In the past few years, there has been an influx of clothing that caters to folks who wish to defy the gender binary.  More than ever, runways are being overtaken by collections inspired by androgynous and gender-bending apparel. At the same time, there have been loads of start-ups, both online and off, which feature similar fashions. It’s impossible to say exactly why androgyny has become so prevalent – have people become more aware and accepting of the idea that gender does not strictly exist inside of a binary? Have those who are frustrated with the mainstream perception of gender become more active in the fashion industry? Or, is it simply an increase in both areas?  Whatever the reason, genderless fashion is making big waves, which is an inevitable step towards broadening common ideas about gender identity.

It’s easy to see that androgyny has become extremely popular in recent high-fashion.  Designer Vivienne Westwood, for example, created a collection for Autumn/Winter ‘14 that was largely inspired by Androgyny Queen (patent pending) Tilda Swinton. Then there are designers like Craig Green, whose Autumn/Winter collection featuring “romantic menswear” like tunics and skirts are flipping gender roles on their heads.  Each of these movements in high-fashion could mean big things for the ways that society perceives gender in general. Fashion, after all, is part of how we choose to represent our identities – and a large part of our identities revolves around our gender.

This could be one of the reasons why many start-ups geared toward, and created by, LGBTQ individuals have begun to pop up all over the place. Companies such as Sharpe Shooting and Greyscale Goods have begun to offer suits and other garments tailored to queer and trans-identified folks. A lot of these companies function mainly online, such as DapperQ and Original Tomboy, allowing them to cater to a much wider clientele.  This is a huge deal for those who have attempted to purchase and wear clothes designed for a gender that does not match their physical bodies. It seems that this issue has been used as motivation for designers and business-owners though, as more and more companies which center around exactly that dilemma are beginning to populate the fashion industry.

Androgynous fashion is still kind of a niche overall – not all of these gender-bending start-ups are exactly affordable, nor are they available in most large retailers – it’s certainly a step toward dismantling binaristic notions of gender identity. Genderless fashion refuses to assign an individual a gender based on their body type. This is awesome, because it allows people to accurately express themselves without being limited by the size and shape of the clothes they’re shopping for.

To reach CHELSEA SPILLER, email her at ctspiller@ucdavis.edu.

Graphic by Jennifer Wu

About two weeks ago, the UC Board of Regents decided in a 7-2 vote to increase tuition across the University of California (UC) system. This vote marked a showdown between the UC and state legislature. The tuition raise is a threat to the legislature: increase state funding of UCs or we will put the burden on our students. It’s a “live through recess” way of treating the student.

The issue of funding is central to any discussion concerning higher education. Money may as well be synonymous with practicality. Many of the ideas which I have proposed in past columns could only hope to be achieved through a greater investment in education. But today, we find ourselves in a situation where money is being used to simply keep our current, ailing system afloat, rather than make substantial improvements.

If unremedied, this tuition raise will prevent many potential students from enrolling in the UC system. It will propagate a contemporary trend of increasing inequality that has defined the United States. Still, the raise should not deter families from sending their children to UCs. As the price of college education increases, the demand for a degree is similarly increasing. It is more valuable than ever to attend a four-year institution, even as tuition increases.

Ultimately, these increasing demands amount to a do-or-die situation, similar to Calvin’s: you will pay and you will be better off. Many college brochures tout the “investment” that you make when you enroll in University X. And after that, in smaller font: the price. Even though college is still worth it,  many families may view the investment as a risk. When students take out large student loans, it takes them longer to pay off the debt, hindering a family’s ability to foresee the benefit of education.

It’s hard to reconcile this analysis when talking about a public school. When I was a high school senior, cost was how I weighed whether or not to attend a private school. For prospective high school students in 2019, annual fees for a UC may exceed $15,000.  And while the UC argues that most students do not pay in full, there is still the issue of financial aid. Currently, financial aid (like the Cal Grant) is subsidized through taxpayer money. In effect, the regents have control over the demand for financial aid as well as tuition.

