4A - Thursday, December 6, 2012
The Michigan Daily - michiganclaily.com
4A - Thursday, December 6, 2012 The Michigan Daily - michigandailycom
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
TIMOTHY RABB
JOSEPH LICHTERMAN and ADRIENNE ROBERTS ANDREW WEINER
EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS MANAGING EDITOR
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board.
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
FROM T PED~lY
Don't allow open season for private sellers
This week, a House-passed bill is up for discussion in the
Michigan Senate that eliminates background checks and
licensure for buyers of privately sold guns. Though the
nationally licensed gun dealers still would fill out the routine paper-
work, House Bill 5225 would eliminate these prerequisites for buy-
ers purchasing from private sellers - in person or online. Michigan's
current model is not the most effective at preventing and solving
crimes, but this law would make purchasing guns even easier while
increasing the difficulty of tracking down criminals. Our country
needs a stricter and more organized form of gun control - Michigan
is no exception. With the passage of this law, we would not only be
ignoring this need, but taking a step in the opposite direction.
Et tu, feminists?
Don't let Katy Perry's pyro-
bosoms fool you - this fire-.
work is no bra burner.
Last Fri-
day, Perry was x
awarded the title
of Billboard's
Woman of the
Year, narrowly
beating out Octo-j
mom and that
lady down the MELANIE
street who hands KRUVELIS
out pennies on
Halloween. And
as her first offi-
cial piece of Queen 2012 business, the
singer of "Ur So Gay" just wanted to
get her politics straight.
"I'm not a feminist," Perry said
in her acceptance speech, "but I do
believe in the strength of women."
Thanks for the qualifier,Katy.
Perry.isn't alone in her tm-no-
Feminazi-but-hey,-equality! stance.
Carla Bruni, the former first lady of
France, recently drew flak for her
own statements about the current
state of women's liberation.
"we don't need feminists in my
generation," Bruni said in a Decem-
ber 2012 interview with the French
edition of Vogue magazine. The ex-
premiere dame continued, sayingthat
she loves family life, doing the same
thing every day, and all the other
splendors of the "bourgeois lifestyle."
Ergo, she can't be a feminist.
Sigh. Et tu, Bruni?
Now, before I overfeed the Inter-
net trolls, let me be clear - it's OK if
you're not a feminist. There's noth-
ing inherently wrong with Perry
kissing off the feminist label, or
Bruni's snub of the movement all
together. But when you moderate
your rejection of feminism with this
nebulous "strength of women" bit,
you get the sense that maybe, just
maybe, Perry actually does support
the tenets of the women's movement.
She just doesn't like the stigma that
comes along with it.
In other words, when you reject
feminism, you've got to realize that
you're rejecting more than andro-
cide and braless anarchy. You're
rejecting an ideology that says, at
its core, women should live on equal
terms with men.
Ironically enough, this aver-
sion, or meh attitude, toward femi-
nism reinforces the need for it.
Or at least, the need for a better
understanding of what it means to
be a feminist. Because if the ques-
tion is "who's afraid of the big bad
'F-word' ", these days the answer is,
well, pretty much everyone.
Why are these women backing
away from feminism? Or better yet,
why does any statement praising
gender equality have to be qualified
with a "but seriously, feminists are
so annoying"? For that answer and a
migraine, we turnto Suzanne Venker.
On Nov. 26, Fox News published
her editorial "The War on Men,"
which claimed that the real victim in
the battle of the sexes is guys. In her
piece,Venker threw up the caucasi--,
I mean, white flag, asking women to
"surrender to their nature." In other
words, be a lady and would you
please quit it with the feminist pop-
pycock? It's ... unsightly.
Venker's logic goes somethinglike
this: Women are angry today. Which
means they look like feminists.
Which means they aren't women. Oh
yeah, and we're all going to die alone.
See that? That link between femi-
nism and unqualified, unwomanly
anger? While Venker and others
color this link as a causal relation-
ship, it only takes about 15 minutes
in a Statistics 250 lecture to realize
just how baseless that claim is. Femi-
nism is not the ideology of the angry
lady mobs. To borrow from histo-
rian Cheris Kramarae, feminism is
"the radical notion that women are
human beings." Connecting this idea
to mass castration is a vast totaliza-
tion of the theory. And a really crap-
py one at that.
