(03/15/11 4:00am)
Expressing oneself is both a freedom and a privilege of living in a democratic society. A functioning democracy protects our rights during moments in which we feel our freedoms are violated. For instance, protecting free speech requires us to preserve that freedom for every individual and accept all forms of speech, regardless of their popularity. Yet if we protect all forms of speech under blind justice, we may never understand the importance of protecting our minds and bodies from speech that defiles human dignity. When applied to unpopular or hateful sentiments, free speech can become difficult to uphold in practice.The Westboro Baptist Church is an organization known for its opposition to homosexuality and religious and ethnic groups. Picketing military funerals is one of the group's controversial protest activities. After members of the WBC protested at the funeral of U.S. Marine Matthew Snyder, his father, Albert Snyder, filed a lawsuit against the WBC and its leader, Fred Phelps, for an invasion of privacy and the intentional infliction of emotional distress. The case reached the Supreme Court and was heard on Oct. 6, 2010. The Supreme Court's decision over the WBC ruled that the First Amendment was applicable to the organization's right to protest. The legality of the case, as well as the organization's negative behavior, has drawn broad attention from the public, both from those who support the decision and those who reject it. Although there is legal justification to rule in favor of the WBC, there are reasons for supporting Snyder that one must take into account. The funeral of a fallen soldier is a private and religious occasion. It is a place of respect and remembrance for the life of a human being, one that deserves protection from disturbance by the government. It is therefore difficult to bear the sudden appearance of parishioners from the WBC. They are known to carry large, antagonizing posters while singing protest songs. This loud environment is a deliberate means to inflict pain upon the existent sorrow of the mourners. The confrontational presence of the WBC is an interference on the family's ability to mourn and show religious respect to the deceased. Showing proper grievance and respect becomes difficult while internalizing hate channeled from an external source. There should be a rational means to properly commemorate the deceased and preserve peace throughout the service. State and federal regulations should act in the family's best interest to protect their privacy and emotional security. Moreover, a funeral protest is an exploitation of a family's private emotional distress. For the duration of the funeral, the property on which the ceremony is held becomes a privately used domain. Unless stated, public access to the funeral of a soldier is undoubtedly limited to those who were invited or were close with the deceased. Attendees of the funeral would naturally assume that privacy needs to be respected. A funeral protest would be a violation of the mourners' privacy. I cannot accept a funeral as a proper forum for the formal declaration of a group's beliefs. Normally, we think of a funeral as an event to commemorate the particular individual who passed away and not as an event for public use. It seems as though the WBC has used every military funeral as a chance to verbally attack or privately harass the deceased for the individual's orientation. This is by no means a protest but rather a public display of discrimination. Moreover, funerals do not capture the broad audience that a protest is expected to provideAlthough the First Amendment allows us to share our opinions in a democratic society, should free speech allow a forum that is open to hate? We express ourselves through an unlimited array of media, whether it is through the Internet, our papers or our own opinions. The WBC can indeed make a public case for their beliefs just as any American has the right to do. However, they have argued for their anti-gay beliefs at the funerals of American soldiers, a delicate setting that demands respect and morality. Overall, Snyder's legal battle against the WBC was a struggle for empathy. As would any individual, Snyder defended his emotions when an event challenged the nature of his conscience. He sought compensation for a personal loss that was ultimately propelled by an intuitive search for justice.Maintaining the framework of our democracy comes with both a legal application of the law and a humanistic approach to society. Although the Supreme Court upheld an accurate interpretation of the First Amendment, they should, perhaps, also consider preserving the ethical values by which we live. The WBC constitutes the tiniest fraction of our nation. The court case acts as a reminder of the freedoms and righteous causes that we truly value in our society.
(03/15/11 4:00am)
Humanist club requires initiativeIn response to your article "Atheists on campus require support" (Forum, March 8):When I came to Brandeis last semester, I had just left Orthodox Judaism and was specifically looking to be active in the Brandeis Humanists. It turned out that the club was about to peter out. Several of us managed to arrange a movie night and a trip to Harvard University to hear [author] Sam Harris speak there. Unfortunately, those events seemed to be the last I have heard the Humanist Club arranged. The Brandeis Humanists need people to arrange weekly club meetings so that future events can be arranged. I think once somebody takes the initiative to do that, the Humanists will be able to build a strong campus presence. After all, other humanist clubs at colleges around Boston have been able to foster strong communities while promoting reason and spirituality (as well as challenging faith-based concepts). -Baruch Pelta (GRAD)Editorial comments disappointingTo the Editor:Due to the selective quotation of Boston University: Students for Justice in Palestine's letter to BU: Students for Israel-the topic of Elizabeth Stoker's column-we at BU-SJP believe it worthwhile for Brandeis' campus audience to hear from us directly. BU-SJP wrote a carefully crafted and principled response to BUSI, outlining why we rejected BUSI's call for a discussion and dialogue and chose instead to resort to building a mock apartheid wall. The basic point is: We are far past the point of debate and discussion. In the 1980s, when campus activism ignited over [then-President Ronald] Reagan's continued support for the white apartheid regime in South Africa, no one would have thought, much less suggested, that anti-apartheid activists stop their demonstrations on campus and sit down with white racists to evaluate the merits of the apartheid regime. However, we at SJP are being asked to do this exact thing here. BUSI's willingness to debate and discuss the Israel-Palestine issue is a ruse-not unlike the 'peace process' to which we have all been 'committed' for 17 long years. It is a stalling tactic designed to ensure that Israel remains immune from criticism on campus and, therefore, allowed to continue its occupation and expropriation of the West Bank and Gaza. We at BUSJP have made a moral and tactical calculation not to take part in the ruse to divert campus attention from the real issues at stake. Nevertheless, BUSJP are willing to have a forum to discuss and debate these issues provided that BUSI take a stand for the legitimate political and human rights of the Palestinians and act in accordance with such a stance by opposing the now 4-decade- old Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. We wait anxiously for BUSI to take up our offer and stand on the right side of history. Until then, we at BUSJP will continue to agitate on campus for an end to Israel's apartheid and occupation regime, without the hindrance of a never-ending dialogue. -Tyler Cullis The writer is a member of Boston University Students for Justice in Palestine.
