November 2015 by Reporter Magazine

REPORTER NOVEMBER 2015 reporter.rit.edu

Please Recycle

REPORTER EDITOR IN CHIEF Alyssa Jackson PRINT MANAGING EDITOR Gino Fanelli

ONLINE MANAGING EDITOR Alex Jones

COPY EDITOR Bryanne McDonough NEWS EDITOR Taylor Derrisaw TECHNOLOGY EDITOR Alyssa Jackson LEISURE EDITOR Gino Fanelli FEATURES EDITOR Mandi Moon SPORTS EDITOR Liz Peterson VIEWS EDITOR Jake Krajewski WRITERS Valerie Horn, Gino Fanelli, Liz Peterson, Mich Zaken, Bryanne McDonough, Alex Jones, Alissa Roy, Mandi Moon, Jake Krajewski

ART ART DIRECTOR Jordyn Carias ONLINE ART DIRECTOR Max Yeager CONTRIBUTING DESIGNERS Caleb Payne, Dennae Makel, Halli Rosin, Olivia Konys, Jane Rosenthal, Annie Wong, Emma Fleming, Kevin Zamperion

CONTRIBUTING ILLUSTRATORS Kaitlyn Fitzgerald, Caleb Payne, Kelsey Skutnick, Daniell Marino Ryan Kovar, Max Yeager, Alyssa Minko, Emily Diehl

EDITOR’S NOTE: JUDGMENT It’s a great time to be alive. That’s not to say things are necessarily good, or life is necessarily easy. On the contrary, while the reader of this editorial is likely preparing for at least a decade of student debt while barely able to afford a proper meal, it may not seem like a great time to be alive. Likewise, when we tune into CBS or CNN to yet another leaked video of police beating unarmed black men and women, when hyper-conservative zealots are still trying to shut down Planned Parenthood and when LGBTQIA+ folks are still subject to near constant attacks, it can seem like a pretty dim time to be alive. But it is a great time to be alive, for one simple reason; we’re talking. Yes, there is more controversy than the world has likely ever seen, but with that comes more conversation. We may be the last generation to see the axe of injustice swing, and we may be there to watch the blade rust away. Perhaps that’s hopeful, perhaps hatred and bigotry are deeply rooted in the human psyche and perhaps justice is something that exists only in theory. Greater minds than mine have spent millennia pondering those thoughts to no avail. What I do know is, simply, judgment has never helped. As we’ve learned not to judge others by the colors of their skin, self-identifications, language or heritage, we need to learn to not judge others by their thoughts or beliefs. Hate never helps, no matter if it’s hate of a race or hate of the racist. Do not alienate, do not shun, do not condemn others for their beliefs. We are all people, and we’re all wrong sometimes. You are better than no one just as you are worse than no one. You will never change someone’s mind by assaulting them, but you can by having those tough conversations.

PHOTOGRAPHY PHOTO EDITOR Kristen McNicholas CONTRIBUTING PHOTOGRAPHERS Dominique Hessert, Victoria Binkley, Ope! Will Kelly–, Justin Barrett, Rob Rauchwerger, Daniel Vasta

BUSINESS BUSINESS MANAGER Jaclyn Bergin AD / PR MANAGER Danielle Sanderson PRODUCTION MANAGER Ryan Walsh ONLINE SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATOR Nathan J. Lichtenstein WEB MANAGER Joe Jankowiak VIDEO EDITOR Sara Caruso

Gino Fanelli Print Managing Editor

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.

ADVISOR Rudy Pugliese PRINTING EPi Printing CONTACT 585.475.2212

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. “I have thousands of selfies in my photobooth of me crying.” -A.J. The opinions expressed in Reporter do not necessarily reflect those of the Institute. Reporter is not responsible for materials presented in advertising areas. Reporter takes pride in its membership in the Associated Collegiate Press and American Civil Liberties Union. Copyright © 2014 Reporter Magazine. All rights reserved. No portion of this Magazine may be reproduced without prior written permission.

November 3

TABLE OF cover photography by Opel Will Kelly cover illustration by Jordyn Carias table of contents illustration by Danielle Marino

NEWS

TECH 6

SMARTPHONES AND SOCIETY Are smartphones making us dumber?

SEX ED IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS The controvery of preparing our youth

LEISURE 10

@reportermag 4 November

COOKING WITH BUGS A collection of insect recipes

IMPOSSIBLE STANDARDS Women still experience discrimination based on the way they dress

AYL How well do you know your fetishes?

CONTENTS FE ATURES 16

UPTALK, VOCAL FRY AND THE WAR ON WOMEN’S VOICES Both men and women speak with vocal fry and uptalk, but women get the backlash

BANNED MEDIA A look at the history of censorship and how it is evolving with the digital age

CONSERVATIVE VIEWS Do liberal campuses silence those who lean to the right?

SPORTS 24

LGBTQIA+ ATHLETES Sexual identity continues to be challenged

TAKING MORE THAN JUST THE TIP The questionable ethics of male circumcision

WORD ON THE STREET What’s your least favorite topic of conversation?

RINGS Drunk dial us: (585) 672-4840

THE DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD OF MASCULINITY A look at how gender roles in society affect all those involved

November 5

Smartphone users are set to pass 2 billion by Liz Peterson | illustration by Kelsey Skutnick | design by Annie Wong

worldwide in 2016, according to a report done by eMarketer in 2014. Currently, approximately 22 percent of the world’s population owns a smartphone. Back in 1971 when the concept for smartphones was first thought of by Theodore Paraskevakos, the world was unaware of what such a device would bring. Through its evolution smartphones have enhanced our knowledge, connected us in a way never seen before, provided fast and constant communication and documented billions of stories. A device capable of doing anything beyond what we could have ever imagined, the smartphone has affected every generation since its first iteration in 1993. But with every piece of technology comes great power, and with that power comes great responsibility. Today, older generations often remark that smartphones have taken over the world. There is rarely a time when you can’t spot a passing individual on their Apple or Android product. Every year cellphone companies release at least two new smartphone models. To be without a smartphone is to almost be disconnected from society. You can’t quickly send a Tweet, post a Facebook status, take a selfie on Snapchat or share a photo on Instagram. You’re unable to send a text or

“HAVE SMART PHONES AND THEIR ENDLESS CONNECTIVITY AFFECTED US AS A SOCIETY?” 6 Tech

email at the press of a button. For some, life without a smartphone is like falling off the face of the Earth. In an interview for an article with Forbes Magazine, technology psychologist Larry Rosen revealed that whenever we choose our cellphones over vital needs like sleep, we are diminishing our brainpower, contributing to lowered IQs. In another study conducted by the Environmental Working Group, the dangers of radiation to the brain that occurs during use of our smartphones illustrated scientifically how they affect our mental health. Productivity and sleep can suffer from cell phone use when we are so easily distracted with the flash of a screen. While smartphones can serve as stress relievers, they also contribute to underlying illnesses such as anxiety, depression and bruised self-esteems. “Social interaction has changed a lot since we’ve been given this way [to] communicate,” said David Stevens, the associate director for the Hale Andrews Student Life Center. He added that though there are a lot of positives to smartphones, there are just as many cons. For example, people used to argue openly about a variety of topics for countless hours. “It puts an end to arguments because you can fact-check so quickly,” Stevens pointed out. In that sense, people surrender their opposition and give up supporting their views. They don’t stand by their principles or beliefs. Though it is great to have unlimited access to knowledge, Stevens believes smartphones can discourage wisdom and passion. Conversations in general suffer thanks to texting. We turn to our smartphones to hold intimate discussions, ones we should be having in person. And with that, a lot of context gets lost in translation between the sender and the receiver. People interpret these messages as they please, which leads to miscommunication and misunderstandings, often causing problems. “We can control what we say better,” said Dr. Kelly Martin, an assistant professor for Communication majors. However, she argued that smartphones still make us poor

communicators. “We expect less.” The use of the device also brings questions of safety and productivity into play. For example, we use our smartphones while we study or even work out at the gym. We don’t consider the consequences of performing everyday tasks while also multitasking with our phones. People have had numerous vehicular accidents due to the fact that either the victim or the driver were using their smartphones. According to statistics collected by the

