six expressed, "My children see weapons and they can label them. They know the names of each weapon, because they've seen so many." UNICEF interviewed a 10-year-old named Fatima in a refugee camp in Jordan. She expressed: "Sometimes I dream. I dream I am carrying a dead man. And when I look at the children living here, I feel like they have lost their hearts." Other children live in a constant state of fear. Exposure to such violence can only stunt or reverse children's social and psychological development. Oftentimes, it seems as if those who are the adults in the world act most like stubborn children, unwilling to share their toys and good fortune. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad will never consider a transition government, and the disorganized rebels are unprepared for leading a bloodied country. Syria cannot very well be run by a leader responsible for crimes against humanity, and it cannot very well be run by a group of people whose primary goal is merely to depose Assad. Children are punished by their parents, but where is the international community to punish the perpetrators of the violence in Syria? This question should fill our minds as we notice the politicians and the reporters who turn a blind eye to these victims' stories. The mainstream media can only keep its attention on Syria for a limited amount of time. Violence in Syria has continued to occur; this past Saturday marked the third anniversary of the conflict. It is not something that simply paused as the mainstream media moved onto the new story of the day. Something can be done to alleviate the immediate needs of those affected by the conflict. UNICEF calls for a distribution of aid in the form of funds as well as greater access to civilians on the ground by humanitarian organizations to Syria itself and the nearby countries that have been taking in Syrian refugees. As a short-term solution, this aid package should be required to provide an education for the children who are the future of Syria through education in refugee camps. This would be similar to the work of the Darfur Dream Team, an NGO which provides education to child refugees who are currently living in Chad. War in Syria can only bring about the destruction of the fundamentally significant strides the country had taken in the realm of education. Education was a pillar of Syrian society for a generation, leading to a literacy rate of over 90 percent according to UNICEF. The international community must demand for the integration of educational opportunities within the refugee camps as a part of a potential foreign aid package. Syrian children should not have to worry about their day to day survival, they should be thinking about building a successful future for their country. Next, the international community should step up to ensure that peace talks are successful for the next round. Only once peace is established can the process of recovery begin. This could include the help of organizations as large as the United Nations or as small as the Cambridge-based organization RefugePoint to work with the most vulnerable refugees. Recovery for children would of course include restoration to family members. Although children will never recover from the loss of their guardians, they must find a safe place to call home, preferably with a family member. In the United States, we have the privilege of childhood, of identity. Now, it is the responsibility of the world to restore humanity. After absolving the conflict of foreign aid, we must pressure our leaders to change the equation for Syria. No one can undo what has been done in Syria. Children in Syria will forever play hide and seek, never to find their parents. Now, they must find their way out of the store on their own. *
(03/18/14 4:00am)
The University recently announced that Prof. Jon Levisohn (NEJS) will be assuming the role of director of the Jack, Joseph and Morton Mandel Center for Studies in Jewish Education in early July. Levisohn will be replacing Prof. Sharon Feiman-Nemser (NEJS), who is stepping down after leading the center for 12 years. Levisohn is a member of the Near Eastern and Judaic Studies department, and is currently the Associate academic director for the center. His main areas of academic focus are the philosophy of education and the philosophy of Jewish education. In an interview with the Justice, Feiman-Nemser said that she is very enthusiastic about this new transition in leadership. "[Levisohn] has wonderful ideas, and I feel that there will be a lot of continuity in what we've been doing." She further added that it "feels like time for a new face [in this role]." When asked why she would be stepping down as director, Feiman-Nemser said that she feels it is time for new leadership. She also said that she believes this transition will give her "more time to do research and write, and not be so involved in administrative responsibilities." Levisohn said that he is eager to take on new responsibilities. "Sharon and I have worked closely for much of my time [at the center], and I am excited for this transition," said Levisohn. He said that he hopes to help the center heighten its focus on the learning aspect of the educator-learner relationship, in addition to focusing on educators. In addition to continuing old initiatives, Levisohn said that he wants to move forward with new initiatives for the center. One such initiative is an undergraduate fellowship through the center that would allow students to be involved in research on Jewish education. "We know that there are a number of undergraduates ... who are interested in Jewish education," said Levisohn. He added that the fellowship would be a "nice opportunity for [the students] to get some experience with research" and provide the center with "ongoing contact with people who are interested in coming up in this field." During her time at the center, Feiman-Nemser oversaw many initiatives, including the Delet Program, which offers the opportunity to earn a Master of Arts in Teaching degree and a Massachusetts initial teaching license in 13 months, according to the program's website. The program allows students to choose from multiple tracks, all of which include elementary general and Judaic studies, middle and high school Bible or general studies and Hebrew. Feiman-Nemser said that Delet is "the only program in the field of Jewish education that combines serious academic and professional studies with a year-long mentorship at a local day school." She added that she is extremely happy with the program, as it has not only "prepared over 100 teachers over the last 12 years," but also serves as a "model for the field [of Jewish education]." Overall, Feiman-Nemser said that she has greatly enjoyed her tenure as director of the Mandel Center. "I feel like we have accomplished a great deal," she said. "The main projects I started are either coming to fruition or winding up... and I think it's probably time for new leadership." This transition does not mean Feiman-Nemser intends to stop working, however. "I intend to continue to be a part of the center and contribute to the work going forward," she said. After the transition, Feiman-Nemser will continue her work with the NEJS department and the Education program, as well as with the center. The Jack, Joseph and Morton Mandel Center for Studies in Jewish Education was started by the Mandel Foundation, a group created by the Mandels with the mission of "helping to provide outstanding leadership for the nonprofit field," according to the foundation's website. The foundation can be located in the Abraham Shapiro Academic Complex.
(03/18/14 4:00am)
Adjuncts across the country and throughout Boston have been unionizing due to a general lack of benefits and low wages. Although the Brandeis Fair Pay Coalition has taken an initiative in meeting with a representative from the Service Employees International Union and several adjuncts have expressed concerns about the current situation at the University, no specific plan to unionize at Brandeis could be confirmed by the Justice. Adjuncts at the University currently receive about $6,000 per course in the Arts and Sciences, according to Prof. Bernadette Brooten (NEJS) in an email to the Justice. Senior Vice President for Communications Ellen de Graffenreid wrote in an email to the Justice that $6,000 is the minimum that adjuncts are paid per course, but that disparities can exist between adjuncts' pay based upon areas of expertise and experience. An adjunct is "someone whose primary employment is not at Brandeis," de Graffenreid wrote. Adjuncts were first introduced in higher education so that universities could hire professionals to teach a course as a unique opportunity for students. The University hires adjuncts in order to fill in for a faculty member who is on leave or sabbatical, to bring specific expertise to Brandeis "often in more applied fields ... because those people bring real-world experience to students in a way that is really usefu (sic)" and to "fill out the curriculum in areas where there is a need for a specific course in a major or program," according to de Graffenreid. However, a lecturer, who requested to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of the topic and job security concerns, explained that many adjuncts have doctorates in their fields from prestigious universities. "We're getting top quality-trained professionally-academics to do these sort of jobs that were traditionally done by adjuncts to come in and go," the lecturer said in an interview with the Justice. According to de Graffenreid, two courses per semester is considered half-time employment, and there is not an hourly requirement. De Graffenreid wrote that this means that faculty members hired on a per-course basis teaching as few as two courses may be eligible for benefits their first semester at the University. According to Assistant Vice President for Human Resources Michelle Scichilone in an email to the Justice, the University offers benefits to any faculty member who is "classified as half-time or more regardless of title." Such employees are eligible to participate in the University's health and dental insurance "and pay the same premium as our full-time faculty members," according to Scichilone. All half-time faculty are also eligible to participate in the University's flexible medical and dependent care reimbursement accounts, the group life insurance plan, 403(b) retirement plan, the Employee Assistance Plan, and discounted auto and homeowners insurance, among other benefits. Despite the availability of benefits for part-time faculty members, the anonymous lecturer said many adjuncts and individuals who get paid per-course can only teach one or two classes per semester, depending upon time constraints. This individual said that he or she only teaches an average of two courses per semester, and that grading papers, responding to emails, answering student questions and other responsibilities are not accounted for in the pay per course. "I'm always here in my office around 8:30 in the morning. I leave around 1:30 after I teach, I send some emails out, but then I go back, at night I spend from 6 to 9 [p.m.] again behind the computer, so I think I work a full-time job," the lecturer said in an interview with the Justice. In addition, the lecturer must work additional jobs apart from his or her employment at the University. "There's no way you could make ends meet on $6,000 a course per semester. That's $12,000 a year, way below poverty," the lecturer said. The lecturer said he or she knows of other colleagues who also work other jobs outside of the University. The lecturer added that students should also be fighting for appropriate pay and benefits for adjuncts because adjunct pay could affect the quality of education for this reason. One reason adjuncts may begin working at a University is the hope that they would eventually be able to land a tenure-track position, said the lecturer. Adjuncts such as Prof. Peter Gould (PAX), who