September 2021 by Reporter Magazine

SEPTEMBER 2021 // REPORTER.RIT.EDU

DISCOURSE CONTROVERSY CANCELED DISCUSSIONS PLATFORM INJUSTICE

OPINIONS

RESOURCES

EDITOR IN CHIEF Marilyn Wolbert PRINT MANAGING EDITOR Karina Le ONLINE MANAGING EDITOR Jay Schading COPY EDITOR Mimi Lee NEWS EDITOR Alex Schneider TECHNOLOGY EDITOR Tommy Delp CULTURE EDITOR Tomas Mendez FEATURES EDITOR Erin Brache WELLNESS EDITOR Anjali Shiyamsaran VIEWS EDITOR Patrick McCullough WRITERS Erin Brache, Tommy Delp, Emi Knape, Karina Le, Patrick McCullough, Tomas Mendez, Alex Schneider, Rylan Valancore

ART ART DIRECTOR Rachel Kogut ONLINE ART MANAGER Quamae Newsome SENIOR DESIGNER Gabriella Licona DESIGNERS Gabriella Fatigati, Rachel Kogut, Adrianna Petrus ILLUSTRATORS Alice Benavides, TingYu Chang, Leah Chirico, Jess Edwards, Meya Goel, Sahana Maheswaran, Maeghan McKenzie, Quamae Newsome, Emily O’Shea, Lisa Zhou

PHOTOGRAPHY PHOTO EDITOR Diana Spencer PHOTOGRAPHERS Sophie Proe, Diana Spencer, Shreya Rathore

BUSINESS BUSINESS MANAGER Kamila Ali AD / PR MANAGER John Grinthal

EDITOR’S NOTE

E Y D S M

REPORTER

he initial title for this issue was to be “The Injustice Issue.” The issue was supposed to tear apart the events that unfolded and have continued to unfold within the RIT community that have worked to uphold those in charge. Where minority voices are told they are being heard while the administration sides with the oppressors. This issue was supposed to expose questionable actions that have taken place for years that warrant answers. Questions about the uses of our students’ money, about manipulation, about the racial injustices that have plagued this campus and the entire United States. Our team wanted to open the wounds that RIT has been trying to cover up over the last few years — to show the disparity between what we are being fed and what is actually happening on campus. We wanted to display the truth about scandals that have been covered up and ignored, to give voices to those who have been affected and suppressed. But what happened? Fear. Fear from the administration and refusal to speak with Reporter. Fear of the repercussions of coming forward with information and refusal to comment on matters pertinent to the functioning of our student body. Fear from those who were affected by the injustice, to come forward and expose themselves to the power that shut them down. Fear of repercussions for our staff for digging into matters that could give them attention from the wrong people. I challenge that fear. I challenge those in charge who uphold the discretion that leaves the students they work for in the dark. I challenge them to hear those who step forward and tell their story and allow them that free speech. I challenge them to respect those who are trying to bring this information forward to make RIT a place where there really is greatness in difference. As for Reporter, I challenge us to take the risks we need to bring information to the student body. We are a community. We need that communication to succeed as students. RIT needs that communication with its students to succeed as a university. Sooner or later, the apathetic mindset and refusal to change will leave you behind. The voices of the oppressed will be heard and RIT will either blossom to new extents, or crumble under the feet of those who will not listen.

ONLINE SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATOR Will Nilges ONLINE SERVICES MANAGER Efe Ozturkoglu VIDEO EDITOR Daniel Sarch PODCAST PRODUCER Ben Brown ADVISOR Rudy Pugliese PRINTING Sutherland Printing CONTACT +1 (585) 475–2212

MARILYN WOLBERT | EDITOR IN CHIEF Letters to the Editor should be sent to rpteic@rit.edu. No letters will be published unless signed. All letters received become the property of REPORTER.

Please Recycle

Reporter Magazine is published monthly during the academic year by a staff comprised of students at Rochester Institute of Technology. Business, Editorial and Design facilities are located in Room A-730, in the lower level of the Campus Center. Our phone number is +1 (585) 475–2212. The Advertising Department can be reached at +1 (585) 475–2213. “I don’t think that’s a breadstick I think that’s painful” -L.G. The opinions expressed in Reporter do not necessarily reflect those of the Institute. Reporter is not responsible for materials presented in advertising areas. Copyright © 2021 Reporter Magazine. All rights reserved. No portion of this magazine may be reproduced without prior written permission.

September 3

IN T HI S I S S UE

NEWS 6

T E C H

RISE OF GUN VIOLENCE IN ROCHESTER

Colliding crises: the rise of gun violence in Rochester

*This issue features articles with sensitive topics, language and imagery that may be triggering. Please take care of yourself.

@REPORTERMAG 4 September

ETHICS IN MODERN SCIENCE

As science rapidly advances, how far is “too far”?

C U LT U R E 10

STALKING AT RIT*

A DELVE INTO SUBSTANCE ABUSE*

AYL: RITCHIE & FRIENDS

Stalking at RIT and why it needs to be addressed

Substance abuse and possible resources available to those afflicted by it

Help color Ritchie and his friends as they dine at our local Commons

cover and TOC by Emily O’Shea

F E A T U R E S 16

THE 2020-21 IMPEACHMENT OF JACOB CUSTER

What we know, and what we don’t know about the impeachment

THE PERVASIVENESS OF UNDERREPORTING* How process, fear and doubt can gatekeep justice

W E L L N E S S 22

ON-CAMPUS HOUSING FOR DISABLED STUDENTS

V I E W S 24

Dealing with RIT’s inaccessible campus is a struggle for students with disabilities

CREATING A CULTURE OF ACCOUNTABILITY While “cancel culture” carries negative connotations, what’s it really after?

WORD ON THE STREET

Do college campuses have a problem with free speech?

RINGS

RIT’s only digital confessional. Text or call (585) 672-4840

R E P O RTER.R IT.EDU September 5

RISE OF GUN VIOLENCE IN ROCHESTER by Tomas Mendez | photography by Diana Spencer | design by Rachel Kogut

