BINGHAMTON REVIEW Editor-in-Chief Contents
P.O. BOX 6000 BINGHAMTON, NY 13902-6000 EDITOR@BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
Founded 1987 • Volume XXXIII, Issue II 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
Kevin Vorrath, Jon Lizak, Dillon O’Toole, Bryn Lauer, Will Anderson
Contributors
Sadtrick McAwful, Gabrielle Pontillo
A NIGHT IN BEN SHAPIRO’S BEDROOM
PAGE 12 3 4 6 8 10 11 13 14
by Sadtrick McAwful
Editorial by Tommy Gagliano Press Watch by Our Staff Snitches Get... Upvotes? by Tommy Gagliano Let’s Say, Hypothetically, Looting and Rioting by Harold Rook are Justified... The Zoom Rant by Joe Badalamenti Throwback: “Swine Flu Hysteria” by Gabrielle Pontillo Joe Biden Will Probably Win by Will Anderson 101 Things You Can’t Do in 2020 by Our Staff
Special Thanks To:
Intercollegiate Studies Institute Collegiate Network 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 II
EDITORIAL Dear Readers,
From the Editor
Welcome back to another fantastic issue of Binghamton Review! For those that may be reading for the first time, congrats on discovering the best publication at Binghamton University. Don’t worry, I’m going to avoid the embarrassment of asking you whether or not the front cover factored into your decision to pick up this magazine. We’re now three and a half weeks into the semester and still going strong, with the number of COVID cases still negligible. Looking back at our staff ’s predictions regarding how long the semester would last before going fully remote, Will Anderson and Harold Rook seemed to have missed the mark with their predictions of three weeks and four weeks, respectively. Dillon O’Toole’s prediction of five weeks and Joe Badalamenti’s prediction of six weeks are both still alive, as well as my prediction that the semester will be able to finish with its current procedures. We continue to look at some of the ways college has changed in this issue. Joe Badalamenti discusses his complaints about Zoom, the default instruction method for synchronous distance learning courses that all Binghamton students (and college students across the country) have become closely acquainted with. I also focus on COVID-related changes, but I instead analyze the way student behavior is different. In “Snitches Get... Upvotes?” I take a look at the way the dialogue surrounding COVID-19 has caused students to turn on one another. We chose to republish an article from the November 2009 issue of Binghamton Review about Swine Flu, because we find it to be an interesting read in the current environment. Finally, we cap off our COVID-related content with a list of “101 Things You Can’t Do in 2020.” While the COVID-19 pandemic continues to occupy much of our attention, there are other things going on in the world. The Black Lives Matter movement continues to make waves, and Harold Rook has some opinions about their actions. Finally, there’s the glorious work that inspired the front cover that I’m sure had nothing to do with you picking this up *wink*. After Ben Shapiro’s bizarre comment about his wife-doctor’s dry vagina, Sadtrick McAwful took it upon himself to imagine what “A Night in Ben Shapiro’s Bedroom” might be like. Thank you always, reader, for your support. You are always welcome to send questions or feedback—positive or negative—to editor@binghamtonreview.com I hope you enjoyed this issue, and I look forward to speaking to you again through these pages on September 30th.
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 “The two-party system fails American voters” Miranda Jackson-Nudelman, Pipe Dream, 8/31/20 “At its core, there’s little tolerance for criticism as voters are expected to vote blindly for their professed party instead of the candidate they may truly favor. So from a comprehensive standpoint, our system leaves no room for the representation of “radical” third party voters and their fundamental beliefs which refuse to concede to either of the two major parties’ platforms.” Even though politics in the United States is currently dominated by two main parties, representation of third parties is still present, such as the Libertarian Party, the Green Party, the Reform Party, and much more. Voters have their own personal agency; it is within their ability to vote for the representation of “radical” third parties should they so choose. Having that option present would mean that there is, in fact, tolerance for this criticism of the two-party system, as your vote would go towards a platform that represents these fundamental beliefs. “Moderates have been abandoning their Republican counterparts for a while now, not only as elected Republican officials have become more extreme but their increasingly influential media, donors and general activists have too. Fundamentally, the face of the Republican Party is one marked by oppositional propaganda driven by unparalleled hatred at its core.” Quite the claim to state that the Republican Party promotes oppositional propaganda driven by unparalleled hatred for their political opposition. One could also make this argument about the modern Democratic Party, with the flirtation with socialist policies and demonization of conservative opposition being prime examples of this. Moderates aren’t just abandoning their Republican counterparts, but are experiencing a growing trend of polarization from both parties.
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.
