Thanksgiving is the fourth Thursday in November.

But I appreciate your column, nonetheless.

So he was a graduate student, or a sophomore? Daily, try to get the facts down.

Just a quick comment to the liberal/conservative divide here:
I strongly agree with Eric on this matter, and I appreciate the dialogue it has created. I do think, however, that this is not about being a liberal or a conservative. I am someone who strongly believes in diplomacy and the futility of war - I might even consider myself a "liberal" (though putting myself in that box is unfair). However, I am not one to disrespect our veterans who, rightly or wrongly I cannot judge, gave their lives for something honorable. I do think that Veterans Day - and perhaps the majority of other Holidays - should not be about liberals or conservatives, but about respecting and venerating those who were sacrificial in their aspirations for the betterment of our country and, hopefully, the world.

“What is important in my life? What is my relationship to community? What are my responsibilities to the world? What values do I hold as important?”

i don't see how any of these questions could be considered to be purely religous/spiritual in nature- they're esoteric thoughts that non-religous people ponder as well. and psilocybin is valid a spiritual journey for most college students as any imaginary friend might be.

Very interesting article, Emi!

How refreshing and forward-thinking. Long past time we recognized that we are all God's children and behaved accordingly. This is a step in the right direction.

Eric, great article! Extremely well written and focused on challenges, I hope many of us never have to endure. As important, the goodness in countless people who look past their own challenges to help those in need of support; emotionally, financially or spiritually. Like others, I have spent a life caught-up in personal challenges, which in hindsight some trivial compared to the plight of others. You also cast a light on those who volunteer to work behind the lime light, without pay, and a humble agenda to only help others. Your article also brought to mind that I am long overdue in giving my help to others. I plan to contact the VA and begin working with veterans afflicted with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (war's demons'); after 30+ years, something I continue to struggle with today.

Thanks for the awakening!

I spent enough on my degree for work that pays what my father earned in the 1960s. Think your getting more? It is not going to happen.

I am the parent of a Tufts sophomore who does not play on the volleyball team. I live 2 miles from University Heights, Ohio where the Jumbos played. When I learned that Tufts was playing so close to home I decided to attend. Even though Tufts did not move to the next round of the tournament it was a good chance to see the game. I had never gone to a college volleyball game but soon learned how intense and exciting it is. If they are in the area again I will return to watch them.

Congratulations on your efforts and wins!

Good luck next year.

Help me understand why Tufts is the only swimming and diving program in NESCAC with both a men's and womens' coach? Every other school has one coach, one salary, etc for their program. Eliminating one coach and having the other coach both teams would save the athletic department enough money so that the teams might not have to pay for so much of their stuff, maybe stay at a hotel without holes in the wall and roaches, a REAL press guide could be created (not just a tacky tri-fold that is the same year to year) etc. If Williams and the other schools have success with that model, why not Tufts? We need to save money everywhere we can - dump a Coach, and its a start.

So open minded, that their brains fall out.

This service is incredibly important to the student body at Tufts. I sure hope that they can find a way to make these repairs. I have used subway services in other cities and I really do not find the MBTA all that bad. Just Old.

Kudos for filling in where the Daily missed out! Keep it up!

no, Rachel was not 'dominant in every race she was in', in the Preakness and the Woodward she hung on to win, particularly the latter, in which another couple of strides we'd have seen Macho Again the winner. Only in the Haskell did she win convincingly.

I applaud both these bakery owners. The North End is a both an historic gem and a true neighborhood. If the ongoing influx of transients (students and other short-term renters) is not reversed, Boston will lose an important part of its history and one more neighborhood will become just another extended Boston campus, full of noise and bars.

Lexi, great article.

Don't count your chickens just yet, Partiots fans. Jets aren't dead yet ... but are on life-support!

"This is exactly President Obama’s plan with regards to foreign policy: Remove the fire department in the hopes that it will remove the fires."

No, not even close. Our military continues to expand under Obama. He has opted to reduce long-term high tech development projects in order to meet the current threats in which we are entangled. We can expect to see more troops added to Afghanistan soon, and our military budget is shifting to resources needed for counterinsurgency campaigns instead of high-tech defense unnecessary for threats that are far on the horizon. Everyone knows the missile defense shield was pulled because Russia would have none of it. Russia's geriatric military cannot possibly launch a campaign against Eastern or Central Europe, but it is more willing to press Iran on nuclear development a bit harder in exchange for tossing the shield (not that I expect this line of approach to work anyhow). The better policy option against Iran is not to spend massive amounts of money on a deterrent, but to stop them from achieving nuclear capability. The presence of a conventional ICBM does not matter-- nobody in Iran would be stupid enough to launch a conventional war against a NATO member. We are far from unprepared to deal with a conventional military threat against Iran. The United States still has the most powerful military in the world by a long shot.

so i guess comments can just be incredibly creepy now?

