4
THE DIAMONDBACK | TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 2008
THE DIAMONDBACK
Opinion RACHEL HARE Embrace global warming
T
oday is Earth Day, and in the true spirit of the environment, let’s take a moment to discuss global warming. First of all, let me say I am a huge fan of the Earth, and when it comes to the environment, I’m all for doing whatever is best to keep our planet thriving. I must ask all those tree-hugging zealots handing out go-green paraphernalia today: What’s the big deal about global warming? If you ask me, global warming seems like a win-win situation: good for the Earth and good for mankind. The truth is, warming might actually produce a better climate than the one we have right now. I think it’s high time we all jumped off the green, ethanol-powered bandwagon and got back into our carbon-emitting, gas-guzzling vehicles to really save the environment. “We have to stop worrying and embrace global warming,” said Stephen Colbert in an episode of his show, The Colbert Report. Never were there truer words spoken. It seems global warming has been given a bad rep by so-called environmentalists, who love to spew half-truths about the negative effects of climate change. Wake up and smell the burning roses, people. Rising temperatures on our planet might just be the best thing since sliced bread. First of all, the heat would keep families together. Like many grandparents, mine don’t particularly enjoy the cold weather, and they usually spend at least three of the coldest Maryland months vacationing in Florida. Perfect solution: global warming. Hotter temperatures would make home states more attractive to grandparents looking to follow the sun, and loved ones could stay together. Snowbirds would have no excuse to fly without any snow. Sorry, Gramps, but if global warming goes as planned, no O’s spring training games next year. Grandparents aren’t the only ones who would benefit from a longer, potentially year-round summer season. In fact, everyone could use more warm weather. No more icy commutes to work on sub-zero mornings. Barbecued ribs instead of turkey at Christmas. No need to struggle with messy sunless tanners in winter; we all could be California girls. And if sea levels rise as much as expected, we could all have a beach house someday. Surfing, swimming, hiking, picnicking, boating, grilling — sound like paradise? Do us all a favor, and buy a Hummer. Of course, global warming will not be all fun and games — mostly, but not all. There will also be responsibilities that come with the world’s biggest beach party. One of those responsibilities: ending world hunger. Yes, with global warming, it will be possible. Climate change is expected to lengthen the growing season, allowing farmers to produce more crops every year, meaning a surplus of food. That surplus could feed the hungry. So the next time you down a can of Pepsi and you’re ready to recycle it to supposedly save the planet from climate change, think for a moment. Do you really want to contribute to world hunger? That’s right — send it to a landfill. Of course, there will always be cynics and doubters. These people will try to degrade climate change as a terrible thing for people, animals, plants, glaciers, the atmosphere, the ozone, the arctic, Florida, freshwater, saltwater, ice, air, endangered species, weather patterns, storm systems and, most of all, the future. But, surely, humans could adapt to this. We invented air conditioners, didn’t we? “How hard can it be to make your jeans into cut-offs?” Colbert asked. Really, it’s time to stop worrying and start wasting. There’s a (very, very) bright future here. It’s easy to get involved, and there are many things that everyone can do everyday to help contribute to this wonderful warming trend. Drive an extra block in your SUV. Never carpool. Turn on your air conditioner. Turn on unnecessary lights. Plug in unnecessary appliances. And, of course, never recycle. But perhaps the easiest thing for Americans to do to contribute is nothing. According to Colbert, “when it comes to global warming,” we should “stop panicking and continue to do nothing.” It has never been easier to help our planet.
Rachel Hare is a sophomore French and journalism major. She can be reached at rhare1@umd.edu.
