4 -- Friday, February 8, 2013 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com 4 - Friday, February 8, 2013 The Michigan Daily - michigandailycom C 1 4e Michinan:43at"Olm l Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@michigandaily.com MELANIE KRUVELIS and ADRIENNE ROBERTS MATT SLOVIN EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS MANAGING EDITOR ANDREW WEINER EDITOR IN CHIEF NOTABLE QUOTABLE If somebody sneezes on a cake, I probably don't want to eat it either - but if you're blowing out candles, how many organisms are transferred to a communal cake, for goodness' sake?" - Australian Medical Association President Steve Hambleton said in reponse to a ban of blowing out candles on birthday cakes in Australia in guidelines set by Australia's National Health and Medical Research Council, a Sydney newspaper reported. The FOMOfunk 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. Open for debate Universities should promote forums for controversial issues n Thursday, two supporters of Palestinian independence spoke at Brooklyn College in New York. The event, co- sponsored by student organizations and Brooklyn College's department of political science, has attracted an array ofcriticism from pro-Israel groups, Jewish students and the New York City Coun- cil. Many have called sponsoring the event a "tacit endorsement" - something they see as unacceptable. These criticisms and threats are inappropriate; they threaten to stifle debate and therefore hinder the 0 S promise of academic freedom. The speakers represented a group that advocates for boycotts and sanctions against Israel. Brooklyn College has a significant Jew- ish student population, and thus the scheduled speakers have provoked harsh responses. On Jan.29, the New York City Council sent a letter to Brooklyn College's president, Karen Gould. They demanded the event be canceled and threatening to suspend funding to the school. Gould replied 'with a letter in support of the event and invited student groups to bring groups with differing views to campus. Brooklyn College has the right to host this event without any threats. Many of the criti- cisms levied against it are highly exagger- ated. For example, Alan Maisel, the New York state assemblyman representing Brooklyn, called this a "potential for a second Holo- caust." This is a gross exaggeration of the speakers' legitimate views in an academic debate. This incident is similar to one that occurred in 1999, when NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani threatened to cut funding to muse- ums because of a controversial exhibit at the Brooklyn Museum of Art. New York is setting a precedent in which politicians intervene in public spheres of education and culture. Bloomberg notes that government shouldn't be "micromanaging the kinds of programs our public universities run." The city coun- cil has no right or responsibility to label any academic opinion it disagrees with as wrong and harmful. Controversial events are common at uni- versities. For instance, in 2003 the University held a political forum with both an Israeli and Palestinian advocate. In 2011 at Brooklyn Col- lege, David Horowitz, a pro-Israel conserva- tive, spoke, but he wasn't sponsored by any department. Exposing students to new ideas and perhaps challenging them with other per- spectives. Politicians shouldn't reprehend col- leges for promoting academic debate. The controversy over academic freedom at Brooklyn College is highly exaggerated. Many of the criticisms of the speakers are misguided, and the council's threat to revoke funding is an inappropriate extension of gov- ernment into higher-level academics. Schools consistently sponsor events with controversial speakers, and fostering academic expression and debate is part of their job. Brooklyn Col- lege should be supported for their dedication to academic freedom. Well, congratulations; we've officially survived the first month of winter semester. And I can't say I'm sur- prised to step out ! of my house and face the frigid, snow-covered streets of Ann Arbor each morning. It's a gray-on-gray SARM utopia - rare SKALUBA sunshine, very few blue skies and an ice-cold chill that occasion- ally makes you question your deci- sion to come to school here in the first place. Meanwhile, half your classmates are casually spending the semester abroad in Barcelona, Madrid, Paris, Prague - insert any romantic Euro- pean city of your liking - while we continue pushingthrough our class- es in the great state of Michigan. And it's a great state indeed, minus the gloomy weather and freezing temperatures. But the constant Facebook albums and statuses that bombard my news- feed each day make things in Ann Arbor seem a little bleak. It's no sur- prise that we're a community that lives online - constantly uploading new pictures, tweeting about the day's adventures and blowing up our friend's walls. But at a certain point this constant communication becomes wearing. We all suffer from the epidemic at some point in our lives. It's a syndrome that affects our genera- tion at unprecedented levels. Espe- cially considering how freely we allow Facebook, Twitter and other social media sites to consume us. It's the "fear of missing out" - a.k.a FOMO. We love our friends abroad, really we do. But the 760 pictures they jam into a single album and the continuous stream of #nofilter photographs uploaded to Instagram prove exhausting. As much as I want to "like" every photo in their album and throw myself a pity-party while stranded alone in Ann Arbor - I politely refuse. The other night I was speak- ing with an exchange student from Istanbul, whining