"The world would be a better place if everyone grew brains." - Humble Master

While we appreciate factual corrections, consider posting on the Board Comment Board, brought to the readers by popular request.

Readers can start asking questions for Alumni Week 2016 beginning on Friday, May 6th.

Posted on 05/05/2016 8:37 p.m.

New Podcast: #34 Season 6, Episode 6

HAMILTON. Music by Lin-Manuel Miranda and the Hamilton Cast

Download Here! -- Length: 00:26:00 -- Size: 23.8 MB

Or Listen Now:

Referenced Submissions

None

Participating Aliases

Tally M. Haleakalā The Soulful Ginger Frère Rubik Auto Surf Adelaide Spectre Alexander Hamilton

Question #86156 posted on 05/05/2016 7:28 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I'm looking for a map of countries' endonyms/autonyms. I found one already, but the names were listed in hardcore/pro mode where in Asia, Russia, and the Middle East, they were unreadable since they were written in other alphabets. I know that China's name for itself can be written accurately in roman characters (Zhongguo), and I'm assuming the others can be as well. I remember someone on the Board liked making maps; would they (at their live's convenience, no rush) make such a map?

-Molybdenym

A:

Dear Doctor,

You probably found this endonym map which is super cool.

However, since the writer that originally had this couldn't finish an actual map, and since it's significantly more work than most of us have to put into it, this set of Wikipedia articles will be able to provide the endonyms in Roman characters you're looking for.

-Tally M.


0 Corrections
Question #86228 posted on 05/05/2016 1:54 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

So I've been a bit up in arms about everything that's gone on with sexual assault awareness month here at BYU? I lot of people have said that BYU isn't a safe place because of the honor code. I don't necessarily buy it. They say that because of the honor code people don't report rape. Therefore the rapists feel empowered to rape again and again. Now my thought is that the honor code protects people from getting raped. I would assume that the number of rapes prevented by the honor code are a lot higher than the rapes caused by our culture. Then people get back around and say that over 90% of the rapes aren't even reported here because of it so my point may or may not be valid. In discussions on rape culture in the past year or so why has so much of the discussion gone away from rape prevention. A lot of women (and survivors) often say 100% of rapes are caused by the rapists. True. I agree with that....then they say end of story. Then I bring up, well if it's so awful why don't we take measures and use common sense to prevent it. Recently John Kasich got under fire for his response to a question at a town hall meeting. He was asked my a girl, "I'm going to college this year, I'm worried about my safety. What can I do from protecting myself from being raped". His reply, "don't go to parties with alcohol". I just don't get why current third wave feminism is so obsessed with doing whatever (think of slut-walks) and being like, it doesn't mater what we do at all, it's not our fault. They are technically being right. But isn't it better to be safe then sorry? With a caveat, I do realize that when it's done it's done and that the survivor needs A LOT of help, and it's pointless to know the circumstances how it happened, only that it happened. I'm just thinking, it would be stupid to say, robbers are at fault 100% of the time, so I'm never going to lock my doors at night and hope that I become a victim. I know this is all so complicated, I just want you to respond on how you'd change the culture here at BYU and to hear if you agree if there should be an immunity clause for rape in the honor code.

-I'm a deriver, not a surviver

A:

Dear Ike,

I agree with a lot of your points actually. I do 100% believe that it isn't the victim's fault and that we ought to teach men and boys not to be sexual predators, but I also do agree that it's better to be safe than sorry. 

I have a bone to pick with the HCO for something completely different from this but it's not my story to tell anyway. But I do really love the Honor Code. That's where my difference lies: the HCO are people who make mistakes, and the honor code is a system of living life. Things only really get screwy when imperfect humans try to enforce it. This whole situation gives a really awkward position that is hard to take any one side on. Yeah, the Honor Code is in place to protect us, and if you were going against the Honor Code then you ought to have consequences for that. But it's very hard to make sure there is a distinction between "you're being punished for rape" and "you're being punished for breaking the honor code." I think either BYU has done a bad job of making this distinction, or people who are being faced with honor code punishment don't see this distinction. I think one of the most important things BYU can do is 1) make this distinction very clear, and 2) help victims who have been raped (legal and emotional support) before going after them for the honor code violation. 

Immunity clauses are difficult because someone who gets in trouble for the honor code can easily call rape. I've heard a first-hand account of this happening and it completely puts life on hold for all parties involved, not to mention it can completely destroy the life of the accused. I wish there was a way for this to be a thing, but an immunity clause just becomes too complex and unfortunately I think people would take advantage of it. 

Those are just my thoughts on the matter. This is also a very unique case that's been brought to light because of the officers who brought the case files to the HCO. Which I think is despicable. 

-Adelaide

A:

Dear Survivor,

In case you're interested, the University just posted this article a few days ago.

One consistent topic I've seen come up in this argument is that people want more evidence, more statistics, more hard data about rape and honor code correlations and all that jazz.

While there can be some statistical data done, for the most part, rape is a crime that is individual and anecdotal.  Everyone who has been raped is in different situations, and we can't just say that "every person who has been raped at BYU was breaking the honor code to the nth degree."  Some people disregard the honor code completely and drink and have sex.  Some people stay half an hour past curfew at someone's apartment.  Some people wear short skirts.  Some people never even broke the honor code.  These are all varying amounts of disregard (if any) to the honor code, and as such, all should be treated differently. But none of them should be taken less seriously if they allege to have been raped.

Because of different severity levels of the honor code that people may have been acting on, the proposal of granting immunity to a rape victim can get difficult.  Like I said, rape is a personal and individual crime, and it can be exhausting for the HCO to not have a standard operating procedure to follow in rape allegations.

I feel like the two instances should be separated from one another.  Treat the victim for the rape and prosecute the rapist.  If applicable, carry out standard procedure if there was a violation of the honor code.  But the two should NEVER be intertwined.  That's where we reach levels of victim blaming.  I understand that doing this can be difficult, but if handled respectfully and tactfully, I believe it could be done successfully.

I feel that nearly every person would agree that it is more important to follow the law of the land than to follow the code of ethics for a school.  Therefore, if action is brought against an alleged rape victim because they broke the honor code, the same action should be brought against the perpetrator for breaking the same honor code violation, and then additional legal action should obviously be involved.

However, one issue brought up is that the HCO has investigated a rape victim who didn't claim to have broken the honor code, which means that there is some level of distrust here between the HCO and BYU students. 

I know this isn't what you asked, but you mentioned it in your question, and this is something I feel strongly about:

Honestly, I'm tired of hearing the argument that "I wouldn't leave my house unlocked and then get mad if I get robbed," or "I wouldn't leave my car in an unsafe neighborhood and be upset if someone steals it."

First: yes, you would get mad or upset.  Anyone claiming otherwise is lying.

Second: yes, it is absolutely 100% the fault of a robber who takes your car or breaks into your home.  It's certainly been made easier for a robber to break in if your defenses are not up, but that never means the victim is to blame.

Third: Rape victims are breathing, feeling, and thinking human beings who deserve more respect than being compared to an unlocked car.  

-April Ludgate

A:

Dear you,

I apologize for holding this answer so far over hours. I have very strong feelings on this issue that I wanted to express, but every time I think about it too much, I feel sad.

Before I go into this specific controversy, I first wanted to make it absolutely clear that I completely support the BYU Honor Code. While there are some aspects of the honor code, i.e. facial hair, that I feel could be updated, in general, the BYU Honor Code contributes to an uplifting, spiritually supportive environment for BYU students that sets BYU apart from other universities. The existence of the Honor Code is a good thing for a lot of students, and I'm glad it's there.

However, certain enforcements of the Honor Code, in my view, sometimes work against this positive environment instead of enhancing it. Some of these are cultural, student-imposed issues, some of them are the direct result of administrative policies, and some are the result of both. As a result, BYU can be a difficult place for many students who are facing a variety of issues. These issues are serious, and nuanced, civil, open discussions are needed in order for administrators and students to work together and bring these students' experiences in line with the positive environment that BYU is supposed to stand for.

I've had the opportunity to personally know many of the administrators who are involved in both this issue and other issues. Last summer, I had the opportunity to work in the ASB and meet Sarah Westerberg, as well as many other people who work with her to draft university policy. She, along with the other administrators, are all good people who are sincerely trying to manage a complicated, large organization that faces many unique issues. (As a side note, if anyone reading has sent personal hate mail or threats to Ms. Westerberg following her speech, knock it off. That's inappropriate and completely antithetical to the kind of environment needed to address these issues appropriately).

While I haven't worked with anyone from the Honor Code office, I did take a student development class from one of its senior employees. Although he and I would probably disagree on a lot of political points, I also believe that he and the other HCO employees are good people who are trying to do the right thing.

Meanwhile, I've also talked to a lot of students who have personal experience with this issue, and feel that they were unfairly treated by the Honor Code Office. I agree with them, and I personally believe that the current policy has serious issues that need to change.

On to your question.

I mainly want to respond to your point about whether the honor code protects people from being raped. I have three thoughts on that:

  1. Rape is against the law. Anyone who is willing to break the law in order to rape is a person who isn't going to be deterred by the Honor Code. No rapist is going to think to themselves, "Well I really want to rape this person, and I don't care how illegal it is/am pretty sure I won't get caught or punished, but since it's against the honor code, I guess I won't." So from the prevention standpoint of "stop rapists from raping," the Honor Code doesn't have much of an effect. Furthermore, many rape victims who attend BYU are raped by people who do not attend BYU, and do not have the Honor Code to worry about.
     
  2. Even if women do everything they can to avoid the possibility of being raped, they can't prevent it from happening. Many of the common-sense things women can do to reduce the likelihood of being raped, such as not getting drunk, are covered by the Honor Code. Because of this, the Honor Code can contribute to reducing rape rates. However, even if every BYU student perfectly followed the Honor Code, never breaking it deliberately or accidentally, rapes would still occur. And the thing is, nobody is perfect. Have you ever gotten in a fender bender from making a left turn when you didn't quite have enough space, or accidentally lost track of time? People make minor, innocent mistakes in judgment all the time. Sexual assault should not happen just because woman makes a minor mistake like staying too late at a guy's apartment, or accidentally having one drink too many at a party (which, for non-members, is not a sin). It's unrealistic for women to perfectly avoid situations where sexual assault is more likely, and it's unfair that men are able to make minor mistakes and lapses of judgment without being in nearly as much danger.

    Furthermore, it's impossible to completely avoid situations that could lead to sexual assault. For instance, I worked for BYU Catering my sophomore year. Whenever there as a football game, everyone was required to work. You couldn't take the shift off, or trade with anyone. It was a mandatory part of the job. When I worked those shifts, they frequently ended at 3 am. I didn't have a car, nor did I know anyone with a car well enough to ask to borrow it or ask them to pick me up at 3 am. I lived off campus, and the University Police will only escort you to the edge of campus.

    I had the following options: (a) I could stay in the Wilk until morning. This is technically trespassing, and is illegal. I also know of a girl who was raped by a campus security guard who found her in a building after it closed, and as you can expect, he threatened her with HCO trouble for being in the building late if she reported. Or, (b) I could get a ride home with one of my coworkers, who I didn't know very well and who were usually male. If I had gotten a ride with a male coworker and he had raped me, lots of people would probably tell me how foolish it was to get in a car with a guy I didn't know well at night. Finally, (c) I could walk from the Wilk to 300 N, at 3 am, alone in the dark. This is the option I usually chose, but I was always aware that if I were raped in that circumstance, people would probably say I shouldn't have been walking around by myself at 3 am.

