Skip to Content, Navigation, or Footer.
The Tufts Daily
Where you read it first | Saturday, April 4, 2026
The Print Edition Print Subscription
Donate | About | Join Us
Advertise | Submit a Tip
Subscribe to our newsletters

Archives

The Setonian
News

Inclement weather and early season problems hinder sailing teams

March 15

Bad weather, slow starts, a lack of practice, and a cold, wet skipper. Just about everything went wrong for Tufts' co-ed and women's sailing teams this past weekend. The co-ed team finished sixth out of 18 at the Admiral Moore Regatta, held at New York Maritime and the women placed tenth out of 16 teams at the NAVY Spring Women's Intersectional, held in Annapolis, Maryland at the Naval Academy last weekend. "I'd like to do better," coach Ken Legler said. "But we really haven't had a chance to practice much. We haven't been out yet." The team has had trouble training recently due to inclement weather. Sailing at the Admiral Moore Regatta was limited by inclement weather as winds allowed the sailors to get in just nine races. Legler said that the regatta is known for having bad weather, but that he was happy just to have the opportunity to sail. "They got some racing in, I'm pleased about that," Legler said. "They needed that practice. Really, I look at it as a practice regatta." Sailing in 420's, Tufts finished sixth in both the A and B divisions. The A boat, skippered by senior captain Joel Hanneman and crewed by junior Elizabeth Haddad, finished with 58 points. The B boat of junior Sebastian Reeve and sophomore Katie Mims had 67 points. Legler said that Reeve was hampered by "bad starts." Brown won the event with an overall lowest score of 80 points. The women's finish was disappointing for a team that won Nationals last year and began the spring season ranked fourth in the country. Despite the poor showing, Legler was not discouraged by the regatta. "I think we're about the same we were at this time last year," he said. "We were ranked as high as fourth going into the season. Now we'll probably drop to about tenth, but I think we'll climb up to fifth, sixth, seventh. That's where we were last year at Nationals." At the NAVY Spring Women's Intersectional, senior co-captain A.J. Crane, an All American last year, skippered the A division boat. She was crewed by senior Kristin Tysell and sophomore Gretchen Curtis. The trio finished with 138 points. The B boat, skippered by junior Lindsey Shanholt and crewed by Tysell and junior Sarah Woodworth, finished with 167 points. Shanholt had a rough day from the start. She forgot her dry suit when packing for the trip, and an early capsize left her cold and wet for the rest of the race. The inauspicious circumstances was followed by another capsize and a few fouls of other boats. "They definitely struggled," Legler said. "But there were some signs of the speed that we know we have. Early in the regatta they were running in third. They'll do better next weekend. I expect them to finish in the top five." The regattas next weekend are much more important events for both the co-ed and women's teams. The co-ed team will be racing at the Trum Umstead at the Naval Academy -- an event Legler described it as "one of the biggest events of the year." The women's team will be St. Mary's women's Intersectional.

The Setonian
News

West Point planning EPIIC sister program

March 15

Given low ROTC numbers and strong opposition to the war in Iraq, it may come as a surprise that the University maintains strong relations with the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. Director of the Institute for Global Leadership Sherman Teichman said West Point is in the early planning stages of creating a sister program, which would serve as a counterpart to the Education for Public Inquiry and International Citizenship(EPIIC) program. Participating cadets would participate in a year-long academic seminar with a theme similar to the Tufts program. "What an incredible reality," Teichman said. "We've been dreaming about it for years." In addition to this newly proposed program Tufts and West Point have maintained a long relationship through a series of exchanges. Most recently West Point sent a delegation of students to the EPIIC annual International Symposium, which took place from Feb. 26 to 29. The cadets joined Tufts students, international scholars and officials from both non-government organizations (NGOs) and government agencies in a discussion about nation-building and the U.S. role in the world. "I thought that [the participants from West Point] would all back up Bush's doctrine," sophomore EPIIC student Boryana Damyanova said. "One-on-one, a lot of them were critical. They questioned the way we went about [the operations in Iraq]. Some of them discussed the lack of a coherent exit strategy." Damyanova acknowledged the benefit of dialogue with the military. "It's a positive thing to have that kind of dialogue between the two schools. It's important to have a broad perspective when you approach complicated issues such as nation-building," Damyanova said. In addition to participating in this event Damyanova was a member of an annual Tufts delegation to West Point's Student Conference on U.S. Affairs (SCUSA). According to Sergeant Cadet Jonathan Blauvelt, a participant from West Point and 2004 SCUSA organizer, cadets at the military academy receive a tax-funded education, which obliges them to respond to their constituents. "I think it's important to hear from people who are open," Blauvelt said. "It's good to hear our peers' opinions, because sometimes we only listen to one side of issues." According to Blauvelt, cadets are forbidden from criticizing their superiors' decisions, particularly in a public setting. Blauvelt also stressed the importance of social interaction between cadets and students at other universities. "Without people actually [meeting] cadets, there are a lot of stereotypes about who we are," Blauvelt said. "We're still just college students in the end." According to Teichman, the goal is not to criticize the military, but to evaluate U.S. foreign policy in order to inform those who will make decisions in the future. "The military is unbelievably complex in their own thinking," Teichman said. "They're neither saints nor sinners. My job is not to educate students as cynics, but to be skeptics." "The goal of EPIIC is to divulge what is actually transpiring rather than what is being told to us as the public diplomacy of the U.S. The truth is an elusive reality, but it's our job to reach the truth," Teichman said. The Tufts Institute for Global Leadership has maintained an 18 year relationship with the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. The Tufts Institute for Leadership and International Perspective also organizes a program joining Tufts students and West Point cadets with Chinese students from Hong Kong University, Peking University and the Chinese University of Hong Kong.

The Setonian
News

Reforming community relations

March 15

The presence of a Somerville Police Department representative at the recent Senate meeting may mark a new era in town-gown relations. A new task force initiative has Somerville police officers patrolling the off-campus regions where many students reside, and it has created new problems between the force and the school. The next few weekends may see a concerted change in party response protocol. Tufts University Police Department (TUPD) Captain Mark Keith said he expects to see a reaction from the new Somerville mayor Joe Curtatone. "There's a new administration. There's a new alderman. They know that, after spring break, the last five weekends are very active, both on and off campus," he said. Presently, 71 percent of seniors live on campus compared to the 25 percent that lived on campus five years ago. As a result, more juniors must live in off-campus residences. "Is there a difference in the maturity of one year?" Dean of Students Bruce Reitman asked. According to Reitman, solving the problematic relations between students and Somerville residents is a complex process. "Hopefully we can have a useful dialogue with how we deal [with the situation]," he said. In a Daily survey conducted on March 3, students were asked to consider Tufts' relationship with the surrounding community. Ten percent "strongly agreed" that the University's surrounding community is accommodating, and eight percent strongly disagreed with the statement. This less-than-perfect relationship may be attributed to the noise violations caused by off-campus parties. Junior Jordan Edwards, an off-campus resident, is disgusted with the situation. "Somerville gets angry because we're pushed off campus and act like college kids. Tufts has forced this problem on itself by kicking hundreds of juniors off campus and then expecting silence," Edwards said. "College kids are going to party," he said. Edwards described the attitude of the Somerville neighborhoods as one of "harassment" toward Tufts students. "The fact that Tufts accepts this additional degree of enforcement is appalling," Edwards said. Longtime Medford resident and senior Matt Gasbarro felt the negative sentiment from the community may be due to lack of campus publicity. As a Tufts student, Gasbarro said he knows the University upholds its involvement in the neighboring communities, placing importance on maintaining good relations. "From the Medford resident perspective, there really is a lack of promotion of all that Tufts does for the community," he said. "Unless residents are directly involved in any of the Tufts initiatives, residents are oblivious to them and the vast resources available to them at Tufts." TUPD Sergeant Doug Mazzola described the new situation of having both TUPD and Somerville officers respond to off-campus calls as "mutually beneficial on both sides." Edwards disagreed. "The University puts us in a situation of double jeopardy. Either let Somerville deal with me, or let Tufts. It's ridiculous that I can be fined twice for the same incident." Reitman defended the extra patrolling from local police. "We're in two cities. The municipalities have the jurisdiction and right to respond to all places. They have to respond more to the buffer zone." -- Danny Lutz and Daniela Perdomo contributed to this article

