As a Drexel student, many things are guaranteed throughout your college experience as a Dragon. One assured fixture in Drexel University’s existence is the weekly tradition of being heckled and hounded at the Mario the Dragon statue — often unexpectedly — by a member of the reigning student newspaper on campus, The Triangle.

Why? Well, to get a copy of the new issue of The Triangle, of course! All jokes aside, it is equally awkward for both the members of The Triangle and for the passersby alike, but it is also an integral — albeit quirky — part of the Drexel campus culture.

When the world went into limbo in March, countless universities, organizations, companies, restaurants and families had to reinvent the wheel when it came to living. How can your life go on without physical, human contact? How do you live life from the confines of your home? Can you even safely get groceries?

Manifold questions have been asked, and many of them remain unanswered even months later. It’s worth noting that the pandemic will continue to drudge on in the United States, and no matter how much we gripe about it, we must admit to ourselves that our country will most likely be in the rough for quite some time.

In the meantime, we cannot rely on temporary measures that were put in place while everyone was still “figuring things out.” This means we have to be prepared for sweeping — and perhaps even permanent — changes to our way of life. It means accepting the new normal, no matter how weird the new normal may be.

The Editorial Staff at The Triangle has been figuring out what it means to be a newspaper — especially one such as ours, well-recognized for its in-person distribution and accessibility — and how to keep people reading. We can continue to improve our digital footprint, expand our social media outreach and produce content that is truly impactful for the Drexel community.

But a newspaper is known for its nitty-gritty personal touches just as much as the content itself. A newspaper is depicted in a myriad of classic movies with its antiquated, smoke-filled newsrooms, copy editors poring over the newspaper proofs, the editor-in-chief worrying about deadlines and headlines, editors fretting over formatting and sizing and their writers not getting them their articles in time.

Newspaper offices are filled with human interaction and discussion. Newspaper distribution is predicated on human interaction.

For The Triangle, we are known for getting our weekly paper published in time for the Friday morning upswing, and we do our best to get the paper into the hands of as many students and staff as we possibly can before the week is over. We drive around in a rickety golf cart and hand-deliver our papers to the various buildings and residence halls on campus. We stand outside in the cold and the heat to give you our paper, and we make sure that even if we are behind schedule, we get it to you in the end.

Over the past several months, things have looked so different for us.

We hope to get back to doing what we do best — continuing the long Drexel tradition of sharing a print copy of our student newspaper with the rest of the campus community — one day very soon. In the meantime, we ask that you continue to support your newspapers and read what we write. Who knows, maybe you’ll learn something new or laugh just a little bit.

While we wait for that day to come, we will continue to write, update our website and hope for the best. Our commitment to keeping the Drexel community informed is and will always be our biggest responsibility and priority.

Living in an urban environment comes with its own benefits and drawbacks.

On one hand, you are in a competitive rental apartment scene. Students who are looking to secure housing — whether at an American Campus Communities property or off-campus residence — usually have to act quickly to secure a lease for the academic year and especially long in advance for the former. Fall and winter of 2019 were no different, with many students securing themselves an apartment well before the unforeseeable coronavirus outbreak this spring.

The pandemic has caused a displacement of the Drexel community, with nearly all students and staff making the migration home after restrictions placed on Philadelphia residents increased and Drexel’s campus closed. As we approach the upcoming school year, many students are stuck with lease agreements, paying for apartments that will likely remain empty.

Due in part to the massive outbreaks at other universities, Drexel this week announced the shift from hybrid to fully remote learning for fall term. As such, Drexel’s campus will remain closed and all students who were to live in residence halls are free from their housing agreements — but the story for residents of ACC and other private leasing companies is not as simple. These companies are not subject to Drexel’s closure policies and may remain in operation, despite a full campus evacuation.

For upperclassmen ACC residents, reletting and subletting are currently the only two methods of avoiding rent obligations — and it doesn’t look like they will allow students to get out of their leases anytime soon. Rent abatements were offered to second-year Drexel students through an announcement emailed to residents on Thursday, Aug. 20. This would allow sophomore students to “receive abatement of their lease installments for that fall term only, with the lease remaining in effect for the period of December 13, 2020 through September 5, 2021.” Since this option was strictly for sophomores (who are required to live on-campus under Drexel’s two-year residency program), it leaves upperclassmen simply out of luck.