    Fortunately, I was never assaulted on my way home from work. However, this situation illustrates the fact that by doing a normal, responsible thing (having a job in college), I was placed into a situation where no matter what choice I made, people could have blamed me for an assault occurring under those circumstances. In order to avoid that situation, I would have had to quit my job, or skip the shift and be fired from my job. This is because in order to live a normal, productive life, women are unfortunately at risk of being assaulted. This is not the fault of women, and the solution is not for women to curtail their activities, because that would quickly lead to a loss of their ability to do important, normal things. In fact, for much of history, the risk of sexual assault has been used to deny women freedom to do all sorts of things that we don't think twice about today. 

    I don't use the word "sucks" a lot on the Board, but I'm using it now, because it does suck. It sucks that women can't do normal things without the risk of being raped. It sucks that I feel responsible to prevent something that isn't in my control. It sucks that it's in the back of my mind if I meet with a male professor and he closes his office door. It sucks to be aware of when I'm paired with a guy for a group project and we work on it alone somewhere. It sucks when I have to walk home alone after dark. It sucks when women try to get something out of their car at 10 pm and are threatened with assault. It sucks that when I was dating my husband, he'd have to walk me all the way to Wyview and back even when he was completely exhausted, because I didn't feel safe walking there myself. It sucks that just typing out this answer makes me feel like I'm being paranoid, but if I didn't worry about these things and take precautions, people would blame me if I were attacked. It sucks that over 80% of rapists are known to the victim, and it sucks that a small part of me feels on edge during normal, harmless interactions with guys who are probably perfectly nice. It sucks that I (and every other woman) feel all this responsibility to make good choices, so that I can avoid being raped (and every woman wants to avoid being raped) even though, ultimately, being raped is not something I can control. And it sucks to feel afraid of that.

    Women are raped when they are dressed immodestly, and they are raped when they are covered head to toe in a niqab. Women are raped when they are drunk, and they are raped when they are sober. Women are raped when they're out late and they're raped before midnight. Women are raped walking alone, and women are raped when they're with friends they trust. Women are raped when they're unarmed, and they're raped when they're carrying pepper spray and have taken self defense classes. Women are raped under all sorts of circumstances, and no matter what the circumstance is, someone almost always finds a way to ask, "Well why didn't she do this?"

    In a nutshell, that's why people were upset by John Kasich's remarks. Most women are already aware that getting too drunk at a party can be dangerous, because most, if not all women already put a lot of thought, effort, and energy into staying safe. And despite that effort, women cannot control whether or not they get raped. Hearing suggestions to avoid getting drunk, or make sure you're keeping the letter of the Honor Code as exactly as possible, or whatever the latest "common sense safety" thing du jour happens to be, feels condescending, because we already know that, and it's tiresome to hear people talk about the issue as though the problem would be magically solved if women would just be smarter about their lives. We could get rid of all the alcohol and drugs in the world, and rape would still happen, and women want actual policy proposals and real effort being put in to solve systemic issues that lead to rape. We don't want another pamphlet from the police about how we can magically keep ourselves safe by following five simple guidelines, because guess what, people have been telling us those things our whole lives, and all of us try to stay safe because nobody wants to be raped, and rape still happens.

    Even if all female BYU students followed the Honor Code to its exact letter, 24/7, and never, ever, ever lost track of time or made a mistake, rape would still happen.

  3. Whether the honor code protects people from being raped is not the issue at stake here. We aren't talking about potential rapes that didn't happen. What we're talking about with the issue of how the HCO treats rape victims of rapes that have occurred, in spite of the existence of the honor code.

Now, I'd like to share some thoughts about how the policy should work. Many of my thoughts can already be found in Board Question #86274, which discusses specifics of how to treat rape cases where . In addition to the ideas I expressed in that answer, I'd like to point out the following things:

  1. I was reading in one of my science classes about measurement errors. Basically, with a lot of processes, you have to choose which kind of measurement error you're willing to introduce. For instance, many methods of cancer screening will produce a certain number of false positives. If you give everyone with a positive test result chemotherapy, you'll treat 100% of the cancer patients, but you'll also give a lot of healthy people unnecessary and painful treatments. On the other hand, if you discard too many of the positive results, people who have cancer are going to go undiagnosed and won't receive treatment, with possibly fatal consequences. You have to choose an intermediate position to draw the line, weighing the consequences of both sides while doing so.

    Similar cases where a line needs to be drawn happen a lot in life, and this Honor Code rape victim issue is one of them. If the policy is too harsh on rape victims, reporting will be discouraged, and a lot of rapists will go free. Most rapists rape multiple times, and rape is a really serious crime with lasting effects on the victim. Obviously, sacrificing the ability to catch rapists is a bad thing. On the other hand, some feel that a policy that is too lenient will undermine the Honor Code and fail to hold rape victims accountable for any Honor Code violations that occurred around the time of their rape. Again, my response to Board Question #86274 goes over why I think that most Honor Code violations could be dealt with through either immunity or a verbal or written warning.

    Essentially, though, I believe that the acceptable margin of error in this situation is a margin of error that is lenient on rape victims in order to catch rapists who are breaking the law and raping people, rather than a margin of error that sacrifices the ability to catch rapists in favor of the ability to catch people who are committing more minor sins or legal infractions. That is basically the definition of swallowing a camel and straining at gnats. It's impossible to punish rape victims unless rapes are reported, and I think it's clear beyond a shadow of a doubt that the current policy is suppressing reporting.
     
  2. While I don't typically read Feminist Mormon Housewives, I really like what they have to say in this article, "Rape at BYU: Weighing Punishment and Policy":

    I want to talk about Rules of Evidence for a minute. In the law, rules of evidence prevent certain things from being used as evidence in a trial. For instance, in the case of a car accident, parties cannot use an offer to pay for medical bills as evidence of liability. In fact, if the jury hears that the offer was made, the judge can call a mistrial. The rationale is that even though a factfinder could reasonably conclude that the offering to pay medical bills suggests that the party is at fault, the courts don’t want to discourage people from offering to pay for medical bills.

    Rules of evidence grounded more in policy than purity of fact-finding abound, but none more than than in criminal proceedings. The Exclusionary Rule provides that evidence obtained in the course of certain constitutional violations, such as in illegal search, cannot be used as evidence against the accused. So if a police officer enters a home illegally and finds a pound of cocaine on the table, and the cocaine wouldn’t have otherwise been found, the prosecution can’t use the cocaine as evidence against the owner of the house, even though obviously, possessing a pound of cocaine is a serious offense punishable by significant fines and serious prison time. The rationale for this is that allowing police to use evidence gained by way of a Constitutional violation would encourage police to violate the Constitution.

    Essentially, in many cases, our society has decided that some policies are so important that otherwise relevant facts cannot be considered by a court of law; the guilty will sometimes go free because protecting people from overreaching police is that important.

    Deterring rape is, in my opinion, even more important than deterring police from conducting unconstitutional searches or encouraging people to pay for medical bills. The psychological consequences of rape and sexual assault are numerous and include self-harm, PTSD, flashbacks, depression, and self-harm. “Research has shown that symptom levels of victimized women… remained elevated for at least two years following a rape compared to women who have never been sexually traumatized (Frazier, 2003; Koss & Figueredo, 2004a,b).”

    And in the Book of Mormon, the prophet Mormon describes the rape of the Lamanite women as depriving them of what is “most dear and precious above all things.”

    Rape is unacceptable. Inflicting violence and long-lasting trauma on others must be discouraged in every way possible. Brigham Young University has a moral obligation to encourage victims to feel safe in reporting the abuse, so that rapists and would-be rapists have no reason to think that they can get away with violence.

    Brigham Young University should look to our legal system and find a way to balance the importance of following the rules of the university with the importance of protecting the student body from violence. It should go without saying that rape is worse than being in the house of a member of the opposite sex after curfew, or lying horizontally with a member of the opposite sex on a bed, and, yes, consensually touching a member of the opposite sex in an erotic manner. Because rape is an issue of paramount importance, honor code violations that would otherwise warrant reprimand should ignored when rape is involved. Full stop. Unless BYU’s policy that essentially protects rapists changes, many rape victims will be deprived of the support they desperately need, and the justice they deserve, and many rapists will believe they can rape without consequence.

    Again, while I believe that a written warning would be an acceptable alternative to ignoring Honor Code violations or providing immunity, the quoted opinions expressed in this article do an excellent job of discussing the substantial legal precedent for ignoring minor violations in order to prosecute more egregious ones.

  3. Another facet of rules of evidence, which is briefly touched on in the above quotation, is the fact that institutions need specific policies about when evidence can or cannot be used to convict someone of breaking a law or rule. Currently, I feel like the Honor Code Office does not have good policies about when to admit evidence. For instance, in one of the current publicized cases relating to this issue, the Honor Code Office's investigation is interfering with the proceedings of the criminal trial of the rapist. Right off the bat, I think that's an obvious issue. If the HCO's investigation is interfering with a legal trial and the ability to catch a rapist, there should at least be a policy that the investigation be delayed until after the outcome of the trial, with the victim able to continue classes and work in the meantime. Full stop. Any other policy interferes with the legal system, places the victim's life on hold unnecessarily, prevents justice from occurring, and increases the risk that dangerous rapists could walk free. That's just unacceptable.

    Meanwhile, that particular case reveals another troubling fact. The HCO received information about the victim's honor code violations because an officer involved in the case gave the case file to the HCO. While charges against the office have been dropped, this could easily have been a violation of Title IX. Additionally, I believe the actions of this officer violated the victim's privacy and were inappropriate. In my opinion, the fact that the HCO accepted this information and opened an investigation based on it is unacceptable. The HCO needs to have standards about when they will accept evidence or accusations, and from which sources under which circumstances. These standards need to be substantially stricter than they apparently are now, if any currently exist at all.
     
  4. False accusations of rape are relatively rare. I tried to look up the stats once, and while I can't remember my sources, various estimates range from 2% (in line with the rate of false accusations for other crimes) to about 10%. No matter which estimate you use, the fact remains that the vast majority of rape accusations are true. Because of this, I believe it's inappropriate to assume that if the HCO instituted an immunity policy, women would start making false accusations of rape in order to take advantage of immunity for other violations. First of all, it would be much easier for the woman to simply not say anything to the HCO at all. Most HCO violations, frankly, never come to the attention of the HCO. Not saying anything is a pretty reliable way to avoid punishment, if that's the person's primary motivation.

    Second of all, women understand the seriousness of false rape accusations. I don't think that most BYU students would make such a serious accusation to avoid personal accountability. If fear of the HCO did drive a substantial number of students to do so, to me that would say something very troubling about the level of distrust of the HCO that would have to exist in that scenario. The best way to prevent this is to make the HCO's policies more transparent and less punitive...which is right in line with not punishing rape victims for Honor Code violations. Adelaide's thoughts on a more repentance-driven Honor Code Office are a good thing to consider in that regard.

    Finally, because false rape accusations are so rare, I believe it's wrong to assume that a woman who's made an accusation of rape is lying. As I just discussed, this means not creating new policies with the fear of immunity or leniency leading to false accusations in mind. It also means that if a rape isn't "proved," either in a court of law, by an investigation from the Title IX office, through DNA evidence, or by whatever standard you want to call "proof," the HCO should never follow that by investigating the rape victim for having consensual sex. Most rapes don't even go to trial, let alone lead to a conviction. It's impossible to prove rape in all cases, and punishing even one innocent rape victim for having sex is one punishment too many. Furthermore, because Title IX forbids retaliation against rape victims for reporting, investigating whether the incident was rape or consensual sex, and punishing the victim if the investigation concludes it was the latter, is literally against the law.

    I seem to remember reading that the HCO doesn't do that. However, I've also read personal accounts of women who attended BYU who said that exactly that happened to them. Ultimately, I don't think we'll ever know exactly what happened in every HCO investigation of every rape victim in the past. In the future, such things can be prevented by having a clear, transparent policy that is not punitive towards rape victims.

