Professor Fired For Freedom of Speech: Steven Salaita Discusses Academic Freedom at Rutgers University-Newark

Professor Salaita speaks in the Paul Robeson Campus Center at Rutgers University-Newark

By: Nancy Elias

Professor Steven Salaita, invited by Students for Justice in Palestine, visited Rutgers University-Newark on Tuesday, November 17, the first stop of his four day tour, to discuss his case against the University of Illinois. Salaita, a tenured professor of American Indian Studies at Virginia Tech, accepted a tenured job position at the University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana and signed his contract in October of 2013. In early August 2014, Salaita learned that his contract had been terminated after he tweeted from his private Twitter account criticizing Israel for its attack on Gaza last summer, raising questions in his university and beyond about academic freedom and the position of the United States regarding the violence that is taking place in Gaza.

The university’s decision to terminate the tenured professor’s contract is, according to Salaita, a move that is symbolic for much deeper issues regarding the university, liberal arts, freedom of speech, and university politics and spending. “We’re entering an era where oppression is formalized,” Salaita said. In his case, this oppression was characterized by the university firing Salaita on the grounds of “civility.”

The liberal arts, which get their name from their act of “liberating” minds from institutional oppression, are, according to Salaita, at stake in his case against the University of Illinois.  On top of the growing controversy of the case, Salatia has filed a lawsuit against the university on Monday, alleging that the university has violated its open records law. He argues, “Critical thinking is incompatible with conformity.  The university’s actions are an attack on Indian Studies and liberal arts.” Salatia states that serious scholars think critically and must, for the sake of progress, challenge the world in which they live in. “UIC is happy to display its Indian Studies program in a pamphlet, but gets angry when the department does what it is supposed to do: think critically,” said Salaita.

The University of Illinois chided Salaita for making Jewish students uncomfortable with his beliefs and to this, Salaita responds, “a good education is supposed to make you uncomfortable.  It’s supposed to make you think.”  Salaita also asks,“which students are administrators helping? The perfect student, the student administration fights for, is their invention, and consists of the most privileged students.  Management doesn’t include other students, who seem to only function in the university pamphlet for their multiculturalism.”

“Nobody asks about the comfort of Muslim students here, and this points out a problem.  Those who disparage Palestinians don’t have to defend their beliefs.  Israelis are assumed humans, but Palestinians must denounce aggression to be considered human in the first place,” added Salaita.

Salaita was accused of criticizing Jewish culture by the university, and to this he responds, “I’m no anti-Semite. I’m a man who condemned Israel’s actions.  I oppose the state of Israel.  That’s the extent of my opinion on Jewish culture,”

The controversy which arose as a result of firing Salaita because of his stand with Palestine is part of an ongoing movement to unionize faculty. Barbara Foley, Distinguished Professor of English, asked Salaita about those professors with no protection, namely non-tenured faculty, who according to Foley, “make up 75% of the faculty here at Rutgers University.”

“Non-tenure track faculty, which include adjunct professors, are not only under compensated for their labor, but can be fired on a whim, especially for expressing their political beliefs,” said Salaita.

Although these scholars, most with a PhD from a top university, are barely compensated for teaching their semester-long courses, administrators receive a much more generous salary for their non-academic positions. Sherry Wolfe, Contract Campaign Coordinator of the faculty union Rutgers AAUP-AFT added some statistics to the conversation, namely that, “79 faculty at Rutgers University make $200,000 and upwards, the most being the athletic coach who makes about $1.5 million dollars a year.”

Badr Rasi, senior at Rutgers University-Newark is a member of Students for Justice in Palestine and helped with the logistics of the event.  “This even was every important to me, because in an age with increased corporate encroachment on the university and on learning space, both students and professors suffer the consequences.  Today’s event demonstrates the impact of corporatization of universities and its effects on academic freedom,” Rasi said.

Rutgers University-Newark was also discussed during Salaita’s talk, whose comments about “for show” diversity struck a chord with students and staff members. “The marketing spin of Rutgers University-Newark is ‘the most diverse student body in the nation,’ but sadly this is not reflected in the diversity of courses and academic departments and opportunities that ensure an equally enlightening and safe campus climate to those coming from underprivileged backgrounds,” Rasi said.

Although upset by the firing which cost Salaita his job, health insurance, and financial stability, he states that the support of his colleagues and students have uplifted him to fight for his position, setting a precedence that he will not be bought out by the university for speaking his mind.

“I’ve upheld my end of the contract with the University of Illinois. I’m waiting, perhaps foolishly, for the university to uphold theirs. I’m upset for me, and for the students to whom I was a thesis advisor to. In their case, they are getting a real education,” said Salaita. Certainly, the issues surrounding his case of the university and politics are as real of a look inside academia as it gets.

