artmouth stereotypes suggest that the average night for males and females in the same class vary drastically not only in comparison with each other, but also with age.

Life as a freshman male…well… often sucks. The freshman girls are too busy going for the oldest, frattiest guys possible and the older girls won’t bother with the freshman boys, at least not until freshman spring. Additionally, social spaces are harder to find, unless you are that rare freshman boy that is just “sweet” enough (yea, right) to have already been accepted socially into a fraternity (or be on a sports team or have an older brother that goes to school here). Beyond that, most freshman boys are overlooked, ignored, and cast aside: tossed into a corner like that beer can you just threw on the ground—kicked off of games of pong, left to sit neglected in a dank corner.

Life as a freshman girl is much different. Wandering down to the River Cluster on a Saturday morning, I listened to two freshman girls, distinguished by their dress, slow walking (I recently had knee surgery and they were even slower than me), and this conversation:

Girl #1: Chi Gam last night was totally sweet.

Girl #2: I liked Tri-Kap better, they aren’t nearly as sketchy.

Girl #1: No, they just pretend not to be. The Chi Gams are super nice and they don’t ignore you just because they don’t know who you are. Besides I’m hooking up with Fred. [All names have been changed to protect the subject’s identities]

Girl #2: No way! He’s so sweet, he’s always playing pong. But isn’t he a little sketchy? And hasn’t Russ [a freshman, confirmed in the DND] been trying to date you…he did pay for the last two dinners.

Girl #1: But Russ isn’t nearly as cool as Fred. Fred and I can hang out, and I can go over to Chi Gam. All Russ and I do is watch movies and talk. Bor-ring!

Life as a freshman girl is exciting, filled with parties and nearly quadruple the attention you got in high school. I don’t care if you’re Heidi Klum, it’s still more than you got in high school. I wish that I could say that most freshman girls have a different head on their shoulders, but we’ve all been there. Granted, most aren’t as open about their social climbing, age-discriminating manners, and perhaps it’s more in the imbedded sexism of the Greek system, but I don’t have the time or the energy to dissect those issues. A much more important issue needs to be addressed.

Sex! Relationships! Man and Woman! Or Man and Man, Woman and Woman. This columnist tries not to discriminate.

The Dartmouth male and female sex lives vary in very drastic ways over time. It has been a long standing joke that the freshman female starts at her peak and it is only downhill (in terms of sex life) from the day she steps foot on campus. The trajectory for a Dartmouth male is remarkably different, with a freshman year doomed with loneliness, less than impressive hook ups, rejection, and nights spent drowning one’s sorrows alone with a bottle of hard-to-procure alcohol. Very few people will deny that the male “sexuality” increases over the four years, with most Dartmouth men reaching their peak their senior year. The two trajectories of sexuality, if they were to be graphed are at exactly equal points sophomore summer. The graph is one giant X marks the spot on sophomore summer—the summer of equality, harmony, the best damn summer of your life!

One has to wonder, why does this change occur? Do age differences really matter? Is there more to the senior boy-freshman girl relationship than lackluster 3AM hookups drenched in a scent of stale beer, cigarettes, and the inevitable walk of shame? How many of those actually last? More importantly, why is the older girl-younger male relationship kept so shrewdly hidden? If the senior boy-freshman girl relationship is considered sketchy, why is the senior girl-freshman boy relationship considered, somehow, legit?

Does age matter?

At Dartmouth, age equals seniority, level of coolness. Often, for males and females alike, to be the “younger” one in the relationship implies a level of maturity beyond your age. Somehow, you are worthy of the older one. The older man or woman is sometimes frowned upon behind his or her back, unrightfully so. To be the older partner in a relationship implies a level of confidence that many lack.

In a relationship of drastically different numerical ages (i.e. senior to freshman), to be that senior suggests that you are 100 percent confident, happy, and secure with who you are and what you do on campus. You do not need a significant other to help, because, well, they are at a different point in their lives. They cannot offer classroom help, or even future life plan suggestions. Often times they have not even planned for life events that you have long experienced and moved beyond.

So perhaps the age difference implies that the sex has to be damn good. If you cannot contribute to each others lives in opinions, because you are at different points in your lives, you must be able to enhance each others lives in some other manner. For many independent women, the younger man is the way to go.

Recent feminist theory suggests that the woman is supposed to be entirely one to herself. She should be happy being single for her entire life, to be emotionally and physically complete independently, before she begins to rely upon a “man” (heaven forbid). And for the ideal feminist, the younger man seems perfect. He cannot fully legitimize his opinions, because he has not been through the life stage that she is experiencing. He can only love her, provide a muse both sexually and emotionally. The younger man is fulfilled in the validation that such an older, beautiful woman has chosen him. The choice implies that he is mature enough, after years of rejection by women (see the plight of the Dartmouth freshman male above), that he is wise enough to provide companionship.

Demi Moore, 42, and Ashton Kutcher, 27, were wed in 2005, causing much controversy and discussion around this issue—does age actually matter? How can two people at such different points in their lives find fulfillment?

An age gap in a relationship might make the most sense in this world that values independence. As people wait longer and longer to get married, the age gap almost ensures that they will be able to maintain separate “lives” while still being emotionally involved on an abstract level, and clearly intertwined on a physical level (two people as hot as Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher could not possibly have bad sex). While developing such a large age gap in a relationship at Dartmouth is close to impossible (unless you’re a skeevy professor), there is something here to suggest that keeping an open mind is the best idea when looking for the ideal relationship.

