Category: Opinion

The secretary of the U.S. Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., said he will find the cure to autism by September, and I am skeptical.

Based on Kennedy’s disregard for past discoveries, such as zero connection between vaccines and autism, as well as some questionable actions with hiring David Geier, this whole operation is sketchy and not worth the resources going into it.

What makes him think that he can find in five months what scientists over decades have not? It’s not realistic.

The shadiest part to me is nobody trusts him. The Autism Society of America said in a statement, “We are deeply concerned by the lack of transparency around this effort—who is leading it, what methods are being used, and whether it will meet established scientific standards.” 

The Autistic Self Advocacy Network has also spoken against Kennedy’s claims. In a statement, they said, “They’re not going in with an open mind, going, ‘Oh, I wonder what causes autism.’ They’re going: ‘We’re going to prove that it’s caused by a certain thing.’” 

These quotes show nobody believes in his motivations for finding the cause of autism. It isn’t feasible to accomplish his goals in his allotted time frame.

On top of Kennedy’s wild claims, his credibility is being questioned. Kennedy has directed the CDC to study vaccines and autism despite there being no link between the two. Kennedy has historically been anti-vaccine and has commented on a measles outbreak that has killed two children. Kennedy said the two children died of other complications, but the Texas Health Department said that neither child had reported any other issues.

Another cause for concern is how quiet Kennedy has been. He has not talked about his process or where his funding is coming from at all. His co-worker, David Geier, has refused to comment.

Geier has been hired as a senior data analyst and will be in charge of analyzing the data found in the studies. He has been fined in Maryland for practicing medicine with no medical degree or license and has prescribed dangerous treatments to autistic children. He has also published a since retracted paper about a connection between autism and vaccines. Rightfully so, Kennedy has also faced backlash for his questionable hire of Geier from The Autistic Self Advocacy Network.

The rates of autism have increased a lot over the years. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “1 in 36 children have been identified with Autism Spectrum Disorder.” There are many reasons for this.

One reason is that we know more about it now. California has the highest rates of autism in children, but one reason for that is because there are more pediatricians that have been trained to screen and refer children to get assessed as early as possible.

Another reason for the increased rates is that the resources to get assessed for autism are more accessible. Pennsylvania has the second highest prevalence of autism in children and has a state Medicaid policy that provides insurance to children with “…physical, developmental, mental health, or intellectual disabilities regardless of parents’ income.” This makes getting the resources the child needs more accessible to families that need it.

Knowing the cause of autism sounds like a good thing, but it needs to be more than a publicity stunt. It needs to be taken seriously and given the best chances to succeed. Kennedy’s quest to find the cause of autism is not set up to succeed. There is too little trust in his claims and in his actions.

On Jan. 20, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that renamed the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. This act was so ridiculous and so ludicrous that all of my friends were talking about it. What I didn’t hear about nearly as much was the litany of other executive orders that concerned immigration action changes.

Now, we are less than 100 days into the new Trump administration, and things are bad and only getting worse every day. 

Political distractions are useful tools in the belt of any controversial figure looking to get things done. Diverting the attention of the public away from important issues and toward an issue that will get them fired up is common. I mean, do we really think Trump cares about drag queens? I’ll give you the answer now: he doesn’t.

Distractions are effective because politicians rely on the public being ignorant about when they are being diverted from a real issue. This is especially a problem within rural areas where education and exposure are lacking. 

Trump is effective at talking to his base and keeping them distracted with social issues while he slowly strips away their rights. A couple examples include Trump endorsing a Republican U.S. Senate nominee who falsely said schools are putting litter boxes in bathrooms for students, or Trump getting rid of regulations on shower heads so they’ll have a stronger stream again. They don’t even care as long as “wokeness” is being destroyed.

You should care that every day seems to bring a new story about a protester being taken into custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and not being heard from again. You should care that the SAVE Act could take away the voting power of millions of Americans if it’s passed by the Senate. You should care that petty tariffs will cause the prices of groceries and other necessities to skyrocket.