about how expen- sive it is to travel to Europe, when she simply asked, "But why worry about traveling across Europe when you have yet to see all the sites here in your own country?" And she's absolutely right. Living in Ann Arbor and experi-' encing Ann Arbor are not one in the same. A conscious effort needs to be made if we really want to challenge ourselves, explore the community around us, create our own adven- tures and immerse ourselves in the uncomfortable. Staying sane during the long winter months is no easy task, I know that. But flocking to Rick's in record-breaking numbers and hit- ting the South University bars like they're the next best thing to Ibiza may not be the answer. Nor will we find refuge bundled up in our blan- kets all weekend, rolling around our apartments. While Facebook- stalking our beloved friends abroad. Instead, I challenge you to take a new approach to combat these drea- ry winter months. Have you ventured to the Farm- ers Market in Kerrytown yet? It's open every Saturday morning Janu- ary through April, which means you can't exactly use the weather for an excuse. What about dragging your textbooks and homework to a not-so-run-of-the-mill coffee shop - maybe Crazy Wisdom Bookstore and Tea Room or Comet Coffee? Living in Ann Arbor and experiencing Ann Arbor are not one in the same. It's easy to fall into a funk of repe- tition and hibernation when it seems like so many of your friends are off seeing the world oceans away, and you're quite literally stuck in the snow at Michigan. But I dare you to do something different - to shy * away from the repetitiveness we so often find ourselves in. Last weekend, I. had breakfast at Selma Cafe - an Ann Arbor- only, community-run cafe - for the first time. Needless to say, I busted straight into the kitchen and looked like a lost puppy ina crowd of regu- lar breakfast-goers. But did I have a fabulous meal, meet new people and make the executive decision that I would have to return for round two? Yes. And this weekend I'll be trek- king to Mt. Brighton to snowboard on a large mound of garbage. Sure, it might not be the Swiss Alps, but there's no harm in trying. To my dearest friends abroad, I loveyouall. Butif Ihappentounsub- scribe from your newsfeed and spend a drastically smaller amount of time on Facebook this semester, I promise it's nothing personal. - Sarah Skaluba can be reached at sskaluba@umich.edu. EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS Kaan Avdan, Sharik Bashir, Barry Belmont, Eli Cahan, Jesse Klein, Melanie Kruvelis, Maura Levine, Patrick Maillet, Aarica Marsh, Megan McDonald, Jasmine McNenny, Harsha Nahata, Adrienne Roberts, Paul Sherman, Sarah Skaluba, Michael Spaeth, Luchen Wang, Derek Wolfe ELI CAHAN| Chivalry's whip -Ihe pdium Study-a-Blog: Madrid Edition: Is it important for American students to learn foreign languages at an early age? Alexis Biaggi explains why being able to say both 'yes' and 'oui' is essential. Go to michigandaily.com/blogs/The Podium All too often we hear from those with gray hair that "chivalry is dead." Well, whether or not that is fact or fiction depends on how chivalry is defined. If by "chivalry" they mean there are no more gentlemen knights to defend royal princesses, then perhaps I don't have an argument; there just aren't any, unless you go to a park in New Jersey on some Saturday mornings. But, if our elders mean that there are no more gentlemen, then I'd have to disagree. The issue is not whether or not knights and princesses exist in the student body. It's whether they'd ever be brave enough to don their shining armor while living on campus. And that's the thing we ought to consider. So, this is all a little abstract - let's bring it back to reality, specifically to the memo- ries from my time in middle and high school. There's a funny term I've heard since Bar Mitzvah season in seventh grade, when we all first started talking about girls: "whipped." I've never gotten a clear definition, but I'll discuss my interpretation. "Whipped" is the idea that doing nice things for women is more of an act of despera- tion than anything else. It's "laying all your cards on the table," presumably because get- ting laid just isn't in the cards for you. It's put- ting out far too much effort because nobody puts out for you. Since when did "trying hard" become "trying too hard?" When did any semblance of "effort made" become "too much effort?" Being a knight is incompatible in a world of whips; rather than a horse chomping at the bit to prove your worth to someone who's worth it, being whipped makes you into an ass. So let's go back to that original statement: chivalry is dead. I think if anything, the problem is more systematic issue than individual. In a world networked communicators and informa- tion, what is there to prove? I suppose, since the first thing we look at when we hear a new name is their pictures, it matters more where they've been than where they're going. Perhaps the absence of chivalry is due to a change in perspective; the question is not "will he sweep me off my feet," but rather, "has he swept people off their feet before?" The anticipatoryexcitementinnotknowinghas been replaced with our compulsion to evaluate by online. "Proving himself" has become more passive than active. The death of chivalry is born out of the basic idea that "if he were really like this, he'd have done it before." Maybe in that sense, the idea of the phrase "whipped" is not so far off. It's the belief that you have met someone who has changed you; they controlyou and they have somehow trans- formed you. But is that really such a bad thing? In the movies, when