BINGHAMTON REVIEW Editor-in-Chief Contents
P.O. BOX 6000 BINGHAMTON, NY 13902-6000 EDITOR@BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
Founded 1987 • Volume XXXIII, Issue V Tommy Gagliano
Managing Editor Matt Gagliano Copy Desk Chief Madeline Perez, Harold Rook
Business Manager Joe Badalamenti
Social Media Shitposter Sebastian Roman
Editor Emeritus
Patrick McAuliffe Jr.
Staff Writers
Jon Lizak, Dillon O’Toole, Will Anderson, Spencer Haynes, Arthur O’Sullivan
TOP HALLOWEEN COSTUMES FOR 2020 PAGE 8 3 4 5 6 9 10
Contributors Sara Traynor
12 14
Special Thanks To:
15
Intercollegiate Studies Institute Collegiate Network
by Our Staff
Editorial by Tommy Gagliano Press Watch by Our Staff Who Are We Voting For? by Our Staff Get to Know Tom Quiter by Harold Rook Six Reasons Why Slender Man is Sexy as Fuck by Sara Traynor Why I’m Voting for Jo Jorgensen by Tommy Gagliano Queer-Coding Villains by Madeline Perez One-Trick Tenney & NY-22’s Other Candidates by Patrick McAuliffe Gaming Consoles: The Next Generation by Dillon O’Toole
Binghamton Review was printed by Gary Marsden We Provide the Truth. He Provides the Staples
TELL US WHAT YOU THINK! Direct feedback to editor@binghamtonreview.com 2
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
Vol. XXXIII, Issue V
EDITORIAL Dear Readers,
From the Editor
W
ow, I cannot believe I just finished production of my second-to-last issue as Editor-in-Chief of Binghamton Review. It feels like yesterday I was stressed because the SA fucked us over and moved us to a significantly smaller office with no way to access our old office to get our stuff… Now I’m stressed because the SA fucked us over and we don’t have any office at all. Now that we’re on Issue V, let’s revisit Issue I, shall we? We’re nine weeks into the semester and, despite the twoweek pause, we have not been sent home. As we have returned to in-person classes, and no one predicted that we would last longer than six weeks before the University shut down, I am officially declaring myself the winner, with my prediction that we would make it through the entire semester. Yay me! Our late October issue is usually our Halloween issue, but this year we’ve doubled up on themes. We will focus on both Halloween and the election—a somewhat appropriate mix, as the options for president are quite scary. On the spooky side of things, Madeline Perez takes a look at a shocking trend among the Stephen King novels she’s read. She claims that he gives queer characteristics to his villains, to create an additional sense of repulsion, paiting homosexuality in a negative light in the process. Sara Traynor also writes about a villain in Slender Man— more specifically, his sexiness. Of course we also continue with our yearly tradition of sharing the hottest Halloween costumes. It may be last minute, but you won’t want to miss the great ideas we came up with this time around! On the even spookier side, Harold Rook, Patrick McAuliffe, and yours truly discuss topics related to the upcoming election. Harold created a write-up of an interview he conducted with Tom Quiter, the Libertarian candidate for State Senate in District 52. Patrick also chose to focus on local elections, discussing the Southern Tier’s Congressional candidates. I explain my reasoning for straying from the two major parties, and voting Libertarian Jo Jorgensen for president. Eight of our staff members also revealed who they are voting for, and included a brief explanation of why. Don’t like being spooked? No worries. Dillon O’Toole wrote a basic breakdown of the upcoming ninth-generation video game consoles, meant to put you at ease rather than giving you a fright. I hope you enjoy this installment of Binghamton Review. Comments and questions can always be directed to editor@binghamtonreview.com. I look forward to seeing you again, for the last time, on November 18th.
Sincerely,
Tommy Gagliano Binghamton Review is a non-partisan, student-run news magazine of conservative thought founded in 1987 at Binghamton University. A true liberal arts education expands a student’s horizons and opens one’s mind to a vast array of divergent perspectives. The mark of true maturity is being able to engage with these perspectives rationally while maintaining one’s own convictions. In that spirit, we seek to promote the free and open exchange of ideas and offer alternative viewpoints not normally found or accepted on our predominately liberal campus. We stand against tyranny in all of its forms, both on campus and beyond. We believe in the principles set forth in this country’s Declaration of Independence and seek to preserve the fundamental tenets of Western civilization. It is our duty to expose the warped ideology of political correctness and cultural authoritarianism that dominates this university. Finally, we understand that a moral order is a necessary component of any civilized society. We strive to inform, engage with, and perhaps even amuse our readers in carrying out this mission.
Views expressed by writers do not necessarily represent the views of the publication as a whole. editor@binghamtonreview.com
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
3
CPampus resswatch “Free speech should not be used to push a political agenda” Colin Mangan, Pipe Dream, 10/15/2020 “On Nov. 14, 2019, the College Republicans and Turning Point USA (TPUSA) held a preplanned tabling event, displaying pro-gun signs.” Here we go again with the intentionally misleading narrative… College Republicans and TPUSA were tabling separately. College Republicans were handing out hot chocolate to promote their upcoming Art Laffer event. TPUSA displayed a number of posters, buttons, and other items, two of which contain gun references. I know we sound like a broken record, but as long as Pipe Dream keeps spewing bullshit, we have to keep correcting them. “Earlier that day, in Santa Clarita, California, there was a school shooting in which the gunman killed two students before shooting himself. Even after the news broke here in New York, the students chose to keep the pro-gun signs up.” The shooting happened only a half an hour before they set up. Presidents of both clubs said, on record, that they were unaware that a shooting had taken place—as would be expected, since they were busy and unlikely to check the news. “This crucial stipulation, in my view, is what led to roughly 200 students showing up to the Spine in order to protest the group.” Convenient how your “view” completely ignores the “there’s not that many [Trump supporters] but fuck em [sic] up anyways” message sent to a group chat of over 1500 students. “...when these student groups chose to continue displaying their signs, even after hearing there was a mass shooting and were well aware that these images may provoke a passionate reaction, they shouldn’t be surprised, or even complain, when other students respond to them — even in a group of 200.”
4
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
Written by our Staff
We know you don’t read the other campus publications, so we did it for you. Original pieces are in quotes, our responses are in bold.