KEVIN LITTEN EDITOR IN CHIEF
YOUR INDEPENDENT STUDENT NEWSPAPER UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK PHONE: (301) 314-8200 | FAX: (301) 314-8358 3150 SOUTH CAMPUS DINING HALL | COLLEGE PARK, MD 20742 NEWSDESK@DBK .UMD.EDU
STEVEN OVERLY EDITOR IN CHIEF-ELECT MEGHA RAJAGOPALAN
NICOLE VAN BERKUM
MANAGING EDITOR
MANAGING EDITOR
AUDREY GOLDBERG DEPUTY MANAGING EDITOR
HADASS KOGAN DEPUTY MANAGING EDITOR
GOUTHAM GANESAN
BENJAMIN JOHNSON
OPINION EDITOR
OPINION EDITOR
Staff Editorial
Lindsay Wilcox
“Your mother has this crazy idea that gambling is wrong. Even though they say it’s OK in the Bible.” ~Homer Simpson
Ignore Skirt Day
Go all in on slots
I
t is once again a time of fiscal crisis in Annapolis, tive to compare this issue to that of smoking. Cigarettes and the state government has once again turned are an undeniably destructive vice. There is unequivocal to the dark side; it is considering the legalization evidence to prove prolonged smoking causes bodily of slot machines to raise revenues. The new harm. It is absolutely impossible to smoke a cigarette debate is over a popular referendum on the desir- without any knowledge of the dangers involved. Yet cigarettes remain perfectly legal. Maryland levies ability of slots. If adopted, the estimate is slot machines would bring in $550 million in the first year. A portion of a $2 tax on every pack sold. The government brings in vast amounts of revenue on the misery this would be set aside for the Higher of smokers, and smokers comply willEducation Investment Fund and ingly. Slot machines should function would, thus, directly benefit the unithe same way. If people want to feed versity. It would be a step toward Despite the obvious quarters into a machine in vain and achieving the permanent and steady funding source this page has consis- problems associated with there are others who want to provide tently argued for. gambling, legalized slot this service, it should be legal, especially when there is no direct harm to The slot machine measure is a nomachines would be a any party involved. brainer for the university; it will If the state can distribute the undoubtedly help the entire Univerboon for the university. penalty from such activity in a way sity System of Maryland. But that does not mean we can ignore the larger debate. The comp- that does some good, then all the better. We learned troller of Maryland, Peter Franchot, is one of the most from Prohibition in the 1920s that government always vocal opponents to legalizing slots. He cites “the crime, fails when it takes a position rigidly based on moral the corruption, the broken families, the welfare [and] objection. The human propensity for vice is as strong a the gambling addiction that flows from this vice” as rea- force as any. The best we can hope for is a tolerable accommodation, like the one that has been achieved sons to oppose slot machines. Gambling is undeniably a vice and also a potential with smoking. Government should legalize slots but addiction. However, the suggestion that slot machines vigorously police the illegal activities associated with would lead to a societal collapse is simply hyperbole. them, and the government should progressively use the Gambling will always hold an attraction for large seg- revenue from slots to ensure its future in securing ments of society. Nevada figured this out a long time ago, higher education funding. The only ones who lose out as did Atlantic City, not to mention many Native Ameri- are the helpless slot jockeys, but in life, not everyone can reservations around the country. It would be instruc- can be a winner.
Our View
Editorial Cartoon: Mike O’Brien
Letters to the Editor Lighten up, women In yesterday’s letter to the editor by Kristin Wagenmann, “Misogyny in The Diamondback,” not only did Wagenmann completely miss the point of Johnny Mathias’s article, she also unknowingly perpetuated horrible stereotypes by showing off her apparent lack of a sense of humor. Now, don’t get me wrong. I am a feminist through and through, but reading about a guy wanting me to show off my legs certainly did not offend me. (Then again, I have hot legs.) But what is actually important is her letter elicited comments such as “I knew there would be an overwhelming fiery response from militant feminists with AK-47s and not enough Midol,” as posted on The Diamondback Online. Comments such as the gem stating feminists should just get a “dick stuck” in them are “misogynistic and sexist,” whereas Mathias’ were just playful and humorous. I am not saying any of these comments are justified, but all Mathias did was try to make a joke, and if we can’t laugh off comments such as “Skirt Day,” we open ourselves up to much bigger attacks. I have no doubt there is a problem with the system, but Wagenmann has directed her anger toward the wrong target, and attacks like that can actually hurt the feminist cause, not help it. My big issue with Wagenmann’s emotional and illogical response (talk about perpetuating negative female stereotypes) is her comment that because of this article she would never vote for Mathias. I would like to suggest perhaps this is one of the biggest problems we face today — people making shotgun decisions on important issues. If we looked into facts and the issues instead of taking sound clips as platforms, perhaps we would do a better job at picking candidates for public office. AMII FOLLMER SENIOR PSYCHOLOGY
Overboard on hazing I wouldn’t say I’m for hazing, but all this talk about the horrors of hazing is getting a little ridiculous. The university’s position is
legitimate: No university officials want to be tied to this kind of press, lest the quality of applicants or (perhaps even worse) funding are diminished, but what I don’t understand are the students on the campus who are up in arms over the issue. We’re all on our way to being adults. Most of us have bills; we have jobs; we have responsibility. We have the power of judgment, and we can decide who we want as friends. If your “friends” ask you to do something that makes you uncomfortable and they aren’t willing to be your friends otherwise, then perhaps you should find some other friends. It’s that simple. I’ll be the first to admit I have no firsthand knowledge of the Greek system and I’ve certainly never been hazed, but I do believe in personal responsibility, and as long as this school isn’t requiring anyone to join a fraternity or sorority, I have no problem with the practice. That’s not to say any kind of behavior can be condoned. As with every rule, there are some things just too egregious to ignore. The example of Delta Tau Delta, which includes activities that clearly and seriously cause harm, certainly cannot be excused. But the question remains: What about the kinds of hazing that are less destructive? Need we throw the baby out with the bathwater? Hazing does have value as a form of bonding, providing a common collective experience. I’m not advocating for all groups to adopt hazing as an initiation practice. I am saying, provided it does not cause serious harm, we should allow college students to choose for themselves whether or not they want to join organizations that practice hazing. Removing hazing completely takes away personal choice in the same way prohibition made alcohol illegal to everyone because of the potential moral and physical consequences of its abuse. The bottom line is people in college are sentient and autonomous and should be able to make decisions regarding their own welfare. Removing any form of hazing is a heavy restriction that suffocates the decision-making ability of students growing into adults. KAITLYN MURPHY SOPHOMORE GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS AND PHILOSOPHY
Air Your Views guest columns to between 550 and 700 words. The Diamondback welcomes your comSubmission of a letter or guest column conments. Address your letters or guest columns stitutes an exclusive, worldwide, transferable to the Opinion Desk at opinion@dbk.umd.edu. license to The Diamondback of the copyright All letters and guest columns must be in the material in any media. The Diamondsigned. Include your full name, year, major back retains the right to edit submissions for and day- and night-time phone numbers. content and length. Please limit letters to 300 words. Please limit POLICY: The signed letters, columns and cartoon represent only the opinions of the authors. The staff editorial represents the opinion of The Diamondback’s editorial board and is the responsibility of the editor in chief.