Distractions are easy to fall for, especially rage-bait adjacent ones like renaming the Gulf of Mexico. An overall sense of discontent and rage has become prevalent in America, especially after COVID-19. 

Being forced to stay inside for several months, combined with the economic downturn that occurred, deeply affected the average American. Grocery prices increased due to supply chain disruption. Because things haven’t changed much since then, and as the wealth gap widens, people get angry at their circumstances.

People are angry that gas prices are so high, and they’re angry their groceries are costing more and more each year. People are angry that landlords keep raising their rent, and they are angry at the cost of health care. 

So, where can they direct all of this anger? Is it at their landlords? Their bosses? Well, it’s easier to get angry at distractions. That’s where politicians step in and fire up the base by inciting rage at whatever will get people angry.  

Politicians spin these molehills into mountains, and people get angry. They take to X and express outrage at drag story hours while their rent gets higher. 

It’s easier to talk about the Gulf of Mexico than it is about these other issues, though. I get it. Looking these atrocities in the eye and then still having to go back to your daily routine is a hard pill to swallow. It’s critical we don’t turn a blind eye, especially now.

Don’t let yourself get distracted. Pay attention to executive orders signed and to news concerning immigration or proposed changes to voting laws. Pay attention and get angry at the right things and the right people. It’s not drag queens raising the prices of rent and groceries.

Every April, our timelines get blasted with sun-drenched influencers in boho fringe, pastel hair and glitter that will haunt us for the next six months. The caption? It’s some variation of “Living my best life in the desert.”

But let’s be honest—Coachella has been looking more awful year after year. On paper, Coachella looks like the perfect two weekends. In reality, it is my worst nightmare: an overcrowded, over-glamorized weekend in the middle of nowhere.

If you feel like you’re missing out, watch the dust-covered reels and overpriced fits, and take a deep breath. You’re not missing out on anything but a glorified mirage.

Let’s break it down. The setting itself sounds like a punishment. People are paying thousands of dollars to camp in the California desert, where temperatures can hit triple digits during the day. On top of this issue, attendees reported waiting over 12 hours to get into the festival.

Attendees share communal showers (if you’re lucky) and brave Porta Potties that resemble something out of a rodeo weekend. You’d think this was a survival of the fittest, not a luxury music festival.

Then there’s the food. Forget the music for a second, let’s talk about the $30 chicken sandwich or the $17 lemonade. Between the once-worn expensive outfits, $700 plus tickets and the cost of transportation and sustenance, it’s hard to believe people are willing to drop the equivalent of a down payment on a car to be in a hot, overcrowded environment.

At its core, Coachella has transformed from a music festival to a festival about class status. Most of the people you see documenting their outfits and bragging over sponsored lounges aren’t there for the music; they’re there for the content. 

Social media has made festivals like Coachella less about the experience and more about the appearance of the experience. The goal isn’t necessarily to enjoy the music, but to be seen enjoying the music. Or rather, to be seen pretending to.

The rest of us at home feeling FOMO need to stop falling for it. The FOMO you are feeling is manufactured and heavily filtered by sponsored brands hoping you’ll buy into the illusion that sweating through heat exhaustion will be a vibe.

As much as it would be great to see your favorite artists perform live, Coachella is not worth the hype. Everything is streamed on YouTube or TikTok, making it more enjoyable to watch without the risk of heatstroke. Most of the artists are going on tour this summer anyway, like Post Malone and Lady Gaga.

If you actually love live music, there are dozens of smaller, more intimate festivals across the country that don’t require you to mortgage your future or inhale three pounds of dust. Support local festivals to feel the intimate vibe they portray. Your sanity, savings and social battery will thank you.

Queerbaiting is harmful to those who are trying to feel represented. Representation is important, but it has to be fully thought out and not added last minute to make fans happy. It makes a mockery of the experiences that LGBTQ+ people have. Representation should be used with good intentions and anything less should be frowned upon.

