The Ray Comfort edition of The Origin of Species. Photograph provided by Living Waters Ministry.

On Wednesday, November 18th the DFP blitzed out a news alert about The Origin of Species paperbacks being passed out on campus, and since then we’ve received many varying responses. Almost all thanked us for getting the information out to campus about the disingenuous campaign to subvert the anniversary of Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species.

For those who missed the creationists passing out their “Special 150th Anniversary Edition” of The Origin of Species undercover, here is a description of the event by Campus Progress:

“Ray Comfort, famous for partnering with Kirk Cameron and arguing that bananas are proof of God’s intelligent design, claims he’s going to distribute 170,000 copies of an adulterated Origin, including an egregiously inaccurate introduction by Comfort. The introduction lists the usual litany of nonsense: claiming Darwin was responsible for the Holocaust, that evolution is a doomed science, and that it encourages atheism. Then he spends a while deriding Islam, Buddhism, and the theological value of ‘good works.’ He plans to distribute these books on 100 college campuses in the US, and 20 in Canada.”

Dartmouth was one of the campuses specifically targeted by Comfort, and on Wednesday morning, November 18th, followers of Comfort descended on Hanover, taking up positions that are usually occupied by individuals passing out New Testaments. But instead of the New Testament, they were passing out these special copies of The Origin of Species, holding up signs scrawled in red marker sloppily celebrating something about the 150th anniversary of the book.

Now, to answer some of the qustions we received after our alert:

Who is responsible for this?

Living Waters Publications (livingwaters.com), which is part of The Way of the Master (thewayofthemaster.com), a Christian Evangelical ministry based in California. The organization believes in direct outreach “in the way of the master,” by which they mean the way of Jesus Christ. In fact, WDJD (What Did Jesus Do?) is literally part of their logo. The people that passed out the books near Collis, on the Green, at Baker, and a variety of other points on campus are a part of the thousands of volunteers organized by The Way of the Master to pass out these books.

Is the actual text of The Origin of Species changed?

No. They added an introduction, which is typeset in a significantly larger font than the actual text and adorned with various comics deriding Charles Darwin. If you wanted to read The Origin of Species, you can. It’s manageable, but the text is not only smaller, but more squished together than you would normally see in a published book. As such, it’s not the most pleasant reading experience in the world, but for some strange coincidence, the introduction doesn’t seem to suffer from this problem.

But either way, the text doesn’t have to be changed for Comfort to achieve his purpose. Darwin’s work—while revolutionary for his time and surprisingly insightful given his context—is now 150 years outdated. Since then, entirely new fields of evolutionary science have emerged. They are all in some way based on the original theory, but Darwin’s Origins is far from state of the art.

Comfort not only frames the argument with his introduction, but he also avoids debating living scientists by simply attacking the original inspiration of evolutionary theory. It’s far easier to “debate” someone who had none of the tools of modern science and was just starting to feel out the basics of his theory. To add to all of this, Comfort disingenuously disguises his (flawed) criticism in the context of an “impartial” introduction.

How can I respond to these people?

They quickly moved out after 10s, so students didn’t have much chance to talk to them even if they wanted to. Some were told to “talk about this book in your science class,” but other than that, we haven’t heard of any instances of sustained conversation between any of the distributors and Dartmouth students (if you did have a conversation, we’d love to hear about it).

Many students across the country have already flooded livingwaters.com with angry comments and responses to the ministry, and as a result, the ministry has now refused to comment further than this initial response:

“An angry backlash from atheists has prompted best-selling author Ray Comfort to stop answering questions about a special edition of Charles Darwin’s Origin of the Species he plans to give away on university campuses this fall.

‘From now on I will refuse to answer questions about the book or its contents,’ Comfort said, ‘because there is such a deep-rooted anger in the atheist world about this publication.’”

Here at Dartmouth, real trends in fashion, politics, and tectonic plate movement often don’t permeate our bubble. But like any isolated civilization, we have developed our unique visual code to signify status, allegiance, and resistance through our dress. Unfortunately, this coding usually involves sweatshirts. I’ll never forget the time I was sitting with a friend and somebody dressed as a cow in FoCo. I was enjoying my sub-par cup of frozen fat, when two pledges started yelling at me to turn around. “You better not be serious about that sweatshirt. YO, YO! FUCK YALE!! Take that shit OFF!” OK, so I was wearing a Yale sweatshirt. And they were probably blacked out. BUT, I am from New Haven, born and raised, and Yale was a very important part of my childhood. And last time I checked, we don’t live in medieval England, so I’m pretty sure the laws about only royalty being allowed to wear ermine cuffs, or Yale sweatshirts, or whatever, have been abolished. I wasn’t going to let them humiliate me. So I calmly licked my spoon, stood up, and proceeded to disrobe in front of them, revealing my eight nipples and Dark Mark to all of FoCo. And then I stole their sirens. Just kidding.