someone says "you complete me," what does that meanPIs it to say that they've found that single piece that beau- tifully fits into the puzzle that was already almost finished? Or does it indicate that what the puzzle means to show is completely incom- prehensible without that piece - that there's no identity, there's no picture, without that one little bit extra. This begs the question, when I flirt with anyone and everyone, am I really trying to prove "me" to them, or am I trying to prove "us?" Because, according to the latter jigsaw analogy, there isn't a "me" that's. significant without that last little part., Perhaps chivalry has died out of our own narcissism. In a constant world of compari- sons, relativity and self-identification, is try- ing to establish a relationship really about "me," or can it be about "us?" There's an expression we all know that supports this sort of realization: "you'll find your Prince Charming." There's no defini- tive person with first name Prince, last name Charming. It's about "us," not about "him." The knight in shining armor doesn't exist without the princess. But undoubtedly, Mr. Knight was riding around for a good long while in the stifling heat without Gatorades or Clif Bars before he found his princess out there in that forest - that sounds like he was trying pretty hard to me. So I should ask: am I "whipped" for really taking the time and effort to see if this girl I met is my princess? And even if I am, am I okay humiliating "me" in front of all of my friends for the prospect of "us?" Eli Cahan is a Business sophomore. ZAK WITUSI Lance cheated, so what? Lance Armstrong lied to us. He cheated, doped and silenced anyone who tried to expose him. He also raised millions of dollars to fight cancer, but who cares? He deceived us and we're hurt. We looked up to him and he betrayed our trust. We praised him and his great American story - the story about fighting and winning and competing and, most importantly, more winning. Arm- strong's desperate desire to win helped him survive cancer and then seven Tour de France titles. So good for him, but better forthe poor souls fighting cancer. Without those vic- tories - which he said himself he probably wouldn't have earned without doping - he wouldn't have had the celebrity-status to start his Livestrong Foundation, which has today raised about $470 million, according to Livestrong's website. But we still don't care about his successes, because he betrayed us. This story circles back to the too-familiar theme of any another American idol deceiving his or her worshipers. RememberPresidentfBill Clinton and Tiger Woods's affairs? What about the baseball players who doped? Well, it turns out Armstrong is just another flawed human being like the rest of them - like the rest of us. Why do we assume athletes and other celebrities are perfect role models? We have no one to blame but ourselves for our disappointment after investing so much into heroes like Armstrong. But who's to say Armstrong is a bad role model? When I make a mis- take, I'm usuallyrushing to the drug store for Plan B. When Armstrong made his mistakes, cancer research got more funding. I wish I could make mistakes like Armstrong's. If we get to make mistakes, show arrogance and fall to our vices, so do the supposed heroes. I'm not saying it's good. I'm not saying it's bad. I'm just sayingthat's the way it is and we should be aware of it. Sure, we'd love all our heroes to be infallible, omni- scient and pure. We'd have truly honorable role models for our kids to look up to. But those don't exist. Even Homer's heroes and gods were a little screwed up. Zeus raped people. Odysseus cheated on his wife. Was Homer trying to con- vince us that these actions should be accepted, no questions asked, because they were gods?In my opin- ion, he wasn't. But what was true of Greek gods and heroes is true of modernAmericanheroes: they're all tragic; they're all imperfect. So if you're waiting for Super- man, fuck off. He's not coming. Even our great American stories - you know, the ones where the protagonist overcomes some great obstacle (cancer), overcomes more obstacles (seven Tour de Fran- ces), uses him fame and celebrity to raise money to fight disease, then lives happily ever after - these stories usually only maintain their greatness so long as the dark truth remains hidden. And per- haps it would be better not know- ing the real story and believing the nobler one. In the end, the guy cheated; but so did everyone else. Sure, he raised millions of dollars for fighting can- cer, but he did so dishonestly and deceptively, so fuck him, right? I say: whatever. Fuck him or punch him - this one dude doesn't matter as much as we pretend he does and we can't continue believing in per- fedt idols like we thought he was. We'll continue to be let down. We also need to examine how and why we judge people. Does our judgment spawn from personal feelings of betrayal, or are we truly examining a person's actions? $470 million to fight cancer? I'll let the cheating go, because it's only sports (in fact, it's only cycling). But money for cancer research? That's life or death. I say that end, however unintentional, justifies doping. Charles Barkley once said, "I'm not a role model." I always wanted to tell him: Chuck, you are whatever we say you are. Hasn't he listened to Eminem? And so, the blame is on us - the fanatics searching for some- one to follow and then dropping them when they make a mistake. So perhaps like you, I'm left ask- ing myself: Who should I follow? Who should I copy? And then I look in the mirror. Zak Witus is an LSA freshman. 0 0 0 A ' 4 A