“In denial of health care system failure deeply exposed by the coronavirus pandemic and after a summer of one of the largest civil rights protests in the nation and world, 2020’s leading presidential candidates chose not only to ignore both sentiments, but disagree with them strongly. They’ve taken their stance against transparent core necessities like universal health care and the end of privatized insurance, as well as even marginally defunding police departments and redistributing funds (back) into community-based programs.” To state that both candidates disagreed with the sentiments behind the protests would be somewhat misleading; Trump himself has signed executive orders in order to incentivize police reform, and Biden has considered changes to Qualified Immunity. Where both of them deviate from what many radical left-wing college students want is the complete defunding of law enforcement, as this could essentially lead to anarchy, especially when the community based measures proposed are only preventative in nature. “Still, in the case of the modern Democratic party in particular, it’s received almost as disrespectful to question our ballot choices. Despite many of its forefront representatives ignoring the literal millions of policies Americans are demanding, we should feel grateful that at least one of the two candidates isn’t a fascist.” Firstly, Trump is not a fascist. Populism and nationalism can lead to fascism, but we’re far from “literally
Hitler.” Secondly, there is nothing stopping you from seriously questioning your ballot choices. If you wish to vote third party, more power to you. Nothing is stopping you from questioning the dominant parties. “Editorial: Testing the waters” Pipe Dream Editorial Board, Pipe Dream, 9/10/20 “Bringing all off-campus students to campus only increases the risk of infection among students.” If that’s the case, then why not just ensure no off campus students come on campus at all? It would certainly reduce the risk of infection, and what can be more important than reducing the risk of infection to absolute zero? “There already have been reports of large lines with little room for social distancing at the testing site, not to mention the fact that there will still be students crossing through the space to commute to their on-campus classes” If you think that’s bad, you should take a look at Appalachian dining hall after 9 PM. “There is also the issue of students either deliberately or accidentally not
Vol. XXXIII, Issue II
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM checking their emails for the testing notification. The University should also make an effort to contact students via text message or telephone call as well.” Accidentally missing a testing email is a bit understandable, due to the sheer volume of emails students are bombarded with daily. Deliberately avoiding testing, however, is a different story. People that don’t see testing as a serious issue will avoid their email summons to do so, along with any text or phone reminders. The impetus to take this public health crisis seriously is on the individual student; the University may need to increase its reminders, but students themselves have a responsibility to heed said reminders. “Socialist student group seeks to get SA-chartered” Nicole Kaufman, Pipe Dream, 9/10/20 Don’t we already have, like, six of those? How is this group any different from College Progressives, Frances Beal Society, College Democrats, and all of the other left-wing echo fighters? “Despite hardships caused by the coronavirus pandemic, Binghamton University students have formed the Young Democratic Socialists of America (YDSA), a new political organization seeking to secure a charter from the Student Association (SA).” Stunning AND brave in the face of adversity. Truly an inspiration to all. “YDSA has successfully recruited over 20 new members, or ‘comrades,’ to the chapter’s roster after its first general interest meeting last week.” Lol. “[Chair and founder Yassin] Elabbassi said the pandemic has made students realize their new political leanings. ‘I mean somehow billionaires have gotten richer during a global pandemic, while the working class is facing evictions and historic unemployment,’ Elabbassi wrote in an email. ‘I think that drives some students who may be on the fence toward us.’” The Bad Orange Man actually issued an executive order in early September extending the moratorium on evic-
editor@binghamtonreview.com
CAMPUS PRESSWATCH tions until as late as December 31st. The conditions for non-eviction are very fair to those doing their absolute best in spite of the pandemic. It’s also government intervention in the economy—basically the founding principle of socialism—that cause so many to lose their jobs, businesses, or other sources of income. The pandemic itself didn’t hurt the working class, the shutdowns mandated by big government did. “Colin Mangan, social media chair of YDSA and an undeclared sophomore, said he hopes to see YDSA get chartered by the SA. ‘I became involved in YDSA because I believe that by having an organized leftist presence on this campus, we can help bring democratic socialist ideals and policies into our sociopolitical discourse,’ Mangan wrote.” Quite a discourse that the organized leftist presence had on campus last fall. Art Laffer was able to engage in a remarkable sociopolitical discussion with them. Is that not what they have in mind? It’s also worth mentioning that socialist ideals already DOMINATE the sociopolitical discourse in colleges. Have you ever attended a Harpur class? “‘I hope to see YDSA begin to build dialogues, whether those be about national or local sociopolitical issues, about the combating of misinformation or simply about raising awareness about ideologies and beliefs that those who are less engaged with political rhetoric may not be familiar with,’ [Vice-Chair] Bosak wrote in an email.” 1. How elitist is this? To paraphrase: “If you’re unfamiliar with political rhetoric, that’s okay *pats head sympathetically*. If you are, how are you not already one of us? You just don’t know what we stand for.” Just maybe, someone outside of the ivory tower - or even within it - may have a different view of the world that isn’t “wealth inequality is inherently evil, white people are inherently racist, Bernie Sanders is inherently God.” Or is that misinformation? 2. Nice last name, Ballsack. 3. No Oxford comma? Really?
chapter at BU because he felt isolated on campus as a leftist.” LMAOOOOOOO. Nothing screams “isolation” like being part of a 75% majority. “‘...I want to see the administration at [BU], and to a somewhat equal extent the town of Vestal, Johnson City and the [city] of Binghamton, held accountable and provide real results rather than B-Line announcements of small incremental changes,’ [Elabassi said].” It’s a bit of a dick move to use one’s college student organization to impact leftist change in the “townie” governments, only to eat their food, drink their booze, and walk their streets for four years and skrrrt right on to better opportunities. These are real people that live outside the cloister of BU, and to see one’s will imposed on them for the sake of one’s own sheltered cause is much less socially-minded than it may appear. Not cool. “Additionally, Elabbassi expects YDSA to begin taking action shortly. ‘YDSA hopes to begin organizing direct action soon, [such as] protests, sit-ins or open letters, to pressure the administration to properly address issues that harm not only the student class but the working class of Binghamton,’ Elabbassi wrote. ‘Our long term goal is to make sure [BU] is not just equal but equitable for all.’” If the “working class” of Binghamton, writ large, cared about these issues, a movement like YDSA would already exist locally. Rich David isn’t some Big Brother with his secret BPD hunting down communists and anarchists; the community knows that “democratic” socialism isn’t the way forward for them. Check your privilege. Our area has a BOCES, for Christ’s sake.
“Elabbassi said he started the YDSA
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
5
SNITCHES GET... UPVOTES?
Snitches Get... Upvotes?