An example of using representation with bad intentions is Kit Connor and Charles Melton’s kiss during a photoshoot for the film “Warfare.” The film is based on a Navy SEAL’s experience during the Iraq war. The kiss was a publicity stunt done by the actors to get people to watch the movie, and seeing the reactions to the clip, it worked.

This is concerning because it distracts from what the movie is about. This is not a romantic comedy. This is a serious movie about the horrors of war and the nightmares the soldiers face on the battlefield. People should be going into that movie for the right reasons. They should be ready to face gruesome sights and hear the stories of real soldiers.

There were comments calling them out for queerbaiting, but there were more saying they ship the two together and they would only see the movie just to see those two together.

“Vampire Diaries” and “Sherlock” are other shows that have been accused of queerbaiting. Both shows have queer relationships that come out of nowhere and are not developed as well as the heterosexual ones. This leaves fans confused and disappointed. Representation in media is important, but it doesn’t matter if the relationships are shallow and not executed to the level as the other relationships in the show.

On the other hand, there are some bands that have used queer representation to create a safe space where people can be themselves.

Gerard Way from My Chemical Romance has said he has “always identified a fair amount with the female gender” and has spoken out against “shitty ass rock dudes” with his makeup tutorials, kissing bandmates during performances, and songs that have potential queer references.

Way has been an advocate for transgender and nonbinary rights through their interviews and on stage. Fans have found a place where they feel comfortable to be themselves.

My Chemical Romance has been an inspiration for queer people to embrace their identity and find a community where they feel accepted.

I am a big My Chemical Romance fan myself, and I agree their songs are anthems to outcasts around the world. Feelings of being isolated and being treated like an outcast are major motifs in their songs; their songs act as a beacon to those who are exploring who they are and give them a place where their feelings are validated. 

Queerbaiting exploits a culture for personal gain. If the relationship in a show sacrifices the quality of the show, it should either be rewritten or cut out entirely. It isn’t fair to the fans who want representation if what they get is a half-baked romance or their partner is killed off.

Since the dawn of time, women have been expected to act a certain way that only makes us smaller.

For example, when Will Smith slapped Chris Rock at the Academy Awards, everyone thought it was hilarious. When Chappell Roan yelled at the photographer who screamed obscene things at her during the MTV Video Music Awards, people said she was extreme.

When Travis Kelce went to Taylor Swift’s concert, he was celebrated for supporting his girlfriend, but when Swift went to his football games, she was admonished for making everything about her. During the 2025 Super Bowl, people actually booed her the one time she was shown on TV, and it caused the whole stadium to roar in a collective against Swift.

These double standards cripple society, and the examples don’t stop here. Being a woman living in a society built for men means we have to work twice as hard just to be heard.

When men are praised for being assertive, while women are chastised for being bossy; when dad bods are normalized, while women must be under 125 pounds to be sexy.

A man who sleeps with multiple people is considered a stud, but when a woman does it she becomes a slut. “Magic Mike” is sexy, but when women are strippers, they’re societal anomies.

This doesn’t just dehumanize women. There are double standards for both men and women, but the construct of gender stereotypes is something that truly frustrates everyone.

Society dictates specific rules for men that have made them feel as if they must act a certain way to be “man enough.” For example, men can’t cry or show any emotions that make them seem hysterical because that’s too feminine.

When men are seen at parks or taking care of their children, they’re congratulated for it. But when a mother does the same thing, people find ways to belittle her.

Society has set unrealistic standards for women that stem from society’s misogyny, where men generally have more leeway in what they can say and do, whereas women simply can’t. In a man’s world, women must adhere to their rules, while simultaneously avoiding the double standards that force them to be small.

Men can walk around without a shirt on, but it’s socially unacceptable for women not to wear a bra because God forbid our nipples show.

In the article, “It’s Time to Question What We (Think) We Know about Bras,” Katie Jgln wrote, “Otherwise what? Someone will be able to see my nipples? A body part majority of mammals on this planet have? Shocking.”

