I am an Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drug Student Assistant in the Health Education and Promotion (HEP) department of Student Health and Counseling Services, and I wanted to address some suggestions that were made in the column “Bar crawl a rite of passage for 21st birthdays”, which promoted the idea of going out on a bar crawl on one’s 21st birthday.

Alcohol is a drug, and binge drinking on your 21st birthday can be dangerous. Have fun with friends, but be safe and realize you don’t have to binge drink when celebrating your birthday.

While the author of the article encourages students to go out and drink at the bars on their 21st, be aware that you could be setting yourself up for some not so great consequences. There are serious repercussions when you are arrested for public intoxication or driving while under the influence in Davis. The approximate cost of a DUI in Yolo County is between $10,000 to $15,000 and would show up on your criminal record.

Some tips to have a fun night on your 21st include reviewing safeparty.ucdavis.edu for responsible drinking tips before going out, drinking water in between alcoholic drinks, eating food high in protein to slow down your body’s rate of alcohol absorption, using the buddy system and having the number for Tipsy Taxi (530-752-6666) or another safe ride on hand to get home safely.

Whether you decide to go out to the bars on your 21st birthday or not, you should be aware of the possible consequences of high risk drinking. Students can access lots of great tips on how to celebrate safely with alcohol on safeparty.ucdavis.edu.

Joel Breck
student assistant health education and promotion department

Tuesday Oct. 26, 2011, a group of individuals distributed DVDs entitled “180” on the UC Davis campus. The content of the film was both triggering for many in our communities and also deceitfully hidden. Our response to “180” is multi-faceted and we want to share both our support for the community and share our critique.

Firstly, the distribution of the films was deceitful, and we find their methods problematic. We are disappointed that many students were misled about the film’s content. Secondly, the comparison of abortion to the Holocaust is not merited and the use of the Holocaust as a metaphor is offensive, insensitive and triggering. Thirdly, the use of the word “choice” both in reference to a person’s choice about the outcome of their pregnancy and to Hitler’s “choice” to commit atrocities during WWII is not comparable.

We stand in solidarity with students identifying as Jewish, Queer, People of Color, Women, Transgender, Romani, and folks with disabilities for whom this film invokes histories of oppression, genocide and erasure. We wish to express our anger that students were unable to make informed decisions about seeing the film and were left without support while watching it.

The following list offers resources for students who may have been triggered by the film or who are looking for accurate information about pregnancy, abortion and adoption. Please stop by the Women’s Resources & Research Center if you are looking for additional support, information or want to talk about your experience.

Women’s Resources & Research Center: (530) 752-0222

Hillel House: (530) 756-3708

Backline-pregnancy, parenting, abortion, adoption talkline: (888) 493-0092

Exhale-after-abortion counseling talk line: (866) 4-EXHALE

Planned parenthood-Woodland: (530) 662-4646

Daniella Moses and Jessie Quinn

Interns at the Women’s Resources and Research Center

The guest opinion “Israeli-Palestinian prisoner swap” on Oct. 25th was simply one of the most slanted pieces I’ve ever read. Not only did the author fail to look at both perspectives of the issue, he managed to unfairly attack one side.

He claimed the release of Gilad Shalit came at the “very high cost” of releasing 1,027 Palestinian prisoners. Let’s examine this statement, shall we?

First, we need to establish this: who is Gilad Shalit? From the sheer joy, sympathy and over-usage of ‘kidnapped soldier’ coming from the Israeli side, you’d think he was a kid who was abducted by those savage Palestinians. The truth is he was a prisoner of war. The author himself identified him as Sergeant First Class Gilad Shalit, a soldier in the Israeli army, also known as the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). This is the same IDF that has killed at least 6,418 civilians since 2000, according to B’Tselem, an Israeli organization. This is the same IDF that receives $3 billion annually from the United States while our college tuition costs have doubled in the past 5 years. This is the same IDF that between Dec. 27, 2008 and Jan. 18, 2009 massacred 1,385 Palestinians, of which over 1,000 were non-combatant men, women and children in a break of a ceasefire that Israel initiated. The actual combatants, in the end, are men who take up arms to defend their families because Palestine has no army. These are the men the author calls terrorists.

Israel currently imprisons over 5,000 Palestinians, over 1,000 of which are detained without due process.