Bullet holes can be seen in the front doors of Bright ou hear about it on the news, and it is Bubble Laundromat, on the corner of Meigs Street more common than you may think: gun and Monroe Avenue, Not much is known about the violence is happening in Rochester. incident that caused the damage, other than that There have been more than 30 homicides it occurred over two years ago, according to the in the city of Rochester since the start of 2021, laundromat’s manager and employees. and more than 70% of those deaths have been from gun violence. What you will not find in the news, however, is the “behind the scenes” information about Quite often, mass shootings reignite the dethe stories of these incidents. bate over gun control in the United States. Do we need more gun control in the U.S.? When we mention gun control, it’s essential Gun discussion is a political and cultural bat- to acknowledge that we are not talking about tle in our country and in our city. eliminating the use of guns. Gun possession has been a never-ending Having more gun control means having argument. Citizens are compelled to carry be- stricter laws and more security with gun cause of the paranoia that they need to defend transactions to prevent potentially dangerous themselves, with the perceived rise of violence. individuals from purchasing weapons. It also But different states with higher levels of house- means limiting the types of firearms citizens hold gun ownership have higher rates of fire- can buy. For example, most people say they arm homicide. need guns for personal protection, but no civilAnyone can be affected by firearm violence ian needs an automatic assault rifle to defend but in certain situations gun violence dispro- themselves. For self-defense purposes, a norportionately impacts communities of color, mal handgun should be sustainable. women and other marginalized groups in sociNo other democracy in the world experiety. Certainly, the killer in most cases is being ences this level of gun violence. That’s because Being an important issue in the life of the citaffected by a motive that somehow make them other free nations have tough gun laws to deal izens of Rochester, politics plays its role. feel victimized in some fashion by society. with this problem. Many groups, plans and policies have been Previous violence is the only evidence-based Gun control make us believe that limiting developed and implanted in our community to predictor of future violence. So, it is critical access to guns will save lives and reduce crime. fight the problem. that the public and policymakers stop respondAlthough gun control reduces gun violence, Take the ROC Against Gun Violence Coaliing to gun violence and mass shootings with it doesn’t erase total violence from the area. tion project, developed by the administration statements that mental health conditions are Reducing the incidence of gun violence will reof Mayor Lovely Warren. The coalition seeks the underlying cause. quire interventions through multiple systems, to end gun violence in Rochester by bringing The reason why a shooting takes place is dif- including legal, public safety, community and attention to the causes and effects of gun viferent than the reason of why most of our peo- health. olence, as well as promoting quality of life in ple think that we can solve problems with viWhether gun violence can be premedi- Rochester’s neighborhoods. olence. However, what we can identify is that tated, spontaneous or impulsive, we should Some ways this project seeks to improve if we want the problem to be solved, we need target the roots of violence to prevent and to Rochester’s quality of life is through educatto work together as a nation to set awareness decrease the number of homicides happening ing our youth. They utilize their program by towards the correct audience. because of gun violence in the city. promoting awareness in the community of the

DICE ROLLER

CAUSE AND EFFECT

COMMUNITY COMING TOGETHER

6 News

“More than 70% of those deaths have been from gun violence.”

dangers and collateral effects of gun violence. Additionally, the plan consists of encouraging individuals to engage in diversion programs that lead to positive outcomes. Some of these programs include — but aren’t limited to — education, awareness and prevention. These programs are specifically targeted towards their families and neighborhoods.

Other anti-violence programs, such as the Buyback Program, have been raised by the local government. This program allows gun owners to trade their firearms to government entities for cash. In this particular case, it also acts as an amnesty program. No identification is needed and no questions will be asked of the person dropping off the firearm. “Getting guns off our streets must be a priority,” Mayor Warren said in a statement, after establishing the city’s new buyback program.

VIOLENCE IN ROCHESTER

Mark’s Texas Hots is known not only for their food, but also through the continuous gun violence that occurs around its establishment. It has become common to see yellow warning tape due to the number of crimes that happen in that corner, such as the events of 2014, 2016 and 2021. Sadly, this is not the only restaurant plagued by violence in the city. Thurston Road, a street along Rochester’s 19th ward, is infamous for its violence that happens daily. Violence is so ordinary to the point where if someone hears a gunshot on the road, they shrug it off, as the sound is almost as common as birds.

A TOXIC FUTURE

Guns are an integral part of American culture. The problem is that these weapons are providing far too many Americans with the opportunity to harm others. Even more, the accessibility of guns are unbelievable. The U.S. has more guns per capita than residents of any other country. The U.S. has roughly one gun for every citizen. At the other extreme, Japan has less than one gun per 100 people. The focus must be towards spreading awareness and developing constant efforts to make the products safer and to limit access by people who are most likely to misuse them. More broadly, preventing gun-related injuries and deaths is a collective, social responsibility. Gun control is one solution to this problem. However, if we also come together as a community, concentrating efforts on education and support centers for the disenfranchised, we can slowly lower the violence that has been plaguing our nation.

“Getting guns off our streets must be a priority.” A billboard by the Rochester Police Department stands at the corner of Alexander Street and East Main Street, just a short walk away from where a man in his early 20s was shot and killed on the afternoon of June 4, 2021.

News 7

Ethics in Modern Science by Erin Brache | photography by Diana Spencer | illustration by Quamae Newsome | design by Rachel Kogut

he idea of how far science, technology and psychology have come is unnerving to some. With how much we already know, it’s even scarier to wonder what else is left to develop. What’s stopping some mad scientist from secretly conducting crazy experiments on people or building a deadly weapon to destroy humanity? Well, a lot actually.

SCIENCE’S CHECKERED HISTORY Every Intro to Psychology class across the country discusses the Milgram Experiment, in which participants believed they were seriously injuring or killing another participant, but did not stop because a superior told them they had to continue. This study is recognized as one of the most famous examples of unethical scientific research, but it certainly isn’t the only one. Kirsten Condry, an associate professor with the department of Psychology at RIT, gave a talk last year called Radioactive Oatmeal: Scientific Ethics and the (Ab)use of Human Subjects in Research, which focused specifically on examples of subject mistreatment in scientific research. The talk examined a study conducted in 1949 when Robert Harris, a professor of nutrition at MIT, fed about a hundred mentally disabled children oatmeal laced with radiation.

“There was effectively no consent. They lied to children … they lied to the parents about what was going to happen,” Condry said. Instead of properly describing the experiment to its participants, the researchers took a page out of Milgram’s book and abused the trust that we give scientists as proof that the test was safe. “They let their authority stand in for all these things,” Condry said. Reports of the experiment were only first published 45 years later in 1994. This was the first time the subjects learned of the radiation treatment. This isn’t the only example of a study shook people’s trust in science. In 1920, John Watson wanted to prove that the idea of classical conditioning was ingrained in humans. Classical conditioning, in its simplest form, is unconsciously training a subject to react to something it previously would not have reacted to. In what was named the “Little Albert” experiment, Watson met an 11-month old baby who was given the name “Albert” for the experiment and gave him a little white rat.

Every time Albert would be presented with the white rat, Watson would bang a steel bar with a hammer, scaring Albert and causing him to cry. After multiple sessions of conditioning, Albert would scream when he saw not only a white rat, but anything resembling a white rat, such as a fur coat or cotton. While this experiment would be considered unethical by today’s standards, many believe it unearthed a fact about humans that would have been much harder to learn otherwise. Although the findings of the study are hard to refute, there are many regulations that have been put in place since then to try and stop unethical scientific research.

MODERN ETHICAL STANDARDS Today, all universities have an Institutional Review Board (IRB) that determines whether a study is ethical and if it can be conducted. There are many rules in place to ensure that every IRB is as diverse as possible. According to the Food and Drug Administration, IRBs must have members of “varying background,” including race, sex, ethnicity and more.

"[Regulations] are too weak as it is. There’s not enough oversight. … People get wrapped up in their own theories and ideas." 8 Tech

“They lied to children … they lied to the parents about what was going to happen.”

Having insight from a diverse IRB allows for discussion about who, if anyone, will be negatively effected by the study, and how that can be fixed. While most people may imagine IRBs as a group of professors deciding to only allow studies they like, one member of the IRB actually has to be someone from outside the university and science altogether. “The reason is to give a real person’s perspective. Someone who doesn’t give a damn about the science,” Condry explained. Their job is to be the voice of the “regular” person and make sure that the scientists on an IRB don’t get too absorbed in the details of their work. Along with IRBs, the U.S. government also has the Office of Research Integrity (ORI), which has its own set of rules and regulations that need to be followed in order to conduct government research. Even with all of these rules in place though, it’s still possible to conduct unethical science. IRBs can only control what research happens in universities, but there is a whole different section of scientific research funded entirely by corporations. Corporate science doesn’t have to go through an IRB. It doesn’t even have to follow the regulations set by the U.S. government as long as it doesn’t receive funding from them.