Admittedly, I have never dated a younger man. I have never even hooked up with a younger guy. But in this world of independent people, perhaps the age gap in relationships is the best way to avoid the head over heels have to be with you 100% relationship that causes so many of us to go “gag!” Then again, is such a relationship that bad? Either way, to refer to any gap in age as inherently sketchy ignores the fact that maybe these two people are simply the ideal modernists—people with open minds and open hearts that are willing to love beyond commonalities and able to embrace differences.

Give the freshman guy a chance, you never know. He might be the next Ashton Kutcher.

he season of rush is upon us. An endless drone of white noise blankets each house as girls try to negotiate the convoluted system, and many sisters try to look as ridiculous as possible in order to calm nervous rushees.

And the system isn’t made easier with the endless debate—are there enough sororities at Dartmouth College?

Admittedly, I’ve been away from campus for awhile. I haven’t had a “real” term at Dartmouth since last winter, but not much has changed since I underwent the same awkward process. Girls flirt with other girls, in the hope of recieving admittance to a “female” social space. A space that many argue is not available in an institution still deeply rooted in male traditions—as evidenced by the Greek system.

The first co-ed class matriculated in’72, and one year later, six fraternities (Alpha Theta, Foley House, Gamma Delta Chi, Parmington Foundation, Phi Tau, and the Tabard) decided to become co-ed houses. It took four more years for Dartmouth’s first sorority, Sigma Kappa (now Sigma Delta), to provide Dartmouth’s first female-only social space. Kappa Kappa Gamma came to campus a year later, followed by Alpha Chi Omega and Kappa Alpha Theta in’81. Slowly, as sororities gained residential space on college grounds and the gender gap decreased, Dartmouth lost (somewhat) its reputation for masculine hegemony.

It appeared that women on campus were participating in a slow but remarkable progress towards gender equality with the slow but steady establishment of new sororities. However, the establishment of any new Greek houses was nearly brought to a screeching halt with the establishment of the Student Life Initiative and the consequential moratorium that the trustees placed on “the addition of new single-sex, residential and selective organizations” in 2001. With the moratorium recently lifted, the potential for additional sororities remains an ever-present reality.

One can make endless arguments in favor of the addition of new sororities on campus. The fact that more girls than ever not only rushed this fall but also failed to receive bids could alone suffice. Another sorority would offer rushees more variety and options in choosing a social space, and allow the sororities to be more selective than the Panhellenic Council (“Panhel”) currently allows.

This argument, however, is incredibly superficial and neglects a crucial, more intellectual issue at sake—is the Dartmouth College social scene still deeply rooted in masculine dominance? The fact that there are fifteen fraternities (according to ORL’s website) and only seven sororities (with only six actively participating in Panhel’s rush process) inherently suggests an extremely gendered social scene. If there are an equal number of men and women on campus, should there not also be an equal number of Greek organizations for each gender?

Using the class of 2009 as a representative sample of future enrollment at Dartmouth College (the classes of 2008, 2007, and 2006 have similar statistics suggesting that gender enrollment has stabilized), 49.7% of enrolled students were female and 50.3% of enrolled students were male. It is reasonable, then, to say that there are about equal males and females on campus, and yet there is not an equal amount of social space—speaking in purely physical terms. This distinction is important to make because sororities are much larger than fraternities are, a point I will explore further in the column.

Dartmouth College is still a college deeply rooted in its masculine traditions. Winter Carnival is infamous not only for being “the Mardi Gras of the north,” but also for the mass transportation in the olden days of women to campus for the weekend, to be rated, judged, and in all reality used. The debauchery that is Winter Carnival has since been stripped of such blatantly degrading sexist practices, except for the fact that fraternities still dominate the social scene.

The numbers would suggest that Dartmouth is a sexist environment. It is an environment run by males, encouraging brotherhood between men more than sisterhood between women. It is “acceptable” to be 100% about one’s fraternity, yet it is rarely socially acceptable to only have friends in and to center one’s life on a sorority. A brother that is duly committed to his house is “cool,” “popular,” and often a “desirable mate,” while a woman that devotes all of her time and energy to her house is usually not cast in such a favorable light. Perhaps this suggests something about the inherent nature of women, but it also suggests something about Dartmouth society. Dartmouth is a school made by men, for men, while women at this school are still fighting for equality—even if it is on such ambiguous social terms.

So the natural step would be to add a seventh sorority—correct? Women who would not otherwise rush might rush. At least Dartmouth women would control another physical space, and physical change is often the first step to social change (and vice versa).

Life is not that simple.

First of all, to add another sorority would not change the attitudes of many Dartmouth women. Dartmouth women must become more comfortable in owning their own social scene by taking control of their lives as opposed to letting men control the space on campus. Perhaps not having a large sorority scene on campus hints that women have rejected the masculine tradition that is Greek life. It seems that at the root of the issue, the sorority debate comes down to an essential conflict within feminism: whether to fight the system by rejecting it or conquering it from within.

Dartmouth women should attempt both. To reject the system entirely would be to ignore the life that is Dartmouth. Dartmouth College would not be the school it is today without the Greek system. As an active member in Greek life, I cannot imagine life without it. Plenty of Dartmouth students are not active in Greek life, many of them readers of this very paper, but to reject the system entirely is to ignore the history and traditions of this school. However, history and tradition are malleable to current attitudes.

Finally, simply adding another sorority or two would not solve the gendered social space. If anything, it would make Dartmouth more gendered, more divided, and even more elitist. So many women and men at Dartmouth are members of the system because of how open and accepting certain houses are. More sororities would make each house pickier, limiting the diversity every house on campus can claim to encompass (granted some more than others). More fraternities would have “closed” events scheduled with a sorority every night of the weekend and fraternities would be pickier about who they did and did not work with. Essentially, the openness and diversity that has made Dartmouth’s social space what it is today would become a stereo-typical Greek scene that has made such books as “Pledged: The Secret Life of Sororities” (a book commonly seen on your local “Urban Outfitters” bookshelf) so popular.