(03/08/11 5:00am)
While many of us were parked on our couches watching reruns of House or Sex in the City over February break, 17 Brandeis students embarked on a journey to explore religion and culture in beautiful Rome. Led by the Rev. Walter Cuenin, the Catholic chaplain on campus, the students traveled all the way to Italy to visit marvelous sights ranging from antiquity to present day. The idea for the 7-day voyage came from Cuenin when he arrived at Brandeis, and the trip has taken place each February for the past four years. It is open for all students to apply during the fall, and participants are chosen by Cuenin on the basis of having an equal number of men and women and students of different ages. The lucky chosen ones receive the coveted ticket to Rome. "The trip is centered around Rome, the center of Catholic origins," explained participant Janette Mynette '13."In a way, it's like Birthright," Mynette said. Birthright, a Jewish foundation funded by philanthropists and the State of Israel, sends young Jews on a 10-day trip to Israel for free in order to solidify their Jewish identities and explore their Jewish roots."This is my Birthright-Catholicism type trip," Cuenin said. "For the Catholic students, I wanted them to see the roots of their faith. For everyone [on the trip], I wanted them to see the great influence of Greco-Roman culture [on the world]." "For me, this was a great opportunity," Mynette said. "At Brandeis, I always question my faith. This gave me an opportunity to pray and meditate and recharged my spiritual life." To help fund the expensive trip, Cuenin raised money from local parishioners and donors. The students also had to pay $600, a relatively small sum for such a trip, which included food costs and room and board. The group stayed at the iQ in Rome, a four-star hotel complete with vending machines stocked with bottles of wine for a small cost of 5 euros. The group toured a variety of places from Rome, the holy city of Catholicism, to Assisi, the birthplace of St. Francis and the Franciscan Religious Order. In Rome, the travellers saw great ancient ruins including the Colosseum, the Roman Forum, the Pantheon and more. They then toured Vatican City, where they experienced an explosion of history and culture: St. Peter's Square and Basilica, the Vatican Museum and the Sistine Chapel.Despite the Catholic theme of the trip, the group included two Jewish students."I did it as a trial run; I want to expand the trip to include more people," Cuenin explained. "When you are with someone from another faith, you learn you are connected, even though you are different," he said. David Azer '11, one of the two Jewish students involved in the trip, chose the trip after being approached by Cuenin and seeing the irresistable itinerary and unbelievably low price."I'm really glad I went. As a Jewish person, I felt really comfortable. People were very willing to answer questions. I could definitely sense the spiritual energy of the place." The group was fortunate enough to receive a blessing from the Pope during Mass at St. Peter's Basilica, which aired on live television."I'm not sure how many people there were; maybe 1,000," Azer said. "People speaking all kinds of languages: people from the English-speaking world, Spanish-speaking countries and Chinese-speaking people.""There was an awareness that, although we came from different countries, we're all connected by our faith," described Cuenin. "To be with so many different people is amazing."The group also discovered the diversity within Catholicism-the different strata within the sect. "A lot of people don't understand that there are different dimensions to Catholicism," Mynette said. "Within the Catholic Church, there are so many different orders of Catholicism-that was enlightening to me," Azer remarked.The trip did not answer all questions, but it allowed students to ponder their religious identities and begin to explore different issues of religion and faith. "I still have questions, but I did take time to be connected with God," said Mynette. "When you are away from school, away from family, away from home, it allows you to investigate life from a very different perspective."It seems, however, that what the participants on the trip most appreciated was the incredible bonding that took place. "Most of us did not know each other before. But now, we feel like a community," Mynette said. "I think I took with myself the relationships I made on the trip more than Rome itself," Azer said.Though the trip is over, the group has returned with new relationships and panoramic views that will hopefully continue to impact them."I'm going to tell people about it and encourage people at Mass to go," assures Mynette. "It was more incredible than I could handle.
(03/08/11 5:00am)
I am an atheist. No, I am not morally askew because I don't follow a religion. I'm not in need of guidance. And I'm not interested in dissuading anyone from his or her own beliefs. However, I am becoming more and more aware of the isolation other members of this minority must feel on the Brandeis campus where the presence of religion is so strongly stated.Contrary to what is commonly perceived by outsiders, Brandeis is religiously diverse and the University attends to all of these religions graciously. With an interfaith chaplaincy, it would be difficult to make the argument that Brandeis doesn't make every effort to welcome every faith. However, my issue isn't with the actual presence of religion on campus. Rather, my issue is with the lack of community for the nonreligious. Nearly a year ago when I discovered I had been accepted to Brandeis, I gave little thought to the school's large Jewish population. I never anticipated that I would regret the absence of a community when surrounded by individuals who habitually come together to participate in their faith. Arguably, this strong presence of religion is inconsequential if the nonreligious had a community of their own to retreat to. However, as of right now, this society doesn't exist. What makes the Jewish population on this campus so overwhelming is the united community these individuals have and the numerous organizations that have sprouted from this community, including the Brandeis Orthodox Organization and the Brandeis Reconstructionist Organization. Similarly, other religions have the Muslim Student Association, and Catholic Student Organization. Atheists on campus do have the Brandeis Humanists club, a club which contends that students can lead "fulfilling and meaningful lives without the influence of religion." Given that, theoretically, we have the potential of a community, what is preventing atheists from finding their niche on this campus?Perhaps it's the stigma and judgment still associated with atheism in our society that prevents people from openly acknowledging their beliefs. When taking into account the ever-increasing religiosity of our country, especially apparent in political issues, atheists are some of the most distrusted members of society, as corroborated by a 2003 study by the University of Minnesota. In a corresponding 2006 study, also conducted by the University of Minnesota of 2,000 random candidates, 39.5 percent believe atheists do not share their idea of the American society. Understandably, atheists negate the core religious structure of our country-they marginalize themselves. Even now, the Boy Scouts of America have barred atheists or agnostics from becoming members or leaders in their organization. In a similar case of discrimination, the nowretired Chief of the National Guard Bureau Lt. Gen. H. Steven Blum openly condoned the disparagement of atheist soldiers because, as they have no religion, they don't have freedom of religion. The presence of a strong secular community can help individuals cope with the discrimination and difficulties of living as an atheist. With the inability to come together in a mosque, temple or church, atheists forego the social aspects that are found in religious congregations. While atheists don't need the texts, traditions and customs of a religion, the community sense of religion is a feature that is both desirable and recommended for the nonreligious. As creatures that naturally search for belonging, atheists can benefit from the psychological support and comfort of a community. But is it even possible to unite people on the basis of non-belief? The recent increase of secular groups on college campuses demonstrates that it is. According to the Secular Student Alliance, secular organizations have increased by 43 percent from 2009 to 2010. Moreover, the number of SSA-affiliated groups on campuses has risen from 159 to 225 in a year with chapters at prominent colleges, such as Stanford University, Yale University, Northwestern University, the University of Chicago and Harvard University. Whether there simply are more nonreligious college students or because more are coming forth and partaking in these secular organizations, this increase indicates that students are forming communities to support each other and their shared beliefs. It is just as important for students on this campus to showcase their non-belief as it is for the Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus or Buddhists to declare their belief systems. While the Brandeis Humanists club exists, it seems to lack a significant presence on campus. The isolation of this minority is only felt if there is no support system or community in place. Certainly, the current membership of this organization does not reflect how many individuals on campus consider themselves nonreligious. However, this group is just a platform for coming together and discussing our beliefs and non-beliefs. Our essential task is to vocalize our doubts and ideas in an intellectual forum because there is strength in numbers. Congregating under a common identity where we can each affirm that we are not the only atheists or agnostics on campus is the start of a successful secular community.
