http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/28/education/lists-that-rank-colleges-value-are-on-the-rise.html?src=me&ref=general

What do you think of college rankings in general when every institution purports to offer something different and have different goals? What about those focused on dollars and not what the school is actually offering in terms of education? How much do those of you currently going through the college application process rely on lists like these to make decisions and judgements about colleges?

This seems like a great idea for a Hawk Talk. I think "YOLO" is a pervasive comment in response to making risky choices, but I haven't seen it used on this scale within the Tam community. I think people seem to say it more ironically or jokingly, and in the context of doing something minorly embarrassing at a rally or in class, not when they've almost died. It would be interesting to touch on that idea of when it's appropriate and also whether or not it's genuine when people say it.

I think it's really interesting because at first it was so universally portrayed as this massive thing where every single gay couple was going out and getting married and there were lines around the block, etc. I wonder what the actual numbers are of like gay couples living together for a year or more (or something) vs. number getting married or with plans to get married. I also think that this will have an impact on general standards in our society regarding how accepted it is to have children out of marriage; if it's not culturally necessary/recommended in gay culture, it seems that marriage could start "going out of style" with everyone.

I think the amount of press this interview has gotten is really interesting. Nic brings up a good point that Brand's speaking ability and his position as a pop culture icon have probably swayed some more than the actual content of his argument. In general it seems like there's no real reason for Brand to be being asked these questions and that is the source of my mixed feelings about the interview. I agree with his sentiment that we have a flawed system that may not be able to be changed internally, and if "revolution" is the word he wants to use for the necessary change that might be fitting, but I think it is also intentionally sensationalist language that serves to get people riled up and supportive of Brand despite the fact that his argument is lacking much substance. I am rarely if ever comfortable with the argument that we shouldn't bother to vote because the system is broken; it seems like a cowardly cop-out unless some better alternative is offered and it isn't in this case. Regardless, I don't know when we started looking to celebrities for ideology, and it seems backwards to me. If a "revolution" requires more mainstream support than Occupy had, for example, that's fine, but for something as seemingly random as this to be the catalyst of change would be sad in my eyes.

My gut reaction is always to say that technology is an evil and that we should strive to be less dependent. But I know that I am equally guilty of sometimes being attached to my phone or laptop to the point where it gets in the way of interacting with the "real" world around me. We need to find a balance that allows us to "be here now" but also make use of the technological advances that we have made, since there are ways that technology can help us.

I agree that we probably need more information before we can say whether these changes are excessive or not, but it certainly seems like at first glance. What culture has been created at Redwood and here at Tam where 8 security guards at a high school dance is anything other than satire? Even though we don't know the administration's specific reasons for this change, it is reflective of overall trends that may be disturbing, but are important to address.

This article is a good example of a major publication like the New York Times trying to make written articles about serious issues more accessible to their readership through summaries and framing the issue with questions or headings. What do you think about the Tam News using some of these same strategies to increase the number of students reading more "serious" or "boring" stories (i.e. board meetings)?

Also, what are your opinions on the conflict in Syria? Do you think this article takes an unbiased perspective? Do you agree or disagree with the various experts cited?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/28/world/middleeast/the-conflict-in-syria.html?ref=world&_r=0

It is definitely sad when anyone's life gets off track, and that is magnified by the difficulties that any celebrity must face. There is clearly constant pressure of all varieties and every action is scrutinized by the media. I think, however, that people are still capable of making their own decisions and that Bynes should not be seen as a victim, just a person who has clearly gotten herself into an awful situation. The media should not give so much attention to this story, even though people are obviously drawn in by it. It makes a spiraling situation worse for everyone involves and gives her the attention that she obviously craves.

Why do you think people are so interested in celebrity gossip, especially of this nature? Do you think the media has a duty to tell stories like this one to its readers; do they have any journalistic value?

I think that the Tam News did something like this on Valentines Day. What do you think about having a running 'street style'-type section, or a style section in general?

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2013/06/03/fashion/streetstyledenimondenim.html

An interesting format that allows many people with many different perspectives to contribute their opinions on a single, controversial topic.

Also, an interesting topic; what do you think about the modern father's role in society and within families?

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/06/03/what-are-fathers-for/?ref=opinion

This article points out that we need to stop relying on the military to end sexual assault within its ranks based on its history of doing little or nothing to this end. Do you agree with this point? Is it fair to give up on our military or part of government due to lack of action? How can we take matters into our own hands?

Also, what do you think of someone writing an op/ed article about a topic they made a movie on? Do we need to read this article differently given the author's background?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/04/opinion/dont-trust-the-pentagon-to-end-rape.html?ref=opinion

Obviously this is horrible and the boy needs to face consequences. But his actions do not reflect anything about his country; there are stupid, self-centered kids who act without regard for consequences in every country. To expand this concept far more broadly, one person's act of terrorism does not represent the views of everyone in their nation, racial group, religion, etc.