Before you go to argue that Dartmouth simply “needs” another sorority because of the numbers, consider the deeper debate. We go to a school with a stringently gendered social space. However, jumping to the conclusion that another sorority would change the issue is to put a Band-Aid on a much deeper question at the root of feminism. In totally rejecting the system, as many Dartmouth students continue to happily decide to do, is to reject a tradition and heritage that has made this school so special. However, to simply change it from within by arguing for increased physical space ignores the intellectual issue and fails to account for what has made Dartmouth’s Greek life so special and so popular in the first place. Dartmouth’s women must first assume more responsibility for their own l
ives, in changing attitudes towards not only sororities, but also, and more importantly, fraternities. In assuming social responsibility for our physical space we can inspire a deeper Dartmouth respect for a female’s place on campus.

Perhaps co-ed houses are indeed the ideal solution for perfect “equality.” Then again there is something comforting in long standing tradition. Tradition does not have to die for progress. Progress can accommodate tradition and visa versa. Dartmouth College must just be more aggressive in finding the long-term balance as opposed to merely covering up for a deeper issue.

was fortunate enough to have trip leaders that taught my trippees and me to play pong. Not every ‘09 will be as lucky. Lucky is, however, a relative term. My first night on campus consisted of a pong reunion. Once I, a relatively naïve freshman who did not have the luxury of knowing anything about pong ahead of time (through an older sibling, Dimensions host, older friend, etc), was able to finally grasp the rules on the fateful Monday night, it was time for me to promptly go home, boot a little, and pass out.

We at the Free Press thought that it might be useful for you all to have a slightly better understanding of pong than we did going into the game. Remember though, knowing the rules and knowing how to play are two different things. Be patient, eventually it will all make sense. Until then, use those brains that got you into this fabulous Ivy League institution for something useful: studying pong rules.

The history of pong is unclear. There is no official story; however, in combining various house legends a brief history of pong unravels itself. Pong started in the fifties as slam pong with two cups. The paddles had handles and the game was much faster. Then, as Dartmouth College began to accommodate women, it was only appropriate that Dartmouth’s drinking game changed as well. Women did not enjoy the fast-paced two-cup pong game and the more arched variety began to become popular. Starting in the early eighties houses developed their own games such as tree, ship, and death.

Pong rules vary house by house. However, there are a few basic concepts that are universal on this campus.

The paddle

The pong paddle is nothing more than a regular ping-pong paddle with the handle broken off. People break the handles off in different ways. My favorite method is holding the paddle on a flat surface (i.e. the benches that line various basements) with the handle hanging off and then stepping off the handle, breaking it just at the jointing. People have various preferences based on the amount of sand paper that they like on the paddle’s face. Some people enjoy brand new paddles while others enjoy more well-worn paddles. But there does seem to be a consensus on the fact that a paddle without any sand paper is all-bad. Paddles over time start to split—try to avoid playing with a split paddle. They are just no good.

The ball

Balls on this campus are pretty generic. When looking for a ball look in crevices, cupboards, under tables, in the ceiling, basically anywhere bizarre where members of the house will brilliantly think of hiding the ball. In truth, most of the time, the hiding spots are pretty obvious. Most pong players are willing to play with just about anything that is not cracked or broken. A pong ball that is broken will start to bounce oddly. Balls and cracks tend to go hand in hand at the end of the night. More often than not, a broken pong ball is lit on fire and then thrown onto the ground. Don’t worry, the fire self-exterminates.

The table

Pong tables vary in size house by house. Methods of construction are also variable as some houses build in the legs on their tables and others opt for the more economical version- stolen trash cans from dorms or a slightly more upscale saw horse contraption. Dividers (the “net”) vary as well—they can include wood, broom handles, or even, occasionally, people (not recommended, but hilarious if tried… passed out people serve best—they move the least).

The game

Typically, two teams of two participate in the game, one at either side of the table. Each team tries to make the other team drink their entire formation (see below) through a series of hits and sinks. There are often two games played in a game of pong- the game on the table and the game between two perhaps already drunk and definitely sexually frustrated college students as one partner will try, sometimes fruitlessly, to win more than just the game of pong.

The formation

Formations vary by house and game. Generally they consist of 8 oz plastic cups filled about 5/6 of the way full with Keystone Light. A game of shrub is seven cups; a game of tree is eleven cups. One places each formation in the center of each end of the table, determined by sight, markings on the table, or an arms length measurement. Shrub and tree are the two most common games on campus. Each is set up with the cup or two in the middle of the last row of the formation, placed set up a pong paddle’s width from the back of the table, with the stem behind it and the rest of the formation in front.

The serve

Now that we have covered equipment and set up, it is time to address the art of play… pong play. How a serve is determined varies house by house, some houses serve Beirut-style to determine which team serves. In this manner, each team takes turns throwing the ball. When one team misses the cups and their opponent had hit the cups, the “loser” serves. At other houses where pong is considered more of a “gentleman’s game” one team will just say “we’ll go first.” There are various styles of serves, but as a freshman you will most likely just start with the generic bounce, and serve the ball to the opponent in the opposite corner of the table. And with the serve, the game begins. There are a few catches with the serve. Generally, you have three tries to hit the table. If you miss three times, drink a half. If you hit the opponents’ cups on a serve, drink a half and serve again. If you sink the opponents’ cups, depending on the house, you will drink a half or whole and serve again.