(03/08/11 5:00am)
Last Monday, I came across a link on a news site that intrigued me. The headline read, "Students For Justice in Palestine at Boston University Need Your Help!" Being a helpful person, I looked into the story, and found a blog post belonging to the Students for Justice in Palestine at Boston University, which detailed an e-mail exchange between their organization and a group they described as "campus Zionists." "Below," read the post, "is a threatening e-mail that BU SJP received and its response." "To Whom It May Concern," began the supposedly threatening letter, "It has come to the attention of the Boston University Students for Israel (BUSI) that next week is Israeli Apartheid Week and that in recognition of this Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) will be constructing a mock 'wall' on campus. It is our concern that such a demonstration will only serve to sensationalize and simplify a most complex, nuanced, and profoundly serious situation. This will only inflame emotions, and incite hatred."So far, I didn't feel particularly threatened. I wondered what BUSI had in mind, if not the construction of a mock wall, to bring the conflict between Israel and Palestine to the attention of Boston University students. My question was answered soon enough: "It is our suggestion that SJP refrain from constructing such a structure and from sensationalizing the Arab-Israeli conflict. In place of this mock wall BUSI suggests that members of SJP and BUSI stand side-by-side next week to promote an organized forum for discourse between all parties!" The suggestion put forth by BUSI seemed more than reasonable to me. After all, while demonstrations certainly have their place in any social movement, I believe that debate and discussion are far more constructive and have a perfect place in an academic setting. Yet, the BU SJP did not agree with BUSI or their perspective on the construction of the mock wall. In fact, they responded a little less graciously. "To BU Students For Israel," their response began, "Our original plan for Israel Apartheid Week did not include building a replica of the Apartheid Wall. But after receiving an email threat and hearing that members of BUSI complained to [the Student Activities Office] about a wall we had not discussed, we decided to construct one." I recalled, upon reading that, the realization that Isaac Babel had upon witnessing a pogrom in Czarist Russia: "My world is small and ugly." It disturbs me deeply that the conflict between Israel and Palestine has been reduced to a war of spite here in the United States, especially on college campuses, which should be hotbeds for intellectual discussion and debate. What SJP decided to do was disappointing, but not unprecedented-Anna Wintour, the editor in chief of Vogue, once sent roast beef sandwiches to members of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals who protested the practice of wearing fur, for example. Yet, having reduced what should be a very involved consideration of a multifaceted issue to a hateful, spiteful competition is to reduce the import of the issue to that of a catfight between animal lovers and fashion designers. The sheer volume of lost human life and prolonged human suffering due to the conflict between Israel and Palestine should be evidence enough that it deserves well thought out discussion. A remaining point of concern is the fact that SJP felt comfortable categorizing the profoundly polite and sensible correspondence from BUSI as "threatening," despite the inclusion of this line in the original BUSI letter: "We would like to emphasize that we are not demanding that SJP refrain from expressing the substance of your opinions. In fact, we are demanding nothing! We recognize your right to freedom of speech, and to express your beliefs by any peaceful means that you determine to be appropriate." Calling them "campus Zionists" is perhaps the kindest action SJP took toward BUSI-though it can be expected that pointing this out will only result in false accusations of "crying anti-Semitism." If the discourse surrounding Israel and Palestine has degenerated into immaturity and spite in the academic institutions of the United States, I shudder to think of what the situation must be in states nearer to the conflict. It seems that any disagreement can now be branded a threat, and any objections to various methods of protesting labeled as attacks. Rarely do I maintain optimism when it comes to the affairs of states, but in this circumstance-here, in this country, in this region, in the world of academia-I really did think we could do better.
(02/08/11 5:00am)
The Department of Public Safety, in conjunction with the Office of Students Rights and Advocacy, a function of the Student Union, held an Eat and Greet last Thursday. The event aimed to provide a forum for dialogue between the student body and the University Police, explained Director of Public Safety Ed Callahan in an interview with the Justice."The purpose of the event is to help ameliorate the relations with the student body as well as with the Police and the Public Safety Department," explained OSRA member and coordinator of the event Ariel Glickman '13 in an interview with the Justice.In attendance from the Department of Public Safety were Callahan and Associate Director Bette Reilly. Director of Student Rights and Community Standards Dean Gendron also attended.Approximately two dozen students attended the event. Representatives of the Student Union, Brandeis Escort Service and Brandeis Emergency Medical Corps were also present. This event was the first in a series of several events that will be held jointly with the Student Union and the Department of Public Safety. This series of events comes at a time when Public Safety believes that it has received negative attention from the student body, particularly following the interaction between police and students on the night of Pachanga last fall, explained Callahan in an interview with the Justice. Callahan said in an interview with the Justice that "it would be good to establish or re-establish communications with students, . especially since there were situations that occurred during the fall semester."Callahan added that the events of last semester were "the impetus to conduct several other events" that would be planned by the Student Union and Public Safety."We had some situations as a result of Pachanga, not specifically Pachanga itself, . and then some students formed some stereotypical attitudes of the police without sharing or knowing information that [the Brandeis Police] have about the situation," said Callahan in an interview with the Justice.Throughout the event with students, Callahan stressed that he believes that the Brandeis Police are "amicable," and that they are not primarily a disciplinary force. "We are here more to educate than we are to enforce. . One of our main jobs is to mentor people," said Callahan. He further assured students that "arrest is not the norm on campus." He added, "The balance of security and safety and individual freedom is very much a concern. The University wants you to have an exorbitant amount of personal freedom but on the other hand we rely on you to lock doors and not let people into residence halls behind you."Callahan added that University Police often contact representatives from the Division of Student Affairs in order to discuss the best methods of handling incidents involving students and the police. This Thursday, Public Safety and the Student Union will cosponsor a game night, and police officers will be in attendance playing video games, pool and ping-pong with students in the game room. The police force currently consists of 15 patrol officers and five sergeants.Reilly said in an interview with the Justice that her department is looking to cosponsor a Thirsty Thursday at The Stein. Similarly, events-although not yet planned-may be titled "Coffee, Cops and Donuts"and "Party with the Police." These would potentially take place at the end of March. According to Reilly, previous efforts to engage students with the police have failed. For example, she mentioned ice cream socials and officer liaison programs held several years ago that "flopped."This time, however, Reilly is optimistic that the events will succeed because Public Safety is now working with the Student Union. Senator for North Quad Shekeyla Caldwell '14 attended the event and wrote in an e-mail to the Justice, "I found the event with public safety to be a beneficial experience for Brandeis students because I can now put a face [to] the department and begin knowing the people within the department on a personal level."She added, "Building a relationship with those in charge of your protection is much more important and useful than most students would initially believe."Head Coordinator of the Brandeis Escort Service and Executive Senator Abraham Berin '11 said in an interview with the Justice, "The event was a positive step forward in the relationship between the police and the student community."Editor's note: Ariel Glickman '13 is a member of the Justice Copy staff.