Take, for instance, feminist lit-
erature. Sure, Barnes and Noble
might put "The Feminine Mystique"
in the same section as "The SCUM
Manifesto." But does that mean that
Betty Friedan, the author of "Mys-
tique," wanted to eradicate all men
as per the manifesto? Probably not.
Just like Tyler Perry doesn't repre-
sent all black filmmakers, "SCUM"
author valerie Solanas doesn't rep-
resent all feminist writers. Pointing
at the extremes and shouting "Look,
I found feminism!" undermines the
real intent of the movement - which
again, is that women should be
judged as individuals, rather than a
product of their gender.
But maybe you're like Bruni. Maybe
you think we don't need this dated
ideology anymore. After all, women
made incredible strides in the last
year alone. In November's election,
20 women earned seats in the Senate
- the highest number of female seats
in U.S. history. But simple subtraction
revealsthat 80 percentofsenators are
male. These numbers are even more
startling in the boardroom. In 2012,
only 4.2 percent of Fortune 500 CEOs
were women - a number CNN called
"a milestone."
And returning back to Bruni's
France, I doubt Olympe de Gouges
would be impressed by the cur-
rent state of women in the so-called
country of human rights.
'Surrender' to
gender roles? I
don't think so.
In response to Bruni's comments,
French female senator Laurence
Rossignol tweeted, "As long as I
get asked whether I'm the senator's
assistant, the next generation will
need feminism." Then there was
the 2011 French initiative Action
Relooking, where a handful of
"lucky" unemployed French women
get a government-sponsored make-
over, to help them "look prettier" for
job interviews.
And that's not even mentioning
worldwide struggles for women's
rights among racial, LGBT and
socioeconomic lines. Which, for a
self-proclaimed gay rights activist
like Perry, might be of interest.
So what's so bad about feminism?
Maybe we don't like owning up to
the fact that there's still work to do.
Social progress isn't moving as fast
as Apple cranks out iPhones - and
yeah, that's a little bit scary. But
rejecting a philosophy based on the
outliers doesn't get us anywhere.
If you accept the idea that men and
women are equal in value, if you
accept the notion that women should
be judged as people and not a gender,
then to nuance Jeff Foxworthy -
well, you just might be a feminist.
- Melanie Kruvelis can be
reached at melkruv@umich.edu.
One of the major arguments for the bill is
that the current system is expensive to main-
tain and that this money could be put to bet-
ter use. Supporters say that with the federal
restrictions already in place, the money spent
on the state system is a redundant waste. How-
ever, statistics show that almost half the gun
sales in Michigan are transacted through pri-
vate sellers, and documentation for these sales
would no longer be required. The police argue
that these records are sometimes the key factor
in finding and prosecuting criminal suspects.
The claims that funding is being squandered
on this system crudely discount the urgency of
bringing a violent criminal to justice.
The faith in the competency of the federal
gun control system as a catchall for criminals
is misplaced. In numerous instances, such as
the Aurora shootings, people with criminal
intent purchased guns at federally registered
stores. The problem is that background checks
only question the existence of mental illness or
a criminal record. Underlying mental stability
or intentions for purchase aren't considered
relevant. But even with these gaps in the sys-
tem, a flawed paper trail is still better than
none at all. In Indiana, where a similar bill was
passed into law, buying a gun is as easy as pick-
ing one from a gun show.
Our country is quickly being singled out
for its resistance to gun control. In other
countries such as Canada, the United King-
dom and Australia, most firearms are banned
outright. Civilians who wish to purchase a
gun must prove a genuine need to do so and
usually must prove they are trained in han-
dling the weapon. Although the data con-
necting restrictive gun laws to fewer violent
crimes is inconclusive, the call for stricter
gun control is not only logical, but also is sup-
ported throughout the world.