The Setonian
News

A slap in the face

March 15

Put yourself in the following situation: You make $10.25 an hour. You have a wife and two kids. You live in a housing project in the inner city. You struggle from meal to meal to provide for your family. You go to your boss. You ask him for a raise. You say you need at least $12 an hour to put food on the table. You say you need at least $12 to heat your apartment. Your boss isn't having it. He says he'll give you $10.50 if you promise to work for at least the next year. You say you'd settle for $11 and work for at least the rest of the year. He says he can't afford it. You call his offer an insult. You call it a slap in the face. You quit the job altogether. You go look for another job that will probably only pay $10. I bet as you were reading those three paragraphs, you said to yourself, "I know exactly who he's talking about -- Ty Law." That's right. If you haven't heard already, Ty Law -- you know, the same Ty Law who just won a Super Bowl with the Patriots -- is in dire straits financially. He's dead broke. Not a penny in his pockets. We're talking MC Hammer in 1994 poor here. We're talking Mike Tyson post-prison, pre-Clifford Etienne poor. So he's walking out. Folding his cards. Refuses to play for the Pats. "That bridge is burned," Law told the Boston Globe last Saturday. "I can't even see myself putting on that uniform again." Because you see, ladies and gentlemen, the first rule of business is respect. And Ty ain't seein' none of that. And who could blame him? You work with these guys a good... uh... seven, eight months out of the year. You have to drag your ass to work every day to put up with... uh... playing a game for a living. So last month, when the Pats offered Law -- who has two years left on his contract -- a four-year, $26 million deal to replace his current one, Law reacted like anyone else would. He called the offer an insult and a slap in the face. The Pats tried again. What about a seven-year, $51 million deal with a $14.2 million signing bonus? Not a chance. Law was thinking more along the lines of seven years, $63 million -- including a $20 million signing bonus and $28 million over the first three years. The Pats' response: "We can't do that. Save the paper." End of negotiations. No new deal for Ty. And Ty isn't happy. "They told me one thing and did another," Law told the Boston Globe. "They said we were going to talk. All of a sudden, negotiations are off." I'm not even 500 words into this column, and I'm already bawling my eyes out. Who's with me? Is this a sad story or what? All poor little Ty wants is to be the highest paid cornerback in the history of the sport. Is that too much to ask? And it's not like the team he plays for is even any good! The Pats have some nerve to turn down Ty when all his work has been rewarded with only... um... a Super Bowl title. He's supposed to make $6.15 million this year and $8.75 million the next, plus $1 million each year in bonuses. The Pats' proposal would cut this down to a paltry $15.6 million total over the next two years. Why in the world would Ty want to take a pay cut? There are so many things you can buy with $16.9 million that you could never dream of affording with $15.6 million. So Ty has a plan. He wants to buy out his contract. If the Pats trade him before Jun. 1, they have to pay $5.4 million in salary cap money. No problem. Ty's got that. "I told them, 'Instead of you paying me a $7 million salary, I'll pay you. For the next two years of my deal, I'll write you a check, and we'll go free and clear,'" he said. Genius, Ty, genius. Why doesn't somebody beatify this guy, because I think that plan counts as a miracle. But you know the Patriots. They weren't buying Ty's buy-out. Something about good business practices, bad precedents, common sense... well, you understand. By now, Ty was feeling like Rodney Dangerfield, he couldn't get no respect. But Ty says he'll show up to training camp. He'll play out this season. But no more. And good for him. Finally, a professional athlete who stands up for what he believes in; a professional athlete who's more about the thanks than the bank. As a writer, you try to set up every quote you use, give the reader some context, explain why you chose to use the quote. Not on this one. This one is all yours: "The money ain't the thing, because I have that. Then again, I'm not going to sit here and say I don't want $7 million, either. That's stupid. Hell, we all gotta eat." Good call, Ty, that is stupid.

The Setonian
News

A play in one act

March 15

I came across an article in the March 3 Daily entitled "Shower incident disturbs lacrosse team." Allow me to quickly quote the beginning of that article: "An unknown male allegedly exposed himself in the locker room shower after the men's lacrosse team practice last Wednesday. According to the police report, at 5:55 p.m. a student reported that an older male had dropped his towel, exposing himself. The suspect then began fondling himself. At that point the student ran out of the shower and alerted a campus security officer, who then called the police." Like a muse, this article inspired me. So, instead of my usual biting social commentary, I would like to present to you a one-act play I wrote based on those events. "Outbreath" rejected it (probably because they were out of breath -- SNAP!) but, thankfully, the Daily has printed my artistic vision. I just want to say that this is a work of fiction and that it is only loosely based on actual events. So, without further adieu, I present to you my play: A SHOWER ENCOUNTER Cast: Lacrosse Player #1: An athletic college student Lacrosse Player #2: Another athletic college student Stranger: A shaggy older gentleman Late afternoon. The shower at Cousins Gym. Lacrosse Player #1 and Lacrosse Player #2 enter the shower after a long practice, drop their towels, and begin bathing. LACROSSE PLAYER #1: Man, coach is really riding us. LACROSSE PLAYER #2: Seriously. My delts are killing me. LACROSSE PLAYER #1: Which ones are the delts again? LACROSSE PLAYER #2: Upper back. LACROSSE PLAYER #1: Yeah. Mine too. Stranger enters the shower. STRANGER: Hey, fellas. You mind if I jump in here? LACROSSE PLAYER #2: Excuse me? STRANGER: I just got through a rough workout. I was about to take a shower. I hope you guys don't mind. LACROSSE PLAYER #1: No. It's cool. STRANGER: Great. Stranger drops his towel. LACROSSE PLAYER #1: So what are you doing tonight? LACROSSE PLAYER #2: I'm gonna go to Zeta Psi. LACROSSE PLAYER #1: Zeta Psi is closed. LACROSSE PLAYER #2: I go there to cry. LACROSSE PLAYER #1: You cry? But you're a cool jock. You could have any girl you want. The lights dim. A spotlight shines on Lacrosse Player #2 for his soliloquy: LACROSSE PLAYER #2: If only he knew that beneath this rough exterior lies something he could never understand. Something he...must never understand. Why? Why was I born a man? Lights up. LACROSSE PLAYER #2: Did I say cry? I meant get high. LACROSSE PLAYER #1: I hear that! They slap five. LACROSSE PLAYER #1: Hey. Look at that guy. He's touching his penis. LACROSSE PLAYER #2: He's just washing it. LACROSSE PLAYER #1: He's been washing it for ten minutes. LACROSSE PLAYER #2: Holy crap! He's fondling himself! LACROSSE PLAYER #1: Let's get out of here! The lacrosse players run out of the shower. The End.

The Setonian
News

Education Briefs

March 15

Bush administration looks to amend No Child Left Behind provisions U.S. Secretary of Education Ron Paige said yesterday the Bush administration will work to soften some provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act. The changes will include relaxing teachers' qualification requirements -- including having a degree in every subject they teach -- and relaxing regulations governing required participation rates on standardized tests. Thousands of local districts throughout the country have decried the No Child Left Behind program as unfair and arbitrary. This is especially true in rural areas where Republican lawmakers consider the law unrealistic. Bush is slated to use No Child Left Behind as a centerpiece of his reelection campaign. Some experts said the administration's emphasis on flexibility contrasted sharply with its stance last year, when it was reported federal officials brushed aside complaints that some provisions were unreasonable. Brown U. to study potential for reparations for slave labor in its early years President of Brown University Dr. Ruth Simmons recently appointed a Committee on Slavery and Justice for the university. The committee will spend two years investigating Brown's historic ties to slavery. They will arrange courses and research projects examining the moral, legal and economic complexities of reparations and recommend how the university should take responsibility for its connection to slavery. Many of Brown University's early donors and officials were wealthy slave owners and traders, and some of the school's original buildings were constructed with slave labor. This is not the first time that Brown has focused on the slavery reparations issue. In March 2001, the Brown Daily Herald printed a full-page advertisement listing "Ten Reasons Why Reparations for Slavery is a Bad Idea and Racist Too." The advertisement argued that since slavery happened so long ago and was ended by white Christians, repartitions were not necessary. The advertisement added that African Americans should be grateful for their prosperity and freedom in the U.S. Simmons is the first black president in Ivy League history. Author of federal aid drug law accuses administration of distorting its purpose Under a provision of federal law that has been increasingly coming under fire, tens of thousands of would-be college students have been denied financial aid because of drug offenses, even when the crimes may have been committed long ago and the sentences already served. Author of the law Representative Mark Souder (R-IN) said that both the Clinton and the Bush administrations have distorted its original purpose. He said they are, "taking a penalty meant to discourage current students from experimenting with drugs and using it to punish people trying to get their lives back on track." Politicians and students disagree over the intention of the law. Currently, violent criminals who have served their sentence are fully entitled to federal aid, but the law would prohibit casual drug users from receive monies. * compiled by Patrick Gordon from the New York Times