Vets are Honored and Called to Civilian Service at Veteran’s Day Commemoration

By Erin Jerome

The New Jersey Distinguished Service Medal is the highest military award for veterans in the state, with returning service members eligible after returning from active duty in a combat zone during wartime.  Two Rutgers University-Newark students were honored with the medal as part of Veteran’s Day Commemoration activities on campus on Wednesday, Nov. 12.

Colonel Stephen Abel, director of the Office of Veteran and Military Programs and Services, presented the awards and praised student military service and the Rutgers University-Newark Student Veteran Organization.  He encouraged student veterans to nominate themselves for the honor.

“We want to give out these medals but we can’t if you guys don’t apply!” he joked.

The awards preceded a talk by Sergeant Rachel McNeill, who served in Iraq and became involved in service as a veteran through The Mission Continues, an organization that promotes veteran adjustment to civilian life and organizes volunteer programs to help vets serve their communities.  Platoons have been organized all over the country to bring veterans and volunteers the opportunity to choose what issues to tackle and projects to work on in their area.  There are already several service platoons in New York, with a platoon in Newark currently in the works. Sergeant McNeill emphasized that the work being done by The Mission Continues all over the country is based on the decisions and efforts of veterans, not the organization.

“It’s interesting to see what veterans can do when they’re given the resources,” she said.

And many are willing to help.  More than half of the attendants at the commemoration were not service members, but supporters with loved ones in the military or just an interest in the cause. The Student Veterans Organization has strong involvement and support from non-veterans.

The self-discipline and pride instilled in so many military veterans became a topic of discussion as Sergeant McNeill shared the work of service platoons across the country.  Business school student Brian Bergen, 35, came to Rutgers under the GI Bill and shared that the military gave him confidence that translated as a business owner.

“I think veterans are more successful entrepreneurs,” he said.  “When you get higher up in the military you have to figure things out without instruction, you aren’t told what to do.”

McNeill asked student veterans to think about what problems in Newark need to be tackled the most as a service platoon is being organized.  The Mission Continues website says these groups work in innovative ways to create partnerships “at the local level to build stronger communities and tackle pressing issues.”

Sergeant McNeill concluded by emphasizing that the leadership of military veterans is needed on the home front:

“The world needs veterans to come home and continue serving in the United States.”

McNeill shared the work of service platoons across the country.  Business school student Brian Bergen, 35, came to Rutgers under the GI Bill and shared that the military gave him confidence that translated as a business owner.

“I think veterans are more successful entrepreneurs,” he said.  “When you get higher up in the military you have to figure things out without instruction, you aren’t told what to do.”

McNeill asked student veterans to think about what problems in Newark need to be tackled the most as a service platoon is being organized.  The Mission Continues website says these groups work in innovative ways to create partnerships “at the local level to build stronger communities and tackle pressing issues.”

Sergeant McNeill concluded by emphasizing that the leadership of military veterans is needed on the home front:

“The world needs veterans to come home and continue serving in the United States.”

Women’s Soccer Team Makes History

The Rutgers University-Newark women’s soccer team meets in a huddle.

By Steven Abalo

The Rutgers Newark women’s soccer team finished the season on a historical runner up position in the ECAC tournament. Despite the loss against Stevens in the final the team has marked a new chapter in the program. The Scarlet Raiders had never won a post season game until this year and made play an outstanding ECAC tournament.

Senior midfielder Sarah Cuhna said, “I’m extremely grateful to have been part of this program at such a crucial moment. It’s been a journey and a half to get where we have, but it was well deserved after all the hard work put in from the coaching staff and players. When such a collective effort is made, it shows in the results. We’ve made history and it’s a great message for this program to send.”

And despite the tough 7-1 loss in the final the Raiders ended with their heads held high for finishing the best season ever. With a record of 14-8-2 the Raiders mark the best record in the history of the program.

Junior forward and leading scorer, Sara Corson said, “There’s almost always going to be a tough loss in your season and it’s important to learn from it. Although the way it ended hurts, there’s still reason to hold our heads high. I think we can look back on this season with pride. We definitely had a great season, the best in the program history, after being picked to finish 9th out of 10 teams in our conference.”

Cunha played her last game in Rutgers career and couldn’t be more overwhelmed with the season at large. This team set the stage and allowed her along with the other seniors on the team to walk out the grand door.

“Rutgers University- Newark can no longer be underestimated.” Cunha said, “I couldn’t have asked for a better season to end with, nor a better team to lead.”

But with shoes to be filled from the graduating seniors Corson believes the coming years will be full of success.

“I think it’s created a great building block for the future years for the program and I’m excited about that.” Corson said.

A bitter sweet ending to a great season for Women’s Soccer team who hope to keep growing in the coming years and be able to reach higher goals and achievements and prove they are title contenders from here on out.

