REPORTER DECEMBER 2019 reporter.rit.edu
“Just because you did it, doesn’t mean you’re guilty.” I wish I said that rst, but I didn’t. I saw it on a billboard somewhere in Georgia. It’s so true. “Guilt” is a legal term of art that means you either: (1) made a knowing and voluntary admission to a charge in a court of law, or (2) you have been found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a judge or jury. Just because you did it, doesn’t mean you’re guilty. That being said, if somebody accuses you of doing something illegal, it’s time to lawyer up. No talking to police, your RA, your friends… talk to a lawyer rst. P. Adam Militello, Esq. (585) 485-0025 https://rochesternyDWI.lawyer
Please Recycle
REPORTER EDITOR IN CHIEF Cayla Keiser PRINT MANAGING EDITOR Kasey Mathews ONLINE MANAGING EDITOR Victoria Sebastian COPY EDITOR Mimi Lee NEWS EDITOR Jess Sides TECHNOLOGY EDITOR Karina Le LEISURE EDITOR Karina Le FEATURES EDITOR Morgan LaMere WELLNESS EDITOR Anne Taylor VIEWS EDITOR Tyler English WRITERS Leland Goodrich, Tyler English, Morgan LaMere, Karina Le, Ali Johnston, Catherine Rafferty, Cayla Keiser, Kasey Mathews
ART ART DIRECTOR Lily Garnaat ONLINE ART DIRECTOR Monica Nguyen-Vo SENIOR DESIGNER Cassy Smithies DESIGNERS Deztiny Di Meo, Deena Feldmann, Cassy Smithies, Ella Mathewson, Cristian Maynez, Jiayi Zheng, Lily Garnaat, Sabrina McCune ILLUSTRATORS Darius Serebrova, Maggie Dybas, Elizabeth Dettmann, Neil Edward Williamson, Lily Garnaat, Aria Dines, Corey Hemingway
PHOTOGRAPHY
EDITOR’S NOTE When my step-dad was in college, he and his friends would find themselves at Denny’s late at night discussing complex, controversial topics. Discussions about abortion, the death penalty and assisted suicide would become heated as they each defended their opinion. At the peak of the debate, one of them would yell out, “SWITCH!” At this point, they had to argue the other person’s perspective. While someone might have felt strongly against the issue, they had to consider why their friend believed the opposite. So often we become completely caught up in our own way of thinking, we deem ourselves “right” and ignore those who think differently. We find ourselves living in social media echo chambers, only surrounding ourselves with the posts and people we agree with. Rarely do we remember that the way we view the world is subjective, determined by our personal backgrounds, cultures, religions, family and experiences. We all have our reasons for feeling the way we do. It’s easy to generalize people by who or what they support, but our perceptions might not be the reality. Just as not all polarizing issues are truly black and white, neither are the reasons behind people’s beliefs. Rather than refusing to interact with those who think differently from you, play the “switch” game. Ask them the reasons behind their beliefs. Resist the urge to cut them off, proclaim that they are wrong or shut them out just because you don’t like the way they think. The point of these conversations is not to persuade others to think the way you do or change their opinions — rather, it’s to come to a fuller understanding of the person, their reasoning and the topic itself. Despite our best efforts to understand each other, sometimes these conversations don’t end how we might anticipate. It’s okay to disengage from or avoid them if you feel like the end result might be damaging to your physical or mental health. What matters is the reasonable effort made to come to a mutual understanding. We need to try giving others a chance even if we disagree with them. We need to create healthy spaces for challenging discussions. Regardless of our opinions, we are all fighting for the same thing — to be heard and understood.
PHOTO EDITOR Catherine Rafferty PHOTOGRAPHERS Jesse Wolfe, Catherine Rafferty, Jasmine Lin, Amelia Hamilton, Becky Reich
BUSINESS BUSINESS MANAGER Ward Couillard AD / PR MANAGER Ali Johnston ONLINE SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATOR Michael Canning ONLINE SERVICES MANAGER Efe Ozturkoglu PODCAST PRODUCER Maximilian Thoburn VIDEO EDITOR Trisha Pickelhaupt PODCAST HOST Wyatt Kinsey ADVISOR Rudy Pugliese PRINTING Sutherland Printing CONTACT +1 (585) 475–2212
Cayla Keiser Editor in Chief Letters to the Editor should be sent to rpteic@rit.edu. No letters will be printed unless signed. All letters received become the property of REPORTER.
Reporter Magazine is published monthly during the academic year by a staff comprised of students at Rochester Institute of Technology. Business, Editorial and Design facilities are located in Room A-730, in the lower level of the Campus Center. Our phone number is +1 (585) 475–2212. The Advertising Department can be reached at +1 (585) 475–2213. “The world is ending anyway, let’s just be gay.” -T.E. The opinions expressed in Reporter do not necessarily reflect those of the Institute. Reporter is not responsible for materials presented in advertising areas. Copyright © 2019 Reporter Magazine. All rights reserved. No portion of this Magazine may be reproduced without prior written permission.
December 3
TA B L E O F NE WS 6
IS ARMING EDUCATORS THE FUTURE? Some states look to arm their educators to prevent mass shootings
T E CH 8
SCIENCE FICTION BECOMING REALITY A look at how far genetic editing has come and where it could lead our species
LEISURE 10
14
@reportermag 4 December
A CULTURE OF OVERWORKING Money doesn’t buy happiness, so why do we work so hard to get it?
AYL: SANDWICH ALIGNMENT CHART If you were a sandwich, what kind would you be?
CONTENTS cover and TOC photography by Jesse Wolfe | cover and TOC illustration by Lily Garnaat
FE AT URES 16
18
THINKING OUTSIDE THE (TO-GO) BOX Is a hot dog a sandwich? Are muffins cake? Does it really matter?
CSR IN THE ERA OF GLOBALIZATION Corporate social responsibility is a delicate balance between ethics and finances
WELLNESS 22
KNOW YOUR OPTIONS: UNPLANNED PREGNANCY
VIEWS 24
Between raising a child, adoption and abortion, there are many factors to consider
28
30
A NEW, DESENSITIZED AMERICA The world is on fire and tragedy surrounds us — but yeah, sure, that’s a cute puppy
WORD ON THE STREET Professors: What’s your biggest fear for students? Your biggest hope?
RINGS RIT’s only digital confessional. Text or call (585) 672–4840
reporter.rit.edu December 5
Is Arming Educators the Future? by Leland Goodrich | photo-illustration by Catherine Rafferty | design by Deztiny Di Meo
H
umans harming and killing one another is as old as humanity itself. The killing of humans at the hands of others has presented itself in countless historical examples of war, crime and self-defense. In modern times, mass shootings have emerged as a dominating threat to society, igniting a plethora of related public opinion discussions. One of these hotly debated firearm discussions has centered itself around arming the education faculty at state and private facilities. As the debate continues, many states such as Oklahoma, Colorado and Ohio have already taken steps to arm their education faculty with firearms. However, many concerns remain about this up-and-coming security tactic. Does arming
6 News
educators deter potential mass shooters and effectively secure our schools? Or will the increased number of firearms create a more chaotic situation for first responders, doing little to stop mass shootings?
BACKGROUND
When discussing the subject of mass shootings in the U.S., one name is on the tip of everyone’s tongue: Columbine. The shooting at Columbine High School in the spring of 1999 surprised and disturbed the American public with the ferocity, viciousness and discipline in which it was carried out. Many believed that the violent acts at Columbine would be an isolated atrocity and did not see the coming effects it would have or the precedent it would set.