The state senate should not pass this pro-
posed law. Relaxing gun control is the exact
opposite of what needs to be done and the pas-
sage of this law could lead to further attempts
to weaken the system. The federal system
itself must be strengthened so that people like
James Eagan Holmes no longer slip through
the cracks. Many countries have already real-
ized the dangers behind the free sale of hand-
guns and have taken appropriate measures. It's
time we follow their lead.
0
Take me home tonight
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
Kaan Avdan, Sharik Bashir, Barry Belmont, Eli Cahan, Jesse Klein, Melanie
Kruvelis, Maura Levine, Patrick Maillet, Jasmine McNenny, Harsha Nahata,
Timothy Rabb, Adrienne Roberts, Vanessa Rychlinski, Paul Sherman,
Sarah Skaluba, Michael Spaeth, Gus Turner, Derek Wolfe
JESSE KLEIN | lWt POlNT1
Crowd- souCin bias
On Dec. 5, John Bracken, founder of the
Knight News Challenge, heard pitches by envi-
ronmental journalism students in North Quad
as part of the class's Pitchfest event. The Knight
Foundation works to engage communities and
foster journalistic innovation.
The pitches I heard while attending this
conference focused on engaging consum-
ers with news by allowing them to respond
as reporters. Two groups pitched ideas for a
web site and smart phone application com-
bination that would allow readers to search
for specific topics, organize their web pages
with desirable information and upload their
own videos, pictures or articles for commu-
nal benefit. The idea was meant to direct-
ly employ the reader and make use of the
instantaneous nature of the Internet to com-
pile news from every possible source. They
wanted average citizens to be responding to
and creating their own news reports.
Newspapers are dying. None of the ideas
I heard talked about print articles - it was
all about the Internet. It was about engaging
readers online, not with a physical paper. The
Knight Foundation asks for innovation because
new ideas are needed to keep the newspaper
industry alive. When news is so freely and
abundantly accessible online, it's difficult for
pricey print publications to compete.
However, everyone knows the inherent risks
of online news - namely, the limited means
we have to check the credibility of a news arti-
cle. People trust The New York Times or The
Washington Post as valid sources for national
and economic news, but only trust Yahoo News
when it comes to Kate Middleton's pregnancy.
High-ranking papers are trusted to have good
reporters, strong fact-checkers and careful
editing. Citizen uploads are not, which is why
forums like Reddit are purposed for entertain-
ment, not as news sources.
On-the-spot video and photo reader uploads
are priceless and informative during a natural
disaster; however, this could easily be abused in
day-to-day life, decreasing the credibility of the
website. As a journalist, of course I want news-
papers - whether online or print - to survive,
but I don't think crowd-sourcing reporting is
the way to keep readers interested.
Readers like to be part of the conversation.
Comments sections and letters to the editor
prove the desire for readers to have a voice in
their news, but these submissions are often
either biased or downright false.
One of the judges for the Knight News
Challenge, Steve Dorsey, vice president of
research and development at the Detroit
Media Partnership, said "it is frustrating
that (The New York Times) reporters can't
respond to (online) comments that are false."
Newspaper policy often forbids report-
ers from chiming in the comments section,
meaning a lot of what you see in comments
could be misleading or downright false.
By using citizen uploads as their primary
news source, the reader will be engaged, but
not as well informed. The pieces aren't prop-
erly edited or provided by someone trained
in journalism. While this doesn't necessar-
ily mean their reporting is misrepresenting
facts, it does mean that I, along with others,
have less faith in it.
Newspapers are the place people go to become
informed by an unbiased teacher on important
issues. While it's foolish to think that any news
story is completely unbiased, editors and writers
make a concerted effort to maintain objectivity.
Citizen uploads don't receive the same profes-
sional scrutiny. Soon, there may be no resource
for people to educate themselves and make their
own opinions because no article will be trusted'
to be presenting the truth. And that will be the
final nail in the newspaper's coffin.
Jesse Klein is an LSA sophomore.
J so a Nov. 19 e-mail to Yale Uni-
versity faculty, Dean Mary
Miller discouraged the practice
of administer-
ing take-home
examinations to
students. Accord-
ing to "Miller
discourages take-K
home finals,"
published last
Wednesdayinthe
Yale Daily News, SARAH
Miller's e-mail, ROHAN
prompted by the
recent Harvard
University cheating scandal, primar-
ily underscores the time burden of
take-home tests.