 -Zedability

A:

Dear you,

I definitely consider myself a feminist, and I concur that women should try to keep themselves safe. But I take umbrage at some of your statements and implications, especially where you say "hope I become a victim." I'm hoping that was a mistake, because no one wants to become a victim, and NO victim is responsible for rape.

I disagree that the Honor Code is specifically trying to prevent rape. It's trying to prevent immorality and protect virtue, and I think that's an important distinction. I'm sure that its statutes do decrease opportunities for rapists to strike, which is of course a good thing. But its main goal is to prevent premarital sex, not rape.

I think the important thing to note here is that women you call "third wave feminists" are using common sense. They acknowledge that rape is awful. But more awful is a culture that allows such things to happen. Feminists are protesting this culture by saying, ACCURATELY, that no behavior on the part of women justifies rape. In no situation is rape ever acceptable. Women should not have to be afraid of going to college or drinking. Women compose half of the population, and half of the population should not have to live in fear. They should not have to tailor their behavior so they don't weaken the self-control of predatory men.

The fact remains that no means no. That holds true regardless of circumstance. It doesn't matter if a girl is in a boy's apartment past midnight. It doesn't matter if she's in his bedroom. It doesn't matter if she strips off all her clothes and dances around the room. It doesn't matter if she insinuates that sex is a possibility. It doesn't matter if sex seems like an inevitability. It doesn't matter if the people have had sex hundreds of times before. It doesn't matter if two people are seconds away from having sex. The instant that either party says no, to continue is sexual abuse.

That's the attitude that women are fighting against. Some still cling to the idea that women provoke it, and that sexually frustrated men are at times justified. That is a lie. Yes, sometimes women do things that aren't wise or in their best interest. But to make a mistake DOES NOT mean that the woman is at fault.

Unfortunately, like Zed said, sexual assault would occur regardless of how women behave. But by being aggressive in defending their rights, women are trying to change the culture. Raising awareness is an incredibly important step in helping protect women, and highlighting the circumstances in which people can seemingly justify rape can help with that.

The most important way to change the culture, at BYU or anywhere else, is to make sure that EVERY victim has the opportunity to charge her rapist, and feels comfortable doing so. That involves erasing the stigma of victimhood, along with ANY sort of implication that the rape was at all justified or understandable. Ideally, this would mean that EVERY rapist is subject to the full extent of the law.

The sections of the Honor Code that help to protect and encourage morality are not commandments. Yes, students did agree to abide by them, but most understand the underlying purpose. Therefore to violate certain aspects, such as curfew rules, may violate the letter of the law, but not the spirit. There are plenty of circumstances when it is appropriate to enter someone's bedroom or to be in an apartment past midnight.

I firmly believe that such actions should not be cause for serious investigation from the Honor Code office. A slap on the wrist may be in order, but violations of that caliber do not warrant a threat towards academic standing. Especially for victims of sexual abuse, I think any sort of investigation sends the message that the victim holds some sort of fault in the situation, and that is never the case. Because no matter what circumstances were in order before the rape took place, the victim is never at fault.

Thankfully, not everyone knows what it's like to be a victim of sexual abuse. But I would imagine that it's especially difficult for Mormons. So many students here at BYU are striving to remain sexually pure. Victims of rape probably have to fight against feelings of shame and dirtiness. In such circumstances, it might be the worst possible thing to imply that the victim was in any way responsible. It would be incredibly devastating to someone who's already dealing with a lot of physical and emotional trauma.

And unfortunately, that's what the Honor Code office does by investigating in this way. I'm sure that's not their intention, but that is what their investigation implies. It suggests that perhaps a minor Honor Code violation contributed to the rape. Not only is that extremely incorrect, it is also extremely insensitive and damaging to already emotionally damaged victims. Therefore yes, there should be an immunity clause.

Such a clause would help give rape victims the strength and confidence to pursue legal action against their attackers, and minimize the fear of jeopardizing their academic futures. It would also help fight the idea that rape is ever understandable or justifiable in any way.

Love,

Luciana


0 Corrections
Question #86367 posted on 05/05/2016 1:20 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Today the news broke of another American citizen being arrested in North Korea on suspicion of espionage and sentenced to hard labor. This guy got 10 years, while the last guy got 15. I'm just wondering... how the heck are people even getting into North Korea? I was under the impression that it was virtually impossible for foreigners to enter the country except for very special circumstances. Have the laws changed recently? The American student who received 15 years of hard labor was said to be in the country as a tourist, and I thought tourists were not allowed. I'm not sure exactly why the American who was just sentenced to 10 years hard labor was in North Korea. They say he was preaching Christianity, which is illegal, so he must have entered the country under a different pretext. Can you shed some light on this subject for me?

-Rita

A:

Dear Rita,

It looks like tourism in North Korea (The Democratic People's Republic of Korea, or DPRK) is legal, but for U.S. citizens, it is a pretty recent thing. Before 2010, most travelers with a U.S. passport were denied visas. Since then Americans (although not many) have visited regularly. Tourism is strictly controlled by the government and certain activities are not allowed, like preaching Christianity or journalistic endeavors. Most of the Americans currently detained in the DPRK are there for entering the country illegally, preaching religion, or acts against the government. This tourism website actually makes it look pretty interesting. Their FAQ addresses a lot of the things you can and can't do, as well as whether it is moral to visit. The U.S. has no current diplomatic relations with the DPRK and the "...Swedish Embassy in North Korea is the U.S. protecting power and provides limited consular services to U.S. citizens. (source)"

-The Skipper


0 Corrections
Posted on 05/05/2016 12:25 p.m. New Correction on: #86316 As we all know by now, I have chronic health conditions. Winner, winner, chicken dinner! :) ...
Question #86222 posted on 05/05/2016 10:35 a.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

A while back I studied at the BYU London Centre... which I LOVED. While I was there I heard some vague history about the building, namely that it was built sometime during Queen Victoria's reign (this may have been someone's guess) and that somehow it was a miracle that BYU acquired this very expensive building. But no one seemed to know any details and since then I've been very curious! I've googled away to no avail.

So my questions are: when was 27 Palace Court built, and what is the history of the building before BYU owned it? And how did BYU acquire it?

Cheers!
London History Obsessed

A:

Dear London,

I am currently re-reading the Harry Potter series (mostly instead of sleeping) so I am feeling particularly fond of England at the moment and was excited to see what I could find about BYU's London Centre.

I tried to get in contact with someone from the Kennedy Center, but the contact I was given never got back to me, so here are some random things I found from various books and articles.

The street, Palace Court, was constructed in the late 1800's. By the early 1900's, most of the road was filled up with various structures. The earliest record I could find of 27 Palace Court was a series of photographs dated 1918. They were taken by Bedford Lemere and Company, who were a firm of architectural photographers. Their subjects were mainly new buildings (and cruise ships), so I assume that construction was completed in 1918. (Although another article I found said "late 19th century, although without a source or specific date.) While this puts it slightly outside the actual reign of Queen Victoria, the architecture is still Victorian and it very well may have been designed before 1901, when she passed away. One of the photographs indicates that the interior design was done by H. H. Martyn and Company, who were interior decorators.

Back in the 70's there were quite a few study abroad programs in Europe. The one in London was very popular, despite housing students in a hotel. It eventually became so expensive that BYU looked to purchase some property. They looked everywhere but had some real trouble finding anything. Thinks weren't looking good when the realtor found out about 27 and 29 Palace Court. An offer was made immediately and accepted, although sorting out the legal sides of everything took several months. It was apparently at one time a temporary home of the Polish embassy, and when BYU purchased the two townhouses they were being used to house international medical residents by the King Edward Hospital Fund of London.

After purchase, a hallway was constructed to connect the two spaces. June 1977 was the first time BYU students occupied the center. It has had several renovations since then, including one that was completed just a few years ago by the Interiors Group and Dunbar Associates.

I don't have the links and sources with me now, but I want to get this question answered. Please feel free to email me at skipper@theboard.byu.edu for them or for more info.

Cheerio,

The Skipper


0 Corrections
Question #86150 posted on 05/05/2016 10:34 a.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I am training for a rolling down the hill tournament during the summer. It will be a fairly substantial hill with a decent decline (incline?). The biggest rule is that one has to roll horizontally (rather than somersaults).

Anyways, so 2 questions:

1. What is the optimal way to roll down a hill based on speed? How should I hold my arms?

2. How do I control the dizziness? Should I look in a certain direction? Spin counter to my roll before going down?

-Any advice would be helpful

A:

Dear High Roller,

Are you ready for some science? 'Cause I did some science!

After an unsuccessful attempt at trying to get the whole Board to do this I bravely took it upon myself to science this.

I had just gone on a date to Red Robin and I ate the "Banzai" which is a huge burger smothered in Teriyaki sauce with grilled pineapple, so I thought, "What better time to go rolling down hills than now?" So off I went to Rock Canyon Park to test out my hypothesis. 

Hypothesis

The fastest way down would be a position where the body was slightly lifted off the ground rather than lying prostrate and rolling. As for dizziness, I assumed looking up or down would be best as opposed to keeping my head looking in a natural forward position.

Experiment

I wanted to thoroughly test this so I came up with 4 different positions for rolling down the hill.

1. Arms straight up, head looking at my hands.

arms up.jpg

2. Arms down, head looking down.

arms down.jpg

3. On hands and knees with arms in a circle, head looking at hands.

circle arms.jpg 

Here's a look at my arm position on this one.

IMG_20160504_193732386.jpg

4. Fetal position.

fetal position.jpg

As you can see from my face, I was very excited to do some science (though I was basically just smooshing my face in the ground for #2) and I enthusiastically ran to the top of the hill to start. I rolled 4 times, once for each type of roll. I started at the same dandelion at the top of the hill (where a bee was just chillin' and cheering me on) and rolled until I hit a certain mark from the freshly cut lawn near the bottom of the hill. Here are the results of the science:

Type of Roll Time Dizziness (1 - 5, 5 being dizziest) Accuracy
Arms up 20+ sec 4.5 Very diagonal
Arms down 11 sec 5 slightly diagonal
Circle arms 7 sec 3.5 barely diagonal
Fetal 8 sec 4.5 barely diagonal

 

 

 

 

 

Analysis

Rolling with my arms up was the most comfortable position but the least accurate. As I rolled, I completely lost track of my position on the hill and drifted far to the side. This caused my time to suffer in this position. Looking at my hands did little if anything to prevent dizziness.

Rolling with arms down was much more accurate but an unexpected result was that my shoulders were hitting the ground with each roll. So my time improved because of my accuracy but discomfort was higher because of the constant banging of my shoulder to the ground. Looking down caused even more dizziness than looking up. I needed a full 30 seconds to recover from the roll.

Rolling with circle arms allowed me to have more control over my movement when I would get off course. I tried spotting using this technique but I started rolling so fast it was all I could take to just keep my head from hitting the ground, though initial spotting helped me keep a straight path. Again, I hit my shoulder with each roll, this time, with much more force than with my arms down. My dizziness was much lower because I was rolling for a shorter amount of time, combined with my head being on the outside of the rotation instead of being at the center of the rotation. Another unexpected result was that I started getting some small air after some rolls (imagine rolling a barrel down a hill, it bounces) which helped to go faster with few rotations.

Rolling sideways in the fetal position was fairly accurate as well. I did have some control to redirect myself if I needed to course-correct but less so than the circle arms. I hit my shoulder while rolling harder than with my arms down but less so than with circle arms. My dizziness went up again since my head was more towards the center of my axis of rotation. 

