Mount Hood

Death by degree

Seniorits2Color

By: Conner Williams
Editor-in-Chief

The disease is spreading at an alarming rate. Nearly 25 percent of all college students have become infected and top-level scientists have yet to develop a cure. Students across the country are exhibiting frightening symptoms, and there doesn’t appear to be any way to treat them.

This terrifying disease is not one that has appeared in the major news headlines; it’s not Ebola or the swine flu, it’s something much more infectious and threatening.

Senioritis.

I know, just seeing the word makes me shudder too. In fact, just writing this very account has caused my symptoms to worsen even more; I’ve had to stop and put my face in my hands in defeat at least a dozen times. That’s right, I am a victim of senioritis, and my case might be one of the worst I’ve seen.

Senioritis causes extreme feelings of laziness, tardiness (and, often times, complete absence altogether), insomnia and/or lethargy, sudden alcohol overconsumption, and a complete lack of motivation. The only thing that keeps these symptoms from keeping one completely incapacitated is the debilitating fear of not receiving his or her degree in time, and even that is becoming less and less of a motivating factor.

In all seriousness though, it’s starting to become a serious problem for me. In a completely honest and conservative estimate, I’ve probably skipped 60 percent of my classes this quarter. Yeah, I get it, I’m a bad student. Whatever. Look, this isn’t a personal shot at my professors (if you’re reading this, know that I think you’re awesome and the work you do is amazing), I just really don’t find much use from going to class. In the increasingly technologically-driven world our educational system thrives in, I don’t see the need to go to class when all materials and information are provided for me online. I simply can’t handle sitting through lectures anymore.

This is something that I think is a major flaw in our education system. To me, there’s a big difference between gaining an education and going to school. I don’t think the two go hand-in-hand. I’ll be completely honest: I despise school. I don’t believe that the traditional classroom setting is an optimal learning environment, at least for me. I don’t learn well by sitting there listening to someone 30 years my senior talking in monotone to me (Bueller … Bueller …). I’ll pass. I’d rather just teach myself the material in the comfort of my own home.

Not to mention the fact that I have to take classes that have absolutely nothing to do with my career just so that I can get a “well-rounded” liberal arts education (aka: keep students in school longer and suck more money out of them), I just dislike going to class. Students have almost zero input for course curricula and are forced to complete arbitrarily important assignments that usually don’t do much for them; it’s simply one going through the motions so that a professor can have something to grade and then assign a subjective value to a student. And, once again, this is not a shot at my instructors; it’s a shot at our education system as a whole.

I think this is the root of my senioritis: a lack of a reason to care. Yes, I know my education is important, and I do take it seriously for the most part. But really, why should I care about half the stuff I’m taught? I’m going to have to be trained to do whatever job I end up with anyways, so what’s the point of learning all of this information that I’m just going to forget over spring break?

I think Peter Gibbons from “Office Space” said it best: “It’s not that I’m lazy, it’s that I just don’t care.” So, I ask you, my faithful readers, why should I care? If you feel the need to berate/celebrate my claims, please contact me.

Contact the author at journaleditor@wou.edu or follow on Twitter @journalEIC

Musings from a woman on the edge

By: Katrina Penaflor
Managing Editor

Leonardo DiCaprio and his beautiful face of perfection finally took home an Oscar.

This was his sixth—yes, non-Leo super fans, sixth—nomination, and after years of being robbed, he finally won.

Please, everyone take a brief moment of silence to appreciate this.

Being an avid lover of all things Leo, I obviously have felt like everything Leonardo DiCaprio has ever been in has deserved an Oscar. Especially in his role of Jordan Belfort in “The Wolf of Wall Street.”

We all saw the scene where his character was so doped out on quaaludes that he couldn’t walk or get down the stairs of the country club. That scene was glorious.

Of course, leading up to the award ceremony there were nothing but jokes about how disappointing it would be for DiCaprio to not win (again) this year. Like, how the Oscar would go to the bear from the movie instead of Leo. But I never lost faith.

As many predicted, his role in “The Revenant” earned him the coveted, gold statue. I mean, the man slept in a dead animal carcass for this movie. How could he not win?