There’s a simple solution that corporations use to conduct unregulated research. For example, if a corporation wanted to test a new product but didn’t want to abide by government regulations, it could just move its study to a country with more relaxed rules and test there. Since the corporation funds it own research and isn’t being conducted in a country that monitors the research heavily, there is nothing stopping these experiments from being as unethical and unsafe as they want. One notable example of this was when Pfizer, a pharmaceutical company, engaged in an “illegal trial of an unregistered drug” by administering it to children in Nigeria who had meningitis.

Scott Merydith, a psychology professor at RIT, explained his definition of playing God. “It means to me that you have the power of making an important decision over someone’s life”, he said. This may initially seem like just killing or saving someone, but there are numerous ways to truly change someone’s life other than bodily harm. When asked if scientists should ever be allowed to play God, both Merydith and Condry gave the same one-word answer: “No.” While some scientists are comfortable with the amount of effort devoted to the conservation of ethics in science, Condry disagreed. “[Regulations] are too weak as it is. There’s not enough oversight. … People get wrapped up in their own theories and ideas,” she said. Nobody can deny that there is much more regulation and oversight on scientific research than there was 100 years ago. The rules we have today are made specifically to ensure that the science being done is as unbiased, safe and accurate as possible. So even if you picture science as mad doctors creating death lasers, you can at least take comfort in knowing that your oatmeal isn’t radioactive.

WHAT DO THE SCIENTISTS THINK? A phrase tossed around when some feel science is progressing too fast is that scientists are “playing God.” But what exactly does that mean?

Tech 9

STALKING AT RIT CONTENT WARNING: This editorial

by Rylan Valancore | illustration by Jess Edwards | design by Rachel Kogut

contains language that may be triggering for those closely associated with stalking.

rowing up I’ve always heard stories about stalkers. I convinced myself that they only existed in fiction. However, stalkers are real and all too common, especially on college campuses. A few years ago, I had a cyberstalker. Luckily, we were able to find out who the person was and deal with it while also keeping me safe. Years later, once again, stalking is a prevalent factor in my life in a different way. Someone close to me was being stalked on RIT’s own campus. It caused them so much stress to the point where they reconsidered being on campus.

STALKING ON RIT CAMPUS

Stacy DeRooy, who works for Title IX which deals with numerous harassment cases said that “reports happen often, usually during the school year, daily.” Stalking is a prevalent problem at RIT with numerous cases being reported every year. Mark Koehler, an investigator for Public Safety expanded on this. “In 2018 there were 30 incidents reported, with 13 of them taking place in the residential facilities,” Koehler said. Though these cases fluctuate, it’s common enough on campus where there’s a common saying: “How do you know you’re a woman at RIT? When it’s the first week of classes and you already have a stalker.” The fact that this is so common, shows how much of a problem stalking is on campus.

A STALKING EXPERIENCE

An anonymous source described how they met their stalker — they worked on-campus, and would often strike up conversations with customers to be friendly.

10 Culture

One customer frequently visited their line at work. During one of the conversations between the two, they had exchanged Snapchat usernames. The source said, at first, the person seemed nice enough, maybe even a potential friend. But then the stalker began appearing at their workplace constantly. Often, they would interrupt the victim and subsequent customers by starting conversations during work, or sending unwanted flirtatious messages. The source made it clear to this person that they were only interested in being friends and already had a partner, and for a time, the stalker withdrew. The stalking grew worse. There were more mes-

“In 2018 there were 30 incidents reported, with 13 of them taking place in the residential facilities.” sages and more visits to their workplace. Their stalker would even wait outside close for them when their shift was over, no matter the time. As the semester was ending, the source blocked their stalker since they knew they wouldn’t have to see them in person and be bombarded with questions on why the blocking happened.

“JUST BLOCK THEM”

In this situation, whenever flirting occurred and the victim would tell their stalker that they were not interested, the stalker would flip the narrative by saying they misinterpreted the conversation. This is gaslighting.

Gaslighting is a tactic used with the intent to manipulate a situation to make the victim believe that what they’re experiencing isn’t happening, or the victim is misinterpreting the perpetrator. Innocuous comments like “you’re overreacting” can become gaslighting when the abuser tries to convince the victim that what they see and feel isn’t true, and that the abuser is right, always. Even more, victims can receive similar comments from their peers, making the victim doubt themselves further. The source described an experience of being sexually harassed, but instead of getting the help they needed, they were told that they took things the wrong way. Experiences like this are some of the reasons why victims don’t seek help from authorities. A lot of times it could do more harm than good. Victims are often told to just “block” the perpetrator if the platform is online. This does not stop the stalking most of the time. Stalkers are relentless. They will go to great lengths to stay in contact with their victim. Blocking becomes even more of an issue when you see this person in your everyday life. The source explained how they held off with blocking their stalker because they were too scared that their stalker would cause a scene or get angry. There are so many factors to account for stalking victims. Sometimes blocking can make things worse and cause stalkers to become more aggressive. Some cases, it could lead to direct harm to victims, rather than keeping them safe.

“Victim blaming” is another problem that happens to victims of harassment. Oftentimes, we will hear people blame the victim, whether it be for what they are wearing or just being friendly. However, being a victim has nothing to do with clothing or being nice to people.

NORMALIZATION OF STALKING AND IMPROVEMENTS

DeRooy explained that a lot of reports are on people who have expressed a romantic interest in the victim. “Most stalking reports, someone has a romantic interest in someone else and ... don’t know how to convey their interest and then the recipient doesn’t know how to decline or doesn’t feel comfortable doing so,” DeRooy said. Many complaints are towards people part of Golisano College of Computing and Information Sciences, a heavily male-dominated program that focuses on technology and com-

puters. RIT assigned a Title IX depute investigator into areas like these to help them be “in the know” where cases like harassment are more likely to happen. “We see the trend, we know the trend. We try to pay attention to where these complaints are coming from,” DeRooy added. Title IX is aware of complaints from students and is actively working to access these situations so they can come up with the best solution for the problem. DeRooy explained that they are working closely with the first-year office to try and incorporate more safety guidelines into the firstyear program. “We’re trying to build more training, we’re trying to make students feel more empowered. Not to victim blame, but to give tools and strategies to confront these situations,” DeRooy said.

To victims of stalking: you are not alone. While professionals are the ones who can make significant changes, it is also important to recognize the ways we can make our community safer. Don’t be a bystander, and advocate for people who can’t. If we leave it alone, it will not go away.

“We see the trend, we know the trend. We try to pay attention to where these complaints are coming from.”

Culture 11

A DELVE A INTO SUBSTANCE ABUSE by Alex Schneider photography by Diana Spencer design by Gabriella Fatigati & Rachel Kogut

CONTENT WARNING:

This editorial contains language that may be a trigger for those closely associated with substance abuse and mental health concerns, including the names, uses, and habitual behaviors of certain drugs.

strong inclination to do, use or indulge in something repeatedly is the cornerstone of addictive habits. According to the National Institute of Health, “addiction is defined as a chronic, relapsing disorder characterized by compulsive drug seeking and use despite adverse consequences. It is considered a brain disorder, because it involves functional changes to brain circuits involved in reward, stress, and self-control.” Recent drug epidemics, such as the rapid adoption and use of e-cigarettes, show that addiction is ever present. David Reetz, director of Counseling and Psychological Services at RIT, stressed the importance of bringing such a widespread occurrence to a more individual level, where underlying reasons for drug use occur. He explained that substance abuse usually starts with the use of a drug to cope with anxiety or a similar stressor. “The more a substance is used, it starts to take over time, energy and attention, then that can create all sorts of other problems in one’s life,” said Reetz. “It’s a sort of a cycle, they start to struggle with other aspects of their life and feel bad about it, so they use more substances to deal with those feelings and functioning gets even worse. It’s just a downward spiral.” Although strategies towards overcoming addiction have been around for years, the stigma surrounding being a struggling addict is still a barrier towards a higher rate in treatments. An addict is still likely to be seen as a junkie who messed themselves up rather than as a person with a treatable psychological condition, which lessens the likelihood that they will get the treatment they need. According to American Addiction Centers, “only 1 in 10 individuals with addiction received any form of treatment at a facility, and 60% of those who perceived a need for treatment made no effort to get treatment.”