Other observations were that, no matter what you do, you will get dizzy when you roll down a hill. Who'd a thunk, right? The faster rolls require more physical endurance because of the constant impact.

Conclusion

My initial hypothesis was correct in that I assumed rolling while raising my body would be faster and it was. But my initial hypothesis was wrong in relation to dizziness. Basically, the faster you get to the bottom, the less dizzy you'll be (but you're still going to be dizzy). Focus on rolling to a certain destination rather than rolling really fast because accuracy is more important than speed in this case.

I hope this helps. Happy rolling!

-Spectre


0 Corrections
Wednesday, May 4, 2016
Question #86255 posted on 05/04/2016 10:41 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I have a confession. I am very conservative but I had a long talk with my brother and he is voting for Bernie Sanders. I was appalled at first. A socialist?! But my brother has actually convinced me! Bernie isn't a socialist he is a democratic socialist he believes nobody is better than another person. Corporations aren't better than poor people.
We both are still anti-abortion (well they should be very very difficult to obtain) and gay marriage (but I don't believe they should be discriminated against), but Bernie's plans make sense to us. I read through https://berniesanders.com/issues/ and it all makes sense to me and for my values.

-Free public education for everyone. The banks pay lower interest on loans than we are offering our students. Isn't a more educated populous better for all?
-Raising the minimum wage
-Paid family leave like other wealthy countries
-Equal pay
-Housing protections
-helping minorities
-Single payer healthcare system

I think these things would really make our country better! We both want Bernie to win the primaries and want him to win the overall election. But how do we approach our friends and family members about it? We have both been very vocal Republicans in the past and we still hold many Republican values but we don't like the Republicans in this race and Bernie just makes sense. In the past Reagan was a democrat but switched Republican.

In the past I have had conversations with friends about liberals who are Mormons and we all have said things about them not having a strong testimony. And how being a liberal or a democrat goes against the church. I don't consider myself liberal or a democrat. I would NEVER vote for Hillary Clinton. But with Bernie Sanders I see family values, protecting the poor, valuing education, helping others, the disappearing middle class.

I really want more people to support him and come to the bright side but I don't know how to do this and support him without them judging me or thinking less of me. My brother has only shared this view with me and we're trying to figure out how to broach it with our other family members and friends. I know they will still love me but I think they will think less of me. But hopefully they will feel the bern like I have as well?

-Republicans for Bernie?

P.S. I like Kasich too but I don't think he could ever win against Hillary

A:

Dear you,

Unfortunately, I don't think you'll be able to completely avoid attitudes about liberals being less faithful, although your question is a great example of why it's a bad idea to judge the motivations behind people's political leanings.

Ultimately, I think that the best thing you can do is to follow the pattern of how your brother talked to you about it. Avoid name-calling or confrontation, maintain a calm tone, and make sure that people are also aware that your beliefs (like those of most people) don't completely follow any one candidate. You could emphasize family values (like paid leave) to social conservatives and the idea of breaking up big banks and separating money from politics to fiscal conservatives.

Sometimes, you need to pick your battles. Some family members or friends might not be worth discussing this with, and that's okay.

Best of luck, and kudos for being honest with yourself about which issues are important to you. It's hard to look at candidates from outside your party and go against what family or friends may think.

-Zedability


0 Corrections
Question #86318 posted on 05/04/2016 10:41 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

This article says, "According to CNN, a new report from the CDC has found a 45% increase in the suicide rate among women between 1999 and 2014, almost three times more than the increase among men." Why has women suicide rate gone up?

-Red Skeleton

A:

Dear you,

The CNN article linked to in the article you shared says,

The reasons for the increase in the suicide rate over the past 15 years are many and complex. Whereas there was a big push between the late 1980s and 1990s for health care providers to identify and treat depression and other mental health problems, some of this progress was undone in recent years because of concerns that antidepressants could increase suicide risk, Moutier said. These concerns were driven by controversy around the Food and Drug Administration's decision to give these medications a black box warning about the suicide risk in children, she added.
 
The FDA cautioned at the time that children should still be treated for depression but monitored for any signs of suicidal thoughts.
 
Another contributor to the rise in suicide rates could be the growing number of overdose deaths from opiate painkillers, which are considered suicide if a medical examiner or coroner determines that they were probably intentional, Moutier said. "Access to lethal means is one of the most significant risk factors for an individual to die by suicide," she added.
 
Yet another factor could have been the economic downturn in the late 2000s, Holland said.
These reasons are general, rather than being specific to women, but the article mentions that because fewer women commit suicide than men, it takes fewer additional suicides to drive the overall rate up. Also, because access to lethal methods is an important factor, it could have something to do with the fact that women typically commit suicide by poisoning. This seems like it would lend itself well to the increase in access to opiate painkillers. Meanwhile, access to guns (the most common method of suicide for men) may not have changed as significantly over the years.
 
-Zedability

0 Corrections
Question #85226 posted on 05/04/2016 10:34 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I promised myself that I would never write a question this long, but here I go.

I've spent the last few months grumbling over the fact that BYU's student health insurance isn't ACA-approved and muttering under my breath at BYU administrators for being stingy penny-pinchers instead of doing their students a good turn. "What," I thought, "they're too niggardly to bring their student plan in line with the MINIMUM standards required by the federal government? Shame on them."

Over the weekend, however, I learned from a probably-reliable source that the reason BYU's health insurance isn't ACA-compliant is because it refuses to cover abortions as part of its plan.

So. Aside from feeling guilty that I'd assumed the worst of those in charge of BYU's student health benefits, I am also now extremely conflicted. The reason I'm conflicted is because I actually found myself disagreeing with the Hobby Lobby case—it didn't seem right to me that employers should be able to deny birth control coverage to their employees (partly because birth control is used for things other than preventing contraception). But even though the situation here isn't much different, this strikes me as truly wrong. My gut feeling is that if (a) a university has strong religious reasons for opposing abortion, (b) it wants to offer affordable health care to its students, and (c) students will be fined for not having health care—how can the government force it to cover abortions? So even though I'm pretty liberal politically and tend to side with the pro-choice people on a lot of things, I find myself thoroughly disconcerted by this revelation.

So here's my question: will you help me decide how to feel about this? How do YOU feel about it? How is something like this legally justifiable? Is it somehow different from the Hobby Lobby case? Can I reconcile my disagreement with the Hobby Lobby verdict to my sense of disgust over requiring BYU to cover abortions? Do you think it's good or bad that the laws necessitate things like this? I'd welcome opinions from all ends of the spectrum.

Also, here are other questions I'm interested in knowing the answer to:

- Does this apply for full-time employees as well, like professors and staff? Will BYU be able to continue providing them with insurance?

- I assume that very few people will purchase BYU's student health insurance now since it doesn't comply with the ACA. Has enrollment decreased since August? How will this affect BYU financially?

- Why doesn't this fall under the umbrella of the Hobby Lobby case? If SCOTUS ruled that Hobby Lobby doesn't have to cover contraception, why does BYU have to cover abortion?

- Could this be challenged on legal grounds? How?

I know you're not lawyers and that maybe you don't have the resources to answer this question. But I'd really appreciate it if you would help me to understand.

-Thusly

A:

Dear you,

Healeaswhatshisnym covered the insurance aspect of it really well, and explained that abortion isn't the issue here. However, your question got me thinking about whether BYU insurance should cover abortion, and I came to some interesting and unorthodox conclusions, after pondering the Church policy about abortion only being permissible in cases of rape or where the life of the mother is threatened.

You see, I believe that in such situations, the moral thing to do is to not add a bill that can range from several hundred to several thousand dollars to all the stuff that the woman in question has to deal with. For instance, I can't imagine how heartbreaking it would be to have a planned pregnancy, be really excited about it, and then have to end it for medical reasons. If the pregnancy's medically complicated, I'm probably facing a decent medical bill without adding an uninsured abortion to the mix, and I'm probably already distraught enough without financial worries. (By the way, this is also an excellent argument against protesters at abortion clinics yelling at women and calling them murderers. You don't know why they're there.)

Similarly, in the case of rape, dealing with the trauma of being raped and the difficult decision of whether or not to keep the baby sounds like quite enough to handle. For some people, the cost of an abortion could be prohibitively expensive. For instance, imagine a BYU student who's living paycheck to paycheck and is mainly living off a diet of rice and beans. A $500 medical bill could well be out of her price range if she were raped, and having to deal with that stress on top of everything else just shouldn't happen, in my opinion.

So the issue becomes, how can the DMBA cover abortions the Church is okay with while excluding abortions that the Church is not okay with? Well, in the case of medically necessary abortions, it's pretty simple to add a clause like "Abortions shall only be covered in the case that a competent, licensed medical doctor has determined that the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother." They could have a form for the doctor to fill out, which would need to be submitted in order to obtain the insurance coverage. Pretty easy.

However, it's a lot more difficult to establish a definitive policy for rape victims, due to the fact that many rapes come down to he-said, she-said situations. Only about 2% of rapes lead to a felony conviction for the rapist. In fairness, those statistics usually include unreported rapes, but after the stories I've read about police mismanagement of rape cases, I can't really blame women who choose to not report their rapes. Some women may feel unable to report their rape, such as when the rapist is a friend or family member. Others may feel that they don't have enough evidence to lead to a conviction, and would prefer to avoid the emotional trauma of providing a rape kit and being questioned by police.

That's not the point, though. There are a lot of institutional barriers to justice for rape victims. However, as things currently stand, only 2% of rape victims receive justice. If you're going to try to impose some sort of legal test to whether someone was raped, for insurance purposes in covering abortion, you're probably going to end up denying coverage to over 90% of rape victims. The only way to make sure that every rape victim has the access to abortion that the Church allows her is to cover all abortions.

Meanwhile, anyone on DMBA insurance already has powerful incentives to avoid getting an abortion that the Church would not approve of. DMBA recipients are Church employees, missionaries, BYU employees, and BYU students. Any of them who got an unapproved abortion would lose their job, be sent home from their misson, or lose their ecclesiastical endorsement, not to mention face disciplinary action from the Church. Anyone who would be willing to take those risks probably wouldn't be deterred by the cost of an uninsured abortion anyways, so there's really no argument to be made that refusing to cover abortion acts as an effective deterrent to abortions.

So, in summary, I think that the DMBA should voluntarily cover abortions, because it's the right thing to do for rape victims and women with medically threatening pregnancies, while providing no meaningful incentive for women on DMBA insurance to get abortions for other reasons.

-Zedability

A:

Dear Theda,

In an effort to clear this question out of the inbox, I have taken Haleakala's really good answer and literally just copied it here (with a few edits for clarity and completion, blah blah blah). So all of this is Haleahealthinsurance's, I'm just putting it here since he said it would be okay.

I've been thinking about your question a lot over the past few months, because I've been placed in a similar situation - I'm getting kicked off my parents insurance soon, but I earn enough that I'll be subject to the tax penalty for not having insurance if I go with the BYU plan. I've spent a lot of time researching this, and I want to give out appropriate information to those who are in a situation like yours and mine. I've also spent a lot of time researching this because I was really upset with BYU too, but I didn't want to judge them unfairly. I'm going to try to present what I've found in my research to you (and other readers) in this answer in case it's helpful. I'm going to answer your questions in three parts. First, I'll explain what the situation actually is (your source wasn't exactly right), second, I'll give you appropriate information about your options if you're in this situation (as well as information about how to tell if you really are in this situation or not), and finally, I'll give you my opinion on BYU's decision.