22% of the world’s population owns a smartphone Huffington Post, one in four car accidents involve a cellphone. They also found that at least nine people are killed every day in a car accident in which the driver was distracted while using their cellphone or texting. Stevens said that as Americans transitioned from the use of house phones to cellphones, people started to make exceptions for what is okay to do. An example is the use of their smartphone during work. “Students always want to be plugged in. I think, value-wise, it has become more of a ‘this is acceptable at my job’ as opposed to ‘when I’m here I’m working and that’s what I’m getting paid to do,’” he said.

“ONE IN FOUR CAR ACCIDENTS INVOLVE A CELLPHONE.” Whether in class or at work, their phones aren’t too far out of reach. Friedrich Griessel, a second year Biology major, offered his opinion on our attachment to social media thanks to our phones. “Some people post exactly what they are doing at the moment, which has no further relevance after it is posted,” said Griessel. Updates become more like narratives of people’s lives. The value and use of social sites like Facebook and Twitter may become less relevant as people use them more frivolously . “I do believe social media is great for networking and keeping in touch with your friends, but to use it to communicate with your friends while you are in the same room with them is just a bit too much,” said Griessel. “Social media should be used as a way to keep in touch and share your experiences or something that you found particularly interesting and relevant. Just posting quick greetings and inanities is not interesting at all.” Do you have a view on the millennial generation and smartphone use? Share it with us by sending it to rpteic@rit.edu.

Tech 7

8 News

s of January 1, 2015, only 19 states in the U.S. require sex education in public schools to be factually accurate. Let that sink in for a moment. The 31 other states who do not require sex education to be medically accurate could lie to your face and you would never know. How can we live in a world where sex is constantly bombarding us, and not have a sensible and decent conversation about it? The impacts of not teaching sex ed can have disastrous consequences. Public sex education is still considered a taboo in the United States. If students are unable to learn about it in the classroom, where will they learn it? Questions like these are left to the states for them to decide. Individual school districts also have the right to decide if they want to include sex education in their schools. Statistics from the Guttmacher Institute show that only 22 states and the District of Columbia require public schools to teach sex education. Thirty three states require students to receive instruction about HIV and AIDS. As mentioned before, only 19 states require that the information be medically accurate. Three states require parental consent before such instruction. Thirty-five states and the District of Columbia allow parents to opt out on behalf of their children. Meanwhile, a 2011 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention survey showed that more than 47 percent of all high school students said that they have had sex and 15 percent of high school students have had sex with four or more partners in their lifetime. Young people from 15 to 24 years old represent 25 percent of the sexually active population. With a high proportion of students admitting to having sex, the risk that they are practicing unsafe sex remains rather high. One of the arguments that opponents of sex education use is that is that preventing discussions about sex from happening will help curb unwanted pregnancies and address public health concerns such as STDs. Supporters of sex education state that exposure with information such as STDs and

proper use of contraceptives would lower the rate of teen pregnancy and STD infection rates. Many argue that most teenagers are either already sexually active or are curious and many of them are not receiving information from their parents. These supporters favor a more comprehensive method involving more detailed lessons in sex education. They also support the idea that sex education in schools can help children understand the impact of sex in their lives. Sex education in schools can answer questions students have about the topic. The supporters also believe that it helps students become responsible, sexually

active people. Opponents to sex education in public schools feel that states have no claim to teachtheir children about sex because they have their own values. One method that they usually prefer is the abstinence only approach, or the idea that a person should wait until marriage before having sex at all. Abstinence only education comprises 23 percent of sex education in public schools. There are cons to sex education. Some teachers who teach sex education to students are not experts and have vague ideas about sexual health themselves. Some opponents stated that sex education in schools are at odds with some religious ideologies. Public school health teacher Todd Kwiatowski from upstate New York said that the state regulations are very loose on the topic. However, it is mandatory that health teachers and instructors cover HIV/AIDS prevention. Kwiatowski personally thought that the district should have the final say in what is covered on the topic, as well as some parental input as it is their children that he is educating. He sees that with a state or federal mandate, politics always influences the final product and no two school districts are alike. Situations that may be typical in

one part of the state or country may not be in another. Kwiatowski believes that the fact that New York State requires mandatory health education is a step in the right direction and that students in New York State are ahead of many students in other states with no mandatory health or sex education program. The more information educators provide students at the appropriate age, the greater the likelihood they will make better decisions. “There are students who are still getting the ‘have sex and die,’ very fear based education,” Associate Director for the Center for Women and Gender Cha Ron SattlerLeBlanc said. “But the thing is that, when you’re asking students about their sex education [before college], there’s so much diversity. Whether it was horrible, or they’re from another country or it was really great, there’s so many factors that come into play.” Due to these differences in education, Sattler-LeBlanc urged for a stronger push on communication in sexual relationships. “That can be hard, especially in this day and age with Tinder and other dating apps,” Sattler-LeBlanc said. “It can be easy to make the assumption that everyone’s on the same page, everyone’s having sex in college ... But in reality, when I tell students that some people aren’t ready, and that’s okay, I see relief.” Sattler-LeBlanc emphasized a variety of factors that play into the stigma surrounding proper sex education, including the Puritan roots of America and immigrant cultures as well as how allowing pornography to be more easily accessible than proper education results in gross misunderstandings of sexuality. At its essence, the issue boils down to a need for real, quality information. “We do a couple of these large scale programs, which do work well, but students are busy,” Sattler-LeBlanc said. “So when a sorority, or a fraternity, or a group or a club reach out to me to do a course on sexuality or safety, they feel comfortable because they’re in a group with people they know, and that can be great in really discussing the hard issues.”