"We try to help faculty members
think about the zero sum of student
time," Miller writes, acknowledging
that without the time-cap of an in-
class exam, take-home tests often take
students much longerto complete.
In late August, reports surfaced
alleging that up to 125 Harvard stu-
dents cheated on a take-home gov-
ernment final, collaborating with
one another on essay questions and
thereby violating exam protocol. As
the school decides how it will pro-
ceed, the controversial scandal con-
tinues to raise questions over the
legitimacy of take-home exams.
With finals fast approaching, the
concerns raised by Miller's e-mail,
as well as by the Harvard scandal,
resound strongly within our own
community here at the University,
where take-home examinations are
frequently administered.
Miller's nod to the Harvard
cheating scandal seems to consid-
er take-home exams an avoidable
opportunity for students to cheat.
Ostensibly confirming her concerns,
a recent study on college cheating
finds thatcheating on written work -
a common component of take-home
tests - occurs at a much higher rate
than cheating on traditional exams.
In a poll of more than 64,000
undergraduates, 24 percent of stu-
dents admitted to "receiving unper-
mitted help from someone on an
assignment" and 42 percent admit-
ted to "working with others on an
assignmentwhen asked for individu-
al work." By contrast, only 8 percent
of those polled about in-class exams
admitted to "using (unauthorized)
crib/cheat notes" and 9 percent to
"copying from another student on a
test/exam with their knowledge."
The potential for increased cheat-
ing - though a legitimate concern
- shouldn't determine the future
of effective and fairly administered
take-home exams. As University of
Michigan students, we ascribe to an
honor code that "prohibits all forms
of academic dishonesty and miscon-
duct."Thoughexampolicies willvary
according to professor and class, our
obligation to the University's honor
code remains unchanged. A test for-
mat should not be altered to antici-
pate potential violations of that code.
In addition to allowing for the
increased possibility of cheating,
Miller contends that take-home
exams can place additional stress on
students as an undue time burden.
Here at the University, midterms
and finals are usually allotted for a
length of time roughly equivalent
to the given class period. So, for a
90-minute lecture class, the final
is normally 90 to 120 minutes long.
Without an enforced timeframe,
take-home exams sometimes ask
students for an amount of work
which would vastly exceed the allot-
ted in-class time.
Additionally, even if a take-home
test does not demand work that nec-
essarily exceeds its would-be in-class
time limit, diligent students will
often work overtime on the heavily
weighted exam. Asa result, the take-
home exams cuts into time students
might use to prepare for other finals.
However, when one considers the
countless amount of time students
spend preparing for an in-class
exam, a take-home test may actually
pose less of a time burden. By allow-
ing a student to complete the work
on his own time, take-homes can
even alleviate student stress.
Potential
cheating can't
nullify take-
home exams.
Furthermore, some privilege the
take-home format over traditional
exams, deeming them more effective
at measuring a student's command
of material. Prof. Scott Lyons, for
example, views take-home exams as
useful indicators of a student's prac-
tical grasp of class material.
"I consider take-home essay exams
to be an important part of my larger
assessment arsenal," Lyons said. "My
exams ask students what they know
and my essay assignments ask them
to do something interesting or use-
ful with that knowledge ... the take-
home exam serves as a kind of bridge
betweenthose two differenttasks."
By specifying an appropriate word
count and providing instructions that
reflectreasonable expectations, Lyons
ensures his take-home exams do not
unfairly burden his students. Taking
into accountthese preventativeguide-
lines, there is certainly room, and per-
haps necessity, for take-home exams
at the University.
- Sarah Rohan can be reached
at shrohan@umich.edu.
INTERESTED IN CAMPUS ISSUES? POLITICS? SEX, DRUGS AND ROCK'N'ROLL?
Check out The Michigan Daily's editorial board meetings. Every Monday and Thursday at
6pm, the Daily's opinion staff meets to discuss both University and national affairs and
write editorials. E-mail opinioneditors@michigandaily.com to join in the debate.