Friday, July 13, 2007 — Vol. 30, No. 6 Student Life Centre, Room 1116 University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1 P: 519.888.4048 F: 519.884.7800 imprint.uwaterloo.ca Editor-in-chief, Adam McGuire editor@imprint.uwaterloo.ca Advertising & Production Manager, Laurie Tigert-Dumas ads@imprint.uwaterloo.ca General Manager, Catherine Bolger cbolger@imprint.uwaterloo.ca Sales Assistant, Andrea Hession Board of Directors board@imprint.uwaterloo.ca President, Adam Gardiner president@imprint.uwaterloo.ca Vice-president, Jacqueline McKoy vp@imprint.uwaterloo.ca Treasurer, Lu Jiang treasurer@imprint.uwaterloo.ca Secretary, Alaa Yassim secretary@imprint.uwaterloo.ca Staff liaison, Rob Blom liaison@imprint.uwaterloo.ca Editorial Staff Assistant Editor, Ashley Csanady Lead Proofreader, Kinga Jakab Cover Editor, Angelo Florendo News Editor, Emma Tarswell News Assistant, Adrienne Raw Opinion Editor, Mohammad Jangda Features Editor, Scott Houston Arts Editor, Andrew Abela Science Editor, Brendan Pinto Sports Editor, vacant Photo Editor, Michael L. Davenport Graphics Co-editor, Peter Trinh Graphics Co-editor, Christine Ogley Web Editor, Gunjan Chopra Systems Administrator, Dan Agar Sys. Admin. Assistant, vacant Distribution, Brendan Pinto Distribution, Andrea Meyers Production Staff Angela Gaetano, Tim Foster, Emily Schooley, Claire the Moose, Dacheng Cheng, Tom Riddle Imprint is the official student newspaper of the University of Waterloo. It is an editorially independent newspaper published by Imprint Publications, Waterloo, a corporation without share capital. Imprint is a member of the Ontario Community Newspaper Association (OCNA). Editorial submissions may be considered for publication in any edition of Imprint. Imprint may also reproduce the material commercially in any format or medium as part of the newspaper database, Web site or any other product derived from the newspaper. Those submitting editorial content, including articles, letters, photos and graphics, will grant Imprint first publication rights of their submitted material, and as such, agree not to submit the same work to any other publication or group until such time as the material has been distributed in an issue of Imprint, or Imprint declares their intent not to publish the material. The full text of this agreement is available upon request. Imprint does not guarantee to publish articles, photographs, letters or advertising. Material may not be published, at the discretion of Imprint, if that material is deemed to be libelous or in contravention with Imprint’s policies with reference to our code of ethics and journalistic standards. Imprint is published every Friday during fall and winter terms, and every second Friday during the spring term. Imprint reserves the right to screen, edit and refuse advertising. One copy per customer. Imprint ISSN 07067380. Imprint CDN Pub Mail Product Sales Agreement no. 40065122. Next staff meeting: Friday, July 27, 2007 | 12:30 p.m. Fall term - first staff meeting: Monday, September 10, 2007 | 12:30 p.m. Next board meeting: Friday, August 3, 2007 | 11:15 a.m.


Imprint, Friday, July 27, 2007

The following article is an editorial printed in the November 7, 1958 (volume 1, no. 1) issue of The Cord Weekly, the first undergrad student publication at the University of Waterloo (known then as Waterloo College and Associated Faculties).