I don't think that the answer to the sexual harassment of military women is to disallow women in the military. That response is fueled by rape culture and effectively blames and punishes the victim. If anyone should not be allowed to serve in the military it is the people doing the sexual harassment. However, drafting is a separate issue. I personally am opposed to the draft because I am opposed to war and I don't think that it should be assumed that citizens stand in line with all of the actions of their government and are willing to fight for them. But in the current climate of sexual harassment against women in the military, drafting women would not only be sending them to their possible death or mutilation at the hands of a cause they may or may not agree with, it would be exposing them to the risks that their colleagues and superiors pose. Perhaps the solution is to crack down on this issue and combat the problem of sexual harassment in the military, not drafting anyone, male or female, until it is addressed. Unfortunately, when stories like this come out, this seems nearly impossible.

What do you think about the argument made in this Huffington Post article? Do you agree that dress codes are fueled by homophobia and/or sexism? Or is this over-sensitive and one-sided?
What relationship does the "distracting" issue have with rape culture?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/soraya-chemaly/school-dress-code_b_2711533.html

I think that there is a different brand of Internet humor that is frequently less politically correct than typical mainstream comedy.I think that it's fine and it has its place, which is on the Internet where everyone involved understands the irony and that is not "real." When companies and regular people start listening to it in their daily life, it may become a problem. Since JC Penny chose to respond to this criticism, it was probably appropriate to remove the billboard, but it might have been better to ignore it as any resemblance between a teapot and Hitler was obviously unintentional, nothing more than an unfortunate coincidence and a forum for individuals with too much time on their hands.

I agree that it is important for the news to stay alive, and I feel somewhat nostalgic about print, but I think that we are in a transitional period in terms of our society's use of technology, and what matters most is maintaining a readership of reliable, important news; it doesn't matter so much whether that readership relies on print or online media. A different issue arises when we look at the way writing and presentation change for the Web, and that is a place where I think we can't make sacrifices; articles shouldn't be shorter to compensate for society's shorter attention span, pictures shouldn't replace words, etc. If it's possible for a school to create a print paper, that's great. But if they find that it is easier, cheaper, or more accessible to students for a publication to exist online, that transition should be made rather than losing journalism entirely.

I absolutely support this policy and would be interested to hear what the board's decision was. It seems more likely that inclusion of students' chosen pronouns, gender, and name would be accepted than gender-neutral bathrooms because the bathrooms could easily be seen as something that would cost money (if a bathroom currently being used for staff, teachers, etc. couldn't be re-purposed and new ones had to be built), but I also think that the bathrooms would have a more tangible effect. Of course calling a student by the proper name or pronoun is important but if necessary that could be changed on a student-to-student basis--though that should certainly not be necessary, and might open the system up to more direct discrimination if a teacher refused to change, didn't know, or made a mistake. The bathrooms, however, might open up more of a dialogue than a simple pronoun, and while administrations are rarely keen on controversy it would be a dialogue worth having. I like to think of Tam and Redwood as being fairly accepting of the LGBTQIA community, but it is in a passive manner and there is not often a high awareness of the issues this community faces, much less any active attempt to make day-to-day life at school less difficult for them.

It seems to me that it is important to discuss any inequality, whether it comes at the expense of men, women, black people, white people, etc. But some people are too quick to jump to the conclusion that if a group ever faces discrimination it is by definition a discriminated-against group, or, moreover, that that makes its members incapable of discriminating against others. In the case of gender, it is clear that our society has made progress in the field of women's rights. We have to be careful to define equality as a state where everyone is equal, instead of just flipping discrimination. But it is also important not to blame the evolution and progress of women's rights for any disadvantages that men face. In an ideal world none of us are discriminated against and none of us discriminate.

I think it's absolutely important and necessary for the morning-after pill to be available to younger girls. In Marin we are accustomed to hearing about "safe sex" (i.e. using protection, be it birth control, condoms, etc.) and we are lucky to have more education than most about these options and preventative methods. Still that is not the case in most of the country and the more options a girl of any age has for preventing unwanted pregnancy the better. From what I've read, this proposal would still require ID from the girls trying to get the pill, and I think that that is a problem given that the average 15 year old does not have government-issued ID, and therefore the lower age requirement exists more in theory than in practice. What one has to consider is that those girls accessing the morning after pill under this new proposal could be using it in response to a variety of situations and judging or shaming those girls, or reacting harshly to making the pill available to younger girls, plays into rape culture by potentially blaming the victim or telling girls that it's not OK to act on sexual desires.

This raises the question: what is consent? And it is a question with a clear answer. As Sarah said, there's a difference between passive behavior and consent, and, furthermore, the law defines certain situations that clearly fall into the category of rape. It often seems to me that even very educated and tolerant people discard date rape or rape where one party is intoxicated as an illegitimate problem, and resort to blaming the victim. I think that it is especially important that this issue is brought up among young people--first of all because we are at a supposedly more impressionable age where we are forming our own set of values and moral standards of right and wrong, and also because I personally feel that at Tam and likely at other high schools as well there are many blurred lines surrounding this issue. This is due both to a lack of education, and the double standards about the sexual choices of women versus those of men. Students are also at an age where their sexual identity technically falls under the jurisdiction of the law. When a monogamous couple is composed of an 18 year old and a 17 year old, many choose to have sex knowing that this could be a prosecutable offense under different circumstances. I think that this personal choice undermines the law in a way that is in my opinion completely justifiable and reasonable, but it potentially creates a culture of total disregard for the concept of rape among teens and especially among intoxicated teens.