GETTING HELP So, how would someone at RIT get help if they need or want it? Students can make appointments with RIT’s Counseling and Psychological Services. Their services range from verbal therapy, group meetings and a bridge to professional help if needed. In the context of drug-related issues, Reetz also assists students who come to him to gauge whether or not their use of any kind of drug is to an unhealthy extent. “We ask every student that comes in to fill out a questionnaire, and it specifically asks about alcohol use,” he explained. “And every time a student comes in we ask about their alcohol use. So we’re gathering information on that, but that’s up to the student to disclose it or not.” Students can also fill out a self help screening on the RIT CaPS website. Using the tool, they can quickly assess what level of risk they’re at and receive follow up recommendations if the results necessitate them. Once they’re at a level to which they desire help, they can begin their recovery by scheduling an appointment with a medical professional. “We do the initial assessment, some brief treatment and we can be a bridge to other intensive services,” Reetz explained, when describing the role CaPS plays in overall treatment. “Our average individual treatment mod-

“You feel like you can’t leave it because it now feels like 12 Culture

it’s a

part of you.”

“It’s a sort of a cycle, they start to struggle with other aspects of their life and feel bad about it, so they use more substances to deal with those feelings and functioning gets even worse. It’s just a downward spiral.” el is about six visits. If it’s an addiction, the answer is going to be something more intense than that.” CAPS also holds a weekly group meeting every semester, called Smart Recovery. “It’s mostly about substance but also any type of addictive concerns,” he said. For example, somebody with a gambling problem can also attend the meetings, and not just someone dealing with substance abuse. Students can schedule appointments on the RIT Wellness Portal or contact us at 585-475-2261. Provided services are accessible to all students.

THE CORE OF THE PROBLEM Reetz likens substance abuse to an abusive relationship. “At first, it starts out with some curiosity and some interest and you explore it,” he explained. “It’s really exciting and fun, and it seems like it works, so you spend more time together.” A core tenet of a relationship is the ability to work out problems and issues had by each partner, and toxicity comes from their inabilities to do so. “It’s the same way with substances, a substance might feel good at first, but over time you don’t break up, you stay in that relationship with the substance, even though it’s like not bringing any joy and pleasure in life,” he said. Both relationship and substance abuse rely on a similar emotional attachment. “You feel like you can’t leave it because it now feels like it’s a part of you,” Reetz said.

Relaxation and anxiety relief are commonly used to rationalize the behavior to the extent of the unhealthy relationship, especially with alcohol or cannabis abuse. The vicious cycle of substance abuse creates an unhealthy coping mechanism, which prevents people from being able to actively confront their conflicts. “We have a little bit of anxiety that drives us to do that and motivates us. We take care of ourselves, we learn stuff, we do things, we engage in the world and we try to become a better person,” he stated. Anxiety is a healthy emotion to feel, but constantly feeling overwhelmed by it, to the point where you need substances to relax, suggests a more serious, underlying problem. The question Reetz poses to people who feel unmotivated or overanxious is: “How can we figure out how to deal with our anxiety and productive ways in ways to actually make us better?” “We have to feel those things to be able to tolerate feeling them so we can work through them in effective ways,” he stated. “Substances block that growth process.”

Culture 13

AYL: Ritchie & Friends illustration by Alice Benavides | design by Rachel Kogut

Help color Ritchie and his friends as they dine at our local Commons! Use markers for the best coloring results.

14 Culture

“You’re not the Devil, and I’m not the Devil’s Advocate.”

M O R

STORIES O N L I N E

REPORTER.RIT.EDU

People who think that criminal defendants are horrible humans have never been arrested. They don’t understand the crushing embarrassment that comes with a DWI or criminal charge. Being arrested is one of the most stressful and anxiety-producing events a person can experience. You don’t know if you are going to jail. You don’t know what is going to happen to your job or your education. Are you going to lose your license? You don’t know how your friends and family are going to react. It’s absolutely awful. So… if you know someone who is facing a criminal charge, have some courtesy, have some sympathy, and some taste. Use all your well-learned politesse, and give me a call. P. Adam Militello, Esq. (585) 485-0025 https://rochesternyDWI.lawyer

The 2020-21

IMPEACHMENT of by Patrick McCullough | illustration by Leah Chirico | design by Adrianna Petrus

“

I fear I will face REPERCUSSIONS simply because I stood for free speech, and I knew the consequences on a liberal campus.

uring the Fall semester of 2020, a petition advocating for the impeachment of COLA Senator Jacob Custer began circulating around RIT campus. The details surrounding this event were a mystery then, and in some ways continues to be one now, almost a year later.

Petition of Impeachment The process of impeachment began with a petition. The nature and contents of this document have not been released to the public since the impeachment process began last fall. However, archives of the original document still exist online. “This letter is intended to bring awareness to multiple accounts where Jacob Custer goes against the mission of Student Government, specifically going against initiatives that enrich students’ lives on RIT campus,” an archived version of the petition stated. The document elaborated on the exact nature of the charges. Custer was accused of violating the university’s core values (P04.0), the duties of senators and voting representatives (B04.0 Article 1, Section 2), the code of ethical conduct and compliance (C00.0 Article 3) and the university’s policy prohibiting discrimination, harassment and retaliation (C06.0 Article 3). “These actions include, but are not limited to, negative attitudes towards members, blatant

16 Features

disregard of the effects of controversial topics such as Blue Lives Matter and how it affects the Black and Brown community, and blatant disregard for anyone’s views,” the petition continued. The snapshot of the document only captured the landing page of what appears to be a larger document. A link at the bottom directs viewers to a collection of evidence that allegedly makes the case for impeachment. The internet archive did not capture that portion of the document. The evidence presented against Custer only exists in the form of edited screenshots that appear in a handful of right-leaning publications that picked up the story in the wake of the impeachment.

Broken Links The case against Jacob Custer had to be assembled in stages, since many of the original documents containing the evidence laid against him are no longer accessible. The evidence only exists in the form of incomplete digital archives and heavily edited screenshots within articles written at the time. “The College Fix” is a conservative news blog that is operated by the Student Free Press Association, a non-profit organization run by veteran journalists to help beginning journalists.