Men’s Soccer Team Fall in Second Round of NCAA Tournament

By Steven Abalo

The Men’s Soccer team headed to Babson College for the first two NCAA national championship rounds this past weekend. With hopes really high the Raiders had one goal in mind which was to play there hardest and try to come home with two victories. Unfortunately, the Raiders lost in second round to SUNY Cortland 2-1 after having beaten Babson College in the first round 2-0.

Senior forward Raphael Araujo said, “Playing this weekend at the NCAA national championship was an amazing experience, even though we lost we came home with our heads up high because we played our very hardest until the final whistle and we never gave up. The game was a tight one and could have gone both ways; sadly we came out on the losing side.”

Junior defenseman Paul Tarnawski added, “We had a great season, and I’m proud of my team. Even though we lost in the second round, we fought all the way to the last second and gave it our all. We made it farther than last year, and our expectations will only grow for next season.”

And the record breaking Raiders were able to do it again in the NCAA. After making it for the first time to the NCAA last year this year the Raiders made history getting the first program win in the national tournament. For many seniors including Araujo it was the last time they will wear the Rutgers jersey.

“Playing my last game with Rutgers was sad but I’m very proud of everything I have accomplished personally and with my team.” Araujo said, “We made history and I’m very thankful for having the opportunity to play for this great program with irreplaceable teammates.”

The seniors carried a big part of the weight this year coming through with exceptional qualities that helped the team finish an outstanding season.

Tarnawski said, “I also want to thank our seniors for playing their hearts out this season. They will truly be missed.”

And like Tarnawski and the rest of his teammates everyone will have to step up next season to be able to once again make the record books and achieve the unachievable by the Scarlet Raiders.

How Underemployed are College Graduates Today?

By Everet Rummel

Here’s more good news for college graduates: getting a degree is still worth it. The economy is improving and even at the height of the recession those with a bachelor’s earned a substantial amount more and were employed more often than those without one, on average. Even so, the nature of our recovery is a concern for some; are fresh graduates being employed in worthwhile, full-time jobs that actually require the type of education they received, or are they stuck in low-paying, part-time service jobs with few prospects for paying off their debt?

The sexy thing to do these past few years has been to paint a gloomy picture for soon-to-be college graduates. An endless stream of anecdotes portray life after school as a hopeless struggle with job applications, rejections, debt peonage, and living in your parents’ basement. Perhaps that was once the case for some, but the data says something different nowadays.

Microdata from the Census Bureau compiled by Ben Casselman at FiveThirtyEight shows the after-school performance of people under the age of 28 with certain types of college degrees, including median and quartile earnings as well as percent working in part-time and low-paying jobs.

From this data it is clear that your employment prospects after graduation are determined largely by your program of study. Petroleum engineering majors, for instance, earn by far the most; the median annual salary is $110,000 while the 25th quartile (those with this income earn more than 25% of the others) is $95,000! Meanwhile only 13% and 10% of petroleum engineering majors are stuck in part-time and low-paying jobs, respectively.

Okay, perhaps that was a fluke? Well, the top 6 majors in terms of median earnings potential are some kind of engineering: mineral ($75k), metallurgical ($73k), naval ($70k), nuclear ($65k), and chemical ($65k). Next is actuarial science ($62), astronomy ($62), and then a bunch more engineering types. The chances of underemployment are incredibly low for all of these majors, as well.

But not all of us are particularly well-suited for engineering or astrophysics. What are the prospects for some of the more popular, less technical majors? Psychology, one of the most popular majors in the U.S., shows median earnings of $32k while over half of graduates hold jobs that don’t require a degree. Biology — certainly popular on this campus — majors earn $33k and almost half could be considered underemployed. This goes to show that a STEM major does not necessarily guarantee one a job. However, psych and bio majors who go on to graduate school (and most do) earn substantially more while underemployment figures plummet. So pre-med and other grad-school-bound students in certain programs can rest easy with their choices, as well.

What about non-science majors? Education majors show relatively low earnings but have strong job prospects. Public policy ($50) and “court reporting” ($54k) show decent earnings, although over half of both may be underemployed. The lowest performers include Library Science ($22k) and Theater Arts ($27k), both of which show severe underemployment potential. In fact, 78% of drama majors are working in jobs that don’t require a college degree, while 31% are stuck in low-paying service-sector jobs.

Last week I argued that the recent college graduate unemployment/underemployment problem may be linked to a shortage in technical skills or certain majors tied to growing industries among graduates. This data adds some more teeth to the claim that technical skills are a boon in today’s evolving job market. While Science-related majors do well if they go to graduate school, Technology, Engineering, and Math students do consistently well with just a bachelor’s. Other majors tied to growing industries, such as education, nursing, and actuarial science, have low underemployment potential and thus greater success after college. I encourage anyone interested to Google search “Ben Casselman college major economic guide” to learn more.

