Within days of the miners’ rescue, talks of documentaries and feature films were rampant. Many production studios were scrambling to secure the rights to the made-for-film story of the men. An international frenzy of reporters begged for interviews. Information was released indicating that the miners had come to a contractual agreement while still underground concerning the expected fame and the money that would result from their entrapment. The men apparently promised never to reveal personal details of how they endured those first 17 days before contact was established with the outside world. They also agreed to evenly divide all future proceeds from what can best be described as a filmmaker’s dream.

Tragedy turned heroic rescue—a better byline couldn’t be made up. There’s much more to the story though, and while all the future movies, books and interviews might paint a picture of those dramatic 69 days below ground, it’s what happened above the surface and after the rescue that might be even more revealing.

The Chilean President Sebastian Pinera found himself in the middle of a political opportunity and milked the successful rescue for all its worth. The government granted the press nearly free access to the site allowing for unlimited online streaming of the president hugging each man who emerged from the capsule, one by one.

Rumors have surfaced in the UK that Spainard Javier Bardem is to star in a movie already in its production stages. The men haven’t even adjusted to their lives above ground, and actors attempting to tell their stories are already replacing them.

One month into the crisis, Nova, a documentary airing on most PBS stations, captured the story of miners trapped underground and the science used to rescue them. This seemingly undercover reality television show was started before the men were back above ground.

What does it say about our world when men who are stuck underground on the verge of insanity spend their time drafting a contract to ensure their financial security? And what does it say when movies about the event are already being made? Isn’t it too soon? The very personal struggles of the miners and their families have been commercialized, and there is no going back. Miners have been turned into sellable characters, logos on a billboard and Halloween costumes. We can’t get enough, and so they will keep giving. But the truth is, who can blame them? These men saw their opportunity for fame and fortune and took it by the reins. The promise of a new kind of life is a powerful thing, even if it comes from half a mile underground.

Many people have experienced the elements associated with fraternity formals that I described in my article. Those elements, of course, are not always present, and some of the comments, e-mails and direct responses that have been stimulated as a result of the article emphasized this point. Reactions from both ends of the spectrum, including everything from outright anger to long-awaited excitement, further illustrate that this is a topic begging for discussion. Yes, some dates go as friends with no expectations of hooking up, others are in relationships and that changes everything, and many attend formals unsure of their intentions. These examples were obvious to me, and therefore, since my goal in writing this opinion piece was not to describe every element of formal but rather to bring attention to a very real issue, I didn’t feel they were necessary to include.

I was in no way trying to insinuate that all guys take girls to formal for the sole purpose of having sex with them. In fact, I explicitly stated in my article that I was glad to be going with someone I knew, because this was not my experience. To all the men whose egos were bruised by my article: There are many courteous gentlemen in fraternities. My date for the last formal I attended is a perfect example. Many of my friends are in fraternities, and these are friends whom I love and respect.

I never intended the article to be a commentary on Greek life. Since it was printed, however, I’ve been surprised to find that a mentality exists among some (not all) members of the Greek community here at Wash. U.: In more or fewer words, “You’re either with us or against us.” This logic is bizarre given the number of people in Greek life with differing outlooks and perspectives. Wash. U. Greek life, in particular, prides itself on involving many kinds of students, and therefore, the community shouldn’t be surprised that its members will have opposing opinions on the system and the traditions that make up sororities and fraternities.

I am not asserting that the expectations I spoke of in my article are more prevalent in Greek life, but rather that they exist and manifest themselves in different ways from the world outside of college. An individual can still be in support of Greek life even if he or she sees certain aspects of it as cause for concern. If criticism only came from outside the Greek community, it would be clear that Greek organizations weren’t examining themselves closely enough. I am a proud member of Greek life here at Wash. U., but like any organization at any university, it isn’t perfect. The discourse that has resulted can only strengthen Wash. U.’s Greek organizations.