“If you disagree with me, I’m going to beat you up.” I’m sorry, but if you truly believe that people who don’t share your opinion deserve to be harassed, and to have their property destroyed, by a group of hundreds, you are the problem. Not to mention the fact that your supposed justification for said harassment isn’t even an accurate portrayal of the event. “So, for the sake of argument, let’s assume that the First Amendment rights of these groups trumps University regulation.” It does. “Yet when Black Lives Matter protesters are assaulted by police, or detained without due process, these groups have remained silent, revealing the true purpose of these accusations and others like them across the nation.” Looting, arson, and assault are not forms of speech, and the people committing these acts are the ones being detained. “Conservative groups don’t really care about defending free speech rights, or at least the free speech rights of their opponents.” What a crazy generalization. There might be certain individuals that this applies to, but on a general level this statement is completely false. “...conservative organizations... [seek] to incite political tensions as they did last November... to take political conversations away from major issues and shift them toward the actions of individuals, who are framed as being representative of the entire political opposition (i.e. “the Left”).” Oh man, this is deliciously ironic. Using individual instances as evidence to accuse all conservative organizations of using individual instances to criticize the left? *Chef ’s kiss* “...this country is indeed divided. Not between left and right, however, but between students with a multicultural outlook and those who are more na-
tionalistic — two competing ideas of what the country should look like.” “Everyone that disagrees with me is a racist.” “The battle for free speech is the latest manifestation of the culture war, with students caught up in interpersonal conflict, calling one another every kind of “-ist” in the book...” Irony 2: Electric Boogaloo. “ Let me be clear that I, in no way, support the disruption of anyone’s speech, and I believe that progressive student organizations should avoid the temptation to lash out in the face of provocation.” Simply being in public is now “provocation.” “Right-wing news outlets mischaracterize terrorism” Seth Gully, Pipe Dream, 10/19/2020 “I can assure you some of the commenters on the articles believe that if the facts aren’t on your side, you should make new facts, make alternative facts or make some way to flip the narrative.” Oh, you mean like the way Pipe Dream has covered the incident on the Spine from last November?
Vol. XXXIII, Issue V
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
Who Are We Voting For?
WHO ARE WE VOTING FOR?
By Our Staff
B
inghamton Review is nonpartisan—as a collective, we do not support or endorse any particular parties or candidates. As individuals, however, our staff certainly have opinions. Here are the endorsements for President of the United States from eight staff members that felt comfortable sharing. Tommy Gagliano - Jo Jorgensen Best policies, mentally stable, and no sexual assault allegations? Sign me up. It also helps that Jorgensen is the most strategic option for New Yorkers who oppose the two-party system. I go into much more detail about my reasoning on page 10. Joe Badalamenti - Jo Jorgensen In his 4 years in office, Trump has shown through several incompetencies and character faults that he shouldn’t be re-elected in November. Aside from corruption allegations, Biden’s “centrist” policies look to be a return to big government policies of the Bush and Obama administrations. In addition, his physical condition makes it likely that Kamala Harris, who has the same deficiency in character as Trump, could succeed him to the White House. This leaves Jo Jorgensen and Spike Cohen as the best options. Patrick McAuliffe - Jo Jorgensen I voted for Gary Johnson in 2016. By the time I reached voting age, I didn’t see the two-party duopoly as something to automatically subscribe to. Since 2016, Democrats and Republicans have not nominated compelling candidates with policies I care about. Don’t try to vote-shame me; if third parties were abolished overnight, I would simply stay home on the first Tuesday in November. Jon Lizak - Donald Trump He is the only president in the last 50 years to even attempt to put America, and its people, first. He is a high T, high energy Chad, and a winner. He is probably one of the greatest Americans to ever live. I am not a slave to the corporate media establishment and I know how the world works. Libertarians are sooooooooooooooo cringe lmao. Madeline Perez - Joe Biden The way I see it, despite the bad and wrong, wacky, and quirky things Joe Biden has said and done in the past, I fully embrace his role as a puppet for democratic schemes. He seems like the best way to get Trump out of office, which is honestly his best selling point. I won’t get into why it would be bad to have Trump re-elected, because you probably already have some idea and I don’t have a lot of space to write. I like that Biden seems to have a plan to combat the “climate emergency” and can probably be bullied into promoting more progressive policies. Harold Rook - Jo Jorgensen Have you ever seen a presidential field that is so catastroph-
editor@binghamtonreview.com
ically terrible that you lose faith in mainstream political parties? Yeah, that kinda applies to 2016, but also to 2020. Want a candidate that actually cares about the issues? Do you want a candidate that wants to lower government intervention in your life, expand personal freedoms, and lower your taxes? Do you want a candidate that is socially progressive? Welp, Jorgenson is for you, and certainly the candidate for me! Sara Traynor - Joe Biden He’s the best chance we have of getting Trump out of office, and after watching Trump say that he’s the “least racist person in the room,” I’m convinced that four more years of his presidency will drive me to commit ritualistic suicide. Matt Gagliano - Jo Jorgensen Trump sucks. Biden sucks. Jorgensen doesn’t suck. It’s as simple as that.
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
5
GET TO KNOW TOM QUITER
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
Get to Know Tom Quiter, Libertarian Candidate for State Senate By Harold Rook
T
he following is an abbreviated transcription of an interview conducted over Zoom on October 14th, 2020. Harold Rook: “Tell us a little about yourself.”
