Tag: Main

  • Elegy for Williams’ football team

    O Williams o wonderful Williams
    Playing for the 109th time
    With many more victories
    Against this smaller team
    On their field.

    O Williams o wonderful Williams
    The weather was beautiful
    Seventy degrees in November
    With plenty of Gatorade and water on both sides
    Provided by the host team.

    O Williams o wonderful Williams
    You started out so well
    Interception and touchdown
    Leading 7-0 at the first quarter
    You looked so handsome in your purple pants.

    O Williams o wonderful Williams
    Despite inspirational music by your opponent
    You score again, 14-0 now
    The other team can’t seem to score
    Against your heavier, stronger players.

    O Williams o wonderful Williams
    Who is this other team you are playing?
    Their half-time show consists of 6 motley dressed cheerleaders
    Reciting poetry about political correctness, sexuality, justice, and diversity.
    Does this school know about your high sports rating in SI

    O Williams o wonderful Williams
    After coasting in the 3rd quarter with your lead
    You score 2 more times in the final stanza
    Williams 26-0 with 5 minutes left
    Another win for Williamstown for sure.

    O Williams o wonderful Williams
    But wait!
    What is happening on the field?
    The other team has scored
    Their admirers—even their cheerleaders—are going berserk.

    O Williams o wonderful Williams
    The last team that scores, wins
    Don’t be too sad, dear friend
    The score could have been worse
    Wesleyan 2-Williams 26.

  • Hippie, Hipster communities demand new courses

    Because of such factors as heternormativity, the administration, and the chalking ban, the academic study of hipness at Wesleyan has been woefully overlooked for far too long. This injustice must end! Hipsters and Hippies Against Hipness Appropriation (HAHAHA) hereby makes the following demands of the administration:

    1. An interdisciplinary major focusing on Hipness Studies, including the following concentrations: Heartfelt acoustic guitar strumming, Apathetic electric guitar holding,, Smoking Pot, Smoking Parliaments, Wearing tie-dye, Wearing leather jackets, Posing, and Posing.

    2. Increased study abroad opportunities, such as a year in London learning how to be two years ahead of American music and also cultivating a totally hot accent, a year communing with the llamas of Peru whilst growing organic coffee (weed), and a semester in New York sleeping in (on) the home (floor) of a host family (heroin addicted performance artist.)

    3. The HIPI department demands guest professors such as Cheech, Chong, and Jerry Garcia. The HPSR department demands Stephen Malkmus and Steve Albini, and the ugly one from Sleater-Kinney.

    4. Field study and internships at the Pabst Blue Ribbon Factory, Organic Fruit Co-ops, Sub Pop records, or somewhere in the jungle with some monkeys or something.

    5. Class options for both the HPSR and HIPI sections, including:

    HPSR 204- Pumas vs. Chuck Taylors: The eternal struggle
    HPSR 312- Homosexuality: Why are the Strokes always friggin’ making out with each other?!
    HPSR 105- How to use your iPod as a supercollider and/or to make everyone jealous (cross w/ Physics)
    HIPI 101/HPSR 101- How to not shower for weeks on end: cultivating grease and dirt
    HIPI 220- Don’t eat the fuzzy bunnies: Being vegan for political, getting ass purposes (cross w/ E&ES)
    HPSR 317- Thrift store culture: Get the good clothes before the poor people do (cross w/ ECON)
    HPSR 150- Irony in literature, mesh-backed hats (cross w/ ENGL)
    HIPI 243- Growing your own herbs, mushrooms (cross w/ BIOL)
    HIPI 300- The 60s: Things were so much groovier back then (cross w/ HIST)
    HPSR 300- The 70s: Reflecting on the mod vs. rocker struggle (cross w/ HIST)
    HIPI/HPSR Junior colloquium- Feigning political interest: Just how much do you need to know? (cross w/ GOVT)
    HPSR 170- Pants: How tight is too tight?
    HIPI 170- Pants: How loose is too loose?
    HIPI 280- Tie-dye your own sarong (cross w/ ARTS)
    HPSR 405- David Lynch: What the hell is going on? (cross w/ FILM)
    HPSR 410- Name-dropping: Picking up chicks (or dudes) with the help of The Fall (cross w/ MUSC)
    HIPI103/HPSR103- Guitar: Which three chords do I need to know? (cross w/ MUSC)