Since the events at Columbine, the number of mass shootings against vulnerable targets in locations such as schools, malls and public venues have been on the rise globally. The FBI reported that from 2000 to 2018, there were 277 shootings of this kind in the U.S. that resulted in 2,430 casualties and 884 fatalities. These tragedies sparked a search for the root cause of mass shootings. While there is no singular cause, blame has been placed on things such as violent video games, explicit music, lack of access to mental health care, volatile internet communities and easy access to firearms. While research to find the catalysts of mass shootings are underway, citizens want solutions in the here and now.
One controversial solution is the idea of arming and training education staff with firearms. Many argue that rapid police response times to these locations and advanced security measures are not enough to put the minds of concerned citizens at ease. However, educators are always on location and could be the key to deterring potential mass shooters. While some members of the general public adamantly defend this new idea, others put up fierce resistance to the thought of turning teachers into combat-ready personnel and seriously question if this policy is effective.
Examination
Examining the results of any program in its infancy is extremely difficult. Giving teachers firearms to defend students is something that just does not have enough data to attest to its effectiveness or ineffectiveness. Yet, many experts believe that policies of this sort will not provide the results people are searching for in the long term. Lieutenant Jake Griffin, a Public Safety officer, sympathized with citizens who are in favor of arming teachers, but personally could not support these types of policies. “I can see the allure of [these policies]. Why wouldn’t you want to fight back? It’s a natural human instinct; but why not just fight the problem?” Griffin said.
The problem he sees is mental health factors, which are proving to be more important in understanding why mass shootings happen. Many experts believe that increasing the availability of mental health care would be a more effective way of combating these acts of violence. He added that “here in New York, we see a lot of funding for mental health and other third-party resources that help people through things.” While the funding of mental health is not a definitive signal that states won’t seek policies that arm educators, diverting funds toward the immense cost that training and arming educators would impose is unlikely. Imagine the cost states would have to burden by training, arming and qualifying educators at all levels in New York alone. The funding necessary would be an astronomical number that tax payers would ultimately have to come up with. Even if the cost of these policies is factored out, there are other complications. Luke Kusmierz, a Rochester community member with five years of military police expertise, noted that “if there was an active shooter, armed faculty members would not do much to stop it.” The training regimen that educators would need to keep up with is not something a community can realistically expect from them.
“Why wouldn’t you want to fight back? It’s a natural human instinct.”
“I don’t think you can ask an educator to keep up with training every four to six months,” Kusmierz said. “It would be a lot to ask teachers to train on top of their rigorous academic schedules.”
would be a lot to ask teachers “toIt train on top of their rigorous academic schedules. ”
Griffin added that many teachers and staff would probably feel uncomfortable being armed. “How many people would even realistically want to carry [firearms] at their job? Teachers want to teach,” Griffin said.
A FUTURE OF ARMED EDUCATORS?
Only time will tell if the newly implemented policies in select states across the nation will have any positive effect. While some states in the U.S. have decided to go forth with arming their educators, most remain hesitant in doing so. Until we as a community can find a lasting solution to mass shootings, Griffin encourages RIT students and staff members to undergo some form of active shooter training. “Faculty and staff active shooter training is done through the Center for Professional Development. [And] most student groups can just ask for it through Public Safety,” he said. While it may be too early to definitively evaluate the efficacy of arming education staff, Griffin emphasized the value of simply communicating with one another. He noted the importance of talking to fellow students and reporting something that seems out of character. “Everyone, everyone needs to talk here,” he said. Just asking someone if they’re doing alright can go leaps and bounds. This communication between educators, students, police and medical professionals are paramount factors that are understated too often. From whichever stance these types of policies are viewed from, arming teachers or staff would require them to go above and beyond their requirements by becoming a combatant, putting them in immense danger. As Griffin pointed out, “it’s one thing to own and carry a gun, but it’s a completely different thing to fire it.”
News 7
S
C
IEN
F B E O MI N G I TION
C E
E
C I T
C
R
EA LI TY by Tyler English illustration by Darius Serebrova design by Deena Feldmann
E
ver wonder where those neon yellow, green, blue and pink fish came from? You know, the ones that have all the matching accessories: tanks, decorations, rocks and their own special ultraviolet light? Well, as it turns out, a team of scientists in Singapore were the first ones to genetically modify fish to glow in such a way. Genetic editing in small animals and plants has been around since the 1970s, according to Synthego, a company that provides genetically edited stem cells. do so, they cut out areas of genes that Starting with plants and bacteria, scientists aren’t performing how they should be began to explore the realm of DNA and or as they’re expected to. genetics. As their understanding of the Dr. Sandi Connelly, a principal lecturer proteins grew, so did their curiosity. in the Thomas H. Gosnell School of Life When scientists learned how to modify Sciences, explained how DNA works and the genes of small, simple organisms, they what the CRISPR Cas-9 protein actually does. began to wonder, “How could this be applied Connelly compared DNA to a street of houses — toTip: humans?” Design your headers as part of the body text! each person has different foundations that It makes it easier to edit the copy later on. sprout out different and unique homes. “CRISPR is a piece of DNA, and we The scientific community is stirring [scientists] attach to it an enzyme ... it cuts with the emergence of CRISPR DNA, more the DNA at a very specific place like a pair of specifically known as the CRISPR-Cas9 scissors,” Connelly said. “When we look at protein. CRISPR stands for Clustered CRISPR, typically we look at CRISPR Cas-9.” Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Whereas CRISPR is the DNA itself, Cas-9 is Repeats. CRISPR is a faster, cheaper and the enzyme, a specialized protein that splits ***Please delete the 1-5 upon submission. more accurate way ofpages editing the genome, the DNA. Connelly said that this allows for according to the National Institute of Health. both the CRISPR DNA and the original DNA By sending in two different pieces of CRISPR to stick together like magnets. However, due DNA, scientists are able to modify genes. To to the specificity of this technique, scientists
CRISPR
8 Technology
need to know where in the DNA they’re looking. “Using those same enzymes, we v can cut [and] place back in the good gene,” Connelly said. Now, this technique would not be done by injecting the CRISPR DNA directly into a fully grown adult. Instead, scientists would take a sample of a person’s bone marrow and alter the genes of those cells. Since bone marrow is responsible for producing red blood cells, the new altered bone marrow will produce cells with the new DNA.
“There is a lot of mi s u nnd eer s ta tannd in gg about gene editing.”
Connelly said the changes would not be instantaneous. The human body replaces a majority of its cells within 13 days, so it would take around two weeks for the newly edited gene to be present in the human body.
APPLICATIONS
The ability to now alter genes of more complex organisms brings with it a variety of applications. Plants can be changed to increase nutritional value and pesticidal properties, whereas bacteria can be used to generate hormones and medicines. Dr. David Holtzman, an adjunct professor in the College of Science, understands how gene editing is used and what it could be used for. “Most people are familiar with it [gene editing] for things like modifying plants ... [but] there is a lot of misunderstanding about gene editing,” Holtzman said. CRISPR has begun to work its way into at-home kits, where those with some scientific expertise can genetically modify their own plants to glow or be a different color. This is fairly simple in the world of gene editing as it is changing a simple expressed trait — one that is biologically shown. Genes decide what traits a person has, but that person’s environment and what happens to their body determines how those traits are
expressed. As gene editing becomes more and more innovative, Holtzman said that there are limitations to what gene editing can and cannot do. “It turns out most traits are more than one gene,” Holtzman said. Holtzman used hair color as an example. Numerous genes and sections of DNA code for what an individual’s hair color will be. It can be hard and time-consuming to find the right area of the DNA to target for modification. Connelly talked about the idea of changing hair color as well, but took it a few steps further. She suggested that we may start wanting to create offspring that all have blonde hair and blue eyes, which realistically we could accomplish. This then opens parents up to the ideas of having all male children or all female children.