I have never understood why men can do things that women can’t. Even worse, why do we need to fight just as hard to stop being seen as ridiculous, bossy or hysterical?

In a Reddit post talking about Chappell Roan setting boundaries, one user wrote, “I prefer women being too quick to defend themselves over whatever we’ve spent decades of conditioning to accept. The double standards are as disturbing as they are fascinating.”

There’s always something women do wrong, and it always feels like women simply can’t do anything right, because when we do, it must be because we slept our way to the top, right?

It’s easy for people to forget there would be no world without women, because without us, there would be no mothers, sisters, daughters, wives, friends, aunts, cousins and more.

We have to fight harder to exist in the same realm as men, to talk less, be quieter, keep our emotions in check, wear less revealing clothing to not be distracting, and support our partners without being controlling.

What would happen if we were loud, talked more, wore whatever we wanted, and took up space to be whatever we wanted just because we could?

What would happen If we, as women, stopped letting society dehumanize us and decided to create our own space where we felt like we could just be ourselves.

In workspaces where men just don’t listen to us, it’s time to say it until we’re heard.

Instead of avoiding the color pink because it makes us too feminine, wear those colors hiding in your closets because you can.

Double standards cripple our society, but there’s something inspiring about women like Swift and Roan who actively work against double standards. It’s inspiring to see women with power taking up space and being who they want to be.

In a world created by men, it’s time to create our own spaces that work for us; and it’s beyond time to start taking up space because we can.

To the sadness and dismay of many basketball fans—including myself—the college basketball season has officially ended with the University of Florida men’s basketball winning the national championship.

March is my favorite time of the year because of the NCAA basketball tournament, better known as March Madness. I love being engulfed with basketball for three weeks straight, and I always look forward to the bracket competition with my family. My grandpa won for the second year in a row, but he only beat me for first place by one point. I’m coming for you, Pa. Watch your back. Love you.

Beef aside, I know lots of viewers, including myself, expected this year’s tournament to bring the madness March is known for—buzzer-beaters, huge upsets and exciting games.

But… did it?

I recently saw one user on Reddit point out how the lack of Cinderella teams made this year’s tournament boring. Cinderella teams are lower-seeded teams who beat the odds and make a deep run in the tournament.

I’ve seen other people online complain about this as well. Cinderella teams are very entertaining to watch and people were complaining about the lack of upsets and how only the higher-seeded teams made it far. I’ve always rooted for the lower-seeded teams.

This year, no seed lower than a three made it to the Elite Eight, and all four one seeds made it to the Final Four. There wasn’t a true Cinderella who made a deep run.

Honestly, I understand where the Reddit commenter is coming from. Watching 11 seed North Carolina State University breeze through power schools like Duke University and Marquette University last year was so fun to watch. When Saint Peter’s University beat the University of Kentucky in the first round in 2022 to begin their run, my basketball teammates and I huddled around my coach’s phone at the end of practice to watch the end of the game. It was awesome.

This year, there wasn’t that Cinderella excitement. I sighed each time I checked a score and saw, yet again, another higher-seeded team was moving on to the next round.  

But did I stop watching? Did I find it boring? Not necessarily. 

March Madness is a time for individual players to shine, and that’s what I was focused on the most this year in lieu of rooting for Cinderella teams. 

Florida’s Walter Clayton Jr. had back-to-back thirty-point games in the Elite Eight and the Final Four, which was the highlight of the tournament for me.  He put the team on his back and turned himself into a star.

I realized I had just as much fun watching these stars go all out as I did rooting for a Cinderella team. Watching these players work like a well-oiled machine is so fascinating, and I don’t think we should discredit any of that because they played for a high-seeded team. 

While it’s fun to watch the giants of college basketball fall, it’s also fun to watch them shine. After all, there is a reason they’ve been named the best in the country.

Ever since I read “The Nickel Boys” my senior year of high school, it’s been my go-to book I recommend to anyone and everyone—I always thought I’d make it into a film, but someone beat me to it.

