Category: Blaze Media
Energy secretary: US weapons tests won’t involve nuclear explosions
Energy Secretary Chris Wright said on Sunday that the weapons testing that President Trump ordered last week will not include nuclear explosions. “I think the tests we’re talking about right now are system tests. These are not nuclear explosions. These are what we call noncritical explosions,” Wright said on Fox News’s “The Sunday Briefing.” “So…
5 takeaways from Trump’s ‘60 Minutes’ interview
President Trump returned to “60 Minutes” on Sunday for his first sit-down interview with the program and with CBS News since its parent company earlier this year settled a lawsuit with the president. Correspondent Norah O’Donnell sat down with Trump on Friday at his Mar-a-Lago estate, where there was a passing mention of the contentious history between…
VIDEO: Sisters’ theft of lobsters, ribeyes, and truffle butter explodes into checkout chaos and racial-slur rampage, cops say
Two sisters attempted to steal luxury food items from a grocery store in Massachusetts last weekend — but the pair exploded when store employees confronted them about the stolen goods, according to police.
The West Bridgewater Police Department said in a statement that officers were deployed to the Market Basket grocery store around 5 p.m. Saturday over reports of two customers “fighting with store employees.”
‘They screamed and directed racial and demeaning words at [a store employee]. Those words included “p***y and [the N-word],” which were loud enough for everyone in the front of the store to hear, causing an offensive condition without a legitimate purpose.’
“The investigation revealed that an employee had observed two women concealing high-priced items, including lobster meat, prime ribeye steaks, and truffle butter, in a bag while shopping,” the statement reads. “The women did not pay for those items at checkout and were confronted by an employee.”
Police identified the shoplifting suspects as 37-year-old Olivia L. Byrd of Quincy and 28-year-old Rahjane J. Byrd of Hyde Park.
Police said the pair were “argumentative, screamed obscenities, and assaulted two store employees.”
Alexander Oseas — a Market Basket employee — told investigators he grew suspicious of the sisters because most of the items in their cart were not bagged except for goods in a blue bag, the Boston Globe reported.
“He tried to take the blue bag from them, and Rahjane tried to get it back, causing her to fall to the floor,” the paper noted, citing a police report.
In addition, Oseas and co-worker Wesley Kimbrel “pleaded with” the sisters to leave the store, but they allegedly “continued both their verbal and physical attacks” against the employees, the Globe reported..
“Rahjane struck Oseas with the blue bag filled with groceries,” the paper added, citing the report, and “Olivia then struck Kimbrel with her purse several times and slapped him across the face.”
The Globe, citing the report, also said Rahjane Byrd “struck Oseas several more times with the bag filled with groceries,” and he suffered a small cut on his face.
The violent incident was caught on video, and it shows one of the sisters smashing a worker in the face with her cell phone.
Oseas said the sisters “became argumentative and belligerent and began to direct racial slurs and other demeaning terms at him,” the paper noted.
“Both Rahjane’s and Olivia’s actions annoyed and inconvenienced the shopping public with their fighting and tumultuous behavior,” the West Bridgewater police report read, according to Boston.com. “They screamed and directed racial and demeaning words at [a store employee]. Those words included ‘p***y and [the N-word],’ which were loud enough for everyone in the front of the store to hear, causing an offensive condition without a legitimate purpose.”
The police report also said that “both females continued to scream obscenities and directed threats at both Oseas and Kimbrel as they made their way out of the store,” according to the Globe.
The sisters exited the grocery store, but police confronted the pair in the parking lot.
The siblings informed officers that they were working for Instacart and that they were shopping for a customer, Boston.com noted.
Olivia said she confronted an employee who she felt suspected her of shoplifting, the Globe said, citing the police report. Boston.com indicated Olivia alleged a store employee watched them closely as they paid for the groceries and tried to take their shopping cart when they were confronted.
When the sisters were questioned about the expensive items in the blue bag, Olivia said the “bag was hers and that the items in it were an Instacart order canceled by one of her customers,” the report stated, according to Boston.com.
The Globe said Olivia claimed the proof of the Instacart cancellation had disappeared from her phone.
Police noted in the report that the sisters’ account of what happened in the grocery store was plagued by “inconsistencies,” and the pair “were evasive, providing only the bare minimum to prove that the high-priced items in their shopping cart had been paid for,” according to the paper.