News 9

Cooking With Bugs by Gino Fanelli | photography by Justin Barrett | design byÂ Annie Wong

e live in a culture where certain things are just never meant to go in your mouth. Thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s not innuendo, thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s an encompassing observation on the food culture of the western world, which is interesting in its own right. In America, cultures have the opportunity to mingle and trickle down components of their local cuisine into Americana. However, regardless of the diverse origins of American cuisine, there is a tendency for it to conform to an American standard. Chinese food is Americanized to focus more on deep frying and saccharine sauces. Italian food is Americanized to focus heavily on cheese, starches and hearty sauces. Sushi is wrapped in bacon and drizzled with Sriracha. And some foods are just completely off-limits. Horse meat, while popular in some areas of Japan, is seen as abhorrent in American culture. Though whaling is seen as barbaric, Japanese whaling continues to 10 Leisure

thrive, even with rampantly failing profit margins, and pilot whales continue to be a staple food of the Faroe Islands. And, of course, insects, worms, snakes, arachnids, lizards, amphibians and all other assorted creepy crawlies that may be comfort foods to one culture have failed to diffuse into the melting pot. In many cases, the cuisines prominently featuring bugs hail from regions where the diet was born out of necessity. While some Central and South American cultures revere certain insects as delicacies, or having medicinal properties, such as the bullet ant in Peru, bugs in Asian diets can often be linked to times of economic and political hardship. In Cambodia, the bloody reign of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge led to impoverished and oppressed Cambodians becoming a bit more resourceful with their diets. When his regime came to an end, so did the cannibalism that many were forced into. But the

taste for deep-fried tarantulas stuck around, now an iconic dish of the town of Skuon. And from Beijing to Bangkok, roasted insects have been made an off-beat substitute for bar peanuts and popcorn. According to a U.N. report, 2 billion people globally consider some form of insect a delicacy. With things like mealworms providing similar nutritional value to fish with much higher sustainability and smaller ecological footprint, the western world is urged to jump on the boat. Presented here are two recipes, each a strongly Americanized version of a southeast Asian staple, with the additional crunch of some six-legged friends. Consider them an imagining of what your local Chinese joint would pump out if the bugs went from their floors to their woks.

CRICKET PAD THAI

MEALWORM FRIED RICE

Serves 4 Ingredients Two dozen large crickets Handful of dry roasted peanuts, crushed Half a pound of rice noodles One large Vidalia onion, chopped Four cloves of garlic, minced One hot pepper (I used Hot Cherry, but any will do), minced Two tbs fish sauce Two tbs tamarind paste Two tbs brown sugar One tbs olive oil Juice of one lime Salt and pepper to taste Add noodles to pot of boiling water and cook until malleable, but not soft. Heat oil in a large wok over medium heat. Add in the peanuts and crickets and cook until brown and crispy. Remove and set aside. If necessary, add more oil to the pan. Fry peppers and garlic until garlic is fragrant. Add in onion and cook until soft. Lower heat and add the noodles into the pan, stirring in the vegetables until uniform. This can be difficult if the noodles are too soft, always shoot for under-cooked. Once the mixture is blended, add in the tamarind paste, brown sugar and fish sauce and blend. The additional liquid from the paste and sauce will cook the noodles the rest of the way through. Once thoroughly blended, add in lime juice, salt and pepper, giving the noodles a couple final tosses to blend. Place noodles in bowl and sprinkle with cricket and peanut mixture. Serve immediately. Taste: The Pad Thai itself is wonderfully flavorful, with rich citrus notes shining through a backbone of sweetness. An addition of fresh grated ginger into the wok could really make this a top notch dish. The crickets themselves had a delightful crunch, and took on a lot of the peanuts’ flavor, with some unique colors shining through. I’d liken the flavor to almost grassy, hinting at sweet asparagus. All in all interesting, and a really nice contrast to the rest of the meal.

Serves 2 Ingredients 25 extra large mealworms Two cups white rice Two large eggs One clove of garlic, minced Half a Vidalia onion, chopped One hot pepper (I used Hot Cherries, but substitute in your favorite for desired heat), minced One tbs olive oil Two tbs soy sauce A dash of fish sauce Bring water to a boil in a medium sized pot and cook rice. While rice is cooking, heat the olive oil in a large wok over medium heat. Add in hot pepper and garlic; fry until garlic is fragrant. Add in mealworms and onions. Fry until onions begin to caramelize and mealworms begin to brown. Drain the rice and blend in with vegetables. Carefully divide the mixture onto one half of the pan. Add eggs into the other half of the pan and scramble. Once eggs are fully cooked, blend into the rice mixture. Finish with the soy and fish sauces and serve immediately. Optional: Mealworms can be cooked live, or baked for one hour at 350 for additional crunchiness. Taste: The worms themselves do not have an offensive flavor, but this is mostly due to the fact that they hardly have any flavor. They are more or less completely innocuous, a soft crunch leading into a slight mild, nutty sweetness with an almost starchy texture. Pairs well with the saltiness and spice of the rice.

This is a culinary frontier where the sky is the limit, and by no means should these recipes be the only options for the intrepid entomological chef. Swap in a healthy dose of ants for the ground beef in tacos, or fry up some beetles for a late night snack. Fulfill your dreams of being an elementary school bully and make a love interest eat a bug. Have an open mind and get cooking.

“WE LIVE IN A CULTURE WHERE CERTAIN THINGS ARE JUST NEVER MEANT TO GO IN YOUR MOUTH”

“HAVE AN OPEN MIND AND GET COOKING” Leisure 11

Impossible

Standards by Bryanne McDonough | illustration by Ryan Kovar | design by Dennae Makel

There has been so much accomplished in the name of women’s equality. So why are women still being passed over for jobs solely because of what they are wearing? Professional attire is certainly an important consideration when preparing for an interview, but it should never be the primary concern. That was the attitude of Elizabeth Bentivegna when she came to an interview dressed in a skirt, shirt, tights and a modest cardigan. Although Bentivegna felt confident after leaving the interview, she was startled when she was told weeks later that although she was perfectly qualified, they would not hire her because she did not look “put together,” according to The Daily Dot. The interview was with OnShift, a tech company where daily attire for men is typically a t-shirt and jeans. Whether or not you agree with the decision, Bentivegna’s experience is not unique. Be it a job interview or just a typical day at school, women are constantly being told what to wear and how to wear it. From five-year-old

12 Leisure

girls being made to cover up spaghettistraps to women getting blamed for their rape because of what they were wearing, standards for women’s clothing permeate every niche of our society. What is it about women’s clothing that causes it to be so over-scrutinized? “Why are we blaming the girls? It’s something that’s easy for us to jump on,” said Cha Ron Sattler-Leblanc, Associate Director for the Center for Women and Gender. School dress codes tend to be much more restrictive toward girls’ clothing than the boys’. Shorts have to be below the hands, shoulders should not be exposed, limited or no cleavage, the list goes on. When questioned about these rules, schools will often respond with the excuse that they are trying to create a “distraction-free environment.” “Are you valuing someone else’s education over mine?” Sattler-Leblanc asked rhetorically when asked about these dress codes. “I’m excited to see that girls are starting to challenge that in schools.”