The play

Pong play then continues, serve to serve. Each partner takes turns hitting the ball until: one, a cup is hit or two, the ball is not hit because someone missed the ball (oh! embarrassing!) or because the ball missed the table. If the ball hits a cup and you don’t save it, drink a half and replace the cup. If the ball sinks (lands inside of) the cup, you drink half and your partner drinks half and toss the cup…preferably in a trash can but in the state of disrepair that most Dartmouth basements exist in, the floor serves as a functioning trash can as well. If the ball misses the table, the person who hit the bad shot serves. If you miss the ball you serve. Play continues to alternate hit to hit, partner to partner, until the game is stopped for one of two reasons: either someone has to serve or drink.

The hit

ARCH! ARCH! ARCH! That’s all I have to say. Hit high. Be high. If your ball is low, lows vary house by house, your opponents will call your ball low and you will have to serve again.

The save

The save is the one time where you can hit a ball low in a return. A save is when a ball hits the cups and you hit the ball back, essentially saving your team from drinking. The save must hit the other side of the table. Save rules vary house by house, see below for more detail.

Social

A variant of pong, normally played when there are an odd number of people in a basement and the normal pong scene is simply not appropriate. Follows generic pong rules except all rules are more lax. Each person plays for themselves with their own formation and paddle. The point is not only to hit all of your multiple opponents cups but also to just keep the ball going. Slight variation- in social, often times, if the ball misses the table you can slam it into a player. If this happens, then the hit person has to drink a half. However, if they catch the ball the “hitter” has to drink a half.

O DO

Rush the field during homecoming. Goddamnit, just do it.

Play pong. Give it a shot, even if you hate beer, drinking games, frat basements, plastic cups, and you lack any coordination.

Wake up at 9 AM on a Saturday morning of a holiday weekend to start drinking again. We promise, as painful as it is to get up, it’s totally worth it.

Play pong before Wednesday night meetings—houses might be closed during meetings, but the pre-meetings scene can be clutch.

Take shots while the upperclassmen are in meetings. Then go out and play pong again.

Play soccer in the rain.

Make friends with your custodians. We promise, they are some of the most important people on this campus.

Make friends with S&S officers. Trust us, they are also some of the most important people on this campus.

Take a Geography class. And an Art History class.

Take a class for the sole reason that you heard the professor was good, regardless of subject matter.

Use your freshman seminar to fulfill a distrib, not to explore a possible major.

Get to know your Dean.

Go out on a Tuesday night.

Go to the freshman snowball fight, even if it is in the middle of finals and you’re pulling an all-nighter and have a final at 8 AM.

Make out with as many people as you can in a night.

Wear crazy clothing out.

Make a slip and slide down the front lawn of Dartmouth Hall.

Pull an all-nighter in Novack. It’s an experience that you will never forget.

Try to take afternoon drill. Morning drill is very hard to sit through still drunk.

Make legitimate friends with those people in basements. We promise, they are more than just dudes with beer.

Stay in on a Saturday night. Watch a movie or spend legitimate time with someone you’re only an acquaintance with. You’ll get to know them better.

Work out in the winter; it will make you happier. Take a skiing P.E. Your instructors and patrollers are good people.

Take a walk through the snowfall at night. It’s a surreal experience.

Swim in the river. Naked, if you’re up for it.

Tell S&S that you are just stumbling because of the heels you are wearing. ( If you’re a guy, this goes on the don’t list.)

Pre-game with freshmen. Its one of the most important freshman bonding times.

Relax. Enjoy and embrace being a freshman. It is something nearly all of us miss.

Befriend townies.

Get a cushy library job.

Do something with the DOC. Anything. Just give it a shot.

Keep your laptop somewhere it can’t be peed on during the night. And lock your door on holiday weekends.

Write for the DFP.

NOT TO DO

End up naked on your common room floor.

When your friends hand your blacked-out, naked self some clothing, try to put the pajama pants on over your head. No matter how hard you try, they simply won’t go on that way.

Get so drunk that you miss the freshman sweep during Homecoming.

Get so drunk that you miss the bonfire.

Get so drunk that you don’t remember the bonfire.

Get so drunk that you boot and then pass out promptly after the bonfire and miss the Friday of your first Holiday weekend.

Hook up with too many people in the same house. They do talk.

Leave your underwear and ID at the river. When they are found together, that will be hard to explain.

Make the walk of shame home the morning after a formal in your formal dress. Or at least try to time it so that you walk back when everyone else is in a class, not when they are walking to class. Or try to borrow your date’s clothes—much better idea.

Pre-game a formal. Bbbbaaaadddddd idea.

Steal things and get caught.

Talk about how much you had to drink the night before. Honestly, we just don’t care. We’ll tolerate it slightly more than discussion of SAT scores, but either way, you’re bound to be labeled a tool.

Forget to wash your feet after a night at Psi U.

Forget to call your parents; they actually do care. And they might call S&S to check in on you if they get scared.

Trust Dick’s house.

Forget to check-in. You get fined!

Write for the Review. Or plagiarize. Both seriously diminish people’s respect for you.

Deny being drunk to S&S if you are dressed ludicrously for a theme party, reek of the “drink of choice” you spilled on yourself, or if you have a barely conscious friend attached to and hanging to your arm.

Say the word “ociffer”. Ever. The odds of your drunken self letting it slip to an officer… Well it’s just not worth the risk.

Ever even think about pulling a double all-nighter.

When an officer gracefully gives you the key you left in your door, after telling you to turn down the music and put the booze away, take more than five tries getting said key into your pocket.

Get so drunk you wake up with questions about “that fight you got in last night.” It sucks to have enemies at the places you go to get drunk. It sucks more when you don’t know who they are.