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
By Tommy Gagliano
I
know it’s been said a million times already, but the world we’re living in right now is totally bizarre. Riots have become frequent to the point that they’re barely shocking anymore, we’re approaching a presidential election between an angry game show host and a guy that cannot form a coherent sentence, and, of course, there’s that pesky COVID-19 pandemic. What’s up with that virus anyway? Is it over? Is it still a threat? Was it ever a threat? I’ve been told the answer to all of these questions is yes. I’ve also been told the answer to all of these questions is no. It really depends which “expert” you feel like listening to. Regardless of the actual seriousness of the novel coronavirus, heavy restrictions are still in place throughout the country, including here at Binghamton University. As I’m sure the majority of readers are aware, most courses are being taught through various “distance learning” methods, there are rules about where students can and cannot sit for those that do have classes in person, all students that live on campus were tested as part of the move-in process, periodic testing will be done on all students, both on and off campus, to monitor the spread of the virus among the student body, and there’s a whole shitload of regulations regarding what students are and are not permitted to do, including in their free time. Normally, a University telling their students that they can’t do perfectly legal things (especially if these things are done off campus) would be seen as an egregious misuse of power and violation of a student’s rights and liberties, but, as I said earlier, the world we’re living in right now is totally bizarre. Activities that are banned by the University include, but are not limited to: entering a building on campus without wearing a mask, inviting a person into a residential building that they do not live in, walking on the wrong side of the hallway, hosting or attending an in-person club meeting
6
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
(unless granted an exception), or gathering in groups larger than ten in residential building. I was unable to find any rules anywhere regarding gathering sizes in places other than residence halls, but the current limit set by New York State is 50 people. This is interesting, considering the way students have reacted to small gatherings in Binghamton. Recently the Binghamton University subreddit (r/BinghamtonUniversity) has been riddled with posts about exposing and reporting students for attending gatherings. This is a complete turnaround from the normal attitude of Binghamton students, who, for better or for worse, can typically be relied upon to keep quiet about underage drinking, drug use and transactions, pirated textbooks, and, unortunately, sexual assault (see “Greek Life” in our “ABCs of Binghamton” from last issue). Apparently hanging out with friends is where they draw the line, though, as the top post seemingly every day is about an “illegal” gathering. On September 3rd, u/Any_ Yam3432 posted a video of a group of students getting out of a van. It is unclear how many students are involved, but given the capacity of most vans, the number couldn’t be too large. The post received over 100 upvotes, which essentially means that 100 more people “liked” the post than “disliked” it. Comments include “This is absolutely irresponsible and disgusting. I hope these students get suspended,” “This is the most stupid shit I’ve seen in a while,” “We need to identify these people. They need to be held accountable,” and “Idk if you’ve done this already,
but this looks like something to be reported to me.” The final of those four comments currently has 50 upvotes. Two days later, on September 5th, the same Reddit user posted a video of eleven people hanging out in a parking lot by College in the Woods. The video suggests that the gathering was brief, as 20 seconds into the recording the individuals dispersed. The comments were condescending, with one user posting “please tell me you reported them,” to which the original poster affirmed that he or she did. Also on September 5th, u/anxietyastronaut posted an image of red Solo cups and other trash in the nature preserve with the title “Nature preserve this morning. Disappointing to see people breaking university rules and harming environment.” The post received over 300 upvotes. Leaving trash behind in the nature preserve is an absolutely shitty thing to do, but it’s bothersome that “breaking university rules” and having a gathering of likely no more than ten people (given the amount of garbage in the photo) is seen as an equally upsetting offense. The phenomenon is evidenced not only by individual instances on Reddit, but by a recent poll on My Binghamton. The poll asked “How likely are you to report a COVID-19 non-compliance,” and, as of the morning of September 10th, it has over 2400 responses. 42.4% of respondents indi-
Vol. XXXIII, Issue II
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM cated that they would be “very likely” to report, and 35.9% said that they would “maybe” report. Only 21.7% of respondents said that they would be “not likely” to report a COVID-19 non-compliance. The poll is obviously not perfect, with the lack of options between “very likely” and “maybe” being an obvious flaw, as well as the use of a very broad term in “non-compliance.” Nevertheless, it clearly shows a shift in attitude towards rule-breaking among Binghamton students, with nearly 80% of all poll respondents stating that they would at least consider reporting a student for violating the COVID-19 guidelines.
“...it is apparently obvious that no one cares about a group of friends hanging out outside at noon, but roll the clock forward twelve hours and add Roddy Ricch and a 30rack and everyone loses their mind.” When it comes to reporting others for breaking rules, typically the decision to report or not to report comes down to the decision-maker’s understanding of the morality of the situation. If the decision-maker perceives the incident as not morally negative, they will usually choose not to report. This is common for violations like marijuana use and underage drinking, which are commonly viewed as “victimless crimes.” If the decision-maker perceives the incident as morally negative, they will usually choose to report. Violations like theft, battery, and sexual assault (except in fraternities) usually fall into this category. If we assume that this is true, it would suggest that most Binghamton students see gathering in small groups as morally unacceptable. Presumably, the reasoning for this is that they see gatherings as dangerous, and as a threat to public health. In some situations they may be right, but in the three scenarios outlined above, there is very little evidence that that is the case. In all three posts, the evidence
editor@binghamtonreview.com
SNITCHES GET... UPVOTES?
suggests that the gatherings were small—no more than 15 people. The evidence also suggests that all three gatherings were purely for social purposes. Logically, then, it would be safe to assume that if one were to have a small gathering for social purposes, they would limit that gathering to their closest friends. It is likely that people frequently spend time with their closest friends, and in college they often live with them. If one person spends a lot of time with another person, especially if the two live together, then it is likely that they already swap germs with each other. To finish up this line of logic, then, in all three situations, it is highly unlikely that the gatherings increased infection risk at all, since the people involved probably already spent a lot of time with one another prior to the gathering, and intend to do so again after the gathering. For some reason, the majority of students on the Binghamton University subreddit are unable to comprehend this concept. In all likelihood, many of those upvoting or calling for action to be taken against the “exposed” students participate in similar gatherings on a regular basis. There is no difference between what the students being blasted online are doing and having your friends over, or going out to dinner with them, or hanging out with them in any other capacity. Hell, even living with a large group of people carries the same amount of risk. The difference between an acceptable and unacceptable gathering for a lot of students seems to be the presence or absence of alcohol. This could be a result of much of the discourse on the topic prominently referring to “parties” and “partying.” Whatever the reason, it is apparently obvious that no one cares about a group of friends hanging out
outside at noon, but roll the clock forward twelve hours and add Roddy Ricch and a 30-rack and everyone loses their mind. The fact that reporting students for socializing has become normalized, and that the reaction to doing so is to applaud the reporter, is, quite frankly, ridiculous. I can understand if students are concerned about massive 200-person parties downtown where people are packed in like sardines, but that isn’t what’s happening in these cases. Large gatherings are dangerous not because people are close together, but because people are coming into contact with others that they haven’t previously interacted with. The goal should not be to limit gatherings, but to limit frequent contact with new people. I worked at a summer camp during the summer, as a member of the “Leadership Team” responsible for planning and executing all camp activities and operations. When developing our COVID policies, our focus was not on keeping campers within the same groups from getting too close to one another, but rather on keeping different groups apart. Campers within the same group were inevitably going to swap germs simply because of the amount of time they spend together, but if we could keep each group separate, we would be able to contain the spread to only one group if a camper were to become infected. The same principle applies here; the emphasis should not be on limiting the types of activities students can engage in, but rather on limiting the number of different people that they engage in those activities with. A gathering of ten people doesn’t increase the risk of infection if those ten people already come into contact with each other on a regular basis.