Olivia said her sister fell as she was pushed by an employee trying to take their shopping cart away, the report said.
“Olivia reacted and admitted to pushing and hitting the employee on the face with her phone,” the report stated, according to the Globe. “Olivia told me she should not have struck the employee but felt she needed to defend her sister.”
Police said the sisters were arrested and charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, assault and battery, shoplifting by asportation, and disorderly conduct.
A judge ordered the sisters not to enter Market Basket and to have no contact with employees of the grocery store.
The suspects were arraigned Monday in Brockton District Court.
The sisters pleaded not guilty to the charges and were released on personal recognizance.
The Byrd sisters are scheduled to return to court on Dec. 17, according to records.
The West Bridgewater Police Department and Market Basket did not immediately respond to Blaze News‘ request for comment.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Gavin Newsom slams lying politicians — then defends Biden’s mental acuity in stunning flip
California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) irony detector may have been running low during a recent interview when he attacked lying politicians, then defended former President Joe Biden’s mental fitness.
Newsom told NBC’s Kristen Welker about his disdain for dishonest politicians. In the next breath, Newsom insisted that Biden was perfectly fit to run for a second term despite the obvious decline that Democrats tried to cover up.
‘There was no interaction I had that suggested otherwise.’
“There is nothing I dislike more than the politician that sits there and lies to you,” Newsom said. “We all just sit rolling our eyes, going, ‘Give me a break.'”
Welker followed up, asking whether Newsom felt Biden was fit to serve in office through January 2029, to which he said his priority was preventing Trump from serving a second term.
RELATED: Jon Stewart shuts down liberal journalist’s Joe Rogan complaints
Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images
“My focus was frankly situational,” Newsom said. “It was making sure Donald Trump didn’t get back into office to experience everything that we’re experiencing today.”
“There was no interaction I had that suggested otherwise,” Newsom added.
Welker pushed back on Newsom, asking him if he regrets not “sounding the alarm” on Biden’s health earlier to pave a path for a stronger candidate going into November 2024.
“I’m not going to substitute myself for someone else or for popular opinion,” Newsom replied. “I’m going to express my relationship to my truth with the former president of the United States, including at the end of his term, quite literally in December.”
RELATED: Reporter humiliates Kamala Harris over Biden health cover-up: ‘That is a world-class pivot’
Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
“There was nothing to suggest what you just said, or others have suggested, in terms of my interaction,” Newsom added. “That’s all I can be accountable for.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
The Robertsons open up about pornography: Childhood exposures and the road to freedom
On a recent episode of “Unashamed,” the Robertson brothers and Zach Dasher dove headfirst into the infamous P-word.
Pornography has become an epidemic that enslaves millions and millions of people, most often boys and men. While it’s technically been around for millennia, the digital age has brought porn into the mainstream and made it nearly impossible to avoid. It’s on our televisions; it’s on our phones; even artificial intelligence has fused with the industry in ways that can only be described as sick and depraved.
Today, many boys are exposed to porn long before they hit puberty.
Al, who grew up in an era where pornography was still confined to magazines, says he first encountered it at a “very young” age — “probably 7 or 8 years old” — while living next door to the bar Phil owned and operated before his radical conversion to Christianity. This early exposure caused Al to struggle for years, even into his marriage.
Zach Dasher has a similar story. When he was just 11 years old, his friend’s older brother put on an adult movie with the intention of introducing the younger boys to pornography. Years later, Zach learned from renowned Christian counselor Dr. Trent Langhofer that exposure to pornography before puberty has “the same effect on you as being sexually molested.”
“It made a lot of sense to me because that was an imprint in me that I dealt with for years. … I think that that early exposure probably set me on a trajectory of sin for many years,” he says.
Jase, who was lucky enough to avoid exposure in his early years, says that he sees pornography as an issue that roots back to creation. God created Adam and said, “It’s not good for the man to be alone,” so out of His kindness, He created Eve and subsequently marriage and sex. Pornography, however, is a perversion of God’s good design.
Not only does it isolate man, which God already said wasn’t good, it also taints his view of reality, and harms his relationships, especially the one with his wife, Jase explains.