The Setonian
News

The Passion' and anti-Semitism

March 15

I am a 19 year old Jewish boy who does not go a day -- not even on this incredibly liberal, warm and open campus -- without fearing that some force will arise and again claim the lives of thousands or millions of my relatives and friends. Paranoid? That is a matter of word choice I suppose, but a tour through the photo albums of my family -- or that of nearly any Jew of Eastern European descent on this campus -- reveals quickly the extent to which that fear is rooted in very near, and very bloody history. Mel Gibson made a movie about the last 12 hours of the life of Jesus of Nazareth, which I saw last week. Some people are upset, some people are moved to tears, some people are disgusted and some people just want everyone to shut up and go home. And a lot of people would rather not get into what they consider petty squabbles with paranoid people like me. I would like to present a few reasons why I believe that it is profoundly important for Jews and Christians (particularly) and the campus at large (generally) to attend the events on campus intended to provide a forum for these issues. I am not worried that Christians who see this movie will leave it with a desire to injure Jews or their property -- certainly not on this campus, and my faith extends to the country at large. Nor am I concerned that this movie will affect Christian theological pedagogy in this country, redirecting its focus towards outward blame. I believe that American Christianity is progressive enough, in an intentional as well as circumstantial and fundamental manner, that Jews should feel no less secure after the movie has finished its theater run. What I am worried about is people will come to the fallacious conclusion that the film is not anti-Semitic merely because the movie does not spark violent anti-Semitic outbursts, or because its content is not readily recognized to be anti-Semitic. Susanna Heschel, the daughter of the late and great Abraham Joshua Heschel, and an eminent Jewish and Feminist scholar in her own right, spoke at Tufts on March 3 and addressed this very question. She recommended using a parallel argument from an already accepted paradigm to elucidate the point. The terms "gypped" and "jimmies", referring to being swindled and chocolate flavored ice-cream sprinkles, respectively, both have profoundly racist origins. The former came from accusations that all Gypsies were tricksters and thieves, the latter referencing Jim Crow Laws and the color of Black American's skin. The fact that these words are used in common speech does not directly correlate to blacks having difficulty being considered equally for jobs, or being followed around stores suspiciously, but that makes them no less racist. The Passion Plays, drawn from the gospels and on which Mel Gibson's movie is based, have a history interwoven with anti-Semitism. Over the course of the Dark Ages, Middle Ages and Renaissance, Jews went through many cycles of tolerance and expulsion in each of the prominent Western European countries. The basis for many of these expulsions where false accusations, stereotypes, and caricatures of Jews, many of which were used in traditional passion plays to incite violence against local Jewish communities, and many of which appear in the current movie. I have reservations about whether this is a battle truly worth fighting. Firstly, is the community at Tufts really who we as Jews should be worried about? Probably not. However, the community at Tufts comprises many future leaders, and therefore they are exactly who we should care about. Secondly, isn't the fact that many people do not even recognize the classically anti-Semitic caricatures in the movie, and moreover have no interest in acting on them, a signal enough of the progress we have made? Yes it is, but go back to the previous parallel. Shouting racial slurs which I myself do not recognize, and which do not cause me to "act racist", is still fundamentally unacceptable -- both because of the effect it can have on others, and because of the way that speech and imagery subtly can affect the subconscious in ways we are not cognizant of. I need no scientific inquiry to prove that covering one's eyes no longer makes a friend disappear. Dr. Heschel reminded me that this movie raises many issues worth discussing, beyond the immediate question of whether I as a Jew can find offense in it. Why is it so violent? Is it sexist or overly filled with machismo? Why did Mel Gibson not film a movie about the Sermon on the Mount? What if this was a movie about violence in modern America? Do we as Jews have a right to attempt to interrupt a Christian narrative? We can all ignore it, and in truth, I cannot make a compelling argument that many will be significantly worse off if we did just that. But this movie also presents an opportunity to make some headway, to re-draw boundary lines, to talk and inform. The human mind does not make it easy for one human to kill another. The act requires the compartmentalization and reduction of a fellow, whole human into a disposable object: an enemy, a usurer, a heretic, and infidel. Both Christians and Jews have very powerful narratives attached to this movie, and I believe that through discussion, each can become sensitively malleable without losing any of its spiritual integrity. In the coming weeks, at least one -- if not two -- programs will occur to address these issues, co-sponsored by Hillel and other religious groups. To those still unconvinced, I would simply ask if attending such an event requires such sacrifice that it is not worth the possibility of expanding your sense of our common humanity through our so often perverted, common religious beliefs. Judah J. Sueker is a sophomore majoring in International Relations

The Setonian
News

Where do we draw the line between war and morality?

March 15

The current international situation, specifically the threat of terrorism, was the foundation for last night's Russell Lectureship series' guest speaker, Rev. J. Bryan Hehir. "How do you carry out moral analysis of warfare?" was the underlying question in Hehir's speech, "War, Peace, and Terror: Defining the Relationships" to a crowd of approximately 25 in Goddard Chapel. "It seems contradictory -- taking lives must not be moral -- and that's what most people automatically think of when they think of war," Hehir said. "But you have to realize that wars are fought, lost, and measured in moral terms." Hehirt listed three justifications for war in the political and religious spectrums: non-violence/pacifism, historical realism, and the "just war" defense position. "The historic Protestant tradition has been rooted in pacifism -- the institution that warfare is morally wrong, and therefore the people who support this situation will resist any and all uses of warfare," Hehir said. Today's pacifists are concerned with the processes of "peace-building" and "conflict resolution" to convey anti-war sentiments. Historical realism represents the opposite ideology. As Hehir puts it, "the strong do what they will, the weak do what they must." These realists, according to Hehir, possess moral restraints. When war is involved, however, these morals are pushed aside and the primary focus becomes a basic desire to win the war. Hehir's personally believes that the "just war" is ideal relationship between religion and war. In this situation, religious beliefs are the framework around which justification for war is built. "There are some uses of force that are morally acceptable, but if these reasons are moral, they are limited in uses and motives," Hehir said. The concept of a just war (and alternatively, unjust wars) has been around since the pre-Christian era and has continued until present day, where its revival has been fuelled by the war in Iraq and the ongoing threat of terrorism. "As a policy and a personal ethic, just war raises to the public a series of questions that are above the concepts of winning and losing," Hehir said. Hehir listed three just war "legacies" that have come together after the recent occupation of Iraq: the Cold War, the humanitarian and military intervention of the 1990s, and the "new century." The Cold War brought to attention the threat of weapons of mass destruction, the balance of terror, and nuclear deterrence. "The problem that we face today, however, is different. During the Cold War, the big question was 'How do we deal with these two superpowers?' Today, the threat is no longer about superpowers, but how easily accessible these weapons are," Hehir said. As the Cold War waned and the world entered 1990s, the public's questions evolved from "How do we avoid catastrophic damage?" to one of "How do we deal with the creeping chaos?" Hehir listed Haiti, Bosnia, Rwanda, Kosovo, Sierra Leone, and Liberia as nations that brought international jurisprudence to attention. This remains an issue with this month's incident of genocide in Rwanda. The rise of the discussion of terror encompassed what Hehir called the "new century." Three schools of terrorism were gathered together in response to the terrorist attacks. Transnational terrorism, which applies best to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, is the ability of a group of people to wreak havoc and terror across the world, Hehir said. Transcendent terror is violence prompted by a mix of religion and politics ideologies while traditional terrorism is the motivation to attack so-called "soft targets," like major cities. "It has become more and more complicated to understand why we use force these days," Hehir said. He named the threat of weapons of mass destruction, justification, and human rights violations to be among the top reasons for the use of force. "But with regard to human rights, short of genocide, should they always be resolved with force?" Hehir concluded. Somerville resident Roberta Ellison was in attendance and found Hehir's talk to be "extremely intellectually stimulating and informed." Ellison was disappointed that not as many people showed up to the event as she thought Hehir deserved. "He's a great orator and when I heard he would be speaking here, I jumped at the chance. It's too bad that not too many other Tufts students were aware of this." Hehir was invited on the behalf of the University's year-long lecture series on politics and religion. Hehir is currently the president of social services and charities within the Archdiocese of Boston as well as a visiting Professor of Practice of Religion and Public Life at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.

The Setonian
News

Senators debate role of off-campus students

March 15

Sunday night's Tufts Community Union (TCU) Senate meeting was unusually packed as senators met with representatives from the University administration, Tufts University Police Department (TUPD), and the Somerville Police Department (SPD). The aim of the meeting was to address the strained relations between Tufts students and Somerville residents. There have been several student complaints since a crackdown on parties began last month. SPD Sergeant Steve Carrabino's description of his first night on his new patrol left listeners with a powerful impression. He came across five students with open containers, two students publicly urinating on lawns, and one streaker on Upland Ave. "It just can't be done," he said. "It makes you guys look bad, really makes the neighbors angry. We have to do something to control that." Carrabino was recently moved from a gang-unit in east Somerville to the Tufts area. There has been a redistribution of police officers after budget cuts caused the department to lose 30 officers. Carrabino discussed the issues regarding Tufts-community relations from a patrolman's perspective. "I'm here to ask for your help," Carrabino said. "I see where this situation is heading and it looks bad." Senators had several different ideas on how to restore community relations. TCU Vice President Joe Mead suggested a group project clean up with volunteers from both the University and Somerville. Senator Simon Sassenberg said letting a student caught with an open container violation off with a warning would have less of impact than arresting the student. Carrabino felt such consequences would be too dire for the type of crime committed. "It's really hard locking someone up who's really apologetic when you know what can happen to their future [because of their record]," he said. While the meeting Sunday did not have tangible results, senators and administrators alike saw the heightened communication as a step in the right direction. "No one expected to solve all the problems. The problem starts with Tufts students and Somerville residents and that's where it will end," TCU President Chike Aguh said. Senators were given the chance to address their concerns to guests. The visitors included Captain Mark Keith and Captain Doug Mazzola from TUPD. Dean of Students Bruce Reitman and Director of Community Relations Barbara Rubel represented the Tufts administration. "We've had a focus on community relations this semester," Reitman said. "We're back to a normal situation now, but this year has had tense and frustrating levels at an all-time high." Efforts to improve relations will begin immediately. "To be ready for the last five weekends, if some of you would like to work with us, we can work on materials as a campaign," Reitman said. Though nothing for the future concrete, both administrators and senators see this as a good forum to discuss town-gown issues and problems.