Tom Quiter: “I was born a farm boy, always lived on some kind of farm. If we weren’t farming for business, we were farming for ourselves. Putting away our own food saved [us] a lot of money [and] allowed us to bring the house up to par… farming is in my blood. I was born with a condition called osteogenesis imperfecta… I’ve had over a thousand fractures by the time I was eighteen. I still graduated high school with an Advanced Regents Diploma on time. I was accepted to and went to Alfred State College for Architecture. Unfortunately, the accessibility wasn’t there for the curriculum, so, you know, after a year I said ‘to heck with it, I’m not going to keep this up if they’re not going to let me pass. So then I came home… and not being the kind of person to sit around and do nothing, I’ve always volunteered for my community, everything from helping the women’s auxiliary fire department… I was the vice president of the local co-op that we tried to get off the ground, to help local producers of goods sell their wares. I am on the board for the Catskill Center for Independence, they’re a nonprofit that serves those with disabilities… Mainly what I’ve been doing… is reaching out to individuals who have been failed by the system. A lot of people don’t understand that these systems we have here in New York sound nice, they sound like they help everybody, but they don’t… I find individuals who aren’t getting what they need… and I help them find those solutions outside the systems, or I help them work with the systems to get through them, because of how complicated they are… It takes very little to reach out to help some-
6
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
one, and our state fails at it constantly. They spend an awful lot of money… you spend all this money, and you get a very poor return, as far as the community is concerned. I also happen to counsel those with addiction problems that are around me. When our systems of punishment come down on someone with a problem like addiction, they get a stigma in our communities. The number one thing that’s necessary for people with these problems to heal and find their function and value in their community is to be accepted, and find a place.” Harold Rook: Who, or what, do you see as your inspiration for going into politics? Tom Quiter: “Probably my fifth grade teacher, Mr. Mason. He was very big in teaching us about the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, why our country was founded. I don’t know what his political affiliation was, but he instilled in us a responsibility for our communities, and what happens in government. We like to blame the government for everything, but it’s really our choice. We get to vote. It’s important that we pay attention to who we’re voting for, and what they’ve done. I would like to see our press release the voting record of every candidate for every election cycle. People need to be aware of what these people are doing and why.” Harold Rook: “Why should voters consider voting for you, for State Senator, as a third party Libertarian candidate?” Tom Quiter: “Well, they should consider voting for me for a few reasons. One, I’m a man of the community. That’s all I do in life. That’s all I’m about. Someone that actually wants to help everyone, not just a few people with money. As far as the third party goes, it’s an interesting situation. We have the right and the left… and the problem there is, that those are two
extremes, and there are a lot of people that are right in the middle… you really need more options, you need more people chiming in with different perspectives. More innovation, more discussion about the problems we have. With two parties, that just doesn’t happen. So why vote for me? I don’t want anything, I just want to help. That’s all I’m here for.” Harold Rook: “What should college students know when considering whether or not to vote for you?” Tom Quiter: “They should know that our communities are what’s important, and the current systems that we pay to help our communities are extremely inefficient; they spend way more money than what gets put back into the community. We really need more economic freedom.” Harold Rook: “You seem to indicate a lot about taking an active role in your community. As State Senator, what role would you play in both the legislature and your community? Will it change?” Tom Quiter: “My passion is helping people, so every free minute I have will be spent doing that. What we see with incumbents is, they give them a salary, and they’re only required to work six months a year. I work every day, no matter what. I don’t need to be paid to do that. So, as senator, I’m not going to seek endorsements merely to bring me money for my campaign, or for my personal glamour. I don’t have that kind of an ego. What I’ll be doing is what I’ve been doing on this campaign: reaching out to various groups, disability groups, marginalized communities of all kinds, local communities. I want to listen to everybody. What we find is that our incumbents in particular fail to do that. Our politicians need to be more connected with our communities… They need to build a large and intelligent team behind
Vol. XXXIII, Issue V
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM them, because one person can’t do everything. I’ve got thirty-five-ish volunteers… in the main campaign. My policy team is always hungry… There’s nobody that I wouldn’t listen to and there’s nobody that I wouldn’t talk to. I’ve said it a few times, I really want to be the most accessible candidate, and, if elected, senator out there.” Harold Rook: “What is the first thing you will do if elected into office?” Tom Quiter: “The first thing I would do is take that podium and talk, out loud, about the problems that I’m aware of in our communities, for those with disabilities, marginalized groups, you name it, and talk about how the economy is the way to drive that forward… The smaller farmer is at a severe disadvantage because the state is taking from our communities and giving it to the larger farmers. One of the things we’ve seen is that large dairy farms are heavily subsidized, and yet we’re dumping millions of gallons of milk every year. When our food system was in trouble because of COVID-19, we were dumping millions of gallons of milk. That doesn’t make any sense. The price of milk has largely stayed the same. I would seek a farm fresh New York initiative… if it’s made in New York, you should only have to follow New York guidelines… The USDA guidelines add on cost. District 52 is somewhere between twothirds and three-quarters agricultural land—something that can be very productive. Small farms are the way to do that. Farm-to-table is a good way to go about appropriately deregulating… it’s a good way to utilize resources we have in this district. That produces a higher quality product, that brings in higher price, that’s in high demand. There’s nothing about that that’s not good for our economy.” Harold Rook: “You mentioned before, actually a couple of times, that COVID-19 is playing a role in this. As State Senator, how would you handle COVID-19, and what do you think of Andrew Cuomo’s policies regarding it?” Tom Quiter: “Fining people during a
editor@binghamtonreview.com
GET TO KNOW TOM QUITER pandemic when they’re out of work is one of the first things they did… when New York rolled out it’s $1,000 fines for no mask and not social distancing, Mexico, their police would stop you, hand you a mask, and inform you of the situation. When you try to tell a large group of people what to do, only a certain percentage of them are actually going to listen. A percentage of them are going to rebel, that’s how people are. If you come down with force, you are going to guarantee that a fairly significant portion are not going to do what you’re telling them to do. But when you give advice, you’ll have a larger amount of people who will listen, who will take those precautions. I’m not a COVID-19 denier, I’m at risk. I have an aid, for physical things like cleaning… he was not advised until late April to use PPE… While at the same time the governor denied cargo ships full of PPE that were at the docks in New York City, because the FDA hadn’t given them approval. And not long after [Cuomo] stated advocating for cloth masks, which are not FDA approved… What should the governor have done here? Should he have said ‘no, we don’t want things that help,’ while also fining people for not having those things? Or should he have accepted it, and maybe gone against the federal government—which is what the state government is supposed to do in situations that are necessary— and let them come in? He didn’t even have to pay for it; it was donated. Another thing that really upset me was, our state government is very anti-gun right now, and when were running low on venthilators… [Cuomo] did not allow Remington, typically a gun company, to produce ventilators. Instead, he went on TV, and stated that he was going to use the National Guard… to seize PPE from upstate hospitals and facilities. That’s not how our government is supposed to act. He also did not allow distilleries to create hand sanitizer. Instead, he used prison labor. He shut down those distilleries, stopped them from adapting their business and doing something that would help, and made prison labor do it.”
Harold Rook: “How will you, as a Libertarian, handle Republican and Democratic colleagues?” Tom Quiter: “Well, I’ve already been doing that. They’re pretty easy to talk to if you see them as humans. We have some very good discussions. Libertarians are about having those discussions… I think it’s pretty easy to talk to people, I think it’s pretty easy to make sense if you take the time to do it. I honestly believe that having a discussion… will do more good than anything else.” Harold Rook: “Recently, it has been announced that Binghamton University is under investigation for issues related to freedom of speech. What are your views on freedom of speech on college campuses?” Tom Quiter: “It’s the same as anywhere else. It’s in the Constitution, read it! Everyone should have freedom of speech… everyone should have a voice, everyone should be heard, everyone should be represented…” Harold Rook: “Do you have any overarching message to provide to our audience?” Tom Quiter: “I do… we need more economic freedom. Our state is underwater, our budget is stripped, and by 2023 the feds won’t be able to bail us out. What’s the solution? We are the solution. We are all in this together. When we don’t address everybody, and when we don’t address everybody’s needs to have freedom to their own resources… that’s a suppression of our right to pursue happiness. Given the freedom to do what we see as right, most people do what is right. When it comes to the economic situation, we are the solution… Help your neighbor, help your community… Try not to let all the stresses that are handed down to us prevent you from being a good person, and doing what’s right.” For more information about Tom Quiter and his campaign, visit www.tomfor52.com.
