A 100-year old bride?

Daniel Radcliffe speaks out on gay rights

Biggest Loser contestants walk off set?

Strangest movie duos

Celebs in Marni for H&M

How do guys deal with a bad breakup?

Join the Undating Revolution!

Are guys only into girls with big boobs?

Cities across England turned dangerous as violent riots, spurred by the death of a black man by police, spread throughout the country. Mobs took over the streets, setting buildings and cars on fire, shattering windows, and looting stores. Things were particularly bad in London, where the Prime Minister sent 16,000 policemen on Tuesday to calm things down. It worked- the worst is over- but the cost of clean up is estimated to be in the tens of millions. Even though the riots began because of one man’s death, the social and economic inequality may have been what really heated things up. That’s an issue pretty familiar to those living in the U.S., and now, many are wondering, could the same thing happen in the states?

A  9,000 signature-strong petition got attention this week for it’s forward-thinking idea: Bert and Ernie should get married on Sesame Street. There have been rumors for a while now that the best buds are actually in a relationship, and their constant bickering is reminiscent of an old married couple. The LGBTQ activists who started the petition claim that an on-screen marriage between the two male puppets would teach acceptance and tolerance to children, but the show disagrees, insisting that such a union is impossible- “Even though they are identified as male characters and possess many human traits and characteristics (as most Sesame Street Muppets™ do), they remain puppets, and do not have a sexual orientation.” Wait… what about Kermit and Miss Piggy? You can still sign the petition here!

The 12 Congressmen who will make up the “super committee” have been announced. The group was part of the last-minute, we-must-avoid-the-implosion-of-our-economy deal to raise the debt ceiling last month. Despite their name, they’ll be searching for savings, not evil villains, though that’d be much more exciting. (Can you imagine if politicians were actually superheroes? Hello Hollywood, this is obviously a great movie idea…) To be exact, the committee, which is half Republican and half Democrat (and btw, only includes one woman and one African American- typical!), is charged with finding $1.5 trillion in savings over the next ten years. Maybe they will need super powers for that.

The main stage at the Indianapolis State Fair collapsed on Saturday night, killing 5 and injuring 40. Chaos erupted on the fairgrounds after the huge, metal structure- which was soon planned to hold the country-pop duo Sugarland- came crashing down due to a “freak gust of wind.” Visitors caught the unbelievable, horrifying event on video (here), but as a warning, it’s pretty scary and upsetting. The fair reopened this morning with a memorial service for those lost.

Warren Jeffs, the leader of the 10,000-member polygamist Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, was sentenced to life in prison on Tuesday. The jury took less than half an hour to decide that Jeffs, 55, deserved to spend the rest of his life in prison for sexually assaulting two underage female members of his church. In court, prosecutors showed evidence that he fathered a child with a 15-year-old and played a recording that was supposedly him having sex with a 12-year-old. For the past 2 years, Jeffs has been leading his followers from inside of a jail cell, and no one is quite sure what will happen to the group now that there’s no way he’s getting out. A former church-member told USA Today that “he will definitely remain a prophet behind bars, and they will be telling everybody that God’s going to tear the prison down and let him loose.”

Pic o’ the Week:

The U.S. has been in mourning for the past week after the deadliest day in the war in Afghanistan, when the above 30 U.S. servicemen died in a helicopter attack. The tragedy has come to be known as the Chinook Crash, named after the type of chopper the men were flying in.  This happened over a week ago, but it’s all people have been talking about this week, as more and more details- like the identities of the lost soldiers and the possible identity of the gunman who shot down the plane- have been coming out. In addition to the 30 Americans lost, 8 Afghanis were killed. Among the men who died were 22 members of Navy SEAL Team 6, the same group that took out Osama Bin Laden.

It’s no secret that getting admission to a college (especially big names like the Ivy League) is kind of a crap shoot. Sure, you need the grades, the activities, the involvement; but we all also know that sometimes you can give your application a little nudge that has nothing to do with academics. Your parents worked two jobs each to help take care of you and your three siblings and it taught you the value of responsibility and family — admissions gold. Or you spent half of your childhood in another country and had to learn the wonder and struggles of adapting your proud cultural heritage to life in the Midwest — brilliant. These kinds of things have been a leg-up in the admissions process for years and now, it turns out, there’s a brand new one that schools are actively seeking out — LGBT.

That’s right, when just a couple of decades ago many people couldn’t RISK coming out in college, now schools are trying to recruit applicants from the LGBT community and while I have no qualms about that, I gotta wonder if it’s fair.