The Setonian
News

Gay Marriage

March 15

I went down to the State House last Thursday to see what I could see. What I saw wasn't very pretty. On one side a group of angry, wacky people calling themselves "Christians", and on the other a group of equally angry, but not so wacky, advocates for gay marriage. Everyone was saying something, but no one was listening. It wasn't really the place for dialogue. Part of me wonders if dialogue is still possible. Dialogue necessitates that both sides be on the same page, but on this issue they seem to be coming from two different worlds. On other social issues, the opposing sides can at least see each other's good points. But on gay marriage, you are more likely to get a look of "What planet are you from?" from a friend who disagrees with you. Each side sees their conviction as self-evident. So, rather than try to argue my own conviction in these pages, my hope is to help opponents and proponents of gay marriage understand each other a little better. Both sides, to start, have severely caricatured the other. The other side can easily be scorned without thought and derided without hesitation when both sides are cordoned off in "conservative" or "liberal" camps. Such labels are unhelpful. The "conservative" label suggests an unthinking commitment to merely human traditions. People who question gay marriage are accused of an arrogant, obstinate desire to preserve The Old Way, simply because it is The Way Things Are Always Done. The "liberal" label is often used with a sneer against imagined libertines who only think about sex, and who are likely to suggest group marriage or horse marriage if given the chance. People arguing for gay marriage are accused of actively trying to dismantle Civilization itself, simply to satisfy their selfish desires. To be sure, there are several individuals for whom those two descriptions would actually apply. But on the whole, neither side would describe themselves in that way. Far from thinking themselves self-interested, the average liberal sees herself as fighting for the good of others, especially if she as a heterosexual doesn't stand to benefit from gay marriage. She sees her motivation to be love, not licentiousness. She sees, perhaps, a gay friend who really loves his partner and really wants to be able to marry him. She thinks the best way to help him is to help the cause that will get him what he wants. A more accurate label for advocates of gay marriage, rather than liberals, might be "allies". "Love your neighbor," a chant I heard from the allies at the State House rally, sums up what motivates them. Allies believe the best way to love someone is to give them whatever they most deeply want. The average conservative wishes to conserve something not for tradition's sake, but because the something is worth conserving. He doesn't believe something gets its worth from simply being old, but that its being old is at least a testimony to a worth it may already possess in itself. Not all things that last a long time, of course, do so because they are good. Slavery lasted a long time, and it was not good. The best way to test whether something old is also something good is to ask if it is also something true. The idea of human rights eventually prevailed over the idea of slavery because the idea of human beings as property is not compatible with the truth. Slavery never had any worth to conserve because it did not conform to the truth of unalienable rights -- humans really do have an objective right to their life and property. In a thousand years, if human rights are called into question, they will not be defended simply because they are old, but because they are true -- they conform to the nature of reality. When a conservative looks at marriage, between a man and a woman for so many centuries, its longevity does suggest to him that many people before him, much wiser than he, thought there was something true about heterosexual marriage. But his conviction to oppose gay marriage only comes when he discovers that gay marriage is indeed not true -- not conformable to the nature of reality. Here is where both sides have the hardest time understanding each other. The ally is used to thinking of marriage as a human invention. If it were, then the conservative would be pretty arrogant in demanding it remain unchanged, for human inventions are meant to be flexible to meet human needs. But the conservative says marriage should not be changed because it cannot be changed -- because it is, like human rights, a basic fact of reality. Man is designed to be with a woman, they hold, and a woman with a man. To depart from the design is actually harmful, because reality is designed to be good and a good used wrongly ceases to be good. In their mind they are also loving their neighbor. They believe that the best way to love someone is to do what is really best for them, not always what they want. "Realists" might be a better label for them. Realists believe that the nature of marriage, like the fact of human rights, exists independently of what people think about it. Just as no one can decide that people no longer have the right to not be tortured, no one can decide that marriage is something it is not. Asking, "If two people love each other why can't they get married?" makes as much sense to a realist as asking, "If somebody wants to walk across a canyon, why can't the air hold her up?" Realists are deeply concerned that just as a car running on the wrong fuel will eventually stop working, a departure from the reality of marriage will have unforeseen, harmful consequences for children and the society at large, despite how innocent the proposal seems at the moment. Realists agree that heterosexuals have made a mess of marriage, by already departing from its design for devotion, loyalty, and permanence, but they see that as no reason to depart even further. Both sides, then, see their campaigns as ones of love. The question of the best way to love turns on facts. Allies may never agree that homosexual unions are against the design of reality. But they should be willing to look to Scandinavia and Norway to see what gay marriage really does to marriage in general. Realists may never agree that the state should grant all privileges of married couples to gay couples, but they should recognize the need for some (hospital visitation, insurance benefits). The Allies should be sure they are allied with the truth, and the Realists need to get real about practicing what they preach. Jack Grimes is a senior majoring in philosophy and political science. He can be reached at Grimes@tuftsdaily.com.

The Setonian
News

Senate meeting should be first step

March 15

The meeting between Tufts Community Union (TCU) senators, Tufts Director of Communication Barbara Rubel, TUPD, and the Somerville Police Department on Sunday needs to be just the beginning of an attempt to bring about a strategy to deal with loud off-campus parties that actually involves student input. The outcry over the last few weeks about the crackdown is not because students are unsympathetic with our neighbors' plight, but rather because they felt like the city's new policy targeted any student who left his room Friday or Saturday night with the intention of going to an off-campus party. TCU Senators should push for a continued dialogue between all the interested parties. The senators' prompt action in bringing about this meeting is commendable, and students should show interest in future Senate action if a priority of theirs is preserving the right to have parties off-campus without police interference. The fact that Somerville felt it necessary to create a Tufts-exclusive police patrol for Friday and Saturday nights is distressing. The police task force effectively takes away the responsibility of the students to keep the noise level of their party acceptable to their neighbors, and assumes that any gathering of students will soon be noisy and out of control. As this page has argued before, the harsh crackdown on parties is not a solution to noise complaints. Like the mythological hydra, two new parties will sprout for every one that is broken up. A real solution must provide a long-term plan for student social life that will not infringe on the rights of Somerville residents, as well as short-term measures to prevent the current situation from degenerating. The meeting that took place on Sunday will hopefully result in a satisfactory policy for all sides. It should not be a singular occurrence, but the first of a series of dialogues between the City of Somerville, the Somerville Police Department, the Tufts administration, TUPD and students. If the student voice is considered during the creation of a new strategy, then students will understand the sacrifices they must make and punishments they will suffer if at fault. For now, students should voice their opinions and hope that the Senate continues to pursue a dialogue with all the parties involved in the decisions that will be made in the near future.