Such public conversation about this topic has hit a nerve; I think that much is clear. The article I wrote is in no way broad or narrow enough to cover all the elements of this issue. The underlying mentality I described as being behind fraternity formals does not only apply to fraternity formals and does not always apply to fraternity formals. It does, however, apply. The article was just a starting point for greater discussion and examination. Anyone who says simply, “This wasn’t my experience and therefore it isn’t true and doesn’t exist,” is far too self-involved and concerned with image to give this topic the consideration it deserves. The pressure to hook up at formal poses a serious issue. The fact that such a debate has been stimulated only further emphasizes this point.

Alissa is a sophomore in Arts and Sciences. She can be reached via e-mail at arrotbla@artsci.wustl.edu.

It is a given, for instance, that if a boy asks you to his formal, you will be sleeping in a bed with him. The implications of this are quite obvious. He pays for the formal, the meals and the hotel room, generally expecting something in return. I find this logic to be absolutely ridiculous. The idea that when a girl says “yes” to formal she is in effect saying “yes” to anything and everything her date has planned for the weekend is not just ignorant; it’s degrading.

I do not mean to intend that guys, or even the more specific fraternity brothers, are solely to blame. Girls play an equal role in accepting the traditions that revolve around formals as uncontested rules. When we fail to question the greater implications of such expectations, we are only further promoting the behaviors we hope to avoid. If you go to a formal and don’t want to hook up with a guy and do it anyway, if you fake sick instead of just saying “no,” or if you feel guilty for not giving your date what he wants, you are only enabling an ideology that is clearly outdated and even immoral in its nature.

I have admittedly played a role in perpetuating this fraternity formal mentality. Once at a formal, my friend felt uncomfortable sleeping in a bed with her date. “Just do it for one night,” I told her. “He brought you here, he paid for the room, and he doesn’t want to share a bed with a guy.” In a not-so-subtle sense, I was telling her to suck it up, to put her needs below those of her date. I was sending the message that her feelings, therefore, were less important than his. This sexist attitude is at the core of every stereotype against women and every abusive relationship. If our feelings are less significant, then we are less significant, and if we are less significant, then we give men even greater incentives to take advantage of us. It is not a stretch to say that when we put aside our own priorities, even for one weekend, we are only a close step away from more catastrophic forms of misogyny.

Boys can’t buy our emotions any more than they can buy our bodies. We say “yes” and then change our minds; we think we have feelings for someone and then realize it’s all wrong, and we agree to go to formal but still aren’t sure that we want to have sex. That doesn’t make us fickle girls—it makes us human.

I’ve apologized again and again for my advice on that night, and I still consider it one of my biggest regrets. What I should have said, and what I’ll say to all the girls invited to formals who are stressing over the events of the evening, is this.

Do what you want to do, and trust yourself. If you don’t want to sleep in that bed, don’t do it. If you don’t want to hook up with him, tell the truth. If he’s pissed and done with you and mad that he spent all this money and the girl he took isn’t going to have sex with him…he can go screw himself, literally. You are not alone. So many other girls and guys at that same formal are worrying about the same thing. If the pressure was off, if the sleeping arrangements weren’t predetermined, and if we stopped worrying about our end-of-the-night hookup, everyone would be having a lot more fun.

Formal doesn’t have to be a trap, though. There is no need to have a catch, a contracted clause, or even a simple expectation of a hookup. You can be a great date without sacrificing yourself. Just like we aren’t predictable, automated machines that can sign away two nights of our life without the slightest hesitation, I’m willing to bet that the same expectations place unwanted pressure on the many guys attending formals.

So, the next time a date tries to guilt you into sleeping with him, remember that it may be his formal but its still your choice. When you take away the fancy dresses and nice suits, you’re only left with a guy paying for a girl to have sex with him, and we all know what that’s called.

Alissa is a sophomore in Arts and Sciences, she can be reached at arrotbla@artsci.wustl.edu.

While the last five months of research may not have resulted in the happy study abroad ending I would have imagined, I have gained a significant amount of insight into the complicated web that is the study abroad system at Wash. U. The department’s lack of transparency contributes to much difficulty in navigating the abroad programs, applications and petitions.