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
7
TOP HALLOWEEN COSTUMES FOR 2020
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
Top Halloween Costumes for 2020 By Our Staff
NBA Player: Now more affordable than ever! Just buy a generic jersey and slap “Black Lives Matter” on the nameplate and BAM! You could be half of the league.
Coronavirus: The perfect costume for frat guys that like entering people’s bodies without consent.
Slutty Police Officer: With this trendy costume, both your looks and your knees with make people have to catch their breath!
Karen: If you are going to report every Halloween party for violating social distancing guidelines you might as well dress the part. All you need is that signature Karen haircut and you’re good to go!
Sexy Slender Man: See page 9.
8
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
Vol. XXXIII, Issue V
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
SIX REASONS WHY SLENDER MAN IS SEXY AS FUCK
Six Reasons Why Slender Man is Sexy as Fuck By Sara Traynor
H
ave you ever looked at Slender Man and thought, “Wow, that’s the most beautiful creature I’ve ever laid eyes on, I wish that someone would write a list with 6 reasons detailing exactly why he’s sexy”? If the answer is yes, you’ve come to the right place. If the answer is no, it better only be because you’d prefer an infinite list. Even if you don’t think he’s sexy (which I guess is fine, I mean, we’re all allowed to have the wrong opinion sometimes), I beg you to read this list and reconsider. By the end of it, you’ll thank me for opening your eyes and— more importantly—your heart. 1. His Height Though he’s usually portrayed as being in between 6 and 7 feet (yummy!), the official Slender Man wiki page says that he can reach heights of about 15 feet, depending on the situation. I don’t really know what “situation” would require him to grow upwards of 7 feet, but whenever I think of that smooth, pale face, I wish that it would be from being on a date with me. He would never have to lie about his height on his Tinder profile and then gaslight you when you actually meet up. “No,” Slender Man would never say, “I am definitely not wearing 3-inch platform shoes, you’re seeing things,” even though you’re totally not seeing things. Slender Man is a confident 15-foot tall gentleman with swagger. 2. His Face Slender Man has no mouth. This obviously has its pros and cons; for example, he won’t be able to constantly praise me for being the most beautiful woman alive, which kind of sucks (among other things). Still, it also means that I won’t have to hear him explain to me the plot of all 931 (and counting) episodes of One Piece,
editor@binghamtonreview.com
so I consider this a definite win. Jeff the Killer and his giant mouth would probably never stop talking about devil fruit. Slender Man? He’s stoic and silent. He’ll listen to you talk about your day and hold you in his long, bony arms until you fall asleep. Actually, do they sell Slender Man body pillows with the arms attached? Haha, just kidding. Unless? 3. His Style Have you ever seen this fine man in anything less than a sharp suit? God. I wish I had. Anyways, this man is constantly dressed to the nines, even while lurking in the woods. Call him what you will, but Slender Man is no scrub. Whatever the opposite of a scrub is, he’s that. What’s the word? Oh, yeah, it’s perfect. He’s perfect. According to the Slenderverse lore, it’s not entirely clear whether or not his suit is made of cloth or is just a part of his skin, which I think makes him even sexier. He can dress snappy for any occasion, whether he’s taking you out to a fancy restaurant or just sitting in your living room, being the perfect Creepypasta eye candy you’ve dreamed about since you were twelve years old. “But I liked Jeff the Killer,” I can hear you say in protest. “Why don’t you talk about how dreamy he is instead?” If you think this, then get out. You clearly have no taste. 4. His Body They don’t call him the “Slender Man” for nothing. He definitely has the
body type of Timothée Chalamet and the long, lovely legs of the Once-ler, two heartthrobs long beloved by many. I don’t doubt that he has some muscle either, what with all the running through the woods and eating people and all. This man has never skipped a leg day in his life; it shows, and we absolutely love him for it. What I wouldn’t give to see his towering, sleek silhouette in the corners of my vision, driving me to insanity and eventually leading to my demise. Whenever I see or even think about his gorgeous body, the term Slender sickness just becomes synonymous with love. 5. His Air of Mystery Picture this: you’re wandering through the woods after feeling an enigmatic feeling you can’t quite place, searching for answers in this mystery we call life. Then, suddenly, when you’re ready to turn back, he appears: the most sexily terrifying creature you’ve ever encountered. Who is he? Where did he come from? Where did he go? You don’t know. All you know is that he awakens something in you, something you never thought existed until now. He moves towards you—no, he doesn’t just move, he glides, powered by some otherworldly force. Do you want him to approach? Do you want to run away and escape to the safety of your home? Should you? You don’t even know. This is all that exists—all that will ever exist—this one suspenseful, mysterious, horrifying moment. Time is no longer relevant. Maybe he’ll kill you. Maybe he’ll be your boyfriend. Maybe he’ll do both. You have no idea, but whatever it is, you want it, need it even. Your heart races as he—Oh god. I’m writing fanfic again, aren’t I? My bad. 6. His Tentacles Need I say more?