Try, in front of 300 people, that skateboard trick you suck at.

Scream, “Oh my God, I’m dying out my face,” when you fail at aforementioned skateboard trick and break your nose.

Send emails to important faculty and administrators while trashed.

Argue with your Dean about how the drug and alcohol policy doesn’t reflect students’ partying habits when trying to get your punishment reduced. Avoid, “C’mon, you’re telling me you didn’t do any of this in college?” and “Seriously lady, you’ve got no idea what goes on here.”

Don’t go to a class if you’re just going to fall asleep. Especially if you have a tendency to go slack when you pass out, and if there’s a chance you’ll slam your face into your laptop when you nod off.

Start calling your roommate pledge just because he won’t drink the warm Zhenka without a chaser. In general, try not to piss off roomies too much. Remember, when you leave the room, your toothbrush is still in the bathroom and you can’t protect it.

Start calling people by their first initials. Alright? Just don’t. It’s not cute. It’s fuckin’ lame.

Try to be the best ’09 pong player. You want to be skilled and impressive, not an alcoholic.

ow it seems counter-intuitive that you are still reading my column, or that I would even continue with this frivolous pursuit that has become “sex according to Strack,” if you will. In the debut column, I expressed my views that you, reader, should “quit overanalyzing, let things be, and go with the flow.” (DFP V.19) And the first step to this process I suggested was to quit reading “self-help” books from so-called “experts.”

I guess that that would include this author and this column.

Yet… you are still reading this column- why? Is it is some eternal pursuit for the perfect way to act with the opposite sex, some miracle equation for perfect sex?

Doubtfully. Perhaps you are just bored in the library, avoiding writing that 15-page research paper due tomorrow. Alternatively, you are waiting for that perpetually late friend at food court. Or even better yet, you are a liberal intellectual who manages to read every Free Press from cover to cover and is just perplexed by this oddly placed column.

But even liberal intellectuals need a little relationship help every now and then. We all do. We could all use the opinions of other people; we need other people as our muses (despite how much someone like me would like to deny this fact). However, how much do we need our peers’ positive opinions of our relationships?

To be honest, I’m not sure. I never have been. There is a plethora of issues with this campus’s dating/hook-up scene; amongst the first, is its size. By senior year, or some would suggest by sophomore summer, it is hard to find a partner that you are not somehow inextricably linked to through some awkward situation. Be it that your best friend liked him for the first week of freshman orientation, that he has made a fool of himself blacked out in front of someone in your house, or that he has hooked up with a housemate. The theory of a world of people only six connections apart is too generous for Dartmouth– by this point, we are all two to three people apart.

And with this fact, there is bound to be some negative opinions of a person. But, how much is too much? How much weight should be placed into the opinions of others on your current fling?

A quick informal survey of this question found that 65 % of people on campus say that some weight should be placed into the opinions of others on your current fling. 7% say a lot of weight should be placed into the opinions of others, 21 % say no weight should be placed into the opinions of others and 7% responded “I am too hung over to remember who my current fling is.”

It appears that this campus is just ambiguous as I am to the response of this question. I would suggest that somewhere between “some” and “none” would be appropriate. Consider the following conversation illustrating how gossip can lead to a bad reputation.

(Two girls):

“That boy was all over everyone last night.”

“Yea, he is always all over everyone.”

“I think that he hooked up with two girls. He was talking to one while playing pong with another.”

“He’s so dirty.”

REALITY: Said boy was slightly tipsy last night and hence, perhaps, a little more conversational than normal. He is normally a friendly guy and in reality does not hook up that much. The problem is that people only see him being friendly in the basement and jump to conclusions about his friendliness implying extensive sexuality. That night, he happened to be talking to a current interest while playing pong with one of his close girlfriends who happens to also tutor him in math. He promised her a pong game in return for help with a problem set. He ended the night not hooking up with either- one is just a female friend and he isn’t sure if the other girl is interested.

The way Dartmouth culture works is bizarre. Girls (and guys) can take the simplest gesture such as conversing with many members of the opposite sex to imply overt sexuality, which simply isn’t the case. The rumors are then perpetuated and a reputation is then created based largely, or at least in part based upon assumptions made by over-anxious people.

So back off. If you are about share your ever-enlightened opinion, or consider the opinions of others, consider first their sources. Are they speaking solely on the basis or rumor, perpetuated by drunken situations or perhaps your friend’s own beer-goggles? Are they taking into consideration biased sources that have been hurt by this guy? If your thoughts on your current fling are significantly impacted by rumors that other people report to you perhaps you should reconsider your own views of yourself.

However, the views of your close friends do matter slightly if they are based on the right considerations. For example, if their opinions are negative on how said guy treats you directly, or on their personal interactions with them, perhaps you should reconsider your choices.

Ok, so perhaps this column hasn’t been much help beyond just saying, back off. Take everything you hear with a grain of salt, and consider the source and the background of the opinion. Ultimately, you are the only person who can decide on the opinion of your current fling and the opinions of others really do not matter. But perhaps, sometimes, your friends might be right. As long as they are friends with the right opinions.

—–

Deciphering Dartmouth Female Speak:

Ever wonder what the Dartmouth female is really saying? The Free Press takes a stab at deciphering “dart-speak.” Even the most straightforward girl can speak with hidden meanings.

She says: “I’m leaving. I promised someone else I’d play pong with them.”

She means: “You were too drunk when I showed up and are now clearly too drunk to waste my time with. Have a good night, you’d better blitz me in the morning apologizing.”

She says: “I’m leaving, there is no way I can handle another pong game.”