To clarify, the show is directed by Sarah Ullman and produced (not co-directed) by Lina Stolyar. Otherwise, thanks for the kind words!

The Boston Globe is reporting this story but leaving out the information that the suspect called the jogger a "d*ke" when he punched her. Why do you suppose that is? I feel that information is critical to the community understanding what type of violence was perpetrated against this woman, whether it was used simply as derogatory language against a woman or in response to someone's apparent sexual orientation. Either way, leaving that aspect out of the broader reporting seems sketchy to say the least. Why would that information appear here in the Tufts Daily but mysteriously evaporate for the broader public?

I agree... I hope the movie is informative. Yet another threat is that from high altitude EMP nuclear bursts. It is curious that many of the recent Iranian tests have been high altitude conventional bursts. If reports are correct, that is not a good sign. An EMP attack can leverage limited explosive yields to maximize collateral damage in a slow and degrading manner.

Antonio,

You establish a straw argument by suggesting that the administration is trying to get rid of drinking completely. In the article the administration mentions that recent surveys have motivated this recent change.

"Bowdler added that recent surveys have shown that over half of Tufts students binge drink, a significant percentage that she hopes will drop. She said most schools in the Northeast similar to Tufts have lower percentages."

In keeping with your weak argument you compare drinking to driving a car, stating that drinking in and of itself isn't dangerous. Sure having a keystone a week won't do anything but 50% of the campus binge drinking? If you think that's inconsequential you're insane. Everybody knows the medical effects of alcohol so there's no need to rehash them here. Have a war on drinking? No. A campaign to curb binge drinking? Probably a good idea.

Griffin,

I have a confession. When it comes to you, I am totally with Harry on this one. For everyone else I pretty much agree with Sally.

Love, your secret admirer

Bravo! Very clever satire of someone attempting to be clever.

Haha sorry for the huge comment. I like writing, wrote this little essay, and really have no where else to put it. The only thing missing is where the ellipse is on the original, it should read: "Social pressure easily and more effectively accomplishes what national and local administrations here try so desperately to achieve, and for 100% less money as well!"

In the particular case of Tufts, my view is that the administration has failed, and will continue to fail, in addressing what is indeed a problem on this campus, because they refuse to accept the reality that human nature will drive curious young people to experiment with the world- in this case, to “try” alcohol and its effects. To them, it is unacceptable if even one underage student were to drink alcohol, and this attitude means all approaches in which some drinking would occur are out-of-the-question; it is an all-or-nothing approach for them. I don’t have a specific answer as far as any particular actions to be undertaken, but I do think accepting that students drink, that it is “OK” to drink in moderation, and that it is actually over-drinking that is unacceptable, is the only way to allow a framework where a realistic solution can be achieved. In other words, the only way to solve the problem of young students drinking dangerous levels of alcohol is to change the culture that facilitates such acts. However, I can’t think of any historical example outside of overt violence where an authority has changed a culture with topical, punitive action.

Allow me to close by reframing the argument in this way: The Puritans came to the “New World” with a glorious vision of creating a society free of vice where all undesirable elements of human nature would be removed and only the desirable ones would be allowed to flourish. I think it’s safe to say that millions of years of “human” (whatever that means) evolution made a rather assertive statement regarding that idea. The “New World” is now become almost the opposite of that particular vision; we have become a culture of consumption and vice. The problem is that we view any sort of selfish behavior as a “viceful”, i.e., drinking, smoking, relaxing, are all “guilty pleasures”. These attitudes continue to prevail in the efforts of the current administration, undermining their work. These proposed seminars to talk about binge-drinking and the planned activities intended to be juxtaposed with late-night “partying” are subtly, but directly, created to be in conflict with the culture of drinking- to “combat” it, if you will. Driven by this mentality, the result will be more of the same: conversion of the converted and retaliation by the others: in other words, those that already don’t participate in the drinking culture will attend these events, and those that feel threatened by them will either “pregame” for them or go somewhere else to drink heavily. This means a continued division of camps between drinkers and non-drinkers where both parties reinforce the actions and attitudes of their peer constituents. Only a mixing of parties will serve to water-down the drinking culture (see what I did there?) into something more safe and acceptable.