  • House-mate rant

    This Wespeak is directed at my housemate, Biz Ghormley. She has been calling me “Captain No Homework” just because I am capable of efficient time-management. Just because I am not writing a thesis does not mean that I am not a real person with real feelings. Also, I would like to add that just because Biz is involved in extra curricular activities such as Rowing for Fitness at the butt-crack of dawn does not mean that I am not a real person with real feelings. Who rows for fitness anyway? You’re not getting anywhere, it’s just a machine. I even made you a fucking card for your dance performance and I got you flowers (sorry Kendra). And you ate my perogies. That hurts, Biz. That hurts. So the next time you feel like commenting on the fact that “of course you want to watch Sex and the City, you’re captain no homework” just remember that this captain is a bitch, so don’t go there sailor. In conclusion, sometimes gross stuff can be funny.

  • Transphobia? We’ve got it!

    To my knowledge, no Wesleyan graduates or current students have been murdered for identifying or presenting as gender-variant. That’s a luxury, and has a lot to do with the intersections of race and class privilege in attending an elite university in the United States. We know there have been over three murders each month on the basis of gender identity or expression. Of those reported murders, all have been transwomen of color, mostly lower-income. That’s Transphobia. Transphobia is also here, though, on this campus.

    Transphobia is when the class relies on the trans students in the classroom to educate them on everything related to gender.

    Transphobia is when people I’ve known for the past two years and see on a regular basis still mess up my pronouns and expect me to still be polite about correcting them, acknowledging that “they’re trying.” Trying what? Trying to fit me into a binary gender identity? Trying to decide for me which pronoun “looks” like me?

    Transphobia is Foss Cross, setting transpeople up as the really funny Other to pretend to be for one night a year.

    Transphobia is the way people are only recognized as trans on this campus if they are white and female-assigned.

    Transphobia is about the professors who still refuse to allow their students to use gender-neutral pronouns in their papers, “at least until The New York Times uses it as its standard.”

    Transphobia is about professors not encouraging students to use gender-neutral pronouns and language in papers and other academic discourse.

    Transphobia is creating spaces in which I am to congratulate people for their Liberal Personas (ex. Using “ze” and “hir” upon occasion, attending a Gender Workshop, reading Kate Bornstein, and then pulling those out as Ally Points).

    Transphobia is one attitude around me, and another at home or in the locker room, or anywhere my marked body isn’t around as a visual reminder.

    Transphobia is well-meaning groups that exclude transpeople because “they haven’t figured out how to approach trans stuff” yet.

    Transphobia is not having gender-neutral bathroom options across campus, and getting questioned for my presence in gendered bathrooms.

    Transphobia is positioning trans-activism as “the” radical queer politics on campus and perpetuating white blindness to student of color and anti-racist activism.

    Transphobia is Davison and Behavioral Health referring students off campus who are thinking about getting counseling around gender identity or medically transitioning, making these options inaccessible to students without the financial resources and/or family support to afford such services.

    Transphobia is The Argus, “correcting” the gender-neutral pronouns in my Wespeak last year to “he” and “him” and “his.”

    Transphobia is The Argus printing birth names and pronouns, and old yearbook pictures, of transpeople who have carefully chosen not to use them.

    Transphobia is the fear that this won’t be published because we’re not supposed to acknowledge that Wesleyan University is not responsible to its diversity.

    Transphobia is you not thinking this applies to you.

  • A peace plan and progress

    Two and a half years ago, opposition members in the Israeli Knesset began meeting with high-ranking Palestinian political figures to negotiate an end-all peace treaty in the region. Their intent was to demonstrate that negotiations between both parties are indeed possible. After two and a half years of working side by side, the group has not only shown that cooperation is possible, but also that a fair and lasting end to the bloodshed is still attainable.