As a response to these unjust — yet legal — leasing agreements, many members of the Drexel community have begun circulating a petition that has well over 1,000 signatures as of Thursday night, Aug. 20. The Change.org petition looks to seek lease termination and a rent abatement option for ACC residents at Drexel. Although the rent abatement option was achieved for sophomore residents, those backing this petition seek to gain this option for all students regardless of their grade status.

The Nest at 1324 North Broad, a luxury student apartment complex near Temple University, stated that they would not charge rent in the fall if there were a cancellation of in-person classes. Since some Temple classes did resume on campus, The Nest has gone on to offer a $200 rent reduction to assist students’ financial concerns. These are practices that are not unheard of and could certainly benefit students within the Drexel community, as well.

Pennsylvania state law says that only when the tenant’s privacy is violated by the landlord, the unit is declared unsafe or the tenant joins the military may the lease be legally terminated. Any other form of the tenant breaking the lease could result in legal action by the landlord.

1. This issue affects a large subset of Drexel’s student body and presents glaring evidence of legal loopholes, like college students being locked into their leases during a pandemic. Moving forward, college students should be sure to thoroughly read through their leases and look for methods to avoid being locked-in during pandemics or other emergencies. With so many people experiencing financial insecurity due to job losses and cutbacks, rent for an empty apartment should not also be on the list of concerns — but it is for many. Although there isn’t much that can remedy this now, the key takeaway should be to prevent this from affecting others in the future.

On May 31, Drexel and University of Pennsylvania police officers arrived at a protest on 52nd Street and joined the Philadelphia Police Department officers already present. This has raised questions as to why both universities’ police forces were present: whether they were called to the scene or whether university police should have been present at a location 16blocks west of their jurisdictions.

Nearly two months later, Drexel’s Office of Equality and Diversity released a statement addressing this incident. “The Drexel University Police Department (DUPD), like other private police departments in Philadelphia, has agreed to respond to emergencies when the Philadelphia Police Department (PPD) calls for assistance,” the Office notes. They continued to state that Drexel Police were, in fact, summoned by the Philadelphia Police Department after the protests escalated and became disorderly.

According to this report, Drexel Police were solely focused on securing the perimeter and assisting with rerouting vehicle and foot traffic at the scene. They were not involved in the use of tear gas, pepper spray or rubber bullets that were unleashed by the PPD on protestors. Although this may be the case, it was still alarming for many students to see Drexel Police officers acting vastly outside of their normal jurisdiction of 30th to 36th streets and Chestnut to Spring Garden streets. The university concluded their statement with an acknowledgement of the situation’s severity and later called for a “thorough review” of their policies. While the details of this review are not yet known, we hope that their policies will adapt according to the concerns raised by this incident.

Working closely with an outside police force is not unheard of for the university, as Drexel Police  often work with UPenn Police, Philadelphia Police, SEPTA Police, Amtrak Police and Philadelphia Housing Authority Police, both on its University City and Center City campuses. However, since the incident on May 31, both UPenn and Drexel have been grappling with what roles they want their campus police forces to fill.

UPenn has called for the abolition and reimagination of their campus police force and has listed other demands such as to “redress the legacy of racism, colonialism and slavery on campus,” “divest form the Prison Industrial Complex” and “decriminalize Blackness, Protest and Poverty.”

The group Drexel Community For Justice has also made a petition to defund Drexel Police and cut ties with Philadelphia Police, listing the following demands:

1. Terminate any current contracts with the Philadelphia Police Department.
2. End all financial contributions to the Philadelphia Police Foundation.
3. Divest from the Drexel University Police.
4. Invest in the Education Equity Fund, paying at least 40 percent of forgone property taxes. These funds will be used to meet the essential needs of Philadelphia public schools.
5. Appoint a committee of law scholars and community stakeholders to conduct an independent investigation of Drexel University Police practices.
6. Safely hold University events without armed officials.
7. Practice transparency with students and community members, publishing a quarterly report on the University’s ongoing anti-racism initiatives.

Drexel Community For Justice is also organizing a University City march to defund campus police scheduled for Sunday, Aug. 9.

