Pray tell how much I should tolerate you?

After completing the most  recent BadCatholic blogpost I began, per usual, to peruse the comments. Some new internetly anonymous had commented, but also those usual ones who tend to comment on all Mr. Barnes articles. 


A conversation ensued in which a certain commentee decided for his own personal use of ad hominum attack, to mock Franciscan, referring to it as "Stupidville". 


One of the regulars, who goes by "Alexandra" replied, 
                    "I know! I was talking to my husband about this yesterday and we both agreed. Resumes from universities like Franciscan will always go off of my desk and straight into the shredder." 


Wow...that tolerance for you. To add icing to her tolerant cake she later qualified, 

"I'd prefer to work with people who went to college in the real world."

It would appear that those who so vehement-ally wish everyone be open to everyone's way of living and "tolerance" is not actually tolerant. 

When people consider someone coming from an Ivy League school, its because they know they will be qualified because they went to an academically prestigious school, not because its liberal, or conservative. When people consider someone coming from a conservative school like Franciscan University they should probably, as concerns the hiring process, look to the actual academics of the school, not the person's beliefs. 

Really what Alexandra here is stating is that she wants to be around only like minded people, who agree with her on most every point. 

On a brave University's response to HHS mandate...

Its old news by now, but many are beginning to forget the gravity of the situation concerning the HHS mandate.

To prepare for this, true Catholic organizations are gearing up and making changes. 

Recently Franciscan University announced its new policy, the only response allowed by conscience, and furthermore, it will not allow the secular forces of all that is Kathleen Sibelius(strong proponate of aforementioned mandate, and self proclaimed Catholic) to permeate its staunchly Catholic saturated campus. 

Read this great piece by Marc Barnes. 

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/badcatholic/2012/05/your-move-obama.html

Ignorance is bliss...

...especially if you want to get angry and lash out about the subject about which you are initially ignorant.

Two weeks ago the Pro-Life club at my school, of which I am a member, organized an event to raise awareness about the murderous act of abortion.

The display, which pictured baby clothes strung out on a clothesline with a red x through every fourth, was put up on a Monday morning, early, by myself and my groups wonderful President.

Tuesday morning the display looked like this,

Ah...very mature fellow University compadres. If by mature, I here mean puerile and froth with pusillanimity(I just wanted to use that word sooo bad today). 

In response to this, our group simply put it back up. 

This display was very important to our group.To have someone rip it down showed to us something many of us already realized: the dissent of thought, and more specifically, a dissent from truth. 

Further confirming this dissent were the things I heard whilst sitting next to said display, to get a feel for the reaction, which it most assuredly spurred.  

"1 out of 4 dies; that means 3/4 lives! Thats enough."

"O my gosh! Haha, according ot Guttmacher."

"Abortion is hilarious."

"If you really care about babies then donate those clothes to the babies."

"What the fuck?"

"Thats a lie."

"Tear them down."

"I don't want to see that, I don't want to look at that."

"This isn't what we should be worried about."

The musings of the ignorant and confused- but lets not give them the benefit of the doubt, shall we? 

Correction, 

           The musings of the willingly ignorant. 

At the core again I find a dissent from truth to be a problem. Not only am I convinced that dissent from truth is the problem, but an apathy towards finding out the real truth of a situation, before silly judgements are made, or vandalism acted.

None of those who claimed our statistic to be wrong moved to correct it, or to seek actual knowledge of the subject. 

None of those who for several nights vandalized the display, shrouded by the darkness, had the gall to openly oppose the message in the light of day. 

When ignorance leads to uneducated statements and actions, it is no longer bliss. 

I respect my University's dealing with these problems, and even applaud their interactions with my group as having been most helpful. It seems ironic though, with the ideology of the University being "tolerance", that students would partake in actions that are contrary to this ideology. 

In the words of Martin Luther King, 

          "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."

Psychology Inherently Stupid

                                                                 
I have a propensity to be rather crass concerning items which to me seem to be both blatant and of themselves, stupid.

Psychology is only one of them, I am sorry to say.

Of all the classes that I have taken in this fine year, and I have enjoyed many of them, Psychology is by far the utmost revolting to me.