The takeaway lesson from this data is that students need to adapt to a changing job market, just as they always have had to do since the advent of higher education.

Certain interest groups have tended to make broad pessimistic claims in order to drum up support for their causes. I am not a fan of buzz words and clichéd political rhetoric, especially when the data should inspire a bit of optimism in view of the job market. I encourage skepticism of any group who claims to represent our interests while ignoring the data and appealing to our fears with carefully-selected anecdotes cherry-picked statistics.

Ferguson, 100 Days Later

Art in Ferguson. Photo by Matt Cole

By Dina Sayedahmed

It’s been one hundred days and then some since the fatal shooting of Michael Brown, the unarmed young adult from Ferguson, Missouri.  On August 9th, at 12:01PM, the 18-year old resident of Ferguson, Missouri, was shot dead only a few meters away from his home.

Brown, according to eye witness testimonies, had raised his hands in resignation and explicitly stated that he was not armed. His killer, shockingly, was a police officer: Mr. Darren Wilson. Brown’s body remained, bleeding, on the warm street of Canfield Drive under the summer sun for four and a half hours and was not covered until 12:15PM. Homicide detectives were not called until approximately 40 minutes later. Brown’s body was finally checked into the morgue, a 15 minute drive from the scene, at 4:37PM, more than four and a half hours after he had fallen dead.

Since then, protests erupted throughout the streets of Missouri, most notably in front of the Ferguson Police Department on West Florissant. Protesters were met with rubber bullets and tear gas. Getty Images photographer and journalists from Aljazeera, The Huffington Post, Anadolu Agency, and The Washington Post were arrested along with civilian reporters, photographers, and protesters.

It took 4 days of relentless protest for the Justice Department to open a civil rights investigation. Soon after, on August 16th, Governor Jay Nixon declared an emergency state and imposed a curfew. On August 19th, military tanks began making their presence on civilian streets: the Governor ordered the deployment of the National Guard. Three months later, on November 17th, Governor Nixon would declare a state of emergency again.

Brown is not the first victim of police brutality, nor is he the last. Indeed, approximately two months after Brown’s shooting, VonDerrit Myers Jr. was shot in the Shaw neighborhood of St. Louis by a police officer. Myer’s killer, however, was an off-duty police officer and working his second job as a security guard at a private firm when he shot Myers. Nevertheless, it still raises the question of a militarized police force targeting young, unarmed black men, as both Brown and Myer were black and unarmed.

What makes Brown’s story unique is the way authorities have handled the situation and the fact that his body was left, uncovered and bleeding, in the middle of the street only a few meters from his doorstep. Brown’s story also awakened the St. Louis community to the challenge the inherent racism engraved on their streets.

100 days after Brown’s killing, protests and rallies continue to erupt throughout St. Louis County. Coffeehouse owners have begun declaring their properties a safe space for protesters and organizers to gather. St. Louis County finally began acknowledging and addressing its longstanding tradition of racism.

This event, though local to the St. Louis area, is an international tragedy and racism is an international crisis. Even as America is looked upon, by the world, as the ideal land of democracy and freedom, the United States justice system has first failed at protecting the life of its citizens.

As both students and reporters studying in Newark, a predominantly black city, The Observer felt inclined to delve deeper into the institutional racism and oppression rooted in the St. Louis County. Given the 1969 Conklin Hall takeover and the resulting diversity for which Rutgers University-Newark is celebrated, the St. Louis County events are directly correlated to the history of this campus and its current demographics.

Being the most diverse college campus nationwide does not give Rutgers University-Newark a simple marketing strategy, but a duty to educate and understand the factors that led to this 17-year distinction.

The unrest and the narratives of those in the St. Louis County drew the eyes of many, including The Observer. An investigation grounded in Missouri led The Observer’s reporters to discover unsung victories and narratives not yet heard.

Over the next several weeks, The Observer will feature a series of articles and narratives from St. Louis County. This series will feature a diverse range of personal profiles:  the young to the old, the grassroots activists, narratives on the awakening of the black community in St. Louis, the impact of Brown’s shooting on businesses and St. Louis community, and the resonating Saint Louis University Occupation.