Dress codes that perpetuate the idea that men cannot control themselves and force women to change only encourage today’s rape culture. “I can’t help feeling there is a powerful irony in accusing a girl of being ‘provocative’ — in projecting that societal assumption onto her adolescent body — before she is even old enough to have learned how to correctly spell the word,” said Laura Bates, co-founder of The Everyday Sexism Project in an article for Time. Children are being told that what they wear matters more than who they are as a person. Prepubescent girls are being told that showing their shoulders is somehow sexual before they even know what sex is. “When do we start imposing our values on children? When kids are dressing like the adults they see, how are we having those conversations?” Sattler-Leblanc asked. She argued that having these conversations with our children is vital to making sure they feel comfortable with who they are and that they are ready to challenge conformity. There have always been rules and restrictions about how women dress and behave. A brief look into the history of women’s clothing can reveal dangerous fashions from corsets to hoop skirts to lotus shoes. Although corsets had been around for hundreds of years prior, they became a standard in the mid-1800s; women would be scorned if they went without. In order to meet impossible standards of beauty,

women would have their corset laces pulled tighter and tighter, often resulting in misplaced intestines, cracked ribs and even suffocation. The hoop skirt, although seemingly innocent enough, had a tendency to be extremely cumbersome, leading to fires as a result of knocked over candles and even sweeping women off their feet into a body of water, making quick work of drowning them. The most extreme expression of beauty lasted for over a millennium in China. Young girls would repeatedly have their feet broken and bound to fit into tiny “lotus” shoes, a feat that would be impossible without the gruesome tradition. Tiny feet were a standard of beauty in China; if a girl wanted to be married, she had a much better chance with bound feet. This tradition continued until it was outlawed in 1942. Considerably less deadly standards for clothing continue to pervade our culture. According to an article in RIT’s University News, in 1961 a “dress neatly” campaign was endorsed by the school. Students were encouraged to wear professional clothing, which for women often still meant skirts and dresses. Although there was not much resistance from the student body, the article notes that only a few years later the rebellious hippie counterculture would change the acceptable style on campus.

When it comes to professionalism today, women must conform to a very complicated standard. If they dress in a suit and tie like a man then they are frowned upon. But dress “overly feminine” and they will be called provocative and unprofessional. Great change has already been made, but if we want a truly equal society, we need to focus less on attire and more on personality and capability. SattlerLeblanc stresses the importance of looking past societal standards: “Learning how to express ourselves in the context of all this noise and all these questions and all these values, I think that’s important to who all of us are.”

“Learning how to express ourselves in the context of all this noise and all these questions and all these values, I think that’s important to who all of us are.” Leisure 13

Features 1414Leisure

UPTALK, VOCAL FRY

WAR ON WOMEN’S VOICES

AND THE

by Alexander Jones | photography by Victoria Binkley illustration by Emily Diehl | design by Dennae Makel

At 13, Jesse Amesmith first learned how not to speak like a woman. “I read an article in Cosmo or something that was like, ‘13 Ways To Drive Him Crazy in the Bedroom,’ and one of the things it said was that men find high pitched noises in the bedroom to be annoying or a ‘turn off,’” Amesmith said. “So, for a good few years of my young sexual life, I was terrified to make a noise that wasn’t some sort of sultry low mumble, which at 15 or 16 is really awkward and strange.” Amesmith is currently the singer and guitarist of the Rochester-based punk band Green Dreams, which has amassed a substantial regional following in their still relatively brief existence (their first demo was released in 2012). Part of what makes Green Dreams stand out against its contemporaries is Amesmith’s unflinching vocal support of modern feminist movements, which has made her a standout figure in the Rochester punk community. The road to Green Dreams was paved with countless moments of casual sexism due to Jesse’s high vocal register, however. “I remember wanting to sing in punk bands in high school and my guy friends who were in bands would say things like, ‘Yeah, but like, you’re a good singer. You can’t sing in a punk band,’” Amesmith said. The phenomenon Amesmith has been experiencing is far from recent. Criticizing and mocking the vocal inflections of women — particularly young women — has been a societal currency for a considerable amount of time. The age-old stereotypes of

16 Features

“valley girls,” “ditzy blondes” and the “bossy woman” have been fodder for comedy bits and generational shaming for long enough that what their usage truly represents can be obscured. Young women are often instructed to speak in a lower register over the phone in order to sound more authoritative and knowledgeable. Women constantly face criticism for engaging in “uptalk,” which is sending one’s sentences in a slightly higher register and a questioning intonation, despite there being no evidence that women utilize it more than men. A recent Onion article bore the headline “Girl Finally Speaking Up Enough For People To Critique Her Speaking Voice.” It was a work of

There is, however, emerging research supporting the idea that women who speak with uptalk or vocal fry could find it more difficult to land a job. satire, but in a global society that has used women’s voices as another avenue to police their actions, it felt particularly resonant. Another speech trait that has been making headlines recently is “vocal fry,” defined by NPR as “a tendency to draw out the end of words or sentences with a low, creaky voice.” Despite vocal fry being largely

pegged as a female-led vocal phenomenon, men are just as guilty of utilizing it. Ann Heppermann, producer of the Slate podcast “Culture Gabfest,” recently put together a mashup of over a dozen examples of male vocal fry. On a recent episode of “This American Life,” host Ira Glass was able to distinguish undeniable vocal fry in his own voice, but pointed out that he has never been made aware of it in the way that women are shamed for it. “I get criticized for a lot of things in the emails to the show,” Glass said. “No one has ever pointed this out.” “It makes me really angry,” Stanford University linguistics professor Penny Eckart told NPR regarding vocal fry criticism. “And it makes me angry, first of all, because the biggest users of vocal fry traditionally have been men, and it still is — men in the U.K., for instance. And it’s considered kind of a sign of hyper-masculinity … and by the same token, uptalk, it’s clear that in some people’s voices that has really become a style, but it has been around forever and people use it stylistically in a variety of ways — both men and women.” There is, however, emerging research supporting the idea that women who speak with uptalk or vocal fry could find it more difficult to land a job. A recent University of Miami study instructed 800 participants to listen to seven

adult females between the ages of 19 and 27 years each speaking the phrase “thank you for considering me for this opportunity” in both a normal register and with vocal fry. The participants said that they would rather hire the speaker with the “normal voice” 80 percent of the time. Interestingly enough, the same participants were asked to listen to seven men of ages between 20 and 30 speaking the same phrase “normally” and with vocal fry, and the 80 percent result remained the same. So what does research like this tell us about our persistent cultural phobia of the female voice? It shows us that both women and men face the same repercussions for having these vocal traits, despite women largely getting the brunt of the backlash. It

also shows us, perhaps more significantly, that modern women are currently engaged in a zero-sum game in regard to how they choose to speak. If they speak with lower intonations, they are slammed with vocal fry allegations and lambasted as too “annoying” to listen to. If they allow their voices to drift into higher registers, they are lampooned as unintelligent — victims of the “uptalk” plague who can’t possibly be taken seriously. If they speak “normally,” they’re often not heard at all. Language is an amorphous, constantly evolving communication medium. Simple vocal patterns like uptalk and vocal fry are hardly substantial indicators of one’s intelligence, and the way they are laid at women’s feet as something to answer for is a

prime example of contemporary sexism. “We can reject the knee-jerk habit of dismissing people for the sound of their voices without actually hearing what they have to say,” Marybeth Seitz-Brown says in her article “Young Women Shouldn’t Have to Talk Like Men to Be Taken Seriously.” “And — rather than telling women to talk like men or shut up — we can encourage each other to celebrate the different rises and falls, the creaks and quakes that make up our voices.”

Both women and men face the same repercussions for having these vocal traits, despite women largely getting the brunt of the backlash.