Two important notes before we begin: First, if you're worried about tax penalties for your situation but don't care about my opinion or political/economic speculation about BYU's decision, you can just read part two. I've written each of the three parts of this answer so that they can be read on their own if you're only interested in certain pieces of information. Second, I am not a tax professional or a lawyer. In this answer I am providing a free service by presenting the information available as best as I understand it. However, both I and the 100 Hour Board official disclaim all liability for all answers posted. Use the advise given here at your own risk.


Part One: The Situation

As you'll read in section three, I don't necessarily have kind words for BYU on this subject, but as I've dug into the situation in order to answer your question, I've found that the situation created by the Affordable Care Act is actually way more complicated than I had originally imagined. I have some sympathy for their situation. This answer is complicated; but given the effort it seems like you put into your question, I assume you're someone that's willing to follow the complexity to get an answer. Let me put in a disclaimer before we get too far: I've done research using publicly available documents and information about the Affordable Care Act to given you an answer. As you'll see, the Church is in a fairly unique position here, and since I'm not a lawyer I may not have gotten everything exactly right, though I've done my best.

Let's start with the basics. This is actually about much more than BYU. This is about the Church as a whole. You see, the Church employs so many people (and runs so many other organizations) that long before the Affordable Care Act (which is important to the story and we'll get to in a minute) was passed, it started it's own insurance company to run it's healthcare plan for its U.S. employees and others it was responsible for. The organization is called "Deseret Mutual Benefits Administrators," abbreviated DMBA. You might recognize their logo; if you're currently on the student health plan, or if you served a domestic mission, their logo was on the insurance card you were given. They run all the Church's healthcare programs, including the student health plan for all church schools, the medical program for domestic missionaries, and a more comprehensive insurance plans for its full-time employees - including employees of BYU.

We'll come back to DMBA. Now let's shift gears and talk about the Affordable Care Act. This is the law that we call "Obamacare." In this answer, I refer to this law by the abbreviation "ACA." However, the terms "Affordable Care Act," "ACA," and "Obamacare" are all interchangeable. 

When President Obama took office in 2010, he made overhauling the U.S. health system a priority of his administration. There were several problems he wanted to address. First, there were too many Americans that were under-insured. Before the ACA, many medical insurance plans had what were called "maximum benefits" numbers (also sometimes called "benefits caps"), which meant that the insurance plan would stop paying for your medical bills, even if you were still sick, after it had paid out a certain amount. This was a very terrible situation. Often, people purchased insurance plans that seemed to have an absurdly high cap on benefits - often in the millions of dollars - only to find that their insurance plans weren't enough when they faced very serious medical problems like a serious car crash or cancer. Imagine being part way through treatment only to find that your insurance company was no longer going to cover your chemotherapy. 

The second problem President Obama wanted to fix was that buying health insurance without an employer was too difficult - almost impossible. People who were self-employed or between jobs often didn't have an effective way to purchase health insurance. Many insurance companies didn't even sell health insurance to individual people or families. And even if an individual or family managed to purchase health insurance on their own, there were almost no laws protecting them. Often, insurance companies would end people's coverage just because the policy holders were becoming too expensive for the insurance company - even if the individual hadn't done anything wrong and had always paid their premium every month - and they could do this completely legally.

Third, President Obama wanted to end the practice of denying someone coverage for what was referred to as a pre-existing condition. Basically, what this meant was that if you signed up for health insurance for any reason (starting a new job, buying an insurance plan yourself, etc.) you wouldn't receive coverage for any condition you had already been diagnosed with, no matter how serious. (Cancer, etc.) That may seem horribly unkind on the part of insurance companies (What if someone just started a new job?), but remember the problem you would run into if insurance companies didn't have that rule: no one would ever purchase health insurance until they got sick. Since only very sick people would purchase health insurance, premiums would skyrocket, and no one would be able to afford health insurance.

So, in order to solve these problems, President Obama made several changes to the health insurance industry in the Affordable Care Act. In order to solve the first problem (about plan benefit maximums), he simply made benefit caps illegal. President Obama almost certainly knew that this would result in higher premiums (and it has), but likely felt - rightly, in my opinion - that the benefit outweighed the risk. To solve the second problem (the difficulty of buying health insurance as an individual) he created the now-infamous healthcare.gov website (and allowed states to create their own websites if they didn't want to use the federal one) where individuals could shop for health insurance.

Solving the last problem was the trickiest part of all. How could you require health insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions without either (a) bankrupting all health insurance companies every where or (b) raising premiums to the point where health insurance is basically useless?

The answer, as you've probably already realized, is to force everyone to buy health insurance. This means that healthy people - who may not normally purchase health insurance unless they are legally required to - would be paying health insurance premiums just like sick people. This way, there's no risk that healthy people would wait to buy health insurance, and this means that health insurance premiums won't skyrocket. 

Now I've only addressed the BIGGEST changes the ACA made. There are a lot of smaller ones. For example, nearly every healthcare plan in the world - even government-sponsored ones like Medicaid - have some form of cost-sharing scheme. Which means that the patient pays some part of their costs. For example, if you see the doctor and the total fee was $100 for a regular appointment (which is about average) your insurance company might require you to pay a flat fee (called a "copay," maybe around $5), or a percentage of your costs (called coinsurance, often around 5-10%). 

President Obama decided that people were less likely to get preventative care if they had to participate in such "cost sharing" measures for that type of care, so he required that everyone get some types of preventative care (immunizations, annual physicals, mammograms) for free without cost sharing.

I bring this up to address one point you made in your question. You criticized BYU for not bring their plans up to the "minimum standard" as required by the government,. However, it's worth mentioning that when the Affordable Care Act was first passed, almost no plans met theses standards, because the rules were just too novel. Many of standards created by the ACA were very new at the time, and few plans met the standards staring out.

And this didn't just effect BYU. Health insurance companies across the country started canceling health insurance plans as the date the law took effect got closer. And that led to a huge public outcry - you might remember it - which led Congress and the president to pass a law allowing plans that didn't meet ACA standards to have "grandfathered" status. This is really important to understand - Congress essentially allowed health plans that already existed before the ACA was passed to continue operating legally (and exempting their participants from fines were not having insurance) until the end of 2017.

 

Part Two: What to Do

Before we begin, let's talk about whether or not you need to be worried. When the Affordable Care Act (also called "Obamacare," hereafter referred to as the "ACA") was passed, part of the law was that every American would be required to have health insurance or pay an additional tax. The ACA set certain standards for health insurance that every healthcare plan had to follow. BYU's health plan doesn't follow those standards, which means it doesn't count as actual "insurance" in the eyes of the federal government. That means that if you only have BYU's health insurance, you may face a tax penalty of around $700. That having been said, this will not effect you at all if any of the following apply to you:

  • You are on your parent's insurance plan and their insurance plan is Affordable Care Act compliant. Nearly all insurance plans (with the obvious exception of BYU's student plan) are ACA compliant, but you can talk to your parents to make sure if you're worried. Keep in mind that you can only stay on your parent's insurance until you turn 26. If you're approaching your twenty-sixth birthday and will still be in school at that time, you'll want to pay attention to the information below. If you'll have your own job by the time you turn twenty-six you can disregard this whole controversy. Stay on your parent's healthcare plan.
  • You or your spouse has a full-time job that provides you with compliant insurance. If you or your spouse are working full time and you are covered by the insurance provided by your or your spouse's employer, you can disregard this controversy. This is true even if you're working full-time for BYU, as long as you're enrolled in the insurance BYU provides for full-time employees, not the student health plan. Stick with your current insurance plan.
  • You get compliant health insurance from another source. If you get health insurance from somewhere else, and that insurance is ACA-compliant, you should keep that coverage and ignore this whole controversy.
Even if you don't fall into one of those three categories, you don't necessarily need to panic just yet. In order for me to explain to you your options, please look at the chart below and find your group letter based on your annual income and household size. Then scroll down to the explanation for you group and I'll explain to you your options. You'll also want to read the Frequently Asked Questions I've included at the end.
 
*******
SINGLE STUDENT:
$0-$10,000: Group A
$10,000-$11,770: Group B
$11,770 - $29,425: Group C
$29,426 - $47,080: Group D
$47,080+: Group E
MARRIED STUDENT (NO KIDS):
$0-$15,930: Group A
$15,930 - $39,825: Group C
$39,826 - $63,720: Group D
$63,720+: Group E
NOTE: THESE NUMBERS ONLY WORK IN UTAH!
******
GROUP A:
Not eligible for ACA subsidies. Advise to stay on BYU plan. Don't earn too much money.

GROUP B:
The "it sucks to be you" group. You are both not eligible for insurance subsidies and subject to the tax penalty. You *may* be able to get out of it by filling out a complex tax form. If you have an accountant in the family, I recommend giving them a call.

Group C:
Subject to tax penalty and also eligible for insurance subsidies. You can enroll in a private healthcare plan on healthcare.gov BUT THIS IS A HUGE RISK! If your income drops below $11,770 (you lose a job, whatever) by the end of the year you will owe the IRS for the ALL the premium subsidies they gave you during year, which will average a couple hundred dollars a month. Alternatively, you can just sign up for the BYU health plan and eat the $695 tax.

Group D:
You earn this much as a student?!? Is your employer hiring?

Group E:
I'm very confident no BYU student falls into this group.

Frequently Asked Questions
What if my income changes and I change group numbers?
It sucks to be you. True Story.
What do I count as income?
Not FAFSA, but yes scholarships
I want private insurance from healthcare.gov but I don't know how to shop for insurance?
Define deductible, premium, copay, coinsurance, formulary.
Can I just not have insurance?
No. That is both stupid and against BYU rules. They will enroll you in the student health plan even if you don't want it.


Part 3:

First of all, you're wrong for so, so, so, many reasons. The ACA does NOT - I repeat DOES NOT - require insurance to cover elective abortions. False. No. Nope. Untrue. Wrong. Was never a thing.

Most of this answer will not actually be opinion, but clarifying what the situation actually is. 

The spokesperson for BYU referred to birth control - not abortions. Even then, she was probably mistaken. BYU can't possibly have a problem with the requirement for birth control because either (A) the university is willing to cover it for single female employees otherwise its employees would be fined for not having insurance or (B) the university is exempted from the requirement. I suspect its B, but I will find out for sure.

Hobby Lobby doesn't actually apply to this situations because Hobby Lobby was about a closely held private corporation. BYU is a subsidiary for the Church and as such is in a different legal situation.

I'm almost certain the actual reason for this problem is that BYU doesn't want to spend the money to eliminate the out of pocket limit which the ACA makes illegal. It's probably not fair to blame BYU for this as being "penny pinchers" - other universities receive public funds to run their insurance programs. Also, BYU's premiums are literally like a third of the U's.

Does this apply for full-time employees as well, like professors and staff? Will BYU be able to continue providing them with insurance?

No, it does not apply to BYU employees. BYU continues to provide them with ACA-complient insurance. Hence you see the mistakenness of BYU's justification. Whatever moral issues it has with health insurance clearly do not seem to apply to its employees. What it's spokesperson said is simply patently false. I don't think she was lying, I think she (he?) was mistaken - when he said the birth control played a role, he was responding to a question from a reporter.

I assume that very few people will purchase BYU's student health insurance now since it doesn't comply with the ACA. Has enrollment decreased since August? How will this affect BYU financially?

Yeah, because BYU is just going to give us those numbers. I can say that it probably won't impact BYU financially overall because the health program is self-funded and I doubt BYU is using student's premium money to do other things. Why? Because that would be stupid.

Some students are exempt from the health insurance penalty and will likely not have to pay very much.

Why doesn't this fall under the umbrella of the Hobby Lobby case? If SCOTUS ruled that Hobby Lobby doesn't have to cover contraception, why does BYU have to cover abortion?

This is a question that I honestly don't know the answer to.

Could this be challenged on legal grounds? How?

Ha. No.