From the genius mind of Colson Whitehead, the story follows Elwood Curtis, studious and on the road to getting a college education, who is wrongfully sent to Nickel Academy. This is where he meets Turner, a survivalist at Nickel. The story follows these two Black teenagers in the ‘60s who become friends after both being sent to the abusive reform school.

This film is different from anything I’ve ever seen because it was shot in first-person perspective, meaning everything you see on screen is how the characters see what’s right in front of them.

I understand the purpose of first-person is to create a bond between the audience and characters, like walking in their shoes, but ultimately, I was not a fan.

What I liked

I chose to read “The Nickel Boys” during my AP English class and fell in love with this gut wrenching story. I had no prior knowledge of Whitehead’s work and randomly decided to pick it up.

Because the story takes place in the Jim Crow era southern U.S., there are depictions of racism, segregation and abuse. Surrounding this overarching theme lies a blossoming friendship between two 17 year olds—and that’s where the magic happens. My favorite memories from when I was a teenager come from the friends I had and still have to this day, and that’s partly why I love this story.

Because this was shot first-person, it gave me a clearer idea of what that friendship meant to Elwood and Turner, and how it was one of the only good things in life at Nickel. This perspective felt more personal, like I was walking in their shoes. Through this, I came to understand how they relied on each other and how much they trusted each other. 

This also meant during scenes that contained abuse, we weren’t witnessing the abuse directly—instead, we were seeing it from the perspective of the abused teenager. I don’t care to see abuse in a film, so I admire this use of first-person. 

Watching first-person is strange at first because it’s not common in the movie industry, but I did feel the connection between characters because it was like I was personally interacting with them.

There’s a reason why people say the eyes are the window to the soul, and that’s because the eyes show pain and despair more than any other physical aspect. Watching this film, you could feel the boys’ angst.

The two young men who play Elwood and Turner, Ethan Herisse and Brandon Wilson, had to adjust to looking straight into the camera, when traditionally as an actor, you NEVER look at the camera. I was impressed with their ability to make that feel natural, like they were reaching beyond the camera lens to communicate with the audience.

Also, I adore this story because there’s a HUGE plot twist at the end, where as an audience, you come to understand just how deeply rooted Elwood and Turner’s friendship is, which leads me to what I disliked about first-person perspective.

What I didn’t like 

There were moments when the perspective would switch from Elwood’s to Turner’s, and as an audience member, you wouldn’t know that until later in a scene. So, sometimes I would get mixed up with whose perspective I was seeing.

While I enjoyed being able to connect with the characters by seeing their point of view, the plot twist at the end was less effective through first-person perspective, which is a letdown. I absolutely will not spoil this twist, but I will say we discover Turner shares far more in common with Elwood than we ever realized.

If I didn’t previously know the twist, I would’ve been SO confused because nothing is explicitly said, but rather shown on screen.

The problem with first-person is you have to infer information because it’s not being told to you by a narrator. If you don’t know the story from “The Nickel Boys,” you will not understand how the movie ends because the film doesn’t straight up tell you what happens.

It would’ve been more effective to have a narrator. With a narrator, audiences who aren’t familiar with the story can still understand what’s happening, but without narration, you HAVE to know the story. Though there were aspects of first-person I thoroughly enjoyed, I wish at the very least the ending was filmed with a narrator. 

The verdict

If you haven’t read “The Nickel Boys” or plan on watching it without any prior information, I’d strongly advise against that. This film is a love letter to the fans and to the people who already know the plot twist and don’t need an explanation.

I’m giving “Nickel Boys” a three out of five stars, and before I say it’s a must-see, you need to understand it’s a must-READ. Make sure you do your research BEFORE you watch it, or you’ll have more questions than answers.  

In 2020, after the COVID-19 pandemic had really begun to ramp up worldwide, George Floyd was murdered in broad daylight by a Minneapolis police officer. 

Floyd’s murder was met with heartbreak as well as an outcry against the United States police force as a whole by communities across the U.S. 