Features 17

design by Olivia Konys illustration by Ayssa Minko by Alissa Roy

he last week of September found America in celebration of banned books. This tradition began in 1982 when library activist Judith King led the mission to teach First Amendment rights and promote intellectual freedom at schools, libraries and bookstores. Censorship, although traditionally thought of in terms of books, now spans across all platforms of media — from books to social media. Your childhood memories may be splattered with vague recollections of library displays of books that were banned in the past, including “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn,” “Looking for Alaska” and “A Wrinkle in Time,” among hundreds of others. Books are usually banned or challenged due to profanity, Satanism, sex, racism, objectionable religious views or violence — or any other reason declared by the banning authority. “Harry Potter,” for example, is one of the most banned books of the 21st century. The tale has been criticized for promoting witchcraft, lying, disobeying authority figures, breaking rules and for being too scary. Some dissenters of the boy wizard’s shenanigans decided to start burning copies of his saga.

BANNED VERSUS CHALLENGED BOOKS Since 1982, more than 11,300 books have been challenged. In 2014 alone, 311 were challenged, with many more issues going unreported. According to the American Library Association, a challenged book is a “formal, written complaint, filed with a library or school requesting that materials be removed because of content or appropriateness.” This does not mean that the book has been completely banned, but a complaint has been filed with the hopes of restricting access to it. “The purpose of banning a book is solely to ‘shelter’ those who may want to read it — and although a parent should be allowed to determine what their child can and cannot read, they should not determine what another child can or cannot read, which is done when a book is censored,” RIT 2015

18 Features

graduate Kelly Gatesman, who did her capstone project on censorship in America, said. Gatesman went on to cite a 2014 case she had researched in which police were called when students distributed copies of “The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian” after it had been banned from Junior Mountain High School. There were concerns over whether or not students had obtained parental permission to read the book, which the school required for banned books. The amount of censorship Gatesman discovered when researching her project was overwhelming. There are new cases of books being banned or challenged on an almost daily basis. There are large groups of people within the United States that hope to restrict access to information. According to TIME Magazine, 9,500 copies of “Operation Dark Heart,” a memoir by Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer about his experiences in Afghanistan, were burned in 2010 by the Department of Defense, and the publisher was asked to further alter what had been written for the second edition.

THE IMPORTANCE OF READING BANNED BOOKS Censoring and attempting to censor books by banning or challenging them is still prevalent today. Books provide us entertainment and expose us to opinions to which we wouldn’t otherwise be exposed. Reading books that have been banned or censored allows us to embrace possibilities and think in different ways, even if they are contrary to our own. In most cases, we now see these

challenges as silly, imprudent or misguided. We live in an age in which getting a book is incredibly simple. If a library bans a book, the same book can be easily obtained online. “It is important to celebrate your freedom to read and your freedom to

black people as rapists that had to be kept in line by the Ku Klux Klan. This caused riots, and its release was cancelled by several US cities. Social media has even been banned in some cases. Yik Yak has been banned at many universities,

BOOKS ARE USUALLY BANNED OR CHALLENGED DUE TO:

PROFANITY RACISM SATANISM OBJECTIONABLE VIOLENCE RELIGIOUS SEX VIEWS

information. By allowing books to be banned and not acknowledging that this happens, you’re giving up the ability to spread ideas and your right to the First Amendment,” Gatesman said.

THE FUTURE OF BANNED MEDIA Censorship and the freedom of speech are still extremely important topics, especially with the rise of new media. Every time you hear a bleep on TV or a song modified for radio broadcasting, you are experiencing censorship. Although we usually apply the concept of censorship to books, there are several examples of the censorship of movies, such as “The Interview.” This film was banned because the hackers who caused the scandal around the film threatened to bomb any theater that showed the movie. Another movie that has been banned is “The Birth of a Nation” back in 1915, as it featured

such as Utica College, because of its contribution to cyber-bullying. Other colleges, such as Clemson University, have completely banned sports teams from using social media during the season so that players have fewer distractions. Banned books are often encouraged by eager librarians in order to proliferate the idea that engaging in activities that were once blatantly banned shows how far we have come as a nation toward protecting our right to free speech. The new media, though, still haven’t found their place. We say we encourage free speech, and then we ban an app because the freedom of speech is causing problems. Censorship is still occurring in America, and the only way to fight it is to stay informed.

Features 19

by Mandi Moon | illustration by Max Yeager | design by Olivia Konys

ON A

LIBERAL CAMPUS 20 Features

ften we look at college as the time

in our lives when we are able to truly experiment with who we want to become, when we can express ourselves and our beliefs without fear of being shut down, when everyone is open-minded and can debate respectfully. For many people, that idealistic experience holds true; others, however, find their beliefs and convictions constantly challenged and ridiculed because they are viewed by many as old-fashioned, narrow-minded, self-serving, uncompassionate or overprivileged. “It’s still kind of jarring when the fact

that I’m a Republican kind of discounts my opinion on every matter,” said Siddhartha Nutulapati, a second year Computer Science major and the vice president of the RIT College Republicans. This is frequently the case of those with conservative beliefs on campuses that are overwhelmingly liberal — not just in student opinions, but also in professors’ opinions, course content, guest speakers and extracurricular events. As always, it’s difficult to find explicit evidence of subtle repressions, and rarely do college students outright state their

disdain for a particular group of people; if you pay attention, however, the signs are there. In a room full of assorted RIT students, you could be reasonably confident that a joke at Fox News’ expense would get, at minimum, a few appreciative chuckles from around the room. In a similar room, however, an expression of concern at the recent Planned Parenthood scandal would net you hostile

In April of 2014, third year Northeastern University student Megan Haas told ABC News that “It comes across that there only is a liberal campus. That’s how I felt most of the way in college so far; that there is no room for conservatives there.” “You definitely notice it. It’s just kind of how it is,” said Nutulapati. “There have been instances where if there is a conver-

although the majority of students at RIT have liberal tendencies, they are open to differing viewpoints and are willing to consider all sides of an issue. However, the environment at RIT may be the exception rather than the rule. “In the end, we’re trying to approach the same issues and the same problems. It’s not that one side is bad or one side is good. We’re both trying to be good,

MANY FIND THEIR BELIEFS AND CONVICTIONS

CONSTANTLY CHALLENGED glances and aggressive assertions about the radicalism of conservative media. This disparity is no coincidence; according to the Pew Research Center, more than 65 percent of people between the ages of 18 and 29 voted for Barack Obama in 2008, and around 60 percent did the same in 2012. In the commencement ceremonies for the top 100 universities in the United States, as defined by the U.S. News and World Report, 49 of the speakers were identified by the Young America’s Foundation as being liberal, while only nine were identified as conservative; the rest had no identifiable political affiliations, which were determined by demonstrated public support of “ideological causes through speaking, writing, serving in public office, commentating or financial contributions.” In addition, the overwhelming majority of college professors identify as at least liberal, if not leaning to the very far left, as discovered by the New York Times and Inside Higher Ed. What does this have to do with conservative students? Many argue that not only is the majority of the population on most college campuses liberal (excluding some specifically conservative schools such as Hillsdale College or Grove City College), those with conservative views attending such universities sometimes face discrimination and unfair treatment simply because of their conservatism.

