Rice University has teamed up with Box, a company that provides online file-sharing and storage services, for a cloud storage and sharing solution for research and collaboration among faculty and staff, according to Barry Ribbeck, director of Systems, Architecture, Infrastructure, Cloud Strategies and Initiatives.
Security breaches at companies like LinkedIn and Adobe, along with over 100 compromised accounts since the beginning of the year, prompted Rice University Information Technologies to send an email on April 2 to all members of the Rice community asking them to change their passwords, according to Information Security Officer Marc Scarborough.
The Student Association is looking for student feedback on upcoming changes to the language curriculum. A survey was sent out through college listservs and advertised on Facebook March 30.
Rice University students from several campus groups protested against Charles Murray, a prominent political scientist and author, at a talk hosted by the Rice Federalist Society and the Baker Institute Student Forum.
This year’s Senior Gala will be held Monday, May 12, from 7 p.m. - 1 a.m. at Proof Rooftop Lounge and Reef. Additionally, a constitutional amendment delegating the planning of Senior Gala to the Student Association Future Alumni Committee and Senior Committee will be proposed at the SA Senate Meeting today, Wednesday, April 9.
Trigger warning : This article discusses issues surrounding sexual assault.Before I begin, I would like to emphasize that I know nothing about the specifics of the event which occurred recently, nor is it my business to investigate said incident outside of the information that the student body received from RUPD. I am focusing exclusively on the language of the emails, which many students and alumni other than myself have found to be problematic. In addition, I would like to also articulate that I am writing this with the explicit permission and guidance from a representative of the Lovett College community as well as other survivors to ensure that I am entering this discussion as sensitively as I possibly can.With regard to the emails the student body received two weeks ago, I have managed to obtain clarification on the RUPD communications from both administrators and fellow students more familiar with these issues. Although this has already been publicly explained a couple of times, I would like to reiterate my findings for those of us who did not have prior knowledge with regard to the discrepancy between Rice policy and the Texas Penal Code, so that members of the community who are still unfamiliar with this distinction — particularly out-of-state and foreign students — can be better informed.My initial assumption was that the confusion resulted from a simple miscommunication; this was not the case. The confusion stemmed from the fact that I, as well as other students, wrongly assumed the Rice sexual-misconduct policy is consistent with Texas state law. The Student Code of Conduct includes non-consensual sexual contact in its definition of sexual assault, which is the case in many state laws — including New York, Pennsylvania, California, Utah, Kansas and Louisiana, just to name a few. However, this definition is not, in fact, shared by the Texas Penal Code (Sec. 22.011). Instead, the Texas Penal Code describes acts of non-consensual sexual contact as simple assault (Sec. 22.01). However, I was told intent of sexual assault — despite the implication of the name — is actually considered a more severe offense than simple assault. I was also told the reason the emails were worded in this way is because RUPD typically launches investigations by using the definitions provided by Texas law.Despite all of this, the issue I am trying to bring up is not one that has to do with the nuances of Texas law. Instead, I would like to focus on the fact that the student body received communication from RUPD that directly contradicted Rice policy. Hopefully, I will be able to explain why I think this is a concern.Every student at Rice University is bound by a set of core values outlined in the Code of Conduct, which includes the university’s policy on sexual assault. The wording of the emails, although expressed using language regarded acceptable by the Penal Code, came across as insensitive to these values. Although the incident involved an outside party, the notifications were ultimately sent from and received by members of the Rice community. That being said, I