So anyways, there's what Halea said. He did a really great job but unfortunately, as Zedabilty said in a flagette, "THE LACK OF GOOD HEALTH INSURANCE KILLED [HALEAKALA]."

Good luck!!

-Adelaide

0 Corrections
Question #85945 posted on 05/04/2016 10:17 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I know you guys aren't doctors or psychologists, but I need an opinion and I don't know who else to ask.

My brother has pretty severe depression (search double depression to learn more) and is having a rough time navigating the treatment process. I have a psych degree, so I have a little more knowledge than the average person about what his treatment and condition look like. I do my best to help my family understand what a realistic timeline and process look like, but I'm starting to get really worried about the effect of my mother on his ability to recover. He's away at school juggling work, classes, therapy, and the hell that is trying to find a medication match. He calls my mother frequently in an attempt to ward off the destructive throughts and patterns he experiences and to seek the comfort of home. Recently I discovered that her thought patterns are very similar to his, except instead of applying them to herself, she gets really down on him and his situation. He already struggles with blaming himself for everything that goes wrong, crediting others for anything that goes right, overgeneralizing any single negative occourance to all future potentialities, etc. etc. He's working very hard in therapy to overcome these patterns in therapy. But my mother not only shares these thought patterns, but feeds them back to him in their conversations and reinforces them to him! I know she wants him to be okay, but I feel like she is unwittingly burning down all of the supportive structures he's built to challenge his depression each time they talk. I'm so frustrated with her and I've tried having rational talks with her to help her recognize how her own thought patterns are affecting him, but she doesn't realize that she's pulling him down.

What can I do to stop this?! He's at such a crucial point in recovery and I know it's not going well. I hate watching her expect him to fail. I KNOW he can be okay and that the process is long and arduous but it DOES get better if he keeps trying. I wish I could tell him these things, but he's only really opened up to my mother about his depression, so I don't want to overstep my bounds. But I certainly can't stand idly by and watch her poison his perspective with her pessimism.
Help. What should I do?


-I believe in you

A:

Dear person,

Your mom doesn't seem to get it, so I would talk to him about it. It sounds like you are an empathetic and understanding person and he really needs that in his life. 

I don't think he would be mad if you said something like, "Hey, I know you've been feeling pretty down and depressed and I really care about you. I know mom sometimes says things like ____ and I feel concerned about how that affects you and if you ever need someone else to talk to I'm here for you."

If he does get upset, that's his choice. But I doubt he would react that way. I think it's likely that part of him probably knows already that she isn't the best influence on him, and maybe he wishes he had other people he felt he could talk to. 

-Sheebs


0 Corrections
Question #86378 posted on 05/04/2016 10:06 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

How strongly do you feel about ethics and the organisation you work for? For example, would you work for a multi national you know are avoiding taxes? For a company who promote something you disagree with? Etc.

-Anglophone

A:

Dear you,

If the company is doing something illegal, I feel like working there is a bad idea, because if the law comes down against them, you could find yourself out of a job. It could also be more difficult to get a job when your most recent job experience is for a company that did something illegal (assuming it becomes public knowledge), even if you weren't a part of that.

For myself personally, I find that when an organization is doing things I disagree with but are not illegal, my comfort level changes depending on how involved I am in those things.

-Zedability

A:

Dear you,

I currently work for BYU, so I don't have a problem with the ethics in general. But my job recently had a management shakeup, which made the organization more frustrating. I really value efficiency, so it can be really frustrating to see the people at the bottom working the hardest but getting paid the least, while the management does nothing productive but profits anyway.

So I have a problem with the ethics of individuals, but not the organization itself. 

Love,

Luciana


0 Corrections
Question #86274 posted on 05/04/2016 9:47 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Long one, sorry.

There is a movement to grant immunity from honor code investigation when somebody is a victim of rape. This is an interesting proposal that I'm still deciding what I think of it. I have two main questions about law in general that stem from what I think are the two legitimate reasons for granting immunity.

Reason 0: the victim has been punished enough. Not a valid reason, and I wish people wouldn't phrase it this way. If rape=punishment, and punishment=consequences of choices, then rape=consequence of victim's choices. We're not going there.
Reason 1:the victim has suffered enough. Potentially valid. Question: legal precedent? Do thieves get parole sooner if their father was beating them as a kid? Are judges more likely to save a murderer from a death sentence if they grew up in bad circumstances? This is a sincere question about how forgiving/just our society is with those who break social contacts, and I really don't know what the precedents are.
Reason 2: release a small fish to catch bigger ones. Wisconsin recently made common practice into law to forgive underage drinking for minors reporting sexual assault. Question:how small does the fish have to be? Should every crime "smaller" than rape be granted immunity to catch predators? Again, I'm sincerely interested to know how you would practically go about that. Where would you set the line?

-The Instigator, actually not trying to instigate anything this time

A:

Dear you,

I completely agree with your Reason 0. In addition to promoting victim blaming, that kind of thinking has, in extreme cases in other countries, led to rape being handed down as an actual punishment from courts (or, if a man committed the crime, the punishment is for his wife or other female relative to be raped).* That's just so, so wrong, and the only time the word "punishment" should be used in the context of rape is when discussing penalties for the rapist. Period.

In response to your other points, I have a few thoughts:

  1. Rape is against the law. The vast majority of ways to break the Honor Code, on the other hand, are not against the law. To my mind, that does suggest that even serious violations of the Honor Code pale before committing rape, which is both against the law and one of the most egregious possible ways to violate the Honor Code. Note that rape is one of the few sins that is explicitly mentioned in the Church Handbook as being grounds for excommunication. Rape is obviously in a different class from other Honor Code violations as a result, and in my opinion, it's wrong to prioritize non-criminal violations of the Honor Code (even sexual violations) over catching people who are egregiously breaking the law and the commandments.
     
  2. The only major Honor Code violations that I can think of that are also against the law that commonly come up in rape victims' cases are drinking/drug use, and trespassing (being in campus buildings after hours). The second is, in my opinion, obviously minor enough that it could justify immunity in order to encourage rape reporting. As for drinking, while I can't remember where I read this information, there are multiple universities that explicitly state in their policies that rape victims will not be punished for underage drinking if reporting their rape leads to the disclosure that they had been drinking. As you noted, Wisconsin did as well. From a legal perspective, I think there is enough precedent to demonstrate that underage drinking should be forgiven if it helps to catch rapists. Most rapists go on to rape multiple times (I think the average is 6). It's a terrible crime with terrible consequences. Meanwhile, while underage drinking in general can lead to drunk driving and other issues, individual cases of underage drinking are relatively consequence-free, beyond the fact that they broke the law. This is reflected in the wide variety of drinking ages in different developed countries; clearly, while drinking becomes harmful to society as a whole when allowed below a certain age, the consequences are not severe enough to make it a clear-cut issue.

    While BYU has the Word of Wisdom, as well as the law, to guide its practices, I think that drinking is still minor enough that the punishment should not be so severe as to discourage rape victims from reporting. I would point out that the Word of Wisdom is a timely, rather than timeless, law; alcohol has, in many dispensations, not been sinful, and while it is against the commandments now, it is more of an issue of obedience than being inherently sinful.
     
  3. Guidance from the federal Title IX office, released in a 2011 Dear Colleague Letter, states on page 15 (emphasis mine):

    Schools should be aware that victims or third parties may be deterred from reporting incidents if alcohol, drugs, or other violations of school or campus rules were involved. As a result, schools should consider whether their disciplinary policies have a chilling effect on victims’ or other students’ reporting of sexual violence offenses. For example, OCR recommends that schools inform students that the schools’ primary concern is student safety, that any other rules violations will be addressed separately from the sexual violence allegation, and that use of alcohol or drugs never makes the victim at fault for sexual violence.

    In other words, it's been explicitly stated for five years that disciplinary policies can discourage reporting of sexual violence. While BYU claims that the HCO investigations of rulebreaking are separate from the actual rape allegations, in compliance with Title IX, I think that more consideration of how that rulebreaking is treated is certainly warranted.
     
  4. Immunity and suspension are not the only two options in responding to rulebreaking. Many institutions, from universities to places of work, have a policy where a first violation of their code of conduct results in a verbal or written warning. I think that rape victims would greatly benefit from a policy that states that any punishment for Honor Code violations that occurred incident to the rape will face a maximum penalty of a written warning. This preserves accountability to a greater extent than immunity, because if Honor Code violations occur after receipt of the written warning, there is a paper trail that this violation is a matter of habit and the punishment will be correspondingly more serious. However, a written warning in and of itself doesn't give students cause to fear for their academic future in the way that suspension or expulsion does. It doesn't disrupt their lives in a way that would force them to explain their rape to people they don't want to tell about it. I think it would provide incentive to not violate the Honor Code in the future, while assuring rape victims that reporting will not result in overly severe punishment.

    I think a policy like this would greatly increase sexual violence reports, and that's incredibly important. While I can't share details, due to the fact that these particular people have not decided to talk about their rape publicly, I have personally heard victim stories where their rapist explicitly threatened to turn them in to the HCO if they attempted to report the rape. The circumstances of these stories strongly suggest that the rapist targeted them because of the honor code violation that was occuring, becuase the rapist knew that he would be able to successfully intimidate his victims into silence. It is reasonable to infer from these stories that the rapists had raped before and would probably rape again. Their stories, to me, strongly suggest the presence of serial rapists on campus who are deliberately using the Honor Code as a tool to enable their rape. That is completely contrary to what the Honor Code, and BYU as a whole, is supposed to stand for. The situation is completely unacceptable, and it's exacerbated by the fact that it's almost impossible to know how the HCO is going to react to an Honor Code violation ahead of time. A clearly stated, transparent policy with a maximum penalty that is not unduly punitive for rape victims would go a long way to fixing this problem.
-Zedability
 
*Male rape can and absolutely does occur, with the rapist being male or female, but I've never heard of it being handed down as a punishment from a local court the way I have of female rape. However, while I'm on this tangent, I'd also point out that male rape in prisons is frequently treated as a reason to avoid committing crimes, despite the fact that it is not an official part of our legal system. In other words, we've become so resigned to the high rates of sexual assaults in jails that we frequently treat it as an inevitable part of the punitive process. This is an unacceptable attitude that needs to stop.


0 Corrections
Question #86377 posted on 05/04/2016 8:30 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

What is the current "Brownie Points" to "Kudos" conversion rate?

-Professor Curious

A:

Dear PC,

About 45 to 1. 

People give away brownie points without a second thought. Kudos are much classier. The conversion rate can vary wildly, however, depending on who the brownie points or kudos come from. It's a big problem with non-standardized social currencies. Luckily, the conversion rate doesn't matter so much if you give them out in bajillions like I do. 

-TEN

A:

Dear Prof,

I would like to back up TEN's claims with some anecdotal research. From what I've seen, after I've baked brownies, there are always tons of little brownie crumbs (or, "brownie points") left in the pan, ready to be collected at one end of the pan and then, in the most dignified way possible, shaken into my gaping mouth. Kudos bars, on the other hand, are practically impossible to find these days, which is basically the worst thing ever because they are basically the best thing ever.

-Frère Rubik


0 Corrections
Question #86286 posted on 05/04/2016 6:28 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Do homemade marshmallows really taste better than store bought? Can you even tell the difference?

-Taste the Test

A:

Dear TNT,

One of my good friends growing up would always make homemade marshmallows and rave about them. But to me, they're all just sugar.

Cheers,

The Lone Musketeer

A:

Dear you,

I don't have much of anything useful to add except that there's a Good Eats episode on Netflix right now on how to make homemade marshmallows, called Puff the Magic Marshmallow.

