J is a good guy. When he sees some worms moving about, he ever so friendly approaches one and asks it, where did it come from and where is it heading. But then he is also the kind of guy who would ask a “sine” function what its value is at infinity and may ask a “Dirac-delta” what is its derivative. There is a good reason why I am fond of J. I also like M. I had always suspected that she moves about with boxes of worms in her pocket, and then one day she showed me an inch insect on her fingertips. She even gave it away to me. After a photo session with that celebrity; I returned it to a tree outside, it was a perfect rainy day for it to be out there. H thinks he knows all the earthworms in his yard and that he can make them dance to his tunes. True that I have seen some of them actually dance to his tunes, but he is yet to see the ones living deep underground in his yard and the ones that will metamorphous sooner or later. They are beautiful, complex, at times frightening and way more difficult to manage. I know, I have lived with worms since my infancy, I have eaten them for breakfast as a toddler. I don’t try to make them dance but I do dance with them sometimes. C if he tries, has capacity to understand worms but he is too busy building automobiles for them.
Not everyone is as much fun as J and M. Now take JD for example. JD is different, he would have nothing to do with cans of worms. SD is positively afraid of cans of worms, but if someone hands him an open can of worms, he deals with it with affection and care, that makes him quite adorable. AL seems uncertain about how she wants to manage cans of worms, I guess she will resolve it, I hope she does that in the favor of the worms. PA has a lot of interest in worms, what he needs is a good magnifying glass so that he can adore and admire them. Right now he just simulates them, which is not as beautiful as the real thing.
S directly comes from the worm country. They are some of her best friends. She would come to fist fights for them if need be. I love her spirit but also worry about her. W is a gentleman; he likes worms and likes people who like worms. Mi? Xie is sweet, I have often found xer playing with a worm or two. ​

Sagittarius (Nov. 22 – Dec. 21): If something bad happens twice it’s a coincidence. If it happens three times you’re cursed. If it happens one time, it’s somebody’s fault.

Capricorn (Dec. 22 – Jan. 19): Let’s face the facts, you’re a mer-goat.

Aquarius (Jan. 20 – Feb. 18): You may feel a sense of emptiness this month. You’ll find yourself wondering if you’re still not over that basil plant. I mean, it was helpless. It only had you to look after it, and, let’s be honest, you failed it. You killed it. You’re a murderer, and you don’t even have a real job yet. You just can’t believe that you would let something that innocent and helpless die without a second thought. Then again, maybe it’s just because you forgot to eat breakfast.

Pisces (Feb. 19 – March 20): You might want to stay away from Cancer this month. Bad vibes and all that.

Aries (March 21 – April 19): Your shoe’s untied. Made you look.

Taurus (April 20 – May 20): Finals week is coming up, so I just want you to remember to KEEP CALM. EVERYBODY KEEP CALM. NOBODY FREAK OUT OR DO ANYTHING DRASTIC

Gemini (May 21 – June 20): Your lucky number is at least 6.

Cancer (June 21 – July 22): Pisces is an asshole.

Leo (July 23 – Aug. 22): But it was not your fault but mine, and it was your heart on the line. I really fucked it up this time. Didn’t I, my dear?

Virgo (Aug. 23 – Sept. 22): Allen Downey has the answers to all your problems and wrote a book about it.

Libra (Sept. 23 – Oct. 22): Then it comes to be that the soothing light at the end of the tunnel [sick bass line] is a freight train coming your way.

Scorpio (Oct. 23 – Nov. 21): Would you like fries with that?

The holidays are great for a lot of reasons: everyone’s happy; there’s good food, decorations, lights; family comes to visit. And when family comes to visit, inevitably someone will ask you why you haven’t found that special someone yet.

This year I’ve decided to help you out and prepared a list of excuses you can give your Aunt Linda when she asks you why you still aren’t dating anyone.