Al says something that helped him think differently about pornography was having his own daughters and wrestling with the reality that every girl on a magazine page or a screen is not only someone’s daughter but also an image bearer of God. “You start thinking like Jesus thinks,” he says.
Zach found freedom in not just learning the truth but by taking action. Accountability was key in helping him break the cycle. Confession is the first step, he says, and if you’re married, it needs to be to your wife. “Now you’ve got skin in the game,” he says.
“And then after the confession, you have to find new rhythms … we are what we consume.”
“If you consume something different, then you will become something different. You will worship what you behold. And so if you’re beholding entertainment, then that’s what you will eventually begin to worship,” he warns.
Freedom is “truth coupled with discipline.”
To hear more of the panel’s honest conversation, watch the episode above.
Want more from the Robertsons?
To enjoy more on God, guns, ducks, and inspiring stories of faith and family, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Riot, repeat: How America’s unrest became a bad rerun
History doesn’t just move forward — it echoes. Karl Marx once said history repeats itself, “first as tragedy, second as farce.” He meant it as a jab at 19th-century France, where Napoleon’s nephew attempted to replicate his uncle’s revolutionary drama not on the battlefield but rather through bureaucratic spectacle. Nevertheless, Marx’s insight fits modern America. Our cycles of unrest and outrage have become predictable theater — each act beginning with moral panic and ending in absurdity.
The summer of 2020 was a national trauma. The killing of George Floyd was a tragedy that radicals turned into revolution. Riots swept through more than 2,000 cities, torching businesses, destroying neighborhoods, and leaving dozens dead. Egged on by the race-baiting activists at Black Lives Matter, mobs looted stores, assaulted police, and terrorized communities.
The line between tragedy and farce is thinner than ever — and this time, we can’t afford to play the fool.
Media outlets downplayed the carnage as “fiery but mostly peaceful.” Political leaders joined the chorus, afraid to confront the mob. Corporate America rushed to signal its virtue by taking the knee, pouring billions into “racial equity” schemes that enriched activists but divided the country.
The real tragedy wasn’t just the damage — it was the betrayal. Spineless mayors and governors surrendered their cities. Police were handcuffed, budgets gutted, and criminals emboldened. The riots hollowed out public trust, replacing civic order with cultural resentment. America’s guardians became scapegoats, and justice itself became negotiable.
From riot to parody
Five years on, the rebellion has devolved into a pathetic sideshow. Antifa’s latest “resistance” — a handful of masked agitators harassing Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents as they carry out long-overdue deportations — feels less like revolution and more like performance art.
Their vandalism is designed for TikTok, not for change: laser pointers at officers, graffiti on walls, choreographed scuffles for social media. It’s a boutique insurgency — staged in deep-blue enclaves, broadcast for dopamine hits, and forgotten the next day.
The chaos of 2020 burned cities. The tantrums of 2025 barely dent a precinct wall. The tragedy has become farce.
Still, both movements spring from the same poisoned root: a left-wing ideology that despises America’s foundations. BLM targeted police as enforcers of “white supremacy.” Antifa brands border agents as fascists for upholding immigration law.
Both rely on the same tactics — decentralized mobs, anonymous online organizing, and emotional manipulation amplified by social media. Both seek power through grievance, not through persuasion. And both reveal how progressive rage, unmoored from reality, becomes self-parody.
In 2020, rioters burned precincts and seized city blocks. They demanded “defund the police” and got it — along with record crime rates and broken neighborhoods. In 2025, their heirs spray-paint slogans and livestream tantrums. Their only victory is visibility.
The digital theater of rage
Social media turned riots into content. In 2020, doctored clips of “police brutality” fueled nationwide hysteria, empowered anti-cop lunatics, and enriched grifters. Today, the same algorithms push Antifa’s posturing, turning vandalism into viral spectacle.
These platforms profit from outrage. They amplify emotion, suppress context, and reward hysteria. The result is a feedback loop of performative politics — activism as cosplay.
After years of indulgence, government crackdowns have finally returned. ICE operates under firm executive backing. Local police departments no longer hesitate to enforce the law. The radicals, once protected, now find themselves exposed and outmatched.