The following is a comment posted on Ashley Csanady’s column titled “Take back the night?” (published July 13, 2007). The comment has been truncated but otherwise left unedited. Want to teach them a lesson? posted by cpb Ashley, on behalf of all men with brains and a sense of decency, I’m sorry you had to deal with this bs. My recommendation: make them pay using the real ‘power’ available to you. [...] So yes, I’m a guy. In my opinion, there is no place for this kind of bull-shite anywhere, anytime. Women should not be frightened in the world today but, unfortunately, all it takes is one attack to inflict lasting pain (mental and physical). The one time you let yourself become overconfident in a possibly dangerous situation is the one time you will regret it. I’m not saying live in fear, I’m saying live smart. You are one woman, they were multiple men. The odds were stacked against you if they were looking for trouble. You were smart to play it safe Ashley. It is better to fume at home than to find out they were out looking to cause real trouble. There is no point in giving them a piece of your mind, it is (most likely) what they want. Walking by with your head raised high won’t help either, they will just pick on the next woman who walks by. These guys crave your attention (as they clearly don’t know how to attract women using their natural charm). [...] If you want to make the world safer for women everywhere it is my opinion that stupid men like this need to have fear put into them and pain brought down on them. If you had a big pack of women with you I might recommend some vigilante justice involving kicking some groins, laughing at how little there was to kick, then walking away. As you were alone, the police or bouncers would be your next best bet (IMHO). [...] Just my 2 cents. :-)

browse our dust-free archives http://imprint.uwaterloo.ca/archives

join the discussion http://imprint.uwaterloo.ca

Let’s hug it out, bitch
Girl talk is cathartic, not something that makes it worse.
Remember obsessing over day-to-day problems for hours on the phone with your best friend when you were a teen? Well, according to a recent study, those overly-long conversations can exacerbate depression and anxiety in teenage girls. The study, from University of Missouri-Columbia, found that this “co-rumination” — complaining and obsessing over problems with close girlfriends — seemed to raise anxiety and depression. While these chats also tightened the bonds of friendship, male subjects achieved the same level of bonding without the increase in negative emotions. Researchers surmised that this might be because girls are more likely to internalize their problems than boys, who are more prone to externalizing them. Now, here’s where my problem with this study begins and ends. If girls are prone to internalizing problems and blaming themselves, shouldn’t venting those emotions to a close friend be soothing, as opposed to a source of more frustration? Girl talk is cathartic, not something that makes it worse. Imagine if parents started isolating their teenage daughters from their friends so that they had to bottle those feelings up inside — would that really solve anything? I understand that co-ruminating about problems may increase negative feelings after the encounter, but in the long run it’s healthier to get the negativity out in the open. Girlfriends can sometimes be the sole source of support for some teens. Their parents may be well-intentioned, but too uptight to ask for real advice, or just MIA. For me, I would take all the potentially unnecessary brooding over reducing my overly-long conversations with my best girls. No matter how hard you try, most teenage girls aren’t going to talk to a counselor or a parent if they’re feeling upset. They’re going to flip through their phonebook and call the closest girlfriends on their list. At the tender age of 14, your best girlfriends may not have been the most sensible people in the world, but at least one of them would usually have good advice, be it to visit the health clinic or change face-washes — whenever one didn’t have the answer, well that’s usually when parents had to get involved. Girlfriends provide a necessary support network for young girls. Surrounded by a constant barrage of unattainable body images and all sorts of marketing, a friend that hugs, tells you that you’re beautiful no matter whatshisface says, stops you from hurting yourself or tells off the teacher who failed you, can be the best cure in the world. Girls are more apt to blame themselves for their own shortcomings than boys, so maybe their form of “co-rumination” seems more negative because they dwell on their own failings, while boys focus on what caused the situation to go wrong. It may sound depressing to lay around watching chick flicks after a break-up and whine about how you “were never really that into him anyway,” but it’s really only depressing if you do it alone. Besides, somebody has to help you finish that Häagen-Dazs.