ETHICS In recent years, science has progressed faster than we could have thought. What appeared to be science fiction in the past is inching ever closer to our scientific reality. “The ability to do [new] things happens a lot faster than our understanding of what we are doing,” Holtzman said.
v
Regardless of the potential scientific progress that could be made, Holtzman, Connelly and other members of the scientific community are having conversations about what should be done with this technology. Where should the limits lie, and how far should humans go with genetic technology? If our parents changed our genes, they would also be changing the genes of all of our descendants by extension. Did they consent to something like that? “Some might argue, whether we gene edit or not, we don’t really have control over what our parents did,” Holtzman said. “There is the possibility that if we changed [certain genes] then we can change them back.” Reversal isn’t a guarantee, though. Holtzman mentioned ways in which gene editing could greatly improve the quality of life for all humankind, such as curing Alzheimer’s disease. Connelly brought up how easy it would be to reduce the effects of aging using genetic modification. The consequences of the choices made now may not affect the generation making them. As the movement to improve the genetic composition of the human race pushes forward, plots in sci-fi novels may no longer be abstract, distant futures. Rather, for better or worse, they could be the reality we are setting up for generations to come.
“Where should the limits lie, and how far should humans go with gy?” gge ne ti cc t eech n o l o gy? Technology 9
A CULTURE OF OVERWORKING
by Morgan LaMere \ illustration by Maggie Dybas | design by Cassy Smithies
M
ost students are bound to have heard something like this: “Enjoy your time at college, because it all goes downhill from here.” As students, we’re regularly bombarded with somber reminders that once we leave college, our lives as we know them are essentially over. We’re told to make college count — to have as much fun as we can so that we can later leech from the nostalgia it provides. But wait a second, isn’t college supposed to be a time to prepare yourself for the fulfilling career waiting for you? What happened?
AN OVERWORKED SOCIETY While far from a universal rule, in America there’s a common idea that we live to work. Rather than working to enjoy our lives, our lives often become consumed by our work. According to Robert Ulin, a professor in anthropology, this is a fundamental difference between the U.S. and Europe that he discovered from years of living in France. “[After giving birth,] women can step out of the workforce for a full year with pay and have no anxiety that [their] job won’t exist when they come back,” Ulin said. Ulin stated that RIT and corporations are still working toward having such
a supportive policy. At the time of his daughter’s birth seven years ago, he relied upon colleagues to fill in for classes and other work and to be understanding if he missed meetings. Alongside strong maternal leave policies, France’s work week is also shortened to as low as 35 hours. According to Ulin, research indicates that this change doesn’t fail to cut productivity — it might even improve it. Vincent Serravallo, associate professor in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology, stated just how different the U.S. was from Europe. He referenced both the U.S.’s heavy emphasis on work, and how we’re one of the countries with the highest hours worked. “In [the industrial era], employers were demanding six days a week, 12-13 hour days,” Serravallo said. “We fought very hard to get the eight-hour workday; now, we’re moving in the opposite direction.” Serravallo claimed that this post-World War II era boom brought about stronger unions. Work was more long term and families could often survive on one paycheck. Now, both spouses are often forced to work, and union representation is down to a small percentage of the workforce. He stated that the population is now split between those who can’t find enough work and those who are overworked, with college graduates often falling into that latter
portion of working over 50 hours per workweek. “All these things together create longer hours, more intense and faster-paced [work environments] with no mandated vacation time, sick days or holidays,” Serravallo said. “Lower-income workers have the least amount of opportunity for sick and parental leave.” This dramatic difference between the U.S. and western Europe has a lot to do with cultural values and the policies that come from them. “In regard to shift leave, vacation and holidays, there is no federal policy on that,” Serravallo said. “In other words, if someone wants to work 365 days each year, they may do so.”
INDIVIDUALISM VS. COLLECTIVISM The lack of an all-encompassing policy has a lot to do with America’s individualism and personal freedom. But does having the individual freedom to pick between two choices matter? “[We have] concerns that if we have those laws, we take away from the autonomy of corporations to set certain policies,” Ulin said. While some might say this lack of policy lifts certain restraints, Ulin argues that this only makes us more vulnerable. “Despite higher taxes, [Europe] gets a great deal more security,” Ulin said.
“We fought very hard to get the eight-hour workday;
now we’re moving in the opposite direction.”
10 Leisure
Without the financial stability provided by a job, individuals are often on their own when providing for their basic needs. “Housing needs and medical insurance is all based on the work we have,” Serravallo said. “We need to work because so many of our needs are coupled.” Connecting our well-being to one specific job only makes our careers more stressful. Maria Richart, director of Career Services and Cooperative Education, suggested one of the main reasons we feel overworked comes down to our core identity. “The first thing people ask you is what you do for a living,” Richart stated. “In Europe, it’s different — each time I go, I come back with a sense of valuing people, time and what you do.” To Richart, the U.S. focuses on what someone does for a living as their identity, while Europeans focus on valuing experiences. Ulin suggested that, by coming together, we can solve things we otherwise could not. In the past, we’ve come together to enact change through unions. If one employee goes alone to request improvements, they are likely to be turned down. However, as shown with the recent General Motors strike, real concessions can be achieved. With a new generation entering the workforce, there is an increased opportunity to enact collective change. According to Serravallo, this change is already taking place. “If we come to realize that people working collectively can achieve certain kinds of common ends, that’s a way to make advancements at the university level and at the political level,” Ulin said. Conversely, there are many who work long hours by choice, rather than by mandate of a company.
This seldom ends well and, according to Ulin, eventually comes to a choice between a connection with their family or their pursuit of economic success. To Serravallo, money does not buy happiness. Social science tells us that less is more if you are connected to something bigger than your own personal life. “Connection with other people, control at work, having a say in decision making in the workplace, your community and in family [is what matters],” he said. “A lot of people graduate from RIT [believing] that success means material success. That’s not true.” For Richart, her views on money buying happiness were definite. “It really can’t,” she said. “Well, for some people it can, but for me, it can’t.” When she was in graduate school, her professor told her that she shouldn’t go into this difficult profession for the money — a position in corporate America would provide a salary three times as high. But to Richart, she loved her work, and it was the American spirit to give back that she appreciates.
“For some people, [earning more] helps them to give back. That giving spirit, it makes you happy,” she said. “That’s what makes us great, our giving experience.” For Dawn Whaley, president of Sharecare — an individualized health platform — her beliefs closely match those of the company she represents. Sharecare is a company focused around helping people build a better life through individual transformation. To Whaley, it’s never focused on the money. “Some people are their best selves when they’re working 24/7 and that makes them really happy,” she said. “Sometimes those people make a ton of money, some don’t, but they’re really happy.”
HOW TO: SELF-CARE Whaley believes that the U.S. is near the top of the list for overworked and undervacationed countries and uses this knowledge to better help her own employees. Nearly 80 percent of Sharecare’s workers utilize the app service. They also frequently
CAN MONEY BUY HAPPINESS? Some employees who work overtime and long hours do so out of necessity, while others work to improve their quality of living. “You’re faced with continuing anxiety of ‘How am I going to pay my bills; how am I going to pay for college?’” Ulin said. “[On the other hand] there are people devoting themselves to making money and ignoring their families, and they come to a reckoning.”