She means: “I really cannot handle another pong game, although a “movie” in your room would not be out of the question. Or you could at least walk me out.”

She says: “I’m leaving, I’m tired.” *note, this is different than above statement*

She means: “I really am tired so don’t try too much although you could clearly earn extra points if you offered to walk me home… hell, you might even get some if you manage to make it all the way to my front door without being picked up.”

She says: “Dartmouth dating culture is bizarre.”

She means: “It has been way too long since a male has treated me like a woman. Would you at least take me out to dinner, open the door, and pay for the meal in order to remind me that you know what life is like outside of your basement?”

She says: “I’m fine, really.”

She means: “I’m already worried about appearing too needy and the last thing I would want you to know is that I’ve given away some of my independence and that you can actually emotionally impact me. That said something actually is wrong. Unless its said in an annoying tone, and in that case you are way too concerned about my emotions and I need some space.”

She says “Will you make it home O.K.?”

She means: “Will you make it home O.K.? I have a futon you can crash on. (But don’t be so presumptuous as to think that I am hitting on you; I’m just being nice).”

have had this column assignment for nearly three weeks and have tried my best to connect with my feminine side. I have read nearly every feminine magazine. Girly pop music has replaced my more masculine preference for classic rock, and neither Carrie, Samantha, Charlotte, nor Miranda (all of whom, in their characters’ endless feminine analysis of gender roles in a complicated gendered space, have replaced my regular best friends) were able to energize me in this pursuit—my very first “sex column.”

So despite my best efforts, I found myself hanging around a bunch of men’s men on a lazy Saturday afternoon watching T.V. These boys were actually discussing a book that “all the girls on campus are reading.” It appeared as though any female worthy of their skirt-chasing had read or is reading He’s Just Not That Into You by Greg Behrendt and Liz Tuccillo.

Granted, I was curious. I will be the first to admit that I do not spend much time analyzing the female psyche at Dartmouth College (or I didn’t, before this column). Nevertheless, I was flabbergasted to think that as a female living with five other females, with predominantly female friends, and a member of a sorority house that this book “that everyone was reading” had not yet been mentioned to me. Perhaps that was for a reason.

Not many women will admit to having read this book.

Allow me to backtrack. Not many independent, liberal-minded women will admit to having read this book. To admit to having read this book is to suggest that one spends too much time and money analyzing relationships, worrying about relationships, and self-consciously muttering to herself about her own insignificance. It is to admit to having spent the extravagant sum of $21.95 on a book that screams, “I’m telling you exactly what you already know but are just too scared/too self-conscious/too timid/too unrealistic to admit.” C’mon girls, you all know better. How can you legitimize spending $21.95 for this book? Why are you wasting even more time than you already do worrying about men?

Before I explore the latter, let me suggest the problem of trusting these authors (hell, if you’re still reading this column it looks like you might just trust any author in print). If you are reading a book about how to deal with guys, shouldn’t you be reading a book written by a man? And not just any man, but a man’s man—not a self-conscious, hopeless romantic, optimistic Sex and The City writer. Are you honestly going to tell me that you intend to listen to a man who spends his time writing a television show for women? What does he know about men? He hangs out with WOMEN all day! He’s happily married to a woman. Yes, he is a man, but a man with a skewed sense of purpose—how masculine can his advice be at this point of his female dominated life? To suggest that he could use insights gained during male bonding time is to ignore the fact that any trick his guy friends mention could get broadcasted on national television. If I were his friend I’d keep my lips sealed and protect my own game.

Your other expert, Liz Tuccillo, is a forty-one year old single self-proclaimed pessimistic woman: truly a winning combination.

Now back to the more important issue, why are women spending so much time worrying about men? I sit here wondering, what is there to worry about? Aren’t men supposed to be our equals? Moreover, if they are our equals, why have you spent 165 pages of your time worrying about how to please them? You cannot honestly begin to tell me that you are willing to slave through 165 pages of time reading about how to please your female friends. I’m sure that 165 pages of reading about the development of slugs in eastern Somalia is more likely to captivate your attention. Why would you waste all this time, money, and energy asking questions that don’t really matter? Why are you still reading this column?

Sex.

Finally! This is indeed a SEX column and it is time to talk about this ominous word. For the sake of my own decency I wish to use the word “sex” very loosely in this context. Sex can suggest many things and does not inherently presuppose sexual intercourse, at least not right here. Sex in this context is an abstract idea of interaction – be it a kiss or two to stay warm in the long Dartmouth winters, the amazing passion of a hookup in the Baker stacks, or the random dance party hook-up that entertained your freshman year roommates the next morning as you stumbled into your room in your dance party ensemble and your make up smeared. Sex is an interaction, chemistry between two people that are sexually attracted to each other. Something physical is implied, but make of it what you will.

Why are women reading these books? A simple search on Amazon.com reveals books with even more absurd titles than simply He’s Just Not That Into You. I think we all realize that It’s Called a Breakup Because It’s Broken, and as for Why Men Marry Some Women and Not Others: The Fascinating Research That Can Land You the Husband of Your Dreams …if this research is so compelling, why hasn’t everyone already landed the husband of her dreams yet? This entire process of the independent woman taking control of her love life, consulting self-help books, and spending hundreds of dollars on making herself the ideal lover is perhaps completely futile and clearly a step backwards for feminism and the modern woman.