– I’m looking for the right one.
– I’ve just been so busy with work.
– I’m emotionally stunted and never developed the ability to trust.
– I would go speed dating but I just haven’t found the right jeans.
– I want to be confident in my own identity before I commit to another person. I don’t ever want to lie about who I am to someone I care about. You get that, don’t you?
– Wow, that apple pie looks amazing. Can I have your recipe?
– For the last time, Linda, I’m ace.
– Why aren’t you dating anyone, Linda? Ever think about that?
– Look! A flying buffalo!
– I’m really still hurting from my last break-up. I doubt I’ll ever be able to feel love again, so don’t make any wedding plans.
– A really cool hat.
– Bobby’s not dating anyone either.
– 404: the page you requested was not found.

In admission information sessions, we receive a wide range of questions, though there are many that come up time and time again. For example: do you prefer the SAT or the ACT? (we accept both, no preference); can I submit an additional letter of recommendation? (yes, up to one); if I receive an outside scholarship, can I use it at Olin? (congratulations and yes!). Most of these answers are straightforward and easily understood. One that requires more explanation is “it is easier for women to be admitted to Olin?”
I’m never shy about this question. Olin has a commitment to equal membership in the class of students who identify as male and female by legal sex (hurray!), and we have a talented pool of applicants to sustain this (double hurray!). Occasionally, this reply prompts a follow up: “so the applicant pool is balanced by legal sex?” Well, no, Olin’s applicant pool is generally between 25-30% female by legal sex (which is fairly consistent with other engineering programs and could actually be considered quite strong in light of the fact Olin offers only 2 of the top 10 engineering majors chosen by women). This is when the brow of the inquirer begins to furrow and a more nuanced answer is needed (stay with me, I’ll get there).
Last spring I received an email with the subject line: Addressing Comments of Admission Gender Bias? The question mark was part of the subject line. The email arrived on May 1. We had just wrapped up enrolling the Class of 2021; I assumed it was from a student (or more likely a parent) who was displeased with their admission decision. But it wasn’t. The email came from a group of current students who identify as women who have had their enrollment at Olin questioned due to a perception that women have an “easier” time getting in.
So, I met with them. They shared stories of parents they’ve met giving campus tours, male-identified classmates from high school, and teammates here at Olin who have, intentionally or unintentionally, seeded doubt in minds of these women. They shared moments of laughing off a comment, ignoring a slight. Justifying your place, whether at Olin or anywhere for any reason, is exhausting, distracting, demoralizing. These students acknowledged these moments didn’t occur every day, but it was often enough that they needed answers. I can identify with these students; I have come up with lots of ways to respond to comments like “wow, aren’t you young for a dean?” or “you are a dean? Atta girl!”
Here’s the more refined and detailed answer to “it is easier for women to be admitted to Olin?”:
First of all, it is not easy for anyone to get into Olin. We have a holistic, intentional, multi-layered admission process that, as Olin students well know, demands a lot in the application and in person. It is a highly individualized process. We hold high standards for academic achievement, potential, aptitude, effort, values, and drive. Every offer of admission is rooted in our desire to see you- each and every one of you- as a member of the Olin community. It’s detailed, it’s personal, it’s messy, it’s highly selective and it is incredibly demanding of the faculty and staff that participate in this process, but it is, in fact, the absolute best part of my job.
But is it easier for students who check “female” for legal sex on their Common Application to be admitted to Olin? No. No. A thousand times no. Is it more probable? More statistically likely? Sure. Herein lies the perception problem. Let’s do the math: about three-quarters of the applicant pool identify as male and approximately one half of the enrolling class identify as female (again, by legal sex). Many people stop there and declare, “Gender bias!” It’s easier for women to get in! Would that it were so simple…
We must be careful not to assume that the size of an applicant pool, or a subset of an applicant pool, is an indicator of application quality or admissibility. The breakdown of the applicant pool actually has little to nothing to do with who is admitted in a highly personalized admission process. It is the individual applicants and what they will bring to the Olin community that matters. The detail most important to the question at hand is: applicants who are invited to Candidates’ Weekends are equally qualified based on our admission process, regardless of legal sex. Every Candidate has cleared a consistent standard for academic preparation and potential success at Olin. And after Candidates’ Weekends (and the extensive and individualized feedback we receive on every participant), the Candidates who are ultimately admitted to Olin are equally qualified based on our admission process, regardless of legal sex. We are fortunate to attract an applicant pool that makes this possible. We also benefit from an admission process that is so individualized, that we can build an intentional class one amazing person at a time.
The worst part of my job is that there are far more deserving applicants in our pool than there are spaces at Olin. This means that incredible folks of both sexes are denied admission to Olin. Are more of them male? Yes, because there are more males in the applicant pool to begin with. But this fact, in no way should reflect on women who are here. Full stop.
I’ve focused on legal sex here, but you can insert just about any biographic or demographic info here and the process holds up: you’re all here because of who YOU are and what you bring to campus. If anyone ever questions that, send them to me.