The offense this time around,
A stage in development, as noted by textbook, that we all must go through to be characterized as adults,

"Postformal thought: recognition that truth may vary from situation to situation...that ambiguity and contradiction are the rule rather than the exception, and that emotion and subjective factors must begin to play a role in thinking and formulating truth."

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
The first two phrases follow the stream of most of the technical jargon the book is bursting with.

The last one, however, screamed at me.
Literally(not really literally) SCREAMED at me.

Thoughts of hunting down the books authors and demanding an answer to the atrocity began to possess my mind. 

It was rather fortunate for all parties concerned, then, that I did not take this course of action, and instead decided to refute the silly claim, as what it is, stupid, right here, right now. 

First of all, it is quite a loaded claim if you disagree with it.   

            Here, I mean that you either lose by falling into the rationalist's trap, coming to their conclusions, or you lose because clearly, if you do not experience this stage, you do not think like a sophisticated adult. 

Au contraire,  fortunately for the more logical of us, this is simply not the case. 

  Determining outcomes and coming to conclusions using emotion and subjective factors is both fallacious and stupid. 

Though I would love to expound upon this, I have already spent hours composing a rather concise post 

concerning this very issue, namely, the role of feelings in determining truth. 

http://highereducationbogus.blogspot.com/2011/12/veritas-truth.html

                                            Nota bene part three. 

Stupid Professor Quote of the Day

Ah...the joys of my college Campus.
Don't get me wrong, I am enjoying this term at college exceedingly, my favorite so far. I feel as if I have a better support system, my own study program, classes for the most part that I thoroughly enjoy, and motivation and drive.
I have to admit though, it peeves me to hear when professors blatantly misinform entire classes with unnecessary and insipid bits of information. Despite the seeming harmlessness of the statements that they make, the implications are not without consequence, and such professors are sending a message(often false) and either furthering their own agendas, or stroking their own egos.

 The statement in question came in my "Human Development" course. We were going over the stages of development from Conception, to Birth.

Without further ado, the statement,
          "By the way, a woman in not considered pregnant until implantation occurs."

Wait....what? Okay did the research. After extensive googling(yes, I just made google into a transitive verb) and finding about 10 websites with articles on this very issue I found multiple answers. About half agreed.
The predominant one I found with this opinion had some other fun stuff(note sarcasm) to say on the issue.

"When Does Pregnancy Begin?

Although widespread, definitions that seek to establish fertilization as the beginning of pregnancy go against the long-standing view of the medical profession and decades of federal policy, articulated as recently as during the Bush administration. In fact, medical experts—notably the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)—agree that the establishment of a pregnancy takes several days and is not completed until a fertilized egg is implanted in the lining of the woman's uterus. (In fact, according to ACOG, the term "conception" properly means implantation.) A pregnancy is considered to be established only when the process of implantation is complete (see box, page 8)."

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/08/2/gr080207.html

Its the Guttmacher Site. This nonsense and propaganda jargon is to be expected. I expect my professor had these implications in mind when he made this statement, that contraception is alright, because its only causing death to the baby by not allowing it to implant. It then goes on to redefine conception and the like, to fit the agenda that the morning after pill, and other abortafacients and contraceptives, are alright.

Another site I found said something quite opposite. When the term of the pregnancy is considered, in order to calculate development of the baby, it is calculated from the point of the first day of your last menstrual period.
http://www.babyzone.com/pregnancy/week/article/1st-week-pregnancy

Let me get this straight, you're not pregnant until implantation, but your doctor will calculate your pregnancy as starting from a time period that is significantly before that? That just doesn't make any sense.

Dear Professors,
  Stop spewing forth lies, and if you are not sure on the subject, you probably shouldn't pronounce your opinions to the world, and especially not to highly impressionable college students, as if they were facts.

Dear Abortion Mills and Your Kind,
  Stop spewing contradictory nonsense. We see right through your agenda, and in due time, even those with their eyes firmly locked shut, will see through you as well. 

The digestive system - an animation

This reminded me of the play from junior year...