However, I do want to address the implication that Israeli government officials are trying to achieve peace (and that Hamas, decidedly, is not) with two examples. Last year, Israeli General Consul Akiva Tor spoke at the UC Davis School of Law about the Arab Spring. As an Egyptian, it blew me away when he said that Israel feared free elections in Egypt because they could result in a government that is unfriendly to Israel. What shocked me even more was his response to a law student who asked why Israel wouldn’t freeze illegal settlement building – Hamas’ only requirement to resume peace talks. His answer? It’s not in Israel’s interests. Okay, fine. At least Netanyahu released 1,027 prisoners for the sake of peace, right?

“…storms are sweeping the Middle East. I do not know if in the near future we would have been able to reach a better deal or any deal at all,” said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Or not. That hardly sounds anything like Israeli officials’ “willingness” to make peace.

So tell me, who’s stalling the peace process?

One final point to note: it’s easy to play the victim when you have one face; Gilad Shalit’s face has been all over the news. They even know the exact number of days he’s been captured for crying out loud! But the over 1,000 Palestinians remain nameless and faceless, known to the world only as “terrorists” because of unbalanced pieces like this. Most Palestinian families don’t know if they will see their son after he leaves for school or work because an Israeli soldier at a checkpoint might be having a bad day. I can’t tell you how many of my Palestinian friends can’t visit their family members (even the dead ones!) because the Israeli government has blacklisted their family.

I’ll pose this question to the author, as well as all readers: why are Palestinians fighting? What drives someone to strap on a suicide bomb? What makes an ordinary civilian like you and me, someone with family and friends, put on a bomb that will kill them? Why does Israel fear the general populous of Arab countries? I want it to be incredibly clear that I do not condone suicide bombing, but it’s important to ask why? If you can answer that and address it, maybe, just maybe, we can achieve peace in the Middle East.

Ahmed Desouki

Senior biotechnology major

Muslim Student Association West president, Muslim-Jewish Coalition member, Arab Student Union president, Students for Justice in Palestine board member

Since the passage of the Oct. 1 Durbin Amendment, which reduces about half of the amount retailers have to pay banks for debit card swipe fees, banks have been trying to make up for this lost revenue. Early next year, Bank of America will be enacting a $5 a month surcharge to debit card users. Other banks are still testing out monthly fees.

To put it simply, this change is detrimental to college students.

Many larger banks will only be charging the monthly fee to members whose checking balance is under $1,500. It is unfair to enact a surcharge on those who have less money in these accounts. And though some banks will exempt people who are signed up for direct deposit for their paychecks, a good deal of students don’t have time for a job while carrying as many units as they can to graduate in four years.

Groups such as moveyourmoneyproject.org – whose slogan is “Invest in Main Street, Not Wall Street” – are leading a national movement encouraging people to move their money from their bank accounts to credit unions. These unions are cooperative institutions owned and controlled by their members.

Although it would seem wise to remove one’s money from banks with the new fees, there are clear downsides to doing this. For college students, switching one’s place of residence often – going from school to home – makes it difficult to put one’s money in a credit union when there are a lot fewer union locations, making it harder to access one’s money than it is when working with major banks.

Banks can take advantage of their customers as they know the difficulty associated with moving one’s money around and that most students will have to stick with a bank – as most don’t know how their interest rates would change when switching over to credit unions.

As it is, it’s difficult for students to deal with money. As a digitalized culture, debit cards are an important form of quick payment. It would be unreasonable for people to abandon debit cards completely, even with the new costs. Swiping one’s card is easier than going to a bank or ATM to get cash out, or writing an archaic check.

Though some students might consider switching from Bank of America to other banks, it seems likely that most banks will have to start a similar fee system. Before you think about taking your money and running from your bank, consider the negative effects of doing so.

On Oct. 9, Gov. Jerry Brown approved Senate Bill 746, which prohibits the use of tanning beds for those under the age of 18. The bill is an important step to decreasing the general use of tanning beds, but in particular decreasing use among minors.

SB 746 was sponsored by the California School of Dermatology and Dermatological Surgery and backed by organizations such as the California Medical Association, Kaiser Permanente and the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Tanning beds use lamps that emit ultraviolet radiation, UV rays, to produce a cosmetic tan similar to that of lying outside in the sun. In some high schools, indoor tanning is a part of prom culture, even though many health studies show that the over exposure of UV rays of minors can increase the risk of skin cancer later in life.