”

According to screenshots presented by “The College Fix,” the effort to impeach Custer started in part with a conversation about a campus security officer who wore a mask in support of Blue Lives Matter. The discussion centered around an RIT Public Safety officer who was seen wearing a ‘thin blue line’ mask, a symbol which is associated with the pro-police Blue Lives Matter movement. Members of Student Government (SG) discussed ways they could apply pressure to RIT. “Effectively putting a spotlight on a big hole in RIT’s claims of making efforts to be anti-racist,” said one unnamed student. This pressure included possibly hosting a public event, distributing posters and advertising the effects of Blue Lives Matter iconography on campus. According to Christopher Ferrari, vice president of SG and a senator at the time of the impeachment, SG did not have the ability to enact policies as dramatic as the banning of speech. “Student Government is an advocacy-based organization,” Ferrari explained. “We’re in a unique position. We’re students, but we’re also part of an advocacy group.” SG can advocate for things that students want, but the organization does not have the power to shape RIT policy. Members can shape

Jacob Custer and enforce their own bylaws, but those bylaws still have to operate under the broader university policy. Additional evidence is presented in a series of screenshots titled “3 BLM” and “Lack of Fathers,” according to “The College Fix.” The article only includes one of those images, which shows Custer discussing the lack of fathers in Black communities. “Campus Reform,” which identifies as “a conservative watchdog for the nation’s higher education system,” also covered Custer’s impeachment. Their coverage of events provided additional context to the conversations going on in SG’s private channels. Screenshots provided in their coverage reveal conversations that were not included in “The College Fix’s” coverage, as members of SG move from the topic of Blue Lives Matter to free speech on campus. “I have seen and know students who support blue lives matter especially with the masks. I am even one of them. I am standing by the idea of free speech as a whole even if I disagree with other ideas,” Custer wrote. He went on to define racism as stating or implying that one race is superior to another. According to Custer, people who supported Blue Lives Matter were not expressing racial animus and that the movement should not be labeled racist.

Other members in the chat took issue with Custer’s analysis of the situation: “As I said before, it is not your place to decide when something is or isn’t racist because of your biases, let alone tell a POC that something isn’t racist.” In correspondence with “The College Fix” and “Campus Reform,” Custer himself doubled-down on the free speech angle. “I fear I will face repercussions simply be-

cause I stood for free speech, and I knew the consequences on a liberal campus, but I believe such fear is something other students should not have to face in a disagreement,” he said. The Fox & Friends segment Custer appeared on in late January reiterates the narrative that colleges are no longer “intellectual bastions where everyone can express their viewpoints and you can learn from your fellow students,”

despite the fact that the impeachment was ultimately overturned. However, not everyone is bound to university policy. Members of SG, including then-President Shine DeHarder, reportedly began receiving threatening emails and phone calls as the story of the impeachment began to circulate around the internet.

Let Bylaws Be Bylaws The case against Jacob Custer is only available through secondhand sources, but the bylaws that govern the process of impeachment itself are still open to the public. Appendix H of SG’s bylaws outlines the impeachment process. The petition for impeachment must be presented to the Standards Review Board, a group of representatives from SG and the Representative Student Organizations (RSOs) selected by the SG Vice President. This group must meet by the fourth week of the Fall semester to review the impeachment process for the year. According to Jacob Custer, this had not happened by the time of his impeachment in late fall. “[SG] didn’t follow their own bylaw proceedings to have a Standard Review Board made up at the beginning of the school year. They had to make one during the three-week proceedings,” Custer remarked. The late formation of the Standards Review

Features 17

The 2020-2021

IMPEACHMENT of JACOB

CUSTER

Board was corroborated by several students familiar with the matter. SG formed the board responsible for overseeing the impeachment after the petition to impeach had already been filed. According to a person familiar with the proceedings, anyone who had signed the petition that had circulated was not able to serve on the Standards Review Board. Once the petition for impeachment was presented, the board held a meeting to review the impeachment. At the meeting, the accused and the accuser made their case for and against impeachment. The final decision was left to a two-thirds majority vote. The decision to impeach Jacob Custer was effective immediately following the meeting.

Continued...

Limited Appeal Impeachment can be overturned if the accused chooses to appeal the decision. An impeached member of SG is allowed to keep their position until the appeal has finished. At the time of Custer’s impeachment, the process outlined in the bylaws was two sentences long. “A. If the voting representatives elect to impeach the accused, the accused individual has the right to appeal the decision within 10 days of the sanction” and “B. Appeals will then be presented to Senate for a final decision,” ac-

18 Features

cording to Appendix H, Section 7 of the SG bylaws. SG’s bylaws are updated by the Governance Committee, which is composed of the President and Vice President of SG and a representative from each RSO. Since the previous SG had not written an appeal process into their bylaws, it fell to the current committee to write one in the wake of the impeachment. “[The Governance Committee] talk about bylaw stuff. They talk about amendments, chang-

es and they are also responsible for the impeachment proceedings themselves,” Custer explained, referring to the rules that govern the impeachment. Custer alleged that the Governance Committee was not restricted in the same way the Standards Review Board had been. According to him, members of the Governance Committee had also expressed support for his impeachment. Once the committee had settled on a process to handle Custer’s appeal, the case was presented to the members of the SG senate. Members of the senate were allowed to vote in the appeal hearing, even if they had previously signed the document supporting Custer’s impeachment.

The senate was to determine whether the Standards Review Board responsible for overseeing the impeachment had conducted the process properly. The senate ultimately decided to uphold the decision to impeach.

Presidential Pardon The Office of the President announced an investigation into SG’s decision to impeach Custer on Feb. 26, 2021. The announcement came in the form of an email from RIT President David Munson. In it, Munson announced the formation of a Review Panel consisting of “members of the RIT Board of Trustees and others.” This panel was tasked with determining whether or not SG’s decision violated Policy C.11, which defines free speech and free expression on campus, and Policy C.6, which prohibits discrimination, harassment and retaliation. “I had been approached by people both inside and outside the university who had asked whether the university’s free speech policy had been breached. To advise me on this question, I decided to appoint a review panel with a number of Trustees and staff members who have experience in dealing with appeals and student issues.” Munson explained when Reporter reached out for comment.

“

The investigation panel returned their findings, and students were made aware of the decision on April 15, 2021. Their conclusion was that Custer’s impeachment had violated RIT’s policies on free speech, though the exact manner or extent of that violation was not explained. The panel also found that Custer had not violated the university’s Policy C.6, which prohibits discrimination, harassment and retaliation. Once this decision was made, Custer’s impeachment was overturned and he was to remain a member of SG. This announcement was coupled with a statement reiterating the importance of open and respectful discussion of controversial issues. It ended with a recommendation directed towards SG, suggesting they amend their bylaws to include more ro-

bust resolution measures and sanctions that do not extend as far as impeachment. Outside of the emails sent to the student body, there has been little insight into the process the Office of the President used to come to that conclusion. According to President Munson, the Review Panel consisted of RIT staff and members of the RIT Board of Trustees. Munson’s statement also affirmed that most of the members on the panel were “persons of color.” However, the information on the panel, its members and its decision-making process ends there. This article is part of an ongoing investigation. To stay up-to-date on the latest information, visit the Reporter website at reporter.rit.edu.

I had been approached by people both inside and outside the university who had asked whether the university’s FREE SPEECH POLICY had been breached.

”

Features 19

Per va siveness Un d errepo rt i ng THE

by Karina Le illustration by Sahana Maheswaran design by Gabriella Fatigati

*CONTENT WARNING:

This editorial contains language that may be a trigger for those closely associated with sexual harassment, stalking and sexual violence.

nitially, this was going to be a piece highlighting RIT’s Public Safety department and their relationship to the greater student community. I was directed to Public Safety’s annual security report, a document showcasing reported offenses. Outside of the typical drug and alcohol offenses, there was very little on reports of sexual assault or stalking. It should be a good thing that there are so few reports, right? But there is a distinct difference between those who report, and those who don’t. With the rise of #CampusLife on RIT’s reddit, it’s essential to understand why victims often refuse to report or drop the case, and how often this happens.