I have a long-standing record on this column of being pro gay rights, and that’s not a streak I plan on breaking, but this is one area where I have some serious mixed feelings. On one hand, it’s great that schools are being active with the gay community and embracing their students’ sexualities as a part of who they are. It’s wonderful that they’re going to an effort to show students that they can be open, active and comfortable in their school and embracing that the challenges faced by many LGBT students are character shaping  and meaningful. Good job, colleges! It’s also not really affirmative action, so it’s not as though schools are trying to fill a certain quota; it’s just that if a good applicant comes along with the added twist of being LGBT, then it might give him or her a little boost.

No, the problem I have with this idea isn’t really about gay students getting a leg-up on the competition because of their sexuality or maybe taking a slot away from someone else based on that – though it is possible – my real problem is the implications for the gay communities within these schools. First of all, while I hate to think it, it would be a hell of a lot easier to fake a traumatic coming out story than something like, coming from a low-income family. It’s not really something admissions officers can check up on and there probably are dishonest students who would fake it or play up their own less dramatic experiences just to edge out the competition. There’s also the issue of creating an archetype for the gay student. Schools aren’t  just going around asking recruits if they’re LGBT, they see activism on transcripts with a certain expectation that it will continue – that an LGBT recruit won’t just be a student, but an involved, gay student. And while getting involved in the community is great, it puts a pressure on the student to be a certain kind of gay student – to be out and active and “gay.” There’s a lot more to an individual than their sexuality and to fit them into one little box, to put so much emphasis on who you are sexually, is kind of discrimination in reverse.

So what do you think? Should school’s look at something like sexuality when choosing students? Is being LGBT suddenly an unfair admissions advantage over straight students? Is it good or bad for the LGBT community? Duke it out!

In the mood for a good fight? Sound off in Lauren’s other battles.

As far as people go, I am rather intolerant.  I am intolerant of people who do not clean the coffee maker after they use it.  I am intolerant of couples that walk too slowly together on the sidewalk and therefore block all of the people behind them.  Mismatched outfits and too much eye makeup make my blood boil. And don’t even get me started on people who don’t know how to parallel park.

However, I’ve always felt that I exemplify a very accepting society when it comes to the bigger issues. Things like racial inequality or sex discrimination. I’m all about equal rights for everyone, regardless of race or gender. In fact, when my professor made me argue for school segregation and against gay marriage last week as a class exercise, I started laughing because I literally had nothing to say.

Why wouldn’t we want everybody to be happy?
Doesn’t everyone feel this way?
Doesn’t the law basically say just live and let live?

Yeah, apparently not. The events of the past couple of weeks have informed me that I am completely wrong about the world and the people living in it. Turns out, my tolerance isn’t the rule, it’s the exception. And minority groups, especially the gay population, have to put up with way more than I realized.

As a University of Michigan student, my local news is recently headlined with the story of Chris Armstrong, our student body president who is being harassed by Andrew Shirvell.  An Assistant Attorney General for the state of Michigan, Shirvell has gone out of his way to harass Armstrong online, accusing him of using his presidency to advocate a “radical homosexual agenda.”  Shirvell has not only shown up at student government meetings to criticize Armstrong, but also seeks him out at home.  While Shirvell claims he has freedom of speech to say whatever he wants, as someone who has actually studied Supreme Court cases, I was always under the impression that government officials were the ones trying to limit hate speech despite the First Amendment preserving its existence.  Wrong again.

And then I heard about Tyler Clementi jumping off of the George Washington Bridge forty minutes from where I live.

In an effort to not turn this into a rant about cruel people or bad judgment, I’ll just sum it up again.  Clementi’s roommate had a WebCam in their dorm room that taped Clementi having sex with another man.  His roommate took this footage and streamed it to the Internet.  A couple of days later, Clementi jumped off the bridge.  Coincidence?  Highly doubt it.

Though the Civil War ended in 1865, it took about a hundred years for real laws to come in place giving African-Americans their rights.  And in the middle of all of this, there was still persecution and murder and violence.  I can no longer speak for what the rest of the world thinks, but I do not think it is appropriate for a group of oppressed people to have to wait one hundred years before they can stop worrying about being bullied on a daily basis.

