You are currently browsing the Dinhternet posts tagged: Mo W


Generally Creepy

If you’re not famil­iar with the Stan­dard Creepi­ness Rule, it says that you shouldn’t date any­one under the age of ((Your Age /​2) + 7). It’s con­sid­ered a “stan­dard” rule because the divid­ing adjusts your dat­ing pool over time, since older cou­ples with age gaps are more socially accept­able than younger cou­ples with equal age gaps. For exam­ple, a 78-​year-​old dat­ing a 68-​year-​old is a lot less creepy than a 22-​year-​old dat­ing a 12-​year-​old. Fol­low­ing the rule, a 78-​year-​old can date any­one 46 or older, whereas the 22-​year-​old must date some­one at least 18.

But when most peo­ple think about the rule, they only think about the low end of the spec­trum. If you turn the equa­tion around, ((Your Age — 7) * 2) gives you the absolute old­est per­son you are allowed to date with­out being creepy. That same 22-​year-​old could be see­ing a nice 30-​year-​old, and that 78-​year-​old could have a 142-​year-​old sugar daddy. :)

Mo W and I were talk­ing about this the other day, and we agree that although the rule is sound in prin­ci­ple, it would be very weird to date any­one our sister’s age (or younger), so I will have a con­stant rule of (My Age — 4) for the rest of my life. Eddie C and I talked about the same thing, and he men­tioned that our friend Tyler P had no prob­lem with this and was glad that his sis­ter had turned 18, so he could now hit on her friends. And of course Eddie C is an only child, so he has noth­ing to worry about.

Any­ways, I bring this up because I noticed an attrac­tive girl on the bus ride home today. And then I real­ized she was get­ting off on the stop after me, which means she’s prob­a­bly a fresh­man, and thus out of my non-​creepy range. :(

Incom­ing search terms:

  • creepi­ness rule

Fear Film Festival

Hmm… this is my first quote in a while.

So last night, I tagged along with Jane to a ser­vice project — the Win­ter Men­tal Health Din­ner, which was at the Veteran’s Memo­r­ial Center’s recep­tion hall. Towards the end of the night, Mo wan­dered in from nowhere and we found out that she and some oth­ers were on the the­ater side of the Memo­r­ial Cen­ter doing another project — the Fem­i­nist Film Fes­ti­val. Since Les­ley was over there, I decided to just go over after my project was over so I could catch a ride home with her.

Of course, when I went over, I didn’t want to just stand around, so I tried to help out, too. When the fes­ti­val ended for the night, I helped clean up the the­ater seat­ing area, and helped the DJ pack up his stuff into his car. Then I went back to the lobby, and the other vol­un­teers and I stood in a cir­cle and talked for a bit as we waited for our next task. A line of the coör­di­na­tors came along car­ry­ing tables, and I (the only male vol­un­teer) hap­pened to be in the posi­tion of our talking-​circle that saw them com­ing first. I walked over to the first coör­di­na­tor in the line, who was also the small­est, and this con­ver­sa­tion ensued:

Let me take that table for you.”

— Me, try­ing to be a good volunteer.

NO!!!”

— The coör­di­na­tor, loud enough for every­one in the lobby to stop and look at us.

…”

— Me, shocked.

I think it’s because you have a penis.”

— Mo.

I was kinda in shock after that. And afraid to offer to help anymore.

Two-Faced, Part 1

I’ve really been try­ing to hold back my opin­ion on the recent scan­dal in Alpha Phi Omega. First, because I’m an SAA, and when I’m chair­ing the meet­ing, I hon­estly try to be as impar­tial as pos­si­ble; sec­ond, because I feel every­one should get noth­ing but the facts and come up with their own solu­tion; and finally, although Will O and I are not the great­est of friends (or friends at all any­more, accord­ing to Face­book), I don’t have any­thing against him per­son­ally, and I didn’t want this to be about per­sonal feel­ings or vendet­tas or witch hunts. That said, after hear­ing yes­ter­day that Brother Mo W was get­ting shit from some mem­bers of the chap­ter and even from advi­sors, I really want to speak my mind.