(02/08/11 5:00am)
Newspaper mischaracterized BunisTo the Editor: I want to thank the Justice for your front-page article on Feb. 1, 2011 announcing my new role as chief of staff. It is a thrill to find myself back here at my alma mater so very many years (as the cartoon on page 10 made clear) after my graduation. But I feel that I should set the record straight on one point. I did not, in fact, found the Jewish Repertory Theatre. Someone else with the name David Bunis did that, and although it looks like a great project, I cannot take any credit for it. And for that matter-and for anyone Googling my name to learn more about me-I am not the David Bunis who lives in Buffalo, N.Y., the David Bunis who wrote A Guide to Reading and Writing Judezmo or the David Bunis who wrote to boatbanter.com looking for swim platform support brackets for his houseboat. The truth is, I haven't been to Buffalo since my cousin Barry's wedding, I can't speak or write Judezmo and I don't have a houseboat. In all seriousness, though, I appreciate your interest in my return to Brandeis, and I sincerely hope that your readers will feel free to stop by my office and introduce themselves. My door is always open, and I am looking forward to working with all of you. -David A. Bunis '83The writer is the University president's chief of staff.Cigarette bans can be successfulIn response to your article "Cigarette bans promise to be ineffective" (Forum, Feb. 1):Actually, smoke-free campus rules have been very effective, and are often suggested and enforced by the students themselves. Quite a few of the colleges and universities in Minnesota have gone smoke free. The latest was Southwest Minnesota State University in Marshall, Minn. -Robert Moffitt The writer is the communications director of the American Lung Association in Minnesota.
(02/01/11 5:00am)
Enter the long and confusing maze within the science complex. Amid the high-tech corridors, the hum of the busy laboratories, the organized chaos of wires and complicated machinery, Prof. Lizbeth Hedstrom (BIOL) can be found conducting research, tucked away in a place where many never venture. In December 2010, The American Association for the Advancement of Science Council, a nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing science around the world, selected a new group of AAAS fellows. Included in the group of fellows is Hedstrom, chosen for her scientific research that could have an important influence on greener chemistry and new ways to make antibiotics. Individuals will be awarded special rosettes and certificates at the Fellows Forum, which will be held on Feb. 19 during the AAAS annual meeting in Washington, D.C., as a form of recognition for their outstanding accomplishments and contributions to science. "I'm interested in how enzymes work," Hedstrom says of her research. Hedstrom's focus on enzymes, biological catalysts that influence the rate of reactions, is due to the fact that biochemistry is so largely dependent on enzymes, according to Hedstrom. Hedstrom's team researches the way in which enzymes function, how other small molecules interact with them and how scientists could engineer better and more useful enzymes. While Hedstrom says that there is no specific part of the research that is unique, she says it is the entirety of her research that is being recognized by the AAAS. Comparing the honor to a lifetime achievement award, Hedstrom describes the award as a recognition of all her work, spanning from her research and work at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of California, San Francisco to all of her contributions to science and technology that have secured her place as a fellow of the AAAS. Nevertheless, she says that she and her team of researchers have done some fundamental studies on what determines specificity, which consists of understanding how an enzyme chooses what it acts upon. "We are really doing a good job in designing some inhibitors, molecules that prevent other molecules from functioning properly," Hedstrom explains. The applications of Hedstrom's work "are limited by your imaginations," as she puts it. Her research aims to design compounds that could serve as both anti-bacterial and anti-parasitic drugs. Stressing research on a particularly puzzling protein whose mutation causes inherited blindness, Hedstrom and her team are devoting specific attention to studying the protein. "We are really excited about that," Hedstrom comments, hinting subtly at her optimism of the outcome. Hedstrom's research may also have important applications in green chemistry, she says. Her work has the potential to be used in the design of chemical products and processes that are not only safer but also more eco-friendly and cost-efficient. This can be achieved by building better proteins, an area in which she has focused much of her research. Despite being personally named an AAAS fellow, Hedstrom is quick to acknowledge how fortunate she is for her large research team, composed of talented undergraduate and graduate students, as well as postdoctoral fellows from Brandeis. "I didn't do any of this with my own two hands," she says, "All I do is sit back and type, [and] other people do the exciting experiments."A graduate of the University of Virginia, with a Bachelor of Science in Chemistry, Hedstrom, who brands herself the prototypical undecided undergraduate, says she was interested in a myriad of topics in school, not only in chemistry. Although the teaching in the chemistry department of the University of Virgina wasn't perfect, she says she still ended up in chemistry because she enjoyed it. "It was May of my senior year and I had nothing to do. I was walking in the hallway of my chemistry department and my favorite professor asked me what I was going to do and I said I didn't know," she admits. "He took me into his office, and he made two phone calls for me-one to Brandeis and the other to Penn State [University]. If that hadn't happened I would never had heard of Brandeis and would have never ended up here," she says. Hedstrom received a Ph.D. in Biochemistry at Brandeis in 1985. She then went on to MIT and UC, San Francisco for her postdoctoral work. In 1992, Hedstrom returned to Brandeis as a faculty member because it was "the best offer I had," she says. Affable, direct and obviously passionate about what she does, it is no surprise that Hedstrom was presented with the Louis D. Brandeis Teaching Award in 2007 for her oustanding teaching. When asked what she likes most about Brandeis, Hedstrom immediately recognizes the students. "The students are very talented, eager and ambitious," she says, mentioning her colleagues as well. "[Brandeis] is really interactive; you have people who will help you achieve your wackiest ideas." While being named an AAAS fellow was unexpected for Hedstrom, her work is well deserving. "It's wonderful to be recognized by your peers and it's also a great way to start the new year," she says.
(02/01/11 5:00am)
The University hosted a number of small liberal-arts colleges to discuss international sustainability initiatives and their implications at the One Size Does Not Fit All event that took place in the Shapiro Campus Center this past Friday and Saturday. Through a grant given by the Association of International Education Administrators, the Brandeis Office of Global Affairs was able to coordinate the One Size Does Not Fit All event, which emphasized the impact that small-scale institutions can have despite limited resources and financial commitments. According to the AIEA website, the organization was formed in 1982 to promote international sustainability, higher education administration on a global level and to establish and maintain international networks between forerunners of higher learning. Representatives from institutions such as Princeton University, Boston College and Vanderbilt University, came together Friday morning in an opening convocation titled "Understanding Sustained Global Commitments," to begin discussions on international sustainability and efficiency. In addition, sessions such as, "The Special Role of the Liberal Arts in Sustained Global Commitments" and "Partnering With Overseas Institutions," encompassed discussions about effective study abroad programs, building international relationships and faculty involvement. Bryan McAllister-Grande, the assistant director of the OGA and one of the coordinators of the event, said in a phone interview with the Justice that the purpose of One Size Does Not Fit All was to encourage question and dialogue between faculty members of various institutions on methods of promoting constructive international initiatives. In addition, McAllister-Grande commented that since Brandeis is a small-scale institution, it makes having conversations regarding such issues fairly easy. Additionally, McAllister-Grande noted that the Brandeis environment is extremely conducive to internationalization and global engagement because of the faculty involvement and history of the school itself. Daniel Terris, vice president of the OGA, said, "One thing that we would like to do at Brandeis is to find more opportunities for students who study abroad to integrate their experiences into their academic work when they return."Additionally, "we would also like to help and encourage the undergraduate students to take advantage of the experience and expertise of the graduate population here at Brandeis, particularly in the International Business School and the Heller School for Social Policy and Management," Terris said.Terris also explained that despite the strong relationships Brandeis has fostered between its student population and its faculty on an international level, there is still much to be done. "Within the next 10 years we hope to develop more sustained commitments in places of particular importance to Brandeis, such as Israel, India and other key countries," that will in turn strengthen the faculty-student bond, Terris said. Overall, "the AIEA Forum was a terrific success because it is a rare opportunity to be able to really sit down with colleagues who have similar concerns over two days and really explore in depth the ideas and best practices that are at the heart of international higher education," said Terris.-Dina Kapengut contributed reporting.