co-teaches "Inner Peace/Outer Peace," continue to return to the University as adjuncts despite the lack of benefits-he only teaches one course that meets for three hours per week-and low pay. Gould has been an adjunct professor at the University since 2009, and shares half of $7,000 to teach this course with an "equal co-teacher," he wrote in an email to the Justice. The course generally attracts 35 to 40 students, according to Gould. "It is not a financially wise arrangement, but I am willing to do it because I am very good at what I do, I take pride in the work, I get great response from students, and I love the work, the students, the material, and the stimulation," Gould wrote in an email to the Justice. "The [U]niversity knows all this, so that puts me in a weak position, since, they know I will likely continue, although I am underpaid, and they also know that there are probably lots of people out there, more desperate than I am, who would love to step into my job if they had the opportunity." Gould wrote that he receives no University benefits. In fact, according to Gould, "the benefits are minus." Gould wrote that he has to pay all his travel expenses to work to Brandeis, with his "long trek" from Vermont. Gould acknowledged that the need for adjuncts does exist, but he said adjuncts should receive more pay. "If [the University has] these very believable reasons why they hire adjuncts, they should bend over backwards in showing their appreciation by paying these specialists a reasonable reward for their work," Gould wrote. The anonymous lecturer added that many universities hire adjuncts because there is no required long-term commitment. The lecturer said that those who maintain a certain number of students in their classes might be able to teach that course again, but that those who do not have no job security. The lecturer's contract is on an annual basis. Differences in standing According to de Graffenreid, there is a distinction between contract status and rank. Contract status would define whether or not an individual is, in fact, an adjunct. Rank would determine whether or not the individual is an instructor, senior instructor, lecturer, senior lecturer, assistant professor, associate professor or professor. De Graffenreid defined a lecturer as a "rank." Although the anonymous lecturer has an annual contract, de Graffenreid wrote that there are long-term, or five-year, contracts for lecturers, as well. In regard to the claim that the anonymous lecturer was paid per course like an adjunct, de Graffenreid wrote that her "understanding is that per course vs. salary depends upon their individual contract." According de Graffenreid, there are 202 tenured faculty members, 59 faculty members on the tenure track, 103 long-term and full-time faculty members and 46 adjuncts. Adjuncts that fit the part-time criteria comprise 11 percent of instructional faculty, according to de Graffenreid. Comparing salaries According to the 2013 American Association of University Professors Faculty Salary Survey on the Chronicle of Higher Education website, full professors at Brandeis make $131,400 per year on average, while associate professors make $93,400. Assistant professors make an average of $83,400 and instructors make $59,000 per year. According to these figures and the Chronicle of Higher Education, Brandeis has the 14th highest paid faculty in Massachusetts. By comparison, adjuncts typically make $6,000 per course. If "a person were able to piece together four courses at different schools-which itself is hard to line up, that person, with a doctorate and the resulting high student debt, would be earning $24,000 per year, without benefits," Brooten wrote in an email to the Justice. The $24,000 per year figure assumes the adjunct only teaches four courses in one year, or two courses per semester. The SEIU, a union that is currently working with adjuncts to unionize, published a report through Adjunct Action titled "The High Cost of Adjunct Living: Boston." The report states that the average annual pay in 2013 for a tenured professor at a private research university in the United States was $167,118, while the average pay per course reported by adjunct faculty was $3,000. According to the report, by 2009, nationally, tenure and tenure-track positions had declined to about 33.5 percent of faculty positions, leaving 66.5 percent of faculty ineligible for tenure. Unionizing efforts Efforts have recently taken off for adjuncts to unionize at universities in the Boston area, including a successful vote last month to unionize at Lesley University. Adjunct Action through SEIU "is a campaign that unites adjunct professors at campuses across the country to address the crisis in higher education and the troubling trend toward a marginalized teaching faculty that endangers our profession," according to its website. According to a Feb. 24 post to the website, the Lesley University adjuncts voted to join SEIU. The post states that 84 percent of adjuncts across the four campuses were in favor of unionizing. Tufts University adjuncts voted to join SEIU last September, and are currently bargaining their first contract, according to the website. "Quickly rising tuition has resulted in record levels of student debt, putting higher education out of reach for more and more working families," the SEIU website reads. "At the same time, ... being a university professor, once the quintessential middle-class job, has become a low-wage one." Andrew Nguyen '15, one of the student leaders involved in the Brandeis Fair Pay Coalition, said in an interview with the Justice that the group had been working to meet with an SEIU leader who had helped to organize adjuncts into unions at other colleges in the area. According to Nguyen in the interview, the coalition had not met with many adjunct faculty members, although some were invited to attend the meeting. Nguyen did not respond to multiple requests for comment on the results of the meeting by press time. "I have not heard about a union, more than in some news stories, but I would be happy to join in an organization working for the general benefit of adjunct teachers at Brandeis and throughout the world of education in the US," wrote Gould of the possibility of unionizing adjuncts at Brandeis.
(03/18/14 4:00am)
As a junior, Frances Taylor Eizenstat '65 studied abroad in Jerusalem, where she cultivated an intimate relationship with Israel. She would go on to become an advocate for low-income families and children. Her accomplishments include chairing several Jewish foundations and charitable organizations. After her death in 2013, her husband, Ambassador Stuart Eizenstat created The Frances Taylor Eizenstat Israel Travel Grant Program through the Schusterman Center for Israel Studies to help students cultivate the same kind of lifelong relationships with Israel as Eizenstat did. The first two recipients of the grant, Mirit Gendelman '15 and Kochava Ayoun '14, used the $2500 grant for drastically different kinds of abroad learning. Gendelman views her time studying abroad in Israel as directly following in Eizenstat's footsteps. "It's amazing to feel that I'm doing exactly what she did. I'm going to Hebrew University, exactly where she studied. She proposed this grant, and it's great to see the Brandeis-Israel relationship develop because of it." Hebrew University is one of Israel's largest academic centers located in the heart of Jerusalem, an international hub for culture, religion and business. Gendelman is completing a double major in Business and International and Global Studies, and during her time in Israel she is taking an intensive Hebrew language immersion course called Ulpan, a public policy class, an entrepreneurship class and a class about negotiating peace in the Middle East. She is taking classes at the university's business school, as well as the Rothberg International School. Gendelman stressed the uniqueness of studying at an international school that acts as an intersection between a multitude of cultures and nationalities, while also retaining a distinctly "Israeli" feel. "I'm taking classes with Israelis, as opposed to just Americans. I love being with Israelis in the classroom, and not just inside an international student bubble," she said. Although Gendelman herself is following in Eizenstat's footsteps, the grant design encourages students from a variety of fields to travel to Israel and pursue their individual interests and goals. "This grant is very flexible -if you want to work, if you want to apply for an internship, if you want to go to school-anything you want to do in Israel this grant can be applied towards [it]," Gendelman said. Gendelman beleives she received the grant because of her significant involvement on campus in clubs related to Israel, as well as an internship at a consulting firm in Tel Aviv that she had secured before submitting her application. The grant has not only furthered Gendelman's academic goals but has inspired her future career. "I now am interested in coming to Israel for business school after Brandeis, and returning to work in the high-tech world in Israel," said Gendelman. The grant certainly lived up to its potential for diverse applications with the first round of recipients. Ayoun chose to use the grant toward a three-week trip to Israel this winter break in order to conduct research for her senior thesis which is about international treaties as they relate to women and children. Her thesis will be published through the International and Global Studies program, which incorporates elements of Anthropology and Sociology as well as Psychology, her second major. "I chose to write about international treaties with women and children because, for me at least, it's the most striking example of where they can go wrong and all the limitations," Ayoun said. Her paper focuses on the Hague Adoption Convention, an international convention meant to address issues of child trafficking and international adoption. For Ayoun, Israel was an ideal case study through which to examine this area of international law. "Israel is a mix of secular and religious law, the religious courts and the civil courts. The issues that arise from Israel trying to adhere to the [Hague] convention shed light on the inherent issues of the convention." Much like Gendelman, Ayoun was also surprised by how accommodating the Schusterman Center was, indicating that "There really weren't any strings attached, which I was really surprised about. It's open-ended. ... I think sometimes you do need more structure, but for me it worked out well." The grant gave Ayoun the funding she needed to attend the International Family Law with Emphasis on the Work of the Hague Conference on Private International Law from Jan. 1 to 3, 2014 in Hos Hasharon, Israel. The conference happened to be held in Israel that year, and she had only learned about it by chance, four days in advance. "I got really lucky, that's the only way I can explain it," Ayoun said. The youngest attendee by at least a decade, Ayoun had the unique opportunity to have lunch at the UK ambassador's house and hear from high profile speakers that included Israeli Supreme Court Justice Neal Hendel. The conference allowed Ayoun to make professional connections and gain access to the academic papers of those who spoke at the conference. Following her undergraduate career, Ayoun hopes to attend law school and pursue international law. So far, the grant seems to have been successful in deepening student's relationships with Israel. In the case of Gendelman, the grant has succeeded in furthering her career goals in the Israeli business world. For Ayoun, the grant was an opportunity to enrich her senior thesis through primary research. "[Eizenstat] was intimately involved in Israel, and I think it's important for Brandeis as an institution to become more involved in Israel," Gendelman said. "I hope students travel to Israel, I hope students take advantage of the Israel experience through this grant," she said.