DiCaprio graciously accepted his award to a standing ovation and worked in a few words about global climate change to top it off. His Instagram bio does say he’s an environmentalist, after all.

Also, look for the picture of DiCaprio holding the card that had his name on it. You can see him subtly, maybe on purpose but who’s to know for sure, flipping off the academy.

After the long awaited win, the Internet exploded in memes and GIFs in celebration. I think one of my favorite things I saw was a clip of DiCaprio getting his Oscar engraved. He asked the woman who was working on his statue, “You do this every year?” And she answered, “Yes.” To which DiCaprio added, “I wouldn’t know.”

God bless him.

Contact the author at kpenaflor12@wou.edu or on Twitter @journalkatrina

Obstructionism on both sides of the aisle

By: Conner Williams
Editor-in-Cheif

So, big bad Obama thinks he has the audacity to appoint a justice to the Supreme Court during an election year of all times? Who does he think he is; the President or something? Oh yeah…

As it turns out, the President doesn’t have the option to opt out of appointing a justice to the SCOTUS just because it’s an election year, as many GOP members of the Senate have claimed. Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution states that the President “shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint…Judges of the Supreme Court.”

Interesting. Maybe I didn’t read it correctly, but I didn’t see anything that said the President may appoint judges, it said that he or she shall do so. There is also nothing in the Constitution that states the President may not appoint a justice during an election year, either. Which means Obama has to appoint a justice.

But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and a large amount of Senate Republicans, including some presidential hopefuls, have publicly voiced that they will block any nomination that Obama proposes.

Many congressional members on the left side of the aisle have publicly condoned this act of “obstructionist politics,” saying that to block any nomination just for the sake of it is to sacrifice the entire system of checks and balances under which our democracy operates. The situation has led to an escalation of yet another feud between the two parties, and I, for one, am sick of it.

Firstly, the Democrats can stop pointing fingers. Many Senate Democrats refused to confirm any justice appointed by President Bush back in 2007, and Obama himself even voted to filibuster one of Bush’s nominations when he was in the Senate. So, what’s with all the outcry when the Republicans do it this time?

I’m a firm believer that much of the debates stirred up by our elected officials are simply to increasingly polarize the country and dig us deeper into the rigged two-party hole that we have created for ourselves. There is no compromise anymore; it’s all about public demonization over which side is trying to ruin the country more. Since when did our legislative system become a jousting match?

Contact the author at journaleditor@wou.edu or on Twitter @journalEIC

Musings from a woman on the edge

ShiaColor

By: Katrina Penaflor 
Managing Editor

Shia LaBeouf is back at it with his performance art.

Remember his last performance, where he stayed in a theater and watched all his movies with a rotating crowd of fans? Silly question: of course you do.

Well, the newest one “#Elevate,” yes, the hashtag is to stay with the title, is the name of the actor/artist’s latest endeavor. LaBeouf stayed in an elevator on Feb. 19 for 24 hours at Oxford University with two other performers: Nastja Säde Rönkkö and Luke Turner.

It’s there so that visitors were welcomed to enter and exit the elevator to talk, question etc. with the three performance artists. But, really, I’m pretty much 100 percent positive everyone went to talk to just LaBeouf.

Oxford Union’s video description read, “Visitors will be able to join LaBeouf, Rönkkö & Turner inside the elevator during this time, and are invited to address the artists, the debating chamber, and the internet, so that their collective voices may form an extended, expansive, and egalitarian Oxford Union address.”

If I was there I would obviously have asked an endless stream of questions about the show “Even Stevens,” and the movie, and of course if he still talks to Beans. Oh, and how can I forget about my grade school television crush Twitty, LaBeouf’s best friend on the show.

Seriously, where is that guy now?

And what I’m really curious about is how La Beouf comes up with this stuff? Never would I ever consider filming myself in an elevator for twenty-four hours. Because one, I could never stand for that long, and two, my anxieties about who is actually entering the elevator would be through the roof.

What if a crazy person entered the elevator and tried to attack me? Or what if a person tried to carry on a conversation about something super boring, and I was literally bored to death during the 24-hour time period.
Whatever the actor/artist chooses to do next I’ll, of course, have to comment on it because the list of priorities for my column include: ridiculous purchases, stuff I find to be outrageous, and, of course, all things Shia La Beouf.