These demands and statements from all parties involved raise a question of what the role of Drexel’s on-campus police should play from this point on. In the coming months, as many students return to campus, this question is incumbent on the entire Drexel community.

In addition to conversations taking place about police brutality, accountability and demilitarization on a national level, we, as members of the Drexel community, are responsible for defining the future jurisdiction of Drexel Police and calling for the change that we want to see. If an incident similar to the one that occurred on May 31 should happen again, do we want Drexel Police to be involved?

One must ask: with the highly financed Philadelphia Police Department and the multiple other university police departments nearby, does Drexel need such a robust force? Why should they, if there are so many others waiting within the wings? And if Drexel does need the police officers it has, what exactly is the extent — and the limitations — of that role?

With September quickly approaching, Drexel University anticipates a limited reopening of campus for the upcoming fall term. However, many students and faculty are understandably wary of the return, especially since Drexel has yet to release a detailed plan about what a socially-distanced, COVID-combatting campus will look like. The student body received an email from President John Fry Thursday morning titled “Watchwords for the Fall: Best Practices, Flexibility, Working Together.” The email resembles many others sent over the past few weeks: emphasizing the importance of protecting campus health and safety without detailing the specific changes that will be made to ensure it happens.

Fry’s message does specify that compliance with social distancing, mask wearing and hand washing rules will be expected, and it promises that Drexel is using science and expert opinions to make its decisions, but this is still too ambiguous. While the need for potential changes to student move-in, face-to-face classes, dining and housing is acknowledged, the email fails to outline exactly what those expected changes will be.

By contrast, the University of Pennsylvania has had a more comprehensive plan for reopening outlined since June 25. The university shared the measures being made to campus housing, dining and arrival dates; this includes renting off-campus space for extra housing, providing private bedrooms, limiting in-person classes to 25 students, switching dining options to pre-packaged meals and staggering student move-in dates. Outlining these changes not only allows students to feel more secure about their fall semester, but also gives uneasy students clear options before they make a decision about returning to campus.

Although Fry’s communications promise the University will “remain adaptable” and “pivot and adjust as needed,” many Drexel students want concrete action over the promised flexibility. Detailed measures are required to instill confidence that the safety of students and staff is being taken seriously.

Of the many logistical issues to weigh, controlling the crowd of a reopened campus is one that should be a high priority. Hallway traffic between classes is a huge concern in both academic buildings and student housing. We hope Drexel considers mitigating the close-quarters congestion in these areas — some solutions include staggering the ending times of classes in the same building, or limiting the number of classes that can be held in one space. The use of stairs and elevators should also be considered, as these are places that get very crowded between classes, and they are often impossible to avoid.

The University of Pennsylvania also intends to test students before they re-enter campus and regularly throughout the term. Though Drexel’s new Health Tracker app promises to use the information it collects during the fall term to adapt and create new testing plans, it is unacceptable that we should wait for the spread of infection before deciding on a solid strategy. Fraternities and other student-run organizations should also be closely monitored to ensure that crowded parties aren’t threatening the spread of infection, with clear consequences for those who intentionally break those rules.

Another big question is whether there will have to be a reversion back to remote learning. Is there going to be a set number of infected students at which Drexel will close down? And if Drexel does have to shut down again, how will they do it? It cannot be a mad scramble like it was in March; it would have to be tightly organized and closely monitored for student safety.

Reopening policies should also be more accommodating to potentially sudden changes to students’ health. It is expected that any student who suspects to have COVID-19 should not attend class, but are there policies that guarantee that they will not be penalized for their absence? While many Drexel professors are understanding, it is important that students know they don’t need to risk others’ health for fear of a failing grade.

The health of the faculty will also be put at risk if in-person classes resume, and if students are more worried about their academic standing than their personal health, they could risk accidentally exposing both their fellow classmates and the professor.

There are clearly so many unknown and unforeseeable variables, but as new developments are discovered and the situation continues to change, we hope that the administration can offer some more clarity on the specifics of fall reopening while prioritizing the safety of our faculty and students.

Despite rising numbers of COVID-19 cases across the country, many universities, especially those that are tuition-dependent and lacking in a large endowment, are planning on bringing students back to campus come Fall semester. Drexel University has not issued any statement on the matter since the June 10 announcement expecting a return to campus in September.