China’s Currency: The Floating Yuan

By: Jeannie Mark

For years, China has faced pressures from other countries such as the United States to allow their pegged currency to float thus allowing the Yuan to appreciate in value. Right now, China maintains a “dirty float” currency which means that the Chinese government takes actions to keep the exchange rate constant of their currency, the Yuan, against the American dollar. Many accuse China of monopolizing exports by preventing other countries to compete with their exports due to their cheap cost. Other countries such as the United States and United Kingdom cannot compete with the cheap labor and, subsequently, blame China for the significant decrease in jobs. They also accuse China of manipulating the global foreign exchange market by not allowing the Yuan to be fully convertible. The United States believes that allowing the Yuan to float freely, meaning that the Yuan will appreciate and depreciate in value based on supply and demand, will solve the imbalance in the global market and help increase exports from other countries. Due to the overwhelming pressure faced from other nations, China makes a decision about whether or not to allow their currency to be based on a floating exchange rate system. However, China has not changed its policy due to a huge possibility of their manufacturers moving to other countries thus causing millions of people in China to lose their jobs which will cause social and political distress. The country of China also fears that they will face the same fate as Japan, a period of deflation and stagnation for the economy, after they switched to a floating exchange rate.

So who will really be effected by this? Due to China wanting to keep their exchange rate pegged to the US dollar, China buys and invests a lot of money into US Treasuries. Buying these US Treasuries puts money into the American government, which keeps interest rates low. These low interest rates reflect on the United States housing market. In a nutshell, China buying US Treasuries keeps American mortgage rates low and allows people to buy houses more easily. If China switches over to a floating exchange rate, the Yuan will go up in value and cause a decrease in the value of the American dollar. Therefore, all the foreign reserves and Treasuries China has in its possession will essentially be worthless which will cause them to sell these reserves. Upon selling these reserves, the American dollar will inflate and interest will go up possibly causing another crash on the housing market. Additionally, if the Yuan goes up in value, this means that the Chinese people will be able to afford more imports thus causing an increase in the price of oil and petroleum.

China’s main concern, a huge increase in unemployment, will be the winning factor in this decision. Many Americans foresee a huge increase in employment if China allows their currency to appreciate. However, China does not directly compete with American jobs. The manufacturing sector of America has gone down due to rising and developing technology for the past decade. America focuses heavily on knowledge-based goods such as software and concepts. China heavily focuses on the more labor-intensive jobs thus posing a huge problem if their manufacturing companies move out of China and into cheaper countries. However, even with the pegged currency, the manufacturing jobs in China have been decreasing. Although China still remains to be underdeveloped in comparison to other countries such as the United States, the have seen an increase in technology as well. Therefore, one cannot say if a floating exchange rate will exactly have a huge impact on the jobs in China as well as the United States.

In the past years, China has allowed their currency to appreciate in value to slowly make its way to a floating exchange rate. Right now, they maintain a “dirty float,” with the government intervening when necessary to make sure the Yuan does not appreciate too much. However, the Yuan has appreciated by 25% in the past decade. Right now, China’s managed float has been the greatest choice given its economy and political regime. If they continue down this road, the switch to a fully floating exchange rate should be nearly seamless.

The Importance of Studying Beyoncé

Kevin Allred plays “Ghost” for the students in “Politicizing Beyonce”

By: Nancy Elias

When PhD student Kevin Allred first began his Women and Gender Studies course which analyzed the music of black female artists and feminist literature in 2010, he did not imagine that his course entitled “Politicizing Beyoncé” would receive such dramatic attention from the university and beyond in 2013 and 2014. In the past year, the career of Beyoncé Knowles exploded after her Super Bowl XLVII halftime performance and the debut of her surprise album which took the music industry by storm. Her appearance at the MTV 2014 Video Music Awards in which the word “FEMINIST” flashed in white, larger than life letters behind her, only confirmed the Beyoncé crave which is sweeping the nation and confirmed Beyoncé’s now public and open discussion of feminism. By making “feminist” a household term, Beyoncé is changing the way the way society views feminism in the most powerful and in-your-face way: music.

Like Rolling Stone and Time, I had the opportunity to interview Allred and ask him about his class. “Beyoncé is reworking images of black women through her art,” said Allred. While arguably, articles, novels, and movies do the same thing, Allred intentionally focuses on music and in particular, the music of Beyoncé.

“I’ve always been into music,” Allred said, “there are novels in this class as well as articles, but music reaches so many more people to go to for analysis. We talk about the musicality of songs and the decisions an artist makes. We look at the lyrics, the videos, and even the way Beyoncé for example, manipulates her voice in certain songs. It adds layers of complexity and reinforces her political statement.”

Allred goes to the superstar’s music for more than just her lyrics. He is interested in all the choices she makes: vocally, visually, and metaphorically. “We look at the type of feminism Beyoncé puts out for us,” said Allred.

Confident, sexual, and enticing, Beyoncé complicates feminism. Her songs explore the more classic feminist topics of ambition and careers, but more than just a businesswoman, Beyoncé is a mother and wife, singing about family and sexual allure as well.

Beyoncé’s surprise album, which dropped on December 13, 2013 is a powerhouse for feminist analysis. Her visual album has 14 very different songs, each which explore a different part of her identity as a woman and the internal feelings and conflicts that come along with it.