The Overseas Programs Web site says, “The goal of international study through the College of Arts & Sciences is to encourage our students to acquire the broad cultural knowledge, the languages and the practical skills to enable them to participate fully in a global society.”

That’s what they’ll tell you. Here’s what they won’t:

Study abroad programs make money for Wash. U. When a student travels abroad through a different program, regardless if that program is better suited for the student’s academic goals or better caters to their career aspirations, Wash. U. loses money. This money is undoubtedly high on our school’s priority list.

Unlike Wash. U.’s May 1 application deadline for study abroad, most reputable universities that sponsor study abroad programs have deadlines for the spring semester that reach far into the summer months. Why does this discrepancy exist? Why does Wash. U. force its students to make decisions almost one year before they are traveling abroad?

When students are forced to make decisions by May 1, application to other outside programs becomes nearly impossible. Students can’t make other plans and have any kind of safety net and therefore won’t know if they are accepted before the Wash. U. abroad deadline. The other (cheaper) options are no longer options.

There is no one person at Wash. U. that carries all of the study abroad information. Every adviser, department chair or professor that you speak to will undoubtedly direct you to another adviser, department chair or professor (generally one with an unknown name and job title). You will then be told to find information elsewhere.

A typical day seeking study abroad info might take you from the Overseas office at McMillan to Brookings for a visit with your four-year adviser, to your department’s study abroad advisor, back to McMillan, and then to the library to browse for more information that can best be found online. You may still be confused, frustrated and lacking a legitimate plan.

I don’t mean to insinuate that the study abroad experience isn’t an easy one for anyone. I am sure there is someone out there who chose their program and location quickly and, with little stress, was on their way to an amazing experience. And, it will be an amazing experience. At least that’s what I tell myself as I plan every detail of my future coursework, document my past experience, track down professors for letters of recommendation, fill out paperwork, approve courses, meet with yet another study abroad adviser, bombard my own advisors with questions, take a placement exam for the language class I am required to take in the fall (even though my program of choice is taught in English) and rearrange my majors and minor—all for a petition to study abroad through a reputable program, all for the amazing experience.

Alissa is a sophomore in Arts & Sciences. She can be reached via e-mail at arrotbla@artsci.wustl.edu.

(Erin Mitchell | Student Life)

Social networking has no doubt changed the way college students interact. Information is shared more frequently, relationships are easier to sustain and knowledge is spread at unprecedented speeds. From sharing photos to dating, social networking sites have transformed cultural norms that were once taken for granted. Casual conversations with friends take place through instant message chats, and gifts and birthday cards are sent virtually to be displayed to a world of hundreds of “friends.”

Such modes of connection also take the guesswork out of communication. My sister was recently admitted to her top-choice university and was faced with the new task of finding a roommate. And so, she turned to Facebook.

After what couldn’t have been more than 10 minutes surveying different possibilities throughout her new school’s “Recently Admitted” Facebook group, my sister had selected her choice for a freshman year roommate. Scanning through the girl’s photos, she became a tour guide, dictating the details of her not-yet-friend’s life.

“She’s close to her family,” she told me with absolute certainty. “And she has a great group of friends.” The photos had changed from a family vacation to a group of smiling, embracing girls. “Look, her boyfriend is cute,” was her response to the boy linking arms with her might-be roommate. In the next photo he was dancing, “…and he seems like a fun guy, right?”

While my sister found her instantaneous judgment somewhat laughable and very possibly inaccurate, she couldn’t help herself. And who was I to blame her? I too stalked my would-be roommate and would-be best friends, all of whom turned out to be far from the people I had seen on their Facebook pages. The information, the photos and the wall posts are all there, acting as open invitations into sculpted, Facebook lives. How can we resist them?