THE FILING PROCESS

There are many reasons why someone would not want to report an incident. For some, the process is just too long. From starting the report, to collecting evidence and to preparing a case, there are many things that can go wrong. Not to mention the possibilities during court, there are a lot of obstacles victims must face to find justice. It’s an incredibly draining process, and if evidence isn’t kept or preserved, sometimes there’s not much RIT or law enforcement can do in pursuing the case. Not to mention the stress it’ll cause for the victim who will need to relive their experience over and over throughout the process.

20 Features

"I wojust di r d whds to un’t ha hap at ex nde ve th pen act rsta e ed ly ha nd to m d e.” This is just in reference to a generic case as well, not even mentioning what comes from more sensitive cases such as harassment, stalking or even rape. For some stalking cases at RIT, the victim may not even know the perpetrator’s name, so there is even less that can be done. Of course, victims can utilize their support groups and have a buddy system where someone is always with them throughout the day. But asking someone to keep walking you to class rather than getting the stalker to stop harassing you is frustrating and demoralizing. However, that still doesn’t explain why there are so many reports for stalking and harassment when it seems like a distinct problem on campus. One part that could explain this is the consistent phenomenon of underreporting, where victims are reluctant to report the crime for a variety of reasons. A big aspect of under reporting is how often victims are afraid to report crimes in general, how often the way society treats them.

AN ISOLATING EXPERIENCE

Some of the most common reasons why victims don’t report crimes against them is shame from the crime happening to them, fear of backlash from the perpetrator in reporting the incident, lack of belief of police and doubt that the crime actually occurred. Especially for victims of sexual harassment or assault, there can be a sense that maybe the victim could’ve been prevented the crime themselves. This is reinforced by external forces, such as society, or even their peers, when people discuss assault. They ask what kind of clothes the victim was wearing, ask whether

What can we do — as individuals and as a community — for each other?

A STORY WITHOUT AN ENDING

the victim was drinking during the incident, whether the victim was provoking the perpetrator — these kinds of questions are pointed to the victim, blaming them for something that was outside their control. “The Red & Black” is a publication that followed the events of a series of 2020 tweets following various University of Georgia students and alum about their experiences with sexual harassment, assault and rape. They interviewed various sources that were sharing their stories, as well as some who were accused. One of their sources explained how, after the assault, they couldn’t put a finger on what happened to them, until people started coming out about their experiences. “I knew [the assault] wasn’t right, but I just didn’t have the words to understand what exactly had happened to me,” the anonymous source, coined as Crystal, reported. This kind of dissociation to the event, and inability to connect the action to the word is a common response to traumatizing experiences such as assault. It’s one of the many factors of why sometimes reports can take years before the victim speaks up, such as the case with Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford. Yet knowing that these events happen so often and that are left unspoken and hidden.

With the amount of people that came out to share their story through @ugasafespace, an anonymous Twitter account that shared stories of sexual assault victims, people thought some change would happen at the University of Georgia. “So many survivors came forward and then when we realized we’re coming forward en masse, we were like, ‘Surely there’s going to be some kind of action, some kind of accountability,’” another source from The Red & Black explained. “But ... nothing happened.” Even with a movement and so many students coming out, change often does not happen. Students are still left with the events that occurred, and are left alone to unpack it. Administration may wait until the event tides over and never speak of it again. Even if changes are put into place, such as RIT’s mental health teams, there’s an uncertainty to whether these institutions will work. Administration may wait until the event tides over and nev-

er speak of it again. Even if changes are put into place, such as RIT’s mental health teams, there’s an uncertainty to whether these institutions will work. So how can we solve this problem that’s been an issue for so many years, in so many communities? This is a systematic problem, a problem that has impacted one out of six American women and one in 33 American men. How can we even think to combat that, as individuals, when we as a society still haven’t figured it out? The first step, out of many, is to sit down and listen.

to g n i o tion, g s ’ ered of acounth t rely e kinof acc othu S " som ind .. n be me k .. But .ned” so ility . appe ab ing h

Features 21

On-Campus Housing by Emi Knape | photography by Shreya Rathore | design by Rachel Kogut

iving on campus at RIT undoubtedly has its ups and downs. From housing assignments, to broken elevators and other facilities — and waking up to alarms in the middle of the night — living on campus can seem difficult. For disabled students, however, dealing with these issues becomes part of their day-to-day routine. Evidently, these complications don’t even begin to explain the multitude of issues, neglect and difficulties that disabled students are faced with when it comes to RIT housing.

MERELY AN AFTERTHOUGHT Anyone who has walked around RIT may have noticed how inaccessible the campus is. From the Gracie’s ramp having too high of an incline to some buildings not having ramps at all. After 53 years, RIT is barely compliant with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards, seemingly not prioritizing the more than 700 disabled students who get accommodations through DSO at RIT. Angeline Hamele, a third year Sociology and Applied Modern Languages and Cultures double major, as well as chair of the Facilities, Parking and Transportation Committee (FPAT), has experience dealing with inaccessibility at

RIT, especially when entering buildings. “I couldn’t eat at Gracie’s, which was a requirement for first years, because the ramp was too steep,” Hamele stated. “The ADA requires ramps to have no greater than an 8% slope but the Gracie’s ramp exceeded that ... The accessible button in [University Commons] was bent in half because people abuse it so much ... I have to call Public Safety a lot for different accessibilities on campus.” Other common issues that many disabled students are faced with include inaccessible bathrooms and doorways that they simply have no control over. “There’s a bathroom I can’t get into because the door is too heavy,” Hamele explained. “I just have to wait until someone passes by just so I can use the bathroom.” In some cases though, Hamele, among other disabled students muster up their strength to pry doors open and wedge themselves inside — risking damage to their chairs or equipment — just to get through a doorway.

STUCK AT HOME On-campus housing has been especially difficult for students with disabilities, such as Madison Russell, a fourth year Human Cen-

“For disabled students, we are completely at the mercy of what disability services and housing wants to do.” 22 Wellness

tered Computing major and wheelchair user. “My issues with RIT housing started the second I committed to RIT,” Russell said. “For disabled students, we are completely at the mercy of what disability services and housing wants to do.” The struggle with living in inaccessible dorms — such as Russell’s dorm on the second floor and Hamele’s dorm as far up as the seventh floor — has proven to be an unnecessarily exhausting lifestyle. For example, broken elevators can be an inconvenience for everyone, but while non-disabled students can simply take the stairs, students with disabilities sometimes have to go as far as rearranging their days as they wait for the elevators to be fixed. “It can jeopardize people’s classes, it can jeopardize your health, it jeopardizes your safety, you can miss class, affect your attendance, you can miss meals, and even simply miss hanging out with friends,” Hamele said. “Not only is it a physical toll on you but it’s a mental and emotional toll on you as well.” For Russell, broken elevators have caused her to have to reschedule a test. She also almost missed an event she was hosting due to the lack of care and attention Public Safety gives to students in wheelchairs during these situations. In the case of one working elevator, other students refused to even let her on.

for Disabled Students “I called Public Safety and all they said was, ‘I’m sure if you asked, someone will let you on,’” Russell stated. “After telling them I already tried that, they just replied with ‘we’ll see what we can do.’” With no fire evacuation plans or training for those in wheelchairs and disabilities, all these students can do is “shelter in place” — by not moving from their location — and wait for someone to come get them.