Her album explores what it means to be a woman, and the spectrum of these feelings is anything but black and white, but rather, many shades of grey. To that respect, her album is dynamic, brilliant, honest, and conflicted.

In “Partition,” Beyoncé sings about wanting to please her husband sexually. She sings, “Take all of me/ I just wanna be the girl you like/ the kind of girl you like is right here with me.”

While some may argue that wanting to please a man, or transform oneself to fulfill his fantasies is “unfeminist,” Allred challenges that notion and asks “Who says you can’t be a feminist and be sexual at the same time?”

Beyoncé’s feminism says “I am a woman who has desires, and there is no shame in that.” In “Jealous,” Beyoncé is vulnerable and honest, and although she is a woman who is confident and comfortable with her sexuality, she is still insecure. She is still human. In “Mine,” Beyoncé sings about relationships, marriage, and what it means to “belong” to another: with belonging being both an aphrodisiac and a force of destruction. In this way, her album is one of the most honest pieces of art that I’ve ever come across.

Perhaps the most feminist song on her album, meaning the song that explicitly fight for the equality of men and women, is “***Flawless” where she samples the speech of Nigerian feminist Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie.

In the middle of her song, listeners hear, “we teach girls to shrink themselves, to make themselves smaller. We say to girls, you can have ambition, but not too much. You should aim to be successful, but not too successful. Otherwise, you would threaten the man. Because I am female, I am expected to aspire to marriage. I am expected to make my life choices always keeping in mind that marriage is the most important. Now marriage can be a source of joy and love and mutual support but why do we teach girls to aspire to marriage and we don’t teach boys the same? We raise girls to see each other as competitors not for jobs or accomplishments, which I think can be a good thing, but for the attention of men. We teach girls that they cannot be sexual beings in the way that boys are…Feminist: a person who believes in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes.”

This substantial sample sends a very firm message about gender equality, and its placement in one of Beyoncé’s most popular song reaches millions of listeners as a result. It’s un-ignorable: a speech explicitly about feminism woven into Beyoncé’s track about ambition and being “flawless.”

I joined the class, which meets on Tuesdays and Thursdays on Tuesday, October 28th to see what the discussion was all about. Allred began the class by playing an audio/visual selection from her album entitled “Ghost” which merges into another song, “Haunted.” Beyoncé sought to create a visual album with her latest album in which her songs were not hits, but rather, part of a larger piece, the album in full. She had an artistic vision in mind, and her music was meant to be seen, hence her songs could not be bought separately, but rather, had to be bought on iTunes as a collective piece, each song flowing into the next with its own unique music video to intensify the experience.

Allyza Umali, senior at Rutgers University-Newark and journalism and video production major, is currently enrolled in “Politicizing Beyoncé.” “I first saw this class last semester and I hoped it would be finally taught on the Newark campus. I’m a shameless, huge fan of Beyoncé, and the class makes me so happy because not only do we talk about Beyoncé, but we talk about women’s roles in the media and women’s status over history,” said Umali.

After watching “Ghost/Haunted,” Allred asked the class, “What is Beyoncé trying to say?” Students commented on her lyrics “I’m climbing up the walls because all the shit I do is boring/ all the shit I hear is boring/ all these record labels boring/ I don’t trust these record labels I’m torn/ all the people on the planet working 9-5 just to stay live/ How come?” Some pointed out Beyoncé’s jab at the music industry, in which often, record labels collect all the royalties off of their artist and leave artists with just a portion of what they have actually made. Additionally, classmates commented on the “commercialization” of the music industry in which top artists adhere to a “formula” to produce a hit, failing to produce a sincere piece of art. Classmates also dissected “people on the planet working 9-5 just to stay alive” with a Marxist eye, stating that often, people are not lucky to do what they love, and so, they work doing what they must do in order to make money versus what they want to do creatively or personally.

But this was just one layer of analysis. Allred asked the class to consider the heartbeat-like bass line which introduces the song, the flashing of black and white which illuminates difference scenes of Beyoncé: one of her in a black shirt singing to the camera, and one of a sexualized Beyoncé being consumed by the darkness behind her. He asked the class to consider Beyoncé’s wardrobe choice, her decision to paint her body with black ink in one scene of the music video, and the overall quality of her voice in the two hits. Each song by Beyoncé is loaded with symbolism in both the visual and audio component. To pair with her carefully thought out video and lyrical choices, Allred also asks the class to read books and articles which offer another critical supplement to the topics that Beyoncé aims to explore.

“It’s mind blowing when Kevin actually connects her visual album with the texts we read for class and with the social and political issues of women in our society,” Umali said, “and when I tell people that I’m taking a Beyoncé class, they say ‘what can you possibly learn,’ but when you sit down and think about the issues behind her songs, you see Beyoncé as more than just a performer. She’s a mother, feminist, wife, and powerful woman,” said Umali.