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
7
LET’S SAY, HYPOTHETICALLY, LOOTING AND RIOTING ARE JUSTIFIED...
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
Let’s Say, Hypothetically, Looting and Rioting are Justified... By Harold Rook
T
o say the last several months have generated social unrest would be an understatement. Following the death of George Floyd, protests erupted nationwide to highlight issues of police brutality and the targeting of black Americans by the criminal justice system. For a short period of time, it almost seemed as though the country was unified in the need for some measure of reform; everyone from Bernie Sanders to Rush Limbaugh decried the killing of George Floyd, and emphasized the need for practical legislation on law enforcement. This was met with some success, ranging from introduction of the Justice for Breonna Taylor Act by Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) as a means of curbing no-knock warrants to increased scrutiny on Qualified Immunity. Additionally, protests have placed these issues in the public consciousness, leading to appropriate dialogue on how to solve this issue. However, in spite of these strides, not all protests have been peaceful; to the detriment of the overarching goal of reform, violence has been spurred on by more radical elements within the movement. By far the most negative and counterintuitive consequences to come from this violence is the presence of looting, arson, and murder. Within the immediate aftermath of Floyd’s death, some took the time to storm private property and have their way with whatever materials they could plunder, in addition to the gratuitous violence that has taken place. This, of course, shattered whatever unity the country held in the events following the initial protests. Many even came to the defense of the criminals looting and committing violence, formulating illogical argument after illogical argument. Needless to say, someone needs to point out the implications of these arguments, which is what I plan to do. Argument 1: White people looted this continent first, therefore they have no right to tell black people
8
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
what to do! I have noticed this argument appear multiple times, and there are several points that rub me the wrong way. Firstly, there is the fact that this statement treats white people as a monolith—stating that white people came to the Americas to extract plunder— when in reality it was specifically the English, Dutch, French, Spanish, and Portuguese that looted the continent. Not only is this imprecise, but it groups together a large portion of people that don’t share that ancestry. There’s another problem: ancestry. How can one hold an individual responsible for the crimes that one’s ancestors have committed? On top of that, this argument also implies that the act of looting itself is inherently bad, seemingly admitting that such acts, past or present, should be looked at in a negative light. Two wrongs don’t equal a right. Even if one were to look past the admittance that looting is wrong, as well as the obvious tribalism, and accept that collective guilt outweighs individual innocence, it isn’t like the looters are a monolith either; the act of looting shares no race, in many ways making the plundering equal opportunity. The fact that such an argument states that one should not tell black people, specifically, what to do is revealing to what that person thinks black people are doing, however… Argument 2: Looting only hurts the big, scary corporations like Target! This argument is laughably and demonstrably false; small business owners have bore the brunt of looting within many of the areas that have been sites for this illegal activity. What makes this issue even worse is the fact that looting, as mentioned before, sees no color, meaning businesses owners who may belong to a disenfranchised group that the protestors are ostensibly there to protect are now being hurt by the uncontrolled looting. Compound
this with the ongoing coronavirus strangling their livelihoods, and they could potentially never recover. But let’s say, for the sake of argument, that we live in a perfect world where looters only target corporations like Target or Walmart. While it is true that the corporation itself will be hurt by this, this also hurts the franchise owner, the business owner who runs the store in a specific location. Many of these business owners belong to the middle class, and could potentially lose their place of work due to the destruction caused by uncontrollable looting. And this doesn’t even cover the impact this could have on the working-class employees within the store, who are likely to be let go due to the destruction their store faced. Argument 3: Stores have insurance! A little looting won’t hurt them! Ah, yes: the classic “money printer go brrrrr” argument. The biggest proponent of this argument is author Vicky Osterweil, who recently used this defense in an interview with NPR (SPOILER ALERT: NPR had to publicly admit that the interview spread false information to its audience). While it is true that companies such as Walmart and Target likely have insurance on their merchandise, this isn’t always true for the small business owners. With nearly 75% of all American small business owners being underinsured, as measured by Insurance Journal, not all businesses are even capable of handling unlawful theft of property. And if such businesses have insurance, it isn’t likely that that insurance will necessarily cover the damages inflicted due to the rioting. Even if these businesses were paid in full with insurance, this will heavily inflate the insurance rates that businesses have to cover, effectively resulting in greater prices on goods for consumers. You can’t just get money to recover damages from nowhere. Lastly, insurance
Vol. XXXIII, Issue II
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
doesn’t bring back lives; if you care to watch a video of former officer David Dorn die in a pool of his own blood after trying to protect a business from looters, ask yourself if business insurance can revive him. Argument 4: Looting is perfectly okay because it’s a form of reparations! This was the justification proposed by Chicago organizer and activist Ariel Atkins while making a speech in the middle of a BLM rally. During her speech, she stated that looting high-end stores, including Gucci, Macy’s, or Nike, was practicing a form of reparations. Of course, there are several problems with this line of reasoning, the first of which is the fact that stolen goods are not a form of liquid cash. In her argument, Atkins claims that stolen goods from these luxury stores are capable of feeding families, yet this fails because people will not be able to readily exchange stolen items for money. There is also the issue of what reparations, at least when proposed, is supposed to accomplish: providing a means for African American families to better themselves economically in the long term. Even if we assume that all looted goods are immediately fenced for their exact value on a black market, doing this only provides a short economic stimulus that will fail to provide relief for poverty. Additionally, this essentially endorses the use of criminal activity to achieve a political goal, being the theft of property, which is catastrophic to advocate for your movement. This doesn’t even scratch the surface to the questions on repara-
editor@binghamtonreview.com
LET’S SAY, HYPOTHETICALLY, LOOTING AND RIOTING ARE JUSTIFIED...