(03/17/14 4:00am)
Foilist Caroline Mattos '16 entered the final pool of the 2014 NCAA Regionals at Wellesley College on March 9 with all of the momentum on her side. She secured a 5-1 record in the opening round and made her way to the finals on the heels of a victory over Harvard University senior Alex Kiefer, the tournament's eventual silver medalist. In the finals, however, Mattos hit a wall and limped to a 2-3 start in the final pool. "My greatest challenge has been controlling my head game," she said. "Keeping a cool mind at all times is a crucial aspect of every sport, especially fencing." In that pivotal sixth match, she rose to the challenge. "I knew that I would have to calm myself down and just focus for each touch if I wanted to start winning," she said. Mattos rolled off five wins in her next six matches to earn a fourth-place finish among all women's foilists in the tournament. In the process she qualified for her second-straight NCAA Championships, to be held at the Ohio State University on Thursday. For Mattos, the journey to Columbus-and fencing on the national stage-has been an unexpected one. A native of Cumberland, R.I., Mattos initially never set her sights on the sport of fencing. Then, her father spotted a recruitment advertisement from Rhode Island Fencing Academy and Club in a local newspaper. He encouraged her to begin lessons with club coach Alex Ripa. One decade later, the rest of her story is history. "It was with Alex's help, as well as the motivation I received from my other teammates at the club, which pushed me to work hard and get to the level I am at now," Mattos said. Two years ago, in heading a core of foilists that include Eva Ahmad '16, Emilia Dwyer '16 and Chaya Schapiro '16, she seamlessly translated her skills and lessons from the club level to the collegiate stage. Mattos contributed to two straight New England Conference Championships, earned a bid to the NCAA Championships in San Antonio in her rookie season and has posted an impressive 67-13 record this season. While her fencing style has mostly remained the same since her time with Ripa, Brandeis head coach Bill Shipman has imparted intangible skills to Mattos that have proven to figure prominently in her collegiate success-confidence, ambition as well as perseverance. "Coach Shipman has been crucial in my motivation to continue to train hard, and has kept me focused on my goals," she said. "Coach has also taught me to be more confident with my actions." This is especially critical as Mattos sets her sights on her second appearance at Nationals. She noted how in her first national appearance in San Antonio last March, a lack of confidence and a concern for meeting lofty expectations resulted in a loss of focus. However, this year, with previous national exposure, Mattos is ready to make a statement. "Since this is my second time attending I now know what to expect," she said. "I am going to try to stay cool and think of each touch within each bout. As long as I stay focused and fight hard I know I will do well." If history is any indicator, Mattos will look to take her own advice to heart this weekend at Ohio State.
(03/11/14 4:00am)
After a week of occupation by Russian soldiers, the government of Ukraine's Crimea region voted Thursday night to leave Ukraine and become part of Russia. The referendum will be put to a regional vote in 10 days. Russian President Vladimir Putin sent soldiers to Crimea at the request of ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, but Ukraine's new Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk has stated that Crimea "was, is, and will be an integral part of Ukraine." Yatsenyuk denies seeking military aid from the United States, but both the U.S. and European Union have considered placing economic and political sanctions on Russia. How should the U.S. respond to the situation in Crimea? * Prof. Chandler Rosenberger (IGS) First, repeat simple facts. Russia invaded a sovereign state, seized its territory, then overthrew the elected government of the region it occupied. A referendum under those conditions won't be worth the paper that Moscow's fake ballots will be printed on. Russia pretends that its assault is the moral equivalent of Ukraine's constitutional removal of a felonious president. We must not let Moscow's smokescreens obscure its belligerence. Second, we should commit to the success of democratic Ukraine. Ukraine can't take Crimea back, but it can make a mockery of Putin's paranoid protection racket. Let's help the Ukrainians secure their currency and make it easy for U.S. and European firms to invest in Ukrainian businesses. Let's bring Ukrainian legislators to Washington, D.C. and Ukrainian students to Brandeis. Let's pay for Yo-Yo Ma, Beyonc?(c), and Michael Chabon to visit Kiev. Let's help Ukraine become the prosperous and free country that 104 people died dreaming of. Prof. Chandler Rosenberger (IGS) is the chair of the International and Global Studies program. * Lilia Leybova '15 The situation in Ukraine is very dangerous and unsteady. The logical answer would be to figure out a way to reach a solution peacefully, however this would only be possible if Russia was [sic] willing to cooperate. I agree with the current actions that both the United States and the EU are taking to try and reason with Russia and pressure them into ending their current seize of the Crimean Peninsula. I do not believe that the U.S. should take any military action as this could easily escalate and lead to unwanted consequences. Hopefully, the current political sanctions, including issuing visa bans to those who are considered responsible for undermining Ukrainian sovereignty, being taken will cause Russia to re-evaluate its decisions. In addition, I think that it is critical for the U.S. and the EU to support Ukraine throughout this troublesome time while still trying to resolve it as peacefully as possible. Lilia Leybova '15 was born in Ukraine. She is a biochemistry major. * Elizabeth Zharovsky '15 This is definitely a complex issue, especially given the history between the U.S. and Russia. The Crimea region was given to Ukraine under the Soviet regime because at that time, it didn't really matter who the land belonged to. Now, Putin has decided he wants it back, presumably to use the land as leverage in negotiations with the new Ukrainian government. The United States and EU have tried to conduct peaceful talks with Russia. Honestly, at this point, the U.S. should stay out of it because our continued involvement will just further tensions between us and Russia. Whatever Putin has in mind has already been decided, regardless of what the U.S. has to say about it. Elizabeth Zharovsky '15 is a Russian Studies minor and president of Russian Club. * Dan Rozel '16 The situation in Crimea is a cause for concern throughout the entire international community, and like Kosovo and Abkhazia, there is no simple course of action for the United States as a world superpower. This is a particularly delicate situation for the United States, as the imposition of sanctions on Russia flies in the face of the American belief of self-sovereignty. One could say that these sanctions would be the United States essentially not acknowledging the right of the autonomous people of Crimea to choose their own associations. However, I am still of the belief that the U.S. and EU should impose sanctions purely based on the method by which the Russians "liberated" the Crimeans. Sending troops into an autonomous region to "protect" it, especially when that region subsequently votes to join the invading country, feels like an unacceptable return to imperialism and brute force colonization. Dan Rozel '16 is an undergraduate fellow of the Brandeis Genesis Institute for Russian Jewry.
(03/10/14 4:00am)
Last summer, a few weeks before I first came to Brandeis, a bunch of my high school friends and I were sitting around in a basement thinking about what we wanted to do in college. There were the usual suggestions-party, sleep, wake up and party some more-until one girl chimed in. "I want to be part of a protest," she said. Everyone nodded and murmured in agreement. An image of myself standing outside a government building, shaking a picket sign and chanting in unison with a massive crowd floated through my brain. It was a common enough daydream, one that I'd had before and which I share with many of my friends, regardless of whether they've ever been part of a real protest. A lot of it stems, I think, from the common idolization of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., one of the great historical heroes of the modern age. He stood up against the most powerful and ingrained evils in his society, and was able to open the world's eyes to them through nonviolent protest. King is an inspirational figure to many, and though he is certainly not the only cause, he is part of the reason why protest is so romanticized in our society nowadays. We want to be angry at something, to vocally express our most deeply held beliefs and shout in the face of authority, "We will not be silenced!" For some, what the protest is actually about doesn't matter as much as the fact that it is happening, and that they can become a part of it. On Feb. 13, a group of students assembled outside the Bernstein-Marcus Administration Center to protest the University's executive payment practices. This was a protest I could get behind: It was time for the students to show their anger at President Emeritus Jehuda Reinharz's salary. We need to hold the Board of Trustees accountable for putting the ludicrous amount of money we pay toward making the rich richer. When I went to see the protest however, I was more than a little disappointed. The group of students stood huddled in a circle outlined by orange cones, the area specifically given by the University for the protest after the students submitted a formal request. They chanted slogans like "Fair Pay Today" and "Cut Jehuda's Salary," but also "F*ck the bookstore prices" and "Free tuition." As heavy snow began to fall, fewer and fewer students passed by the protest or gave it any attention, and soon, some of the angry chanters began to pack up and head home. The event's Facebook page even stated the incorrect amount of money being paid to Reinharz. If anything, the Feb. 13 protest made the University look better for allowing student discourse on campus. The protest was sectioned off in a little bubble of safety, where administrators could look down from their offices and admire the cute gang of angry children. Advocating executive pay changes is a goal that's both admirable and achievable, but free tuition? Something that absurd devalues the whole protest, and delegitimizes the very real concerns that students have. Likewise, getting mad over something as petty as inflated bookstore prices is an exercise in futility. Brandeis is a university that has sanctified the phrase "social justice," yet it has executive practices that create a class divide. That's a very real ethical concern, but if the student body is only worried about having to pay a few extra bucks for their textbooks, who is going to listen? This is the critical difference between the romantic image of King-esque protest, and the reality of what King did. King was strategic. He waved signs and sang songs, but he did so in ways that would specifically damage the institutions he was trying to change. The Montgomery Bus Boycotts weren't successful because people said they were angry; they were successful because the public transit system was losing money. The protesters made it clear that Montgomery buses wouldn't turn a profit until they changed their racist practices, and eventually the laws of economics prevailed. King didn't start his civil rights work by running for president. He started by supporting one woman who refused give up one seat on one bus. He built his way up to big targets, earning a name for himself in the media and showing persistence in the face of challenges. But he didn't just march in circles and hurl slogans in the air. All of the most effective protests of the Civil Rights Movement were deeply symbolic, and specified to the targeted goal of each specific protest. It was the way King was able to paint his opposition as so clearly in the wrong that he was able to earn followers and succeed in his goals. Who wouldn't let a tired woman sit on a bus after a long day? Who wouldn't serve a kid who had sat in a restaurant for hours on end? Who would dare to blast pressurized water at a group of peaceful men and women walking down the street and singing about freedom? The Brandeis student protest lacked any of the strategy, symbolism and realistic aims that lead to successful protests, and which were at the heart of King's victories. One has to start with demanding change on one specific issue and work up to sweeping reforms. Most of all, what the Brandeis protest movement needs is organization and clearly stated goals. Ten different people shouting 10 different slogans won't earn anyone's attention. Ten different people shouting one simple slogan ("Fair pay to janitors! Fair pay to janitors!") for hours upon hours will turn a few heads. Then if 10 more people join in the next day, and 10 more the day after that, people will start to pay attention. Then when all 30 protesters refuse to spend at the bookstore, dining halls and other retail locations until their demands are met, and more and more students join in, who's to say what could happen. Am I advocating anything as dangerous as the Birmingham Ala. boycotts? No, that would be inappropriate for the subject of concern. But if the student body wants to actually change Brandeis' executive practices through peaceful protest, we need to be willing to be unsavory. An effective protest cannot be something that one walks away from at night and ticks off as just another event in a busy day. It cannot be something that you do for the thrill, only because it's something people do in college. An effective protest is done to create change, even if it comes at a cost. *