A lot of what we wear here has less to do with self-presentation in the traditional sense and more to do with associating yourself visually with a tribe (i.e. Greek house, athletic team, or campus group). We live in kind of an alternate universe, one where sparkly fanny packs denote a higher social standing than dress ties? But we aren’t completely disconnected from society and its fashion dictates. We go to West Leb occasionally (…Tuxedo Store?) and browse online sales during 10As. We have a vague understanding of fashionable colors and silhouettes. And then we throw this notion in the blender with three cups of flair, a liter of Keystone, and three weeks at the end of the term without enough DA$H left to do laundry. And that’s when things get real. Real beat. So we’ve canvassed our peers to find out what they think the most offensive campus trends are. Here are the results:

“If people here actually followed real fashion trends, I’d say Aladdin pants. They look like kitten hammocks between your legs.”
–Kathleen Mayer ‘11

“Psi U unis.” –Anonymous

“KDE’s ‘Down to 09F’ pledge shirt just rubs me the wrong way. Especially because it comes from a sorority that claims to be progressive on the gender equality front. It seems like a step in the wrong direction.” –Anonymous

“See-through leggings as pants.” –Everyone.[Disclaimer: I am a prime offender of this trend. It is becoming an offensively perennial staple in my wardrobe.]

“Tights as pants…not that I’m complaining.”
–Andrew Mertens ‘12

“Dartmouth Indian T-Shirts.”
-Hilary Krutt

“The word Dartmouth plastered on everything.” –AJ Kuhr ‘13

“Your tights.” –Mary Ann Carolan ‘80
[Disclaimer: these were actually
leggings. See above.]

“Kappa ribbons.” –Anonymous

The Grill Guys hard at work in FoCo. Photograph by Liz Klinger.

Eating at Dartmouth is unlike eating in at a restaurant or at a dinner table. Most of us don’t think of a late-night trip to FoCo as a chance to enlighten our taste buds, and it is certainly not the kind of place where you wait for your friends to sit down before you dig in.

We get so wrapped up in our to-go wraps, our “facetime” and our frenzied hunter-gatherer instincts that we don’t stop to appreciate the hands that are feeding us. If you haven’t noticed the interesting people who work for DDS, then you are a victim of this hunger-induced blindness.

To find out more about the ways we interact with DDS employees, I waited for a lull at FoCo when there wouldn’t be any lines. I met many recognizable faces for the first time and shook their hands across the counter.

DFP: I think for a lot of people at Dartmouth, getting food is more of an expectation than a privilege. What do you think is the best thing people can do to connect on a more personal level with the servers and improve their dining experience?

Hippie: To me, the most important thing in our interaction with the students is good manners. “Please” and “thank you” are like the grease on the wheels of communication, and we really appreciate that.

Kevin: The “please” and “thank you’s” are nice, especially for the older guys on the grill. Being the oldest guy on the grill, and having at least one child almost your age, saying please and thank you really helps. I don’t demand it, but in some ways I still expect it.

DFP: What time of day do you find your job to be most enjoyable?”

Kevin: Things are usually easy going anytime before late at night. Around a quarter to one or twelve thirty is the worst time. Sometimes you’ll have customers who are belligerent for one of a number of reasons, usually alcohol-related. You’re all around 20 years old… We were all there once.

Eric: One night at around 11:30 we had a long line of people all chanting, “We want Mozz Sticks! We want Mozz Sticks!” because we had temporarily run out of them.

DFP: What do you guys do to deal with that? Do you just take a cigarette break? Or do you try to intervene?

Kevin: You know, I let it roll off. But a lot of times I will say, “What’s the magic word?” You know, just like I would do with my kids. We enjoy having a little fun just to interact with the students. Sometimes I say, “Cluck like a chicken.” Some people will flap their arms and go “bck bck bck,” and some of them just go, “Give me my steak.” I wouldn’t make them cluck like a chicken, you know? At the same time, maybe next time that dude comes around, I’ll do something a little better for him.

DFP: Are they any circumstances where you don’t have to serve someone?

Kevin: In some cases if the person is being really belligerent, we won’t serve them food, and we’ll probably just call one of the managers.

DFP: If people do share casual banter and have good manners, does it really make a difference?