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
9
WHY I’M VOTING FOR JO JORGENSEN
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
Why I’m Voting for Jo Jorgensen By Tommy Gagliano
O
n November 3rd I will go to my polling place in Binghamton, New York to cast my vote in the 2020 election. For president, I will see the option of “Joseph R. Biden / Kamala D. Harris (D),” and I will pass them over. I will then see “Donald J. Trump / Michael R. Pence (R),” and again I will pass. Finally, I will get to Jo Jorgensen / Jeremy “Spike” Cohen (L),” and I will make my selection for President and Vice President of the United States of America. I will not be “throwing away my vote,” nor will my vote be cast as a form of protest. Jo Jorgensen is simply the best option for me, considering both policy preference and strategy, and after hearing my reasoning, I hope some readers will discover that she is the best candidate for them as well. It is no secret that Donald Trump and Joe Biden are near-universally disliked. Both have significant flaws in their character and ability that make them undesirable before even considering their platforms and policy ideas. Trump and Biden are both in their mid-seventies, and they’re both feeling the effects of it. Biden’s mental decline is significantly more apparent, as his frequent inability to finish a thought or form a coherent sentence has many claiming that he is suffering from dementia. Seemingly every time he talks in front of a camera, at least one nonsensical remark comes out of his mouth. While Trump’s mind is undoubtedly sharper, contrasting his most recent debate performance to his debates from 2016 makes it obvious that he has lost a step since first running for president. Trump and Biden are also similar in that they have both been accused of various forms of sexual misconduct. While most of these claims have been denied, and none have been proven in a court of law, it’s still not ideal to have a president with such an abundance of allegations against him. The congruent complaints against the two major-party candidates don’t stop there: both have been labeled “racist” for things
10
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
they have said and done, both are wealthy and unaware of what it means to be in the working or middle class, and both are straight, white men (because that matters to some people). Simply because she doesn’t share the above features, Jo Jorgensen has superiority in character over the two major party candidates by default. The strength of Jo’s character goes beyond the extremely low bar of not being a mentally deficient alleged rapist, though. She has a Ph.D. in Industrial and Organizational Psychology from Clemson University, where she has worked as a Senior Lecturer since 2006. While I am of the opinion that the level of education and number of degrees one does or does not have has little to no correlation to that individual’s intelligence, earning a Ph.D. does show dedication and a strong work ethic. She is not a career politician, like Biden, nor is she running to boost her ego, like Trump. Jorgensen is very much a “normal person” with a “normal” career, who understands what it is like to be an average American. While I don’t claim to know what goes on inside her head, it seems to me that she wants to become president, not for personal gain, but to make our country better for everyone.
I am a registered Republican, so it should come as no surprise that I find Joe Biden’s policies to be extremely unattractive, and likely harmful to the country. Biden wants to increase the power and scope of government, hemorrhaging taxpayer money in the process. Though claiming at the first presidential debate to not support the controversial “Green New Deal,” his website says otherwise, stating “Biden believes the Green New Deal is a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges we face.” His environmental plan would cost a preposterous amount of money and would cause many industries to struggle, or go completely extinct. Additionally, while
“The only way my vote means anything, as a New Yorker, is if I vote for Jo Jorgensen, to help her and the Libertarian Party reach the 5% threshold.” Biden does not support universal healthcare, he does intend to expand Obamacare, a nightmare of a program that led to increased healthcare costs for many. Of course, to pay for all of these policies, more money would be required, which is why Biden plans to increase taxes in a number of areas. Under Biden’s plan, top earners in New York City and California would be forced to give up a whopping 62% of their paycheck—a revelation that appalled 50 Cent, as he “[doesn’t] want to be 20cent.” Biden has also refused to answer when asked if he would pack the Supreme Court with more [presumably left-leaning] justices, an awful proposition that reeks of petty bitterness and would set a terrible precedent for future presidencies. In general, Donald Trump’s policies align much closer to my preferences, but he too seems to be a proponent of big government, albeit in
Vol. XXXIII, Issue V
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM different ways. I appreciate his desire to increase jobs in the United States and agree with his cutting taxes and rolling back regulations to do so. When he interferes with free trade, though, he starts to lose me. Similarly, I like that he is willing to pull out of unfair international deals and agreements, citing “America First,” but I wish he would apply that same attitude to involvement in foreign countries and adopt an isolationist mindset, instead of interfering in Iran and increasing the size and funding of the military. (Space Force? Really?) Unlike Trump and Biden, Jo Jorgensen sees government as the problem, not the solution. While the two major-party candidates argue over what frivolous and ineffective programs they want to spend billions of taxpayer dollars on, Jorgensen seems to be the only one that realizes that it might be better to let people keep more of their own money instead, stating on her website “As President, I will work tirelessly to slash federal spending, make government much, much smaller, and let you keep what you earn.” Jorgensen also wants to end US involvement in foreign wars and bring our troops home, having the military ready to defend our country in the event of a threat. On the topic of healthcare, Jo supports a free market system, in which government intervention is removed and true competition is allowed to exist. With the resurgence of the Black Lives Matter movement following George Floyd’s death in May, criminal justice has become a hot topic. Neither Donald Trump nor Joe Biden have any plans or intentions to reform the criminal justice system in any meaningful way, but Jo does. She wants to decrease the federal prison population by decriminalizing drug possession and other victimless crimes (that often target racial minorities) and pardoning anyone convicted of said crimes at a federal level. She also intends to defund federal involvement in policing, end civil asset forfeiture prior to conviction, abolish no-knock raids, and end qualified immunity. Jo Jorgensen is the only presidential candidate on the ballot that unequivocally believes in freedom
editor@binghamtonreview.com
WHY I’M VOTING FOR JO JORGENSEN
and liberty and sticks to those principles consistently in every facet of her campaign. Now, surely some readers must be thinking that this is irrelevant, since the two-party system in the United States essentially guarantees a victory to either Donald Trump or Joe Biden. This is not necessarily true. I am not daft enough to believe that Jorgensen actually has a chance of winning the election, but becoming president is not the only way for her to be victorious in November. The Libertarian Party is playing the long game, and their next goal is not 270, but 5%. The Republican Party and the Democratic Party have a lot of institutional advantages over third parties, beyond name recognition. As major parties, they receive federal funding to assist with their campaigns. The Federal Election Commission’s website states that taxpayer money is used to “Match the first $250 of each contribution from individuals that an eligible presidential candidate receives during the primary campaign; and… Fund the major party nominees’ general election campaigns (and assist eligible minor party nominees).” The mention of “eligible minor party nominees” is important. Currently, the Libertarian Party is not considered one, but if they were to receive at least 5% of the popular vote in the 2020 presidential election, they would meet the requirements. Gary Johnson earned 3.28% in 2016; if Jorgensen can score an additional 1.72% of voters, the Libertarian Party would secure federal funding for 2024. It’s a small step, but an important one in working towards dismantling the two-party system. From there, the additional funding could be used to
increase awareness of Libertarian candidates, and maybe even get the 2024 candidate on the debate stage. In all likelihood, it will be a slow process, but not an impossible one. For voters that live in swing states, it may be wise to vote for your preference between Trump and Biden, but for voters that live in solid blue or solid red states, such as New York, California, Vermont, Massachusetts, Alabama, or Tennessee (among others), voting for Jo is the strategic move. If I were to choose the “lesser of two evils,” I would vote for Trump, but as a New York resident, it isn’t logical for me to do so. New York is going blue regardless; despite popular rhetoric, voting for either Trump or Biden would be “throwing my vote away.” The only way my vote means anything, as a New Yorker, is if I vote for Jo Jorgensen, to help her and the Libertarian Party reach the 5% threshold. I was too young to vote in 2016, but had I been born four months earlier, I would have voted for Donald Trump without a second thought. He was among my least favorite Republican candidates during the primary stage, but at the time I was eager to support anyone with an “R” next to their name. I do not think Trump has done a bad job, but he is far from my ideal presidential candidate. I will not be supporting him again in 2020. Jo Jorgensen is the strongest presidential candidate on the ballot in 2020, both in character and platform, and she is the best option from a strategic perspective. Rather than “wasting my vote” I will be voting for her on November 3rd, and I implore others, especially those that live in solid red or solid blue states, to do so as well.