tions, such as who will pay for it, who qualifies for paying it, how much reparations should be, and more. Argument 5: rIoTiNg AnD lOoTiNg ArE nEcEsSaRy To OvErThRoW CaPiTaLiSm!!! Welp, gotta hand it to the tankies for finding a way to larp for the destruction of private property and the deaths of citizens for their communist utopia. It’s actually quite impressive that this argument doesn’t pretend to care about the wellbeing of others, and I don’t think there is much else to say. Actually, wait! There is! *Ahem*: Союз нерушимый республик свободных Сплотила навеки Великая Русь Да здравствует созданный волей народов Единый, могучий Советский Союз Славься, Отечество наше свободное Дружбы народов надёжный оплот! Партия Ленина - сила народная Нас к торжеству коммунизма ведёт Сквозь грозы сияло нам солнце свободы И Ленин великий нам путь озарил На правое дело он поднял народы На труд и на подвиги нас вдохновил Славься, Отечество наше свободное Дружбы народов надёжный оплот Партия Ленина - сила народная
Нас к торжеству коммунизма ведёт! Argument 6: Violence is the only way to get everyone’s attention to our cause! Out of all the arguments presented, I would give this one credit for at least being somewhat true; the presence of rioting, arson, and murder for your cause can certainly bring attention. Here’s the thing though: not all attention is good attention. More specifically, negative acts, including unlawful behavior, will only serve to distance moderates who share the overarching goal of reform with you. If the movement you have features members who literally stalk and assassinate people with differing political opinions before getting into a shootout with police, there should be no justification for that behavior, and the movement that defends it will make itself appear to justify murder. If this is the case, such as what happened with the death of Aaron Danielson, don’t be shocked when your movement gains a reputation for being violent, and some believe it is necessary to come prepared to defend oneself if they are attacked. This self-fulfilling prophecy came into fruition when Kyle Rittenhouse, 17, defended himself against a mob of attackers. If you’re going to brand yourself as violent, it isn’t shocking when others feel it is needed to defend themselves from violence. The result? Chaos and further polarization. Anyway, there are a lot of ridiculous arguments out there regarding this anarchistic looting. What this fails to solve, however, is the underlying issues that, supposedly, these looting proponents claim to care for. The best advice I can give to those that promote such arguments? Stop sullying the memory of those like George Floyd; he did not die so you could justify breaking into a local shop and stealing a new pair of shoes. Additionally, it makes a once-unified issue polarized, something that shouldn’t have been possible, given the circumstances. If you are truly after reform and accountability, and not robbery and anarchy, respect private property. You won’t do any good for the protests by supporting this.
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
9
THE ZOOM RANT
The Zoom Rant
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
By Joe Badalamenti
A
s a result of a disease outbreak, many schools and universities have decided to cancel in-person classes. This has consequently spread to Binghamton, although it seemed like we didn’t have a choice considering decrees by the NY state government. Because this occurred in the middle of the semester, schools needed to find something to replace classes in order to teach. For synchronous classes, Binghamton, as well as many other schools, decided to choose the Zoom application as it’s new medium. While the app functions at a minimum, I’ve determined, in less than 2 weeks of use, that Zoom is not a decent substitute for in person classes. While Zoom may seem like it’s a fine replacement, it has some glaring issues. The first issue is on the technical side. Has this ever happened to you: you just logged into a Zoom class when all of a sudden the quality starts dropping and you’re suddenly disconnected from the Zoom call. You eventually reconnect despite missing about a minute of instruction. This has happened to me several times and has been a constant source of disappointment. While it may sound like a small inconvenience, it becomes pretty aggravating when you consider the alternative of physical classes. But, then again, we’re in quarantine because of a disease that affects .01% of college students, so what do I know. While random disconnections are the largest technical issue, smaller video
10
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
and audio bugs can also occur. Some of these issues may just be the result of bad internet connections but this just means that the course quality is dependent on something you can not control. For example, in a normal semester I can control whether I’m in my morning chemistry lecture but I can’t control my WiFi connection if there’s a power outage. While these technical problems may be the only issues inherent to zoom, there are other issues that affect classes. One effect of the sudden transition to online classes is a change in behavior of the students. A lack of interaction is one of the first things that come to mind. Back when in person classes were still a thing, a common occurrence was to converse with my fellow classmates. This would happen before the lecture began, with topics ranging from discussions on the material and teaching to small talk about the latest news story. This form of social interaction, also called having a conversation, has led to former classmates becoming acquaintances as well as team mates for class projects. This loss is especially detrimental to freshmen who likely don’t know anyone other than the students in their dorm. In the world of Zoom, however, no one is in person to have any conversations. While class group chats do exist, these aren’t unique to Zoom classes, so you only lose out on the social interaction. I believe this is one of the major causes why many students have decided to take their classes from home instead of living on campus. This may sound like a big nitpick but once the restrictions are removed, you should notice the difference. Of course it would be foolish not to mention the outbreak of Zoom bombings. The only thing worse than being removed from the lecture due to a bad connection is a drawn out disruption by some anonymous troll. The last thing already stressed out students need is for “Michael Oxlong” to join the meeting and blast the latest bass
boosted mumble rap single. Last week, Binghamtonbarstool posted a video of one such occurrence, so it’s clear that Binghamton isn’t immune. While it may be funny to see it on your daily dank meme compilation, it’s pretty annoying when it happens in person. The cause behind this phenomenon isn’t hard to understand. Because of the anonymity as well as the lack of consequences from these attacks, those who seek clout (read: attention) are encouraged to this behavior. It also doesn’t help that it only takes a link to join an in progress meeting, so almost everyone can join whatever meeting they can get their hands on. While Zoom does have protections such as passcodes and ban power, passcodes can be easily bypassed and bans usually happen after the disruption. It’s clear that Zoom classes have problems when compared to the traditional mode of instruction. One can go through all the technical difficulties and Zoom bombings and say that online classes are a suitable replacement. Even if a different medium was used such as Google Classroom, I would expect the same issues to present themselves. While private universities may be able to offer quality classes online, Binghamton was not built to be an online university so we should not expect it to have the infrastructure to support such a transition. Once things return to normal, it’s in the best interest of Binghamton University to transition back to regular classes permanently.