The phrase “Defund the Police” became more widely used as a way of verbalizing some sort of action that could be taken against a militaristic force with its boot on the face of the American public. This widespread backlash was made possible through social media platforms.

People started posting blank black squares on their Instagram feeds to show their solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement. But what did this performative activism actually achieve?

It wasn’t until I got a little older and started reading political theory on top of paying attention to the news, that I realized just how ineffective this means of activism can be, especially when used as a way to signal virtue during an important movement.

While I thank social media for my initial forte into political activism, I realize it’s not a form of real action. Social media can be used as a public forum to discuss and dissect ideas and concepts, but as a tool for social change? It just doesn’t work like that.

It is an unfortunate reality that big political decisions don’t lie within the jurisdiction of the people. Abraham Lincoln may have said “By the people, for the people,” but unless those “people” he refers to are the select few billionaires that run our government for profit, then that’s not a reality for the common people.

One of the real means of power the people have is through protest and collective action. 

Protests can take many forms, and it is a really effective tool. Actions like marching in the streets with signs may come to mind, but protests can also include boycotts of certain companies, blackout days and so on.

It might make you feel good to repost an Instagram infographic on your story about a particular movement. But what is that really doing besides signaling to others that you think the right things, and that you have the right opinion on an issue?

Don’t get me wrong, I’ve posted my fair share of screenshotted tweets about current political issues I feel strongly about. Social media can be a great platform for thoughtful discussion and sharing information that provokes ideas in someone who may not have known about the issue. 

It only gets to be a problem when your “activism” starts and ends on Instagram. It is more important that these ideas are taken into the real world and acted on in a material way, otherwise we’re all just talking at each other for no reason. 

Having conversations with loved ones and friends is a great start. Though these conversations can be difficult, they can also serve as a doorway to opening someone’s mind up to new ideas. 

Joining local advocacy groups and volunteering at shelters or food pantries are also ways to be politically active. 

It’s important you don’t let social media sites like Instagram or TikTok be your end-all-be-all of political activism. You can demonstrate your solidarity and allyship with underprivileged groups by volunteering or protesting.

Everyday in the Sun News class we start with a question of the day. A quick, fun way to get to know the people in the classroom, and the other day the question was what is the biggest red flag for someone to have? I am still new to the dating scene, so I don’t know much about these topics, but I am learning slowly as I experience more.

Red flags are signs you might not want to be in a relationship with a person, whether they are not your type, if they show signs of manipulation or even abuse.

Not having anything in common

This is probably the biggest red flag for me. Having things in common allows two people to create a bond over something they both like. A big part of being in a relationship for me is to be able to share a passion.

If they try to change who you are

Another red flag is when your partner tries to change who you are. Whether it’s the way you dress or even the way you act, if they try to change you, that’s a red flag. A relationship is all about appreciating the differences between two people and finding beauty in that. Both people in a relationship should feel comfortable to be themselves without fear of judgment.

Jealousy

I couldn’t be in a relationship if my partner got overly jealous if I spent time with other people. I would understand getting jealous if I spent too much time away because I would get jealous too. It just comes down to having a healthy balance of time together and spending time with friends and family.

Someone who can’t take a joke

I am a very sarcastic person, and I make a lot of jokes. I tease and I realize I can cross a line every once in a while. I just need them to know I don’t mean any harm. I couldn’t be with someone who doesn’t like my jokes.

I consider myself a funny guy, and I couldn’t handle being with someone who doesn’t think I’m funny. If I was dating a person who didn’t laugh at my jokes, I would lose my mind.

Over-complimenting

My final red flag is over-complimenting. A partner can do this either because they are insecure and they worship you so they feel better about themselves, or because they hold people to incredibly high standards. This can also be described as love bombing—when someone over-compliments someone to manipulate them. I don’t love bomb, but I make sure the people around me feel special.

Looking for these signs can keep you from getting hurt or wasting time with someone who doesn’t match your needs.