However, many members of the Drexel community are unsure how to feel or act about the plans moving forward. Over the past week, The Editorial Board reached out to faculty members to hear how they are feeling about the university’s intention to return to University City.

Some professors are confident that Drexel’s health guidelines will create a safe learning environment, but others are more dubious. A professor in the department of English and Philosophy who preferred not to be named expressed some concerns. “Seeing the lack of compliance in the general public, I don’t trust that there will be universal compliance of social distancing, hand washing and mask wearing of everyone on our campus.”

It’s certainly no help to anyone’s optimism that we’re seeing parts of the country hit their peaks months after some areas were able to flatten their curves. “I’m feeling extremely uneasy about the return to campus, especially given the recent spikes we’ve seen in cases across the country,” Dr. Ronald Bishop, a professor in the department of Communication noted. These are “spikes caused by rushed re-openings and the flouting of CDC guidelines by a shockingly high number of people,” he added.

There’s also worry that no matter what efforts the University undertakes, there are physical parts of the in-person learning experience that cannot be controlled. “I don’t feel safe in elevators or in classrooms without proper ventilation of outside air,” another professor in the department of English and Philosophy who preferred not to be named revealed. They also expressed concerns about the safety of public transportation at this time, which many Drexel students and staff rely on. Dr. Bishop also pointed out the issue of the confined size of some of the older buildings on campus. “Many of our classrooms are quite small, and many lack windows. I worry that social distancing just won’t be possible.”

It’s hard to know just how to proceed in this situation. Martin Fisher, an adjunct professor of Screenwriting in the Westphal College of Art and Design, compared making the decision to “being asked to buy an airline ticket, only no one knows where the plane is going.”

Scott Tattar, a faculty member in the department of Communication, expressed that he “will put [his] family’s health first and let that guide [his] decision to return to teach on campus.”

For others, however, adjusting to Zoom learning is just not worth it. Dr. Gabriella Ibieta, an associate professor in the department of English and Philosophy, said that “after more than 40 years in the classroom and more than 30 as a tenured professor, I have no interest in teaching remotely.” Dr. Ibieta, who was originally planning to retire at the end of the upcoming academic year, has accelerated her plans and will not be returning to Drexel.

The shortcomings surrounding the quality of remote learning is one every professor and student unfortunately must face. With some universities, like Princeton, discounting tuition for the coming semester, some feel that charging full tuition for remote instruction is unjust. However, this claim undercuts the efforts that professors have made to maintain an engaging learning experience.

“I strongly believe that my online courses are not ‘damaged goods’ but provide my students with the same levels of knowledge and same skills as my regular courses,” Dr. Alexander Nikolaev, an associate professor of Communication, asserted.

In Drexel’s case, it has also been pointed out that the University could face hard financial ramifications if we do not return to campus in the fall.

Across the faculty, there’s an evident sense of uneasiness. While some feel that the administration is doing all they can in their planning, many still feel that the process is being rushed and that there are still numerous factors not being closely considered. It’s clear that no one can be sure of the correct course of action, but The Editorial Board hopes that the administration will continue to protect and support our faculty and students as decisions continue to be made in the approaching months.

This time last year, our organization had financially flatlined after 93 years of printing. It’s difficult to pinpoint what exactly went wrong along the way, but the changing landscape of advertising in media and the transition away from print were factors of the fall. 

On Feb. 8, 2019, The Triangle was jolted back to life after a mind-blowingly successful “Save the Triangle” Campaign in partnership with the Drexel Fund. The Drexel community, along with collegiate news media supporters on a national scale, generously poured thousands of dollars in support to get us printing again. Words can’t express how grateful we were to see Drexel students and alumni showing their support for us and independent student journalism. If actions speak louder than words, then we needed to make our second chance count.

One year later, where are we now? What did $16,000 plus in donations to The Triangle buy? The short answer is time. The long answer is…

We immediately got to work recruiting new journalists and revamping our expectations for what makes our college newspaper worth reading. After a couple terms of searching for the brightest writers at Drexel, we were fully staffed with about 70 total students. As the quantity of articles shot up, so did the quality, and it wasn’t long before we had regular columns worth reading. Our strategy shifted from covering what events happen to why events happen, making meaningful connections with the people we write about.