believe the RUPD communications had the unfortunate side effect of confusing a university policy which is already misunderstood by so many of us — including myself. Such confusion is a threat to student safety, because most perpetrators typically do not realize they are committing a crime (some victims may not immediately realize it either). I know that many students other than myself would feel much safer knowing there is no doubt in anyone’s mind as to what constitutes acceptable behavior at this university, which is one reason why we found the emails disconcerting.Protecting students is not just about fighting misconceptions. More importantly, it’s about implementing a much-needed sensitivity toward a victimized community, whose aftermath is often colored by fear and distress. To integrate a broad definition of sexual assault is to communicate sensitively on such issues without opening discussion to the details of the event itself. The more unnecessary information the community is provided with, the higher the chances are that subsequent conversation will only promote further distress. In this respect, I believe the notifications included unnecessary details about the incident which failed to give the victims and the case space. The communication was thus unsuccessful in reinforcing one of Rice’s core values, which is to put the physical, emotional and mental welfare of the community above all else, including, on some occasions, our collective desire for information.In light of this unhappy incident, I would like to make some productive suggestions. Since the university’s definition of sexual assault is often something students already find confusing, and since seeking clarification can have the undesired side effect of inciting additional trauma, I believe communications of this nature should seek to limit the narrative in such a way that it does not contradict Rice policy. In accordance with the Clery Act, the RUPD crime logs use the term “sex offense” in reference to such crimes. I believe this classification is broad enough to encompass both Texas law and Rice policy, and therefore sensitive enough for our community in that it does not necessitate any specific accounts of the event. This kind of language goes a long way in reassuring students who, like me, feel extremely protected by policies which embrace a broader definition of sexual assault.There has been discontent amongst students with the fact that the notifications were sent so late in the timeline — a logistical issue which I certainly hope will be addressed in the near future through further productive dialogue. Despite all of this, I would like to mention that I personally am extraordinarily grateful to both the administration and to RUPD for working hard to keep us safe and for being surprisingly open to discussion. I hope they will continue to do so in the future. Finally, I would like to bring attention to the fact that April 7-10 is Sexual Assault Awareness Week at Rice; this is a good opportunity for all of us to further educate ourselves, revisit Rice’s policy and continue to support one another as we continue to navigate these issues.Adelina Koleva is a Martel College senior
The Thresher was excited to see the political activism exemplified by the protest of Charles Murray’s speech (see story, pg. 1) but thought the protest could have been more effectively executed.
On Saturday, April 5, the Rice University women’s tennis team beat DePaul University 6-1 at Jake Hess Tennis Stadium. This recent victory is the latest in a seven-game winning streak for the Owls. Rice’s record is now 13-5.
The Rice University baseball team hosted the Eastern Carolina University Pirates this past weekend in a three-game series between the top two teams in Conference USA.
Every day, Mike Rhoades wears a custom-made black rubber bracelet that says “Lots of love and faith — with no excuses.” Rhoades swears by this motto, and he hopes to bring his philosophy to the Rice University men’s basketball team as the new head coach.
This past Saturday, April 5, former president George W. Bush launched a public exhibition of his paintings at his presidential library in Dallas. Bush’s paintings include everything from cats to world leaders produced in large, clunky brushstrokes on a variety of solid-colored backgrounds.
The Rice University Art Gallery has commissioned Vietnamese artist Dinh Q. Le to showcase his latest work, Crossing the Farther Shore, from April 10 to Aug. 28.