    The fruit of their labor, the ‘Geneva Accord,’ is being hailed by some as the definitive end to hostility and derided by others for promising “useless hopes. What right,” Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has asked, “do members of the Left have to suggest steps that Israel can’t, and will never take?” However, this fails to capture the crucial aspect of the Geneva Accord: that a treaty can emerge that is agreeable to both sides. The Accords are a truly indigenous effort by Israelis and Palestinians to hammer out a final status agreement. As opposed to the Oslo and Camp David accords, which left the most difficult aspects of the negotiations for last, the framers of the Geneva Accords recognized that no meaningful peace could come without addressing these painful issues. Thus, the accords contain agreements on land swaps, settlements, borders, control over Jerusalem, holy sites, refugees, and more. Moreover, the Accords, as agreed upon by both the Israeli and Palestinian officials involved in their signing, are intended to be a “final status agreement,” meaning that once they would go into effect, neither side would be allowed to press further claims upon the other on the issues agreed upon within the Accords.

    Regardless of whether the current leadership in Israel and Palestine has the courage to implement the Accords, the spirit of cooperation that this process has brought about will remain in full force. Both Israelis and Palestinians are being shown that there is someone to talk to on the other side, contrary to what they’ve come to believe. The potential for peace is only strengthened by this humanizing process.

    On November 20th, the treaty will be signed by negotiators from both sides. Peace organizations the world over are mobilizing to mark the signing and Wesleyan is no different. All week long, Third Path is tabling outside of MoCon and the Campus Center with a petition backing the process behind the Accord and its five central tenets. We will also have telephones available to call our members of congress and let them know how important this process is to us. All are urged to sign the petition or at least pick up a brochure to learn more about the Accord. On the 20th, Third Path will be holding a candle-light tribute to mark the signing of the Accord at 6 PM in front of the Campus Center. All are urged to come and show their solidarity with those that are striving for peace in Israel and Palestine.

  • Wind: a flawed solution

    In response to Cecilia Seiter’s Nov. 14 Wespeak, “Green power to the people,” here is why wind power is not a viable energy source for us.

    Wind generators need a lot of wind to function at optimum capacity. Most generators reach their maximum capacity at a wind speed of 30 mph or higher. Unfortunately, this part of the country does not have a lot of wind. Over the past 48 years in Hartford, Conn., per the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the average wind speed has been a measly 9.1 MPH. The months with the least amount of wind are July, August, and September, when the average wind speed is under 7.5 MPH. These are the hottest months of the year, when the demand for electricity is the highest, in order to power all of the air conditioners that are in use. Just what everybody wants. A bunch of blackouts when the temperature becomes miserably hot. The wind here is also pretty gusty, which results in premature wear and tear on the turbines, shortening their life.

    The power that can be generated from the wind is a function of the cube of the wind speed. What this means is that, given a wind speed of 10 MPH, the power generated is 1/27 of the power generated at the optimum wind speed of 30 MPH, or about 3.7 percent of capacity. At the average wind speed of 9.1 MPH in this area, and assuming the turbine blades are 25 meters long (about the maximum length in service), one turbine produces about 66 kilowatts of electricity. In a year, this one turbine will produce 578,160 kilowatt-hours of electricity. Using Seiter’s number of 26 million kilowatt-hours of electricity that this university uses every year, it would take 45 turbines to power Wesleyan, if we switched completely to wind power. That’s a lot of land compared to that used by a conventional power plant, and a lot of steel. Neither that land nor that steel comes cheap.

    There’s also the danger that wind turbines pose to birds. According to the National Wind Coordinating Committee, each wind turbine kills an average of 2.19 birds per year. So, just to power Wesleyan, 99 birds would die each year. That doesn’t sound like much, but Wesleyan is a small drop in the bucket when it comes to electricity usage. Produce 1,000 megawatts in this region (enough to power 1 million homes), and you end up killing 33,000 birds per year. Not such a small number anymore, is it? This number is only the deaths caused by direct strikes. More birds will die during migration because of the longer distance that they will fly, in order to go around and avoid the turbines.