Outdated, but fascinating

Textbook Assumptions are the Sheep's Facts

As to the point of our last post a month ago.  I figured I keep with the same topic but share with you a link. There are a few videos that help set the facts strait.
Over Population is a Myth

More posts are soon to follow I hope. I'm in Sociology class this quarter so wish me luck.

No support assumption from Nutrition Book

Question: Overpopulation is the most serious problem that faces the world today.
           
               True or False

I put false, the answer was true. Scary that that is an excepted fact nowadays. Thanks you textbook for opening my eyes! 

Veritas: Truth

"What has happened to 'truth'?" Is the question that comes to mind as I stand adversary to the modern school of thought that I see has permeated my college Campus.

Here I'm not questioning that there is truth, I am simply expressing my own agitation at the daily attacks on this truth that I have encountered.

Truth to put it simply is - that which is.

As simply as this concept may seem, it must be beyond the comprehension of many of my fellow college goers.

As I sit and simply walk about my campus, I hear tidbits of what it, quite plainly, pure stupidity, ignorance, and what is true close-                  
                                                                                                       mindedness".
**********************************************************************************
1. Stupid.


Yes, I said it, stupid.  There is a lot of stupid going on here, for certain. Could it be from the conversations I most definitely hear everyday that I have gleaned this? Is it from the fraud that is the so called "Honor's" program I am in? Is it the university system crumbling down upon itself? Or could it be the overall stupidity and lack of thinking skills I see exhibited by my fellow students?

Its all of them, I believe:

*Why in a college setting are there remedial lessons?
                              -And why are a fair amount of the incoming freshman taking these remedial lessons?
                                              Did their education fail them so much? And yet we continue to see nothing              
                                              wrong with our teaching institutions?(Not to mention that I have looked up the
                                              graduation rate for NKU and it is[brace yourself]....a whopping 34%).
*Why in a college setting are students unable to engage in any form of mature debates even on 'tender', we'll call it, issues?
                              -Now, I'm happy that NKU offers this "Communications" class. Here they attempt to
                                teach at least some form of logic, in their instructions on debate.
                              -Unfortunately they must not be making much progress, for even the articles I            
                                occasionally peruse in The Northerner are aflame with fallacies.

Examples I have encountered on Campus:
                             1. In my drawing of analogies, not false ones, I once have been greeted not with an actual legitimate rebuttal of the argument that I presented, but a "How dare you compare that to that! You sicken me."
                       Well, that says....nothing. Absolutely nothing.
                       
                             2. When I say I don't agree with gay marriage as a right, or homosexuality as an accepted norm: "Well, you're just a f---ing homophobe/bigot/etc etc."
                     
                      Oh. So what you label me as invalidates my statement, and all the points I can and will make in support of my statement?
                      -Wrong, my friend. Not only have you shown yourself an idiot(now wait for the reason) by your ad hominem attacks, but you didn't offer any rebuttal or any supports of your evident polar opinion, and for all I know you I have none.
**********************************************************************************
2. Ignorant
                 Figures, right? You can't be stupid without being initially ignorant about the matter which you are being stupid about.
                                            I'm not simply pinpointing the lack of an authentic culturing.
                                                    And, NO, I'm not talking about, nor do I care about what happened on the last episode of the totally realistic to life show, GLEE!....that's not culture...thats just sad. :(
                                                   These kids aren't cultured. Shakespeare? Nope. Literature?    
                                                   ...Twilight(eek!). Poetry? Free verse(also known as stilted line prose).
                                                   Art, modern.
-My reaction is yuck. Yes, yuck. I find this quite disgusting. An indication of this culturing, or more correctly, lack thereof, is the "freshman bookpick" of this year at NKU:

PRESENTING Kabuki a graphic novel(aka comic book)

 that will give you nightmares and waste your time.

 ...kind of backwards...I got over picture books 12 or so years ago...

when I learned to read. 

How 'bout ignorance in thought?

1. SoulOfDiscretion: "Ha ha..it always amuses me when people refer to themselves in the 3rd person."

                            -"Whats the 3rd person?" ....conversation killed...

2. In an argument, after I referenced Senior Aristotle, 

                            -'Oh, and he lived recently'(note sarcasm).

So...he is old and that matters...why?