I’m still in shock. Rice University, home of one of the most prestigious think tanks in the nation, just hosted the man who wrote The Bell Curve and Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010, two works that were published without peer review and, as it turns out, for good reason. In his hour long discussion, Dr. Murray made enough offensive, uneducated, unsupported comments to fuel a separate hour-long discussion by itself. This was especially disappointing given that I find his newer thesis about class segregation quite interesting.Murray was certainly aware that the majority of the people attending his talk were there to protest and did not view him favorably as he opened up with “according to your [the audience’s] standards I am racist, I am sexist, I am ageist, I am ablest...”It was really painful listening to him since he’d make claims like marriage civilizes men, women choose to be single mothers, and minorities should appreciate oppression since it has made them stronger without giving any evidence past personal anecdotes, his opinion or his liberal interpretation of data. Perhaps he did have credible evidence. If so, he irresponsibly did not focus on it during his talk.Murray’s “research methods” include designing surveys based on his stereotypes of white people from high versus low socioeconomic backgrounds (see his survey for yourself at PBS.org) and going to bars to collect opinions which anyone with even a basic understand of statistics would find to be an extremely skewed sample.Additionally, Murray failed to successfully measure or even quantify "empathy" or lack thereof between social classes. I am sympathetic to his argument that we have a dearth of empathy in America, but not persuaded by any of his efforts.Murray attempted to steer clear of his opinions on race, intelligence and poverty in favor of his opinions on the differences between upper middle class and working class white Americans perhaps in part because his audience was mainly protesters (240 students RSVPd to the protest versus only 40 students for the actual event). Nevertheless, he still made some interesting assumptions about the audience. He assumed most of us in the room were upper class, which clearly tells me he is not familiar with Rice’s financial aid practices. He assumed none of us belonged to or could empathize with white, working class Americans. He assumed none of us have had a job where working has caused a part of our body to hurt (an example from his survey). He assumed the most contact we have had with people of a different socioeconomic status from us was from working at soup kitchens just because we needed service hours, our parents made us, or we wanted a nice looking resume. Ouch! This also tells me he assumes that Rice is a homogenous community rather than a diverse community with people representing different socioeconomic backgrounds along with different races, different life experiences and in turn different political opinions.I haven’t even touched on Bell Curve. I have two questions: Since when has performance on Intelligence Quotient tests, a misnomer anyway, equated to intelligence, and since when has only intelligence equated to success? Even if one were able to find differences in IQ scores between races, race is not entirely a biological construct, but rather a social one. Furthermore, Murray has not been able to establish a causal effect between race and IQ score. I invite you to read Inequality by Design: Cracking the Bell Curve Myth by Claude S. Fischer and five other co-authors. You would think that if Murray were not biased, he’d want to consider social inequality factors as well like unequal educational opportunities, varying access to stable housing and nutrition and exposure to violence that may be more prevalent among minorities due to historical exclusion, discrimination and disenfranchisement. If Murray had ever rationalized racism, you can be sure it was not by truly rigorous academic means.I will say I am extremely proud of the organization and execution of the protest. Students representing several Rice groups, including BSA, HACER, RASA, CSS and APASA, as well as Queers and Allies and the Women’s Resource Center, came together to speak out and create dialogue. It definitely challenged the common saying that Rice students are apathetic regarding social and political issues. I hope this sets a positive precedent concerning the power of unified voices taking a stand at Rice. Thank you to all of the bold students and supportive faculty who practiced free speech without diminishing anyone else’s.