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
11
QUEER-CODING VILLAINS
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
Queer-Coding Villains: Homophobic Undertones in Stephen King Novels By Madeline Perez
S
tephen King. I’m sure you’ve heard of him. Many of you have seen movies inspired by his novels. The quirkiest of you have maybe even read his books. For decades, our culture has happily lapped up Stephen King’s material like a stereotypical kitten does heavy cream, and we love it. American pop culture simply can’t get enough of the bloody horror, chilling tension, and humiliations of being a pre-teen that are just too relatable. The books are normally a guaranteed fun read, despite the sheer amount of times a male character will talk about the physical state of his balls or being super erect, which is just all the time. Yes, reading Stephen King sure is a fun time all around... except for when he, you know, uses gay scenes to portray his villains as more evil. Now, this “gay villain” trope was not invented by Mr.King; it was already pervasive within media at the time. For most of the pre-2000s, queer people existed in movies and television shows for three main reasons: serving as a villain, a punchline, or a victim of murder. Not to say this still doesn’t exist, it’s just that it used to be a lot more obvious. A lot more obvious. I’m looking at you, Ace Ventura: Pet Detective. Certain tropes, like the “Depraved Homosexual” and “Sissy Villian”, specifically targeting gay men were probably the most common; making a character psychologically sick and twisted because of their repressed “evil” sexuality, and giving a villain flamboyant, stereo-
12
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
typically “gay” characteristics to make them less threatening, more cowardly, and clearly differentiated from the protagonist. Making a villain queer was another way to justify them being satisfyingly punished at the end for their “bad behavior’. Queer-coding is a phenomenon best described as, “Well, we can give this character a bunch of stereotypical queer traits so as to heavily implied that they are gay but obviously we can’t outright say it because then this won’t be able to get aired and we’ll lose a lot of money.” Queer-coding villains is a huge trend in pop-culture, and some of the most clear examples are in content intended for kids—something that’s only barely started dying out. By doing this, movies and shows often create subconscious associations in the minds of viewers between “gay” and “evil”—and it’s been so heavily ingrained that it’s being done without the majority of people realizing it. Even if you don’t think you’re familiar with it, you probably are. Think of the flamboyant nature of Hades from Disney’s Hercules, the prissy traits given to Governor Ratcliffe in Pocahontas, the effeminacy of Jafar just as a whole, even Scar’s limp wrist! Hell, pretty much everyone knows that Ursula was directly based on the drag queen Divine (Wait, does Disney do this to all their villains?)! These things are done on purpose to “other” the antagonist and make fun of these traits. I only used a few examples, but if you look for it you will find this everywhere. Now, “What does queercoding villains have to do with Stephen King?” you’re asking, blissfully unaware of the true horrors of the world. Sit tight and strap in, babe, because the only thing worse than me relaying these scenes to you would be if you actually read them first-hand. Let me get one thing straight (haha): I do not think Stephen King is a homophobe, as is pretty clear from his support toward his daughter (who is married to another woman, for context). I also don’t think that these scenes can be excused, no matter how much the trope was a “reflection of the time” or how absolutely-drugged-outof-his-mind Stephen was when he wrote these novels. They’re clearly meant to associate homosexual acts with perversion, sickness, and to evoke a sense of disgust in the reader. I will start out with the novel most fresh in my mind, The Stand—and as someone who doesn’t necessarily abide by all traditions of the Jewish faith, you know I had to read the uncut edition. Keep in mind, this version has about 350 extra pages of arguable importance, the excerpt I’m about to discuss being one of them, so if you didn’t read that version you’re not going to remember this fun bit. Probably the most disturbing part of the book was when one of the most insane and murderous villains, the Trashcan Man, is sexually assaulted by a debatably less insane and equally murderous villain, The Kid (not an actual kid, just his quirky villain nickname). I won’t get into the abhorrent details, in which there were many, but it happens at gunpoint and may or may not involve penetration with said gun. This scene serves no purpose to the plot other than to
Vol. XXXIII, Issue V
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM associate predatory gayness with the mental disturbance and perversion of the character. This is used, by extension, to make the reader uncomfortable and disgusted—banking on them already having an uncomfortable unfamiliarity with gayness to play upon. Now, I’m fully aware that the fact that this scene is disturbing due to it being sexual assault and not the gender of the characters, but my point is that Stephen King would not have written an assault so depraved and abhorrent committed by straight characters. In his novels, it’s only repressed gay men who are capable of committing the most heinous sexual crimes. I wouldn’t normally have taken much note of this scene if it hadn’t reminded me so heavily of a similar scene in It that employed essentially the same trope. I’ll get to that later. On a positive note, The Stand features Dayna Jurgens, a strong and lovely Bicon (bi icon), as a heroine. Yes, while her one important scene ends with her promptly dying, it was very heroic—and there’s a lot of dying in that book, so I’ll make an exception. It (the book) has gained a butt-ton of popularity lately, something easily attributed to the recent movies. When I heard there was outrage about “homophobia” in the second movie, I was horrified, thinking they had actually kept in the weird homophobic scene in the book. Thankfully, this was not the case. What people were actually upset about was a depiction of a hate crime in which the character Adrian Mellon is violently beaten and thrown off a bridge for being openly gay, which later leads to his murder by Pennywise. You know, the monster who sometimes presents as a clown when he’s not busy pretending to be a myriad of childhood fears, including but not limited to: a big bird, a dead kid, a bunch of dead kids at once, a giant statue of Paul Bunyon, a mummy, a leper, Beverly’s dad, a teenage werewolf, Georgie, the creature from the black lagoon, a big eye, leeches, the shark from Jaws, Dracula, Frankenstein, a dog, and the moon. This is not a homophobic scene in the book or the movie because it does not mock or indignify the characters for being gay, but rather uses the unjust violence against them as a plot device to exemplify the unsettling “sickness” present in Derry, Maine, and how the monster “It” takes advantage of this. Other racist and control-fueled acts of violence are later used to further show how Pennywise thrives as townspeople harbor hatred and fear within themselves. My point is that it’s not homophobic. Also stirring up controversy around the movie was the film’s choice to make Richie Tozier gay and kinda in love with his good pal Eddie. While I don’t have a problem with them doing this, it felt kinda shoehorned in to possibly gain the favor of a queer audience desperate for representation without being explicit enough to scare away anyone who would have a problem with it. The “homoerotic subtext” critics argue was present between them in the book is really just parts where Richie uses jokes to try and make Eddie uncomfortable taken wildly out of context. Anyway, back to the point. Against everyone’s best interests, there is a part in the novel It where two of the side antagonists, teenagers Patrick Hockstetter and Henry Bowes, share an uncomfortable sexual experience from the point of view of Beverly, a little girl at the time, who watches, entranced, yet petrified. Patrick, who’s just really into killing small animals and his baby brother, was already established as a sadistic psychopath. This scene attempts