(02/01/11 5:00am)
Correction appended
(01/18/11 5:00am)
An article in Forum misspelled the writer's name. The writer's name is Rebecca Blady, not Rebeca Blady. (Dec. 7, 2010)The Justice welcomes submissions for errors that warrant correction or clarification. E-mail editor@thejustice.org.
(12/07/10 5:00am)
Last Thursday night, University President Jehuda Reinharz and President-elect Frederick Lawrence spoke to the senior class in the Rose Art Museum's Foster Gallery for an event titled "When We Were Seniors," a forum for the Class of 2011 to ask Lawrence and Reinharz about a variety of topics concerning their experiences in college.Planned and presented by the Senior Class Gift Committee, just under 30 seniors attended the event. According to Aaron Louison '11, the co-chair of the committee, the fact that Brandeis currently has two presidents presented a unique opportunity that he and the other co-chair, Jennifer Shapiro '11, did not want to pass up. "The point of the event was to be able to have seniors ask any question they wanted in order to learn more about [the presidents]," said Louison, "and to ask questions that many of us really need to know about ourselves." The first question asked was whether senior roommates had any impact on Reinharz's or Lawrence's thinking or development. Lawrence said that he had the same roommate his freshman, sophomore and junior years. Both served as residential advisors for their first 3 years and lived in the same building their senior year. "We got each other through a variety of crises," said Lawrence. "We spent a lot of time talking about careers-what he was going to be and what I was going to be-and we went through a number of different career paths together." When asked what career he saw himself pursuing after graduation, Lawrence, who graduated from Williams College in 1977, said that he went to law school because that was what interesting and "larger- than-life" people were doing, and it seemed to be the best path at the time. He also said that he would never have pictured himself in his current role."I would have assessed the likelihood of being a college president at zero," said Lawrence. "But living through my life, there were so many decisions that could have gone the other way." Lawrence said that at the time, he had dreamed of becoming a judge at some point down the road. He also warned the seniors "not to plan too far ahead, because you really can't see that far."Reinharz, who graduated from Columbia University and the Jewish Theological Seminary in 1967, shared that he was the first person in his family to attend college. He applied only to Columbia and was "somehow" accepted, but the transition was not easy for him."Today, we have orientations that are a week long, [with] staff running around you. I showed up the first day of classes on the Columbia campus and I looked around me and had no idea what I was doing," recalled Reinharz. "I had no idea I would get into administration or that I would have this job."Reinharz changed his major "four or five times," but he eventually settled on history. He explained that he took a total of 13 courses over the course of his senior year at two separate schools while maintaining a relationship with his girlfriend and teaching soccer. Looking back, Reinharz wished that he had been more involved outside of simply academics. When asked about their alcoholic beverages of choice in college, Lawrence recalled that on the occasions that he did drink alcohol he usually drank cheap beer or wine. He joked that he would have considered Rolling Rock a high-quality beer at the time. Reinharz replied that he rarely drank in college and is still not a drinker today. He then quickly added, "But we smoked all kinds of stuff."Lawrence reminisced about the days when the dorms were quiet at 11 p.m., he used a typewriter to type all of his papers, and cell phones smaller than bricks did not exist. "Without a cell phone, it meant you were on your own a lot more. . I spoke to my folks once a week on Sundays because the rates were lower." He also described a box of letters that his brother wrote to him during college, a possession that he treasures. Reinharz echoed this sentiment, saying, "In the old days, you treasured phone calls a lot more." Lamenting the loss of "old-fashioned" methods of communication such as letter writing, Reinharz added, "The future is going to write your biography one day, and what will there be? A bunch of e-mails?" Despite these feelings of nostalgia, however, Reinharz also credited students' all-around excellence in the modern day to the age of "instant knowledge.
(12/07/10 5:00am)
Counterprotest was necessaryIn response to your article "Don't fall for picketers' trap; avoid a response" (Forum, Nov. 23):I can understand the intent of Ms. Diamond's opinion. In a perfect world, everyone would hear the call to ignore the Westboro Baptist Church and isolate opinions like this until they die on the vine. Unfortunately, that idealized world doesn't exist. You aren't going to keep people from commuting down South Street on a Friday morning. This is one of the reasons they chose a weekday and not a weekend to protest outside of Brandeis. They will have a built-in audience one way or another. I also disagree that the solution in any case is isolation of The WBC's message. Isolation of that message only serves to condone it. If anyone is unfortunately miserable enough to buy into the church's message, then when viewed on its face with a lack of opposition, it will come out as clarion rather than insipid. Increasingly on the political stage, we've seen the result of attempted "ignore-to-marginalize" campaigns against the provably false accusations and opinions of a limited group of liars and spin-pushers. The result is that the members of the WBC embolden their base to accept the lies in the absence of presentation of the overwhelming truths out there. The lies then reverberate, and the end result by many is their acceptance as facts. When it then becomes expedient to expel those myths, they're hardened in the minds of the willing rather than exposed as they should have been in the beginning. There will always be a certain element that will wholeheartedly accept whatever lie fits the ill-conceived notions that they already hold dear. No amount of the truth will shake that. But we live in an age where to ignore is to tacitly accept as valid, or worse, as fact, the opinions of the ignored. The correct response to such despicable opinions is to address them. -Karl Clodfelter Boston WBC protest is exceptionalIn response to your article "Don't fall for picketers' trap; avoid a response" (Forum, Nov. 23):Ordinarily, I agree with the general sentiment of Ms. Diamond's remarks. However, the Westboro Baptist Church is one of the most universally reviled institutions in all of the U.S. Many have speculated that the WBC's appearances substantially benefit the causes that they protest (especially gay rights) because of a) hyperbole they use and b) the way that their protests unite and recruit counterprotestors, especially counterprotestors who might not otherwise have been likely to take a stand. The WBC's protests outside numerous high schools, for instance, have raised the profile of LGBT rights among high school students far more than gay-straight alliances alone could have.-Matthew S. Meisel BostonRev Cuenin's service is admirableIn response to your article "Chatting with the chaplain" (Features, Nov. 23):As a Brandeis alumna and a staunch atheist, I am so proud to have Father Cuenin as part of the Brandeis community. Even though I never spoke with him directly during my time there, I only heard warm descriptions of him from my fellow students and always saw him as a positive and respectful force in the often ugly world of religion. I wish him all the best and hope he continues to serve Brandeis for many years to come.-Amy Hoffman '10Foster positive discourse on IsraelIn response to your article "Lamenting the fractured condition of Zionism at Brandeis" (Forum, Nov. 16):Thank you for stating your ideas so eloquently. As a Israel History teacher in a Jewish day school and as a Brandeis graduate, I think that you speak for many of us who love Israel and see both its strengths and its weaknesses. I hope that you will continue to share your views and help us (modern Jews and Zionists) reshape the discussion on Israel to focus on the ideas of democracy so that people can see the values of Judaism that care for the widow, elderly and poor as governing values for a country.-Tamara Beliak '00