As I’m sure many of you are aware, this past week the Baker Institute Student Forum and the Federalist Society teamed up to host an event featuring controversial scholar Charles Murray. As many students have correctly pointed out, Murray is well known for contentious statements he made in his 1994 book The Bell Curve, in which he forwards some blatantly racist and sexist notions. Let me be clear –– I find these viewpoints outrageous and despicable. However, this does not mean BISF or the Federalist Society were out of line for bringing him to campus.First off, Murray is hardly a fringe figure; his views are arguably as central to modern political dialogue as many of the other speakers who have been invited to campus. He is part of the American Enterprise Institute, a major think tank the Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin recently described as the “dominant conservative think tank.” His viewpoints have recently been cited by former VP candidate Paul Ryan and Texas gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbott. A majority of the Rice population, including myself, may not agree with his ideas, but he is an entirely reasonable guest for BISF to invite considering the club’s mission is to encourage policy discourse.Furthermore, Murray is not discussing the views put forth in The Bell Curve. His talk is centered around his current book, Coming Apart, which is included on the New York Times’ list of 100 Notable Books of 2012. His current work has pulled away from his focus of 20 years ago; Coming Apart is about his perception of the decline in traditional values among lower and middle class Americans, not I.Q. differences between genders and races. It has been hailed by highly-respected authors, such as David Brooks (who spoke at Rice in 2011), as an extremely important book about the state of American society. Again, like it or not, Murray is an extremely significant figure in the political world, and it is entirely reasonable for clubs intended to promote policy discourse to invite him to address his views.Next, I would like to address Dean of Undergraduates John Hutchinson’s commentary about the event. In his public statement, Hutchinson condemns, in principle, the idea that someone with views he finds “ignorant or repellant” should ever be invited to speak at Rice University. Universities have an important role to play as free spaces for the exchange and critique of ideas. They are not incubators for one particular perspective, but rather places where students can be exposed to a wide range of viewpoints and consider them and react accordingly. Columbia University demonstrated this when it invited the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to speak in 2011. Those who invited Ahmadinejad probably did not agree with his abhorrent viewpoints, but they understood the importance of allowing students to gain access to a viewpoint that is present in the world and which they are often sheltered from in a liberal, academic setting. Mr. Murray’s views may be repugnant to students educated at an academic institution like Rice, but they are widely accepted by many other sectors of the population. For a university to deprive its students of any viewpoints just because they are controversial is to not prepare them for the real world, in which such views are widespread. Hutchinson’s statement is incredibly disappointing because it implies that Rice is a place that penalizes those who wish to expose students to any perspective outside of the norm.As an officer in BISF, I find Hutchinson’s accusation that “there is a very strong implication that the invitation and advertisement implies endorsement” to be highly offensive. It suggests that our decision to provide a forum for views outside of the liberal norm makes us racist and sexist, and that is very hurtful. Does Hutchinson also suggest that we ban other forms of expression that give a forum to unpopular views? Should we ban publications like the New York Times, which publicizes controversial op-eds by figures like Vladimir Putin? Should we withhold invitations to other speakers who decades ago may have opposed marriage equality, decriminalization of abortion or other elements common to the liberal policy agenda?Hutchinson’s remarks endanger free speech on campus by implying that students must ensure a speaker has views conforming to Dean Hutchinson’s or else risk personally-directed, public backlash by the administration. It implies that we must avoid inviting any speaker to campus who has previously made statements deviating from the liberal norm.Again, I do not agree with Murray’s point of view, and I fully support students’ decisions to protest after they have given him a chance to speak. However, I am disappointed in the administration’s condemnation of the Federalist Society and BISF for inviting him to campus. The real world is not a liberal haven in which unpopular views are repressed, and students need to be equipped to respond to these perspectives. The invitation was not an “endorsement,” but rather a brave endeavor to allow students to hear a prevalent, while controversial, perspective and defend their values against it. It is, in fact, a university’s responsibility to provide this opportunity to students in a safe environment. If every invitation was an endorsement, BISF members like myself would be juggling a messy handful of contradictory political ideologies.Students and administration –– be confident in your beliefs and values, and welcome the opportunity to defend them in the face of criticism. As philosopher John Stuart Mill famously pointed out, it is to everyone’s benefit to hear all dissenting views; even if your mind is made up, listening to counter-perspectives will reinforce your beliefs and equip you to defend them. A well-rounded university like Rice should provide a diverse mix of perspectives that students will encounter outside the hedges, not isolate itself as an incubator for single-perspective popular thought.