Leisure 11
“Take a step back; look at the company, look at the culture, does it match your culture?” visit massage therapists and bring in pets. In addition, their work from home policy allows for a more flexible work environment. Working from home has its own problems, according to Richart, stating that it’s often difficult for people if they don’t have a set eight-hour workday. “People who work from home have a harder time disconnecting [their work life from their home life] — where do you draw that line?” Richart said. Workers with salaries face a similar issue. While workers who are paid hourly have strict rules, salaried workers work until they get the job done. According to a study conducted by Ohio University, the top 10 percent of employees don’t work a full eight hours, usually taking breaks every hour. A similar study in Sweden showed that, of the nurses included in the study, those who worked a six-hour day instead of eight took half as many days off, were 64 percent more productive and were 20 percent happier overall.
12 Leisure
Harvard Business Review also showed that working a six-hour day could be just as productive, if not more. A New Zealandbased study showed the creative benefits of a 32-hour workweek. The evidence is there; for many, however, tradition can be hard to break. “When I was coming up in the early ’90s, you worked hard, came [to work] first and left last,” Whaley said. “Now, it’s shifting to quality over quantity.” Part of this change is being spurred on by the introduction of millennials to the workforce, overcoming the patterns set in the industrial age. “The second or third most important thing to millennials is working for a passion and being true to themselves,” Whaley said. “I feel like, I always want to tell anyone to just do their best.” This change is not only being felt in the workplace, but also on college campuses and during co-ops. “Your generation is completely different from the generation before, specifically
valuing work-life balance,” Richart said, regarding typical students. Richart noticed that many students going on co-op are really valuing not just the technical aspects, but the time to explore. However, there is still some improvement to do. “College students know what they like to do, [but they only] look at the job and the salary,” she said. “Take a step back; look at the company, look at the culture, does it match your culture?” Corporate culture changes every day, but still too slowly for some. In the meantime, take those few minutes and extra days here and there for self-care. If you have a break, use it, and try to keep work confined to the actual workplace. Richart cannot express how important it is to take some time to have an actual lunch break and talk to people, to stand up and walk around. “Take care of your mental health during the day,” she said. “Create relationships; you see them more often than your own family — you better like them!”
Research in Sweden has shown to impact the following after implementing a
six-hour workday:
+64%
+20%
Happiness
Productivity
-50% Call Offs
Leisure 13
AYL: Sandwich Alignment Chart by Karina Le | photography by Jasmine Lin | design by Deztiny Di Meo
EVIL
NEUTRAL
GOOD
LAWFUL
14 Leisure
NEUTRAL
CHAOTIC
BLT
Hoagie
Hot Dog
You’re not plain, per se, but you don’t really venture out of what you believe is a classic sandwich. However, you’re the type of person who can be very passionate about your sandwiches, and it can be very charming. But most times, it comes off as you judging other people’s sandwiches because how can they not like your BLT?
Hoagies are sandwiches, for sure, but there’s something unique about them that can make people think otherwise. Just like the hoagie, you’re the type of person that gets along with people usually, but you can also surprise people when you want to.
Hot dogs always toe the line between being their own individual existence and a sandwich in line with the rest. Today, you decide you’re a sandwich and no one can really stop you. You make your own rules and if it just so happens to align with the law, it’s just a coincidence.
Lunch Meat Sandwich
Bread Sandwich
Toaster Pastries
Just your regular, plain ol’ sandwich. It has some deli meat and some cheese — the works. People who align with this sandwich are creatures of habit. You tend not to cross most lines, if you come across them at all, and pretty much mind your own business. Good for you.
Sometimes people ask you if eating a wheat-on-wheat-on-wheat sandwich is really that good, and you answer that it is. But honestly, you’ve eaten it so much that at this point you ARE the bread.
Toaster pastries are the classic breakfast sandwich the whole family can enjoy. Even if people question your taste in sandwiches, you’re the type of person to go about your own pace and do what comes naturally to you.
Reuben
Two Pizzas Smashed Together
Lasagna
As a sandwich that mandates that you put chips in there for MAXIMUM crunch, you’re the type of person who’s just a little mischievous and a lot spontaneous. You’re the type of person to find loopholes in everything, and then proceed to jump through those holes because, hey, it’s technically legal!
“Wow” is the only thing anyone can really say about you. You’re never quite sure if it’s a good thing or a bad thing. One thing is for sure — you really stand out among all other kinds of sandwiches.
If you really think about it, lasagna is just a multi-tiered sandwich. Lasagnas are the kind of person you sit next to and think “glad I’m not that guy.” But you are. You are that guy. For better or for worse, you’re the kind of person who really thinks outside of the box and decides to light the box on fire once you’re done.
WELLNESS
Spacious apartment-style rooms, in a park-like, riverside setting only 5 minutes from campus! Visit
RITstay.com for exclusive RIT rates Staybridge Suites- Rochester University 1000 Genesee Street Rochester, NY 14611 585-527-9110
Leisure 15
Thinking Outside the
(To-Go) Box by
I
on
nst
oh
J Ali
n by an on ttm ati e r t s son hD illu ew bet h a t z Ma Eli lla yE b ign des
t’s late and you begin to feel that familiar pain in your stomach — suddenly the only thing on your mind is the batch of cupcakes in your kitchen you have left over from the night before. You ask your friend if she wants anything, and she responds with a question that makes you realize how little you actually know your best friend: “Can I have one of those muffins?” The hunger turns to rage and a heated debate begins. A cupcake isn’t the same thing as a muffin, is it? One question becomes a string
16 Features
of other controversial topics. Does pineapple belong on pizza? Is a hot dog a sandwich? There’s a reason why we don’t have a definitive answer to any one of these questions — they are all based on opinion. The only one who can answer these questions is the person asking them, but that doesn’t stop us from debating them.
Why Do We Care?
Take a look around whatever room
you’re in. Notice each of the things in the room, but don’t put those objects in a group. Instead, look at the individual title of a book, the name of the snack on the table or the material and color of the vase in the corner and treat them as unique objects unlike any other in the room. Unless you’re in an empty, windowless cell, you can likely see hundreds of different things around. It can be overwhelming to look at each of these items one by one, so humans decided that it would be easier to group them together.
With this mindset, now the room that you’re in could have books, desks and computers. It’s much easier to wrap your mind around a few different groups rather than hundreds of individual items. William Middleton, a professor of sociology and anthropology with a focus in cultural food studies, gave his understanding of why it’s easier to look at items while they’re in categories. “Humans are really good at classifying things, and I think it’s vital for our existence to be able to lump certain seemingly familiar concepts together,” Middleton said. Not only does classifying different objects make viewing the world a little more bearable,
sandwich, but what happens when it doesn’t stop there — what if you try to put a label on everything you know? “The problem [with categorization] is this; sometimes we’re too good at spotting these patterns of similarity,” Middleton said. “In pathological cases, you get conspiracy theories — where everything has meaning and everything is signifying something else.” Not every object or situation in life has meaning beyond its surface level. When we try to find a meaning that didn’t initially exist, it’s easy to fall down a rabbit hole of conspiracies.
It’s vital for our existence to be able to lump certain seemingly familiar concepts together.” but it also allows us to form an opinion on something previously unknown because it shares characteristics with something else. For example, if you see a mosquito, it is easily recognizable as a bug. In your mind, if all bugs are gross, the mosquito will be, too. Anthony Jimenez, a professor of sociology and anthropology, explained why we might use categorization as often as we do. “From a sociological perspective, categorization has to do with meaning making; I think that, as human beings, we like to categorize things because we’ve internalized meanings associated with those categories,” Jimenez said. “We like to do that because they make sense to us and they correspond to messages that we’ve been taught from our childhoods and onward.” So if categorization can help us manage our day-to-day lives and give meaning to seemingly unimportant objects, does it really matter if it causes an argument every once in a while? As it turns out, trying to fit things into specific groups might be doing just as much harm as it does good.