Between the arguments over inequality and price is the inclusivity debate. The UC says tuition will be used to accommodate for a larger student population. This position has its merits. Despite the negative connotations associated with a bigger student body, there are creative ways to ensure each student learns. But what kinds of students would we be welcoming in? Under the raise – only students who could afford to pay. Notwithstanding scholarships and grants, the economic diversity of UC campuses would decrease.

While the UC should not have raised tuition in the first place, I hope the state will match the raise with funding. Ideally, the state would have been first to act. As a result of the raise, everybody is politically stunted. If the state decides to remain silent, the UC system will continue to be demonized, and rightfully so. If they do match funding, it gives the UC too much bargaining power on the issue of state funding.

The effects of this raise will be felt in the long-term. A healthy economy is built on spending. Millennials are already having a hard time paying off their loans. And in response, this burgeoning demographic will spend less and less, and take longer to settle down. I have a mixed opinion about the stereotype that millennials are an infantile generation, but it’s easy to see how they may be more dependent on help than past generations.

Students have been very vocal on this issue, which makes me happy, though its easy to see us in Calvin’s position. Like him we are loudmouths, but perhaps more importantly, we are similarly limited in our power. Let’s just hope our “worthy cause” becomes cheaper. Calvin’s ten cents at six is our fifteen-thousand at nineteen.

To share your story on the tuition raise, you can reach ELI FLESCH at ekflesch@ucdavis.edu or tweet him @eliflesch

Graphic by Jennifer Wu

Protesting as a means of expressing discontent is a recurring theme recently, as it has been the response to both the proposals for UC tuition increases and the ruling in the Ferguson case. Then there are the people protesting about workers having to work at 6 p.m. on Thanksgiving. On top of protests on Black Friday about unfair treatment of minimum wage employees, there were the protesters calling out the shoppers who prioritized discounts on vacuums over recent racial injustices, using the terms #BlackLivesMatter and #BlackoutBlackFriday in relationship to the ruling on the Ferguson case.

I am curious to see how much surface area of the world would be covered if you highlighted all of the places where people were protesting. Some of the pictures of the protesting look pretty apocalyptic too, like a scene out of War of the Worlds. We aren’t even under alien attack, unless you count a flawed judicial system, militant police officers and economic inequality as extraterrestrial.

In all of this chaos it’s common for some people to shame rioting and highlight the negative impacts of protesting and what effective social organizing looks like. I understand where some of these riot shamers are coming from when I think about everyone trying to commute to work and those who are trying to enjoy the little time they do get off of work. In my own experience back home in the Bay Area, I know that the closure of several BART stations impacted peoples’ plans to explore the city when they were in the area visiting family. However, the frustration that comes from showing up late to work and not being able to make it somewhere is nothing in comparison to feeling as if your life does not matter. When it comes to the riots taking place on campus about the tuition increase proposal, some people look down upon it because they think that it’s ironic that students are skipping class that they pay tuition for in order to protest about how much tuition they pay. But if their voices aren’t heard now, there is always the possibility that they may never be able to attend another class at a UC again.

Instead of commenting about how everyone is doing it wrong, I think President Obama’s outlook toward the Ferguson case and the resulting protests can be used to lessen some of the riot shaming. Obama revealed in his ABC interview with George Stephanopoulos that he thinks there is an “empathy deficit” and that both sides need to acknowledge the concerns of the other. The president also thinks that police officers should “work with the community, not against the community” and that protesters should remain peaceful. Even though saying that there is an “empathy deficit” is a relatively passive response, I think we should still acknowledge it.

If there was more empathy involved in our reaction to the protests, we would be able to see the beauty in some of the ways communities have come together amidst all this chaos instead of the way the media portrays it. One example of community are the protesters who stood in front of a store to prevent it from being looted by other protesters on Black Friday. When news reporters asked them their intention in standing there, they said that they came just to peacefully protest and did not want anything bad to happen. Then there is the popular photo of the police officer hugging the black boy holding a “Free Hugs” sign at a Ferguson rally in Portland. It is important that we keep these images in our mind instead of solely focusing on all the destruction the protests have led to. The protests have played their role in fostering a sense of community among a group of people who have a desperate need for it, as they feel alienated from their justice system, the armed force and their employers.