Charles Murray, a libertarian political scientist, will speak at Rice University Monday, April 7, as part of his national tour to present his book, Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010. The talk, hosted by the Rice Federalist Society and the Baker Institute Student Forum, has prompted a protest organized primarily by Black Student Association President Jackie Mutai.Murray is best known for his 1994 book, The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life, which argues that class and race are linked with intelligence.“I know [Murray] as a racist,” Mutai, a McMurtry College junior, said. “His view are repellent and very, very ignorant, and so the fact that his name and Rice University were in the same line – I was just kind of really surprised.”Rice Fed-Soc President Blake Delaplane said the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank where Murray is a fellow, reached out to him about hosting Murray as part of a book tour. Delaplane said he was aware of Murray’s controversial past upon accepting the offer.“The Rice Federalist Society was aware that some of Murray's views had been controversial in the past, but our focus in inviting him was his latest book, ‘Coming Apart,’ which steers clear of the controversy of Murray's past works,” Delaplane, a Duncan College junior, said. “Murray's studies have been the center of engaging intellectual discussion among many leading scholars in political science and sociology. As such, Rice Fed-Soc hoped to continue these sorts of stimulating and challenging conversations on campus.”Mutai said although she is an advocate for free speech, she doesn’t agree with the decision to host Murray.“Everyone’s entitled to free speech,” Mutai said. “You’re allowed to bring on campus anyone that you can find [who] can intellectually stimulate convocation and grow the community. I was kind of surprised [they] would bring someone to campus whose views are not really going to enhance much. I would not bring someone [to] campus whose views are repellent and bogus. He’s not someone who’s helping the community; he’s hurting the community.”Dean of Undergraduates John Hutchinson said in an email that, because Murray had been given an invitation by Rice Fed-Soc and BISF, he should be entitled to speak at Rice, but that he hopes students will challenge Murray’s views.“I am a strong advocate of unbridled free speech,” Hutchinson said. “The free exchange of ideas is how we learn and how we progress. Rice students can invite to the campus those whose ideas they wish to hear, to learn from, or to challenge. Members of the audience during [Murray’s] discussion have equal right to point out what they consider to be his ignorance and, if they are so inclined, his apparent prejudice. Indeed, I would be disappointed if they did not do so.”Mutai said she questioned whether Murray would be able to stimulate a constructive conversation.“The fact that [BISF and Rice Fed-Soc] willingly just took this invitation just because he’s such a controversial speaker just seems kind of – It didn’t seem like the right decision,” Mutai said.Delaplane said that just as Murray was invited by Rice faculty in 1995 to speak about The Bell Curve, Rice Fed-Soc hopes to do the same with Murray’s new book. He said he expects many to disagree with the work and that Rice Fed-Soc doesn’t endorses Murray’s views just because they invited him.“We hoped [those who disagree] would dispute Murray's claims in the context of a professional intellectual discussion,” Delaplane said. “We never anticipated being pressured to shut down the event or being accused of endorsing Murray's views. Murray's views do not represent the views of the Rice Federalist Society. Rice Fed-Soc is here to provide a civil forum for challenging intellectual discussion among students and scholars.”Mutai said she disagreed with Delaplane and felt that by inviting Murray, Rice Fed-Soc invited and endorsed his views.“By bringing a person here, you are indirectly endorsing his views,” Mutai said. “Indirectly, having him here means that you are okay with him speaking about whatever he wants to speak about. We’re not attempting to cancel the event or to stop him from speaking, because you’re allowed to speak about whatever you want. We are never allowed to take away someone else’s free speech, but if someone’s views are bogus and repellent then we are going to speak back.”Delaplane said that inviting controversial figures like Murray to campus isn’t new and that his club is doing the same thing Rice has done in the past.“In the past, Rice University has hosted a wide variety of influential and potentially controversial speakers,” Delaplane said. “I sincerely hope that does not mean Rice has endorsed all their views. It is better to hear from these speakers firsthand and discern their arguments through discussion than to ignore their reasoning and pretend it does not exist. Shouldn't this be at least one major priority of the university?”BISF President Nathan Joo said the mission of his club is to facilitate dialogue from all perspectives and to provide a forum for students, faculty and scholars to engage in discussion about today’s policy making.