Case in point: if you’re a regular reader, you’re probably familiar with The Triangle’s newly-formed food column. The food column, published weekly by Ethan Hermann, introduces an original format for content, encouraging the Drexel community to explore Philly and develop new tastes. It has also broken new ground and made new connections for the Triangle itself.

It’s a lesser known fact that our business team dissolved at the time of our financial crisis, leaving us writers to make sense of what happened. Since then, we have managed to assemble a new business team with promising young talent — but this time, we aren’t going in blind. It became increasingly apparent that financial advice from successful business people in the field was the best way forward. Our alumni network connected us to new insights and strategies that are underway today.

If we wanted real change, our paper needed to reflect that. We reduced our paper size to tabloid format, a return-to-form for us, as we’ve been broadsheet-size since the summer of 2007. We concluded that tabloid would feel better to handle, being a more manageable size with a more concentrated collection of content. As a not-so-coincidental bonus, tabloid size is more cost effective, despite being many more pages than our broadsheet format.

We never want to give up our tradition of print, but we will continue to find new ways to embrace multimedia. Besides continuing to publish our content online, we’ve dug deeper into audio media, launching our first consistent podcast, “Last Call,” as part of our podcasting section, officially known as “Tri-Pod.” With many new shows to come, Tri-Pod acts as our maiden voyage into alternative forms of content.

In the last quarter, we’ve come a long way. From active recruitment to diversifying our content, we have made a lot of change happen. However, much like a shark, we can’t afford to remain static. We hope you continue to pick up copies or listen on your devices, and who knows? We may even see you among our team. See you in spring, folks! 

There is a lot to be said for cities actively trying to reduce the number of sugary beverages consumed by its residents. When Philadelphia took a stand back in 2016 and became the first city to enact a tax on soda, it was seen as a big step toward not only reducing soda consumption in the United States but also to boost the health of the residents of a city.

Time and time again, there are studies conflating the consumption of sugary drinks (such as sodas and fruit beverages) with less than 25 percent fruit juice leading to Type 2 diabetes, obesity and other conditions, and that includes several research analyses done by Drexel’s College of Nursing and Health Profession.

Back in 2016, when Mayor Jim Kenney introduced the soda tax, he offered it in another light — as funding for a program to renovate public spaces and “refresh facilities in the neediest neighborhoods.” The program Kenney was referring to was Rebuild, with over 200 included facilities that were slated to be renovated in the 2016 pitch.

Now that it is just a few months past the soda tax’s third birthday, there isn’t much progress in the reconstruction of Philadelphia’s neediest spaces, and there isn’t a statistically significant difference in soda consumption, to the shock of absolutely nobody. 

But just how far off are the actual results from the expectation?

In terms of soda consumption, the purchase of soda in stores inside Philadelphia’s city limits did in fact decrease, but the purchase of soda in the neighboring suburbs greatly increased in attempts to avoid the tax. Philadelphia has earned over $200 million since the 1.5 cent-per-ounce tax was introduced in January of 2017. The predicted steady decrease of soda consumption by the city’s residents hasn’t happened. According to Drexel researchers, the difference in soda consumption after the tax was instituted compared to before just isn’t statistically significant compared to other cities without a soda tax implemented.

In terms of Rebuild, the number of projects finished with money raised from the soda tax hovers around 25. To rub salt into the wound, the finished projects were only smaller sized, to begin with. Only 72 projects are on the list for renovation for Rebuild now, with uncertainty regarding the future of more being added. To make it worse, 10 of those 72 project sites don’t have a contract for renovations, and many other contracts are merely for fixing emergency repairs.

That being said, Rebuild had been dealing with legal litigation until November 2018, and projects such as these are known to take multiple years to really hit their stride.

A slightly ignored topic is the effect the soda tax has on local businesses, some of whom simply can’t afford the tax for their own purchases. Citizens across Philly are still up in arms as the soda tax raised their perfect $5 transaction for a meal with a beverage from their beloved halal food carts to be raised to $6. 

The American Beverage Association has been fighting Philadelphia over the soda tax, and having spent tens of millions of dollars in this fight, it seems the soda tax is only doing more harm than good.