Indoor tanning companies even buy advertisement space inside high school newspapers, offering discounts to students as long as they have a parental consent form. From this, it’s clear teenagers are target customers.

Much like the cigarette industry, the tanning industry claims that the concerns about their product are overblown, or even that their products are actually helpful. They claim that the ability to time the session and control the UV level in the bed gives the person tanning an ability to control their exposure that an outdoor tan will not. However, numerous studies show that indoor tanners are likely to get burned and suffer other skin damage from using the tanning bed.

The concerns are especially strong for minors. The World Health Organization placed tanning beds in its highest cancer risk category, “carcinogenic to humans,” after more than 20 studies found that those who start using tanning beds before the age of 30 are 75 percent more likely to develop melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer.

Before the bill passed, teenagers were allowed to use tanning beds as long as they brought a signed parental consent form. These parental consent forms did not explain the possible risks of tanning for teenagers.

Preventing teenagers from using tanning beds is similar to keeping them from smoking before they turn 18. Once a person reaches adulthood, they can decide for themselves if the increased risk of skin cancer is worth the benefit of an even tan. Until then, keep teenagers out of tanning beds.

In elementary school, we’re taught to accept a very specific idea of kindness: “sharing is caring,” “treat others as you would like to be treated” and the like. Truisms though they may be, these doctrines are conceptually good rules to live by. The issue with them is that as time wears on and relationships become more complex than kickball matches at recess and crayon sharing, kindness takes on a whole new meaning.

The concept of “too nice” becomes a possibility; too many people spend their time trying to be diplomats or friends of everyone, giving off the impression that a personality can be universally compatible. But even children have to admit, in spite of everything they learn, that it’s just not possible to be liked by everyone or vice versa. So citizens, teach yourselves to recognize the fact that sometimes kindness and brutal honesty go hand-in-hand. Be yourself; be blunt; be an asshole, if necessary.

DO NOT READ THIS AS AN ENDORSEMENT OF INSULT. I’m not advising you to throw caution to the wind and start freely calling people sluts or fatties under the presupposition that they may end up not liking you anyway. Be kind – just understand that sometimes you have to be brutal to do so. As a matter of fact, I’ve found that the further I advance into adulthood, the more frequently it seems that the road to kindness is paved with cruelty.

“Yes, actually, you do look fat in that peasant dress.”

“I don’t have any romantic interest in you, just a heads up.”

“No, this column is not good. Don’t send it to the press or you’ll regret it.”

I’m not going to try to sugarcoat the fact that these kinds of comments sting (though being the flawless individual I am, I wouldn’t know from experience), but which is worse: temporarily deflating someone’s ego or knowingly allowing them to wear the unflattering outfit all day or obsess over whether or not you like them back? In the end, wouldn’t it be just as kind to hit them with a quick sucker punch dosage of honesty so that they don’t end up hurting themselves in the long run?

And then there’s the matter of your own peace of mind: people become so overcome by the embedded notion that kindness consists of not hurting someone’s feelings that they forgo speaking their mind. Interactions become built on complacent head nods and passive, insincere affirmations – attempts to quell insecurity and self-doubt. There’s no reason to do this; a genuine friend would view your most honest response as a form of support, regardless of the harshness of the delivery. “Yeah, you definitely fucked up in this situation. You really should have done X instead of Y.” Break the seal. If you care about someone, you owe it to them to be an asshole. And more importantly, you owe it to yourself.

For example, some friends of mine recently bought a cat, Adele, for their apartment in the Ramble. They post pictures of him on Facebook and Tumblr, capturing him in brief and rare moments of calm, but these are gross misrepresentations. Outside of the snapshots shared with their extended network, the creature spends his time lunging at hands and feet, chewing shoes, defecating tapeworm particles and eating everything within reach. “Isn’t he cute?” they ask.

“No,” I answer. “He’s an absolute fucking nightmare.”

Admittedly, this might be melodramatic, but I take solace in thinking that I expressed myself honestly and now my friends know how I really feel. It would have been just as easy to nod along and praise Adele’s ability to look adorable and lie in cute positions, but where would that get the conversation? Where would that get me?