The Setonian
News

The Dude's Dudes are the man

March 15

Fridays: not just for frats anymore. This winter, Fridays were not even the exclusive realm of sleeping late and going out early, and the game of choice was not always Beirut. For one group of students and alumni, at least, "Friday Is The Time For Ultimate [Frisbee]" (FITTFU), and last Friday was the time for old scores to be settled, for skipping schoolgirls to battle mad cows, and for the two-year-old league's 2004 champion to be crowned. From the smoke and chaos of five weeks of regular play, four of FITTFU's six teams emerged as playoff contenders, while Becker's Peckers and Bill's Middle Infield Action, the two squads that failed to advance, were left behind to lick their wounds and nurse matching 1-4 records. Though all qualifiers entered the Rocky Carzo Cage on Friday night with visions of Ultimate grandeur, only the Dude's Dudes would ascend to the summit of FITTFU greatness, earning yearlong bragging rights, and carrying home the figurative golden Frisbee with a 14-13 double-overtime win over Skipper's Skipping Schoolgirls in the finals. The league MVP, junior John Korber, also emerged from the realm of the Dudes. A recent convert from the baseball team, Korber led the FITTFU ranks in regular-season goals (22) and was tied for fifth in assists, with 12. "[Korber's] doing amazingly well for his first year, he was a dominant force," said sophomore Evan Ream, FITTFU general manager. "He's an incredible athlete and he reads the disc very well... He'll always come down with it. The other team's best defender always had to guard him. Otherwise, [the Dudes] would run away with it." The Dudes did anything but 'run away with it' in the playoffs. In fact, their eventual victory was a bit of an upset, as they entered the championships seeded second with a 3-2 record. The Dudes opened the season with back-to-back losses, including an embarrassing 8-7 slip-up against the Middle Infield Action -- the eventual last-place team -- in week two. With a sparkling 5-0 record, the Schoolgirls entered semifinal play as the top seed. The team, captained by freshman offensive-defensive threat Chris Skipper, also boasted talented alumni leaders like Dan "Funboy" Forester and Nate Johnson (17 goals and 12 assists in the regular season). Stud players like sophomore Chris Healy and senior Zach Geller added to the intimidating roster. "Skipper's team had no weak player and that's why they did so well," Ream said. "There was no weak link." Amassing a plus-29 goal differential in the regular season, the Schoolgirls steamrolled over most opponents, with their closest match a 9-6 defeat of the Dudes in the season opener. The Schoolgirls' largest victory margin was recorded in week two, when they easily herded up Danny's Mad Cows, 11-3. Despite the early-season thrashing from the Schoolgirls, the Mad Cows eked out a playoff berth with a 2-3 record, grabbing the fourth seed behind Crocker's Roughnecks (3-2). Aside from determining semifinal pairings, previous results seemed all but irrelevant once the tournament was underway. "At the end, no team was significantly better than any other," Ream said, "Skipper's team [was] undefeated until the final game, they had the edge, but they didn't end up winning so obviously everyone was pretty closely matched." In the first semifinal game, the Mad Cows fell to the Schoolgirls, 8-6. The Dudes then secured their own spot in the finals when they edged the Roughnecks, 7-6, in what was touted to be a rematch of last week's 8-7 Dudes-over-Roughnecks bout. Revenge eluded the Roughnecks Friday, as they were hampered by several injuries and a resulting lack of substitutes, which left them worn down (and down by one) in the end. Excitement and competition rose to a fever pitch in the finals, when the Dudes and the Schoolgirls faced off. The game was tightly contested throughout, and the lead seemed to change hands almost as often as the Frisbee did. In one spectacular play at the halftime buzzer, the Schoolgirls' Skipper launched the disc from his own end zone towards a waiting mass of Dudes and Schoolgirls at the opposite end in hail Mary like fashion. Johnson skied above the field to make the catch, landing in the end zone and giving his squad the momentum advantage going into the break. Eventually, though, the Dudes' own play-of-the-night would come at a more advantageous time. With the two teams deadlocked at the end of regulation and through one over-time period, the Dudes finally tipped the scales in their favor and completed the upset with just a few ticks left in the second OT. It began with a smooth offensive drive working the disc downfield, and finished with a quick pass into the endzone from senior Jesse Goldberg to sophomore Jeff DeMaso. According to the Dudes' captain, freshman David Rodman, his entire squad contributed to the winning play. "I'd say the whole team scored that point," Rodman said. He also commended senior Matt Abbrecht and sophomore Michael Chirlin for lending strong play throughout the season. The Schoolgirls' Geller called the unexpected loss "heartbreaking." "We were the heavy favorite, but they knocked us off. I don't know how it happened," Geller said. He mentioned that strongmen Forester and Johnson suffered from injuries that prevented them from playing for the duration at full capacity. "We'd sort of relied on them all season," Geller said. "It forced our other players to play a lot more minutes for us." Despite his disappointment with the loss, Geller stressed the fun, laid-back nature of the FITTFU league. "We play our games, and when [they're] done, we're done," Geller said. "No one takes it that seriously at all, but of course when you call it the finals, people are going to get into it." According to Ream, the league's primary aim is to give members of Tufts' men's and women's Ultimate Frisbee teams an opportunity to tune up for the spring season. FITTFU squads are captained by a freshman in order to foster the newbies' involvement, and alumni are encouraged to participate as well. While the league focuses more on fun than cutthroat competition, the Dudes' hard-fought win was certainly a satisfying feat for a team named after The Big Lebowski's infamously lethargic main character. "We were the underdogs for sure," Rodman said. "We came in as the second seed and then beat the vastly over-stacked [Schoolgirls]. They were super dope and we just pulled one out. It was pretty awesome."

The Setonian
News

Freshman Jones earns All-American status at NCAA's

March 15

Neither freshman Fred Jones nor junior Nate Brigham quite gave their best performance on Saturday at the NCAA Div. III national championship meet in Wisconsin. Still, one All-American isn't too shabby. Jones earned the distinction by finishing sixth in the nation in the triple jump, while Brigham finished ninth out of twelve competitors in the 5,000-meter race, missing the top eight finish required to achieve All-American status. "It wasn't as close as you think," said Brigham, who finished the race in 15:00.1, over eight seconds out of eighth place and almost half a minute slower than his seed time of a converted 14:35.85. "I'm disappointed. I just didn't quite have it out there." Jones didn't jump his furthest, falling short of his school record jump of 48 feet and a quarter inch, set at the end of February at All-New England's. But it was still his second best jump of the season, and it was good enough to make him a rare freshman All-American. "Usually, you get there as you mature," coach Connie Putnam said. "But Fred is [already] mature. If you saw him at the meet you would have been proud to be from Tufts. He was serene, calm, and poised, and he just had a great time out there." Jones' teammate echoed that thought. "Fred's a great guy and he was great to travel with," Brigham said. "He had a decent day, not his best, but still good, and he didn't buckle under the pressure, he just went out there and had fun." In the preliminaries, Jones won his heat with a leap of 46-9 1/2 (14.26m) to advance to the finals. There, his jump of 47-4 1/2 (14.44m) landed him sixth overall in the nation and gave Tufts three points, good for a 40th place tie out of 53 teams. Wisconsin La Crosse took first with 70 points. "It takes an amazing mark to get out here, which both of our guys had, but it usually only takes your mean performance to place as an All-American," Putnam said. "You can't pop your best every day of the week. Fred was able to get beyond his mean but I think [Nate] went out there thinking he needed the race of a lifetime, which wasn't the case." Brigham likened his race to his performance at cross country nationals this fall, where he started out strong before fading back to 94th overall. "Again I started out near the front but fell back," he said. "But it was a tight pack, and I was in contention for most of the race until the end, but I didn't realize that and my confidence went down. I just got down on myself and didn't close well." Wisconsin Oshkosh senior David Cisewski captured the 5,000 with a 14:30.58, the best Div. III time of the season. "I ran well at nationals once," Brigham said, referring to his 11th place individual finish in the cross country nationals in the fall of 2002, which garnered him All-American honors. "I'm hoping to recapture some of that magic again. The meet never loses its luster for me. I still appreciate being here, and I still get very nervous, and maybe that's part of the problem." Jones, meanwhile, said that he didn't feel such pressure. "It was fun," Jones said. "It's been a long season and I haven't been in the weight room for awhile, so my legs weren't really under me. But I'm taking away from it a positive experience, and I just want to work towards having my best jump at nationals next year." Brigham, although very disappointed, is also moving on and focusing on his favorite event, the 10,000 race in the outdoor season. "We're looking past it and gearing up for the spring," Putnam said. "In every event, there are eight All-Americans, so four to six guys go home very disappointed, but they're still among the best 12 or 14 for that event in the nation in their division. Nate didn't have his best day, but it doesn't take away from the fact that he set a school record this year, went to nationals, and is the best 5000 meter run this institution has had."