Which leads me to my final point, RELAX. Who cares if He’s Just Not That Into You? The money, the time, and the emotions invested in reading one of these silly books, digesting the information, and struggling through a recognition that we have done everything wrong according to the “experts” is simply not worth it. We are no longer living in a society where our lives revolve around pleasing men. Make yourself happy. You are fine. A guy will come along when it is meant to be, but hell, if it isn’t meant to be perhaps if you just relax a little you’ll at least end up with a friend or two to edit your sex columns. Quit overanalyzing, let things be, and go with the flow. After all, it’s sophomore summer, and who knows, maybe if you put these stupid “self-help” books down, quit reading my column, go outside, tan by the river, and finish the day with a game of pong or two you might (heaven forbid!) even end up with a little s-e-x. Or at least with some promising prospects.

FP: What is your background? What are you working on right now?

Daowd Salih: I have been involved, working, helping the community and talking with community services in Sudan since’88-1989. It was then that I have been appointed as assistant philosopher and contact person with German and Swiss Red Cross reports about Sudan for school relocation program for displacement from South Sudan and Darfur to live around the capital city of Kartoum. And I was then elected through a tribal leader to work with that. I did that until the current government came to power and then I got asylum and worked with international organizations and asked them questions. I went to Egypt and stayed there. There I finished my associate degree in mass media and communication and I attended a “worker university.” And then I joined African Union media. We formed an African culture society with a group from south Sudan and Darfur to promote Africa generally and particularly Sudan because we feel like the influence of other cultures can and has destroyed African cultures. It is a tribal conflict between tribal cultures that can destroy each other.

Then I become secretary of foreign affairs for that organization in’94. During that time I joined a political party which was started by Father Phillip- he formed the party for all Sudanese indigenous people to join and fight for their freedom. I join that party in Cairo. I become secretary for information for that party. That was from’96-1998 and then from’99-now, to the present, I am just focusing on human rights activities and Darfur problems and the world of human rights- particularly Sudan and Darfur. I am one of the founders of the Representatives of the Massaleit Community in Exile which was the only organization, or rather the first, in the region to contact the international community to report the ethnic cleansing in Darfur.

We talked to the press from the very beginning and in our open letter- we include so many events to express the region. Day by day and year by year and events [in] village by village we included in the letter and that came out after’99. That was the first time that the Darfur case was published, in the case of the human rights of Sudan and Darfur. And in’99 that was the beginning for us to become known by the international human rights community as human rights activist. We are now here in the United States, working together through the SaveDarfur coalition which is formed by the group of human rights activists which was formed by human rights associations to form a body as an organization to save Darfur. To stop the genocide in Darfur. And we are a member in that and I personally attend their meeting, the American Jewish World Services meeting. At that time we make the Save Darfur Coalition and we are proud to be a member of the save Darfur coalition and then making now that the day of conscience through the coalition and organizing events on campuses and colleges and universities and organize people to help Darfur people.

DFP: Can you describe what is going on in Darfur?

Salih: A group of the people now will say what will happen in Darfur in genocide and the rest will say it is tribal conflicts and the rest say that it is just a conflict. I am personally from that place and from that region and I am the first person who wrote about that crisis. The definition of genocide is any group of people that kill other people without defense… women, children, elders. Go into their villages and kill them and take what they have. I think that is genocide. That is slaughter. Slaughter is genocide. But I am glad that the United States senate and the US government and the US people in the past that they have said what is happening in Darfur is genocide and they must take serious action to stop this and we really appreciate for the US people and senate and government to take action in the world community to stop for ongoing ethnic genocide in Darfur. And also we are proud that the SaveDarfur is working hard that some representatives and senators visit Darfur to be eyewitness for what is happening. We really appreciate on behalf of the people of Darfur for the Senate and representatives who signed, almost seven members of the house, for the United Nations to take serious action in Darfur. That is really appreciable and thankful, on behalf of our people, for the Damanga Coalition of Freedom and Democracy and for the Masselite Community in Exile.

We hope one day that the killing will stop and our generations will be friends and allies with the people who stand today and who we owe our culture and our life. We want the United States people to keep focusing on this and encouraging the US Senate and government to do more effectively to send peace keepers, not just monitors because we believe that the African peace keepers from Darfur will not stop the genocide or killing because meanwhile the African Union is there but the genocide is still taking place now. So we strongly demand to the international community to help us, to send in peace keepers or some other regional organizations like NATO to send peacekeepers, to save the lives of our people. Before completely the earth is going to be burnt.

DFP: How can we stop the genocide?

Salih: To stop genocide the government must stop funding and supporting the militias, janjaweed. And United Nations to try to help and stop that crisis. And also we demand for the UN and the consulate to stop allying [with] the Sudan government and protecting Sudan because of their interests. Because that interest is you supporting killing and genocide for the people in Darfur. But you indirectly are killing the African people, destroying them from their villages, their land, their languages, their cultures to believe. We want the UN to take serious action to send peacekeepers to Darfur to stop genocide. And then take those that are involved officially who are involved in the genocide and to take them to court as soon as possible, without negotiation. We want effort. We want those who are involved must be taken by international investigator and be brought outside of Sudan because we believe that these governments who are involved in genocide and do not have the rule of law to bring those people to justice.

DFP: What can Dartmouth students do?

Salih: First of all we appreciate what Dartmouth students and administration for organizing, for organizing awareness for Darfur within the college. We appreciate on behalf of our people and organization. We encourage the students to keep writing. Keep writing your senators, anyone who wants their voice be heard to put their voice with us together to stop the genocide going on in Darfur. We believe that this kind of awareness and organizing this in universities. We believe that the students are the future for the US, the future of the world. We believe that it is this is a history of people learning how to keep people from going through what we went through. So tomorrow in your life when you face a similar problem like this you will know where to start. We encourage the students to research in their higher educations those kinds of crises. We appreciate if an organization who finally to help the people of Sudan and make use of the research and higher study of the crisis in Sudan or anywhere else in the world. Because that is a human being and you need to protect it and how can people protect it.