DANGERS OF DICHOTOMIES
Categorization branches beyond simple food controversies. You might not hurt anyone if you try to label a hot dog a
Beyond conspiracy theories, another issue with categorization is that it tends to work in dichotomous pairs. Often, a question will be framed with choices like “this or that.” Such a dichotomous question can lead people to believe that the answer is black or white, but more often the answer falls somewhere in the gray area.
Asking a question itself isn’t harmful, but asking a question designed to have only two answers can discredit other opinions someone may have on the topic.
THINKING DIFFERENTLY
You might still be upset that your friend suggested putting pineapple on pizza, and that’s your prerogative — but keep in mind, they might consider your favorite toppings weird, too. Everybody comes from a variety of different backgrounds that socialized them into knowing what they now consider to be normal. Sure, these dichotomies might not be harmful when asking a question like “Coke or Pepsi?” but they can be when discussing more serious topics, such as gender, law or politics.
Sometimes we’re too good at spotting these patterns of similarity.” Jimenez maintains that generally, dichotomies can cause problems or even loss of perspectives. A Brain Food article titled “This or That: How Useful Are Dichotomies Really?” discusses the same concept. “Things are often more complicated than just a ‘one or the other’ scenario. Happiness and sadness exist on a spectrum, much like light and all its different shades and hues. The simplistic way of categorizing this information doesn’t always capture the whole picture,” John Panetti, the author of Brain Food, wrote.
Like puzzle pieces, not everything you know is going to fit into one specific category. What’s the point in trying to shove the pieces into a puzzle where they don’t belong? So go ahead — put the pineapple on the pizza, dip the fry into the milkshake and call the hot dog a sandwich. Until there is a definitive answer to those questions, you can’t be wrong.
Features 17
CSR IN THE ERA OF
GLOBALIZATION by Catherine Rafferty | illustration by Neil Williamson | design by Cristian Maynez
B
usinesses are responsible for making money. They need to make profits to pay their workers and to continue to fund making more of their product for society. However, an often overlooked responsibility of businesses is their social and cultural impact. Large U.S. firms have become more and more politically engaged, publicizing their stances on polarizing issues and policies, such as LGBTQ rights, climate change, geopolitics, gun control or immigration reform, in response to changing consumer expectations. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is the idea that businesses should be conscientious of their impact on the communities they serve and be actively seeking to benefit society at large. There are different frameworks that companies can employ to take steps toward incorporating social responsibility into their business practices. This can help make big decisions about when to choose profits, when to choose their values and how to balance their two competing interests.
18 Features
The question is, are these efforts to be socially responsible always in good faith? Or are they just trying to improve the public’s image of the company to make even more money?
A CLOSER LOOK The National Basketball Association (NBA) had to make an ethical judgment call in a recent debate sparked by their connection to markets in Hong Kong and China. Daryl Morey, general manager of the Houston Rockets, had no idea that his simple seven-word tweet would spark a controversy that crossed between cultures, geopolitical spheres and corporate ethical bounds. On Oct. 4, 2019, he tweeted, “Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong” — a reference to his support of the antiextradition bill protests in the former British colony. It has since been removed from Twitter by the NBA.
The corporation backpedaled on Morey’s statement following the announcement that the Chinese Basketball Association would suspend all cooperation with the Rockets. The Rockets would also lose the sponsorship of two Chinese companies — multinational conglomerate Tencent and NBA-affiliated shoe company Li Ning. The NBA issued a formal apology, stating the tweet was “regrettable.” China is the NBA’s second largest market and, by making these attempts to repair their business relationship, critics believe they failed to stand behind a basic right to freedom of speech — a freedom that many Americans feel should have been defended. The apology prompted bipartisan examination from American politicians who denounced the NBA for appeasing Chinese authoritarianism rather than supporting the American value of democracy. Texas Senator Ted Cruz tweeted and condemned the sports giant for “shamefully
retreating” when faced with the decision. Beto O’Rourke, former Democratic candidate for the 2020 presidential election, conceded with Cruz, denouncing the NBA for “blatant prioritization of profits over human rights.” The NBA isn’t alone in its actions, though. Other American entertainment companies are complying with Chinese censorship to protect their own business interests. Activision Blizzard, a major American gaming company, suspended Hong Kongbased professional gamer, Ng Wai “Blitzchung” Chung, because of a comment supporting Hong Kong protests during an official interview after winning in the highest level of the online card game Hearthstone in early October. Blizzard argued that Blitzchung’s comment brought him into “public disrepute,” a violation of the Hearthstone Grandmasters rules. Both incidents raise questions about how businesses must balance making profits and supporting values, whether those values be
those of the organization, the country of origin or the host country in which they are operating.
BALANCING ETHICS WITH PROFIT American companies that operate overseas must take into account the impact that expressing their political views has on the social environments they do business in. By voicing political opinions, corporations put themselves in difficult positions with foreign business partners, especially when they have vested interests in markets whose political forces are at odds with each other, as seen with Hong Kong and China. Robert Barbato, a professor of management who teaches a class on business ethics, says businesses do not necessarily have to sacrifice profits to be socially aware. In fact, in order to do good business, the company should have been considering their social standing from the start.
“We want to be mindful of making sure that anybody we do business with is better off because we’ve done business with them. This is the beauty of business,” he explained. Barbato continued, stating, “This requires a moral awareness, moral sensitivity, moral imagination [and] sometimes moral courage on the part of companies. And it requires a balance, being able to understand that there are different competing tensions [and] goals that have to be addressed at the same time.” The NBA has previously pushed back against markets that threaten its moral values domestically. The league pulled their 2017 All-Star game from Charlotte, N.C. in response to the passage of a law that would restrict transgender individuals’ access to identityconforming bathrooms. In the case of China, the NBA is dealing with an entirely different set of moral and ethical standards than in North Carolina. It also has a significant amount of
We want to be mindful of making sure that anybody we do business with is better off because we’ve done business with them.
Features 19
This is about capital, and using capital wisely and efficiently for the betterment of the world. financial assets — capital — to protect. Their operations in China alone are worth $4 billion annually. Barbato emphasized that businesses must protect capital in order to operate properly, and if they do their jobs right, the exchange of capital should be helping people. “You shouldn’t see this as just greedy people wanting to make more and more money. This is about capital, and using capital wisely and efficiently for the betterment of the world,” he said. Critics of social responsibility, such as American economist Milton Friedman, defend the idea that business’s only responsibility is to make a profit. Friedman wrote a well-known book detesting corporate social responsibility called “Capitalism and Freedom.” In a 1970 New York Times op-ed, he wrote, “Only people can have responsibilities. A corporation is an artificial person and, in this sense, may have artificial responsibilities, but ‘business’ as a whole cannot be said to have responsibilities, even in this vague sense.” Friedman explained social responsibility does not work because corporate executives would become “civil servants” and would be using their employer’s money to carry out their individual social responsibilities or serve a general social interest when he should be acting as an agent of the stockholders of the company. However, businesses have been employing these non-market strategies — strategies that do not contribute to the financial interest of the company — for years. They are able to gain soft power by engaging in these activities. A lot of firms choose to take a stand on political issues because they can lobby, endorse political candidates and fund political campaigns to shape public policies in their favor.