While America may allow everyone to have his or her own belief, this freedom does not entitle us to be cruel.  As a society, we see stories every day about our neighbors going out of their way to make others’ lives a little more difficult. For what? What’s the point? If Shirvell or Clementi’s roommate are experiencing higher quality lives after what’s gone on during the past two weeks, then someone please alert me.

So just stop.  Stop being difficult just for the sake of being difficult.  Stop ruining other people’s lives just because you can. I don’t think that being a little more accepting really ever hurt anyone.

[It's pretty obvious that the average CollegeCandy reader has some very strong opinions. Opinions that she likes to share with everyone on the site. Sometimes with mean words. We love a strong woman (unless she happens to be charging at us with her fists raised), so we thought we'd give her a real forum to discuss her thoughts, feelings, and perspectives. Every Friday I'll be featuring a hot topic (like flat rate tuition!) and leaving it up to you, the readers, to duke it out. So, read it and get your debate on in the comments section below!]

Last week, the Senate voted not to repeal the military’s ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy – a policy that’s essentially a band-aid for the absence of gay rights in the military. The policy, which was introduced in 1993, has essentially stood all of this time as a way of saying ‘you can be gay in the military, as long as nobody knows about it’. It looked close for a while there, but ultimately the policy stands – even though Obama actually campaigned on changing the policy and his administration is openly opposed to it – and I think it’s time we had OUR say.

As I’ve said before, I’m not unbiased on this issue, but regardless of my own personal moral compass being pro-gay rights, there are also some compelling reasons why the policy should be repealed. For starters, under this policy anyone who comes out or is outed in the military is given a dishonorable discharge, no matter how well they were actually doing their job. That means that we’re actively spending military budget on getting rid of military personnel regardless of the quality of their work or the necessity of their position, which, considering how much trouble there already is with military budgeting, seems like a massive waste. There’s also the very obvious fact that this is the AMERICAN military and if it were any other position, say, at an American business perhaps, a person could sue for being fired over their sexuality – because it’s freakin’ illegal!

Suffice to say it’s pretty backassward that our own laws don’t apply the same way to our protective body as they do to the public.

One of the big arguments against repealing the policy is the fact that it’s going to take a lot of work and since the system as it stands functions reasonably effectively, to throw a big restructuring in right now would just mess things up for everybody. Now on the one hand, I see a point in this argument, because yes, the military is doing tough stuff at a tough time and they’re doing the best job they can. Yes, massive restructuring to deal with changing policies and deal with things like housing – where do LGBT soldiers live? With their own gender? The opposite? – as well as overall attitudes and the general social unrest that major changes like this cause, would be a serious burden on the system and would likely make it work less effectively for a time.

But then again, if that’s the rationale, then there’s really never a good time to restructure anything. The military always does tough stuff at tough times and it will always upset the system to have major changes; that didn’t stop the military from desegregating in the ’40s.

OK, what do you have to say? Is ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ a blotch on our historical record? Does it desperately need to be repealed? Or has the policy been working so far so why fix what’s not broken? Should we wait for another, better, time to make a major effort like this?

Duke it out!

OK, I can already feel this one’s gonna get messy, so hold on tight folks.

I admit, I’ve put off talking about gay marriage here for a while, in part because, well, I went to a liberal arts school in NYC – I have way too many gay friends to really be impartial here. Then last week, the assistant managing editor of the Notre Dame student newspaper resigned during the controversy over an anti-gay joke that appeared in the paper’s comic strip and I realized that this is an issue that still affects us all, and we need to talk about it.

Now I’m not going to get into a moral argument here – I doubt that I could change anyone’s opinions one way or another about that particular issue; my questions instead are logistical – is gay marriage inevitably going to become legal and if so, what’s the point of fighting it?

Right now, five states allow gay marriage and several other have passed bills allowing it only to have them repealed. Regardless of your moral standpoint, the legal (and yes, marriage is considered a legal institution, not a religious one in the US) arguments for gay marriage are persuasive. Now, admittedly, there’s a lot of strange and old-fashioned laws still on the books that just hang around (did you know that it’s illegal to let a donkey sleep in a bathtub in Arizona?), but that’s mostly because people forget about them. Same-sex marriage is one issue that people are fighting for and are probably going to continue to fight for, so why not just let it go?

On one side, we’ve wasted enormous – like huge, gigantic – amounts of money fighting about gay marriage in the courts. Plus all of the money that’s been spent on propaganda on both sides is way up there too, which seems ridiculous given our current economic climate. Why not put all of that cash toward social programs and just admit that the battle is lost? Same-sex marriage would mean equality (supposedly the most American of all virtues) and it could also help clarify a lot of sticky legal situations about partnership rights and help ease up the burden with the foster system by allowing gay couples to adopt more easily. After all, 70% of Americans believe that the LGBT community deserves the same rights as straight individuals, so it just makes sense, right?