Contact the author at kpenaflor12@wou.edu or on Twitter @journalkatrina

What motivates you?

By: Conner Williams 
Editor in Chief

“Your competition got stronger and faster today … Did you?”

That omnipresent statement was plastered in huge bold letters on the wall of my high school weight room. It served as a constant reminder that there is always someone out there who works harder than I do. I took the statement as a personal challenge to do my best to put in more effort for each workout than I did for the last one.

I like to think that I work hard in most areas of my life. I do well in school, complete work assignments with professionalism and enthusiasm, and exhaust myself in the gym.

Weightlifting has been a passion, hobby, and lifestyle of mine for a while now, and my hard work has allowed me to progress significantly over the years. And while I work hard, I am occasionally reminded that there are others out there that work way harder than me under circumstances that require extreme mental willpower.

Sometimes I use this as motivation to push myself when I see others who are differently abled than I working harder than me, but lately I have felt a little bit differently.

I feel like I owe it to those that tackle the world through a differently abled experience that I do to push my body and mind to their limits in order to achieve my maximum potential. Without attempting to sound vain, people like me –those that are temporarily abled– have it pretty good, and we owe it to those that are less physically blessed to give our best effort in all of our pursuits.

I used to train with a man that was born with dislocated hips, leaving him basically unable to use his legs for everyday functions. In high school, he was told that he would never be able to bench press 400 pounds. A little more than a decade later, he set a world record by pressing 710 pounds at a bodyweight of 259 pounds. But get this: his legs don’t touch the ground. And anyone that has ever performed the bench press before knows how crucial one’s leg drive is for a successful lift. He did not take no for an answer, and he had to approach it in a personalized way unique to him. I used to think that way – that I needed to prove myself to other people and that I had to show the world that I was capable of athletic greatness – but I think I just grew out of it.

I don’t think like that anymore. I’ve stopped worrying about other people and what they look like, and I no longer constantly compare myself to others. I now focus on myself by doing things day in and day out that help me reach my goals for me. I feel like I owe it to others that are differently abled than I. And when I say that others are not as blessed genetically as I am, I am not implying that they do not have amazing skills and qualities about them that make them extraordinary people in their own way; I am talking in a physical sense of being able to achieve fitness goals. Those that are temporarily abled physically have it easier to accomplish athletic feats than those that are differently abled, which is why I aim to give my best effort whenever I can. I still have a long way to go in order to get where I want to be, but I know that each step forward that I take is for me, and for those that are unable to do so.

And this is not to say that people who do things for others or in spite of others are wrong for using that as their motivating factor; I have simply found more happiness by focusing on myself and doing what makes me happy for me, and not for others.

Despite my renewed attitude of doing things for myself, there is one thing that has always stuck in my mind since the day I heard it: the conversation between Chuckie (Ben Affleck) and Will (Matt Damon) in “Good Will Hunting” towards the end of the movie.
“Oh, come on! Why is it always this, I mean, I f—-in’ owe it to myself to do this? What if I don’t want to?” Will said to Chuckie when he was told that he had something none of their others friends had. Will had a gift, a way out of poverty. He was a genius.
“[…] F— you. You don’t owe it to yourself. You owe it to me. ‘Cause tomorrow I’m gonna wake up and I’ll be fifty and I’ll still be doing this s—. And that’s all right, that’s fine. I mean, you’re sitting on a winning lottery ticket and you’re too much of a p—y to cash it in. And that’s b——t ‘cause I’d do anything to have what you got!” Chuckie exclaims to Will.

That line gets to me every time I see the movie. We all have our own inherent gifts and talents, and there are many others out there that would love to possess what someone else has. That is what I mean when I say that I owe it to other people to give it my best every day.

What’s the deal with churching?

By: Declan Hertel
Entertainment Editor

I have no stance on this. I have no feelings for or against. All I am doing here is stating facts. Facts have no opinion. And these are the facts.

Monmouth has a lot of churches. Like, a lot of churches. At least eight in Monmouth proper, and the number jumps to 14 including Independence, not to mention the couple that are just outside the limits of both cities.