(12/07/10 5:00am)
Over the past week, I've read many different reactions to the latest WikiLeaks document dump. I've found the commentary on it both scandalous and thrilling and do admit to losing some sleep upon discovering WikiLeaks' fancy Cablegate, which lets you sort through cables based on their country of origin and classification.Of course, once I found this function, I rushed to read all the cables marked "Top Secret," figuring that section would provide me with the most earth-shattering news and mind-boggling stories about my country's diplomats. And then, in the midst of my mad rush, it occurred to me that my instinct upon reading the cables-which many in our nation undoubtedly shared-wasn't very unlike another website I had read before. In a moment of clarity, I realized that WikiLeaks was sort of like JuicyCampus for the government.Remember JuicyCampus? Around two years ago, this website was the subject of great controversy on college campuses. Just to recap: Created in August 2007 by Duke graduate Matt Ivester, JuicyCampus hosted a collection of forums unique to 500 individual colleges (Brandeis included) for users to discuss anonymously and explicitly the newest, juiciest and oftentimes vulgar and mean-spirited gossip. In November 2008, I urged readers of this newspaper not to visit the website:"Although college students created JuicyCampus, the Web site does not embody the goals and needs of students within a university setting. Free speech should not be taken for granted. In a society in which this right is considered an absolute, we must consider its limitations. We are obliged to curb free speech for the sake of our classmates' emotional well-being. Four years of college grant us the opportunity to take advantage of the various media that advance this right. We don't need to take it out on our peers.As college students who claim to positively influence our society, we should encourage free speech. But not in this twisted, libelous manner. Channel your first amendment right into a more productive form, not the profane gossip forums of JuicyCampus."Harsh? Perhaps. But at the time, the site really did ruin people's lives. It called them out by name and exposed their sexual lives and drug habits. Here at Brandeis, the forums had some students so distraught that one student initiated a petition to the administration to ban the website on campus. At the time, Dean of Student Life Rick Sawyer said that blocking access to JuicyCampus at Brandeis was under serious consideration-even though Brandeis had never before blocked any websites of similarly questionable nature. The problem solved itself when JuicyCampus shut down in February 2009 due to plummeting online ad revenue and the loss of venture capital funding, according to Ivester's press release then. Fortunately for many, the site that could have done good reputation damage ended up being a short-lived fad. While JuicyCampus lives on-sometimes fondly, sometimes with horror-in the memories of many college students who are still around to tell the tale, I think it's safe to say that once the site disappeared from our collective mentality, the desire to know everybody's dirty secrets for the sake of knowing everybody's dirty secrets disappeared as well.Now back to WikiLeaks, whose founder Julian Assange probably didn't intend to create a gossip forum for the world's diplomatic representatives. Such a thing would most likely be quite unproductive, considering a diplomat makes a living from being kind to and cooperative with other diplomats. Imagine if the world had access to a website that chronicled the secret lives and private conversations of the diplomats around the world! Wouldn't that be-Oh, wait.It's true that Assange's stated purpose-"to humiliate the U.S. government," according to Bloomberg News' Albert R. Hunt's letter from Washington published in Sunday's New York Times-reflects nothing more than his desire to exploit the functions of a good democracy. But gradually, after reading cable after cable of U.S.-Arab relations and discovering nothing particularly new and exciting (Persian egoism has affected international relations since Biblical times), I think the world has come to realize that WikiLeaks has done nothing but what it planned on doing. Having exposed many secrets of many states, Assange has created a global forum open to any ordinary person to simply humiliate the government.I wholeheartedly agree with the short-term result Hunt predicted, which, to the detriment of open, serious diplomacy among nations, "will be to discourage candor in cables." Why? Because it's just plain embarrassing for people who are simply trying to do their jobs to have a world full of critical citizens have a look a bit too far behind the scenes. Think back to the less significant stories posted on JuicyCampus two years ago. Despite their relative unimportance, at the time, the crucial thing was the mental health of our classmates. It seems that diplomats should deserve the same kind of respect-the ability to work unimpeded by global gossip channels toward a safer, more peaceful world.In the meantime, as long as it's up on WikiLeaks for everyone to see, I may just have to revisit the Cablegate's "Top Secret" classification. Good democracy is good democracy, after all.
(11/23/10 5:00am)
The ad-hoc Alcohol and Drug Policy Committee intends gain feedback from students by holding a town hall meeting, forming focus groups and providing the option for online feedback on its website, according to a Nov. 18 campuswide e-mail from Prof. Len Saxe (Heller), the committee's chair.According to its website, "The Alcohol and Drug Committee's goal is to ensure that Brandeis, consistent with its value-based mission, has policies to assure the safety of all students and an environment that promotes learning and growth." The website also says the committee will ensure "the health and safety of our students and the entire university community." In his e-mail to the Brandeis community, Saxe wrote that seeking student input is the "next phase" in the committee's work, and that the committee aims to present its final report by the end of this semester. Saxe wrote in his campuswide e-mail that the committee is consulting the Student Union regarding the town hall meeting. In an interview with the Justice, Student Union Director of Community Advocacy Sarah Geller '13 said that the tentative date and location for the town hall meeting is Dec. 6 in Salzberg Lounge. Geller described the basic premise of the meeting as "a forum to discuss . progress and . a [question and answer session] for the students about what's going on." In an interview with the Justice, committee member Heddy Ben-Atar '11, senior representative to the Board of Trustees, said that the town hall meeting is going to be held "because the committee is really interested in hearing student feedback about any kind of proposals that they'll put forth. The committee definitely feels like student participation in this process is crucial to any kind of successful outcome." Committee members who are affiliated with the Heller School for Social Policy and Management will conduct the focus groups, according to Saxe's campuswide e-mail. "All information from the groups will be shared with the committee confidentially and individual anonymity will be assured," he wrote in his e-mail.In an e-mail to the Justice, Saxe wrote, "Our goal is to collect student data [from focus groups] and hold the Town Hall before the end of the semester."The committee's website has the option for providing feedback. Regarding the online feedback option, Saxe wrote in his campuswide e-mail, "We are particularly interested in your perceptions of drug and alcohol issues on campus and your thoughts about University policy. Again, all information will be shared anonymously.""It's clearly not enough student participation in this process, but the committee is really working hard to kind of like get as much student participation as they feel comfortable with," Ben-Atar said. -Fiona Lockyer contributed reporting.