(03/04/14 5:00am)
This week, JustArts spoke with Do Dang '15 and Catherine Cho '15, the president and vice president of Brandeis Asian-American Student Association, respectively, about the group's celebration of Asian Pacific American Heritage Month. JustArts: Would you tell us a bit about APAHM and what it means to BAASA to be celebrating it and sharing it with the Brandeis community? Catherine Cho: APAHM stands for Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, and basically, it was recognized by the United States as a national celebratory month in May of 1992 officially. It's usually celebrated in May, but BAASA celebrates it in March every year because we have final exams and stuff like that. It's one of the biggest events that we do for BAASA each year, and I think it's important because it embodies everything our club stands for. Throughout the beginning of the year and throughout the whole year in general, it's hard to remember through the little events we do what our club stands for, and showcasing our heritage and our background-so I think APAHM is really the one month where we show everything to Brandeis in general. Do Dang: Every year, we choose a specific theme to celebrate for APAHM, and this year it was identity. Last year it was "Breaking the Bamboo Ceiling," which relates more to stereotypes in general, like, we don't want to be seen as stereotypes, it's our identity, you can't really define us-just examining how we define ourselves. CC: We, collectively as an E-Board, get to think about what we want to show for that month of APAHM. This year... we all really wanted to focus on identity and what it means to be Asian-American. So our theme this year was called "Bridging the Gap"-it's about how there is this Asian heritage that we all have, that's part of who we are, but we are also American. So bridging the gap between those two cultures was what we focused on this year. DD: Usually it's a conflict for many Asian-Americans growing up. Like, for me, growing up-I grew up in a Vietnamese household-my parents were very busy. As I entered first grade, I was transferred to an English-speaking class and I lost my Vietnamese tongue after that; I can't speak Vietnamese anymore, I can't speak it well, I can understand it. It's trying to reconcile that disconnect after so many years. JA: How does art and expression play a role in APAHM and conveying a message of identity? DD: Art is identity, I think. It's how you choose to interpret yourself through some medium. It's most pronounced during our APAHM dance, it's something that we thought of in the background for that dance. We modeled it after the Asian-American identity development model, which has five stages: ethnic neutrality, content, then white identification, awakening, redirection and incorporation. That's why we had five dances with the five songs we chose to reflect those five stages. CC: That one showcases really well how I feel like art is a medium of expression for yourself, and for just showing identity in general, and how the main performer for that night, Yuri Tag, really embodied how she uses art to express herself. DD: She said that first, her dance was more choreographed by other people, but then she found her own choreography. CC: And that was really cool. JA: Yuri Tag was a big hit at the Opening Ceremony. Can you tell us about BAASA's decision to bring her to campus? DD: At first, we wanted to bring Mike Song, but due to some miscommunication, he was booked by some other school. Yuri Tag was another one that we wanted to get in touch with, but we couldn't, so this was fortunate for us that we could get her. She fit the bill-she has some of the same background as Mike Song, which is the Kaba Modern on [MTV's show] America's Best Dance Crew. In the description for APAHM we state that [her career] helped turn the tides for Asian-Americans to identify as [something] other than being doctors or lawyers. It helped people recognize our own identity, that we're not just these stereotypes. CC: I was also really happy that we got her because she was a pioneer for that kind of thing, and also she was a pioneer for Asian-Americans within the dance community-like hip-hop dancing-and also for breaking into media, like showing on TV. In her early interviews for Kaba Modern, for America's Best Dance Crew, she was saying how her parents didn't initially support her dancing because it's not really like, what a stereotypical Asian parent would want their children to do. So I really think it is-as clich?(c) and cheesy as it is-inspirational... A lot of Asian-Americans look up to her for that. JA: What was your favorite artistic moment during the Opening Ceremony and why? DD: I really liked Yevin [Roh's] first piece, ["The Top 10 List of Messed Up Things Racists Have Said to Me Because I am a Racial Minority"]-that really got the crowd going. You could hear the snaps, like, people do relate. What he's saying is not untrue; we have experienced these moments where people ask "Where are you really from?"-these microagressions. CC: I agree. I really liked his piece, I think that it does resonate with people. I know that I found myself nodding along and being like "yeah, you're right." He puts into words what other people normally wouldn't be able to clearly pinpoint-like what it is about things that really bother them or that are racist. Dan Tran, our keynote speaker from [sic] [the Opening Ceremony], used the word "microagressions." It's referring to little things that people do every day that you wouldn't really be able to outright point to and be like "oh, you're being racist,"-like if someone asks me where I'm from, and I say "I'm from Miami," then they say "No, where are you really from?" DD: It makes you feel like a foreigner. CC: Kind of. Like I was born in the States, you know. I feel like Yevin clearly put into words what you normally wouldn't be able to put into words. *
(03/04/14 5:00am)
Dear Readers: The editors of the Justice have decided not to follow the lead of the Washington Post, and I think their decision is a good one. This Friday (Feb. 28) marks the one-year anniversary of Patrick Pexton's last column as the Post's ombudsman-and the end of a 43-year-old tradition at the paper. Although the Post has continued to field questions from its readers through one of its blogs, the practice of having a regular column devoted to readers' concerns and written by an independent critic has not been continued. In contrast, the editors of the Justice have decided to revive the tradition of an ombudsman at their newspaper, and they have asked for my help. An ombudsman is essentially a readers' advocate. Because the term is a little cumbersome, some papers (such as the New York Times) use the term "public editor" instead. An ombudsman receives complaints from her newspaper's readers about the accuracy, fairness or tastefulness of the paper's coverage. She investigates how and why the coverage came to be and reports back to the readers in a column, outlining the nature of the initial complaint and recommending appropriate remedies. Sometimes an ombudsman finds herself schooling her colleagues-that is, the reporters and editorial staff who are responsible for the coverage. Other times she finds herself schooling the readers, who aren't always familiar with the tactical factors that influence coverage and are responsible for the decisions that readers perceive as sloppy or partisan in nature. The Washington Post's first ombudsman, Richard Harwood, convinced his colleagues to stop using the name "Cassius Clay" when writing about the boxer Muhammed Ali, who consciously rejected his given name, because he saw it as a relic of slavery. When Harwood was appointed in 1970, he exhorted reporters to recognize that the word "hippie" was pejorative and should not be used except when it was part of a quote. He suggested that the young reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein be taken off the "Watergate" beat, because they were too inexperienced to handle the story (Harwood later wrote that he was glad that the Post's executive editor, Ben Bradlee, had not adopted that recommendation). He also got the Post to publish a front-page apology to President Nixon's Attorney General John Mitchell, because Harwood's investigation concluded that the paper had misquoted Mitchell in an earlier story. Newspapers have ombudsmen primarily for two reasons: They want to monitor and improve their coverage, and they want to educate their readers about the factors that shape the craft of journalism. This raises the natural question of what the Washington Post's priorities are, now that it has softened its commitment to the ombudsman tradition. But it also points to a positive development in the priorities of the current editorial staff of the Justice. The students who create that paper each week recognize that they don't always get it right, and they want to improve. To do that, they have asked for my help - and I, in turn, am asking for yours. I have agreed to write a semi-regular ombudsman column for the paper, provided that the Justice's readers ask me to investigate decisions that are made by the reporters and editorial staff. If you write to me about the paper's coverage, in other words, I will launch an investigation and write a column. If you don't, I won't. It's that simple. I will not be serving as the paper's adviser; I will be serving as your advocate. The editors at the Justice will be free to take my advice or not. The paper has always been an independent publication, and I will not review any articles before they are printed. I will, however, continue to field informal questions from students about the stories they are working on, as I and my colleagues in the Journalism Program have always done, not just for reporters at the Justice, but for people who write for all of the University's publications. We are, after all, teachers first. I look forward to this partnership between and among myself, the readers of the Justice, and the dedicated students who volunteer their time and their talent to produce this paper. Yours, Maura Jane Farrelly Associate Professor of American Studies farrelly@brandeis.edu *
(03/04/14 5:00am)