Eric: Yeah, if a guy is cool, we might put a little more pizaz on his cheese steak. Or if he orders the same thing every day and he’s nice, I might get his food to him a little earlier. I might see him at the end of the line, and he’ll just put up one or two fingers, and I know he wants a grilled chicken so I throw it on the grill right away.

So next time you’re awkwardly standing in line at the Hop or FoCo with nothing to say to the people next to you, try throwing a comment across the counter to one of the cooks. This could be a simple “top of the morning,” a commentary on something happening behind the counter (“I saw what shape you made that fried egg, heh”), or if the line isn’t too long, it could even be a brainstorm of some outlandish and exotic dish—don’t be mistaken, they love making something different.

Whatever way you choose interact with the DDS employees, it will pay off, whether that means not eating an egg that was once in the shape of a phallus, getting your food earlier, or getting your cheese a little more melty.

And bring back the trays at the Hop (I wonder who it could be, AD pledges?)! We already have enough to juggle in our lives.

A typical day at Bored at Baker. Screenshot taken directly from http://boredatbaker.com

Dartmouth has once again fallen under the spell of Bored at Baker. I’m not going to dwell on the obvious—this anonymous message board is plagued by outrageously offensive comments that not even the staunchest racist would condone. The amount of seemingly random, blindly hateful comments against women, Blacks, Asians, gay people, and every other group under the sun is overwhelming the trashcan, broken up only by pathetically uncreative insults aimed at every Greek house on campus and spam about corporate recruiting.

What fascinates me, however, and keeps me coming back, is the deep-seated voyeurism implicit in this kind of anonymous design. The posts that make me care the most about the toxic appeal of Bored at Baker are those that target specific students on this campus, everyday people who for some reason or another (or perhaps for no reason at all) have drawn an inordinate amount of attention to themselves and to their private lives. The guise of anonymity lends people a power they have never had before—to spew every opinion (hateful or otherwise) that they’ve ever had in a public domain. On Bored at Baker, they feel their voices can be heard without the consequences of culpability. What is it about our culture that fosters this sense of privilege to speak about people we hardly know, or literally had never heard of until we just Facebook-stalked them?

Our generation, unlike any other, is bombarded by celebrity gossip, reality television, and networking websites like Twitter and Facebook, which all further this trend of voyeurism; they quickly made it normal to feel as if we know people we have never met and who will never know that we are observing them. We idolize watchability above all else and especially those who seem the most unaware of being watched, the least self-conscious. We feel the need to comment on other people’s lives, to voice opinions and then gobble them up so that we can feel we’ve learned something about them—gained some access to them that they do not want us to have.

Now, I’d venture to guess that most Dartmouth students are all familiar with the concept of “campus celebs.” The term is basically a catch-all for anyone who makes themselves known in a public way, usually through some student organization or another, yet is completely unaware (or at least pretending to be unaware) that most people know who they are. Yet because Dartmouth is so small, everyone is bound to have multiple friends in common with these people, to have picked up certain tidbits of gossip about their lives and feel some secret access to their most intimate experiences. We even apply this celebrity image to ourselves, carefully crafting Facebook profiles to create these ultra-publicized personae that are all image and no substance. We become selfless, public figures that interact in a public and digital realm;we move from obsessing about being watched by others to watching ourselves and keeping track of all our friendships by such arbitrary measures as wallposts and mutual friends. We feel that our own personal thoughts are but distant third-party commentary on the goings-on of our superficial social connections, that there is some anonymous critical voice that transcends even ourselves in this hamster cage of staged social interactions.

Our lives are a TV show and B@B is the anonymous narrator. We feel we know the people in our little world, because we have some sense of their characters. They are our Barbie dolls, our celebrities. We can weave whatever scandalous stories we want out of their lives because all they are to us is a collection of Facebook drunk-at-a-party pictures—figureheads whose private selves are irrelevant to how we know them. We in turn give up our own private selves and join the TV show; we forget who we’d be if no one (including us) were watching. It’s only to be expected if you take into account the evolution of popular media itself, which went from scripted sitcoms with cookie-cutter characters perfectly fulfilling structured social norms (fantasy worlds we could imagine ourselves into); to reality television (“mirrors” of the real world we do live in, distorted and glamorized though it may be); to Facebook (a public display of our actual selves). We have become the celebrity, the fantasy, the show. The transition is complete.