Of course, not every project a city attempts will work. And while Philly has been joined by many other U.S. metro areas in the fight against soda consumption, there is the question to ask in 2020: Do we, as a city, feel it is worth it to continue this fight?

It feels like every year, we become more and more comfortable with talking about mental illness — and that’s really important. The stigma around mental illness is not only unhelpful and cruel, but also dangerous, both for people who suffer from mental illness and those who don’t.

In contrast to just 10 years ago, the dialogue about mental illness now exists in the mainstream. While some are still stigmatized and misunderstood, it feels like the vast majority of young people are aware of depression and anxiety, what those conditions mean and how brutal they can be. The absence of blame on people who suffer from the mental illnesses in these conversations is so crucial.

But we still have a long way to go, and this week’s  National Eating Disorder Awareness Week is a stark reminder of that. From Feb. 24 to March 1, the campaign is designated as a week for raising awareness about eating disorders. For more background on this week, you can check out the NEDA’s website or The Triangle’s article on the topic published last week.

Eating disorders are a highly misunderstood, stigmatized and easily dismissed mental illness in the public eye. The conversation about eating disorders really began after the death of singer Karen Carpenter in 1983, due to a heart attack brought on by complications from anorexia nervosa. In this editorial, we want to discuss two essential points. First, explain what eating disorders actually are and how they develop and manifest. And second, how you can change some minors behaviors to avoid vilifying and shaming people who suffer from them.

According to the National Association of Anorexia Nervosa and Associated Disorders, at least 30 million people of all ages and genders suffer from an eating disorder in the U.S., and every 62 minutes, someone dies as a direct result from an eating disorder. This issue is clearly a widespread one.

There’s a pervasive myth that only models are anorexic. That they choose not to eat in order to look slim. Not only is that untrue but even if they were, that’s not something to mock. Living with an eating disorder is extremely difficult. It’s inescapable. You need to eat to survive, yet your body and brain refuse to let you do that. Many people have difficult relationships with food, but eating disorders are incredibly powerful and overwhelming. You can see yourself wilting away while you lose energy and your every thought is overwritten by thoughts of hunger, pain and self-loathing. 

Countless athletes suffer from eating disorders and are just as trapped as anyone else, despite the fact that they consistently exercise. Studies done by the Norwegian School of Sports Sciences indicated that 47 percent of female athletes in sports that “emphasized leanness” had clinically diagnosed eating disorders and that 21 percent of women who weren’t elite athletes also did.

Gender also plays a big role in the effects of eating disorders. According to the NEDA website, an estimated 10 million men will deal with an eating disorder at some point in their lives, but men in the U.S. are less likely to report it than the 20 million estimated women with eating disorders.

Eating disorders are often rooted in body image problems and go hand in hand with body dysmorphia, depression, anxiety and other forms of mental illness. But they are, at their core, a means of self-harm, and in the same way that other forms of self-harm shouldn’t be mocked or dismissed, neither should an eating disorder. If you think there’s a chance you may be dealing with an eating disorder, we unfortunately don’t have all of the answers for you, but it’s important to remember that you are not a bad person and you should never feel ashamed for your affliction. There are resources at the Counseling Center and outside of Drexel that can be of great help.

Which leads into what people without eating disorders can do in honor of this week. Creating a space among your friends where they can talk about their issues is always important. It’s so important to avoid forcing your friends to eat and shaming them or making little comments about their body or dietary habits. Someone else’s body is none of your business. Let them live, and if you are concerned about their health, discuss that with them instead of  attacking them. If you notice someone in your life has lost a significant amount of weight and you know they haven’t been trying to, approach them with caution. Don’t just say, “You lost so much weight! You look so great now.” You may think you’re helping, but you are only exacerbating their problems. 

Everyone is different, and there is obviously a variety of ways people experience disorders, as well as multiple kinds of eating disorders. But if you’re reading this, thank you and this week is a great time to set aside a little bit of time to learn more about eating disorders and how to help people you think may be dealing with one.

On Valentine’s Day, there are often two kinds of people: those in relationships who can celebrate with their significant others on the ultimate day of romance, and those who are single and spend it crying in a bed, pantsless, compulsively opening social media just to see that no one contacted them. 

Well, it’s now time to create a third category — for both people who are single or in a relationship, because there is a group for whom Valentine’s Day, the ultimate celebration of love, should have a focus on: our moms.