As soon as Spain scored the winning goal of the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa, I started to get excited for 2014. Brazil, home of one of the world's most talented soccer squads, would be the host country. For the first time in FIFA's history of 110 years, back-to-back World Cups will have been hosted by non-European countries. As a soccer fan and a supporter of the Brazilian team, I was thrilled. FIFA has a habit of giving tournaments to the highest bidder, and the fact that two developing countries got the hosting opportunity instead of Europe or the United States blew me away. And who wouldn't want to see soccer's most prestigious tournament played in the country that produced Ronaldo, Luis Fabiano, Robinho and Pele? However, as June approaches, my excitement over Brazil hosting has considerably subsided. The World Cup is supposed to serve as a celebration of the world's favorite sport and, especially for a country like Brazil, an opportunity for development and economic growth. The latter is most certainly not happening. The Brazilian World Cup is plagued by corruption, unsafe working conditions and skyrocketing costs. As of February 2014, the Brazilian government has spent nearly 15 billion dollars on the World Cup, as much as Germany and South Africa, the last two hosts, combined. Part of it could be due to Brazil's economic status, but South Africa is also a developing country and did not have these cost problems. There is currently no evidence that the current spending, which is already more than double projected costs, will actually positively impact tourism or international investment beyond the World Cup, unlike predictions made before Germany and South Africa hosted their respective World Cups. It is also unlikely that Brazilian teams will even use some of the new stadiums, which are in more remote locations that do not have elite teams. Due to these rising costs and the fear that some stadiums won't be finished in time, the government has been especially lax when it comes to safety standards. As of Feb. 8, three workers died building the controversial Arenada Amazonia. Since 2013, Brazilians have been protesting and rioting about many of the government's plans for the World Cup, especially plans about infrastructure and transportation costs. The current infrastructure projects mainly focus on hotels, which would only benefit tourists, and would raise the cost of bus and train fares for normal Brazilians. At least 10 billion dollars have been spent on these infrastructure changes, but very little of that money is benefiting Brazilians. While Brazil is an emerging economic power, an estimated 11.5 million citizens live in favelas, urban shanty towns characterized by drugs, gang violence, police brutality and poverty. Citing safety concerns, the Brazilian government has authorized police raids in Rio de Janeiro and S??o Paulo to relocate nearly 15,000 families. There is little rhyme or reason over which neighborhoods get to remain in place and which stay: some favelas are offering themselves as cheap housing for tourists, while others face deadly riots and brutalities. The government claims that there is a policy of gentrification in place, but in reality, given that there is no sort of payment system for favela families, this gentrification is just another name for forced eviction. Unfortunately, Brazil is not the only World Cup host to be less than ideal when it comes to government policy and work practice. Russia and Qatar were controversially selected to host the 2018 and 2022 World Cups, respectively. Russia has a pretty weak human rights record, as demonstrated by the jailing of Pussy Riot, continual abuse of the country's Muslim minority and the anti-gay propaganda law that effectively criminalized being openly gay. Qatar is not much better. The 2022 World Cup is nearly a decade away, but there have already been reports of laborers, many of whom were illegally brought over from Southeast Asia and the Philippines, being underpaid or not paid at all. As a soccer fan, I want to celebrate the best teams in the world playing each other. As someone who identifies as a progressive, I am more than troubled. It is wrong that countries with abusive labor practices or egregious human rights violations are rewarded by the international community and get to host these extravaganzas. Obviously, as an American, it is easy to decry the actions of Brazil and wonder why the government hasn't been better about safety and corruption. The United States and Western Europe can afford certain protections that a country like Brazil simply cannot. It is also easy to forget that the World Cup is giving Brazil a major chance to prove itself as an international player. But this doesn't mean American soccer fans should idly sit by and not be critical about the running of their favorite sport. Sports fans must become more aware of the situation in many of these host countries. While it is hard to control a group like FIFA, and raising awareness is not going to solve every single problem Brazil, Russia and Qatar are facing, it might put pressure on domestic and international lawmakers to change policy. A country like Brazil that wants to be a major world player may be more open to reforms if it is clear Americans are paying attention. It is fine to cheer yourself hoarse for your favorite team, but if fans are ignorant or choose not to acknowledge the problematic elements of a host country, it is unlikely that FIFA or host countries will have any incentive to improve how World Cups are hosted. *
(03/04/14 5:00am)
After a car struck three students on South Street on Feb. 2, new safety measures are moving forward. Following the accident, Waltham Police presence near the crosswalk was heightened in order to enforce lower speed limits and overall caution, as requested by Director of Public Safety Ed Callahan. A plan to implement more safety measures was created by Callahan and Waltham city officials following the accident. The enhancements are being paid for by the University. These improvements include brighter streetlights near the crosswalk, rapid-flash beacons "that have been shown to increase drivers' attention" and spotlights focused on the crosswalk, Senior Vice President for Communications Ellen de Graffenreid wrote in a Feb. 24 statement. "When the strobe lights are eventually installed they will be a brighter flashing light similar to police vehicle lights," Callahan wrote in an email to the Justice. Another major enhancement is a motion detector system at the South Street crosswalk by the Linsey Complex so that pedestrians would not need to push the button in order to activate the crosswalk. The system is "something we are reviewing from a technological perspective," Callahan wrote in an email to the Justice. "I am waiting to receive information about the motion system which I imagine would involve some type of passive detection system." A motion detector system could pose a problem for Shabbat observant students. "We would appreciate a notification before it is installed so we can inform students who might be concerned about issues of Sabbath observance," President of Brandeis Orthodox Organization Noam Cohen said in an interview with the Justice. "Still, Orthodox students will be able to cross at the bridge, so it does not seem to be a problem. Almost anything to make the crosswalk safer is a welcome change." One current problem, according to Callahan, is that "the crosswalk buttons have been checked and function, but many community member[s] opt not to use them." Prior to the installation of the motion detector system, more prominent signs will be placed on crosswalk poles instructing pedestrians to "Please Push Button to Activate Lights." These signs have already been purchased and will be installed shortly, according to Callahan. They will stay up even after the motion detector system is installed, since the existing buttons will stay in place as backup. "I do not have a timeline for these enhancements as of yet," Callahan wrote. However, Public Safety and Waltham officials are working as quickly as possible to implement these improvements, weather permitting. The students were hit by a 42-year-old Bedford, Mass. resident while they were crossing South Street in the crosswalk by Linsey Pool and Gosman Sports and Convocation Center. The students, an 18-year-old female, an 18-year-old male and a 22-year-old female, were taken to Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. Two of the students were released from the hospital the next day. *
(02/11/14 5:00am)
I believe the author of "Internship courses raise controversy" (Jan. 28) brings up important ques-tions about: 1) The role of internships (paid and unpaid) in students' academic and pro-fessional development, 2) If and how universities should award academic credit for unpaid internships and 3) The overall quality of instruction in all university courses, not just internship courses. However, I am concerned that the author failed to present a more subtle and balanced picture of the "internship experience"-at least at Brandeis. As internship instructor for the Health: Science, Society and Policy program-one of the largest majors at Brandeis that oversees 70 to 80 percent of its students as they undertake internships each year-I believe it is important to present a more nuanced view of the internship experience. Regarding points one and two, the author has the legal issue partly (but significantly) wrong. The real issue is about unpaid internships at for-profit enterprises, not unpaid internships in general-an important distinction. Within the HSSP program, the lion's share of our students intern at nonprofit organizations, many of which operate on a shoestring budget. When students intern at a well-known organization in good (or great) financial health, it is not safe to assume that the financial health of all departments within the organization reflects that of the overall organization. For example, within hospitals' research arms, most of the funding is a patchwork quilt as well as grant-based-so-called "soft money." Beyond the financial component, it's not clear to me that organizations are exploiting academic credit as a vehicle for compensating their interns. In fact, in my conversations with potential internship organizations, I can't think of one that hasn't been surprised that students can receive academic credit-and has thought about how to make the internship all the more meaningful as a result. My impression is these organizations really would like to provide the students with something substantial to grapple with both during the internship itself and during their coursework. Additionally, experience has shown me that internship organizations are impressed that the HSSP program has the level of supervision it does over its students during their internships. Neither the internship organizations nor the HSSP program treat the internship experience as "just another box to check." Regarding point three, I think of the internship course as an opportunity to slow students' thinking down-perhaps the only time in most of their adult lives they'll have the opportunity to be this deliberate-and to get them to really consider where this experience fits in their academic, professional and personal development. Last time I checked, staff development was at least on the list of priorities in most workplaces. I understand not all students may be enthusiastic about that sort of reflection, but I strongly believe it's important for all professionals-young, mid-career and seasoned-to take a step back every now and then and see if they can make sense of the bigger picture and make adjustments as necessary. In one-on-one conversations with a number of resolute premed students, I've seen their eyes light up when they realize that being a physician isn't the only (or best) way to approach medicine, health care or human welfare. I believe such profound moments of self-awareness are a direct result of the opportunities HSSP students are exposed to-both on and off campus. Not all internship experiences are created equal. That the author of the original Justice article begins from the premise that they are is a disservice to the many, many organi-zations that care deeply about their interns' intellectual and professional development, to the academic programs that invest substantial time and energy in complementing internships with deliberate reflection and to the students who deserve a pragmatic and fair discourse about the role of internships and internship courses during their time at institutions of higher learning. -Andrew Hart is a Lecturer and internship instructor in the Health: Science, Society and Policy program, and a Ph.D. Candidate at the Heller School for Social Policy and Management.