editor@binghamtonreview.com
QUEER-CODING VILLAINS to further instate his insanity by framing “gay actions” in a way that highlights his unfeeling nature and sick fascination. Stephen King seems to only present perverted sexual behavior in a queer context. Patrick dies almost immediately after this, partly as a way to punish him for that gross thing he just did. Henry, an aggressive boy who torments and eventually tries to kill our perky protagonists, is driven by a similar internal torment. By passively receiving the majority of a hand-job from his homie, the tone of the writing attempts to further establish Henry as immoral. The scene itself should not exist, given that, like the aforementioned scene in The Stand, it adds nothing to the plot besides fleshing out the inhumanity of these characters through queerness. Additionally, these characters are essentially young teens, and putting them in a sexual context like this is pretty yucky. As the readers know, this scene is definitely not the worst offender when it comes to that. No, I will not elaborate. One more example I’d like to touch upon is, you guessed it, the dog-man scene in The Shining. This example doesn’t queercode antagonists, but, like the other examples, uses controlling gay sex in less-than-optimal circumstances as a gross-out and fear factor. In this barely notable part of the book, it is explained that the hotel’s previous owner, Horace Derwent, continuously humiliated this gay man who had a crush on him, eventually making him dress up like a dog, wet himself, and “slob on his knob” (like corn on the cob). This, while further establishing the hotel as corrupt and decadent, is another prime example of King associating “gay” with “bad.” The ghost of the dog suit man later chases Danny (the son of the husband and wife pair who are all stuck in the empty Overlook hotel for the winter) around the hotel—just another wacky thing to scare Danny as if there wasn’t enough he had to worry about already. In the Kubrick film, this part is reduced to a throw-away scene of the guy in a dog (changed to bear?) suit, giving head to some outof-shot no-name, until he looks up and into the camera. This is just used as a creepy, wacky scene, and has left viewers of this movie simultaneously very confused and deeply disturbed. I know I was. An important distinction to be made is that most of these characters in question are not framed as actually being gay, as much as that makes sense. The sexual stuff is portrayed as unfeeling, as a means to an end, and as a branch of the sickness of their characters. It’s about control rather than emotion. Stephen King consistently associated queer sexual behavior and assault in his novels with psychopathy, a heavy contrast to his straight sex scenes. These are normally heavily idealized. Heavily. In most cases, heterosexual love-making is clearly used to frame protagonist characters as sensual, competent, and able to build an emotional bond through love and trust that will stand the test of time. By queer-coding villains, the King himself further established already-present negative stereotypes about gay men being predatory and immoral. In these scenes, it is impossible not to be disgusted by what’s going on, and Stephen uses the shock and explicitness to capture readers attention and scare them—you know, his goal as a fictional horror writer. Except it’s not cool to do it this way. As much as it would be my pleasure to give you more examples of Stephen King using queer sex as a horror trope (as I’m sure there are), these are the only books of his I have read. Still weird that it happened three times though!
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
13
ONE-TRICK TENNEY AND NY-22’S OTHER CANDIDATES
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
One-Trick Tenney And NY-22’s Other Candidates By Patrick McAuliffe
B
inghamton students may not care much for local politics. As seems to be the trend in college-dominated towns, students come for four years to get their education, widely-available booze, and socialization with people their own age before heading out into the world for better opportunities. However, should you, dear reader, care to know how our Congressional district’s candidates stand on current issues beyond the D, R, or L next to their name, I’ve assembled a quick guide on each candidate, their major talking points, and my own impressions of them. NY-22 extends from Syracuse and the surrounding area all the way down into parts of Broome County, encompassing Binghamton, Vestal, and Johnson City. The incumbent Democrat, Anthony Brindisi, defeated Republican Claudia Tenney in 2018. Tenney had beaten Democrat Kim Myers in 2016. The fact that President Trump also won the 22nd District in 2016 by 55% (to Hillary Clinton’s 39%) is indicative that our district can often flip between the two major parties if a Democratic candidate strikes the right chords with voters. This year, Tenney is running to reclaim her seat for the Republicans, and Keith Price is looking to join Justin Amash (L-MI) as another Libertarian representative in Congress. Where do they stand on the issues of the day? Claudia Tenney’s major talking point this time around is her association with Trump. Half of her campaign signs that you may see from here to Norwich contain a photo of her and Trump giving a thumbs-up with the text “Claudia: Endorsed by President Trump.” Her campaign website touts her stance on popular hot button issues shared by the President, such as “Jobs and Economy,” “Veterans,” “Second Amendment,” and “Immigration”. Most notably, and a bit hilariously, her top-listed and most extensively flushed-out issue is “China.” I have not seen many of her positive campaign ads, primarily because she only received $1.9 million in campaign contributions compared to Brindisi’s $5.2 million (according to the FEC), but her explanations on the issues from her website give a good indication of what she’ll do in Washington (take note of the wording here). Tenney held office in the New York State Assembly from 20112016, and many of her issue blurbs talk about how she co-sponsored such-and-such a bill or fought against such-and-such a measure in the Assembly. There is very little mention about what she actually managed to pass in her two years as NY-22’s representative from ‘16-’18, even in the “Accomplishments’’ section of the website. This was a period when Republicans held two of three branches of government; any successes she had during this time should surely be trumpeted from the rooftops in what everyone keeps telling me is the mOsT iMpOrTaNt ElEcTiOn EvEr. The most concrete law she seems to have passed is the SPOONSS Act, mandating that the military buy domestically-made flatware from Upstate New York. If that’s all there is to show for her record and not her intentions, we would be forked if she was elected.