But even as law enforcement regains its footing, the left’s playbook remains unchanged. The grievances are repackaged, the slogans recycled, the media coverage predictable. It’s cultural Marxism with a TikTok filter — ideology as entertainment.
Farce doesn’t mean harmless. Every protest turned stunt still corrodes civic life. Each viral act of defiance feeds distrust in law, borders, and the rule of order itself.
The radicals thrive on illusion: fake oppression, fake urgency, fake rebellion. Meanwhile, real Americans bear the cost — higher crime, divided communities, and institutions too timid to defend themselves.
RELATED: The left’s costume party: Virtue signaling as performance art
Photo by serazetdinov via Getty Images
The lesson we refuse to learn
The tragedy of 2020 proved that surrendering to the mob invites ruin. The farce of 2025 shows that ridicule alone isn’t enough to defeat it. Both demand resolve — the courage to confront lies, restore order, and defend the institutions that safeguard freedom.
History doesn’t stop repeating itself; it stops being repeated. Whether America ends this cycle depends on whether its citizens choose firmness over fear, enforcement over appeasement, and truth over spectacle.
Enough with the doctored outrage porn. The burning question is whether we’ll tolerate this clown show recycling into catastrophe or crush it with resolve that honors real American values.
The line between tragedy and farce is thinner than ever — and this time, we can’t afford to play the fool.
AI can fake a face — but not a soul
The New York Times recently profiled Scott Jacqmein, an actor from Dallas who sold his likeness to TikTok for $750 and a free trip to the Bay Area. He hasn’t landed any TV shows, movies, or commercials, but his AI-generated likeness has — a virtual version of Jacqmein is now “acting” in countless ads on TikTok. As the Times put it, Jacqmein “fields one or two texts a week from acquaintances and friends who are pretty sure they have seen him pitching a peculiar range of businesses on TikTok.”
Now, Jacqmein “has regrets.” But why? He consented to sell his likeness. His image isn’t being used illegally. He wanted to act, and now — at least digitally — he’s acting. His regrets seem less about ethics and more about economics.
The more perfect the imitation, the greater the lie. What people crave isn’t flawless illusion — it’s authenticity.
Times reporter Sapna Maheshwari suggests as much. Her story centers on the lack of royalties and legal protections for people like Jacqmein.
She also raises moral concerns, citing examples where digital avatars were used to promote objectionable products or deliver offensive messages. In one case, Jacqmein’s AI double pitched a “male performance supplement.” In another, a TikTok employee allegedly unleashed AI avatars reciting passages from Hitler’s “Mein Kampf.” TikTok removed the tool that made the videos possible after CNN brought the story to light.
When faces become property
These incidents blur into a larger problem — the same one raised by deepfakes. In recent months, digital impostors have mimicked public figures from Bishop Robert Barron to the pope. The Vatican itself has had to denounce fake homilies generated in the likeness of Leo XIV. Such fabrications can mislead, defame, or humiliate.
But the deepest problem with digital avatars isn’t that they deceive. It’s that they aren’t real.
Even if Jacqmein were paid handsomely and religious figures embraced synthetic preaching as legitimate evangelism, something about the whole enterprise would remain wrong. Selling one’s likeness is a transaction of the soul. It’s unsettling because it treats what’s uniquely human — voice, gesture, and presence — as property to be cloned and sold.
When a person licenses his “digital twin,” he doesn’t just part with data. He commodifies identity itself. The actor’s expressions, tone, and mannerisms become a bundle of intellectual property. Someone else owns them now.
That’s why audiences instinctively recoil at watching AI puppets masquerade and mimic people. Even if the illusion is technically impressive, it feels hollow. A digital replica can’t evoke the same moral or emotional response as a real human being.
Selling the soul
This isn’t a new theme in art or philosophy. In a classic “Simpsons” episode, Bart sells his soul to his pal Milhouse for $5 and soon feels hollow, haunted by nightmares, convinced he’s lost something essential. The joke carries a metaphysical truth: When we surrender what defines us as human — even symbolically — we suffer a real loss.
For those who believe in an immortal soul, as Jesuit philosopher Robert Spitzer argues in “Science at the Doorstep to God,” this loss is more than psychological. To sell one’s likeness is to treat the image of the divine within as a market commodity. The transaction might seem trivial — a harmless digital contract — but the symbolism runs deep.