T
o all girls: You are beautiful. You are not gorgeous because of your hot body or sexy clothes. You are so lovely because you are the crown of creation. To all guys: Help us realize our dignity as women by being real men. We know we’re not blameless, but you can show strength by living up to the challenge of showing all women that they are loved — and by ignoring the alleged Skirt Day. We are all human beings, not just human bodies. When we’re inching toward middle age and the minis start to look ridiculous, shouldn’t we be assured that love will remain? Those are sweet sentiments, I know, but words are worthless compared to actions. It’s spring. The sun has returned, the cherry blossoms are at their prime, and the girls’ clothes are getting smaller. With warm weather comes the return of super-skimpy clothing. Here at the university, where we’re all trying to learn something, eventually get degrees and have some fun along the way, we’d like to think we’re building a respectful culture. Maybe the women are even finding empowerment, The Vagina Monologues notwithstanding. But when a girl can’t take more than two steps without pausing to pull down her skirt and cover a little more leg, that doesn’t signal power. It signals defeat. We live in the aftermath of the sexual revolution. Our mothers fought long and hard for the right to wear the micro-minis their moms wouldn’t let them leave the house in. They felt free, but that freedom has been twisted back on our generation. The new oppression makes young women, especially on college campuses, feel compelled to wear immodest clothing. The new feminism emphasizes the innate, dignified and unique roles of men and women. It is more interested in a cute skirt from Old Navy than a feathered thong from Victoria’s Secret, bought to peek over low-rise jeans accidentallyon-purpose. The detractors against modesty remain, and they don’t even realize they’re complicit. “It’s what’s in the stores,” says my own mother about my 16-year-old sister’s tight tank tops. “That doesn’t mean you have to buy it,” I think, “and if you keep buying it, they’ll keep making it.” Don’t think guys play no part in the new oppression. If a guy turns his head as you walk by because you’re not wearing enough clothes, then it’s his fault, too. But if he told you that your modest clothes made you look pretty, wouldn’t that be infinitely better? Guys, who would you rather date: the girl who respects herself — and you — enough to cover up or the girl who doesn’t care and won’t care even when your friends start to check her out? Don’t encourage the wild girls. Show the mild girls that you respect them, you want to protect them and you still desire them. I have to admit that my own modesty kick is a recent development. I remember the way my exboyfriend and male classmates looked at me in miniskirts and lowcut tops. The only reason I felt good was because I knew they were looking at me instead of the other girls, so they had to pay attention to my thoughts and words ... when they looked up. Men are inherently visual. Women know this; that’s why the girl is bothering to pull down her skirt instead of moving right along and blaming the men for their lack of self-control. She knows that the spring breeze shouldn’t be hitting that part of her thigh. She doesn’t want to dress that way, but what else can she do? Rebel! It’s as simple as putting on a T-shirt under that tank or buying a longer shirt for those jeans. You don’t have to ignore your heart when it reminds you that you’re more than a bunch of body parts. You have more to offer than skin. If you don’t want to be treated like an object, don’t give the world a clear view of the objects you want it to look beyond. Grab some leggings for that mini; the ’80s are in right now. No one’s saying you have to grow your hair into long pigtails and find dress patterns from Little House on the Prairie. Try some modesty on for size. You might be surprised at how beautiful you become.
Lindsay Wilcox is a senior English major. She can be reached at lwilcox@umd.edu.