But at the same time, (and this one shocked me) the same percentage of Americans are opposed to gay marriage. And we have always been a country where, if nothing else, your opinion matters and you fight for it. So if that much of America – the “by the people, for the people” nation - doesn’t believe in same-sex marriage, should we really make it a law? I mean, ultimately we Americans have always been about doing what we believe is right – sometimes that has led to bad things, but it’s also the spirit that pushes us to pitch in and help big time with things like the disaster in Haiti.

OK, you tell me, same-sex marriage – yay or nay?
Should we go with the flow, or keep on fighting?
What would you vote for?
Keep it clean people, but duke it out!

We didn’t think it would happen either.

Um, what is going on here, Akon??

Who wants to see Tara Reid naked?

Woman arrested for Facebook poking.

Lady Gaga fights for gay rights.

No Glee at Thanksgiving this year.

Obama thinks some gay couples should have rights…

Ooo! A Gossip Girl movie?

Simon Cowell is off the market.

OMG. Ryan Reynolds makes us drool. Droooooool.

A classic and perfect summer ‘do.

MLK Day is often thought of as just another day off of school and a glorious long weekend, but this year – more than any other year – should be different.

MLK died in his efforts to get equal rights for African American men and women. And now, 40 years later, a black man will finally be president. The thought is chilling, and has inspired all of us to dream again. Our dreams and goals really can become reality.

So this week, in honor of MLK, Obama, and history in the making, the CC writers share their dreams for the United States and our futures.

Elisabeth – UA Huntsville: It would be nice to see deserving students be able to get the financial help they need for school without having to jump through ridiculously tiny hoops.

Brithny – Duke University: My dream is to get more sleep so I can actually have dreams. The REM-induced ones.

John – UConn: I’ve got two dreams: one, a world where we fix our broken culture of masculinity, so young men get the chance to grow up and be normal, useful people instead of overcompetitive, bigoted, emotionally crippled date rapists. Two, which is I guess more of a nightmare, a world that doesn’t get nuked, globally warmed, smacked with an asteroid, aerosolized, Ebola’d or Gray Goo’d within my lifetime. Or ever, I guess.

Lauren – University of Michigan: It would be nice to see the American automakers producing cutting-edge technology to allow us to compete in the world market again and save the state of Michigan.

Amanda – Wagner: I would like to see our rights as women protected. I would also like to see more shirtless Obama!

Alex – Lakehead University: My dream is for the war in Iraq to be completely over and done with and have all the soldiers back home.

Thu – USC: More people being environmentally conscious. I know that more are becoming aware of their effect on the environment, so that’s already a great step toward improving our surroundings.

Meregan – Brown University: I would like Americans to be proud of this country again.

Mazuba – Westchester Community College: My dream is for Barack Obama to have a successful year in office and to solve the economic crisis. I also hope he helps use his power to end the war in Darfur .

Maddie – Tufts: I want to see college tuition made cheaper. Too many students are deprived of a good education because they can’t afford $50,000 (frightening, right?) a year.

Sarabeth – University of Texas: My dream is for gay couples to be legally recognized in this county; be that gay marriage, civil union, whatever. Give them the rights they deserve.

Elizabeth – UC Berkeley: I would like to see America make environment-friendly practices a priority.

Sarah – East Carolina University: I’d like to see the country unified and patriotic again, like we were just after 9/11. But we’re pretty polarized.

But today, instead of protesting, activists are asking that gays call out of work. The reason: they’re gay.

Much like the immigrant rights demonstration a couple years ago (ex. Day without Mexicans), gays are trying to prove a point: they are valuable members of society, despite their sexual preferences.

But can you imagine a world without gays?!

Who will I go to to get my hair done just the way I like it?

Who’s blog will I read to stay abreast of all the celebrity gossip essential to keep my day moving?

What will Jessica Simpson do without that guy to put those really awful extensions in her hair?!

Who will dress the world?!

What will I watch at 11 a.m. on NBC everyday?

Who’s FIERCE catch phrases will I steal?

And most importantly…

What the hell will I do without Tim Gunn’s inspiration to “make it work” everyday?

…a world without gays? I’d rather not.