“The co-sponsorship of any event should never be construed as an endorsement of a particular speaker's views or ideological affiliations,” Joo, a Will Rice College junior, said. “[BISF] fully embraces the power of debate and in that vein encourages the critical participation of all undergraduates in all events.”Mutai said her protest aims to create a dialogue that Murray believes impossible.“[Murray] believes that we, being minorities, are not intellectual beings,” Mutai said. “We’re going to show him how intellectual we are. I can’t control anyone yelling out or screaming anything, but in the protest I’ve planned, people will create a dialogue. I want you to ask intellectual questions. I want you to raise your concerns. I want people to have signs. I want, before the actual talk, for people to meet outside, talk to each other and get to know what’s going on. I want you to use your voice. I want you to speak up or speak out.”Hispanic Association for Cultural Enrichment at Rice President Fernanda Pierre, who is helping organize the protest along with co-President and Will Rice senior Alexandra Zambrano, said she and Mutai specifically designed the protest to not be disruptive.“We met with Dean Hutchinson to make sure how we went about the protest was going to be [the] best approach for all parties involved,” Pierre, a Jones College senior, said. “We came to the conclusion that disruptive protests to try and shut down Murray from speaking wouldn’t be the best approach. So we’re going to make posters with statements, sit in the front section and raise those posters if something questionable is said. One example might be a poster simply stating ‘wrong’ in red ink.”Mutai said the protest is an opportunity for Rice to recognize that minorities have a voice on campus.“I want us to start a dialogue on campus to let students know and understand that these kinds of actions aren’t okay and that a lot of students don’t find them okay, especially minority students and minority groups on campus,” Mutai said. “Sometimes, comments are said or situations happen on campus that it’s hard for us to react to. Time and time again, our voices are left forgotten. We are a voice on campus.”Mutai said the protest has become a combined effort of many cultural clubs at Rice.“We have many organizations coming together like the Chinese Student Association, Queers & Allies and Multiracial Students at Rice,” Mutai said. “It makes me proud that Rice students can react in this short amount of time to a man a majority of us aren’t agreeing with.”Lovett College senior Daniel Cohen said he agrees with Rice Fed-Soc’s decision to invite Murray. Cohen was BISF President until he stepped down last December. He said the Murray event was proposed while he was president and that he replied that BISF would explore the possibility, but that the event solidified after he stepped down.“I believe in the power of debate to push the best ideas to the forefront of society and to debunk baseless theories,” Cohen, a Lovett College senior, said. “We should not be afraid to hear offensive or controversial ideas; we should challenge them with earnest listening and critical thinking through open dialogue. There is no setting more appropriate for such debate than universities because they are the places where ideas are articulated, debated, refined or discredited.”Pierre said by inviting Murray, BISF and Rice Fed-Soc are providing him a platform.“Most of his ideas are harmful to students, alienate students and are bad for public policy,” Pierre said. “This person doesn’t represent Rice’s values. There’s a difference between endorsing someone and allowing free speech.”
Rice University’s Sous Chef Martin de Santiago cooked his way to victory at the National Association of College and Food Service’s Southern Regional Contest March 24-26 in Stillwater, Okla., winning first place and advancing to NACUFS’s national contest to be held in Baltimore, Md. this July.
Two Lovett College students were sexually assaulted in their rooms by a Lovett alumnus during Beer Bike, according to Rice University Police Department Chief Johnny Whitehead.
This past weekend, the Rice University women’s tennis team traveled to Williamsburg, Va. to compete against the College of William and Mary and Yale University. Due to inclement weather, all the matches were held indoors, but that did not stop the Owls from winning the tournament.
The Rice University baseball team faced Conference USA foe Middle Tennessee State University this past weekend in Murfreesboro, Tenn. For the first time this season, the Owls lost a three-game series, dropping two of three games. Thirty games into the season, the Rice Owls are 21-9 while posting a 9-3 conference record.
“And the only thing that really matter is the one thing I can’t seem to do,” vocalist and lyricist Martin Courtney sings on “Talking Backward,” the third song off New Jersey-based jangly, indie-pop band Real Estate’s third LP, Atlas. Although the track gives some insight into his emotional dilemma, there is the ever-present sense that we are missing something. If this was a 60s-pop lyric, we would safely assume the “one thing” is to say is “I love you,” but Real Estate always leaves the listener feeling a bit unsure, partly because Courtney uses words so sparingly, but also because the eternally sunny, bright landscape created by Real Estate’s trademark trebly, wavering guitar lines always seems to cloak even the darkest lyrics in radiant light.