INDEPENDENTLY DEPENDENT Issues with RIT housing goes beyond the dorms, though, and presents even more issues when it comes to finding housing in places like Global Village or University Commons. RIT lacks a list of accessible housing options or accommodations for disabled students, and when students ask for one, they’re told the list simply doesn’t exist. In regards to accommodations, RIT leaves it up to the student to provide them with a list of what they need, which can be difficult if there are no references or examples of what those accommodations may be. “This is something a lot of us don’t realize until we’ve moved in and we’re like, ‘Well I can’t reach this’ and then it’s an issue,” Russell said. On the other hand, disabled students who are granted accessible housing may not even receive their requested accommodations. This is the case for Hamele, who moved into University Commons at the beginning of the year and could barely use any of the facilities in her room due to unmet accommodations.

For starters, housing and RIT’s Facilities Management Services (FMS) failed to fulfill any of Hamele’s requests: replace the washer and dryer, make the oven more wheelchair accessible by replacing it with one that has controls on the front, clean the bathroom and install automatic door openers for the heavy doors. Luckily, Hamele was able to get an automatic door opener for the front door and bedroom. However, the oven still is not accessible despite having put her request in last August.

“Not only is it a physical toll on you but it’s a mental and emotional toll on you as well.” “It was a lot of stuff all at once that they neglected to do in preparation of my arrival,” Hamele stated. “That’s why I took my job as the facilities committee chair ... I was able to make sure students with disabilities were put into the planning process — not just as an afterthought.” In short, the struggle to find accommodating housing at RIT — along with navigating the inaccessible campus itself — is an issue that is commonly overlooked. In the words of Russell, “At RIT, students literally have to fight to get through the door.”

Wellness 23

CREATING A CULTURE OF ACCOUNTABILITY by Karina Le & Tommy Delp | illustration by Lisa Zhou & Meya Goel | design by Adrianna Petrus

SIDE 1 - KARINA LE “C

ancel culture” has been a buzzword for much of the post 2010s. It’s a modern event of ostracism, a way of socially boycotting someone for committing an action that is then shunned by the group. There are differing opinions about “cancel culture” and its effectiveness, but I personally think that the way modern discourse has digested it has really detracted from the main reason why it came about in the first place, and the term has lost its effectiveness over time.

illustration by Lisa Zhou 24 Views

Take the recent case of creator and main director of the “Five Nights At Freddy’s” series, Scott Cawthon. Recently, Cawthon announced he would step down as the head director for the “FNAF” series. The reasons weren’t explicit, but it was right after Cawthon was called out for donating to high-profile anti-LGBT politicians.

These included donations to Republican politicians John Cornyn, who was the chief backer of a constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage on a federal level back in 2004, and Ben Carson, who has previously claimed no group gets to change the definition of marriage, establishing LGBT individuals akin to people who commit beastiality.

Failure to understand the movement causes FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES at the crux of it. We have to hold people accountable, and protect those who are shut down.

Regardless of the motivations behind his actions, many fans were outraged due to the “FNAF” fandom’s significant overlap with the LGBTQ community. Cawthon explained that it was his right as an American citizen to contribute to politics in donations, but stepped down as the head director of the franchise amidst the backlash. On a surface level, this “callout culture” was working. Someone in a high position stepped down due to outrage over their actions, but does accountability end there?

REPERCUSSIONS OF A “CALLOUT”

‘QAnon.’ All references to Notch were removed from any Minecraft product or title, and he does not make money from the franchise anymore. In my opinion, “cancel culture” is simply a movement about awareness. People in high profile places can often escape any legal repercussions of their actions — if legal repercussions are needed in the first place. We are entitled to inform people about the actions of others, especially if they could be affected by interacting with the person being “called out.” This is especially true for situations where high profile individuals abuse their authority to interact with minors on a sexual level, such as the case of the YouTuber Mini Ladd. However, at the same time, innocent people can also be blacklisted from calling out issues that matter. Take the case of John Boyega: He stood out among “Star Wars” stars by taking a firm stance on the Black Lives Matters movements that were exploding across America around 2020. Boyega shared his own experiences about the ways he was harassed by fans for his race, and was critiqued by Hollywood for any signs of aggression. Since these events, Boyega has had his twitter verification taken away, and was subsequently blacklisted in all but name. Yet many people still view “cancel culture” as a symptom of a society where ‘no one can have opinions anymore.’ But that’s not the point of it, and the failure to understand the movement causes fundamental issues at the crux of it. We have to hold people accountable, and protect those who are shut down.

Despite Cawthon’s seemingly good-hearted farewell, it’s safe to assume that Cawthon will still make money from the franchise. EspecialConsider the callouts directed towards sevly since he did note he would continue to cre- eral comedians, such as Louis C.K., on the basis ate and produce games. of reported sexual harassment. Louis C.K. was However, it’s also important to note that ousted from the main headlines of comedy, but amid this controversy, Cawthon claimed that has since turned to ‘controversial’ comedy that his personal information had been leaked, includes ‘kids these days’ jokes about preferred and that he had received threats due to the na- pronouns and a skit mocking the survivors of ture of his donations, which are publicly acces- the Parkland shooting. sible information. Regardless of your political Rather than deter Louis C.K. from making alignments, this kind of behavior is not okay, money on comedy in general, he shifted his auand one of the big contributors to deviating dience and focus to a community who would be from any effective outcome “cancel culture” okay with him regardless of his actions. could bring. Some people would see this as a failing of That’s not to say these tactics haven’t “cancel culture.” Louis C.K. is still celebrated and worked in the past. One of the biggest success- unapologetic to how he changed his direction in es of “cancel culture” was the “callout” of origi- comedy. This is especially disheartening when nal Minecraft creator, Markus “Notch” Persson, you think about how many other celebrities like who was removed after a series of posts that Louis C.K. who have done the exact same thing; showcased his transphobia and his support when they get called out, they simply change for the bizarre right-wing conspiracy theory their audience.

BLACK, WHITE, GRAY

So the question is, what’s the point of “cancel culture” if it doesn’t do anything in situations that should matter, such as sexual harassment? Ultimately, this is where I want to replace “cancel culture” with accountability and critical thinking. Upon seeing someone high profile called out for something, rather than rush to the defense of the individual, I want people to be able to take a step back from our parasocial relationships with celebrities. I want people to decide for the sake of others, rather than themselves, to inform people of the current happenings — especially if they target a specific group. People fear to call out big figures on the chance that the callout is a lie, or a fabrication. We have a social obligation to each other and our communities to hold people accountable to protect those who can be harmed if the callout turns to be true. At the end of the day, that’s wishful thinking. The person who ultimately chooses whether or not to keep following, thinks for themselves and no one else. Actions have consequences to the people around you. Be critical.

Actions have consequences to the people around you. BE CRITICAL.

CREATING A CULTURE OF ACCOUNTABILITY CONTINUED SIDE 2 - TOMMY DELP

ersonally, I have not been “canceled” and have not “canceled” anybody. That being said, I have made mistakes that have resulted in ruined friendships, and I’ve also grown apart from friends that have made mistakes of their own. The term “cancel culture” is often used poorly, by both sides of the American political spectrum. What more mature people may refer to as accountability or personal growth, is often referred to as “cancel culture” by the shouting masses on leftist Twitter and at places such as the Conservative Political Action Conference. This idea of “cancel culture” as somewhat of a political boogeyman permeates modern society. The term certainly elicits fear from many, but we often forget that that’s all it is: a term. If we strip away the term and really think about what the proponents of “cancel culture” are aiming to do, is their goal really all that bad?