And, if we can’t resist them now, will we ever? Facebook, or some updated version, will undoubtedly change the way we function as adults and real people outside of college. I imagine our relationship with social networking sites, as a generation who grew up connected to the Internet, will be very different from that of the older adults who currently use Facebook. Just as our college years were transformed by the use of such sites, our 30s, 40s and 50s (I’m too afraid to go any farther) may also reflect the more recent trends. Just as many of us set privacy setting to block our parents, family members and potential work prospects from viewing our photos, we may be doing the same to block out our own children. It is no longer easy to simply hide parts of our youth inside stacked boxes in a dusty attic where no one will look for them. The Internet is accessible and its contents traceable. With the capacity to “back stalk” to our college years, our past, which one day will seem like a lifetime away, will in fact be available literally with the click of a mouse.

Alissa is a sophomore in Arts & Sciences. She can be reached via e-mail at arrotbla@artsci.wustl.edu.

Yes, for the stalker in all of us, it is very appealing to think that we might know if the recipient of our text has read the message. But what about the flip side? Many of my BlackBerry-addicted friends are caught in a battle between opening the text they so desperately want to read, and knowing that upon reading it they will be forced to respond. Is it not enough to intuitively know that everyone reads some texts and waits hours to respond? BlackBerry users have gone a step further to confirm their greatest suspicions about the boys who don’t reciprocate their love or the girls who don’t want to hang out.

BBM creators have found a way to even further intertwine users’ lives with technology. That we are already a phone-obsessed generation doesn’t give BlackBerry owners any reason to doubt their BBM lifeline, but the nearly unbreakable attachment between the phones and their doting users goes further than the typical criticism of technology-dependent college students.

Like with any other trend, many buy the BlackBerry because it seems that everyone else owns one. Specifically at Wash. U., the network of BlackBerries is growing, and while only a few years ago many might have been confused when confronted with “send me your pin,” today this request wouldn’t faze even those who haven’t converted to the BlackBerry world. The BlackBerry is infectious, and, most notably on a college campus, texting is no longer enough.

“I think sometimes it’s a social status-type thing,” said sophomore and BBM user Helen Bogen. “At lunch one day, we were comparing how many BBM friends we had. I felt like a loser because I only had 50.”

At this rate, the day when BBM is the only socially acceptable mode of communication may not be far off. “It’s easier!” BBMers tell me. “And you can see the entire conversation!” But I’m not convinced the convenience is worth the added complication. So to all of you who are tempted and sense yourselves slipping toward the BlackBerry for your next phone purchase, remember this: Maybe you’re feeling out of the BBM loop, but unless you want your private communication tracked by your overzealous friends, it may not be a loop you want any part of.

Alissa is a sophomore in Arts & Sciences. She can be reached via e-mail at arrotbla@wustl.edu.

(Erin Mitchell | Student Life)

February fills our calendars with the start of exams and heavier work loads; we remember influential African-Americans during Black History Month; and Valentine’s Day serves as a reminder to the couples about how very lucky they are while pushing the rest of us into a depression. In addition, there is one more element to this month that many Wash. U. students find particularly daunting.

February marks the beginning of the pandemonium that is the housing selection process at Wash. U. For those of you who have not experienced the insanity, I will try to paint a picture that might do it justice.

There are tears and fights, friendships are lost, and loyalties are tested.

Now I realize this resembles a byline for a bad movie, but bear with me and you might just appreciate the reality—it’s worse. The housing process is not unlike February itself in the way it creeps up, unexpectedly. Over winter break, a seemingly harmless postcard arrived at my home, only to be lost in the shuffle of bigger envelopes and holiday packages. It eventually found its place on my kitchen table basking in innocence and light from my ceiling fan. And it was there that I noticed its Wash. U. return address. I turned it over with no warning of what I would find on the back.

Housing Selection Begins Feb. 18, 2010.

The terror of last year’s housing selection process came back to me with all-too-poignant clarity. “Questions?” the card read. “Please contact Residential Life.” OK, Residential Life, can you answer me this? What if I want to live with Becca and Cary and Melissa, but Becca won’t live with Cary and Cary won’t live without me? Becca wants to live with me, Johanna, Rachel, Parker and Alex, but Johanna and Rachel won’t live with six people—what do I do? How do I tell Jamie that Laura doesn’t want to live with her, and how do I tell Laura not to worry because Jamie doesn’t want to live with her either? (It doesn’t mean we’re not friends anymore, Jamie, but thanks for being so mature about it.) What if my excuses run out? How do you respond to “It’s not you, it’s me,” or “You’re still my best friend, but I just couldn’t live with you”? What do I do with the non-committers, the over-committers and those who are in denial?