The difference with CSR is that the audience of the corporation’s view on controversial topics is not only politicians and public officials, but also the employees, customers and public at large. There are some instances when companies try to be socially responsible and it goes wrong. Ethics— what an individual or organization values — is what’s most important. They can vary from place to place and can change over time depending on a variety of factors. Americans value free speech, like in the case of Morey’s tweet, and many would have preferred for the NBA to have defended this value on the global stage. Barbato believes the company needs to have respect for the other country’s culture while still sticking to their own moral standards. He argues it would be “moral imperialism” for the NBA to assume that their values are superior to any other markets’ values. However, they should not become “moral relativists” and simply accept that the values of one of their global markets without stopping to consider if the organization was going to benefit from them in the long run. Barbato believes moral progress comes with the understanding of other people’s morals in relation to one’s own, finding a way to balance the two. “We have to try to navigate the sweet spot that properly balances the competing tensions. This is what being in a moral dilemma is all about,” he said. “But hopefully what results from this is we make progress.”
SUSTAINABILITY Social and ethical responsibility are also connected to the sustainability of a company. Companies may make business choices to preserve their business and the world for generations to come.
In 2015, the U.N. proposed the Sustainable Development goals that highlight 17 key areas of sustainability. Many of these goals include social elements, like “decent work and economic growth” and “responsible consumption and production.” Companies are starting to see the importance of social responsibility to their consumer base. Research shows that engaging in social responsibility pays off. According to a study by Nielsen, 48 percent of U.S. consumers say they would “definitely or probably change their consumption habits to reduce their impact on the environment.” Another study done by University of Toronto sociologist Josée Johnston found that nearly two-thirds of consumers resonated with the statement, “shopping is a powerful force for social and environmental change.” Gretchen Wainwright, senior lecturer in the Department Civil Engineering Technology, Environmental Management and Safety, explained that businesses are now issuing CSR reports. There are two main frameworks in place for companies who want to be more sustainably minded — becoming a certified B-corporations or issuing a GRI report. Certified B-corporations, according to their website, have aims for “reduced inequality, lower levels of poverty, a healthier environment, stronger communities, and the creation of more high-quality jobs with dignity and purpose.” Smaller firms apply for B-corp certifications because they see it as a marketplace differentiator. All by “harnessing the power of business,” the company is able to pursue its non-economically driven goals without harming profits because the certification builds the consideration of stakeholder impact into the legal structure of the company. GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards, which are designed for larger corporations,
They weren’t necessarily standing up or supporting some of the big social issues and social change that needs to take place. 20 Features
is the first and most widely adopted global standard for sustainability reporting. They collect data on a corporation’s impact on critical sustainability issues such as climate change, human rights, governance and social well-being. Wainwright said that before these new standards, companies didn’t fully commit themselves to social change. “They weren’t necessarily standing up or supporting some of the big social issues and social change that needs to take place. Especially when it comes to governments, democracy and freedom,” she said. “They were essentially just paying lip service to it.” These reports are not only good for the consumers of the products or the people living in the environment of the company, but also for the health of the employees of the company. In a study published in Strategic Management Journal, researchers Caroline
Flammer and Jiao Luo found that companies employ CSR to “(1) improve employees’ productivity, (2) differentiate themselves from their competitors, and (3) decrease employees’ dissatisfaction associated with firms’ stigmatized image.” “It’s important to have your social obligations and your social position known,” Wainwright said. “Think about someone who works for the NBA — maybe someone whose family is from China or Hong Kong … what’s he supposed to think now that it’s more important for the NBA to make money than for them to support his countrymen or people that he knows are being attacked by police in Hong Kong?”
are expecting it. According to a 2018 study by Global Strategy Group, 77 percent of Americans believe that corporations have a responsibility to take action on important issues. Barbato pointed out that the controversy within the NBA raises society’s awareness of the implications of social media. “This is something that we never would have imagined in the early years of social media, that we would have created a call-out culture like this, and a bunch of social justice warriors were just waiting for somebody to do something wrong,” he said. Businesses should be wary of how their core values impact their business strategies and how the public views them, for their sake and our own.
MAINTAIN RESPONSIBILITY CSR is more important now than ever before, especially in the era of globalization and the internet. Consumers not only welcome corporations to take a stand, but
Features 21
Know Your Options:
Unplanned Pregnancy O
ut of the 6.1 million annual pregnancies in the United States, 45 percent are unintended. This means the pregnancy was either unplanned or mistimed, according to the Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. For many women, an unplanned pregnancy can be scary. “When the stick turns [blue] or you get two lines, there’s going to be that moment of panic, like ‘Oh my god what have I done? What do I do? My future is in jeopardy,’” said Lynn Handley, president of the American Pregnancy Association. Women are taught about possible ways to prevent pregnancy, including birth control options, using a condom and abstaining from sex altogether. However, despite preventative measures, you can still get pregnant if you choose to have sex — and it’s important to know what your options are if you find yourself unexpectedly pregnant. Talking about unplanned pregnancy has become a politicized issue in today’s culture, said Matt Sones, the vice president of patient services at CompassCare Pregnancy Services. As medical providers, he continued, it’s their job to help pregnant women see the options they have more clearly, free from societal pressures.
22 Wellness
by Cayla Keiser photography by Amelia Hamilton design by Jiayi Zheng
“
If you find yourself pregnant and questioning what your future looks like, educate yourself.
“When our patients come in, it’s not a political issue for them,” Sones said. “One of our little mottos is ‘We inform; you decide.’ We’re here to give you as much information about what’s going on inside of you so that you can make the most informed decision for yourself.” The first step in making a decision is to determine if you actually are pregnant.
Are You Pregnant? If someone thinks they might be pregnant, they can start by taking a home pregnancy test or going to the Student Health Center (SHC) on campus. The SHC provides urine pregnancy tests to students free of charge, according to Betty Vickery, women’s and
sexual health nurse practitioner. Pregnancy tests can also be purchased at most stores, such as Wegmans or Walmart. “One thing they need to understand about the test is the timing is important. They have to be at least 10 days pregnant for the test to turn positive,” Vickery said. “So if someone’s concerned that a month ago they became pregnant, if I do the test now I can count on its accuracy. If they had sex with someone last weekend, it’s too early for me to tell.”
What Are Your Options? If the tests are positive and pregnancy is confirmed, it’s important to know all the options before deciding how to move forward. They can raise the baby, put
can customize how much visibility, how much participation you want to have in that child’s life,” Handley said. “Semi-open adoption is similar. You don’t have as much contact, but you can be available for health records, medical background, ancestry. With a closed adoption of course, once you’ve given birth, the baby is taken and given to the [adoptive parents].”
Abortion The final option one might consider is abortion. About four of every 10 unplanned pregnancies end in abortion, according to Planned Parenthood. There are two kinds of abortion: medical and surgical. Medical abortions, in which the person takes a series of two medications, are safe up to the first 10 weeks of the pregnancy. The first pill blocks progesterone, which is a hormone needed to sustain a healthy pregnancy. The second pill causes the body to expel the uterine contents through cramping and bleeding. “Then there’s something called surgical abortion,” Vickery said. “In that case, a suction tube is placed into the uterus and the contents of the lining of the uterus are removed.”
the child up for adoption or terminate the pregnancy through an abortion.
Raising the Baby “The thing they need to consider most is: do they feel that they personally are ready to take on the responsibility of parenting another human being?” Vickery said. Raising a child is a lifelong commitment with financial, health, personal, relational and other implications. Parenting can be “joyful, rewarding, and life-changing” — but it can also be challenging and demanding, according to Planned Parenthood.