Vol. XXXIII, Issue II
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
THROWBACK: SWINE FLU HYSTERIA
Throwback: Swine Flu Hysteria By Gabrielle Pontillo
*This article was originally published in the November 2009 issue of Binghamton Review* We’re republishing it 11 years later, as we are in the middle of a different pandemic.
editor@binghamtonreview.com
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
11
A NIGHT IN BEN SHAPIRO’S BEDROOM
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
A Night in Ben Shapiro’s Bedroom By Sadtrick McAwful
S
he gets home late, at about 9pm. The hot California weather had bore down on her during the commute home; although her doctor’s office had central A/C, her car had warmed in the parking lot like a convection oven. Sighing, she drops her keys in the bowl they keep next to the door. It’s simple, made of ceramic and purchased from a vendor they found in Israel during their wedding. G_d, was it really that long ago? More than a decade at this point… Slipping off her plain black flats, she notices that the house is surprisingly quiet. Normally, their children would be out and about, playing with each other or on their electronic devices (if they were especially well-behaved that day). They wouldn’t even necessarily be making all of the noise that children are known to make, as he had raised them to be disciplined and to respect authority. The family had a certain dynamic, one that she dutifully played her part in. Despite her education and doctor’s salary, especially the doctor’s salary of a resident of California, he had made it known early and often that he would be head of the household. No feminist nonsense had ever entered their home; the notion was inconceivable to him. She obeyed, as was expected of her. Where were their children? She notices a single lamp left on in the living room, perhaps a gesture from him to let her know that all had not fallen to pieces in her absence. All is well. All is quiet, and orderly, and peaceful. Climbing the stairs, she checks in on their children. Their daughter is lying in the dark room, sound asleep. She’ll be six this year… or is she already six? Tiptoeing softly into her room, she kisses her on the forehead and kicks herself for not being around as much as she should be. Their daughter will be a young woman before they know it, and life as a doctor doesn’t always let one experience the joys of family life. Closing the door softly behind her, she next moves to her son’s room. He’s four years old and full of boyish energy, but his father must have tuckered him out all day; he was in dreamland, his junior-sized MAGA hat hanging on his bedpost and toy guns strewn across the room. She kisses him on the forehead as well, taking care to avoid the hazards on the floor. Under his father’s tutelage, he would learn to respect and even wield real weapons one day, in defense of his life and the lives of his loved ones. As any good American should. She wouldn’t even bother with the baby. Passing her room, she hears no sound and thanks G_d that she had somehow fallen asleep this early. She would get maybe two or three more hours of respite before she was summoned by banshee-like wailing only comparable in volume to a BLM protest. Rubbing her temples, she remembers what the single lamp in the living room is for and silently groans. That’s why the children are asleep so early. She prepares herself to enter their bedroom. She recalls being so full of joy when they first saw it. Spacious, with a lovely bathroom and a walk-in closet full of suits, polos, and white coats, it was a sight to behold. They had painted the walls a light
12
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
gray. He referred to the color at the time as akin to the dull gleam of the machines in American industry, the backbone of our economy; to this day, she preferred to think of it as the color of clouds fresh from a summer rain. She takes a small breath and exhales quickly before entering their bedroom. Those light gray walls are barren, save for a small American flag hanging over his desk. The mahogany desk is covered with papers and essays strewn about; she had given up long ago on asking him to leave work at the office. After all, an editor-in-chief ’s work is never done, according to him. Her white walnut desk on the opposite side of the room is comparatively more bare, with nothing more than a tube of mascara and a small copy of the Torah decorating its surface. She did have a cyclamen flower frozen in clear resin that she used to keep there; he had gotten it for her during their wedding. She remembers why she doesn’t keep it out anymore as she turns to face the man on the right side of the bed who hadn’t glanced up from his computer once during her entry and brief survey of the room. His face illuminated by his computer screen, Ben Shapiro has the look of a man on a mission; whether tonight’s was researching how to own the libs or rushing to the defense of the President’s latest tweet is unclear to her. Ever since Kamala had been announced as the Democratic VP candidate, he had been like a shaken bottle of soda ready to blow. On weekends when she was home, he would lock himself in his study - a different, more concentrated area of literature than his bedroom desk and took his meals poring over his computer and writing notes feverishly in as low of a voice as his could go. He would not touch her and would barely speak to her, beyond the occasional “She’s utterly ridiculous!” and “Why would he choose her?” She hopes that she will be left to her thoughts tonight and goes into the bathroom to get ready for bed. As she slaps on black sweatpants and a gray tank top, Ben mutters a bit to himself, reaching a skeletal hand below the bed with lightning-fast precision to grab one of his spare notebooks and a pen. By the time she finishes brushing her teeth, the entire first page had been covered in writing that looked as unintelligible to her as the way she signed prescriptions. Because she was a doctor. She returns to the bedroom and lays down, plugging her phone in and placing it on the side table next to her. She looks over once more; Ben has returned to his computer screen, training his beady eyes on the words as if he was a never-blinking police dashcam. She turns away from him, hoping that the worst was over, but is startled out of her entry into sleep by the
Vol. XXXIII, Issue II
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM closing slam of his laptop. He turns to her, seemingly filled with a new fire, and asks vehemently, “Dearest, let’s say, hypothetically, although we have just brought a new child into this world, I wanted to have you produce another for us. Would you let me do it?” She feels her hope for a good night’s sleep crumble to pieces. Sighing, she replies in as groggy of a voice as she can muster, “Not tonight, my love. I’ve had a long day.” He sits up abruptly, his little eyebrows furrowing for a millisecond. “Well, why not?” he retorts, a bit too loudly. His voice always seemed to have the same volume when speaking to another person. “I am your husband, you are my wife, and it’s perfectly logical, if we assume that husbands and wives should show each other their love in both physical and emotional ways, it is only natural that we should attempt to procreate at any moment. The children are in bed, and we are alone. It is the perfect time. Don’t you agree?” Any attempt to placate or bargain with him would end in his shame and resentment, and she was not prepared to deal with that upon coming home for the next few days or weeks. “Alright,” she agrees begrudgingly. Slipping one leg out of her sweatpants, she turns completely on her back and spreads her legs for the golden mean between her discomfort and his satisfaction. She hadn’t worn any panties, remembering the lamp when getting dressed for bed and deciding to make it as quick as possible to get dressed again after he was finished. As if anticipating what she was thinking, he gets up from the bed and stands at the end of it, continuing, “I even left the lamp on in the living room for you. This is a sign - that you and I agreed upon - that should be used to indicate that I am aroused and prepared to have intercourse with you. I had hoped that you would have remembered its use and implication.” “Yes, Ben, I remembered,” she replies. “Begin the intercourse.” His face breaks into a boyish grin and in a flash, he unbuttons his navy-blue shirt. He tears away his pants in one fluid motion. Underneath the tear-away pants, he wears a red thong with a white logo emblazoned on the front: it’s from ExpressVPN, tonight’s sponsor. Still spread eagle, she waves her hand to signal him to proceed, and for the next minute and thirty-seven seconds, he explains in great detail the benefits of using a VPN to mask one’s personal files and search history from ISPs and potential hackers. Ben hops impishly onto the bed and inches closer, reassuring her that “he’ll send her a link later to get 15% off her first three months of ExpressVPN.” He kisses her mouth as voraciously as the President chowing down on a delicious Trump Tower taco bowl. As she lies motionless, his finger traces down her stomach to touch her groin. It doesn’t find its intended position, as a tomahawk missile would, but meanders around her labia, like a Joe Biden speech. He repeatedly asks - no, demands an answer - whether she “likes that” into her ear. She grunts affirmatively. He sits up suddenly. “There may be a problem, my love,” he says gravely, his post-Kamala grouchy countenance returning. “Your vagina seems to be a bit moist. Is anything the matter, medically speaking?” Cocking his head like a bird, he asks, “You are a doctor after all. Are you alright?”