Until ResLife is ready to offer some advice of their own, here is mine.

Like everything else that tends to get blown out of proportion, deciding on living arrangements will only be as catty and dramatic as you make it. Becca will still be your friend if you choose to live with Cary, and no matter where you live, you are still going to make it to class on time, even if it means taking the campus circulator a little earlier.

The fight and tears will only make move-in day that much sweeter. It is then that you’ll realize that no matter with whom you live, your roommates will drive you crazy. It could be your best friend or a stranger, but at some point you will wish you had chosen the other suite, infamous plan B, your second option. Know this and trust that nothing can be perfect, but it will never be as bad as you think. Except for you, Rachel. I’m sorry, but you’re right. Your roommates really are from hell.

Alissa is a sophomore in Arts & Sciences. She can be reached via e-mail at arrotbla@artsci.wustl.edu.

There is no shortage of public figures vying for approval; but the less-published but potentially more-important news is that there are many citizens, both ordinary and extraordinary, who have changed public policy without nasty campaigns and official elections.

One such example is Theodore Olson, a Republican lawyer who has chosen to represent same-sex couples’ efforts to overturn California’s ban on gay marriage. To say that Ted Olson is a Republican or a conservative is an understatement. This is the man who headed the Office of Legal Counsel under Ronald Reagan and advised Republicans in their effort to impeach Bill Clinton. He was responsible for George W. Bush’s presidency after persuading the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore and defended the president’s claims of expanded powers during wartime.

Yet though Olson is a Republican, he does not blindly subscribe to all notably Republican viewpoints. Olson doesn’t follow the knee-jerk reactions many politicians have built careers upon, and when approached by a team looking for a lawyer to challenge Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative that outlawed same-sex marriage in the state, he did not abandon his political principles but rather rose to them.

There is a difference between standing for equal rights and fighting for them. Those who are not quick to jump on any political bandwagon but bring about positive change by thoroughly examining all perspectives exemplify this difference.

Olson’s choice to argue on behalf of two gay couples in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, a federal case challenging Proposition 8, wasn’t well received by many of his Republican colleagues. Fortunately popularity was never Olson’s priority, which highlights a fundamental problem that exists with our current political system. In order to get in the position of making laws and upholding the Constitution, one must adhere to a set of rules. These are not the rules laid out by Jefferson, Madison or Washington when they scripted our nation’s principles, nor are they the democratic rules of our government; rather, they are the rules of a political party, rules that stifle our country’s potential.

As a Democrat, I would be lying if I said I fully analyzed every aspect of the issues I’ve chosen to represent. It is easy to pick a side, develop a belief system and belong. Why second-guess health care and national security? Why not allow Republican ideals to immediately raise red flags in my mind simply because they are Republican?

Olson and many others like him who take the more difficult road and question their own beliefs have shown me why. Olson believes in equality under the Constitution; he believes in freedom from government interference and in individual liberty. These are the rules that drive him. Olson took on the case because he sees gay marriage as a civil-rights issue and has found no legitimate argument for why same-sex couples should be denied the fundamental right to marriage. True to form, he has sought out all perspectives but has found no legal precedent behind the opposition’s claims. “They had all sorts of intangible instincts and feelings about what’s ‘right,’” Olson told Newsweek of both friends’ and adversaries’ arguments. “But I didn’t hear any persuasive response.”

The danger of politics stems from the inherent separation it creates. Clear political lines have been drawn and it seems it may take an outsider to cross them. Olson’s reasoning is simple: “This is not a conservative or liberal issue; it is an American one, and it is time that we, as Americans, embraced it.”