Adoption Another option one may consider is putting the baby up for adoption. There are three different types of adoption: open, semi-open and closed. “If you have an open adoption, that means you want to be available to the child ... you
Where Can You Find Support? “My advice to young women would be: if you find yourself pregnant and questioning what your future looks like, educate yourself,” Handley said. “Get the best advice you can and sit down and take pen to paper — or fingers to keyboard — and write
“
out the different scenarios you can envision based on the information you have.” Dana Godfrey-Brophy, a counselor advocate in the Center for Women and Gender (CWaG), suggested that you talk to someone who you trust, who supports you and who will help you make the best decision for you. There are many safe resources on campus to go to — CWaG, Counseling and Psychological Services (CAPS) and the SHC are just a few to name. “We are happy to talk to students about all of their options, never pushing them one way or another, but letting them know about what options exist out there,” Godfrey-Brophy said. “If you decide to keep the baby, if you decide you want to stay in school — how do we support that? … How do we get [you] in contact with other resources if [you] choose not to keep the baby? How do we get you that medical treatment or the adoption agency?” Beyond logistical factors, it’s best to always consider personal beliefs and morals regarding pregnancy. Sones said that women often feel pressured into their decision for external reasons. “As human beings, when we make decisions that are contrary to what we believe or who we think we are, it has significant negative impacts for us in the future,” Sones said. “[Ask yourself], ‘What does my heart say about what’s going on inside me?’” No matter what decision is made, know there are people who will be supportive. “I think the big thing for me is just so students know they aren’t alone in the process,” Godfrey-Brophy said. “We never want a student to feel like they have to do this by themselves.”
When our patients come in, it’s not a political issue for them.
Wellness 23
A New, Desensitized America by Kasey Mathews | illustration and design by Lily Garnaat
The opinions expressed are solely those of the students and do not reflect the views of REPORTER.
24 Views
W
ow, that’s absolutely terrible. Sending my thoughts and prayers. Wishing that community a quick recovery. I couldn’t imagine such a thing. We’re a nation rocked with grief. This will surely serve as a wake-up call. Change is needed. And now for the weather. Tragedy has become so commonplace in our daily routine that it, too, has become as quintessentially American as apple pie and baseball. Every day, horrible news comes across our screens. Yet, more often than not, we treat these bulletins as an annoyance — a momentary interruption to our regularly scheduled programming. There were 340 mass shootings in 2018, accounting for 373 deaths and 1,346 injuries, according to Business Insider. Escalating this statistic, CBS reported in September 2019 that there had been, up to that point, more mass shootings in America than days passed in the year. This is the first time such a high number of mass shootings has ever been recorded. The first time, that is, since 2016. A mass shooting, as defined by these numbers, is any shooting in which four or more people are killed within a localized time and location, not including the killer. With so much tragedy and loss bombarding our everyday lives, why are these events not being taken as seriously as events in the past?
FRAMING THE PAST
In 1999, the high school in Columbine, Colo. was ravaged with violence as two gunmen — students of the school — stormed the building and opened fire upon their classmates. As Reporter senior writer Leland Goodrich discussed in the article “Is Arming Educators the Future?”, the news shocked the nation. People from Connecticut to California mourned alongside the heartbroken community. Media covered the story for months, with updates given every day. It was a lot, and for good reason. As Joe Berkowitz of Fast Company explained it in his article, “Some of the nonstop coverage may have been driven by if-it-bleeds-it-leads sensationalism, but something else was at play: a struggle within the nation’s very soul.” Such an event was completely unthinkable at the time — so many innocent fatalities; so many more injuries. Even now, as mass shootings occur, they are so often harkened back to Columbine, as it serves as a vital touchpoint in the American conscience. School shootings had happened before, even within just the past year. So Columbine wasn’t the first. But the scale was unprecedented —
two gunmen killed 12 of their fellow students and one teacher.
ADAPTING THE PRESENT
Now, Columbine isn’t even listed among the 10 deadliest shootings in modern U.S. history and hasn’t been since November 2017. The Washington Post took a look at various points in the timeline of recent mass shootings, utilizing two notable events as signposts to divide this timeline. Through this division, we are able to see the exponential growth of shooting frequencies. The Columbine High School massacre occurred on April 20, 1999. On June 17, 2015, nine people were killed at a Bible study in a historic African American church in Charleston, S.C.
“Every day,
horrible news
comes across our screens. Yet more often than not, we treat these bulletins as an annoyance.”
progressively younger. A heart-wrenching number of victims were children and teenagers. The frequency is now unthinkable. And yet, how much of that matters when these events are tuned out and relegated to our periphery? We experience more mass shootings now than ever before. Admittedly, many often look to compare the number of these shootings in the U.S. to those around the world. Yet, the data behind these numbers is foggy at best, leaving these comparisons difficult to assign merit. It is inarguable, however, that the rate of domestic shootings has dramatically increased in recent years. Shootings, however, aren’t the only type of tragedy to befall this nation.
EFFECTS OF TRAGEDY
In November 2018, a wildfire raged across California. It tore through a number of towns, destroying much and terrifying many. The Camp Fire, as it came to be known, was the deadliest, most destructive fire in California’s history. As it burned, towns and cities such as Paradise were engulfed in flame. “For thousands of residents, the terror of sitting in traffic jams as the wildfire bore down left emotional scars,” said Stephanie O’Neill in an article titled “Mourning Paradise: Collective Trauma In A Town Destroyed.”
Before 1999, mass shootings took place on average every six months. Between April 1999 and June 2015, the average was shortened to once every two-and-a-half months. In the time between the Charleston shooting and August 2019, this shortened to an alarming one every six weeks. Looking at the sheer volume of mass shootings, one can see trends emerge. Most shooters are men, who have been getting
Views 25
Eighty-five were killed in the area, with thousands more left homeless. It took some residents hours to escape the city, as day turned to night and explosions could be heard all around — the sound of superheated residential propane tanks overwhelmed by flame. Whereas nightmares and flashbacks are normal in the immediate wake of a disaster, according to Executive Director of the Trauma and Anxiety Recovery Program at Emory University School of Medicine Barbara Rothbaum in O’Neill’s article, it becomes worrying when these symptoms persist for longer than a month. She observed this in analyzing the effects of the Camp Fire in Paradise. “It’s very similar to the grief process,” Rothbaum was further quoted as saying. “We don’t think there’s any way to the other side of the pain except through it.” Avoiding this pain can lead to long-term trauma. Those who do not acknowledge their pain — by talking about the experience, journaling it or some other method of healthy coping — can experience post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This can affect one’s life long term, inhibiting the individual from continuing on as they did before the trauma. Revisiting Columbine, the tragedy held an impact that was widespread and long-lasting. 26 Views
Typically, those who experience a traumatic event firsthand are who we associate with being traumatized. However, as the Los Angeles Times reported on April 23, 1999 — just three days after the massacre — it wasn’t just the victims experiencing this trauma. The article was titled “Frenzy, Shock, Numbness Have Faded; Now Comes the Pain.”
“The community is traumatized, and we are all members of that community.” “Emergency workers and SWAT team members who first ventured into the high school’s blood-soaked library are starting to seek grief therapy,” reported Julie Cart, author of the Los Angeles Times article. “The therapists, in turn, are themselves getting help.” Cart later reported that even those who debriefed the therapists and helped them
sort through their emotional overload often sought debriefing, themselves. The community of Columbine reeled from the massacre, including those who may not have been directly affected. The direct victims may have been the students, teachers and other faculty, but the trauma was felt by the community as a whole — much like those in Paradise, Calif., they were experiencing a collective trauma.
OUR COLLECTIVE TRAUMA
Gilad Hirschberger, professor of psychology at IDC Herzliya in Israel, explained collective trauma as “a cataclysmic event that shatters the basic fabric of society.” As seen at many other sites of tragedy, communities tend to grieve as one, and the effects of a tragedy are recognizable long after the event itself has passed. But where do we draw the lines of “community”? The increasingly high amount of mass shootings, among other horrific events both natural and manmade, take their toll on the American psyche. Due to the large number of these terrible blights, many Americans have begun to feel the effects that one might expect from those more directly tied to tragedy.