    I will be the first to admit that there is an energy problem in this country. Wind power, however, is not the answer. When EON’s pledge reaches the administration, I hope the administration has the good sense to reject it. There are better ways to reduce emissions.

  • Misinterpretation of Intown events

    Ms. Jacob and Ms. Strunk succeeded in proving my point through their selective reading of my piece and the misinformation they included in their responses. Their Wespeaks explicitly and indirectly accuse my quotation of “Come to X House and we’ll see what happens to you,” as racist. Why would they possibly do this when I neither mention that the speaker was black or a woman, let alone one who was part of an “uncontrollable black mob.” 

    Ms. Jacob does happen to be a black woman, but clearly her previous argument could have been said by anyone and been correct. Likewise the threats of violence could have been said by anyone and still been threats. Race played no role in my quotation, and for Ms. Jacob and Ms. Strunk to suggest that there was is irresponsible and a personalized act of hostility towards me. Further, I did not write a single word which said that X House is populated by a violent, angry, racist mob. 

    Why did Ms. Jacob and Ms. Strunk deem it necessary to depict my words in such a way? Their world view of racial reductionism dictates that any negative interaction or comment about people of color is necessarily racist—it doesn’t matter to them that I made no explicit reference to Ms. Jacob or her skin color. 

    Why do Ms. Strunk and Ms. Jacob perceive the interpersonal violence perpetrated by my visiting friend against a person who has lived in Hawaii as racially motivated? Since they perceive the world in a racial manner, there is no possibility of interpersonal actions – like those in response to prolonged verbal abuse – as being derivative of the verbal abuse, and not the ethnicity of those involved.

    Why does Ms. Strunk ignore that I pointed to character of not two, but three aspects of the night (the good, the bad, and the ugly)? Obviously it’s more inflammatory to accuse me of complacency and racism than to make a coherent argument for their position. 

    The racially charged misreading and selective readings of my Wespeak prove my point. I had hoped that by not personalizing the debate, my broad point – encouraging students at Wesleyan to share their views and try and convince others of their correctness – would be heard. Instead, Ms. Jacob and Ms. Strunk applied a racial prism in which one instance of what they deem to be racism constitutes the makeup of a whole event or group of people, e.g., “His white friend threw a beer at a person of color, therefore his quotation is racist.” 

    I’m not suggesting that race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or any number of defining factors do not affect how we view the world. I know that my being Jewish influences how I perceive various situations. Yet it would be absurd for me to argue that Ms. Jacob and Ms. Strunk’s libelous statements are anti-Semitic, not in the least because neither of them mentioned that I was Jewish. Of course, this is what they claim I did in my anonymous quotation.

    I and many others have seriously reconsidered our beliefs about the commodification of diverse cultures since the issue of Hawaiian parties was first raised. How can people reevaluating their beliefs, in the direction suggested by Ms. Strunk, be a bad thing? Dialogue is happening and change is too. Some parts of a debate – which one should recall involved over a dozen people and lasted over three hours – may be unproductive (the incident described by Ms. Strunk would fall into this category, which I labeled “harmful failed communication” in my first Wespeak), but this does not preclude dialogue from being necessary.

    The idea behind my words is that we, the Wesleyan student body, are in a position of distinct social privilege. We all are members of the academic elite, where as peers we can educate each other about our beliefs. The content of our beliefs must never be judged a priori by self-appointed thought police. Racial reductionism and absolute intolerance towards any dissenting viewpoint limits the ability to improve Wesleyan or the world. All I propose is that instead of expectations of magical intellectual homogeneity on campus, we all enter into dialogue about what we believe, why we believe in it, and why our beliefs are worthy of being believed by others. As this dialogue happens I will agree with some beliefs and disagree with others, but I will never deny someone’s right to hold a belief that I think is wrong.