Holding people accountable for their beliefs and actions is an IMPORTANT PART OF ANY COMMUNITY, even if this new way of doing so has its flaws.

26 Views

The ability to hold those in positions of power, authority and notability responsible is an important one in any community that wishes to thrive.

NOT CORRECT, POLITE

People often see “cancel culture” as political correctness taken to extremes. While that second term is also loaded in of itself, I disagree with the claim anyway. For me, “cancel culture” is not about being correct; it’s about being polite. “Cancel culture” forces people to recognize that their words and actions have consequences. There are no laws against you openly speaking your mind, but there are also no laws protecting you from being held personally accountable for the views you express. The court of public opinions, no matter how unruly it is, is one guided by societal standards and best practices, the biggest of which is common courtesy. Seth Rogen, unlike many of his fellow entertainers, seems to follow this mindset. “Saying terrible things is bad, so if you’ve said something terrible, then it’s something you should confront in some way, shape or form,” he said, in a recent interview that touched on “cancel culture.”

REMAINING CIVIL, VIRTUALLY

The term “cancel culture” rose to prominence through the internet. This virtual space has overwhelmingly changed how we interact with the world and others. While we have quickly adapted to the many pleasures of online life, it seems like our morals have yet to catch up. The toxic stew created by many online communities needs to be addressed.

The various screens of modern day life act as a barrier from repercussions for many. If we are to regain our sense of humanity and community from a piece of technology that shields us from it, a system such as “cancel culture” needs to be put into place. The internet is akin to a public square, and when you shout your every little thought into the public square, there are bound to be consequences. In his opinion for Packingham v. North Carolina, former Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy echoed a similar statement when he compared the internet to a place such as a public park or utility. He stated, “These places are ... essential venues for public gatherings to celebrate some views, to protest others, or simply to learn and inquire.” While it may sound a bit harsh, “cancel culture” is a tool for teaching people this lesson in this new environment.

“CANCEL CULTURE” 2.0

I strongly believe in the goals of “cancel culture.” At the same time though, there are numerous flaws in how and why we currently use it. Just like any new tool, everyone needs to work together to wield it more responsibly. For one, intent needs to play a more important role. Every situation has context, and canceling people without having it leads to misunderstandings, along with various other detrimental effects. Did the person purposefully commit the act you consider harmful? Is this act part of a pattern? Do they have a history of doing such things? Dan Kovalik, a professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law stated, “What has to be distinguished is the difference between the person who is well intentioned but makes a mistake, and really ill-intentioned people …

They shouldn’t be treated the same. And yet they are, quite often.” Secondly, people need to recognize that the instant gratification jumping to conclusions provides doesn’t help anyone. If you’re “canceling” someone for fun, maybe find something more productive to do. If you’re looking to create real change, patience is required. Discourse should be a constant cycle of discovering and informing, and applying that same mindset to “cancel culture” would lead to better outcomes.

We need to replace the current environment surrounding “cancel culture,” one of controversy and scaremongering, to one of learning and sharing. Instead of allowing the loudest voices to control the conversation, the focus should be on distinct discussion and communication between as many informed people as possible. If you’re looking for an example of “cancel culture” done almost entirely right, look no further than disgraced Hollywood mogul, Harvey Weinstein. The long list of women, across time, location

and career field, to have accused him of sexual harassment and assault prove everything we look for in a case of “cancel culture.” From the first accuser to the handing down of his 23-year sentence, over three years passed. Justice may have not been swift by internet standards, but by allowing time for greater discussion and consensus, the punishment was much more than anything Twitter could have possibly mustered. Society’s way of debating and having discourse will continue to change and evolve. “Cancel culture” is also still a relatively new phenomenon. Holding people accountable for

If we strip away the term and really think about what the proponents of “cancel culture” are aiming for, IS THEIR GOAL REALLY ALL THAT BAD?

illustration by Meya Goel News 27

WOTS

word on the street

Opinions expressed are solely of the students and do not reflect the views of REPORTER.

photography by Sophie Proe | illustration by Maeghan McKenzie | design by Rachel Kogut

camDo co a p pus llege r e fre oblem s hav e sp w e eec ith h?

Belle Delaney

second year Computer Science major

“I think it depends on the college, since RIT is a very diverse campus with a lot of different types of people with different opinions and beliefs I feel that RIT does a good job of supporting free speech but if you’re going to something like a small Christian college there are some things that might not be widely accepted in that type of community (ie different religions/LGBT/etc).”

Kayla Brady

second year Illustration major

“If there is clearly a political/religious/social cause majority at a college it can be very easy for the minority to feel uncomfortable sharing their views/ edit what they say to appease the majority, but I don’t think it is the college’s doing for the most part, more on a student and faculty level.”

Rory McNamara

second year Photography major

“I think that college campuses do have a problem with free speech in that there’s little to no consequences when people say hurtful things. I remember hearing about multiple instances this past year at RIT where both students and staff had said harmful things, which in most cases were in regards to race, and they didn’t face any serious consequences.”

28 Views

Gabe Peters

second year Imaging Science major

“I think RIT is up there in terms of campus environments that make students feel safe when articulating their own opinion. It’s relatively diverse and understanding compared to other campuses.”

RINGS RINGS RINGS RINGS “I wish I had a dumpt ruck ass. I have to settle for a dumptruck mind.” Sunday, May 9, 2021 @12:51 a.m.

“Trader Joe’s has been playing with my heart more than Nicholas Sparks.” Monday, May 3, 2021 @8:24 p.m.

compiled by Patrick McCullough illustration by TingYu Chang design by Rachel Kogut

RIT’s only digital confessional Text or call (585) 672-4840

“Every day academ ia puts me ever so closer to finding my villain origin story. I am going to lose it.” Tuesday, April 6, 2021 @5:32 p.m.

“The raccoon’s eyes invited me to hug him…” Wednesday, May 12, 2021 @9:04 p.m. “I saw a deer get exploded by a ca r.” Monday, April 26, 2021 @9:50 p.m.

and why have , l. a t e is o h ” “W many papers? they written so , 2021 @ 1:41 p.m. 8 Tuesday, June

“We ju coon s st created t tip wit rip club wh a race h char Thursd cuteri re you e @12:36 ay, May 1 .” 3, 202 p.m. 1

Disclaimer: All calls and texts may be subject to editing and truncation. Statements do not reflect the views of REPORTER.

REPORTER IS HIRING! So much is happening every day, and we need your help ensuring awareness of these events within the RIT community. Gain great experience in a fun, professional, student-led environment at RIT’s only fully student-run journalistic magazine. Apply today to be a Writer, Photographer, Designer, or Videographer!

WRITERS

Future writers, please send your resume and a writing sample to rptonline@rit.edu.

Future photographers, please send your resume and portfolio to rpteic@rit.edu..

DESIGNERS

PHOTOGRAPHERS

Future designers, please send your resume and portfolio to rptart@rit.edu.

Future videographers, please send your resume and portfolio to rptvideorit@gmail.com..

VIDEOGRAPHERS

Writing samples and portfolios do not need to be any specific format and do not necessarily need to be journalistic in nature, but should reflect your ability. If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to Editor in Chief Marilyn Wolbert at rpteic@rit.edu.

@ REPO RTERMAG