(11/23/10 5:00am)
The Office of Global Affairs recently announced that it will be accepting applications for a round of "small seed grants" to support projects focused on the "global dimensions of teaching and learning at Brandeis," according to a Nov. 17 on BrandeisNOW press release. The Office of Global Affairs awarded an initial round of grants in 2007 to 10 projects, according to Bryan Mcallister-Grande, the associate director of the Office of Global Affairs and the coordinator of the global fund. The projects, which received grants in 2007, were put into practice in academic year 2008, McAllister-Grande said. Those projects included the "Global Affairs Table," a forum for students and faculty to talk together about global topics, according to the BrandeisNOW article. Both Daniel Terris, director of the International Center for Ethics, Justice, and Public Life and McAllister-Grande said tha although no grants were given in 2009, the program was not deactivated. According to McAllister-Grande.now that people involved in the initial round of projects may have moved on from Brandeis, the Office of Global Affairs thought it was an appropriate time to provide more funding for the grants. Applications for the grants are due Jan. 31, 2011, according to the BrandeisNOW press release. Terris said in an interview with the Justice that the grants are available to any faculty member, full-time administrator or full-time graduate or undergraduate student. He said team applications are encouraged, adding that preference is given to applicants applying "on behalf of a department, unit, office, school club or program." Grants will be given to projects that will take place next academic year.Funding for the grants is provided through the budget of the Office of Global Affairs. McAllister-Grande said that the new round of grants coincides with the development of global learning goals for Brandeis students. A small committee of students and faculty, according to McAllister-Grande, is working to develop a set of learning goals that focus on world culture as part of a larger effort by the University to set overall learning goals for students. McAllister-Grande said that the focus of the grants this year will be on projects that address teaching and learning at Brandeis. "This focus comes from wanting to connect to these learning goals so that we're really focusing on the curriculum and the cocurriculum at Brandeis, and we're not worrying this year so much about overseas partnerships," said McAllister-Grande. Grant winners will be chosen by a small committee of faculty and staff, according to McAllister-Grande.Terris said that the Global Brandeis Fund is unique because it has a focus on global issues-specifically on bringing together international students and elements of Brandeis' curriculum. McAllister-Grande said that the fund is focused on building partnerships on campus and oversees which "enhance Brandeis' connections to the world."-Nashrah Rahman contributed reporting.
(11/23/10 5:00am)
Cartoon was inappropriateIn response to your article "Don't ban Four Loko; leave the decision to us" (Forum, Nov. 16):While I make no judgment on the content of this article, I am extremely disappointed at the cartoon the Justice chose to run next to it. It depicts a devilish male student pouring Four Loko into the drink of a female student in an effort to get her "BEMCo-ed." Considering the epidemic of date rape on college campuses, it seems wholly inappropriate to use the idea of young men poisoning young women as a topic for humor. It belittles the traumatic experiences many young women----even at Brandeis-have had to go through. Moreover, as far as I can tell, neither the article nor the incidents to which it refer ever indicate that anyone consumed Four Loko involuntarily. Rather than poking fun at a real incident, this cartoon goes out of its way to make sexual assault a gag. Rape culture works by making violence against women laughable. I sincerely hope that the Justice will take serious steps to avoid the perception that it promotes this attitude.-Jonathan Sussman '11State of Zionism is acceptableIn response to your article "Lamenting the fractured state of Zionism at Brandeis" (Forum, Nov. 16):There is an extremely disconcerting tendency to equate Zionism with full support for every policy of the Israeli state. Many of those who oppose Israeli occupation and colonization support the people of Israel and consider ourselves Zionists. Why does Zionism equal full support for every policy of the Israeli state? If you support the interests of the people of Israel, you would have to oppose Israeli policies of occupation and colonization, as they sacrifice peace and security for territorial expansion. This week seems to have shown that the Zionist dream is alive and well, and many people care so deeply about the Israeli people that they do not want to see them suffer for the sake of Israel's territorial expansion.-Matt Gabrenya '13Appreciate disabilities servicesIn response to your article "Disabilities services goes above and beyond" (Forum, Nov. 16):Fifty years ago there was no Brandeis Office of Disabilities Services and Support; there was no Americans with Disabilities Act, and there was no specific office on the campus that dealt with accommodating the unique requirements of my fellow students. And while there was an office of student affairs, there was certainly no one like Director of Disabilities Services and Support Beth Rodgers-Kay, who you speak so positively about. Your column and description of Rodgers-Kay's enthusiasm for her critical assistance gives this old alum an incredibly positive feeling about Brandeis. Kudos to Rodgers-Kay and kudos to you for being very public and upfront in saluting the services that she has offered you and other students in need. And additional praise is given to those Brandeis faculty and staff who understand and do what needs to be done. -Martin Zelnik '61
(11/23/10 5:00am)
Unlike high school, where teachers cling to the belief that students are chronically impressionable to others' opinions, college offers a platform for students and professors alike to discuss their ideas and opinions openly. However, the growing fad of excessive political correctness on college campuses is threatening the candidness of this platform and effectively muzzling academic voices. By threatening free speech at universities, we also eliminate the possibility of ever actually understanding the issues we're avoiding. Political correctness forms a dual reality that nurtures the gap between what we mean and what we say. Never have our words been so carefully chosen as to avoid controversy and discontent while encouraging artificial dispositions. According to a survey conducted in 176 colleges by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, 76 schools restrict speech that would otherwise be unrestrained off campus. Among those 76 is the University of California, Santa Cruz, which prohibits any speech that is disrespectful to others, like the disparagement of one's political views. Intellectual discussions should not be hampered by the possibility of offending someone. True, we should always follow normal rules of social decorum and common sense. But when talking about delicate issues, the classroom is the ideal place to have such discussions.Some universities, such as UC Santa Cruz, have wrongly instituted "speech codes." FIRE defines a speech code as any type of campus policy that punishes, regulates or represses speech that would be protected by the government. They consider the suppression of these fundamental rights on college campuses, usually as a result of extreme political correctness, as a violation of professors' and students' civil liberties.In fall 2007, Brandeis encountered one such violation with regards to an incident surrounding Prof. Donald Hindley (POL). In a course about Latin American politics, Hindley allegedly described to his class that Mexican immigrants are sometimes referred to as "wetbacks." An offended student complained and consequently the University responded with a letter notifying Hindley that he had violated the school's "Non-Discrimination and Harassment Policy." According to the policy available online, the school strives to "be free from discrimination and harassment on the basis of race, color, ancestry, religious creed, gender identity and expression, national or ethnic origin, sex, sexual orientation, age, genetic information, [and] disability." In