Imprint, Friday, July 27, 2007


Letter tO tHe eDItOr
Present dental plan is preposterous

The Sins of Celebdom
It must be tough being a celebrity. Every step has to carefully elude the lens of a paparazzi camera. Every word has to be screened internally before it’s spoken. Every $25-million-dollar summer home in the Hamptons has to be carefully maintained by a grounds crew that would make Yankee Stadium jealous. But there are plenty of positives to being a celebrity too, like the gobs of money, the legions of followers and the free — well, free everything. And in exchange, all they have to do is follow a normal, relatively humble existence. But I guess that’s just too much to ask. Exhibit A: Michael Vick. The Atlanta Falcons quarterback was recently indicted on charges alleging that he was the ringmaster of an illegal dog-fighting operation at his home in Virginia. Here’s a guy that’s on the cover of a video game and he can’t think of anything better to do with his time than train pit bulls to kill each other — and train a bunch of dumbass Virginians to wager huge coin on it. He should be caged up and beaten like the dogs he tosses into makeshift rings. But he’s a celebrity, so he’ll likely get a couple years probation and 150 hours of speech time to warn kids of the dangers of pit bulls and one-toothed gamblers from the hills of Virginia. Exhibit B: Lindsay Lohan. Lohan is like Madonna meets Debbie Does Dallas. I’m pretty sure I acquired a venereal disease just by typing her name. This past weekend, she once again fell victim to the trying life of a celebrity when she was arrested for driving impaired — not to mention the cocaine stuffed in her pocket. Lohan will undoubtedly find her way to rehab — again — before asking the public for chance number 4,672 to forgive her flaws and go see her movies (and to forget about that baggie of blow in the glove compartment). But she’s a celebrity, so she’ll avoid the orange-jumpsuit, side-of-the-freeway garbage duty in favour of another stint of mansion-arrest with a side order of alcohol-monitoring ankle bracelet. I could go off on a rant that Vick and Lohan and all the other badass celebrities on the planet are simply stupid people. But the fact that we’re inundated with real-time updates of every step they take is nobody’s fault but your own. Don’t worry, it’s my fault too. It’s everyone’s. I thought about purveying the message that celebrities are role models, whether they like it or not. But then I got to thinking: why are they role models? It’s our own fault. All the major news websites have chucked their pages full of coverage on Beyoncé falling down a staircase because we want to see Beyoncé fall down a staircase. We could all spend our time more wisely by steering clear of the National Enquirer racks at the grocery store. But as long as the tabloid rags can make bucks and CNN leads off the hour with a feature on the day-to-day life of Britney Spears, celebrity lawbreakers will never be held accountable for their actions. I guess being a celebrity isn’t that bad after all.

I recently decided to take advantage of my dental insurance and go get some cleaning done. I was shocked to discover that we were required to pay the bill up front and are only reimbursed by the insurance company in four to five business days. Considering the exorbitant amounts charged by dentists and the fact that students often do not have hundreds of dollars lying around, this is an outrage. I suspect that many students do not use their dental plan purely because they cannot afford to dish out the money up front. It doesn’t have to be this way. There are insurance policies that cover the payments up front if one goes to dentists within a certain dental network. However, the Feds and GSA opted for this current policy, and being in Actuarial Science, I can understand why. The cost to Feds/GSA of the current policy is lower than it would be under the proposed policy. Why? The insurance company worked in the expected number of students too poor to utilize the dental plan into their calculations. This resulted in a lower premium than if costs were covered up front. However, in trying to reduce the overall cost of the insurance, the Feds and GSA are, in effect, not providing insurance to the students who require it the most; the students who are the most financially constrained. This is preposterous. Feds and GSA should change this dental insurance policy to one that pays the cost of the covered dental procedures up front, even if that requires us all to pay a little bit more for our health insurance. I would further request these bodies not to get slowed down by bureaucracy on this issue. It is simple enough to understand how the present plan is ridiculous. We need them to change it as soon as possible.
Syed Ali Hasan Fourth Year Actuarial Science

Lohan is like Madonna meets Debbie Does Dallas. I’m pretty sure I acquired a venereal disease just by typing her name.

Don’t mind paying up front for Dental services? read something else that irks or excites you? Pour your heart out: opinion@imprint.uwaterloo.ca

Available for September 2007. Ask About Our Great Rental Incentives and Bonuses.