– “It’s a little rude. It’s like asking someone how much money they make. Asking a vector for its components is a little rude.”
– “Cars don’t usually stop when they come near me.”
– “I would go make some popcorn if people weren’t getting murdered in my room.”
– “I got distracted by the word fucking in the middle of that sentence.”
– “It’s very hard to burn the internet.”
– “Mechanically, that gives me a rash.”
– “There is a perfect number of meth on the board, which is 0.”
– “I blame my family’s ridiculously high arches.”
– “I had a plan but I’m not finding much cardboard or motivation.”
– “We’ve been using mechanical engineering to kill people for thousands of years. You’ve only been using electrical engineering to kill people for about 200, and I’m being generous.”
– “I barely know pick-up lines in American.”
– “That’s what Thanksgiving is for. Watching people get their hair cut for hours on end.”
– “At least your parents didn’t turn your room into an opium den.”

A previous article from October entitled “The Real Enemy: Capitalism” argues that issues of discrimination around gender, sexuality, and race have been “dramatically magnified and perpetuated by capitalism” and that when combating these societal ills it is necessary to be aware of “when our efforts align with what the money-making system wants: to deflect blame, and capitalize on your well-intentioned efforts.” A response article from November entitled “Capitalism Is Not Evil. We Are” argues that capitalism “creates products that reflect the culture and values of the consumers” and thus capitalism is not the “root cause” of discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry, but rather our sexist and racist culture is the root cause.
Despite the different theses of these articles, they actually both seem to have similar arguments. Compare these two statements:
“We reward unethical companies for implementing “green” or “inclusive” practices, thinking they’ve become good guys, instead of thinking that they’re just cashing in on a different phenomenon.”
“Progressivism and inclusionism happen to be “in” right now, and businesses from soap to Broadway are just trying to sell you more products.”
I think that this confusion of disagreement and agreement highlights the importance of systems thinking when dealing with complex systems like culture and capitalism. The first article argues that A causes B, and the second that B causes A, when in reality A and B both feedback on each other. What we call “culture” is created by a huge number of factors, which includes capitalism and the things that people learn from what they consume. The behavior of investors and businesses (capitalism) is also determined by a huge number of factors, including what people have bought in the past and what they think people will buy in the future, and thus one of those factors is definitely culture. Neither capitalism nor culture determine each other, but rather they exist in a system of feedback loops in which they clearly influence each other as well as many other important systems (like politics and physical reality).
To simply look at one system determining the other is to miss the full picture and will always be misleading. The problems of capitalism, racism, sexism, heterosexism, colonialism, white supremacy, sustainability, poverty, etc. are all systemic problems; they are not causes or effects of this or that, but properties that emerge from the structure of the systems and systems of systems of which they are a part. This is why systems thinking is necessary when trying to tackle these issues. For a short introduction to systems thinking I recommend checking out “Thinking in Systems: A Primer” by Donella H. Meadows.