The Setonian
News

Draw a curtain over this "Secret Window"

March 15

The most disturbing part of "Secret Window" is not the bloody screwdriver sticking out of Chico the dog, who is sacrificed early on in the film. It's not John Turturro's eerie psuedo-Quaker character demanding revenge and it's not the violent, jagged writing carved all over the walls of Morton Rainey's cabin. The creepiest part of the movie comes after the plot has wrapped itself up and the credits are done rolling: the screen goes black and the disembodied voice of Johnny Depp drones the folk song "Shortnin' Bread." About a half an hour from the end of the movie, Rainey (played by Depp) announces that, in a mystery story, "the ending is the most important part." In this case, the ending is the only thing that keeps "Secret Window" from being a typical thriller. And the literal ending -- Depp's song, which is the last thing we hear -- is just as unexpected and confusing as the denouement of the plot. Morton Rainey is a mystery writer who lives alone in a cabin in the woods. He recently split from his wife, Amy (played by Maria Bello), after finding her in bed with another man. Since then, he has been unable to get any work done and lives the life of a textbook depressive: he sleeps too much, he eats unhealthily, and he snaps at his hapless housekeeper. A more decisive blow to Rainey's creativity comes in the form of John Shooter (John Turturro), a farmer from Mississippi who accuses Rainey of stealing his story, "Secret Window." Shooter starts to terrorize Rainey, leaving ominous notes on the door and threatening to harm Rainey if he doesn't prove that he wrote the story first. What follows is a confusing and unbelievable story, in which murders are committed in the name of plagiarism. The combined forces of Depp and Stephen King (who wrote the novella on which the screenplay was based) make "Secret Window" more than a hackneyed screamfest, but not much more. The movie seems pretty formulaic until King makes an almost palpable appearance: as the film's bizarre ending begins to unwind, the supernatural influence of the author announces itself in an inexplicable beam of light that splits the walls of Rainey's house in two. Rainey begins to talk to himself -- first in his head, then in person, thanks to the help of CGI-duplicated Depps. It's hard to think of any actor who could play the role of the broodingly crazy, yet bizarrely comic artist like Johnny Depp. His performance is able to simultaneously represent these two poles. Perhaps the best example of this is the oddly placed "Talking Heads" reference that occurs when Rainey watches his ex-wife and her new lover kissing outside their old home; deadpan, Rainey stares out the window and declares, "This is not my beautiful house. This is not my beautiful wife." Depp skillfully shows Rainey's transformation from little boy to lascivious man. At the beginning of the film, Depp's Rainey behaves somewhat like the grown Tom Hanks character in "Big." He only eats childish junk food (Doritos, Mountain Dew, peanut butter and jelly), he sings to his dog, and he sneaks cigarettes. The house is his playground, and, clad in a torn bathrobe, he dances about it (in a mincing Jack Sparrow-esque style) while flouting any authority the real adults (cops, bodyguards, store owners) in the movie try to enforce. By the end, Rainey has become a man, a role that is somehow less believable than Depp's bratty child. He trades his ratty robe for a professorial getup of a button-up shirt, sweater, combed hair, and wire-rimmed glasses. In line at the grocery store, he hits on the girl from the post office. And he gets an exercise bike and a weight bench. That's right; Johnny Depp has a home fitness system. Despite the complexity King assigns to Rainey, the rest of the characters are wooden stereotypes. Turturro's Shooter is the epitome of the Southern hick: violent, crude, and inarticulate. Bello's Amy is unsympathetic and annoying, and the townspeople of rural New York are all stoic and impassive. In this story about writers, it's hard to believe that there are no believable personalities besides Rainey. In the end, characters and clues from earlier in the film are awkwardly resurrected to presumably create some kind of continuity, but the filmmakers fail to tie together all the loose ends. There are many moments in which characters accusingly confront one another with, "I know what you're doing and it's not going to work." If the viewers could address the characters, they would say, "I don't know what you're doing, but it's not working anyway."

The Setonian
News

Bad Boy turns the big 1-0

March 15

The latest release from P.Diddy and Bad Boy record label camp is the type of cover-up of which any criminal would be envious. With a big "thank you" to the late Christopher Wallace, a.k.a. the Notorious B.I.G., Diddy and his "family" have constructed their latest CD in the true form of a hits album, complete with easily recognized hip hop classics from the past ten years. The problem is, nearly all of the songs included on "Bad Boy's 10th Anniversary ... The Hits" were hits at least five years ago. Bad Boy suffered a great loss in star power after the murder of the Notorious B.I.G. in 1997 and the exodus of talented rapper Mase to a life of the Lord in 1999. With the fizzling out of projected stars Black Rob and G. Dep, Diddy was forced to create a "best of" album that highlights the last 10 years with songs which would more aptly be titled "Bad Boy: Back in the Day." The "back in the day" trend of this album is highlighted by the presence of its biggest star -- Brooklyn-born rapper Notorious B.I.G., also known to fans as Biggie. With Diddy's help, Biggie's reputation has grown and endured in the seven years since his passing, and his inclusions on "The Hits" prove no exception to his legacy. Throughout the album, Biggie's well respected flow makes its way into the listener's ear, and Diddy's use of hit B.I.G. songs on this album illustrate the fallen rapper's lyrical repertoire. The big man's past smash hit "Hypnotize," included on the album, dominated the airwaves and the charts during its quest to establish B.I.G.'s greatness in the mainstream. Another one of B.I.G.'s solo tracks, "Big Poppa," showcases the rapper's tight, slow, smooth flow that is one word -- "ridiculous." Flip to any of the album's tracks with B.I.G. holding down a verse, and you have found a song that will get any party jumping. Though B.I.G. appears in and steals the spotlight of eight of the thirteen tracks, there is a distinct drop-off in the hotness factor otherwise. The inclusions of cuts by two of Bad Boy's past "stars" offer only a slight amount of help in the process. Black Rob and Mase do their best to add some flavor to the mix, but with neither hip hop artist anywhere to be found today, these two hits are all they have in their claim to fame in the rap game. Black Rob's "Whoa" offers a mediocre, monotonous flow over a tight beat with a deep, subwoofer friendly baseline. If you want your speakers to pound "like WHOA," switch to this track -- just keep your friends from hearing too much of the lyrics. Mase's solo effort "Feels So Good" is a track with a tight chorus. Make no mistake about this club banger: it will get the "party people in the place" moving and singing along in between each of his verses. Like "Whoa," Mase's appeal borders on the realm of novelty. If you have not listened to their cuts in a while, you might just want to leave them on repeat, until they become lost in the shadow once again. The inclusion of Carl Thomas's track "I Wish" may leave many listeners shaking their heads. By giving the nod to Thomas's work -- which is average at best -- Diddy has chosen to exclude tracks such as his and Mase's "Can't Nobody Hold Me Down" or G.Dep's "Special Delivery." Both are considered legitimate hip hop hits, not a so-so R&B effort. While "I Wish" lacks a true niche on this album, the recent hit "I Need a Girl Part II" proves to be a pleasant addition to the compilation's lineup. Reflecting the current trend in hip hop, the sort of pseudo love and/or lost love track, this work by Diddy, Loon, and Mario Winans hits you with an infectious beat, a smooth flow, and classic Bad Boy "Hip Pop" lyrics. The effectiveness and party appeal of tracks like this makes up for the questionable inclusion of Carl Thomas. From top to bottom, Diddy uses tight flows from B.I.G., Busta Rhymes, Lil' Kim, and even himself and Mase to create yet another solid Bad Boy release. Diddy is graceful in his effort to create the best possible work, and the final product effectively hides the lack of productions from Bad Boy in the past five years with the inclusion of a few mediocre tracks that act as decent filler material. In true Diddy fashion, the tone for the album is set with a new version of a past hit, this one entitled "Victory 2004." This hit track, pumped up with a new Diddy, 50 Cent, and Lloyd Banks verse, creates an arguably better hybrid of the original. Both the intro and beat are altered as Diddy declares that Bad Boy "still runs" the rap game, and closes out the song with an emphatic Biggie verse newly laced with a triumphant horn sound in the beat. The true triumphs of Bad Boy may have become few and far in between in recent years, but Diddy has clearly not lost his ability to put out a hot album.