Ultimately, it’s a more all-around cathartic experience for everyone when you speak your mind – unless, of course, it isn’t. Maybe it relieves you and just winds up leaving everyone else stunned and offended. Perhaps, rather than be pleasantly surprised, they’ll just be completely taken aback by your unabashed assertion of assholery in a place where most would choose a route of saccharine placation and pretty words. But next time you feel the need to tell someone they’re just a hookup or that they look like a manatee in their gray sweats, recall the immortal words of Sadie Saxton from “Awkward”: “You have to be cruel to be kind … You’re welcome.”

Share your brutal honesty or flat-out insults with DYLAN GALLAGHER via e-mail (dylaaaaan@gmail.com) or Tumblr ask (cleverblog.tumblr.com/ask).

In Belgium, my housing options were to live with students in an apartment or to live with a host family. I chose the host family.

My friends back at home said I was crazy. As a study abroad student, wouldn’t I want to prance around the city, party all the time and live without rules? Maybe to a certain degree, but I figured that learning the local language and culture would be far more beneficial to my life than the ability to freely chug vodka with a bunch of other Americans.

I don’t regret the decision at all. I live with a lovely host mother, her two daughters and a precious dog. I live in a gorgeous house in a charming residential neighborhood, walking distance to everything I could possibly need. I’m served breakfast and dinner, accompanied by French conversation.

It’s a pretty ideal life. I’m learning tons about this bizarre country and I feel freer than when I’m living with my parents back in the States.

But three weeks into my stay, I received a lecture from my host mom. She said I was partying too often, not sleeping enough, not studying enough, and that if I were her daughter, my behavior would not be tolerated.

I was shocked. What prompted this?

The night before, I went out with a few friends to grab drinks. It was a mellow evening of conversing with other expatriates, and it ended around midnight.

The only problem is that I wasn’t out with my roommate, and it’s not recommended for a young lady in any big city to take public transportation alone late at night. This meant I could either hop on the last metro by myself or spend 15 euros on a taxi. In order to avoid both of these less than ideal situations, I have taken a liking to crashing on a friend’s couch every so often.

It’s not a big deal. I’m asleep by 2 a.m. and I take a bus back home in the morning. As an American college student, this sounds like a normal night.

This is where my Belgian host mom and I don’t see eye to eye. To her, returning at 9 a.m. after sleeping at a friend’s house is akin to being out clubbing until morning.

In other words, every Tuesday morning that I’ve walked into the house and sat down for breakfast, she must have thought I was insane. When I tell her that I merely slept at a friend’s house, she doesn’t seem to believe me.

I have a theory about all of this, and it stems from America’s drinking age.

In Belgium, the beer drinking age is 16. I’ve been approached in bars by 17-year-olds. It’s weird. Kids start going out to bars and discos when they’re 15, since bartenders rarely ask for identification. It’s weird.

Thus, Belgian teenagers are used to hanging out in public spaces. They meet for a drink in a pub or a cafe. They buy beers from a nearby store and lounge in a park. It’s the culture. Why hang out in someone’s house when you could be somewhere … well … cooler?

In the States, there are no public spaces to hang out in. Yes, we could meet at a coffee shop. We could meet in a park. But let’s face it: alcohol makes a place of residence far more appealing. As 15-year-olds, we Americans flock to homes to eat our parents’ food and watch movies. The “bad” teens flock to homes to steal from their parents’ alcohol cabinets.

Everything takes place in private spaces. Our friends become families. Our friends’ families become families. We send a text message five minutes before we arrive as warning. We start arriving completely unannounced. We come over for dinner unannounced. We have impromptu sleepovers. Why not? We have nowhere else to go.

And at UC Davis, this mentality is only heightened with our parentless dorms, apartments and houses.

But most Belgian students in Brussels still live with their families. Big cities are expensive and living alone isn’t ingrained into “the college experience” like it is in the States. A group of 20-year-old students aren’t going to hang around someone’s parents’ house drinking beer and watching “Adventure Time” until they fall asleep. No, they’re going to go out and dance until 6 a.m. and take the morning metro home!

I have not received another lecture from my host mom, but I’ve also toned down the weeknight outings. Part of studying abroad is trying to live like a local, so I’m doing more normal Belgian things. My Monday nights consist of watching “The Mentalist” dubbed in French with the family, and I save the 6 a.m. metro rides for Saturday.

JANELLE BITKER recommends you live with a host family – you can party with Americans in America. Don’t buy it? Send concerns to jlbitker@ucdavis.edu.