14
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
Anthony Brindisi has been attacked in ads for Tenney as “too liberal” or supporting “defunding the police”, but his website has no indication of this. He touts his bipartisanship at every turn, from claiming that his every bill in the House has a Republican co-sponsor, to standing against King Cuomo’s SAFE Act in the Assembly (in Brindisi’s words, “because it was a bad law”), where he served from 2012-2018. Brindisi has a few overlapping issues that he shares some common ground with Tenney on, such as “Second Amendment,” “Veterans,” “Social Security and Medicare,” and “Healthcare,” but his list of issues is much more expansive. In addition, instead of having to click multiple tabs for each issue and each accomplishment, Brindisi gives both his stance and what he’s done about it for his many topics of interest. Were there not three candidates on this ballot, I would probably vote for him. Keith Price is running as a Libertarian candidate for our district. He worked at SUNY Broome while attending school there, working up from dishwasher to head cook, as reported by the Utica Observer-Dispatch. His wife got him interested in Libertarianism, and he has run for several local offices. There isn’t much online about his platform or where he stands on specific issues, so I reached out to his Facebook page directly. Keith answers his messages punctually, and to summarize his campaign, he stated: “Government transparency, accountability, and fiscal honestly [sic].” As a response to the pandemic, he is also campaigning for an “income and payroll tax holiday to bring immediate economic relief.” He has held several events all around the district, usually in conjunction with Larry Sharpe, Libertarian candidate for governor in 2018. He may be a relative unknown in the race compared to the duopoly candidates, but an ideology based on government reduction and accountability and an endorsement from Larry is enough to convince me. Take time to do your own research before Election Day on these three candidates. The Cook Political Report rates this election as a toss-up, and the historical flip-flop from the last few election cycles proves the volatility of NY-22. Look beyond the letter after each candidate’s name, dig into what each person plans to do about the issues affecting our area, and cast your informed ballot with confidence. Interviews, press releases, social media, podcasts - they’re all available to you. We’ll see you on the other side.
Vol. XXXIII, Issue V
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
GAMING CONSOLES: THE NEXT GENERATION
Gaming Consoles: The Next Generation By Dillon O’Toole
P
re-orders: the final barrier. These are the hurdles of the quarantine gamers. Their mission—to find a new gaming console; to seek out new games and developers; to boldly go where no console gamer has gone before. Besides being an excuse to ripoff the Star Trek opening monologue, this article was written to remind anyone who may have forgotten that November’s cold winds bring with them the release of the Playstation 5 and the Xbox Series X/S. That’s right, this November is going to have massive division amongst young people over petty differences and disputes, and also the presidential election is happening. All jokes aside, if you have an interest in getting a new console, you’re going to have to make a decision. While making this decision, you’ll have to consider what traits are most important to you among what the consoles are offering. Let’s talk about the availability of the consoles. Both consoles sold out quickly during their respective pre-order periods and both are out of stock at the time of writing. Both Microsoft and Sony have assured customers that more consoles will be available at the time of launch, but if you weren’t one of the individuals who managed to get a pre-order on the consoles, it seems likely that the next chance you will have to buy a console is on their respective release days (November 10th for the Xbox Series X/S and November 12th for the Playstation 5). Microsoft and Sony are each releasing two different versions of their upcoming gaming systems, one of which has a disc drive and the other which is digital-only. For both companies, the console with the disk drive will be the most expensive option at $500. Playstation’s digital-only console, the Playstation 5 Digital Edition, is being sold at the retail price of $400 while Microsoft’s digital-only console, the Xbox Series S, is being sold at a price of $300. Both versions of
editor@binghamtonreview.com
the Playstation 5 have the same specifications (excluding the absence of the disc tray), but the two versions of the Xbox have different specifications, with the Series X (the one with a disc tray) being more powerful than the Series S. In an ideal world, everyone would be able to comfortably buy both consoles. The world we live in is certainly not an ideal one, and as such, it is necessary to think about which console would be better for you. For some people, this decision may be obvious as they may already have a significant investment in the previous generation of consoles and will want to carry that investment over into the new generation. For others, the decision may not be so obvious. To help those who may be undecided, the following sections will list some pros of each respective next-generation console. One of the biggest draws to Playstation are the exclusive games. The Playstation 5 is no exception, as it already has several games that are part of critically acclaimed series coming exclusively to the console. Some of these exclusive games are Demon Souls (a remaster of the precursor to the Dark Souls franchise), Gran Turismo 7, Horizon Forbidden West (a sequel to the 2017 game Horizon Zero Dawn), Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart, and Spider-Man: Miles Morales. On top of the new exclusives coming to the Playstation 5, Sony has announced that many Playstation 4 games will be backward compatible with the Playstation 5 so those of you with older games will be able to keep playing your favorite games from the previous generation. One final point is, as mentioned earlier, that both the disc and disc-less Playstation 5s have the same specifications, so no matter which version of the console you have, you will get the same gaming experience. While Xbox may not have had as many blockbuster exclusives over the lifespan of the Xbox One, they seem
to be course-correcting themselves for this generation with multiple purchases of development studios. Some of the exclusive games developed by these studios are Halo Infinite, Fable, Forza Motorsport, State of Decay 3, and Senua’s Saga: Hellblade II. On top of Microsoft’s previously-owned studios, their most recent acquisition was the $7.5 billion purchase of ZeniMax Media that gives Microsoft ownership of several iconic franchises such as Fallout, The Elder Scrolls, Doom, and Dishonored. While these series have not been announced to be exclusive to Xbox at this time, it can be expected that these games will appear on the Xbox Game Pass. The Xbox Game Pass is one of the ways that Microsoft is aiming to create a more affordable gaming experience. The Xbox Game Pass works much like Netflix does; you pay a monthly subscription and in return get access to various games that Microsoft pays to have on the platform, as well as any first-party Microsoft game. In addition to the Game Pass, Microsoft is also offering a program called All-Access in which one could buy a new Xbox console by paying a monthly fee over the course of two years that includes the console itself as well as a Game Pass subscription. To finish off the Xbox section, the new Xbox consoles will be backward compatible with all games currently playable on the Xbox One (excluding Kinect games) which includes games from both the original Xbox and the Xbox 360. For those of you unsure of which console to buy, I hope the very brief overview of each console has helped you come closer to a decision. As this is just a brief overview, I would urge you to look further into the information available on each console before making a purchase, specifically as it relates to the things you value in a gaming system. To those of you who have already decided, good luck getting a console, and happy gaming.
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
15