-Squirrel


0 Corrections
Question #86376 posted on 05/04/2016 5:58 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

What things about being a BYU student do you wish you had known about as a freshman? I'm talking about things like not using all your Dining Plus money on food and stocking your sophomore apartment with things, or great study places, or cool clubs or classes, or half-off cards in the Cougareat, whatever you can think of. It's only been about a decade since I've been at BYU, but I know lots has changed.

-Momma Chubbs

A:

Dear Doctor,

There a ton of questions in the archives about advice for freshmen, and while I don't have links for you right now, keep an eye on the FAQs.

But, my one bit of advice is to get to know professors better, because there will come a time when you need letters of recommendation and then you will realize that you have maybe one professor to ask when you need three.

-Tally M.

A:

Dear Momma,

As someone with a disability, I wish I had known about the UAC. I also knew about the counseling center but I wish I had known that I could request a faculty counselor. My counseling sessions improved significantly when I stopped seeing a student counselor.

-a writer

A:

Dear Mommy,

My answer isn't really specific to BYU, but as I near graduation I'm realizing I have a lot of regrets about how I've pursued my college education.

1. Don't declare your major as a freshman. Even if you think you know what you want to do with your life, take the time to explore classes that interest you or classes you wouldn't otherwise take. I declared a history major halfway through my freshman year, and so I immediately adjusted my class schedule so I was taking history courses and GE courses.

Now, as a senior, I regret that. My education has mostly focused on liberal arts, and the only scientific or technical classes I've taken have been the ones I was required to take. I really enjoyed the elective classes that I chose, but suddenly I realized how few technical skills I have. I have friends studying biochemistry who have all kinds of research and lab experience, and I have nothing like that. So choose some classes for fun, but also some that will stretch your abilities and teach you concrete new skills, like computer programming or personal finance or creative writing.

2. Try taking some spring and summer classes. Admittedly I'm only a week into my first spring term, but I love how relaxed it is, and how empty campus is (though I know, EFY is coming...). The classes aren't too much work and are relatively easy. Plus it's way easier to get through everything when classes are only like seven weeks.

3. Work. College is a time when you need to work on enhancing and fleshing out your resume. I think it's incredibly important to have a job and to try out jobs in various fields while you can. Since starting college, I've worked in food sales and food prep, retail, custodial, and as a TA. Each job has brought me good experience and a history of customer service, but they've also taught me about what kind of jobs I like and what qualities of a job frustrate me. That has really helped me narrow down what career I think my future could hold. Even if you don't need to work, you should do it, both to build up your resume and to teach yourself the value of hard work. As a side note, you can get a 50% off card for BYU food only if you work in food (and concessions doesn't count).

4. Try your hardest to be independent from your family. If your family lives in Provo that might be more difficult, but I think perhaps the most important thing you learn in college is to be an independent adult. You have to learn what it means to take care of yourself and not rely on other people to solve your problems. You have to learn what it's like to struggle without an intimate support system, and what it means to be poor.

5. Network. Get to know people going into your field and professors who are established in your field. Find people who you can ask for help and advice. Be assertive in asking for assistance in finding worthwhile jobs, internships, and other opportunities.

6. Take classes that will challenge you and force you to see the world in a different way. For instance, I think every BYU student ought to take World Religions, because the rest of our education is so focused on the LDS faith. If you're studying mechanical engineering, then take an Intro to Humanities class. If you're studying English, take a physics class. Take subjects that will force you to contemplate opposing points of view.

7. Keep up on the news. This can seem like just another chore if you've already finished a ton of homework that day, but you can't consider yourself an educated person if you have no idea what's happening in the world around you. You can pick up a copy of The New York Times from the Kennedy Center every weekday.

Sorry that this wasn't terribly BYU-specific, but please, learn from my regrets.

Love,

Luciana


0 Corrections
Question #86316 posted on 05/04/2016 5:21 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

As we all know by now, I have chronic health conditions. Winner, winner, chicken dinner! :) Recently, I've been more sick than usual, which has resulted in me being tested for several nefarious diseases/issues by hematologists and so forth. I'm keeping my chin up about it. In efforts to maintain a positive outlook, I am trying to be creative. (Please, see below).

One of the many tests being conducted is a FISH BCR-ABL test (sent to the Cytogenetics). I never heard of this before, and didn't really think about it (as I hadn't heard of the many others either, Jak 2 anyone?). But my friend who is doing his Medical Residency at Stanford was ecstatic to hear that my doctor sent my blood-work to the Cytogentics for FISH testing, and told me to ask the pathologists for a copy of the slide (apparently, FISH tests/results look like these images, which depict my chromosomes). He said I should get a copy of it (regardless of the results) and frame that puppy because it's like a picture of me at the tiniest level I'll prob get a chance to see.

I'm wondering, will the pathologists automatically give me a copy of the image or do I have to request it specifically? If so, how? My hematologist sent it a special Cytogentic lab so I'm not in contact with the people performing the tests -- just my hematologist. If I want to frame my image, how do I get a copy? Do you know of anyone who has a copy of their image and what creative things they have done with it, if any?

-Pills & Pillows

P.S. On a slightly related note, if I wanted to get DNA testing to know the exact fractions/percents of where my ancestors came from (ex: 87% Western European, 13% Native American), how much is that, and where do I do that?

P.P.S. In the Bible, we read about the woman with the "issue of blood." We know that means she was like having menstruating issues, but have modern doctors tried to diagnosis her with the little info they have about her?

A:

Dear Pills,

It looks like none of us on the Board have any experience with the FISH BCR-ABL test, so we can't give you step by step instructions on how exactly to get a copy of the picture of your chromosomes. The best thing you could do is ask your doctor if you can have a copy. If your doctor doesn't know, ask for the contact info of the people doing the tests, and ask them. We at the Board are knowledgeable and have lots of collective life experience and stuff, but for things like this, asking your doctor is probably your best bet for getting a specific answer.

As for your first P.S., ancestry.com does genetic testing for about $99, but apparently they have lots of sales. My sister and her husband just did this a few weeks ago, and they said it was great! We know in general in my family that we're Scandinavian and British with some other stuff mixed in, but the exact percentages actually vary from person to person based on their genes. My sister said it was really cool to see exactly how much of everything she is, so this comes highly recommended!

And as far as the woman with the issue of blood goes, I wasn't able to find any information about modern doctors trying to diagnose her specific condition. The King James version of the Bible says "issue of blood," but apparently the original Greek is better translated to "bleeding woman." According the the Wikipedia page on her, that's why modern scholars say she was "having menstruating issues." I know there are some women who have normal periods throughout their life, and then suddenly they start their period and it just never stops, and they can be constantly bleeding for months or even years. There are probably lots of causes for that, so the Bible doesn't give us enough information to know exactly what was causing this woman's period to last so long.

Good luck with all your medical tests and staying positive! You've got this! 

-Alta


1 Correction
Question #86375 posted on 05/04/2016 3:41 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

If you lost an eye in a horrific incident, would your wear a glass eye, or an eye-patch?

-The Board Ghost

A:

Dear Doctor,

I'd channel Nick Fury and get an eye patch.

But I also like Auto's idea below.

-Tally M.

A:

Dear TBG,

I'd wear the glass eye and then put the eyepatch on the wrong eye, rendering me effectively blind. I think it would be funny to confuse people, and I don't need more reasons than that.

-TEN

A:

Dear Ghost,

I choose an eye in the style of Mad-Eye Moody.

If it can't see through objects and the back of my head, I have no interest in it.

-April Ludgate

A:

Dear you,

My aunt had a glass eye. You couldn't even tell. I'd go with that.

-Zedability


0 Corrections
Question #86372 posted on 05/04/2016 2 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Wow, it seems like everyone here is pairing off. It may not be necessary but would you like to update us on your relationship status, M.O.D.A.Q.?

-possibly M.O.D.A.Q.

A:

Hello Kitty,

Why, yes, I did just ask this question so I could state for the record that I am not dating any of these nerds now or ever.

-M.O.D.A.Q.

A:

Dear Mo,

Wow! Wow! I thought we had something special here. Thank you for rejecting me so publicly and thoroughly.

- Soulful 

A:

Hey Ginger,

Me? Reject you?

You've brushed me off so many times I've lost count.

-M.O.D.A.Q.


0 Corrections
Question #86335 posted on 05/04/2016 9:59 a.m.
Q:

Dear Graduated Writers,

What were you most excited for about graduating (is it the same thing now that you're graduated)? What do you miss most about BYU?

-Pallas

A:

Dear Doctor,

I was really excited to not have to commute as much as I was, but while I'm still commuting less, I'm commuting more than I thought I would. I do have to say that I miss the amount of variety that was in my day; even if I was super bored, I'd be doing something different in an hour.

-Tally M.

A:

Dear P,

Before I graduated, I was really excited to start graduate school. Immediately after I graduated, that didn't change, and I'm still quite happy with my choice. Nowadays, I'm getting really tired of taking classes because my research is more interesting and engaging. I definitely won't miss being graded on everything I do. Grades were a huge impediment to my education, and I love that I can direct my own learning now. If I want to become an expert on, say, supersonic jets or music production software, I can learn what I need without being bogged down by prerequisites or unnecessary information. If I find a topic I like more, I can switch gears whenever I want, and tangents are no longer a bad thing. It's very freeing. 

I'm not really qualified to answer your second question since I never left BYU. I graduated in April 2014 and started my graduate work the following spring term. I can't predict what I'm going to miss, either, since I don't know where I will go afterward.

-TEN

A:

Dear Palisander,

BEHOLD YE LONGE AND BORINGE MONOLOGUE, READER, AND DESPAIR! Let's get started.

Honestly, I was dreading graduation. I started work on my undergraduate in Fall 2007 when—ironic though it may seem—I tried to get through school as fast as possible. I signed up for a Spanish major, then switched to a Biology major, discovered it was boring, declared myself an Environmental Science major because I saw a cool pamphlet, and went on my mission. When I arrived back from my mission I decided maybe I had to figure out if my major was right for me. I began taking classes like crazy and would end up going to school year-round for the next three years in an attempt to both figure out if I liked my major and blow my generals out of the water. And blow them out of the water I did, if that phrase can be read here as "withdrawing from College Algebra 110 once, failing outright twice over spring and summer and eventually getting a C- a semester later."  When I ended up re-declaring Environmental Science as my major, I did so not because I really cared for the classes, but because I needed to have a declared major to apply to the Media Arts program as a minor and it sounded more likely to bring me employment than a Latin American Studies major, where for some reason I had effortlessly accumulated like thirty-three credits.

Okay... If this is going to be a sob story, we may as well get to the sobbing part. Bla bla bla, I went on like two study abroads in the same year that were freakin' sweet. I went to both the Jerusalem Center and the Andes and Amazon Field School in Ecuador where I met Owlet while I was still a reader. Things were great, until I had the worst semester of my entire academic career in Fall 2013. It wasn't my only bad semester, either. The intervening years between then and April 2016 have been nothing less than a royal sufferfest of academic malaise and possibly depression. I hate academic work... but I dearly love being at BYU. WHY, ARDILLA, WHY?!?

At the time I write this, I would probably say it's all I've ever really known. We're trained basically from birth to be students, and so for the last twenty-two years I've had some sort of vague goal to work towards. Now... now what do I work towards? 'Cause while you're a student you seem to have more flexibility with telling people "I have no idea what I'm doing with my life, but it's okay because school." Well, I still am telling people that, except now I have no idea "because recent graduation." 