RIDICULED

sation going on between people, I will actively withdraw myself.” Nutulapati is by no means the only college-aged conservative who has felt the pressure to remain silent in a friendly debate among peers. A quick search of “#MyLiberalCampus” on Twitter shows many personal experiences of conservative college students facing discrimination because of their political beliefs. One such tweet reads “On #MyLiberalCampus a professor asked Republicans to raise our hands and said ‘Oh, Republicans, I wish that there were more of you ... on Mars.’” Nutulapati said he had not experienced this level of discrimination from professors at all in his time at RIT. According to NPR, Intelligence Squared held a debate on this subject in March of this year titled “Do Liberals Stifle Intellectual Diversity on College Campuses?” Before the debate, 33 percent of the audience was in favor of this statement and 21 percent were opposed, with the rest being undecided; afterward, the scales shifted to 59 percent in favor and 32 percent opposed. Even if the results of one debate do not provide enough evidence to come to a conclusive ruling, it is definitely food for thought. Nutulapati stated that although he has noticed a large political divide at other colleges, RIT has a more open and accepting attitude toward differing opinions than most other liberal colleges he has experienced. He has found that,

it’s the way we’re trying to approach it,” Nutulapati said. Liberal students on college campuses often have their beliefs validated while conservatives are consistently having theirs challenged, and sometimes even laughed at. While a good debate is beneficial for all involved, persistent discrimination and mockery is not and is indeed actively harmful, not to mention the fact that it goes against an ideal that lies at the core of liberalism — that no one should have their views or rights repressed simply because of who they are, whether it be on the inside or out. The reality is that this “us vs. them” mindset is a microcosm of some of the greater political issues facing the country as a whole, and does neither party any sort of favor. Nutulapati encouraged those of all political affiliations to attend club meetings on Mondays at 8 p.m. in Liberal Arts A201 and engage in healthy political discussion. The RIT College Republicans and the RIT College Democrats participated in a debate moderated by the RIT Debate Society on October 19. For more information about upcoming political events, follow the clubs’ Facebook pages and keep an eye out for advertisements on campus.

Features 21

THE

DOUBLE-EDGED

SWORD OF

MASCULINITY by Gino Fanelli | photography by Rob Rauchwerger design by Halli Rosin

22 Features

“

or quite some time, there has been this binary understanding of gender, of masculinity and femininity,” said Laura Shackelford, chair of the Women and Gender Studies Program. “And in that, the negative characteristics of femininity reinforce the positive characteristics of masculinity, and vice versa. For me, the sad thing is that tends to limit the possibilities both for men and for women.” In contemporary society, these roles of being “manly” and being “womanly” have been put under increasing scrutiny. Before delving into the factors relating to the shift in traditional gender roles, it is first necessary to define what “traditional” means in this context. The causes for traits of masculinity can be broken down into both psychological and sociological perspectives. On the psychological end, masculinity — which traditionally encompasses traits of being stoic, independent and strong with extremely subdued emotions — can be pinpointed to the earliest stages of development. Clinical psychologist Dr. Michael J. Diamond postulates that the roots of masculine traits are strongly linked to the relationship between the growing male’s relationship with his mother in an essay entitled “Masculinity Unraveled: The Roots Of Male Gender Identity And The Shifting Of Male Ego Ideals.” Much akin to Freud’s Oedipal theory on male development, Diamond speculates that a growing male will form an identification with his mother in the early stages of development. A healthy male will not exactly grow to dis-identify with his mother’s traits, but will rather develop a mature balance of femininity and masculinity, often with the help of a father figure. However, Diamond suggests that a male who strongly dis-identifies with his mother is far more likely to display an extreme and fragile masculine state of mind, which is often accompanied with narcissism and, in some cases, psychopathy. The same can be true of a male who has a disproportionate affinity for his mother and dislike for his father, displaying overwhelmingly feminine traits. Balance between the two polarities is key to a well-rounded individual, and likely defies gender. However, balance of these traits, regardless of health, is not something commonly portrayed in pop culture. Hypermasculinity is glorified, while femininity tends to be frowned upon. “Going back in American history, going back even to frontier days, you have this

image of a self-reliant, individualistic outlaw hero, or the genius who does what he wants without being tied down by family or culture — the independent, fearless visionary,” Shackelford said. She went on to explain that these masculine ideals can even be found in places we might not expect them, particularly in popular culture. Shows such as “The Big Bang Theory” heavily feature the trope of the misunderstood brilliance that panders to this idea of masculinity. “It speaks to a central value of American culture, even when looking at historical heroes, that they never went to school or had families, were totally self-reliant and just woke up one day with these genius ideas. It’s not a bad value, but when people aspire to that, they’re not realizing that it’s

an incredibly unrealistic ideal,” Shackelford said. This idea of the independent genius is echoed throughout American history, yet is often a fallacy. Perhaps the most notable manifestation of this masculine ideal is Thomas Edison; however, while Edison is generally seen as a true independent visionary, the fact of the matter is that Edison received a large amount of funding and assistance throughout his career, and even fabricated stories of his life to better fit the exact image Shackelford described, such as claiming he never received any formal education. Additionally, the battle between himself and Nikola Tesla, iconically seen as the epitome of independent visionaries in nerd-culture, is also more or less fabricated.

Shackelford suggested that admitting that these heroes received assistance, had familial support and were not independent or self-reliant breaks from a masculine narrative and emphasizes feminine traits. French feminist Luce Irigaray explains why this is generally seen as a negative in a gender binary system in which masculine traits are the 1’s while feminine traits are the 0’s. In other words, “masculine” attributes such as self-reliance, independence and stoicism are countered by the absence of working cooperatively, depending on others or being emotional. These are traditionally “feminine” traits, which will always be seen as negative, or the absence of, masculine traits. “What follows from that,” Shackelford said, “is that women are just defined in terms of the male standard. They’re defined in not having what males have, in negative terms. So what Irigaray said is that, in a binary system, there is no femininity represented. There’s just men and their ‘other.’” Today, with the rise of the transgender movement and a greater focus on understanding gender, this image has begun to falter. The idealized male has been an increasingly popular subject of prodding and exploration in pop culture. For example, the HBO classic “The Sopranos” summarizes the modern fall of masculine culture. Centered around perhaps the most traditionally masculine subcultures imaginable, the series systematically breaks down every characteristic of being a “man,” such as loyalty and rigidness, into a form of being troubled, insecure, often savage and, in the end, archaic, exploring the philosophy of a time that may have never existed. Similarly, “True Detective’s” second season focuses intently on the harsh realities of attempting to live up to ideals of extreme machismo, with it’s disastrous consequences for the characters. “There’s a lot of space overlapping between gender roles,” Shackelford said. “And there’s a lot of texts and literature exploring the more complicated understanding of gender. It’s exciting, because it seems that it’s a generational shift. It’s not just people who want to have a different identity with their gender or sexual orientation. It’s an entire generation realizing that there is much more complexity to gender, and it’s a right that people have to express however they see fit.”

Features 23

LGBTQIA+ ATHLETES by Mich Zaken | photography by Dominique Hessert | design by Jane Rosenthal

Kelly gets ready in the locker room for her soccer game at RIT against Potsdam.