Oscar Wilde captured this inversion of morality in “The Picture of Dorian Gray.” His protagonist stays eternally young while his portrait, the mirror of his soul, decays. In our digital age, the roles are reversed: The AI avatar remains young and flawless while the human model ages, forgotten and spiritually diminished.
Jacqmein can’t destroy his portrait. It’s contractually owned by someone else. If he wants to stop his digital self from hawking supplements or energy drinks, he’ll need lawyers — and he’ll probably lose. He’s condemned to watch his AI double enjoy a flourishing career while he struggles to pay rent. The scenario reads like a lost episode of “Black Mirror” — a man trapped in a parody of his own success. (In fact, “The Waldo Moment” and “Hang the DJ” come close to this.)
RELATED: Cybernetics promised a merger of human and computer. Then why do we feel so out of the loop?
Photo by imaginima via Getty Images
The moral exit
The conventional answer to this dilemma is regulation: copyright reforms, consent standards, watermarking requirements. But the real solution begins with refusal. Actors shouldn’t sell their avatars. Consumers shouldn’t support platforms that replace people with synthetic ghosts.
If TikTok and other media giants populate their feeds with digital clones, users should boycott them and demand “fair-trade human content.” Just as conscientious shoppers insist on buying ethically sourced goods, viewers should insist on art and advertising made by living, breathing humans.
Tech evangelists argue that AI avatars will soon become indistinguishable from the people they’re modeled on. But that misses the point. The more perfect the imitation, the greater the lie. What people crave isn’t flawless illusion — it’s authenticity. They want to see imperfection, effort, and presence. They want to see life.
If we surrender that, we’ll lose something far more valuable than any acting career or TikTok deal. We’ll lose the very thing that makes us human.
‘Franken-wheat’: The real reason Americans can’t eat bread anymore
Across the country, Americans have begun realizing they have a gluten sensitivity — but other countries don’t have the same issue. And according to Christian homesteader Michelle Visser, it’s not the fault of bread, but rather, how it’s made in America.
“Talking about other countries, back when we were adding into our flour and enriching it, other countries didn’t do that. In fact, in Italy, they had a pellagra outbreak around the same time that we were dealing with it here, but they responded completely different in little towns in Italy,” Visser tells BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey.
“They literally built communal ovens, bread ovens, and they encouraged them to use good grains, which had not gone through the green revolution of our country … and make whole wheat bread,” she explains.
“They knew that it was related to folate, and they knew it was dietary, and they said, ‘What can we do? We have in these small towns a lot of poor people who can’t necessarily afford good food. So one thing is, let’s at least give them the equipment to make the bread,’” she continues.
And the result of this, Visser explains, was wiping out pellagra — which was attributed to spoiled bread and polenta.
“So do you think gluten is unfairly demonized?” Stuckey asks.
“I think it is,” Visser says, using Norman Borlaug, the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970, as an example of being focused on the wrong issue when it comes to gluten.
“He had figured out how to manipulate wheat to give it a higher yield and to just simply grow more wheat for your buck. And while there’s definite advantages to understanding plant science, unfortunately, every time that we genetically change or we breed certain characteristics into any of our food, we are losing some nutrition,” she tells Stuckey.
“When they started milling it with the steel mills, they went from 20 barrels of flour a day to 500 barrels of flour a day with no extra energy, no extra expense. So there’s definitely money involved in the whole story is what I’m saying,” she explains.
“This bread that has been stripped of the good stuff, inserted with the synthetic stuff, that is maybe what’s causing the problems, especially in America,” Stuckey comments, surprised.
“Yeah,” Vasser confirms, noting that we’ve also added more protein into modern-day wheat, which has created a “franken-wheat.”
And then on top of what already is “franken-wheat,” wheat manufacturers have begun using pesticides and herbicides.
“If you are not buying organic flour, glyphosate is in trace amounts in your flour. It’s just, it’s there … if we are exposing our gut to glyphosate, we are killing the good bacteria. We’ve had gut problems in this country for many decades … and I think a lot of it has to do with this glyphosate in our flour.”
Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Coddled Harvard students cry after dean exposes grade inflation, ‘relaxed’ standards
Harvard University’s Office of Undergraduate Education released a 25-page report on Monday revealing that roughly 60% of the grades dished out in undergraduate classes are As. This is apparently not a signal that the students are necessarily better or smarter than past cohorts but rather that Harvard As are now easier to come by.
According to the report, authored by the school’s dean of undergraduate education Amanda Claybaugh and reviewed by the Harvard Crimson, the proportion of students receiving A grades since 2015 has risen by 20 percentage points.
‘If that standard is raised even more, it’s unrealistic to assume that people will enjoy their classes.’
Whereas at the time of graduation, the median grade point average for the class of 2015 was 3.64, it was 3.83 for the class of 2025 — and the Harvard GPA has been an A since the 2016-2017 academic year.
“Nearly all faculty expressed serious concern,” wrote Claybaugh. “They perceive there to be a misalignment between the grades awarded and the quality of student work.”
Citing responses from faculty and students, the report revealed that the specific functions of grading — motivating students, indicating mastery of subject matter, and separating the wheat from the chaff — are not being fulfilled.
RELATED: Harvard posts deficit of over $110 million as funding feud with Trump continues to sting
Photo by Zhu Ziyu/VCG via Getty Images
“In the view of faculty, grades currently distinguish between work that meets expectations or fails to meet expectations, but beyond that grades don’t distinguish much at all,” said the report. “‘Students know that an ‘A’ can be awarded,’ one faculty member observed, ‘for anything from outstanding work to reasonably satisfactory work. It’s a farce.'”
Claybaugh acknowledged that grades can serve as a useful and transparent way to “distinguish the strongest student work for the purposes of honors, prizes, and applications to professional and graduate schools.” However, since As are now handed out like candy and many students have identical GPAs, prizes and other benefits must now be dispensed on the basis of less objective factors, which “risks introducing bias and inconsistency into the process,” suggested the dean.
The report noted further that Harvard University’s current grading practices “are not only undermining the functions of grading; they are also damaging the academic culture of the College more generally” by constraining student choice, exacerbating stress, and “hollowing out academics.”
Steven McGuire, a fellow at the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, highlighted the admission in the report that Harvard owes much of its current crisis to its coddling of unprepared students.
“For the past decade or so, the College has been exhorting faculty to remember that some students arrive less prepared for college than others, that some are struggling with difficult family situations or other challenges, that many are struggling with imposter syndrome — and nearly all are suffering from stress,” said the report.
“Unsure how best to support their students, many have simply become more lenient. Requirements were relaxed, and grades were raised, particularly in the year of remote instruction,” continued the report. “This leniency, while well-intentioned, has had pernicious effects.”
The new report is hardly the first time the school has suggested that Harvard undergraduate students tend to be coddled, intellectually fragile, ideologically rigid, and slothful.
Citing faculty feedback, Harvard’s Classroom Social Compact Committee indicated in a January report that undergraduate students “have rising expectations for high grades, but falling expectations for effort”; often don’t attend class; frequently don’t do many of the assigned readings; seek out easy courses; and in some cases are “uncomfortable with curricular content that is not aligned with the student’s moral framework.”
The January report noted further that “some teaching fellows grade too easily because they fear negative student feedback.”
Claybaugh’s grade inflation report has reportedly prompted complaints and whining this week from students.
Among the dozens of students who objected to the report and its findings was Sophie Chumburidze, who told the Harvard Crimson, “The whole entire day, I was crying.”
“I skipped classes on Monday, and I was just sobbing in bed because I felt like I try so hard in my classes, and my grades aren’t even the best,” said Chumburidze. “It just felt soul-crushing.”
Kayta Aronson told the Crimson that higher standards could adversely impact students’ health.
“It makes me rethink my decision to come to the school,” said Aronson. “I killed myself all throughout high school to try and get into this school. I was looking forward to being fulfilled by my studies now, rather than being killed by them.”
Zahra Rohaninejad suggested that raising standards might sap the enjoyment out of the Harvard experience.
“I can’t reach my maximum level of enjoyment just learning the material because I’m so anxious about the midterm, so anxious about the papers, and because I know it’s so harshly graded,” said Rohaninejad. “If that standard is raised even more, it’s unrealistic to assume that people will enjoy their classes.”
The student paper indicated the university did not respond to its request for comment.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!