(02/11/14 5:00am)
Hey there, Brandeis! Here's your pop culture breakdown for this week: On Wednesday, reports surfaced alleging that singer/actress Selena Gomez spent two weeks at the Arizona facility Dawn at the Meadows back in January as part of a secret rehab stint. Though rumors have swirled that Gomez, 21, was admitted for an addiction to alcohol, marijuana and the prescription Ambien, her representative tells People Magazine that the "Come and Get It" singer "voluntarily" went to the rehab facility and specified that her time there was "not for substance abuse." In December, Gomez canceled her Australian tour, articulating in a statement that she needed to "spend some time on [her]self." Still, many are blaming the singer's rehab stint on her rekindled relationship with former beau Justin Bieber, a headline-maker in his own right. The two were famously photographed early in January riding Segways around Bieber's neighborhood in Calabasas, Calif., fueling reports that they had gotten back together. Just a few days after this scooter outing, Gomez checked into rehab. Of course, Bieber also found himself in the headlines again this week. On Jan. 29, just six days after his infamous Miami Beach arrest, Bieber turned himself into Toronto police, and was subsequently charged with assaulting his limo driver. The arrest stems from a Dec. 30 incident, during which the driver of a limo transporting Bieber, 19, and five other people from a nightclub, was hit on the back of the head multiple times. Reportedly, the man who struck the driver left the scene before police arrived. Bieber's court date is set for March 10. It doesn't end there. On Friday, Jan. 31, Bieber and his entourage (including his father, Jeremy) flew on a private jet from Canada to Teterboro, N.J., in order to attend Super Bowl festivities in the New York area. However, NBC News reported that the plane became so filled with marijuana smoke that the pilots were forced to wear oxygen masks in order to avoid risking a secondhand high. Reports filed after the incident also indicate that Bieber and his entourage were verbally abusive to a flight attendant, who was forced to hide out in the plane's cockpit. Members of the flight crew weren't willing to press charges, but authorities allegedly later searched the plane and found bags that appeared to contain marijuana at one point. They could not, however, link their findings to Bieber or his traveling companions. After all the SelGo and JBiebs talk, here is a kind of restoration story of sorts involving none other than Dirty Harry himself: Clint Eastwood. On Wednesday, Eastwood was attending a party for the AT&T Pebble Beach National Pro-Am golf tournament in Monterey, Calif. when he saw that Steve John, the tournament director, was choking on a piece of food. Eastwood, 83, swiftly performed the Heimlich maneuver and, according to John's public statement, "saved [his] life." Eastwood told the local newspaper, The Carmel Pine Cone, that it was his first time ever performing the Heimlich-what a scene that must have been. *
(02/11/14 5:00am)
Most college professors write books and articles for an audience of intelligentsia, keeping their prose precise and the ideas strictly academic. Prof. John Plotz (ENG), a scholar of Victorian literature, has quietly bucked the trend with his forthcoming children's novel. Time and the Tapestry: A William Morris Adventure, Plotz's first work of fiction, will be published in May. "Fundamentally, the book is set up as a time-travel narrative where kids from the present fall back into the past," Plotz explained in an interview with the Justice. His novel centers around the journey of siblings Jen and Ed who must find the missing pieces to their grandmother's old tapestry so she can sell it and save her house. Jen and Ed fall back into the tapestry and find themselves back in 19th-century England, where they meet William Morris, the famous English textile designer and Jen's personal hero, and formulate a plan to complete the tapestry. Plotz explains that his motivation to write a children's novel comes from the fact that he has young children himself. "It comes out of sitting around with my kids and telling stories and reading books with them and rediscovering all those books from my childhood that I loved," he says. The Wizard of Earthsea, the Madeleine L'Engle books, The Hobbit, just remembering what incredible joy you can get if you lose yourself in one of those stories." The focus on William Morris, however, comes from Plotz's academic background. "I've worked on William Morris in the academic context for a really long time and I am always excited to talk about the things I love about him and his socialism and his ... amazing forms of art, and I noticed there had never been a children's book written about it," Plotz explained. William Morris is a significant figure because of his socialist ideology, his textile designs and his publications as a science-fiction writer. "I got interested in him, I think, because the ways that he thinks about what he hates about the capitalism of his day seem very relevant to the critiques of multi-nationalism capitalism today," Plotz said. In addition to being a textile designer, William Morris was also a writer and wrote News from Nowhere, which Plotz described as a "wonderful science fiction" book that considers the idea of "an England after capitalism had disappeared." Plotz has kept the process of writing his new book very quiet, describing it as "a labor of love off in its own world." However, he did seek advice from Prof. Stephen McCauley (ENG), associate director of the Creative Writing program, on how to shift gears from an academic prose and write more creatively. "Steve McCauley said probably the most important thing to me. We were talking about the book early on and he said 'yeah, it's clear you know a lot. You probably want to forget some of it too,'" referring to Plotz's background on Victorian culture. "Talking to people like Steve McCauley at Brandeis really helped in terms of thinking about what is different about that kind of writing. But dialogue was for sure the hardest part," he commented. Having just spent about a year and a half writing and editing his first novel, Plotz is already starting a second, this one directed toward young adults. Although it is too early to give many details, he explained that the second novel would focus on author Mark Twain. "I can say that it's going to be about the old Mark Twain looking back at the stories of his childhood ... in a way, it's going to be set in two times," said Plotz. Despite enjoying the process of writing fiction, Plotz doesn't plan on giving up his academic studies. He explained, "I really enjoy my scholarly work and I can't see giving it up, for sure. I enjoyed this a lot, whether that means I can keep doing it, I don't know. My kids gave me the thumbs-up," Plotz has authored two academic monographs and is currently at work on a third tentatively titled Semi-Detached: The Aesthetic of Partial Absorption, the research for which has been supported by a Guggenheim Fellowship. Other professors have published literature or poetry alongside their academic work. Profs. John Burt (ENG), a scholar of American literature, and Mary Baine Campbell (ENG), an expert in literature of Early Modern Europe, have each published books of original poetry. In the history department, Prof. Jane Kamensky (HIST), an expert on early American history, co-authored Blindspot, a 2008 romance novel that takes place in the era of the American Revolution. Time and the Tapestry: A William Morris Adventure is illustrated by Phyllis Saroff and is scheduled to be published in May by Bunker Hill Publishing. *
(02/11/14 5:00am)
The 2014 Winter Olympics opened in Sochi, Russia on Friday. The games have been mired in controversy since before they began: Sochi is only 180 miles from an ongoing war zone in the Caucasus Mountains, which is why the games will have the largest security force on any Olympics in history. Russia's homophobic laws have led many to boycott and protest the games. Journalists have been given rooms in hotels that are not fully constructed, with undrinkable water and poor facilities. How do you feel about the Winter Olympics taking place in Sochi? * Prof. Irina Dubinina (GRALL) I agree with Thomas Bach, the president of the International Olympic Committee, that the Olympics are about building bridges to bring people together. And in my opinion, the focus should be on athletes first. But the hosting country also comes into the spotlight months before the games even open. The spotlight can promote the country in the eyes of the world, but it also exposes its problems. The promotion is precisely what Russia sought (please don't think that only Putin wanted these games to happen in Russia!). An overwhelmingly negative coverage in the Western media is what Russia got. Don't take me wrong: there is much to criticize about the Russian society, from the unprecedented scale of corruption to the homophobia of most Russians and more! There are also documented problems with the state of preparedness which brings shame to the Russian organizers. But there is a thin line between criticism and schadenfreude in which much of the American media is engaged turning the Russian Olympics and the country itself into a joke. The only issue that is not a joke to anyone is the threat of terrorism, but even this topic does not often receive an impartial coverage. Yet if we are to find the much needed solution to our common problem of terrorism, we desperately need each other, and schadenfreude is not the way to build bridges. Prof. Irina Dubinina (GRALL) is the director of the Russian Studies program. * Prof. Peter Gould (PAX) In the past, Olympic games have been held close to war zones. There have been local problems, international threats, fierce objection to the politics of the host country and the oncoming or receding tides of war. While protesting or boycotting the games could be a strong statement, it takes away from the dedication, and long years of training, of the participating athletes. I lived through the 1980 summer Olympic boycott-he U.S. protested the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. No matter how sensible it might have seemed, no matter how intense the feelings we had about murderous Russian troops sacking Afghan homes, most people today only remember that athletes' hopes and dreams were shattered, that the decision proved an unpopular embarrassment to President Jimmy Carter, and, anyway, in the next generation we invaded Afghanistan and did the same things. Send all our lesbian, gay, bisexual, transexual and queer, etc. athletes to Sochi and show the world that in this matter at least we lead freely. Prof. Peter Gould (PAX) is a lecturer in Peace, Conflict and Coexistence Studies. He teaches PAX 120b: "Inner Peace and Outer Peace." * Joseph Babeu '15 As a Russian Studies major and LGBTQ advocate, my feelings regarding the Sochi Winter Olympics are mixed. On the one hand, I want for the first thing that comes to mind when you think of Russia to be something other than a joke about the Soviet Union-a hugely successful Winter Olympics would help do that. On the other hand, the Russian government has made some truly horrendous policy decisions regarding the queer community. While the games' success may not be as relevant to this problem, I feel as though simply having the Olympics in Russia is. It provides a focus on Russia that I do not think would otherwise be present. In today's day and age, keeping oneself informed about international events seems to be becoming less and less common. Without these games, I am sure that the righteous outrage now directed at Russia would not be present. Joseph Babeu '15 is the president of the Russian Club. * Molly Gimbel '16 From my eyes as an LGBTQ+ activist, I can understand the resistance and hesitation from the countries participating in the games, as the newly implemented laws in the country are considered homophobic by these countries' standards. That being said, I also believe that having the games in Sochi is forcing much of the U.S. to recognize other LGBTQ+ issues- besides the fight for marriage equality. The unity of much of the world is showing to express their disapproval with Russia's new laws is a promising sign. It shows many people within the LGBTQ+ community that there are many people who want to help fight for equal rights. Hopefully, their unity on this issue can be utilized to create a more unifying group to fight for the more basic issues and needs of those in the LGBTQ+ community across the world and the states. Molly Gimbel '16 is the general coordinator of Triskelion, Brandeis University's GLBTQSA student group.