24 Sports

o.” “No.” “No.” “Well, yeah but they’re not out yet and don’t want to [be], so...no.” These are the typical responses from RIT athletes or their teammates when asked if they would be willing to talk about the LGBTQIA+ community in sports. Coming out in general is not an easy task, and coming out as an athlete seems to be exponentially more difficult. There is a standard held for athletes of the college and professional division alike. That standard tends to go hand in hand with the fear and feelings of being ashamed for coming out, for showing other athletes, and even fans, who you really are. While there was some difficulty finding anyone to interview, there was one girl who stepped up to the plate (literally and figuratively), confident and unashamed: third year Industrial Design major and RIT softball player, Sam Killian. When asked about how she came out as gay, Killian told her story as if she was just talking about what kind of car she drives or what she ate for breakfast — relaxed and nonchalant. “Stereotypes are a big [issue],” Killian said. “People think softball is the classic ‘gay girl’ sport, but you can go into any athletics and you’re going to find it.” The only thing stopping athletes, or anyone, from coming out is the pressure they put on themselves stemming from the expected backlash and negative labels that society has given them. In a sense, we’re taught that being a part of the LGBTQIA+ community is wrong. Instead of being supportive, people tend to treat their friends and family members who come out differently. Disapproval and hatred are still directed

toward this. Killian offered a word of advice for any athlete that has not come out yet. “Just do it. You’ll be more happy and if people reject that, they’re usually not your friends,” she said. “True friends really — I know it’s cliche — will accept you for who you are. No matter what. Even if it is scary to you, you gotta do it and you’ll just be so much more happy because hiding it and covering it up is so stressful.” Student athletes should not feel alone. The ongoing struggle of being an athlete in the LGBTQIA+ community is something that occurs to anyone in the sports field. Kwame Harris was the first round draft pick for the San Fransisco 49ers in 2003 and played six seasons in the NFL. Just before the Superbowl in January, he was outed due to an alleged altercation with his former boyfriend. However, the real focus of the event turned towards his fellow teammate, Chris Culliver who objected to Harris’s lifestyle. “I don’t do the gays man... No, we don’t got no gay people on the team, they gotta get you out of here if they do... Can’t be... in the locker room. Nah,” said Culliver in a press interview. Inappropriate commentary like that from someone that was seen as a friend to Harris is exactly the problem the LGBTQIA+ community faces. Thanks can change for them the moment that someone finds out their gender, sexuality or romantic preferences. Kelly Rogers, a second year Mechanical Engineering major and soccer goalie, was another student who felt comfortable discussing her bisexuality. “With our team at least, my coach puts a lot of effort into... our team mentality and how we talk to each other,” Rogers said. “Last year we did this safe space training here, it was good for everyone to be a little bit more

Kelly watches videos with her roommate/teammate.

understanding ... It was to open up forum, for everyone to be more comfortable talking about [having gay girls on the team].” Rogers also mentioned that she wasn’t the only one on the team who is part of the

covered cases of an LGBTQIA+ individual in athletics we have seen. She competed in the 1972 and 1976 Montreal Summer Olympics, taking home a gold medal in the decathlon. Then, after much speculation, it all changed in 2015. This topic is more controversial than any political debate topics. Being lesbian, gay or bisexual seems much less taboo than being transgender, but it is receiving pretty much the same attention and conflict that being part of the lesbian, gay and bisexual community was receiving 20 years ago. People are confused. They feel as though they do not know about these topics and the immediate reaction to things one is unsure of is fear. Maybe in another 20 years this can just die down

and be exactly what it is. Jenner is a person who didn’t feel as though she belonged in the body she was given. She came out as transgender and she represents the thousands of other transgender people wishing to do the same and have people accept them for who they are. Megan Rapinoe, US Women’s National soccer player and recent World Cup champion, was recently quoted in an article posted on The Huffington Post website stating: “I think it’s pretty cool, the opportunity that I have, especially in sports, because there’s not really that many ‘out’ athletes. I think it’s important to be out. It’s important to stand up and be counted and be proud of who you are. I’m happy if I can help anyone else in their struggle. I’d like to make a positive impact on people.” Rapinoe was discussing her experience coming out as lesbian. However, the word ‘struggle’ stood out. It should not be a struggle coming out. It shouldn’t have to be that hard.

It shouldn’t be a struggle coming out. It shouldn’t have to be that hard. LGBTQIA+ community. With all of the girls supporting her when she came out to her teammates this year, it was the moment she had felt the most accepted in her life. As an athlete, your team can lift you up and support you, or bash you down and break you. For the RIT women’s soccer team, there is only one option, and that’s to have each other’s backs. Caitlyn Jenner, previously known as Bruce, was and still is one of the biggest and most

Kelly’s ankle tattoo, juxtaposed with one on her shoulder, reflect the highs and lows of existence.

Sports 25

TAKING MORE THAN

JUST THE

TIP WHY MALE CIRCUMCISION NEEDS TO END by Jake Krajewski | design by Halli Rosin

26 Views

hen an American couple has a child, the issue of whether or not to circumcise is not usually debated. It is such a widely practiced and accepted procedure in the States that it hardly requires a second thought. But is cutting off that little flap of skin really something parents should be doing? Is it even something they have any right to do, if it is not medically necessary and not a part of their religion? No, it isn’t. An extremely common double standard that simply blows my mind is how vehemently we abhor the female circumcision happening in other countries, while male circumcision is practically customary. We are one of the only countries in the world that routinely circumcises males for non-religious reasons. In fact, medical professionals from across the Atlantic have attacked previous attempts by the American Academy of Pediatrics to defend circumcision. Some European political groups even go so far as to call unnecessary, neonatal circumcision “child abuse.” Some argue that circumcision has health benefits. There are sources that claim that circumcised males are less likely to get urinary tract infections, a circumcised penis is easier to clean and circumcision helps prevent the spread of certain sexually transmitted diseases. This is usually based around the idea that the foreskin provides an enclosed space for germs to multiply. However, considering that the United States is a first-world country with running water, this argument is null and void. Regular washing can clear out germs from under the foreskin the same way flossing clears out germs from the pockets between the gums and teeth. While some data does show that circumcised men tend to be less prone to diseases like HIV, the simple fact is that wearing a condom makes men, circumcised or not, nigh immune to the spread of the virus. Studies also show that circumcision reduces the chance of penile cancer, which only occurs in the foreskin, but the rate of penile cancer in first-world countries, including European countries where circumcision is rare, is so incredibly low to begin with that it doesn’t warrant such a barbaric procedure. So we know that getting circumcised has

minimal health benefits, but are there really any drawbacks? Are there any reasons not to be circumcised? The answer is yes, there are several. Removal of the foreskin may be a common surgery, but it is still that: a surgery. Slicing off a fold of skin, no matter how commonly practiced, carries with it risks of infection and complications. Additionally, this procedure causes pain. Even if an anesthetic is administered during the surgery, the infant will still be in pain while he heals. Many animal rights groups say that de-clawing a kitten is inhumane because it is a painful, permanent procedure, so why are baby boys not protected when a similar situation plagues them? However, perhaps the greatest reason not to circumcise does not come into question until the boy’s teenage years. The foreskin plays a very important role in sex. On top