The Setonian
News

All lies are not created equal

March 15

Martha Stewart isn't the only individual whose proverbial (and high-profile) pants are on fire. Stewart, who was charged last week with making false statements to the government and obstructing justice, is only the latest in a litany of public figures -- from Bill Clinton to Pete Rose -- whose dishonest dealings have come to light. Very wealthy individuals -- like Stewart -- may be more tempted than the average person to tell big lies in order to protect their wealth, according to Assistant Philosophy Professor Nancy Bauer, but people of all standings have been lying, for various reasons, "since the beginning of time." "I think [lying] has always been an issue, though more recently brought into the limelight by some high profile cases," junior Jeremy Ng said. Those cases, he said, are "unfortunate but easily predictable -- most people don't live by clear-cut and homogenous codes of honor, and no one really likes getting in trouble, obviously." "I think the recent rash of people getting caught lying is unsurprising," senior Paul Johnson said. "These few famous cases simply reveal what is common human practice -- it's our nature to distort the truth in order to get what we want and avoid the consequences of our actions." Biology Professor Sheldon Krimsky's latest book, "Science in the Private Interest: Has the Lure of Profits Corrupted Biomedical Research?" includes the stories of several individuals within the scientific community who distorted the truth to get ahead. One prestigious corporate scientist lied about her credentials; another scientist "made almost $145,000 overnight on zinc lozenges" through insider trading, Krimsky said. According to Krimsky, these and other forms of lying "happen all the time." For example, he said, "there have been famous scientists whose statistical results were re-examined and found fraudulent." Other common types of deception include lying about data, lying about animal treatment, and lying about violating lab safety rules. Lying is also common outside the realm of science -- and inside the world of higher education. In her introduction to ethics class, many of Nancy Bauer's students disagree with philosopher Immanuel Kant's view of lying, that "it's always immoral to tell even the tiniest white lie or, at the other extreme, to lie to a terrorist," Bauer said. Her students, she added, "reason this way: since everyone lies all the time, it's unreasonable to ask people to stop lying altogether. In other words, they seem to feel that because we do lie, we ought to be allowed to lie." Senior Betty Amoah's view of lying is more in line with Bauer's students' than with Kant's. "I try to be honest in most of my life, but some things are better left either unsaid or misunderstood," Amoah said. "Even if you tell the truth sometimes, you aren't believed. So sometimes [lying] saves a lot of stress." Paul Johnson, however, doesn't feel that saving stress or protecting someone's feelings are good enough justifications for lying. According to Johnson, "the lie [would have to be] told totally selflessly, completely for another's benefit," for it to be morally acceptable. "I don't think this would include things like not telling someone they look fat in a certain outfit -- that seems more like a desire not to hurt someone's feelings, which doesn't seem like a very compelling justification." he said. To Krimsky, however, "lying is sometimes acceptable, excusable, and even desirable, especially when it involves human feelings." For example, he said, "If someone has aged rapidly because of an illness, it would be cruel to tell them how you really perceive them, rather than to say something positive and uplifting." Though neither Krimsky nor Bauer have noticed an overall shift in their students' opinions of lying, Bauer has noticed a shift in the relationship between lies and the media. "Global media coverage might be putting public figures on the spot in ways that didn't exist before this era," Bauer said. "For example, when Bill Clinton is accused of having sex with Monica Lewinsky, literally billions of people know about it within hours ... his first instinct is to deny the charges and try to prevent political disaster. This is just not how these things panned out in the days of, say, JFK, who had his share of female guests at the White House." The lies of public figures may have received the most press coverage, but Krimsky is more concerned about lies of a different sort. "Probably the most injurious lying is institutional lies put out by corporations and government agencies," Krimsky said. "These lies affect millions of people's lives." "Corporations lie about product safety and about occupational disease," Krimsky added. "They lie about the safety of automobiles. They hide information about drug efficacy. They tell researchers to lie about results so they can continue to get funding. All of these and many more cases can be documented." Krimsky feels that such cases' existence is not due to the erosion of individuals' morality, but rather to "social, political and economic systems [that] help create the climate for lying. Krimsky does not believe there is evidence that the human character is on a decline. Bauer agrees that social forces have an impact on lying. "I actually think that people may be lying less than they used to, since standards of decorum are more relaxed than they once were and toleration of difference is higher," she said. "People may feel less reserved than they once did about saying what they actually think." For example, Bauer added, a gay person "might have less reason than he had in an earlier era to lie to his friends or family about his sexual preferences." Even the most tolerant and diverse social climate, however, is unlikely to eradicate lying completely. "Some amount of lying is inevitable," Bauer said. "Not because people are corrupt or selfish, but because human relations are complicated."

The Setonian
News

Scripture outdated on homosexuality

March 15

As I read the viewpoint by Lydia Claudio ("More than the ten Commandments?" March 2), I was extremely disappointed and disheartened. The article lacked depth and clear argumentation. Her article has three key points: scriptural support against homosexuality, her own opinion, and an argument supporting the evaluation of the context of a scripture passage. These points are ultimately contradictory in her article. If one wants to debate homosexuality through a religious text, there needs to be greater scholarship of hermeneutics, or critical interpretation of the Bible. She argues that "God established," "God does not approve," etc. This is incorrect. God did not write the Bible. There are only four scriptures that are taken to discuss homosexuality, albeit remotely: Leviticus laws, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah found in Genesis 19, 1 Corinthians 6:9, and Romans 1:26-27. Claudio mentions three of these. I will debate these scriptures but, first, I would like to point out that those passages were written by men years, in some cases hundreds of years, after their supposed occurrence, during a time when Judaism (Genesis & Leviticus) and Christianity (1 Corinthians, Romans) were trying to establish themselves among a time of conflict. First, Jewish commentaries of Maimonides, a Jewish scholar, and others agree that passages from Leviticus 18-20 are not moral values but symbols of Jewish distinctiveness. There are over 600 individual laws in the Levitical code, the breaking of any of which would make the sinner unclean and unacceptable to God. Second, the sins of Sodom (derived from the Hebrew word "S'dom" for "burnt") and Gomorrah (derived from "Amorah" meaning "a ruined heap") have nothing to do with homosexuality. God tells Abraham that he will destroy the two cities if ten righteous people cannot be found. God sends two angels to Sodom and stays with Lot, Abraham's nephew. "All the people from every quarter" surround the house demanding "to know them" (Genesis 19:5). ALL of the people took part in this assault. In response, Lot offers his daughters to be raped, clearly not an action associated with either homosexuality or heterosexuality. In Ezekiel 16:48-50, the specific sins of Sodom are given: pride, idleness, plenty, uncaring for the poor and needy, haughty and committing an abomination. If one read the word "abomination" throughout the Hebrew Bible, it is always connected with idolatry, never homosexuality. Third, Romans 1:26-27 mentions homosexual acts performed by people who are described as heterosexual and about men in a patriarchal culture exerting dominance not only over woman but over younger males too. The nature of these acts is different from what we know as homosexuality today and has no application to today's homosexuality. In Claudio's article, she writes, "Before you use a Scripture passage as the basis of your argument, read the context." Well, here is the context and God does NOT say flat out that homosexuality is a sin. In the Hebrew Bible and New Testament, God is indifferent to homosexuality. On an end note, I would like to address the issue of concern that the Tufts campus is not receptive to minority viewpoints. Resistance comes with any minority opinion in free speech. Opponents of gay marriage will be met with this resistance at Tufts. The Tufts student body is looking for an intellectual conversation about gay marriages, as it is with every other issue. Why does one support it or not? Arguing that the Bible is the Word of God and divinely inspired will cause a stalemate in this conversation. Historical critical method and hermeneutics should be applied and be a part of any conversation that uses ancient texts as the foundation for an argument. Natawnee J. Fritz is a sophomore and has yet to declare a major.

The Setonian
News

New show won't make you crack up

March 15

It isn't enough these days for a sitcom to have a few sensible characters trapped in a house of maniacs and let the comedy run its course. FOX's new show, "Cracking Up," is proof that even the most outrageous slapstick can't survive if it isn't backed up with strong characters and writing. The premise of "Cracking Up" is that psychology graduate student Ben Baxter (Jason Schwartzman) is assigned to live with the Shackletons, a rich Beverly Hills family, in order to treat their "troubled" youngest son, Tanner (Brett Loehr). By the time Ben soon discovers that in fact, it is nine-year-old Tanner who is the only sane person in the house, he is already too tangled in the hysteria to free himself from the Shackleton family. The form of this show is a tried and true: a rational straight man trapped in an irrational world. Ideally, the nutty characters play off the straight man for comic effect by confiding in, asking favors of, and revealing their schemes to him. This form falls apart in "Cracking Up," however, for lack of a compelling and effective straight man Jason Schwartzman is a terrific actor, but he's ill-suited for this role. He is too much the determined and bizarre personality he played in "Rushmore" to have any success as the straight-man. No doubt he's a genius in his own right, but "Cracking Up" is a bad fit. A straight-man needs to be utterly plain and unremarkable, which is not something Schwartzman can (or should try to) pull off. Sadly, the only other possible straight-man, Tanner, is nine and can't act his way out of a wet paper bag, though he can probably still fit in one. If the success of "Cracking Up" rests on his shoulders, the show is up a creek without a paddle. Liam, Ben's best friend, is the next closest thing. As an almost straight-man who hits on everybody for comic effect instead of dead-panning, he brings the essential one-liner aspect to the show, essentially spiking the punch. Liam even tries to enlist female clients for Ben, yelling to them, "Hey ladies, are you in trouble? ... Do you want to be?" The head of this family of lunatics of the family are presented as follows: Ted (Chris McDonald), the father, is an unfaithful husband and sociopath. Lesley (Molly Shannon), his wife, is a bipolar alcoholic in need of attention. Preston, the oldest son, shaves his body as an obsessive compulsion and exhibits "homosexual tendencies." Chloe, the daughter, broadcasts her cheerleading routines over the Internet from a webcam in her bedroom. Chloe and Preston are funny enough to stir up the action and keep the story moving, but Ted and Lesley are the comedic ringleaders of this motley crew. McDonald revives his trademark glossy-eyed red face for Ted. This shouldn't still be funny, but it is. If you don't remember, think villain in "Happy Gilmore." McDonald's character Ted is even a little better than usual in "Cracking Up." Among the Shackletons, Ted is deserving of some sympathy, which gives him a little moral wiggle-room with the audience. Though Ted is having an affair with his secretary, he says to Ben, "I'm tired of people accusing me of things they're not sure I did!" Fair enough, Ted. Lesley holds her own as the loveable and erratic housewife, but without the support of other actors who know how to set up Shannon, she's not as funny as she could be. As Lesley employs Ben to help her break open the liquor cabinet with a crow bar, there is that familiar sensation of Mary Catherine Gallagher about to lose control and flip backwards into the set. Somebody should review "SNL" tapes with Schwartzman and show him how to play it because in scenes with Shannon, he looks like he's doing improv at the repertory theatre. "Cracking Up" may be worth watching, but don't expect much from Schwartzman. "Cracking Up" isn't "Rushmore" and in the former, Schwartzman exists more for overall appeal than anything else. It's that "close, but no cigar" feeling. If anything, watch for Shannon and McDonald, who prove that they can still get a laugh even when the odds are against them.