(02/11/14 5:00am)
The Super Bowl is a curiously American tradition; Friends and families gather together around the TV, with some watching for the football game itself, but others watching only for the advertisements. This year, one ad in particular stood out. Kicking off a new campaign called "America is Beautiful," Coca-Cola aired a 60-second commercial showing attractive children and young adults laughing, playing, hiking and drinking Coke together. The interesting part-and for a certain portion of viewers, the controversial part-was the audio. Accompanying the visuals are a group of young women who sing different sections of "America the Beautiful" in seven different languages, from English to Mandarin to Hebrew. While I didn't watch the game this year, I sure did see the ad, as Rush Limbaugh and other conservative commentators shook their fists and popped their forehead veins over the ad's multicultural message, keeping it in the news for days after it aired. Satirizing the controversy is not especially difficult. Comedian Doug Walker noted on his Facebook page that making fun of the angry masses is "like shooting brain-dead bigots out of a Coke bottle." Stephen Colbert summed it all up nicely in his bit on the issue: Screaming and throwing his hands to his ears, Colbert furiously proclaimed "Only English can give that song its certain je ne sais quoi! The last thing I want to be is a prima donna, but I am full of schadenfreude over this!" Both Walker and Colbert hit the nail on the head: the fact that this controversy even exists is ridiculous. Apparently Limbaugh and his compatriots were unaware that "America the Beautiful" does indeed have Spanish, French and Arabic translations, but the response against the outrage has been overwhelming. The video has over 10,000,000 views and 40,000 likes on YouTube, the most of either metric for any Coca-Cola video, and an extended version aired during the opening ceremony of the Sochi Olympics. Evidently, the advertisement has affected a lot of people, either filling them with rage or national pride. But what does it mean that we've been so deeply affected by something designed to get us to buy soda? Last year, Coke began being sold in Myanmar for the first time in 60 years, meaning the only countries left in the world without the iconic cola are Cuba and North Korea. According to a National Public Radio feature, Coke's ad executives had to go back to their company archives and look at Coca-Cola ads from the 1880's to rediscover how to sell their product to people who had never tasted it before. Coke ads in Myanmar center around two words-"delicious" and "refreshing." They also offer free samples of the drink at Buddhist festivals, and give out instructions to "Chill the bottle" and "put three cubes of ice in the glass" in order to best enjoy Coca-Cola in a country with bad refrigerators. As more and more Burmese start drinking Coke, the Coca-Cola company has established itself as both the world's wealthiest and most widespread soft drink company. Coca-Cola, like most soft drinks, is correlated to weight gain. In addition, two of the ingredients that create its caramel color are known to cause cancer. These ingredients are purely cosmetic, but despite numerous petitions, Coke refuses to extract them from the soda's formula. Coke's numerous artificial sweeteners also don't break down in water treatment plants, meaning that pouring Coke down the drain can cause water pollution. It takes a lot to get people to keep buying a product that they know is bad for them. In 2010, Coke spent a whopping $2.9 billion on advertising, more than Microsoft and Apple combined. The majority of Coke ads have nothing to do with the drink itself: they center around icons like the American flag, young people having fun at night or the cute and cuddly polar bears who serve as the company mascots, and who got a short animated movie produced by Ridley Scott last year. Coke hires some of the best advertisers in the field, men and women whose job it is to make you want to drink what is essentially liquid garbage. Out of all of the executives who must have had a hand in designing the Super Bowl ad, I find it hard to believe that not one of them ever predicted that their multicultural message might generate some harsh reactions from a certain part of the American community. It is hard to get anything noticed in the information era, where news updates, apps and advertisements flash at us every second we are online. Look at how much attention Coke has gotten after the Super Bowl: many of the pundits who would usually criticize Coca-Cola for its unhealthy products value racial tolerance more than they value health issues. Suddenly, liberal commentators find themselves in the position of defending a major soda conglomerate, giving it more and more press time, while video shares, tweets and Facebook posts surge. Coca-Cola is now releasing several "Behind the Scenes" videos, interviewing the young women who sang in the ad about what they think it means to be an American. Apparently people really do want to know everything they can about a 60-second video designed to make them thirsty. Whether or not any of this controversy was intentional is honestly irrelevant. It is fascinating to note how the media scandal has become the best way to get everyone talking about your product. For years now, Coke has no longer sold its soda but its own image, but this recent kerfuffle has somehow made the American people into Coke's own advertisers. The media, both social and traditional, is what perpetuates the conversation around this ad, giving Coca-Cola more and more and more free advertising. And as advertisers have said for decades, "any press is good press."
(02/04/14 5:00am)
One of the first songs I remember learning was "If I Had A Hammer" by Pete Seeger. My grandmother would always sing the liberal folk music canon to my sister and me: "If I Had A Hammer," "Union Maid," "This Land Is Your Land," and countless others. At the time, I didn't fully understand what the songs were about, only that they were easy to sing along to and were somehow important to members of my family. Shortly after my grandmother was diagnosed with cancer, she took my family to see a documentary about Pete Seeger. I didn't want to go; the idea of spending time with my grandmother while she was dying terrified me. I didn't want to acknowledge what was happening. My mother forced me to go of course, but I can't say I remember enjoying it. After my grandmother died, I stopped listening to Pete Seeger, Woody Guthrie and other folk musicians, partially out of trying to fit in with my friends' musical tastes and partially because they reminded me too much of her. It wasn't until Pete Seeger was a guest on The Colbert Report that I started listening to old folk music again. I was older, almost out of high school, and trying to determine what sort of person I wanted to be as I grew into an adult. Even a few years after my grandmother died, I rarely talked about her, and would grow uncomfortable whenever my aunt or my mother brought her up. At the same time, though, I knew I also wanted to make her proud of me. It is a contradiction that still bothers me: I wondered what my grandmother would think of who I was becoming, while still feeling guilty for ignoring her as she died. I am troubled by my own idealization of her. My grandmother was an amazing woman; she was active in the Civil Rights Movement and the anti-war movement during the Vietnam War. It's often all too easy for me to brag about her achievements, both as an individual and a part of the bioethics community. It is also all too easy for me to forget that she was by no means the perfect person I make her out to be. After someone you love dies, it is easy to look back and romanticize them. Certainly people have done this with Pete Seeger. Read obituaries of him, or listen to news broadcasters share his life story and you'll find they typically don't mention his often-controversial politics. The New York Times obituary mainly focuses on how Seeger inspired Bob Dylan or sang with civil rights marchers, but glosses over his relationship with and membership in the Communist Party, or his active involvement in the Occupy movement. The focus is on the non-controversial things Seeger did, the things that people find nice and safe rather than the aspects of Seeger's life and personal philosophy that so informed his music. I find it troubling to romanticize people, to change the past to fit in with your own perceptions of how someone ought to have been. I'm not saying I am innocent of it either. It's easier to only acknowledge the good parts of someone you loved, to brag about what makes you proud and to simply ignore the contradictions and hypocrisy that were equally a part of who that person was. My grandmother was not a perfect woman, but when I think of her, I only remember the good, the parts that I want to relate to. It's human nature, I suppose, to ignore the controversial or unpopular, especially just after someone's death. But it is not necessarily the best way to honor their memory. People are complicated. Even those who we look up to, men and women like Eleanor Roosevelt, Nelson Mandela or even your late grandmother are not perfect. Can we really understand and respect Nelson Mandela's life without acknowledging his advocacy for violence early in his career? By ignoring Eleanor's Roosevelt opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment, are we also ignoring the complexities of her character? Is Pete Seeger's life and advocacy overly simplified by ignoring the politics that inspired him? If I only focus on the things I admired about my grandmother, am I discrediting who she really was? Everyone has their complexities, and it is important to acknowledge them while understanding someone's imperfections does not make them any less of a person you admire. I believe that people are afraid of acknowledging these short-comings, these flaws, especially following the death of a beloved figure. It can be easier to simplify people after they die, to hold them up on a pedestal, but that is doing them a disservice. To fully understand those we love and admire after they die, we have to appreciate the full picture, not just the pieces that appeal to us most. After all, it is better to love a real person than a fantasy.