I don’t know what this means. I don’t know what to make of it. In my hometown, we have at least six times as many people as Monmouth, and maybe three churches: the Super-church on top of the hill, the LDS church in the wetlands, and I’m sure there’s another one somewhere in the city limits.

But Monmouth, a town whose already small population drops by about 67 percent during the summer months, has eight.

I’m sure there’s a logical explanation: holdovers from the farmstead days, Monmouth’s convenient middle-of-nowhere location, varying denominations, etc.

But that doesn’t change the fact that there are, like, a ton of churches in Monmouth.

It’s also notable that there are no non-Christian houses of worship in the area. The nearest synagogue is in Salem and the nearest mosque is in Corvallis, not to mention places for the non-Abrahamic faiths. This is probably due to the local demographic breakdown, but even so. Interesting.

Is the concentration of churches a bad thing? No. That’s silly. But is it a good thing?

I don’t know, maybe. I can’t see any positive effects on my Monmouth experience from the high density of churches. But I also can’t see any negative effects. This may be because I am nonreligious and have no real stake in the issue.

But I suppose it’s a good thing for not only the local religious contingency, but also for the population of faithful students trying to find a place to practice their faith while away from home. That’s undoubtedly a good thing.

All that said, I’m still a little bit baffled. Because, guys: Monmouth has a LOT of churches.

Musings from a woman on the edge

By: Katrina Penaflor 
Managing Editor

My excitement for the “Full House” reboot “Fuller House” has completely flown off and disappeared somewhere far, far away.

I just watched the trailer for “Fuller House” and sadly, I’ve grown to be completely underwhelmed, and it left me questioning why I enjoyed the show so much in the first place. Also, no Michelle Tanner (I’ll get to that in a minute).

Shows that I long thought rested away in television heaven seem to be making their way back to our screen. “X-Files,” “Gilmore Girls,” (both of these I have zero complaints about), and, of course, “Fuller House.”

I’m pretty sure this idea reaches to people’s love of nostalgia, and how, for me, letting things you love go can be pretty impossible.

My anticipation for the show has been building ever since I heard about it through John Stamos’ Instagram. And, yes, of course I follow him, and all the people who don’t are severely missing out.

Unfortunately, after seeing the trailer (and if you haven’t seen it just go watch it or accept the fact that this article will make no sense) I have one word to describe it—cheesy.

But then again, “Full House” always did have that cheese-ball factor in the past. Maybe because I watched it when I was younger I didn’t think about it the way I do now.

I’d like to add adorable, yet at times mildly annoying, Michelle (played by Mary-Kate and Ashley Olson) is nowhere to be seen. She was mentioned via a voicemail by her sisters, but that was it.

My disappointment in her absence was a major part in my less than enthusiastic response to the trailer.

Who knows, maybe when I give the actual show a try I’ll take back everything I just said? Also, it arrives on Netflix on my birthday, which—because I’m super odd—always makes me feel really cool.

WOU logo

Facebook   Instagram   Twitter  YouTube  LinkedIn  wouTV

WESTERN OREGON UNIVERSITY
345 Monmouth Ave. N.
Monmouth OR 97361

503-838-8000 | 1-877-877-1593

Tools

Campus Maps
Canvas
Find People
Portal
Virtual Tour
WOU Email
Technical Support

Resources

A-Z Index
Accessibility
Academic Calendar
Class Schedule
Jobs at WOU
Partnerships
Student Services

Western Oregon University’s Land Acknowledgement
Western Oregon University in Monmouth, OR is located within the traditional homelands of the Luckiamute Band of Kalapuya. Following the Willamette Valley Treaty of 1855 (Kalapuya etc. Treaty), Kalapuya people were forcibly removed to reservations in Western Oregon. Today, living descendants of these people are a part of the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Community of Oregon and the Confederated Tribes of the Siletz Indians.

Accessibility    Public Records    Privacy    Student Consumer Information

WOU prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national or ethnic origin, age, religion, marital status, disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression in all programs, activities and employment practices as required by Title IX, other applicable laws, and policies. Retaliation is prohibited by WOU.