  • Transgender day of remembrance

    Thursday, Nov. 20, is the Transgender Day of Remembrance. It is set aside to memorialize those who are killed due to anti-transgender hatred or prejudice. Although not every person represented during the Day of Remembrance identified as transgender, each had violence directed against them for not fitting societal expectations of their gender.

    So far this year, there have been 37 documented murders motivated by transphobia. Since that only includes murders that have been reported, that is over three every month. Significantly, all of the reported murders this year have been of transwomen of color, most of whom were also low-income. One murder, of Jessica Mercado, happened in New Haven, Connecticut. She was a 24-year-old transwoman, killed May 9, 2003. Her body was found draped across her mattress in the charred remains of her apartment. She had been stabbed multiple times before the apartment was set on fire. Mercado was laid to rest in her native Puerto Rico. More information can be found at www.gender.org/remember and www.rememberingourdead.org.

    While transphobia at Wesleyan has not been known or reported to have killed people, it still exists here in many forms. Luckily, steps can be taken to become a better trans ally. These include, but are certainly not limited to the following:

    – Be aware.
    – Publicly challenge assumptions.
    – Educate yourself.
    – Don’t make assumptions about a trans person’s sexual orientation.
    – If you don’t know what pronouns to use, ask and actually remember to respect them.
    – Be aware of confidentiality, disclosure and outing.
    – Don’t assume what path a transperson is on regarding hormones or surgery.
    – Don’t police restrooms.
    – Don’t just add the T (for transgender) without doing work.
    – Listen to trans voices, but do not rely on transpeople to educate you.
    – Don’t expect that trying to become a better ally means that you will be applauded for it.

    In honor of Day of Remembrance, check out any or all of the following events going on this week.

    Bathroom Art Installation. Wednesday-Friday, Campus Center, bottom floor. Vespers. Trans Remembrance Day Memorial Service/Ritual. Wednesday, Nov. 19, 5:30 p.m., Memorial Chapel. Intersections of Race, Class, and Gender. (discussion) Thursday, Nov. 20, noon, Meeting Room 1, top of the Campus Center. Theories in the Flesh: Judith Butler off the Page. (discussion) Friday, November 21, Noon, Meeting Room 1, top of the Campus Center. Screening of Trans Short Films. Friday, Nov. 21, 7 p.m., PAC 001.

    Additionally, Gender 101 workshops will be run four times in the two weeks following Thanksgiving break.

    Contact trans_gender_group@lyris.wesleyan.edu for more information about on-campus events.

  • Thinking about my white privilege

    In my last Wespeak I said that it is the responsibility of everyone at Wes to challenge embedded oppressions. David Wiener wrote back asking if I excuse myself from my white privilege because I am female. I do not. I believe that racism is a system of power (privilege) and prejudice. Unless I am challenging racism, I am perpetuating it. In recognizing my own racism and working on strategies to confront my own and other’s racism, I seek to disturb a historically rooted, but very prevalent system that oppresses people of color and negatively affects my life.

    Because it is seen as the norm, whiteness gives me unearned privileges in this society and at Wesleyan because it is conceived of as the norm. I’ve always felt comfortable speaking in my classes at Wes. When I speak from personal experience, my words are not seen as representative of white people’s experiences. I’m frequently able to speak authoritatively, even if I am not an authority on the subject. I’ve felt free to walk around campus, attend any campus party or event, and travel abroad without the anxiety that I may have to deal with racism, overt or covert.

    I have depended on people of color to teach me about what I assumed was “their culture,” or “their race” by asking them about their personal experiences. I have said things like “just because I’m white, doesn’t mean that I’m racist” as a way to situate “society” as the problem and not me. I have wallowed in white guilt as a way to distance myself from my own racism, not realizing that white guilt is an extension of white privilege—often causing me to ask people of color “what can I do,” thinking that I was being a good ally, when really, people of color should not have to, and don’t, care about my white guilt. Reflecting on my white guilt, I realize that it often refocused conversations to be about white people, thus perpetuating white dominance.