Here at The Triangle, we really love our mommies. You may point out that Mother’s Day is right around the corner, so this is a premature article — but you know what? We’re the writers, not you. 

Valentine’s Day, which celebrates love, rarely recognizes the purest one of all: unconditional love, the same unconditional love that mothers give throughout the lives of their children, the same unconditional love that requires, above all else, sacrifice. Every one of us can appreciate the role our moms play in shaping us as individuals. They push us to be our best selves and expect nothing in return. Love takes many forms, but there surely can’t be a nobler one than that given by our mommas.

For nine months of gestating a growing creature, they can’t drink alcohol or caffeine, eat sushi or deli foods, go to a sauna, do hot yoga or pilates or pretty much do anything. They put the exciting parts of their lives, such as hot yoga, on hold for over a year to make sure we, the children, come into this world healthy. 

Add to it the extra weight, the wrinkles, the stretch marks, all the marks of pregnancy that can add to a mother’s depression and hormonal imbalance, and the pain. No need to mention the pain. The most painful part of a person’s life is to bring someone else into the world. But then, the unadulterated joy.

And, throughout our lives, not just during pregnancy, they made sure that when we were sick, we had someone taking care of us. When we had nightmares, they sang or read us to sleep. When we were happy, they celebrated with us. When we cried, they held us tight and made sure that we were alright. They exposed us to the world, taught us our basic principles, became our biggest fans and our biggest critics.

Honestly, if there was an award to give to all the moms out there, it would be the MVP ⁠— Most Valuable Person. Just look back to when NBA All-Star Kevin Durant shouted out his mom during his 2014 NBA MVP acceptance speech, thanking his mom for being “the real MVP.”

That’s all just 18 years of young angst and power struggles, a battle that costs roughly a quarter-million dollars.

So this Valentine’s Day, be sure to do something special. Even if you have something planned with your significant other, pick up the phone and call your mom. Let her know how much you appreciate her, not only on Valentine’s Day but every day of the year. She deserves it. 

Jan. 22 was a day that rocked our fair nation. We all awoke, ready to take on another day in the endless fever dream of the decade (It’s only been a month? What do you mean?) and were stopped in our tracks. Headlines burst off the page: “Did Gritty punch a 13-year-old in the back? Philadelphia detectives are investigating” in the Inquirer and “Philadelphia police investigating alleged assault by Gritty, the Flyers’ mascot” in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette. Needless to say, we were distraught. Devastated, even. We called our parents to see if they were okay, as any good kid would do. It shook the city of Philadelphia to its very core.

We couldn’t believe it. Since Gritty’s birth in September 2018, he has done nothing but bring joy to our city. Sure he has his “bullying tendencies,” as it says on his website, and is practically the embodiment of orange nightmare fuel. But this is Philadelphia! “Bullying tendencies” are how we show love! When we wish death on people for not thinking the way we do, it’s meant to show affection and say that we secretly agree with the statement. However, we didn’t think it could escalate to this. 

Allegedly, the orange monstrosity charged a 13-year-old at a fan meet-and-greet and absolutely leveled the kid square in the back with a big, furry fist. The kid (whose name is very funny given the situation, but who we won’t reference explicitly) and his father claimed that this had happened unprompted and that upon bringing the kid to a chiropractor (huh?), he had some bruising on his back (liar). 

We’re afraid to admit it, but the story had its points. Gritty is an unhinged, terrifying monster, and the thought of him decking a child doesn’t take much imagination to picture. In fact, Gritty is the type who could have trained with The Karate Kid to level a punch that’s strong enough to knock out Gandalf, let alone a 13-year-old. You can picture Gritty rearing up, with the fervor of a bull seeing red, and just tossing a kid into space with a mighty punch. It’s a pretty funny image. In fact, he said that Gritty punched his son “as hard as he could.”

This past week, some relieving news broke. First it was Meek, now it’s Grit; he’s innocent! 

We’re proud our man was cleared of all charges, so he can continue on his path of being a scary monster that instills fear in the hearts of our friends and enemies. And we’re happy he can go on continuing to not punch any more children. However, if there is a child wearing a Penguins or Rangers jersey in his vicinity, we won’t blame him for taking a swing.