I cried 3 times over winter break. No, I did not attend 3 funerals; I worked at a large retail chain store. I am unable to say the name of the specific store for legal reasons (really, it was in my contract), but I can assure you that I will be vehemently hinting at it throughout this article.
In Spring 2013, the CSA passed a transparency resolution for Carleton’s endowment. Students were not allowed access to information about the college’s public equity holdings, aside from the top 10 largest holdings.
Relative to the rest of the world, Carleton has a warped understanding of value. In the past week alone I have heard people call international flight fares "relatively cheap" and $40 shoes a "steal," and others agreed. There are few other places on this planet where these statements could pass as reasonable... This mentality manifests most clearly in relation to the recent proposal to bring WiFi to the Bald Spot.
Sometimes, lovely ideas are completely ridiculous. The other day at Sayles, I was asked to watch a short, graphic video about animal rights abuses and discuss my reactions. Now, I’m a vegetarian, so I was on board until one of the members of the student organization that sponsored the event began talking about complicated topics like "veganism" and "speciesism." I disagreed with him, but felt stupid and non-progressive doing so.
We cannot be blamed for where we come from, but we are always responsible for where we are going. I cannot be blamed for being from a wealthy background. However, I will always be responsible for my aspirations from this upbringing. This means that I am responsible for continuing to aspire towards where I am going even when where I come from makes this difficult. At the same time, we can show sympathy towards this difficulty.
A parting thought from fall term... happy break, friends.
This past week, my article in issue six of the Carletonian was the subject of criticisms by Maddy Halloran and Michael Goodgame. They argued that I had no evidence for my views, which were not only false and unfair to CUT, but (as Mr. Goodgame charges) downright “hateful” and “spiteful.” I concede that I ought to have more clearly referenced my sources in the piece.
Everyone wants to be loved. It’s as simple as that. While mulling over this week’s Viewpoint topic, I couldn’t come up with anything clever or witty to say. No matter how hard I tried, it just ended up sounding cheesy.
If a stranger on the street asked me about the dating culture at Carleton, I’d likely tilt my head, squint my eyes and let out a long, uncertain “um”--because the fact remains: I don’t sense that there even is an overwhelming dating culture at Carleton.
So for the first time this term we have more space in the Viewpoint than we have articles to plop in (I’ll cut y’all some slack given the 8th week workload you probably have…), which means I guess I’ve got an hour and a half to come up with 800 words on a topic I’m hilariously unqualified to write about: the Carleton hook-up/dating scene. Should be fun.
There is so much wrong with Hanley’s article that it’s hard to find a starting point. His commentary is so lopsided, so unsubstantiated, so ambiguous, and so factually incorrect that it barely even deserves a response that has any semblance of clear-headedness or articulation.
I was disappointed by your portrayal of the CUT in last week’s issue of the Carletonian. Yes, I happen to live with three members of the CUT senior class, so some may say that I’m a little biased in their favor, but I would like to point out a few specific issues I think any student athlete would have with your article.