           Isn't truth eternal and unchanging?

           -We still listen to classical music, yes?

           -And continue to read and esteem the classics above the modern bs authors happen to be producing?

           -And study history?         

                         Clearly age doesn't ever suggest something is invalid or unrelatable. (Such thought is results in  

                         the heresy known as Progressivism. Alas.)

Though I could elaborate, ever so much more on ignorance, I'll get to my final point. 

**********************************************************************************

3. Close-mindedness

        Oh yes, I went there. 

               Touchy subject...Mayhaps we shouldn't discuss it. 

                                Thats the college standpoint. 

                                If you might 'offend' someone, don't say anything at all. 

Unfortunately this standpoint doesn't promote thought. If anything it discourages it. 

So let us analyze this scenario.  To engage in thought processes can be referred to as open-mindedness. And so, if you deny, discourage, and suppress thinking on any given subject you are being close-minded.

Alright, I follow you.

Scenarios!!!
          There are a plethora of personal instances and examples I could use to illustrate my point. I don't wish to antagonize anyone in particular, so I will use a typical contended issue to demonstrate.

Scenario One:
-After arguing for a considerable amount of time on the issue it ends as thus:
The person ignores my last refutation of what I have said, and instead of coming up with a rebuttal, which they would be able to do if they had one, uses this timeless cop-out,

"Well I believe women should be able to get abortions
and choose
because obviously they should be able to. I feel its a right."

-1st Statement: Let me see if I've got this right. Woman should be able to get abortions...because woman should be able to? Can't argue with that logic. Wrong. It isn't logic. Its sounds as stupid as it...sounds. 

                                        Here is a depiction on perhaps a less weighty matter: 

 'Star Wars is the best film, because Star Wars is the best film.'

Sound stupid? 

                              Yes...yes it does.

Wanna know what this sucker of  a fallacy is called? 

"Begging the question",  and yes it is a fallacy(I learned about such things Freshman year of highschool) and invalidates your point in an argument. It says nothing, it means nothing, and ultimately in debate serves as a subliminal admission of guilt.

2nd Statement:  'I feel as  if its their right.'

Issue aside, let's analyze the phrase that, to  any educated mind should send up little red flags: "I feel."

Alrighty then, 

1. Why do your feelings validate your argument as a support(or lack thereof)? 

2. Lets looks at feelings in the real world, shall we?

         Perhaps the legal system in America could benefit from this feelings policy. Instead of evidence, support, and proof decisions should be based on how one 'feels' on any lawbreaking issue. 

         Imagine a lawyer, attempting to defend his client with, "I feel as if the suspect is not guilty of murder/arseny/theft." 

          ....or policeman pulls you over and gives you a ticket because he felt as if you were speeding?

                                               Sounds legit, right? 

                                                                                                              WRONG.

                                                                                                                           In fact, it sounds ridiculous.

Ultimately, the person you debated with in this situation and won against(yes, you've won) can not admit they are wrong, and have copped out, and are continuing to delude themselves. 

Scenario Two:

          "End of discussion, I'm not answering your questions or your statement, I believe what I believe."

Hello major cop-out!!!!

        The message I can glean from this type of statement:

                                       1. I don't have a support.

                                       2. I don't like where this is going. 

                                       3. I am losing. 

Again, lets play fill in the scenario to illustrate just how ridiculous this sounds. 

1.You: "You can't say the earth is flat because there is substantial evidence that it is not. In fact, it is an established fact that it is not."

         Retort: "I'm not discussing this any further.

                              I believe it is flat, that's it."

2.You: "Incest is a wrong. The medical defects alone bear witness to this."

         Retort: "I'm not gonna stop believing its okay, it is. I'm not talking about this anymore."

Sound like legitimate supports, right? 

        Translation: I believe this, because I believe this....?

Is someone cutting off the oxygen to their brains? NOOOOO, these are NOT legitimate supports.

In fact, anyone pushing them we would probably label as 'loons' and the very minimum 'unbalanced'. 

Both these scenarios share one common theme. 

                                                            TRUE CLOSE-MINDEDNESS

Not the fake/faulty close-mindedness that many clear thinkers are accused of today. 