(01/28/14 5:00am)
Jan. 22 was the 41st anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court case that solidified women's right to choose abortion. On that day, I spent two hours in the bitter cold counter-protesting the March for Life on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. The March for Life, the largest anti-choice demonstration in the world, takes place every year on the anniversary of Roe to challenge the Supreme Court ruling's pro-choice premise. I, along with a friend and a group of about 20 other protesters, donned our "Keep Abortion Legal" signs and "I Trust Women" pins and assembled in front of the Supreme Court to show the anti-choice marchers that a strong pro-choice voice exists in our nation. At the march, I had some intense revelations that I want to share with you all. After the march, I used Facebook to post photos from my experience, and some friends and acquaintances subsequently asked me to explain or justify my pro-choice stance. I realized that although I do a lot of work in reproductive justice, I've never taken the time to pause and explain why I fight for what I fight for. So here it goes. I am staunchly, proudly and unapologetically pro-choice. Abortion is a medical procedure, one of the safest in the world when performed by a trained medical professional, that allows women the right to decide when and if to have children. It gives women the chance to plan their families, and, as such, to secure educational opportunities, economic stability and autonomy. That being said, I recognize that not everyone agrees with me. According to the New York Times, abortion is one of the most divisive issues of the 2014 election cycle. The contention, hatred and venom that exist on both sides of the aisle of the abortion debate are baffling to me. At the protest, my friend and I linked arms and an anti-choice man attempted to physically plow through and disrupt our peaceful demonstration. A woman carrying an anti-choice sign began screaming in the face of the counter-protesters from the National Organization for Women. We were scoffed at, yelled at and physically intimidated-not to mention outnumbered, obviously-by our anti-choice counterparts. These interactions are not productive. They do not create useful dialogue or a sense of understanding among the different factions. They foster hatred, violence and demonization of the "other side"-an "other side" that is composed of people, people like you and me, who are just as convinced that what they are fighting for is as righteous as what we are fighting for. At the end of the day, we are each fighting for what we believe is moral and just. This is a democracy, where we are free to voice our opinions openly, proudly and encounter the support and opposition that subsequently follow. I do not "hate" people who are anti-choice. I respect the staunchness with which they support their beliefs, and I respect their right to do so. But I demand that they respect my right to do so as well. I will continue to fight this fight-peacefully, respectfully, and fiercely-until a woman's right and ability to choose are secure nationwide. I'd like now to speak directly to those of you who may be fiercely pro-choice, moderately pro-choice or undecided: According to NARAL Pro-Choice America's Choice Out Loud Campus Toolkit, 61 percent of millennials, our generation, are pro-choice. But only 21 percent think the issue is important. Meanwhile, 44 percent of anti-choice millennials believe the issue is important. That means that the modern pro-choice voice is being outspoken by the voice of the anti-choice movement. We, the pro-choice folks, are the majority, but not enough of us are willing to take a stand, vocally express our support and take action to secure women's right to choose. At the March for Life demonstration, the marchers kept chanting; "We. Are. The Pro-Life Generation!" If we as pro-choice millennials do not raise our voices, mobilize and stand in support of a woman's right to choose, our generation will become the pro-life generation. In 2013, three states attempted to ban abortion at varying points throughout the pregnancy; five states attempted to ban insurance coverage of abortion; and eight states attempted to close abortion providers through anti-choice restrictions. We can protect Roe, and secure women's right to reproductive health. But we have to make a dedicated effort, and we have to spread our passion and dedication to our friends, our families and everyone who is willing to listen. Some people won't fight because they don't believe abortion affects them. To those people, I offer this: Stop and think, just for a minute. Think of every female-bodied person you know. Every individual that may, at some point, experience an unplanned pregnancy-whether it's you, your mother, your friends, or your role models. According to the non profit organization Advocates for Youth, about one in three women will get an abortion by the time she turns 45. Odds are, you know more than one person who has had an abortion. Odds are, one third of the women at the March for Life had received abortions. We cannot forget the regularity with which abortion occurs, nor can we forget that women will continue to get abortions even if the procedure is legally outlawed. We cannot forget the alarming number of women who have died, or become seriously ill, from botched abortions performed in back alleys because the procedure was not legal. And, most importantly, we cannot forget the power of a story. These issues seem vague and distant until we realize that we know someone who has experienced them firsthand. The best way-the very best way-we can shift public opinion to become more pro-choice is to share our stories. To say, "I had an abortion." Whether you had one and regretted it, or had one and never looked back, or had two, or more: at the end of the day, you had the ability to choose your future. Expressing that you have had an abortion-a procedure so stigmatized in our society-is not easy. But the rewards of doing so will be enormous. Be brave, take a stand and share your story. You will be shocked by how many people have been waiting for the right moment to share theirs. You will be shocked by the support and understanding you receive as a result. I am pro-choice. I am proud. And I am dedicated to making sure that 2014 is a year in which the pro-choice voice becomes louder and stronger than ever before. *
(01/28/14 5:00am)
In a team full of seniors, it can be hard for a first-year player to shine. That has not been the case for guard Robinson Vilmont '17. In his first year as a member of the men's basketball team, Vilmont has appeared in all 16 games this season and has impressed for the Judges, averaging 7.1 points per game on 45 percent shooting from the field. Vilmont averages 18.6 minutes per game, easily the most minutes per game of all first-years, ranking fifth on the team behind four seniors. No other first-year player averages more than 12 minutes, 3.3 points or 1.9 rebounds per game. Vilmont leads in all three categories for first-year players on the Judges. He has grown into his spot on the team, culminating in a season-high six assists in Sunday's 94-88 loss to Emory University. "My goal was to get 10 assists [on Sunday], but I couldn't get it," he remarked about the game. On the team's final possession, and down by just two points, Vilmont found himself at the top of the key. He then drove into the lane in the hopes of drawing a foul and obtaining a chance to tie the game. Although he did not get the foul call he was looking for, the confidence his teammates have in him has been well earned. Vilmont began the year with a personal-best 13 points in the team's home-opening win in November. However, he saw his playing time-and his point totals-dwindle as the competition got increasingly more difficult. Coach Brian Meehan has shifted his starting lineup throughout the season based on matchups, and ultimately, Vilmont's time on the court has been reflective of the coach's strategy. The guard saw a season-high 30 minutes against Lasell College in November, but then, entered the game for just one minute in the team's loss to Washington University in St. Louis on Jan. 17 and only five minutes in a loss to New York University six days prior to that. Since the loss to WashU, Vilmont has averaged nearly 20 minutes per game, adding eight points and four assists for the Judges in the team's previous three games. "My confidence has been going through the ceiling because of how much trust coach has on me now," he said. Even amid his changing role, Vilmont looks to contribute to the overall success of the team. "Since coach switches the lineup depending on matchup just means that when your number is called you need to be ready to perform and work hard," he explained. Vilmont has found a different way of contributing in each game, registering a game-high four assists in the Judges' win over Rochester on Friday and a team-high four rebounds on Sunday. The guard, who spent last year in the Myra Kraft Transitional Year Program, is proud of his contributions so far to the team but has his sights set on pushing himself to be the most complete player possible. "My first semester as being a Judge is going really well," Vilmont said. "I am doing well in all my classes thanks to [TYP] for preparing me. My personal goal for the future is to be in the best shape of my life and soon become an All-American." A team with a core of experienced players may just have to step aside as Vilmont continues to develop as a key member of the Judges. *
(01/28/14 5:00am)
On April 15, 2010, a vision came to fruition. Shaina Gilbert '10 watched from the sidelines as students squared off against staff for a novel fundraising event known as "Hoops for Haiti." The Brandeis Haiti Relief Effort, now known as the Brandeis Haiti Initiative, staged the friendly basketball exhibition between staff and students to fundraise for relief efforts for a disaster-ravaged Haiti. The Haiti Relief Effort that year focused on support for three organizations, one of which proved to be Gilbert's Empowering Through Education camp. Founded in 2009, and based in Hinche, Haiti-the hometown of Gilbert's mother-the summer program sought to serve and educate 100 children in at-risk communities. Fast-forward to Saturday. Hoops for Haiti received an added boost in publicity this year from its affiliation with Brandeis' inaugural HOOPcoming week. Led by Stacy Finley '16 and Terry Shaipitisiri '16, the committee planned a series of spirit-based events, revolving around the Judges' two critical University Athletic Association games this past weekend, to rally the student body. Gilbert reflected on the sustained success of this event, a fundraising initiative that, each year, has continued to take Red Auerbach Arena by storm. "Even four years later, I am so glad that Hoops for Haiti is alive and kicking," she said about the event. Her words resonated as Dean of Student Life Jamele Adams led the student squad onto the court against a staff team coached by men's basketball guard Ruben Kanya '14. While Kanya had a fifth straight victory in mind for the faculty, he also expressed his appreciation for having the opportunity to participate in such a great cause. "It was an amazing experience to have the opportunity to coach the staff and faculty team in an environment raising money for a great cause," he said. "It was fun to see the different faces from all departments unite as one community." Kanya looked like he would have his way, though, in the first 10 minutes of the game. The students did not earn their first basket until the five minute, 42 second mark in the first half. Prof. Chad Williams (AAAS) drained a statement three-pointer from the right corner. Meanwhile, Cary Weir Lytle, associate director of employer relations at the Hiatt Career Center, and Darryl David '08, from the Office of Student Activities, continued to lead the charge, pacing the faculty to a 19-6 lead. The students would not be deterred. After a 6-0 run, the students found themselves down by just six points at the half. Adams' squad continued to claw back from seemingly insurmountable deficits in the second half, pulling to 25-16 and 29-24 margins. The staff, though, seemed to have the game in hand, boasting a 35-29 lead in the closing minute of the game. The students then benefited from a helping hand at the scorer's table. With the click of a button, the score suddenly stood at 35-35 and the outcome of the game hinged on the next basket scored. Vincent Asante '14, who has shined in countless meets on the track during his four-year career with the Judges, then took his talents to the basketball court. He drained the game-winning basket from inside the paint to clinch the 37-35 victory. The students, accompanied by Adams, stormed the court to the tune of "We Are the Champions." David, even while on the losing side, alluded to the enriching opportunity that Hoops for Haiti provides for both students and faculty. "As an alum and staff member, I am ecstatic every time I get to participate in the Hoops for Haiti initiative," he said. "Not only does it bring attention to a great cause in Haiti but also creates relationships among staff and the student body. As long as my body permits I will continue to support this event and aid in any way possible." While the students rejoiced, the true champions that night proved to be the 250-plus children in Gilbert's ETE camp who stood to benefit from the fundraising efforts. Their mission is now more pressing than ever. KIND Snacks, a major multinational food provider, is currently offering $10,000-as a part of the "Do the Kind Thing Initiative"-to support a project aligned with the ideals of social justice. ETE is a front-runner for the grant, and as the month-long voting period continues to pass, Gilbert elaborated on her program's ability to enrich and inspire children from throughout Haiti. "We have many eight to 12 year olds enrolled in our program and encourage them to make our nation better," she said. "We hope one day that they will be fearless leaders." Each year, as students and staff square off for the annual Hoops for Haiti title, that aspiration continues to become more of a reality.