If you want to find beauty in the breakdown instead of looking down on people for standing up for what they believe in you can email NICOLE NELSON at nsnelson@ucdavis.edu.

Graphic by Jennifer Wu

Did you enjoy your Thanksgiving holiday break? I know I did, which is why this column will be shorter than my previous ones. My main point throughout my writing has been to show you, the reader, how science can make a positive impact in society. Scientists spend their lives researching things ranging from stem cell cancer research to making a Mountain Dew drink that taste like Doritos (it’s actually real and called Dewritos). No matter how small or big, or how expensive or costless — someone always wants to conduct research. My question to the readers is this: What would you research?

We are part of what some might call the “ivory tower” schools. The university is in fact a public research institution, whose purpose is to produce the next generation of thinkers who solve our state’s, nation’s and ultimately the world’s questions. As students, we may not have the privilege of being in our own research lab 24 hours a day, but we are encouraged to answer the burning questions in our mind about pretty much anything. This had me thinking: Why not gather your questions through this column and pursue an impromptu research opportunity?

Is there something you’ve always wanted to know about things at the UC Davis? Do student sleep patterns correlate with their grades? Would we have a happier student body if Taco Bell closed at 10 p.m. at the Silo? Do students actually know who Gunrock is? These are some questions I had in my mind (and not the only ones, mind you…). I would like to know what kind of questions you have in your mind, and, if possible, pursue a research project to attempt to solve that question. I don’t have any funding at all, let alone a lab to work in, so in the immortal words of Bon Qui Qui: “Don’t get crazy.”

Why would I want to do something like this? I believe that research, in any form, is an expression of the scientific method. We can learn something about ourselves and even solve a problem, no matter how small. Should you wish to participate and help out with a potential research opportunity, send me an email (which you can find in my contact line). If you have a question you’d like to see researched (something UC Davis-related, or local), send me an email as well!

If you’re interested in this venture, email me your ideas (uwsufi@ucdavis.edu) or tweet them (@umayrsufi).

Graphic by Jennifer Wu

During class today, a professor inquired about our involvement in the student protests. Her sly smile revealed optimism and pride stemming from her past involvement in political movements. A few students raised their hands, radiating immense feelings of gratification. However, one student raised his hand to disclose his opinion about the protests.

“Hasn’t the tuition already gone up?” he asked, insinuating that there was a lack of purpose to the protests. Immediately I realized that many students are missing the point of these public demonstrations.

The cost of a bachelor’s degree goes far beyond that of a quarterly tuition. Instead, an education will also cost you the high price of your time, your soul and your sanity. We students willingly sacrifice ourselves for a degree, a vast testament to our dedication to education. Now, this very dedication is used as collateral. Our degrees are held ransom by the university, unless we are prepared to pay the price. Some of the students have already invested years toward their degrees, so it is unlikely that we will forfeit our intellectual capital. Instead, we bite the bullet.

As a first generation college student, I already understand that post-college life involves repayment of loans, repayment of loans… oh, and repayment of loans. Basically, I am sacrificing my financial future for a degree. However, I did not realize that the university was going to keep doling out debt to students, with a blatant infringement on the right to an education. A college degree should not be limited to those that can afford to pay. Enough is enough.

The protests represent a communal voice and an opportunity for change. The marches, sit-ins, occupations and demonstrations speak to the sacrifices that thousands of students have made. More importantly, these protests empower students that have fallen victim to the tuition hikes (unfortunately, not everyone was able to afford the ransom). The protesters’ occupation in Olson Hall is a nostalgic and romantic gesture that reflects the history of student dissent. We are dissatisfied with the UC system and its lack of empathy for its students. It is time for change, and all good changes start with a voice. I am certainly relieved that the voice of the student community has spoken. While we may be willing to bite the bullet, we sure as hell will tell the chef how bad it tastes.

CHELSI FOREMAN can be reached at cbforeman@ucdavis.edu.

Graphic by Jennifer Wu