    I have been able to repeatedly experience these privileges because white society expects and allows me to be complacent in my racism. Over the last three years, I have come to recognize my agency in society. Choosing to do nothing about my own racism means that I’m continuing racism and making it worse. I have developed some strategies for confronting my racism with insights of teachers, students, and authors of color, but consciously anti-racist white people too. Even though I can articulate these strategies, I am not always effective in fully implementing them and often, trying to confront racism means using my white privilege.

    The most useful tool I have found in confronting everyday racism is being consciously self-reflexive. I try to question when and how I use my voice and in what situations. For example, I find it very easy to dominate conversations that revolve around theory and to shy away from conversations that ask me to critically engage my personal experiences. I try to question when and how I speak as an authority, and to contextualize my “authority” in my personal location.

    I try to support people of color in their activism and not ask them to be “bridges” for me to learn from, or access student of color activism through. I try to recognize that when I feel uncomfortable in predominantly student of color spaces that this discomfort may be how many people of color often feel. I am careful of how I use the word “we,” cognizant of who I am including and how.

    While these strategies are not foolproof or an easy answer for challenging racism, they have been a good starting point or me. I make an effort to talk to my white friends and family about their experiences confronting their own racism, and I encourage white people on this campus to do the same. White people have a responsibility to challenge, confront and resist personal, everyday and institutional racism.

    This is not a request for white people to constantly feel guilty. Instead, I am suggesting that white folks think about how whiteness grants us privilege in social, academic and political spaces. White people need to tlak about race and privilege more, but do so critically and don’t expect any progressive award or cookie for it.

    If you would like a place to start, visit www.whiteprivilege.com, check out Peggy McIntosh’s article “Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack,” or read Beverly D. Tatum’s book “’Why are all the Black kids sitting together in the cafeteria?’ and other conversations about race.” You can also email me at ejaeger@wesleyan.edu.

  • Green power to the people

    I hate feeling bad for using my computer. Or turning on the lights. Or taking a hot shower. But I can’t help but feel guilty, when the electricity Wesleyan uses, every minute of every day, pumps tons of pollution and greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. We’re powered by burning fossil fuels (coal, oil, natural gas), from the stage lights of Crowell to the kitchens of Mocon to the heater in your room. Fossil fuels are difficult to extract, often requiring the destruction of natural areas to reach deposits that are depleted quickly. When burned, they release particulate matter and chemicals that decrease air quality and cause health problems, not to mention carbon dioxide, the most notorious greenhouse gas. Not only that, but buying fossil fuels empowers the energy industry, quite possibly the most evil industry in the U.S.

    So, what to do? Resort to living in huts, cooking over fire pits, and renouncing computers?

    That doesn’t sound too good to me…I need my iTunes, and I know you do, too.

    Instead, let’s take a step towards a different kind of energy—clean, green energy. Wind power, the most viable source in this area, uses huge windmills to harness the power of wind, generating electricity without mining, drilling, or burning anything. Wind power is also renewable—we’re soon going to run out of oil reserves, but we’ll never run out of wind.

    Once, Wesleyan bought 10 percent of its energy from a company that supplied this clean wind energy. When that company went out of business, the administration went back to depending on fossil fuels. Wesleyan uses 26 million kilowatt-hours of energy every year, spending about $2.5 million. Ten percent green energy cost $30,000 a year—a small percentage of that budget for a move that makes a big difference. Other colleges have made similar or larger commitments—Connecticut College, Oberlin, Yale, Middlebury and others have realized the benefits of green energy.

    The state of Connecticut and the New England Governors are also pushing green energy, with a pledge to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 10 percent of 1990 levels by 2020. If Wesleyan switched to partial green energy, we’d be right in step with efforts throughout the area.

    This year, EON (Environmental Organizers Network) is presenting the administration with a pledge to sign, which includes purchasing 20 percent of our energy from green sources (well within our financial capabilities) and reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent by 2010 (buying green energy would partially accomplish this). All we need is student support for the issue—we’ve had green energy before, and we can get it back. With a little bit of that activism we’re so famous for, Wes can be clean, green, and feeling good about our electricity.