With such richness of content, it is no wonder that a whole course is dedicated to this artist. She is a powerhouse of vocal talent, stage presence, and awe-inspiring performance, and no other artist, let alone female artist, has as much power as Beyoncé Knowles today. In conjunction with this, she is a woman who makes it a point to explore herself through her art and illuminate her feminist beliefs, and with Beyoncé’s super-stardom, any message, especially one as polarizing as feminism, is hard to ignore.

Is Voting Rational?

By: Everet Rummel

We’ve all received that email about voting this Tuesday, the one urging us to “embrace and exercise that empowerment [to vote] as both a right and a responsibility.” NJPIRG similarly encourages us to vote by going so far as to solicit voter registrations on campus. Despite the efforts of many groups telling us all to vote, the rate of eligible American voters who actually vote has been declining since at least 2004. Is this a trend to be concerned about? As it turns out, refraining from voting is a perfectly rational thing to do given the high costs and low benefits. In fact, the real wonder is the fact that so many Americans actually vote at all.

A 2012 study by the Center for the Study of the American Electorate found that 60.4% of eligible voters voted in 2004, 62.3% in 2008, and 57.5% in 2012. Even if the spirited (first) Obama campaign managed to interrupt the trend and increase turnout, by the second time around it was drastically lower. If it is our civic duty to vote, a right which we are privileged to have, why are so few people doing so?

What’s wrong with voting? For starters, Election Day is held on a Tuesday, a work day, giving us the options of getting up very early to stand in line at the polls, take time off from work (i.e. not get paid) to stand in line at the polls, or delay going home after work to stand in line at the polls. Decisions, decisions.
If the mundanities of forgone income and leisure aren’t enough, add to that a bunch of highly technical issues with voting. First, it is highly unlikely that any individual’s vote will actually make a difference in a large election. Second, even if everyone believe their vote mattered and everyone voted, the notorious Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem states holds that it is almost impossible to design a voting system that will accurately reflect the true preferences of the electorate. America’s electoral college voting system is particularly backwards in this regard; one need only to recall the controversy surrounding 2000 U.S. Presidential Election to agree.

Finally, voters are generally uninformed and fickle, which is to be expected. It is extremely costly if not impossible to become completely knowledgeable about every issue relevant to the welfare of the nation. Geopolitics, alternative energy, climate change, GMOs, epidemics, monetary policy, tax reform, comparative economic development, criminology, regression analysis; the topics and methodologies required to understand the issues at hand would require years of specialized education across multiple fields. Add to this the fact that we all have (or wish to have) jobs, families, social lives, and a dwindling amount of time available for leisure, it is perfectly rational to remain ignorant about most issues of importance (“rational ignorance” is actually the academic term for this behavior).

What’s more, people tend to vote based on preconceived notions, gut feelings, and instinct rather than the actual merits of politicians’ platforms. A growing literature within psychology finds that people tend to make character and ability judgements based on physical appearance alone. Candidates that look trustworthy and competent are trusted and promoted to positions of power.

Other studies show that many people simply vote based on party affiliation rather than facts. A 2014 paper by Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler, political scientists at Dartmouth University, found that when a Democratic president was in office, a majority of Democrats believed that the president could not do something to alleviate high gas prices while a majority of Republicans believed the opposite. Later, when a Republican was in office, the numbers switched; most Democrats said the president wasn’t doing enough about high gas prices while most Republicans said it wasn’t his fault. In fact, the president actually has no influence on gas prices at all, which are largely determined by international markets, but beliefs eskew facts, especially when the facts are expensive to obtain.

In sum, people vote in completely irrational ways with little regard for making an informed choice. The act of voting itself is perfectly rational — people often do it for non-economic reasons such as concern for social benefits — but so is the choice to not vote.

RU-N Athletic Director Investigated for Alleged Racial and Homophobic Remarks – Mark Griffin Denies Ever Using Any “Slurs”

By Ray Gnagey

Photo Credit: Rutgers Newark Athletics

            Mark Griffin, Athletic Director of Rutgers University in Newark was at the center of an internal investigation, for allegedly making controversial statements at a Dec. 2013 coaches meeting. According to several sources, Griffin made two offhand remarks, one reportedly homophobic in nature, and another racial.

Kevin Morris, Head Coach of RU-N’s Women’s Basketball team, told The Observer what he remembers as Griffin’s “exact words” at the meeting:

“‘Listen we’re getting our mascot ready,” Morris recalled Griffin saying. “‘It should be ready for September. So we’re still working on it—and don’t worry, it won’t be gay.’”

Morris, who is currently on leave, said Griffin had admitted to making the comments when the investigation began. According to him, Griffin told the Human Resources Department at Rutgers-New Brunswick that when he made the alleged ‘Gay’ remark, he hadn’t meant it in a homophobic context, rather he intended it to mean: ‘Happy.’