Tuna was only the beginning. “Why,” friends would ask me with demanding fervor, “won’t you at least try some?” Well, I had a very long list of reasons why. The smell. The texture. The color. The smell. The smell. The smell. And so I refused to pair my sushi with the disgusting pink stuff or to try the white glob with crackers or to put the stinky mush on my sandwich. Until one day when my defenses were low and I couldn’t refuse any longer. I tried the tuna. This fact in itself was not something I easily came to terms with—my family is still unaware that I gave in to the peer pressure. And so you might imagine that allowing myself to recognize my taste buds’ reactions to the carnivorous fish was a difficult feat. Six months later, I can admit only this—it wasn’t bad.

Tofu was next. Do I really need to list the reasons “why not?” for this one? The bland-looking, misshapen squares didn’t exactly make my stomach growl with excitement. But after much pushing and prodding, I was swayed to try the vegetarian obsession, knowing in advance that I was never going to view tofu in the same positive light my animal-loving friends did. The idea that I might enjoy tofu carried with it greater implications that stretched into the scary world of other tastes and smells I won’t dare to try. No, if I accepted tofu I would have to acknowledge too many possibilities. And so I pushed my stomach’s cravings away and announced confidently that the tofu was at best subpar.

In asserting my certainty that I had not missed out on the foods I despised from afar, my identity as a girl who knows what she likes remained intact. But, as I was reminded to no end, college is of course the time to try new things. Do your own laundry, live with someone you’ve never met before, learn about another culture and eat the food you so desperately want to avoid. My fellow “picky eaters,” I would never ask you to let go of the preconceptions that hover like steam above the bowl of unidentifiable goo. But, just try it! No need to fear that you may end up kicking yourself for living without the food for so long. As you force the cottage cheese past your quivering lips, the words “eww” and “gross” will float through your mind so many times that you might just forget you tasted anything at all. Sometimes even the strongest taste buds can’t overcome stubbornness. So to all those oatmeal lovers out there who I’ve refused again and again—I’ll try it, but I’m not going to like it.

Alissa is a sophomore in Arts & Sciences. She can be reached via e-mail arrotbla@artsci.wustl.edu.

The daunting task of completing five finals in five days is just too much for some. And because deep breathing exercises and the occasional 20-minute workout don’t always do the trick, the stress of finals pushes a generally diligent student over the edge. So, instead of lecturing you on the already well-known ways to prevent non-preventable stress, let’s just assume you’re past the point of no return.

During finals, stress is not some abstract, indefinable concept; rather, it is a way of life. Finals stress is jolts of caffeine when your body is begging for sleep. It is late nights turning into early mornings at Whispers café and 12 incoherent typed pages of a research paper that no longer makes any sense. The stress that comes with these next two weeks isn’t as scientifically precise as MedicineNet’s definition of “powerful neurochemicals and hormones that prepare us for action”—no, our stress is messy, and real and so very familiar.

For many at Wash. U., the quickened heart rate and nausea that come with approaching finals are feared more than the finals themselves. Effort is wasted worrying about anxiety, and comparatively less time is spent preparing for the exams and papers that determine our GPAs. Yes, finals have disproportionate weight when balanced with the constancy of work throughout the semester. And yes, one slip-up now has destructive potential when it comes to our tentative grades. That’s all the more reason to use stress to our advantage.

Eliminating it is impossible. Fighting it is futile. And as for running from it, well, we all know what comes with procrastination. So, why not accept it? I’ll be the first to admit that my finals track record isn’t exactly impeccable. But close bouts with option number three are things of the past. How can a student resist the urge to give in to the overwhelming nature of finals? The answer is alarmingly simple. Accept stress for what it is—a motivator.

It might make you sick and shaky, but if you decide the headache is worth the A, stress this week can be the very thing that makes the end of December that much more enjoyable. The best winter break is the one that follows a week of finals hell. So embrace your miserable self for the rest of the semester, and the home-cooked meals of the holidays will taste that much sweeter.

Alissa is a sophomore in Arts & Sciences. She can be reached via e-mail ararotbla@artsci.wustl.edu.