More than that, though, school seemed to represent possibility. Something I began to say in Board Question #84452 but then stopped because I was trolling Tally, M. (sorry Tally) was that I've realized I am crazy about access to things, or rather, the perception that I have access to things. Let me 'splain: Have you ever sat in one place with two convenient options, but then you don't want to make a choice and pick something to do because then you can't do the other thing instead? I hate that feeling. I hate it. And it basically defines my life. I hate it when I realize I no longer have access to resources, programs, or people. When I take the time to think about it, I subconsciously try to set up situations so I can access stuff. To make this clearer, let me make you a short list of some things I have had access to at one point or another since I showed up at BYU:

  • Most buildings or rooms on campus (when I was a nighttime building security officer at BYU, not so coincidentally during the summer when I failed College Algebra twice)
  • Basically all of the Museum of Art (signed up when I left my first job and became a MOA guard)
  • Part of a government base because I had a summer job there
  • A sweet greenhouse and a lab on campus, for a research job
  • Being able to sign up for random classes because I was a student, especially film, foreign language, dance and student activity classes (it is harder to take classes at a university when you don't attend it, btw)
  • Being able to use campus student resources (including but not limited to counseling)
  • Harold B. Lee Library services and resources, especially the Multimedia Lab
  • The 100 Hour Board, obviously.

Sometimes the access is more abstract in nature.

  • When I worked as a figure drawing model I had an "in" with the students and teachers, and I could sometimes sit in on classes and draw with them because they were already familiar with me. I also heard about random animators and artists coming and lecturing at BYU (people like Cory Loftis, character designer for Zootopia). I was also able to go to the anatomy lab and learn about the human body via cadavers because of this job. Yes, that was on my bucket list. Also dead people smell weird. When they're preserved in formaldehyde, anyways.
  • I weaseled my way into BYU's  Theatre Ballet performance of Alice in Wonderland partly because it was a very convenient way to very quickly get to know all the BYU ballet girls, who I generally found very attractive (turns out they were almost all freshmen... **sigh**). 
  • On a wider scale, BYU I think to me has represented access to people to date and access to some yet-to-materialize successful dating future. More on that in a second.

Now, this idea of access has some serious limitations. Try I might, my functional access to any one thing or person is limited. I can't take advantage of every thing and resource because there simply isn't time, and even though all the time in the world would never be enough while I was still at BYU there was still the possibility I could somehow make meaning out of all this stuff. 

There's a serious social component to this as well. Much of my social life for the last decade-ish has come from BYU. My coworkers, classmates, friends, roommates and people I date are overwhelmingly people I've met here, and it's nice to know people and be able to run into them as I walk around campus or study in the library. Also, shout out to my peeps at the Learning Commons desk, if you're reading this. You're the best. Circulation desk peeps, you're cool too. But the other desk and me, well, we tight. We tight.

Now I can still go to campus and see people I know, but I feel as a graduate I am no longer a student. I feel I have become "other." Now when I show up to campus, I feel like I have to theoretically have some reason besides just wanting to be there. 

Okay, now comes the foretold whining about dating: I statistically have been pretty bad at dating at BYU. We won't go into all the reasons for this, but I left BYU very frustrated with dating and very, very single. I recognize it's not healthy to base my feeling of self-worth on something as fickle and sneaky as dating, but to some extent I consciously or subconsciously have and it left me bitter, weary and frustrated. That's pretty close to how I always feel about it, but at least before I knew there was the possibility of finding new people to date serendipitously as I did virtually anything on campus and being able to hit the "reset" button on my Feroz Dating Hopefulness Modulator whenever a new semester started. 

What do I miss most now I've graduated? I'm not sure, as it's only been like a week since I dumped my stuff into a beat-up Honda Odyssey minivan and drove it reluctantly to the casa de mis padres and moved back into the basement and resumed whatever it was I was doing before college, which it appears are video games and wasting my life on the internet and avoiding human contact (although I did manage to accidentally get a decent summer job starting in a week). This week has been very frustrating, as it appears my procrastination and self-loathing have survived my academic career. There are some good things, though. For example, I found out my parents own TWO WHOLE BAGS OF GARLIC RYE TEXAS TOAST CROUTONS! At least, they did. Now there's only one. Also now I can move anywhere and be jobless there at any time! And struggle with student debt! Yay! You know what? Maybe I'll just go find that second bag of croutons.

TL;DR: Ardilla is angry about lots of things but he also has some croutons. 

Suerte,

--Ardilla Feroz


0 Corrections
Question #86364 posted on 05/04/2016 9:58 a.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

The honor code/rape scandal has been breaking my heart. I hate hearing that women were treated so atrociously; I hate seeing the university I love in the news for such awful situations.

Since I'm not at BYU these days, can you tell me about what the on-campus reaction has been? Have any actual changes been made since the statement from President Worthen?

And what do you, personally think should happen when women (or men) report sexual assault? Does that change if they were breaking the honor code when it happened?

-sad cougar

A:

Dear Sadie,

The Honor Code is awesome. It really is, and it's there to protect us. We all signed it. Unfortunately, just like we break the commandments, sometimes we might slip up. We might stay over too late, cheat, have a drink, or even go too far with a member of the opposite gender.

However, just like Christ's Atonement allows us to repent of our misdoings and of breaking the commandments, the Honor Code Office at BYU needs to find a way to allow students to really, truly, and thoroughly repent of their misdoings without a blatant expulsion for a simple violation. Because here's the fact of the matter: actions have consequences. If you go to a party, get drunk, and get raped, there are TWO actions that happened here. One, you got raped. This is NEVER EVER EVER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES the victim's fault. However, there is another action here: you broke the Honor Code. Plain and simple, you had alcohol, which is obviously against the Honor Code that you signed and agreed to live by.

I think people are under the assumption that one violation of the Honor Code will get you kicked out of BYU immediately, no questions asked. I have heard of cases of this, but I think it's less known that a lot of the time, people who violate the Honor Code are expected to do something to make up for what they have done while still being able to remain a student (I might be wrong on this), especially for first-time offenders or people who turn themselves in. They might have to write an essay or do community service, but I think getting expelled is kind of the rare extreme. I think what some people forget is that there are consequences for every action. A lot of people these days (myself included) seem very quick to make up excuses or deny their actions but very slow to accept consequences and work through whatever they may need to do to make it better. In my opinion, consequences need to be accepted (you had a drink, which means you broke the Honor Code, and there should be a consequence to that). There should always be a way to accept consequences of your actions but, through true apology, make it better without necessarily getting kicked out of BYU. However, first and foremost, victims of sexual assault need to be helped with that (legally, emotionally, physically, etc.) before any kind of Honor Code investigation.

If there is a way for ALL people (sexually assaulted or not) to confess to Honor Code violations without the fear of getting expelled, then there is opportunity for true repentance on all fronts to occur at BYU. Honor Code violations happen more often than we know, I think, and I know the repentance process is blocked off for a lot of people who are afraid of telling their bishops because they are terrified of getting expelled. The HCO also needs to accept help from bishops in assessing how an individual is progressing in the repentance process: after all, the bishop is the "judge in Israel" and, as a University owned by a Church that believes in revelation, the HCO should hold bishops' opinions in extremely high regard.

Personally, I think creating a system of true "repentance" for Honor Code violations is the thing the HCO needs. Victims of sexual assault can get the help they need, but justice is still satisfied. Even if the Honor Code Office finds out about an Honor Code violation that occurred before the sexual assault, someone who is truly repentant should be able to make their way back on the path. People should not be afraid of reporting sexual assault because they're afraid of getting expelled. Frequent counselor meetings and maybe some community service (for the Honor Code violation, NOT the sexual assault) can help an individual progress and truly repent of their actions. After all, isn't that the message of the Gospel? That we are imperfect people who just need a little help and mercy to help them become better?

-Adelaide


0 Corrections
Question #86374 posted on 05/04/2016 9:57 a.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Can you sing the praises of your favorite beverage for me?

-Limeade is king

A:

Dear Yes,

The problem here lies in me picking a "favorite beverage." Do I go with orange juice? An Orange Julius? Fresca Toronja? Lemonade? Cherry Limeade from Sonic? A Castaway from Sodalicious? A cold Gatorade or Powerade after working in the hot sun? A lemon San Pellegrino paired with a delicious SLAB? That cheap powdered lemonade that always is served at my ward's Break the Fast and always tastes super delicious after fasting? A cold glass of fresh Rubikland ice water with one of Mère Rubik's delicious pastas? A hot Pacific Cooler Capri Sun that was accidentally left in the car on a day at the beach? A 32 oz. Arizona Golden Bear Strawberry Lemonade with pebbled ice, purchased for a mere $0.69 from a Floridian RaceTrac gas station? A warm mug of apple cider or herbal tea after a long snowboarding run? 

The killer of all of this is that I am stuck at work and thinking of all of these delicious beverages has made me very thirsty.

-Frère Rubik

A:

Dear Lick,

Until the last two years or so, I didn't really like cola. But I am now a Diet Coke addict. More specifically, I could live on Cherry Coke Zero.

First of all, though I can't claim it to be healthy, it does have zero calories and zero sugar, which for me is a big plus. 

Second, it tastes delicious. 

Third, it has caffeine. Even if you try to limit your caffeine intake, in small quantities it can do great things for your motivation and productivity.

Love,

Luciana


0 Corrections
Question #86371 posted on 05/04/2016 9:57 a.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

How would I go about finding out the superior of one of my professors at BYU. I've had a bad experience with a particular professor who has mistreated other students as well and I'd like to write a letter to his superior letting them know of my specific concerns. Anyone know how I could do that?

-N.Hawkins

A:

Dear Hawkeye,

I recommend contacting the Dean of whatever college the professor works for.  Most of this information can be found on the college's internal site through BYU.  There may be another person of authority between your professor and the Dean of the entire college, but the Dean is definitely a good starting point.

I've already found the Dean's Offices for each college below:

BYU College of Business (Marriott School)

BYU College of Education

BYU College of Engineering and Technology

BYU College of Family, Home, and Social Sciences

BYU College of Fine Arts and Communication

BYU College of Humanities

BYU College of International Studies (alright, I'm not a fan of how this college's website is set up at all.  Follow the link and filter the directory by "Administration," you should get the Dean's Office from there.)

BYU College of Life Sciences

BYU College of Nursing

BYU College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences

BYU College of Religious Education

Many of these colleges have smaller departments within them, and it might be more beneficial to narrow in on the departments, depending on who your teacher is.

If you can't get through to the Dean, I would recommend just calling or emailing the college's main office, using the information at the bottom of their websites.

-April Ludgate


0 Corrections
Question #86373 posted on 05/04/2016 2:54 a.m.
Q:

Dear Frère Rubik,

So how do you feel about the retcon of Spider-Man's marriage to Mary Jane?

--Axe Cop

A:

Dear Axey,

So, really, I don't feel too qualified to comment on the whole thing. "One More Day" happened before I started getting into comics. I mean, I've been a Spider-Man fan since I was a kid, but I didn't have access to any real comics until I came here to BYU in 2011, and that was years after the Peter/MJ split happened. Since then, I've followed a few Spider-Man story arcs; some have been really good, some have been really bad (I'm looking at you, "Ends of the Earth"). It's hard to say whether or not the stories would have been improved or worsened if Peter and Mary Jane were still married; some probably wouldn't have happened at all. 

So, on one hand, I think a lot of really good Spider-Man stories have come in the time since OMD, and those might not have been possible if Peter and MJ hadn't split up. On the other hand, I really like Mary Jane as a character. She's independent, and yet incredibly supportive of Peter. She understands the enormous responsibility he feels to help others, and so doesn't get upset when that responsibility often comes before her (obviously, there are exceptions to this, but I feel that, as a whole, this is how she feels).

So, in the end, I guess I'm sort of neutral about the whole thing.

-Frère Rubik just noticed he started every new paragraph with the word "so." Did you?


0 Corrections