You: "I think abstinence is a 100% way to avoid premarital pregnancies, STD, HIV, other sexually transmitted diseases."

                 After a an eye roll, and a nice and long condescending look, your combatant replies,

                                            "Well, aren't we being a little close-minded?" 

What?! No actual refutation of the point I made? Huh? ...just a blanket statement that ultimately means NOTHING!!

-Flip back to the previous scenarios.

Such phrases as, 'End of Discussion', 'I'm not discussing this any further' and 'I'm not talking about this anymore' are pawns of those that practice true close-mindedness.

They outright scream: 'I'm not opening my mind to thinking, I'm closing it to protect my faultily formed deductions.'

Would we take that from a criminal on the stand who has agreed to testify?
"Well. I don't think I'm guilty. I'm also not going to say anything on the matter though."
                                              Bet that goes great with the jury.

Again, rendered ridiculous.
                        Sounds to me like the criminal is just afraid.
**********************************************************************************To conclude, truth is attacked on all fronts. To preserve it(yes it exists). We must point out idiocy when we see it. We must argue for what we believe in a mature and sophisticated manner. Finally, we must be martyrs for the truth.

In the words of G.K. Chesterton, a quote given to me by a dear friend:

           

The Northerner, Welcome to My School Distributed Newsletter

This issue is actually from a week and a half ago, but its still "interesting"...

Highlights. Think what you will. 

"Mother Reflects on Son's Decision"

"Good Game: The Future of esports"

"Housing Options leave out one group: gender-neutral" ...written by Staff member ...thick with themes of progressiveness...

"National Role Call Salutes fallen Soldiers"

"NKU V.E.T.S honors those who were lost"

"High Priority Resolution Introducesd" -this article is about getting a Red-box on Campus, and is of the utmost importance...

"Senators Continue to Say Their Goodbyes"

"Univ. seeks more state funding" Just looked up the Grad rate...34%....and they want MORE money?

"Mock Trial Offer Real-Life Experience"

"Men Sprout Manly Facial Hair" ....would be quite surprised if they sprouted womanly facial hair...

"Collision Calls for Heightened Awareness"

"Prepare Early for Winter Weather"

"Two Sororities to Join NKU Greek life"

"Students Occupy: Nationwide movement coming to NKU" ...already posted on the fiasco...

"Artist's Surge Through Gallery"

"English Opera Breaks Barriers"...more non tradition. Cast it out! We need it not! We will attempt to make English sound as pretty, and then pretend it does :)

"Gender-Neutral Housing A Possibility"

"OVC rejects NKU bid for Division 1" I could care less about sports, except when it means rising tuition. Thank you OVC, thank you, thank you.

Interesting Article

Thought I'd share this article! Its pretty interesting. Read on...and on...

Click Me To Read Me!

HAPPY LAST WEEK OF CLASSES EVERYONE! :)

Intelligent Professor Quote of the Day

"The Crusaders were not chivalrous. Chivalry was something that they had to learn from the Muslims in Spain."

And the latest...

Report: More Recent College Graduates Making Extra Money By Tutoring High School Teachers

NOVEMBER 3, 2011 | ISSUE 47• http://www.theonion.com/

They're Occupying the Crap Out of That Post

When I entered the Student Union at NKU, as I often do, many different groups and goings on all fought a brilliant battle for my attention. There was the Cancer Awareness Table, kudos to those who volunteered to man that one, The Common Ground Table, hosting a raffle to raise money for I know not what, the Military, among many many others. I sat down to enjoy my book before I ate my lunch and I noticed a woman who was attempting to give out some kind of packets to the students entering and exiting the building. Most people brushed pass quickly and didn't even give the woman a first look, let alone a second one. I decided to go over and see what exactly she was handing out, that was so abhorrent to my fellow students.

To my surprise I was given a wee little bumper sticker, as well as a paper, explaining the connection perhaps?



"We are the 99%" proclaimed the sticker in big bold letters.

I know for a fact by Occupier standards that I would qualify as part of the 99%. I, however, protest that my status as a "99% er" is being used to serve someone's "cause", "mission", "agenda", whatever you call it, especially in the light of my disagreement with the movement in general.