Drinking CAN be dangerous, but it is not inherently dangerous. Framing alcohol as a dangerous substance to be avoided at all costs is both ignorant and irresponsible for an institution of higher learning. Driving a car can also be dangerous but Tufts facilitates car-driving by even allowing places for students to park their cars! I know that last sentence is a bit exaggerated (driving a car is legal) but the point I mean to illustrate is that the issue is not IF people drive their cars (read: drink) but HOW they drive them that results in dangerous situations. The legal status of underage drinking does pose a tricky problem for University policy, but I think at a school like Tufts, where we would like to feel we have a more nuanced and enlightened approach to the world, our current attitudes and policies are anachronistic and ham-fisted at best. When new students enter campus, they quickly begin forming opinions and attitudes based on observation and social reinforcement. What is the example we are setting for the future of what we would like to be an “elite” institution?

Let’s hold our heads high, and begin showing ourselves and new students alike that this school is one of adults, not children, who don’t need to be scolded or “put on time out” for drinking alcohol. This requires both a change in attitude from the administration and from the behavior of students. It’s not fun or cool to be consistently “blackout” drunk, but the more people act as if this is the only way to drink alcohol, then that image will continue to exist as an alluring act of rebellion. I think a successful solution lies in our future if both the students and administration here stop viewing alcohol as such a terrible thing and begin acting sensibly. I want to close by saying that personally, I find the fact that such discussion even exists and is furthermore necessary as a sign of a large problem in focus. Tufts students want to change the world but they can’t even deal with something as insignificant as alcohol in a logical, modern, or enlightened manner? That does not reflect well on either the University or the student body.

I am both an alumnus and current student at Tufts, and I really wish I didn't just find out about this meeting today, as I would have loved to attend. One of my biggest concerns with Tufts has been its archaic approach to American Drinking Culture, which for some reason is considered to be "Tufts' Drinking Culture". They're hoping to solve a nationwide problem, one that is deeply seated in the nation's culture, with (counter)programming options?

I mean, with all the surveys and studies Tufts conducts on the subject, when is the administration going to recognize the data showing that prohibitionist measures only STRENGTHEN what they choose to inhibit? What has been shown to work, instead, is actually the same pressures that influence (notice I didn't use the word "cause"- we're not dealing with robots here) students to drink on campuses around the country. If the social pressure is NOT to drink, then students are much less likely to engage in this behavior. The problem is bringing about this change in culture, which up to this point has been attempted through flawed authoritarian measures.

I am an Italian-American and I think Italian culture is an excellent example of what I'm talking about, both in its manifestation and in its general perception by Americans. Italy is known for having some of the best alcoholic products in the world (wine) and these products are not only a large part of the culture, but have even become somewhat symbolic of the national culture to foreigners. However, I constantly encounter incredulity and shock when my wife and I inform people that not only does she not drink, but she hates the taste of wine! "But you're Italian!" they often exclaim, as if the abundant availability of a delicious intoxicant MUST lead to consumptive habits. No, my wife is not even an exception to a rule, but rather a very common member of a fairly large demographic in Italy. She has no moral qualms about drinking in general (in fact she will sometimes have a nice "Bailey's on the Rocks"), she just doesn't have much motivation to drink heavily, if at all, and she’s not alone; many of my friends and family in Italy have similar behaviors.

Why, in a culture of rich alcoholic tradition (the chemical-kind, not the disease-kind) do these seeming paradoxes exist? Well, it certainly wasn’t a governmental edict that instilled these practices. My opinion is that people such as my wife only SEEM to be paradoxical according to the prevailing American logic which, I think most will agree, can be summed up as "if alcohol is available then people, especially young people (who lack common sense) will consume as much as possible". This indeed seems, to me, to be the prevailing attitude of many administrations in the U.S, legal and non. Granted, the Tufts administration does have the added pressure from the law weighing on them, but why do they need to do the work of the police? Why does the school administration need to become an added enforcement arm of the state?

I don’t think that the school does, in fact, have any obligation to enforce state law on such a detailed level (actively searching for and removing alcohol from students, enforcing severe punishments for alcohol related offences, etc). Stated simply, the University has no theoretical legal obligation to force students to comply with the law, but rather, its basic responsibility is, instead, to neither condone nor allow illegal activity to occur. This is a fine line to be walked for sure, and it requires both dialogue and creative and informative programming and policy formation to enact, however Tufts (as well as other administrations in the U.S.) follows a much less subtle plan of action, hoping instead to subdue the student population into compliance. This always comes from one basic (and flawed) assumption: “Young people do not have the capability to drink responsibly. Given the opportunity, they will consume as much alcohol as possible risking both their health and the status of the respective institution charged with guarding their safety. Therefore, they must be prevented from drinking or they will be a liability to the institution and to themselves”. Tufts fears being viewed as a facilitator of illegal activity (underage drinking) and at the same time has to respond to an overwhelming amount of pressure from American youth culture which insists upon drinking.