the end, the Committee on Faculty Rights and Responsibilities determined that the administration abused its power and violated Hindley's academic freedom (Though Provost Marty Krauss overturned the decision and closed the case). While the intention of this policy is commendable, its execution in Hindley's case shows a gross miscalculation of the administration's interpretation of harassment. For these actions, the University has been put on FIRE's Red Alert List. According to the organization's website, the Red Alert List is a compilation of schools with "severe and ongoing disregard for the fundamental rights of their students or faculty members." Although FIRE claims on its website that it contacted University President Jehuda Reinharz multiple times, Reinharz has supposedly yet to reply once to its pleas to acknowledge the wrongful violations against Hindley.Taking a statement out of context where the professor was clearly attempting to educate the students of a historical fact and then proceeding to use that statement to penalize the individual indicates that extreme political correctness is unfortunately penetrating the membrane of this university. If Hindley had chosen to avoid using the word or any ethnic slur, the students' education would have been hindered, and the very real issues of nativism and racism would not have been discussed. That being said, our school shouldn't be written off so rashly for this one faltering incident of political correctness gone awry. Despite the reputation of being ideologically homogeneous, the invitations from various on-campus groups to Prof. Noam Chomsky, Prof. Bill Ayers and Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren show that the University is dedicated to upholding the academic rights of its faculty and student bodies. Knowing that Chomsky's speech would create controversy and that Oren's commencement address would cause tension but still allowing the discussions to take place indicates that we're not afraid to talk about these provocative and sensitive issues. When Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke at Columbia University in 2007, he caused the entire country to turn and glare at the school for inviting the bigot, anti-Zionist and known Holocaust denier to speak. However, the purpose of inviting the Iranian president wasn't to create controversy or to ridicule him, as Lee Bollinger, current president of Columbia University, did in his frank opening remarks at the event. The purpose was to ask the difficult questions and challenge Ahmadinejad about why he believes what he believes. Inviting the president of Iran is certainly an extreme example in rejecting excessive political correctness. However, the essential idea of having a discussion is the crux of a college classroom experience. Being politically correct doesn't eliminate the offensive mistakes we're trying so desperately to avoid; it merely masks them. By opening up the forum to discuss controversial issues of race, religion, nationality, gender, etc. in an intellectual environment, we eradicate the fear of offending each other and really begin to understand the issues at stake.
(11/23/10 5:00am)
An article in Forum gave the incomplete name of an organization. It is Brandeis Jewish Voice for Peace, not Jewish Voice for Peace. (Nov. 16, pg. 11)An article in Forum incorrectly referred to Israeli settlers' uprooting of Daoud Nassar's trees as "unwarranted action." The original term should have read "violence." (Nov. 16, pg. 19) An article in Arts misstated a character's occupation. Franz is a coachman, not a soldier. (Nov. 16, pg. 19)An article in News incorrectly stated that the Supreme Court decided to hear an amicus brief. The article should read that the Court decided to grant a writ of certiorari, meaning that the court will hear the case. (Nov. 16, pg. 3)An article in News gave the incorrect name of a themed week. Noam Chomsky's presentation was a part of Israeli Occupation Awareness Week, not Israeli Occupation Week. (Nov. 16, pg. 1)The Justice welcomes submissions for errors that warrant correction or clarification. E-mail editor@thejustice.org.
(11/16/10 5:00am)
Chomsky event walkout was unfairTo the Editor:Like many of you, I expected some sort of fracas at the Noam Chomsky speech. However, the staged and coordinated walkout by many students seemed rather tepid compared to the histrionics at the Gold-Goldstone event last year. At first, I considered the walkout as laughably ineffectual: Chomsky didn't seem to care, and many people who were sitting on the floor were able to take the seats of these impetuous dissidents. Moreover, the joke seemed to be on the protesters, who had waited for over an hour to get seats for an event they would ultimately walk out on. However, this got me thinking. Many students wanted to see Chomsky speak, yet the Sherman Function Hall reached maximum capacity, disallowing many students from attending the event. My Facebook wall was besieged by a cavalcade of disgruntled friends bemoaning their inability to hear Chomsky. By walking out, the protesters deprived approximately 50 neutral students of the right to see the speech, and, in my opinion, this was the most egregious effect of the protest.-Scott Evans '12Hosting Chomsky is inappropriate In response to your article "Chomsky to speak during Israeli Occupation Awareness Week" (News, Nov. 9):As an alum and as clergy, I find this event to both appalling and divisive. We need to work toward peace among our own community and those in the Middle East. Additionally, it was problematic to promote this event mere days after we commemorated the 10th anniversary of former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin's assassination. We need to foster a legacy of dialogue not inbred hate and distrust.-Rabbi Glenn Ettman '99Choose majors based on interestIn response to your article "Advertise the advantages of math, science courses of study" (Forum, Nov. 9):This article opposes the fundamentals of a liberal arts education. First of all, I do not believe there is such thing as a "lucrative major" as a college undergraduate. You are propagating a common misconception that certain majors are directly connected to specific careers with high salaries and that others are not. This is simply false. If you are a math or science major and expect your course of study to automatically lead you to a lucrative career, then you have a thing or two to learn about your college education. Your undergraduate education is just that--your education, not training for a job. By fulfilling any major, you learn to think, to write, to argue, to research, to interact with people; to generally become a more informed, reasoned and intelligent person. It is not Brandeis' purpose to train you for the career you will have in 5, 10, 15 or 20 years! The sciences are wonderful subjects to major in. So are the humanities, arts and social sciences. I am not trying to put down math and science majors, but I want to convey that your one-sided view in this article discredits lots of other amazing fields of study. The fact that you correlate Art History directly to unemployment and "financial insecurity" is disappointing and misinformed. You state briefly that "humanities majors are still crucial," but do not explain: why this is, nor to whom or what they are crucial to. Frankly, the steps you choose to take with your major are what make you successful, not the major itself. You ask, "Should American colleges put more emphasis on future salaries when helping their students choose majors?" No, they should not. All students have the power to decide what compels them to learn, and choosing a major is not the time to make students focus on their salaries later in life. We have very few opportunities to dedicate all of our time to whatever topic we choose. No one should try to remove the undergraduate college experience from that short list.-Jonna Cottrell '13Focus on content, not e-mail itselfIn response to your article "Reinharz's Pachanga e-mail was inappropriate" (Forum, Nov. 2):While this article highlights some interesting concerns, I think the space would be better served by discussing the actual content of the e-mail, not merely the fact that it was written. I urge the Forum section to take a closer look at the fact that the e-mail discusses this past Pachanga as an anomaly when there was, in fact, a similar situation in fall 2009.-Joanna Schorr '10The writer is a former editor in chief of the Justice.