The paper handout I was given, besides an invitation to join the 3:00 P.M. occupy movement, which I did briefly make an appearance at in order to get some information and ask questions,  made four key points:

1. more and more American students are choosing to forego their college education because they can no longer afford it.
2. Tuition costs keep rising.
3. financial aid continues to be cut or reduced in most state and federal budget proposals
4. Quality of Education continues to plunge

Some of the points actually hold some weight. Let's take it point by point.

 - "more and more American students are choosing to forego college education because they can no longer afford it"

Congrats Americans! I think its good that American students are no longer foolish enough to borrow money that they know they can't pay back. I think its disastrously wrong, however to assume that its impossible to get a hold of some funds in order to go to college. 

I would say its an irrelevant point concerning this 1% issue though. 

 -"tuition cost keep rising" 

This is undeniably true. 

When I asked the woman representing the Occupy movement, she seemed about as upset as I was about this issue. I personally am responsible for paying for my own college education, so of course tuition cost is an issue. 

"Tuition has gone up over 600%," said she. 

This seems valid enough, considering that I've discussed the huge difference in cost of college just between when my parents attended NKU, and the current going rate I must now pay. 

"Where's the money going?" asked I.

Her claim was that its the higher ups, such as the president, being paid too much. 

Alright, how 'bout some facts then?

None were present to verify this claim, making it impossible to make an educated opinion concerning this issue. 

But another claim was given, a red-herring of sorts, and perhaps an underlying theme, as it were. 

The gist was that our teachers aren't being paid enough, nor do they have enough benefits at our public institutions, especially our universities and colleges. 

Again, the question of what does this have to do with the 1% crossed my mind. This didn't seem like the program professed at all at the beginning of the "Occupy Movement". 

The last point, and most important to me as a student, was:

"the quality of education continues to plunge."

Academics should come first, in my mind, so quality is an ideal that a university should strive to make a reality. 

That the 1% are to blame? How so?

The spokesperson's connection was that the teachers just go to whoever pays them the highest.

I'm not sure what that has anything to do with quality, or more importantly since you occupiers claim it as your slogan, the 1%. 

Its evident from many statistics that more spending has no effect on higher quality. The results of an institution essentially at the beck and call of its teacher's unions is as follows:

Besides the four points of dissent mentioned in the handout there was within the article a section labeled, "Pledge of Non-Violence"

A caption artistically positioned above a picture of a man who has become the stereotype of all that is peace, Gandhi. 

Their statement,

"We reject violence, including property destruction."

But why you may ask? Read on...

"because we recognize that it undermines popular support and discourages the broadest possible  participation among the 99%."

They're peaceful then only because they want support? Not because its THE LAW? (Hello 1st Amendment:  the right to peacefully assemble).

So they're not peaceful because violence isn't the answer to solve the many issues pinpointed by the movement?

As before mentioned, I did decideto stop by and talk with the Occupiers of NKU. The woman I spoke with was nothing but kind, and full of information to give me. I did expect a bigger turnout though. Standing about the entrance of the Student Union were no more than 5 people. My thoughts as I walked up, "they're occupying the crap out of that pole over there." 

They gave me another paper. In fact, they gave me an entire pile so that I could disperse them among my friends. 

The first part, opens with a poem written by a pastor who had been imprisoned in a Nazi concentration camp. 

This is applicable, why? Is this a warning that if I don't support this movement it will come back to haunt me? Are you equating the Occupy movement to standing up to the Nazi's? 

This poem was followed by an article by Nicholas D. Kristof, from the New York Times, read article here.

Very good point Mr. Kristof, and your point is quite revolutionary(note sarcasm). I'm against crony capitalism as much as the next person, but redistribution of the wealth, in any manner shouldn't be the answer. Pointing out crony capitalism isn't a novel idea, as much as you protesters pretend it is. 

I was against the movement from the beginning, but I had no idea that the occupiers were so very concerned with my education before. Perhaps it was just that media sensationalism distorting  views on all fronts, or perhaps, when they decided to come to college campuses, they decided to make it sound more appealing to college students:

                      Flip side of their points: ....lower tuition....more financial aid....more quality....