FP: Why do you find it necessary to go to jail to make such a point—that the occupation is wrong?

Noam Bahat: It is not that I think that it is the only way to do it. Going to the army is a very specific action. You have to declare that you aren’t accepting the rules of the game. Such action is a good way to influence people. They will listen to you more if you can say, I believe this and I stuck by it. I went to prison for nearly two years for my beliefs. It will be easier this way to get my message out.

DFP: Would you encourage other Israelis to take the same action?

NB: Definitely. I would encourage them to act against the occupation. In my opinion I do not believe in the Israeli occupation. If the government is interfering in such a way to deprive innocent people of their rights, I cannot act with it. I would encourage other Israelis to educate themselves on what the occupation means and what their government is doing.

DFP: Why do you think that it is important to act in such a way against the occupation?

NB: If the government is interfering with the basic rights of others, I cannot support it. You must understand what it means to live under occupation. To live under occupation means to live without civilian rights, without human rights. To be forced under a curfew, to live without freedom of movement- that is what to live under occupation is.

DFP: If you were to go back, would you change any of your actions? Is there anything that you would choose to do differently?

NB: I would have changed one thing, I would have gone public earlier. I only went public about four or five days before I was supposed to join the forces. If I had gone public earlier I would have been able to raise more awareness and get more media help in my sentencing.

DFP: Did you get a lot of media attention? Did you feel as though the media was biased? How did you ensure that the public was aware of your group’s message?

NB: Yes, lots of people helped us. They helped us secure interviews and get media attention. Normally the media does not cover many refusers, but since we were a group of students we got more attention. Normally the media would avoid transferring the message, but we had enough help to be successful. We wrote opinion editorials, did interviews, talked to the public, and produced pamphlets.

DFP: You joined four other friends in this action. Would you have done this alone?

NB: Yes. I’m not sure if I would have been able to get through prison alone, they helped a lot. But when I decided to refuse, I was willing to spend the time in prison alone.

DFP: Why did your friends and you get longer sentences than many other refuseniks we have heard about?

NB: The Army was afraid that we were a growing group, they were expecting more and more refusers and were afraid of the impact that this could have. They used us as an example.

DFP: What was prison like? How did you spend your time? Were you in the same prison as your friends?

NB: I was in five prisons. The treatment varies prison to prison. I spent much of my time in two army prisons, prison number four and prison number six. The policy of army prisons is to make your life as miserable as possible. They force you to do meaningless physical labor with no reward, no end in sight. You sleep in tents that leak and so you wake up at 4 am soaking wet, your clothes soaking wet, your sleeping bag soaking wet only to wake up to a day where the point of every task is to make your life miserable. I was also in three civilian prisons. The purpose of civilian prisons is to make sure that there are no riots. The guards understand that the best way to do this is fair treatment. Here I read and educated myself. I learned Russian and some mathematics. Most of the time we were all split up between two or three prisons. Initially some of us were sent to prison number four and some to prison number six.

DFP: Why were you transferred so often? Do you keep in touch with anyone that you met in prison?

NB: The Army’s policy is to not let you be in any one place for too long. If you are there too long you get comfortable, and social comfort can threaten their authority. I spent the last seven months in the civilian prison. I keep in touch with my friends who I met that are also refusers as well as a Russian student I was teaching Hebrew to. He will be released in two weeks.

DFP: Does your family support your decisions?

NB: At the beginning it was very hard for them to understand my decision. Why would I choose to go to prison, to live in such awful conditions, rather than serve in the army? After a while they began to support me as parents and then after a month they began to support me ideologically. It helped for them to talk to parents of other refusers. My older brother is in the army and was recruited to a combat unit. My younger siblings are too young for me to really talk to, however I would encourage them to educate themselves about the conflict before they make a decision. It is very important to make your own opinion.

DFP: When do you think that the numbers of high school refuseniks will quit rising?

NB: We already have hundreds. Currently we don’t have a massive draft so the numbers are sort of stagnant. The number of refusers comes in numbers, in groups. Until a change in Israeli occupation, we need to change the opinion of the Israeli public.

DFP: In your court testimony, you talk about having felt “pangs of conscience” as a child. What do you feel is the first step to creating more conscientious children?

NB: Every child is being grown up as a conscientious child. Children naturally have a conscience. It is important to teach children to be more sensitive and thoughtful and to educate them on having their own opinions. It is important to teach them to be a thinking people.

DFP: What are your current thoughts on American politics?

NB: I have two thoughts. First, you need to change your system of elections to make sure that it is a democratic system, a direct democracy. Second, you need to be less aggressive towards other countries and interfere less. U.S. policy right now serves only the interest of rich people in the U.S. and that is immoral.

DFP: How do you feel about current Israeli politics beyond the occupation?

NB: We have lots of problems in Israel, but we must deal with the occupation first. We must deal with Israeli societies and the problems within. I say societies because we have more than one. Because of the occupation we naturally have to deal with these societies. The occupation is about the conflicting societies.

DFP: What steps would be necessary for the Israeli Army to take for you to be willing to serve?

NB: First, Israel would have to get out of the occupied territories. Second, they would have to stop being an occupying nation in practice.

DFP: And the future? Do you plan on staying in Israel?

NB: I want to travel, to learn about international affairs, things and processes. Yes I plan on staying in Israel. It is my country. I have a responsibility to make sure that this situation does no longer exist, to take part in groups and/or movements in that direction. I want to be able to wake up and look in the mirror and know that I did not just stand aside, that I took the moral ground and am a moral person.