Let’s look back at Italian culture: Why aren’t all Italians raging alcoholics if alcohol has a prominent role in their culture? Well, the culture of Italian wine (and other spirits) is one of refined taste and appreciation, not wanton consumption. Getting a little tipsy IS part of enjoying alcoholic beverages, but those who over-imbibe are viewed as lacking self-control and proper manners. In other words, it’s not “cool” in Italy to be absolutely wasted, and it is especially not cool to brag about how wasted you are/were on a particular night. Social pressure easily and more effectively accomplishes what national and local administrations here try so desperately to achieve, and for 100% less money as well!

In the particular case of Tufts, my view is that the administration has failed, and will continue to fail, in addressing what is indeed a problem on this campus, because they refuse to accept the reality that human nature will drive curious young people to experiment with the world- in this case, to “try” alcohol and its effects. To them, it is unacceptable if even one underage student were to drink alcohol, and this attitude means all approaches in which some drinking would occur are out-of-the-question; it is an all-or-nothing approach for them. I don’t have a specific answer as far as any particular actions to be undertaken, but I do think accepting that students drink, that it is “OK” to drink in moderation, and that it is actually over-drinking that is unacceptable, is the only way to allow a framework where a realistic solution can be achieved. In other words, the only way to solve the problem of young students drinking dangerous levels of alcohol is to change the culture that facilitates such acts. However, I can’t think of any historical example outside of overt violence where an authority has changed a culture with topical, punitive action.

Allow me to close by reframing the argument in this way: The Puritans came to the “New World” with a glorious vision of creating a society free of vice where all undesirable elements of human nature would be removed and only the desirable ones would be allowed to flourish. I think it’s safe to say that millions of years of “human” (whatever that means) evolution made a rather assertive statement regarding that idea. The “New World” is now become almost the opposite of that particular vision; we have become a culture of consumption and vice. The problem is that we view any sort of selfish behavior as a “viceful”, i.e., drinking, smoking, relaxing, are all “guilty pleasures”. These attitudes continue to prevail in the efforts of the current administration, undermining their work. These proposed seminars to talk about binge-drinking and the planned activities intended to be juxtaposed with late-night “partying” are subtly, but directly, created to be in conflict with the culture of drinking- to “combat” it, if you will. Driven by this mentality, the result will be more of the same: conversion of the converted and retaliation by the others: in other words, those that already don’t participate in the drinking culture will attend these events, and those that feel threatened by them will either “pregame” for them or go somewhere else to drink heavily. This means a continued division of camps between drinkers and non-drinkers where both parties reinforce the actions and attitudes of their peer constituents. Only a mixing of parties will serve to water-down the drinking culture (see what I did there?) into something more safe and acceptable.

Drinking CAN be dangerous, but it is not inherently dangerous. Framing alcohol as a dangerous substance to be avoided at all costs is both ignorant and irresponsible for an institution of higher learning. Driving a car can also be dangerous but Tufts facilitates car-driving by even allowing places for students to park their cars! I know that last sentence is a bit exaggerated (driving a car is legal) but the point I mean to illustrate is that the issue is not IF people drive their cars (read: drink) but HOW they drive them that results in dangerous situations. The legal status of underage drinking does pose a tricky problem for University policy, but I think at a school like Tufts, where we would like to feel we have a more nuanced and enlightened approach to the world, our current attitudes and policies are anachronistic and ham-fisted at best. When new students enter campus, they quickly begin forming opinions and attitudes based on observation and social reinforcement. What is the example we are setting for the future of what we would like to be an “elite” institution?

Let’s hold our heads high, and begin showing ourselves and new students alike that this school is one of adults, not children, who don’t need to be scolded or “put on time out” for drinking alcohol. This requires both a change in attitude from the administration and from the behavior of students. It’s not fun or cool to be consistently “blackout” drunk, but the more people act as if this is the only way to drink alcohol, then that image will continue to exist as an alluring act of rebellion. I think a successful solution lies in our future if both the students and administration here stop viewing alcohol as such a terrible thing and begin acting sensibly. I want to close by saying that personally, I find the fact that such discussion even exists and is furthermore necessary as a sign of a large problem in focus. Tufts students want to change the world but they can’t even deal with something as insignificant as alcohol in a logical, modern, or enlightened manner? That does not reflect well on either the University or the student body.