“The more we swipe away notifications of terrible tragedies, the more we fall into the spiral of trauma.” One event may dramatically affect those it impacts directly; however, we’ve been experiencing a larger number of events at a higher frequency. Due to the increased regularity of these events, the perceptions of safety and security held by those much more distant from the individual epicenters of these tragedies have been impacted, too. Now, we’re all feeling the shared effects of these events. The community is traumatized, and we are all members of that community. So is our tendency to no longer dwell on singular events due to the sheer volume of these events? Is it an involuntary defense mechanism to protect ourselves from further trauma? Or is it simply the tendency toward a more rapid news cycle? Regardless, it’s not healthy.
ANTICIPATING THE FUTURE
While measures have been put into place in a number of areas attempting to prevent further tragedies — mass shootings, natural disasters or otherwise — the grim reality is that these attempts are likely not going to succeed overnight. We’ll be continuing onward as a nation, trudging through this horrific emotional wasteland for at least a while longer. How can we ensure we come out the other side with
our psyches intact? Our current method has been to desensitize ourselves, but is that the best method? As Rothbaum said, it’s important to work through trauma rather than ignore its effects. We cannot tune out a nation wrought with disaster. We must acknowledge it. Discuss it. Learn from it. According to Dr. Sandro Galea, dean of Boston University’s School of Public Health, there are two key methods for a community to recover from collective trauma. The first is to seek regular mental health treatment. Cognitive behavior therapy is one such approach that Galea recommended. Broadly speaking, this entails a coursecorrection of negative or unhelpful behaviors, such as attitudes, thoughts or beliefs. These are nudged to be more positive, helpful and emotionally regulated, leading to a healthier thought process and therefore a healthier mental state. The second is to address the operation of the community on an economic and social scale. While America is operating economically, the social level is questionable. Should we continue to ignore these issues rather than take note of them, we fail to operate socially. The more we swipe away notifications of terrible tragedies, the more we willfully
ignore the implications of another mass shooting or infrastructural failure, the more we fall into the spiral of trauma. Outrage can be annoying. It can demand much of our energy. Worse, it can lead people to think about topics easier left ignored. But it acknowledges and addresses issues in a way that connects people and progresses through the darkness. The longer we sit and ignore the looming danger around us, the less likely we are to come out the other side unscathed. To achieve a better future, we must be attuned to the present. Flipping through the pages, we look at issues through the lens of an outsider. We fail to realize, willingly or otherwise, the real impacts these topics have on our lives and our mental state. We can either continue to pass and distract ourselves with other things and inevitably continue on our path of desensitization; or we can address the issues plaguing our communities. America touts itself to be the epitome of success and defender of the Free World. Yet its citizens are readily prepared to ignore those issues and divisions that threaten to tear our society apart. We’re too entranced by simple distractions to recognize the flames around us. By the time we feel them licking at our heels, it may be too late. Views 27
W. O.T. S.
WORD ON THE STREET
photography by Becky Reich | illustration by Aria Dines | design by Ella Mathewson
FEAR:
“In class, a student will think ‘I will get it later.’ If they figure they’ll understand a topic later, they won’t try and understand it now.”
FEAR: “I worry people are going to get so absorbed in their technology that they’re going to start skipping out on the activities.”
HOPE: “I hope that everybody, regardless of ability, can further their understanding, their enjoyment, their love and their appreciation for whichever sport they’re taking with me.” Ed Sherman, Wellness instructor
28 Views
HOPE:
“My students would be understanding of what I’m staying in class.” Richard Cliver, associate professor of the Department of Electrical, Computer and Telecommunications Engineering Technology
FEAR:
“They’ll accept and live by bad ideas; and there are lots of bad ideas in the culture. I fear that they’ll embrace irrationality in one of many horrible forms.”
HOPE:
“They live prosperous, productive, safe and peaceful lives advancing human knowledge, enjoying the freedom and prosperity we have inherited from the good people of the past. I hope that they embrace rational values and a rational philosophical approach in life.” David Ross, professor for the School of Mathematical Sciences
WHAT’S YOUR BIGGEST FEAR FOR STUDENTS? WHAT’S YOUR BIGGEST HOPE FOR STUDENTS?
FEAR:
“That those of us that are over 40 have messed things up too much and that it’s too difficult [for them] to recover. Whether it’s recovering enviromental stability, or our sense of community, support and respect for each other, that the lasting impact remain through their adulthood.”
FEAR:
“For years, I’ve been afraid of an evil scientist from the government attaching laser beams to sharks’ heads. And as technology improves, I’m even more afraid that they’re going to add robot legs and reverse-scuba suits on the sharks as well. It would be a serious danger to all my students.”
HOPE:
“They realize their strengths and their dreams; and that they devote themselves to making a world a better place for others.”
HOPE:
“I see a lot of stress amongst students and, though I certainly hope they enjoy the jobs and career paths that they have set forward, I hope they recognize that that’s not everything that life is. They should enjoy a complete and whole life.” Jason Hoople, lecturer for the Department of Electrical and Microelectronic Engineering
FEAR:
“My greatest fear for students is that they just give up.”
HOPE:
Gretchen Wainwright, senior lecturer and program chair for Civil Engineering Technology and Environmental Management and Safety
“They find success in whatever they do. It might not be whatever they have their degree in, and that’s fine. So long as they’re happy. That’s what I define success as.” Renae Veneziano, visiting lecturer for the Department of Manufacturing and Mechanical Engineering Technology
The opinions expressed are solely those of the professors and do not reflect the views of REPORTER.
Views 29
R
S G IN
Sent by “People ar e awful to day” — me, every single day Oct 22, 2015 7:41 p.m .
S E L I DF
ALE
E
UNS
The opinions expressed are solely those of the students and do not reflect the views of REPORTER.
h unc y l t to m y ex to njo p n o e ts u wich t h d y g r an li I t y s ne s. by hen omeo ted m hank w Sent s T n e d a v n w o s. I l ide a ally tte s u ar e t g c out i I a e c me. e lik p.m. t :08 tas 2012 12 , 3 1 p Se
of some use he u t o y ace n’t Sent by repl y do me o h o t w s y RIT with mone ek, s s Hey l u l l s we sta surp final e h t s t . a ’ th shit . It r in aper pape that p d n r t a o e s f oil ime al t ot t actu dy g o b o n . aint :22 a.m 2013 11 , 8 1 b e F
of oll s. r a nd by eco ed 0 s e... t 4 r a m d -sm goo iled out r a a y f t b t o Sen jus er f has as ap ion t I w et p a l this duc hat toi IT e ar t a.m. ed R e 7 w 4 s : i 4 s gn My 012 y: I e de 2 a r , s e 7 w one . els Oct 2 Sent by some y up tunn ld fl eard ind u h w o w t s t Jus irts nd i s sk ol a irl’ scho g o en s by m 1 p.m. 2012 2:2 , 1 2 Oct
Sent by Does the first time the “L” brought word is up in a relation if it’s ship coun in a drun t k text? Feb 28, 2013 12 :17 a.m.
Sent by
That moment when someone asks you where the never ending staircase is in building 7 Apr 09, 2014 3:13 p.m. Text or call RINGS: RIT’s only digital confessional
compiled by Tyler English | illustration by Corey Hemingway | design by Sabrina McCune 30 Views
(585) 672-4840
REPORTER
Our meetings are open to the RIT community. We provide free pizza, you provide the story ideas! Where: Campus Center A-730 When: Fridays at 5 p.m.