“[Griffin] admitted to both of the statements,” Morris said. “He admitted to the other one where he said: ‘Listen the laundry room’s going to be closed for the Summer, so if you need to get your laundry done, you can take it down the corner to the Chinaman.’ He admitted to that one too. And he said: ‘Well, I didn’t mean like racially. I think there is a Chinese guy that owns a Laundromat in Newark. That’s what I meant. Take it to him.’”

An unnamed source familiar with the story heard that Griffin had in fact made the alleged remarks, citing the talk they had heard circulating among the coaching staff.

“I heard it from the coaching staff and I heard that [Griffin’s] boss, Gerald Massenburg, talked to faculty and that they agreed that they backed up what Mark Griffin was saying,” they said. “Obviously, I’m not comfortable with anyone of a high power or anyone of regular status making such comments. Here at Rutgers-Newark, we thrive on things like [diversity]. We’re the number one diverse campus, and to hear your Athletic Director made those comments, those things don’t sit well.”

They mentioned that players, as well as members of RU-N’s coaching staff were brought in over the summer to talk to the Human Resources Department as part of the investigation.

“[Griffin] was under investigation this summer,” they said. “Some of the coaching staff and some of the players had to meet with human resources. This was probably nine weeks ago. So they’ve been informed on everything that has been going on. And no one has done anything. So if anything they’re trying to sweep it under the rug and trying to not make a big deal about it.”

An additional source familiar with the situation, said that it was nothing new and that they had heard Griffin say “abrasive” comments before in their personal interactions with him.

“I’ve been around [Griffin] enough to know the way he speaks,” they said. “It’s been about two years since I’ve been around him where those types of comments would come out. If you hang around the man for five minutes you’ll see for yourself how abrasive he is—kind of obnoxious, I guess.”

“I don’t dislike him at all, he’s just kind of tough to deal with at times,” they added. “It’s hard to explain. I don’t know what makes him that way.”

When confronted about the comments he allegedly made at the Dec. 13 coaches meeting, Griffin insisted that he’d never made the remarks. He did, however, confirm that there had been an investigation.

“I’ve never made any kind of claims like that or comments like that and the University investigated stuff like that and they’re going to complete their report hopefully any day now. I can tell you there isn’t any truth to any of that stuff. And I personally find [the accusations] extremely offensive.”

“I got nothing to hide,” he added. “My goal and the University’s goal is what’s in the best interest of the student athletes and our institution as a whole. And I think we’ve done better than our due diligence to make sure we’ve got a good program and the student athletes are getting the best we can provide.”

Kevin East, Head Coach of RU-N’s Men’s Soccer Team, backed up the Athletic Director, saying that he’d known Griffin since before he’d ever been slated to coach at RU-N. “I’ve never heard him say anything like that,” East said. “I don’t really recall [the comments.] And honestly I’m not even sure I was at [the Dec. 13] meeting. Some of them I haven’t been to.”

East did confirm however, that there had been an investigation into the Athletic Director’s behavior.

“My understanding is they made an internal investigation and that everything was cleared,” he said.

Provost Todd Clear told The Observer that Griffin was under investigation, but any issue has since been resolved. “He is not [under litigation], the process which was filed with regard to him has been resolved by the university,” he said.

Senior Vice Chancellor Peter Englot, echoed similar statements when asked about Griffin. “This is a personnel matter, we are restricted from being able to talk about it. What I can say is that there is, as I believe you all know, an official look into the situation and any corrective actions have been taken,” he said. “We’ve had an official inquiry into the situation, and it has been addressed and anything else is a matter of personnel issues and we’re not free to talk about it.”

According to several sources, Griffin admitted to using the alleged comments to Gerald Massenburg, Assistant Chancellor for Student Life at R-N, in a meeting back in August.

When asked about Griffin’s remarks, Massenburg was unable to confirm or deny any of the allegations.

“All personnel matters are confidential,” he said.

Lisa Grosskreutz, Director of Employment Equity at Rutgers-New Brunswick, gave a similar statement, when asked of Griffin’s situation.

“I have no comment,” Grosskreutz said. “Our investigations are confidential. Basically to protect the person who’s complained as well as the respondent.”

Morris says that he and his attorney are in the process of filing a lawsuit against Griffin, citing a “hostile work environment” as one of the key reasons.

“I’ve been there 13 years and I can’t work for this guy anymore.” Morris said. “I’m not suing him because he’s making racial remarks. I’m going after him because of contract issues and that type of thing.”

“Any other school would fire this guy.” Morris added, “[Rutgers doesn’t] take action. They’re trying to cover it up. This guy needs to go. He is a disaster. He is so crazy.”

© Copyright 2014