The Setonian
News

4x400 runs second at nationals

March 15

Standing on an unfamiliar track surrounded by the top Division III athletes in the country can be a nerve-wracking position, especially when you enter an event seeded second in the nation. "It's pretty intimidating," sophomore Rachel Bloom said. "You're standing in the gym in groups of four, you can see who all the relays are and everybody's looking at each other. Everybody's trying to figure out who's going to come out on top." But the women's 4x400 meter relay team of Bloom, senior quad-captains Jess Trombly and Emily Bersin and junior Sika Henry lived up to its ranking, running a personal record (PR) of 3:53.45 to place second in the NCAA Division III Women's Indoor Track and Field Championships at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater on Saturday. Illinois Wesleyan's team (3:52.36) of Gianina Taylor, Katie O'Rourke, Nicole Williams and Gena Rawlins took first. Tufts' time was short of the school record of 3:52.82 set earlier this season, but bettered the school record's converted time of 3:53.62. "We ended up fifth going into the final which put us into the slow heat with Illinois Wesleyan, [whose] top two got third and fifth in the 400," coach Kristen Morwick said. "We thought, 'well, maybe we'll get higher than fifth because we have this team to run with.'" The top two teams ended up coming from that slower heat, as Bersin set a PR by running 59 seconds flat in the leadoff leg and Henry broke the 59-second barrier for the first time in her career with a 58.70. "Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan had a big lead on us [at the first hand-off] and Rachel closed the gap a bit," Morwick said. "Sika walked down Wheaton. Illinois Wesleyan literally had a 50 meter lead on us, and we almost handed off even going into Trombo's [closing] leg. The race was awesome." Tufts dramatically improved on last year's national performance in the same event, when it placed ninth in 3:55.68, missing the final by .67 seconds with the same four runners. But Bloom said that last season's result was part of the lead up to Saturday's race and the culmination of two years of training and bonding between the quartet. "The four of us worked so well together because we're so close anyway," Bloom said. "We just pulled it together at the right time. We had two years of practicing the 4x4 together. We went in with much more confidence [this year]. We knew what we were doing and we were more ready for it." That bond, however, will soon come to an end -- at least on the track -- with just the upcoming outdoor spring season separating Trombly and Bersin from graduation, and the indoor chapter of their Jumbo careers now closed. Tufts will be hard-pressed to replace that dynamic when Trombly and Bersin depart, but Bloom is confident the Jumbos will be able to restock from either incoming freshmen or their current team, which she says has the potential to step up. "It's going to be tough, we're definitely going to have to find some new people," Bloom said. "But you can't replace those two. We have a great dynamic and it'll be really tough to replace that." The weekend was not all highlight-filled, however. In the meet's first event on Friday, Henry tied for ninth in high jump with Frostburg State freshman Anna Routzahn with a 5-03.25 foot jump, finishing one place out of All-American status. The result was disappointing for Henry, who, despite competing in the event on the national level for the first time in her career, was shooting for a top eight finish. "I was obviously disappointed," Henry said. "It's very different there, girls that beat me every week this season placed behind me. Everybody's staring at you and there are cameras there. It's very nerve-wracking and you don't always perform as well as you want to." Henry did, however, place ahead of New England rivals Karima Ummah of Colby and Katherine Wallace of Wheaton, who both cleared the same height as the Jumbo but placed below her based on earlier failed attempts. Wilmington's Emily Herring (5-07.25) won the event by an inch with a facility record. "Sika made her first two heights easily. She missed her first attempt at 5-03 and then sailed over her second attempt, so on misses she was in good shape," Morwick said. "[NYU's Lauren Henkel] who got eighth had the same amount of misses but she didn't miss at 5-03, and Sika did miss one at 5-03. That's what determined it." Trombly also competed in two individual events, the 55-meter hurdles and 400 dash, but missed finals in both. The hurdles saw her run an 8.46 in preliminaries, just a hundredth of a second short of a place in finals behind Rachel Hutchins of Iowa's Loras College. The event was paced by sophomore Sheana Grigsby of Carthage College, WI, who ran an 8.10 to win. "Jess was in there with a bunch of really speedy kids," Morwick said. "It was probably the best hurdle race I've seen her run all year. She was right in the middle of her heat, and that's just the luck of the draw." Trombly was stuck in a slow preliminary heat in the 400, finishing in 58.30 seconds, well off her qualifying mark of 56.46 that had seeded her fourth overall. Trombly's time placed her tenth in the event, which was won by Wheaton's Amber James (55.62), and far short of her expectations. "She was heartbroken, because pretty much the exact same thing happened to her last year," Morwick said. "She didn't have anyone fast to run with, and often times when that happens, the people that run slower tend to go out harder and die. She's a heptathlete so she can run a fast 400 because she's such a good athlete, but it's not her event. She doesn't have a lot of experience in a lot of different racing situations." But overall, the team can be proud of the fact that Tufts was represented in four national events while recording national provisional times in two others, the distance medley relay and the 800. Three school records also fell during the season, including the 4x400 (3:52.82) and Trombly's double in the 200 (25.59) and 400 (56.26). The squad will look to carry that momentum through to the spring. "Knowing how Nationals panned out for our team, I think a lot of people on our team have a lot of confidence that we can go into outdoor season and do even better," Morwick said. "A lot of people were just getting going in indoors, so at the end they were on the verge of doing some pretty big things. I think that bodes pretty well for outdoor season."

The Setonian
News

Corpus Christi a powerful interpretation of the Bible

March 14

What if you took the best selling story of all time and tweaked it just a little? Terrence McNally's "Corpus Christi," which was presented by Pen, Paint, and Pretzels (3Ps) this past weekend in the Balch Arena Theater, does just that. The play displaces the context of Christ's life and death, and the result is a poignantly timely story that seems to fit almost too perfectly today's politically contentious climate. The play's modern retelling of the New Testament resituates Jesus' life. By presenting Jesus, or Joshua as he is referred to throughout the play, and all twelve of his apostles as homosexuals living in the conservative Texas town of Corpus Christi, McNally strips the story of many of its previous associations, distilling it down to its most fundamental message -- love. Directed by senior Jenn Jarecki, this incredibly courageous production took some of today's most controversial subjects -- religion and homosexuality -- and confronted them head on, all the while retaining the message of love and hope. The cast's individual talent, however, was not to be upstaged by contentious displays of affection. Jarecki managed to avoid relying simply on shock value as she exposed many taboo subjects and turned several traditional assumptions upside-down. The all male cast directly challenged the belief that homosexuality and scripture are mutually exclusive as Jesus and his apostles openly flirted, passionately kissed, erotically danced, and even got married (Jesus himself performed the ceremony). The in-your-face production also made no apologies in its stereotypical representation of religious conservatives. Supported by an exceptionally talented cast, the play successfully broke down the conventions of theater. As the actors casually served as ushers and chatted with audience members, it was clear from the beginning that there would be no barrier separating the audience and the actors. By beginning the play conversationally, the audience was gently eased into a performance that would undoubtedly make many very uncomfortable. The audience even got to see each actor adopt his character as he was lovingly baptized by, appropriately, John the Baptist, played by senior Marc Aronson. "I bless you," Aronson said as he addressed each actor by name and embraced him. "I recognize your divinity as a human being. I adore you." The actors, now baptized and christened with the name of an apostle, personally introduced their character, directly addressing the audience. Sophomore Luke Brown, who played Thaddeus, strutted to center stage and set the tone with McNally's unapologetic dialogue. "Thaddeus was a hairdresser," he announced. "Anyone have a problem with that?" In addition to immediately engaging the audience by eliminating the barrier imposed by the theoretical fourth wall, the production made no attempt to cushion the story's impact with over dramatization and the regular theater extras. The set was simple -- using only black blocks -- as were the costumes, which consisted of white t-shirts and jeans. This minimalist method was effective in the play's unabashed presentation. From beginning to end, the cast made no excuses and did not pretend to illustrate an objective, or even accurate, depiction of Christ's life. Nor did it assume to apply or appeal to everyone. Because the play's context was so far removed from any semblance of biblical times, the play's inherent irony became all the clearer. As the theatrical representation of Christ's Passion left Joshua, played by sophomore Sam Stiegler, nailed to a cross with the word "Fag" scrawled in red across his chest, the timely poignancy of "Corpus Christi" hardly seems a coincidence.

Trending
The Tufts Daily Crossword with an image of a crossword puzzle
The Print Edition
Tufts Daily front page