of containing millions of nerve endings, the foreskin is designed to protect the glans of the penis from desensitization due to outside elements. It also acts a provider of natural lubricant and improves the overall sexual experience for the man. If removing the foreskin is really so damaging, then why did we start performing the operation to begin with? In the United States, religions that promote circumcision — such as Judaism and Islam — aren’t ubiquitous, so there must be another reason. Today, we circumcise because it’s the standard, but circumcision began catching on in the early 1900s. In this time period, a societal trend of sexual fear was developing, with masturbation increasingly being seen as disgusting and as a source or symptom of mental illness. Propaganda encouraging the removal of the foreskin as a means of preventing masturbation began spreading as early as the 1870s. Medical articles from this time seem so overly in favor of circumcision

that today they almost sound satirical. One article from this time calls the desire to masturbate an “octopus-like grip.” This same article goes on to explain that circumcision removes the glans’ protective shield, causing them to dry out and desensitize. More disturbing, however, is how enthusiastically the author expresses fondness of the procedure, stating that the foreskin makes up “a picture that is exceedingly tempting to the surgeon’s scissors.” The bottom line, however, is that this is a permanent surgical procedure that is performed without consent. Unless the surgery is medically necessary in order to prevent a recurring urinary tract infection or another complication, it is morally and ethically questionable for parents to have their son circumcised as an infant. Even in cases of religious circumcision, it should be the child’s choice whether or not they wish to be circumcised. The boy should be allowed to reach an age where he can make an informed decision about whether or not he wants to keep his foreskin. To make that decision without consulting him is incredibly insensitive to the child’s right to control his body. Although some technology exists that can work over time to create a simulation of foreskin, it cannot replace all of the nervous tissue that has been removed. If you have a son whom you plan on circumcising, I beg you to reconsider. You will be inflicting upon him a painful, irreversible procedure that will permanently damage his sexual functionality. When a baby is born, their appendix, which is without function but carries the potential to cause great harm later in life, is not immediately removed. However, a baby boy’s foreskin, which has purpose and rarely needs to be removed for medical reasons, is cut away without a second thought. While it is true that an appendectomy is more invasive than circumcision, circumcision is still an anesthetized procedure that cuts into flesh and causes bleeding. It is dangerous and completely unwarranted as a “preventative” measure. There’s a trend of genital mutilation here in our homes, and we have to be the ones to stop it.

WOTS WORD ON THE STREET photography by Daniel Vasta | design by Kevin Zampieron

Lucas Jackling Mechanical Engineering Third Year “Obviously, an uncomfortable topic to talk about is sex, you know. I mean, I’m just going to come right out and say it. Like, not uncomfortable to talk about, for me, with people who are older, and mature. But in college, where everybody is kind of still this

Audrey Rovero Computer Science First Year

dynamic changing person who hasn’t really figured out who they are yet, in that vein, that’s very uncomfortable.”

“I guess conversations about political views. It’s like, when people get really heated up about it, I don’t know, makes me nervous.”

Heather Hedges Finance Second Year “I hate when people talk about their cats too much.”

Jessica Gover Marketing First Year “Usually anything super personal. Like questions that involve me having to think

freely give away. I don’t know, I’m more

Sameer Balasubrahmanyam Computer Science Graduate

introverted; I’d rather people not give me

“I really don’t like to discuss discrimination.

probing questions. I just want to be left

We are at this point of time that we should

alone.”

just accept each other as how we are. We don’t

about why I act a certain way, or why certain things happen. Things that I wouldn’t

even care about these things, but we still do [talk about it], right?”

28 Views

WHAT’S YOUR

LEAST

FAVORITE TOPIC OF

CONVERSATION?

Anh Nguyen Physician Assistant Fifth Year “I’d probably say abortion. I’m pro-choice, and I guess I don’t like to argue the fact that people want to change that to make it illegal or make it only pro-life.”

Evan Natter Industrial Design Fourth Year “My least favorite topic would definitely be about religion in general. So, I am a religious Jew myself, and I think that the worst possible thing is to force your beliefs — religious beliefs specifically — on someone else. Because that means you think your religious beliefs are

Saul Fabozzi Finance First Year “I don’t like to talk about pregnancy.”

better than theirs. I just think that is insulting on many levels, demeaning to yourself, demeaning to other people, and should just be avoided in general.”

Raven Benfield Industrial Engineering Fourth Year “Well I don’t like complaining. So, I don’t like talking about all my problems, or everyone’s problems, all the time.”

Kasia Kozak Industrial Design Fourth Year “I guess I don’t like discussing, in a serious manner, what I’m going to do next year when I graduate. It used to be okay back a few years ago not to know what you are going to do when you graduate, but now that you’re a senior, everyone wants to know these things.”

Molly Hill Film and Animation/Motion Picture Sciences Third Year “It’s hard to talk about faith, it’s hard to describe faith.”

ING

Tuesday, September 22, 9:52 PM

“This blister on my foot has lasted longer than any of my relationships. Does that mean we’re going steady now?” [Text]

Wednesday, October 7, 10:51 PM

“I think the name of my eyebrow shape should be called ‘I can’t aim, but it’s working out.’” [Text]

Saturday, September 26, 11:51 PM

“Hello, [unintelligible]! It is nighttime, I am at Murphy’s Law... And I am drrrunk! I just put my nose into Joe’s beer, and [incoherent] to figure out what I [incomprehensible]! I’m gonna drink cranberry juice and vodka because I’m [indecipherable]! Call me later! [strange yodeling noise]” [Call]

Have Something to Say? Text or Call:

585.672.4840

Wednesday, October 6, 3:38 PM

“The amount of shame in ordering a pumpkin spice latte is ridiculous. I will order my PSL with unabashed pride, because it’s good and it’s ridiculous to be shamed for a damn coffee drink”. [Text]

Thursday, October 1, 2:01 PM

“Order drinks like adults, get drunk like children.” [Text]

Compiled by Jake krajewski | Design by Emma Fleming 3030Views Views

College of Liberal Arts Theatre Program presents

Richard O’Brien’s

The Rocky Horror Show

Book, Music and Lyrics by Richard O’Brien Directed by David Munnell November 19-21, 2015 at 7:30pm November 20, 2015 at MIDNIGHT November 22, 2015 at 2:00pm Robert F. Panara Theatre $5 students/seniors/alumni $10 public/faculty/staff ntidtix@rit.edu - email for reservations Tickets go on sale November 9th at the NTID Box Office First floor LBJ Hall 11am to 4pm and one hour before curtain on the day of a show All performances will be captioned for the deaf and hard-of-hearing. “Rocky Horror Show, The” is presented by special arrangement with SAMUEL FRINCH, INC.

Be one of the first 100 people to sign by November 6th & get

preferred pricing.

PARK POINT

W Jefferson Rd

k Par

d rR ive

al R

enth

n Poi

Low d Charles Perkins Rd

John

Andrews Memorial Dr

ROCHESTER INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

Andrews Memorial Dr

THE PROVINCE

Apply online today at

ROCHESTERSTUDENTLIVING.COM · · · · · · · ·

Great locations to campus Private bedrooms & bathrooms available Fully furnished apartments and townhomes Amenities for a fit & healthy lifestyle Academically-oriented environments Cable TV & internet included Individual leases Roommate matching available

WALK OR BIKE TO CLASS.

AMERICANCAMPUS.COM Deadline, amenities & utilities included subject to change. Select floor plans only. See office for details.