Will O did wrong, and he should be pun­ished. Some say that oth­ers have done worse and got­ten away with it. I don’t know of any of these cases, but if some­one else in the chap­ter has com­mit­ted a felony, I would want to expel him as well.

Some say that the motion passed this time because we strong armed the chap­ter into sub­mis­sion by imply­ing that we would con­tin­u­ally bring this up until the motion went our way. Believe me, that was con­sid­ered and dis­cussed before the motion was brought up again. If the chap­ter did feel strongly that Will O should be allowed to remain a brother, then I explained the “Objec­tion to Con­sid­er­a­tion” motion in my e-​mail and any­one could have made it at the meet­ing, but no one chose to.

Some say that the motion passed this time because Brother Alice C wrote some num­bers on the board, and the total was higher than before. I hope that’s not the case. I hope that there’s no magic amount of money in brother’s heads, and a cor­rupt brother should only be expelled if he takes more than that amount. To me, it doesn’t mat­ter if he emp­tied out our cof­fers or if he took a sin­gle dol­lar. The fact is, we pay dues and raise funds to advance the chap­ter, the fra­ter­nity, and our valu­able pro­grams of ser­vice. We trust our Trea­sur­ers to safe­guard those funds. Will O vio­lated our trust by tak­ing money with­out our per­mis­sion and using it for his own per­sonal gain.

And while I’m on the sub­ject of trust­ing our Trea­sur­ers… some seem to think that Broth­ers Michelle F and Jes­sica C are respon­si­ble for this scan­dal. That is ridicu­lous! First, trans­fer of office (and the bank account) is a duty that falls equally to out­go­ing and incom­ing offi­cers. And sec­ond, there is no rea­son why they should have sus­pected that Will O was going to take funds for per­sonal gain. They trusted him, as we all did. He, and he alone, is respon­si­ble for his actions and his vio­la­tion of our trust.

Some say every­one who was involved in or even knew about what Will O was doing should be expelled. That is stu­pid. First, the Trea­sur­ers were not respon­si­ble, as I said before, and on top of that, they brought this mat­ter to the chapter’s atten­tion. If any­thing, we should praise them! Sec­ond, his house­mates may or may not have known what was going on. It would be impos­si­ble to prove who knew what, and it would be a fool­ish witch-​hunt to try to find out. Also, none of them would have been involved if not for his first action to pay rent with chap­ter funds.

Some say that the pun­ish­ment should fit the crime, or ask if there’s any other way to pun­ish him short of expelling him. Pay­ing back the money doesn’t make things right, because the real crime wasn’t tak­ing our money. It was break­ing the solemn trust we had put onto him to act respon­si­bly as our trea­surer, and he broke that trust. There is no way for us to now go break a trust with him. As for other pun­ish­ments, such as a tem­po­rary sus­pen­sion — we have no pro­vi­sion for such a pun­ish­ment. In fact, all Alpha Phi Omega events (other than our rit­u­als) are sup­posed to be open to the pub­lic, so ban­ning Will O could be con­sid­ered a vio­la­tion of that. But tech­ni­cal­i­ties aside, how does a two-​, four-​, six-​month, or “until he pays us back” sus­pen­sion help restore the trust that was bro­ken? Would you want to entrust him with any ExComm or chair posi­tion after this? Do we really want to cre­ate a caste sys­tem of mem­bers? (And yes, I know in a way we do already, but a “pledge” class is unavoid­able, and I don’t really agree with the “asso­ciate” class, either.)

Maybe if it was a one-​time thing when he was really des­per­ate, and he paid it back as soon as he could, I could for­give him. But it was sev­eral times span­ning sev­eral months, down to an ATM with­drawal of $20 because he was “just short on cash that day.” And if he could pay $1000 off his bal­ance within a week of his trial, why couldn’t he have just paid that back before the trial came up?

Maybe if he had shown some remorse, I could for­give him. But he said him­self that he does not value mem­ber­ship in our fra­ter­nity. When asked about his actions in e-​mail form by the inves­ti­gat­ing com­mit­tee and in front of the rest of ExComm, he tried to joke it off.

… and that is why I feel we had to expel Will O.

(Part 2 next.)