editor@binghamtonreview.com
A NIGHT IN BEN SHAPIRO’S BEDROOM She refuses to meet his eye and replies, “Everything is fine. I checked earlier. Please continue.” Truthfully, a residual amount of urine remained after she relieved herself in the bathroom while dressing for bed. He had never made her sexually wet. Ben nods, now laser-focused on his new mission, and slips off his thong. He positions himself nearly in a plank and guides his now-erect four-inch penis to touch her labia. He uses those skeletal fingers to pry open the lips of her vagina and force his member inside of her. He thrusts with all his might, lightly shaking their bed. His emaciated chest heaves with effort as she remains silent during his penetrations. After what very well might have also been one minute and thirty-seven seconds, he thrusts one final time, grunting and groaning in his rapid tenor as he shoots his seed inside of her. Rolling over her to his side of the bed, he sighs with a “whew” that carries an air of finality. She slips her sweatpants back on wordlessly. He hadn’t bothered to remove her shirt. He had never been much of a tits guy; he mostly just seemed to be a guy. Bolting upwards, Ben Shapiro addresses her and says, with no sign of exhaustion, “Now, light of my life, is the most important part. Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that the best way to conceive a child is to put a pillow under your hips after completion of intercourse.” She turns back away from him and closes her eyes, hoping for sleep to free her, as he continues. “Naturally, if this is the best way to conceive, and we are working to conceive a child tonight, you should obviously choose this course of action immediately or near-immediately after I’ve finished inside of your vagina.” The baby cries. She opens her eyes, gets up from the bed as he continues talking, and goes to try and lull the baby back to sleep. As was expected of her.
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
13
JOE BIDEN WILL PROBABLY WIN
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
Joe Biden Will Probably Win By Will Anderson
I
n hindsight, 2016 was a time when Americans would fabricate problems for themselves. Do you remember when there was some big controversy over private businesses telling their employees to say “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas?” Somehow this snowballed into “PC culture running amok” and an electoral plurality of the republican voter base declared Donald Trump to be the answer. After the primary we were given pragmatic reasons to vote for Trump rather than actual reasons to like him. Do you want more left-wing activists on the supreme court? Hillary Clinton’s campaign is financed by massive corporations, she’s not looking out for you, she’s looking out for her bottom line. It’s hard to say whether anyone actually cared about the whole Clinton email fiasco. Whether it was an act of supreme incompetence or a tiny detail that didn’t amount to much is irrelevant. The Trump campaign had something to attack her with. Every week leading up to the 2016 election felt like a blur of Trump saying something offensive, mainstream news sources overreacting in a way that made voters roll their eyes, and then Trump would say something even more offensive. By the end of the news cycle most people would forget about whatever Trump said or did last week because they were too busy focusing on what he did this week. Meanwhile verbal attacks on Clinton were a constant stream of “emails”, “benghazi”, and “corruption.” When election day rolled around most voters had forgotten half of Trump’s controversies, but they definitely knew about Clinton’s. According to an npr article from 2017, approximately 12% of people who voted for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 democratic primary ended up voting for Trump in the general election. 12% might not seem like alot at first but Bernie supporters made up a massive portion of the democratic electorate. Then there were the 1.5 million Americans who voted for Jill Stein, the 4.5 million Americans who voted for Gary Johnson, and the 700,000 Americans who voted for Evan McMullin. It’s hard to conceptualize just how differently voters saw Trump and Clinton back in 2016, but according to PEW research most Americans considered Donald Trump to be significantly more moderate than Hillary Clinton. This might sound odd now, but during the Republican primary Ted Cruz was calling for a flat-income tax and abolishing the IRS, so if that was the standard Republican position at the time then Trump’s proposals would seem pretty tame by comparison. The reason I’m spending this time contextualizing 2016 is to say that 2020 is a completely different beast. In 2016, Americans were worried about the rise of ISIS, economic instability, and PC culture. In 2020, Americans are worried about surviving a worldwide pandemic, fixing systemic racism in law enforcement, and creating unity in a politically divided country. It’s also hard to imagine third parties seeing much success this election after what happened in 2016. But what makes Joe Biden different from Clinton? For one thing, Joe Biden is not a leftist, or at the very least he’s moderate enough to infuriate the democratic socialists on Twitter. Most Trump ads on the
14
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
internet claim that Joe Biden is some radical socialist trying to destroy the American way of life, but that’s pretty hard to believe when every actual socialist keeps saying that he’s basically a Republican to them. Either they’re saying that because they actually believe it or they’re saying that because they’re trying to be trendy. Regardless, Biden looks really moderate to the majority of voters. Trump also lost the anti-establishment angle awhile ago. Big names within the Republican establishment (George W. Bush, Mitt Romney, John Kasich, etc) may have turned against him, but it’s still absurd to argue that a vote for the incumbent president is a vote “against the system.” Even next to a former Vice-President, Trump looks pretty establishment. Speaking of Biden being a former Vice-President, moderates are becoming nostalgic for the Obama administration, or at the very least they’re nostalgic for a time when late-night talk shows would be about something other than shit-talking the President. It’s not unthinkable that otherwise apolitical voters would vote just to stop the constant stream of anti-Trump propaganda coming from every channel on television. But the biggest reason I’m expecting Trump to lose is something you’re pretty unlikely to hear from anyone with a reputation they need to protect: Joe Biden is actually a good candidate. Biden came into the Democratic primary with more name recognition than any other candidate running and people saw him as more competent than anyone he was running against. Biden has a unique appeal with working class voters in key rust-belt swing states (like PA, WI, MI, OH, etc.) that no other Democratic candidate even comes close to. That’s not to say that Biden is some kind of a perfect candidate; on top of his frequent gaffes during speeches and interviews, he has come under fire recently for making sweeping generalizations about the black community in a recent interview with an NPR reporter, but despite making such comments his standing in polls didn’t worsen by any meaningful margin. These past few months, Biden has done a reasonably good job at presenting himself as a sensible and calm alternative that most research would suggest Americans want after the tumultuous year that was 2020.