"Hey, you can't bring up the frats! They do nominal community service!"

I'm not sure why you think frat boys should be personally responsible for curbing binge drinking.

I think that removing alcohol from fraternity parties would actually just cause the majority of students to find other parties. Sticky, smelly buildings full of grab-assers aren't as fun without free booze.

i'm sure drivers would love to finance a transportation method that they aren't using.

I agree that a fraternities appear to strangely be some of the "safer" drinking venues. They have a lot to lose if (when) things go wrong

One student did bring up the fraternities as a popular venue for getting alcohol and a major source of the problem. I personally countered that argument as the fraternities are always very aware of what is being served and to whom it is being served. It is in their best interest to avoid serving alcohol to people that are too drunk. If anything removing alcohol from fraternity parties only makes the situation more dangerous by increasing the pregaming that students will do before they go to the parties. If they know they can't get beer at the party they'll drink lots of hard alcohol before going to the party, arrive at the party fine, enter the party and then once inside they start having medical issues. And the fraternity is still responsible for them even if they didn't serve them anything.

I also pointed out at the meeting that the role of fraternities in the drinking culture was an important aspect of the recent TCU Senate survey for which I was personally responsible. Everyone should complete the survey so that we can have the most accurate results and can provide real statistics to accompany this discussion.

Hey, you can't bring up the frats! They do nominal community service!

I'm curious to know if the town hall discussed the fraternity aspect of the drinking culture. I missed the meeting, but would like to know what was said on the subject.

i know for one my senior gift will be a big goose egg

u probably should lighten up. i know some football player probably made you cry at some point in hs and now you have a deep hatred for all things athletic, but it doesn't mean you need to admonish all student athletes in the campus newspaper and insist they don't deserve a little acknowledgment from the student body. all the editor wanted to say is that sometimes sports gets overlooked at this school and maybe we should take a step back and recognize the achievements of our fellow jumbos by taking some pride in our school and attending a game or two (which for normal people can be fun). doesn't sound so bad right? seriously, people like you make me glad to be graduating in may.

Very good article, i totally agree with the grieving process and how the new generation handles the passing of a loved one. I myself lost my father a year ago and i found peace and acceptance with the spiritual side. For some reason though I am finding difficult to totally let go. I believe when both parents are gone something happens unforseen to the remaining members of the family mainly the siblings...i have not spoken to anyone in my family since my father passed away. This makes it even more difficult to move on without the strength and support from brothers and sisters.

irresponsible students not knowing their own alcohol limits has resulted in a terrible senior year riddled with a slow-footed administration and pissed off students who will probably never donate a penny back to this institution.

Stephen,

Precisely my point. Oprah's move was clearly ratings motivated, and what drives ratings? People. In this case, it's hard to tell who keeps the Palin flame hotter. Her growing base, (and it is growing), or the crowd of people who outright despise her.

Personally, I am mystified by the logic driving the deep-seated hatred of the former veep candidate and at times find it paradoxical. Simply take a tour of the Huffington Post. You can't swing a dead cat daily without finding an article about Palin and guess what? They are often the-most-commented on, with many of the missives echoing Mr. Minch's sentiments. Shut Up Sarah... Why-won't-she-go-away... Duh! Because HuffPo, (and the world), keeps writing articles about her. SNL keeps parodying her folksiness, and talk show hosts clamor to have her on. Why do they do that? Because people gravitate to it, put their eyeballs on it, and let's be honest. Eyeballs translate to ratings and ad revenue. For whatever the reason.

Clearly while one college paper opinion piece isn't responsible for shifting the spotlight it is at the very least complicit. And, my core point is this article makes no sense. "I hate you, go away, but only after I flex my intellect on and take advantage of the very subject I claim I want to go away".

On a parting note, I think the true frightening trend in American politics today is forming social, economic, and political opinions solely on entertainment outlets and news channels that fit your own comfortable narrative. I say this to both sides of the aisle. If you think Fox News is the last bastion of accurate reporting and all you'll ever need to stay informed, you are undoubtedly deprived of actual news and differing opinions that you need to hear. Likewise, if you think the über-cultured and oh-so-hilarious "teabag" comments espoused by Maddow/Olbermann/Stewart are spot on, you are clearly immature and need to take a sober look at the world you actually live in as well as your neighbors.

As an FYI, I found this article linked from a Google hosted AP piece on how Obama stated he wouldn't read Palin's book.