Sounds great, right? 

I must admit, I'm getting rather mixed signals from the Occupy Campus movements, and the Occupy Wall Street movement. Are these the real points and issues they are asking our nation to address, or are these issues just shading some other agenda? I'm not sure the Occupiers know, so at least we're in the same boat.

To quote Steven Crowder, "I don't know, I just don't know." 

Peace Out,

-But only cause I want your support!

Intelligent Professor Quote of the Day + Wonderful Website

Professor: "You only had to breathe Jewish in order to be massacred by Christians in medieval Europe."

http://www.westernyouth.org/

"Let There Be...Coffee."

Found this masterpiece in a coffee shop in Madison.

 

If I had one wish, it would be to see the university function for just one day without Starbucks.

I'm a sucker for their wonderful creations just like everyone else, but I still suffer pangs of guilt if I go there more than once a week. It's scary to watch the endless lines of students there every morning, blowing $4 on a cup of coffee, and to know that most of them have 5-figure numbers of debt hanging over their heads. Sometimes I wonder if any of them even realize it. 

Sexually Insensible

In my Success in College and in Nursing class there was quite a stir as some student health advisers entered the classroom. I heard a girl behind me say, "Is that a dick? That looks like a dick." Of course I am thinking, "Come on! Why does everyone always have to be so perverse and see everything through a sexual lens." However, when I turned my head I saw what was quite clearly a model of a human penis. Oh how I regret not stomping out of class right then and there.

The student health advisers had been invited to give a presentation on staying healthy in college. They talked about eating healthy and exercising for about five minutes. They talked about sexual health for thirty. I'm not going to scar you with the details but they did say how to properly put on a condom-- I'm sorry, actually they had a student volunteer to put a condom on the model they so kindly provided. Then they asked for a round of applause. I am so sorry to report that I was the only one not clapping.

Do I think sex is evil? Do I shun all sexual intercourse? Of course not! I believe that sex is something sacred and therefore needs to be treasured and not abused. It is not something one should talk about in public. Sex is under-appreciated by all who abuse the use of it.

College students talk about sex the same way young children talk about going to the bathroom. It is with giggling and a naughty sense of rebellious pleasure. It disgusts me. The very atmosphere on campus is permeated with sex. It reaches into conversations, into posters, and now even into classrooms. Sexual thoughts float into your consciousness at the slightest provocation. College campuses are infected by the sex-craze.

Chesterton said, "No restriction on sex seemed so odd and unexpected as sex itself.... It showed not an exaggerated sensibility to sex, but a curious insensibility to it."

Got Spandex?

I wonder as I walk around campus. From many fashion-minded critics' perspectives, it seems that the general mass of female college students dress in UGG boots, sweatpants, and hoodies. My expectations upon entering college ran something along those lines.

Lo and behold,  the situation is even worse.

It was bad enough when the sweatpants were around. They boldly proclaimed, "I don't care!" Yes, they were unfashionable and unattractive, but the point is that we  knew that they were and made no pretenses about it.

Since then, black Spandex has crept into the female closets and is clinging to college girls' legs like a second layer of skin. 

The rest of the world must have missed the memo that said that it was attractive to clad yourself in a manner that allows every twitch of the muscles in your behind to be painfully visible.

Either someone declared a contest to see who could successfully squeeze the most body fat into the slenderest tubes of fabric,  or Spandex contains a certain brainwashing quality that gifts  its wearers with an ability to forget their weight. 

I say this because there is no distinction made between those who weigh 100 pounds and those who weigh 300 pounds. Regardless of their size, they all wear Spandex. 

And I'm not suggesting that leggings look good on either type. It doesn't matter if you're overweight or underweight, no one wants to see what you're forcing us to see.

The major issue here is not the appalling spectacle that these leggings inevitably present. The issue is that said leggings are worn with obvious confidence, as though they make the wearer a potential candidate for a Parisian catwalk.

And don't give me the "I wear them because they're comfortable" line. We all know that's not true, and that you feel as awkward as you look.

Let's bring back the sweatpants, please.

My eyes are starting to hurt.