Vol. XXXIII, Issue II
BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM
101 THINGS YOU CAN’T DO IN 2020
101 Things You Can’t Do in 2020 By Our Staff
1. Go outside without a mask 2. Be within 6 feet of another person 3. Make jokes 4. Call the police 5. Cough 6. Sneeze 7. Exhale 8. Read a physical copy of Pipe Dream (not that you would want to do that anyway) 9. Have a decent meal at any dining hall 10. Go to the gym 11. Walk on the left side of the hallway 12. Have a healthy social life 13. Exit the dining hall out of the wrong door 14. Exit the bus out of the wrong door 15. Leave Broome County 16. Leave 17. Mention bat soup 18. Lose your virginity, loser 19. Go to a sporting event 20. Go to any club meetings 21. Eat at Hinman dining hall 22. Use the Hinman Quad 23. Hinman...just Hinman in general 24. Use “China” and “virus” in the same sentence 25. Mention that Mulan was filmed in the same province that puts Uyhgurs into concentration camps 26. Say anything that makes China look bad 27. Get a haircut (unless you’re an elected official) 28. Watch Joe Rogan on YouTube 29. Criticize looting and rioting 30. Use illness as an excuse to get out of work 31. Resist the urge to read Binghamton Review 32. Be happy 33. Not have crippling depression 34. Be a police chief or district prosecutor 35. Have gatherings of more than ten people (but nine people is perfectly fine) 36. Not get cancelled for something you said 15 years ago 37. Watch upcoming movies from Chadwick Boseman (rest in peace) 38. Vote in person 39. Participate in a fair election
editor@binghamtonreview.com
40. Participate in a fair debate 41. Participate in an in-person class 42. Participate 43. Say the p-word 44. Say the n-word (noob, obviously) 45. Oh shit, I just said it! 46. Win the nomination for Bernie Sanders (there’s always next election!) 47. Believe that 2+2 = 4 48. Have a job 49. Have an office (What? Just us?) 50. Get your sandwich toasted at Subway in the Marketplace 51. Advocate for human rights in Hong Kong 52. Watch The Ellen Show 53. Murder 54. Sexual assault (unless you’re in a frat) 55. Not listen to “Ben Shapiro sings WAP” 56. Hand in physical copies of assignments 57. Go to Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, or Wisconsin 58. Write a coherent sentence as a group 59. Listen to a coherent Joe Biden speech 60. Play Fortnite on iOS devices 61. Go to a Zoom class without technical difficulties 62. Hold a Zoom meeting without getting Zoom bombed 63. Why is it called Zoom anyway? Isn’t the point of it to stay in one place? Isn’t that the opposite of “zooming?” 64. Make a funny joke^ 65. That was already number 3, Matt^ 66. Clearly it holds true Tommy^ 67. Take off classes on labor day 68. Take off classes on Jewish holidays 69. 69 (with a stranger) 70. Noice ;) pogggers 71. Have fun 72. Use a water fountain
73. Go to Six Flags 74. Use facts and/or logic 75. Not be an NPC 76. Not use hand sanitizer at least 10 times a day 77. Protest (unless it’s against Drumpf or racist police) 78. Not get expelled 79. Disobey Lord Cuomo 80. Not live in a constant state of fear 81. Not hear random yelling from down the hallway 82. Not be stung by murder hornets (remember how that was a thing for two weeks?) 83. I really don’t like double negatives, guys - Tommy 84. Get what you want (just like the Rolling Stones said) 85. Get punished for defying basic grammatical rules 86. Play a good Madden game (unless you’re old school) 87. Play a good Last of Us Part II story 88. Trust Netflix to not release movies with pedophilic undertones 89. Listen to the Pipe Dream response diss track (we’re still waiting) 90. Read a funny satire article from the BUTT 91. Have good taste in music 92. Have taste (I might be sick, you guys) 93. Have shit in Detroit 94. Have a Target store 95. Have a sense of smell (I should really see a doctor) 96. Find a gamer GF 97. Be cringe (will lose subscriber) 98. Live in an apartment without 5 sponges 99. Respond to GroupMe messages 100. Eat actual meals 101. Let’s end it here guys, no one is going to understand these inside jokes anyway 102. Live in 2021 103. Count correctly 104. Have fun with Madeline 105. Guys stop adding things, we’re way past 101 106. Drink without eating (even though eating spreads more germs) 107. STOP
BINGHAMTON REVIEW
15