Whatever form this transformation from human to celebrity takes—Bored at Baker, JuicyCampus—the implications are the same. We feel we have some right to the lives of others, some ownership of their images because they are so publicly known. Yet it is essential to remember that we are all human beings with similar insecurities and weaknesses, as obvious and repetitive as the idea may seem, and these sites are, in essence, pure garbage and nonsense. The hookups revealed on these sites themselves were probably just as shallow and impersonal as their crude public discussion, if they even happened at all. This kind of rampant anonymous hatred can be poisonous. It can make people feel unsafe in their own school, a supposed home away from home. But more disturbing is the underlying reason for this phenomenon of public commentary on the private lives of regular people. It is part of a larger trend that is ultimately more terrifying than any one violent or racist post could ever be.

So how long has it been since Dartmouth first began to admit women to the student body? With the first full-time female students in 1972, we’re nearing four decades of coeducation. But despite Dartmouth going co-ed well before the first memories of current students, many of the persistent themes on our campus would seem to suggest coeducation arrived to our snowy New Hampshire grounds much later. Gender inequality, sexual assault, campus spaces and fraternity dominance—these issues continue to haunt our discourse and maintain a lingering presence regardless of how many panels and task forces we create to investigate them.

While sex-based discrimination and inequality certainly isn’t exclusive to Dartmouth, our campus seems to move at a painstakingly slow pace compared to the outside world and other colleges. As a transfer student from UC Berkeley, I felt the difference the moment I stepped onto campus. Beneath the friendliness of each student, the excitement of DOC trips, and the breathtaking wonder of the Green and our historical buildings, there was something else. It was an undercurrent of proud athleticism, rugged outdoorsmanship… and…what was it? Privilege. I could almost taste it in my mouth through the cool autumn air.
Not privilege as material wealth, or class division—though I would find it in abundance later—but instead a lofty inaccessibility. Not elitism, but elite. It was evident in the physical structure of the campus. I was used to precise, ADA-compliant angled ramps abundantly positioned throughout campus and handicap signs dotting campus. Cultural relics in Berkeley challenged authority on the faded face of Bob Marley. Here, I was greeted with wide fields and majestic entrances and steps, daunting and proud. When I arrived, Berry Library’s Orozco murals stood out to me as a half-amused study of a primitive “other.”

But besides these physical hallmarks, these differences created a certain feeling that gnawed at me, like a word on the tip of my tongue that I couldn’t quite name and still can’t to this day. It is a feeling that there is a “correct order,” one distinctly Dartmouth and not the of the powerful institutions that create class, race, and gender divisions in society. In the case of gender, this “correct order” wasn’t something as obvious as meeting housewives-to-be or even seeing women as more “subdued.” But when I thought about gender and gender discrimination here at Dartmouth, there was something that made me think of polo shirts, golf sweaters, neat haircuts, and smiling rows of white men.

In my time here, I’ve met others who have shared that feeling. One said that she felt it was the male-centrism still present in the administration and alumni. Another has said that she actually thought the women were more subordinate here to the men. In her opinion, the fraternity environment forced women to become subservient, even if they didn’t start out that way. I don’t know if I can really echo those claims in my own experience, but I do know that I am not entirely alone in my sentiments.

After all of this, readers of this editorial may think that my reaction was obviously revulsion, that I made a horrible mistaking coming here. Some readers who agree with me are probably nodding in emphatic acknowledgement, thinking about their own experiences. Those who disagree might be thinking that this “Berkeley liberal” must have had some sort of culture shock after coming into a “normal” environment.
Well, I have a guilty confession to make—I didn’t greet this feeling with anger, revulsion, or even distaste when I first began walking across the Green. I welcomed it.

I didn’t hate Berkeley and I left many friends when I transferred across the country to Dartmouth. However, I hated the rat race that had overtaken it by the time I was there. Whether it was always there, I can’t say, but when I was there, it wasn’t a place of grand rebellion or anti-establishment sentiment—and that wasn’t my thing anyway.

What it was though was a place where introductory classes tried to “weed” students out of the department’s majors. It was a place where those interested in economics and business engaged in climbing over one another to gain a place in these coveted majors. Those progressive values that were normally associated with Berkeley were well in the background, whispering, if not simply rasping, almost imperceptibly. Instead there were endless meetings and hundreds of business clubs, with some students more often in suits than casual clothes, and not for interviews. The competition, anxious bustle, and above all, insecurity that radiated from the organizations and its students left a sour taste in my mouth.

So when I arrived here, this proud Sparta of colleges, Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged-utopia, I savored its proud, traditional smugness as I breathed deep the New Hampshire chill. I celebrated the change, I admit, even though I have personal reason to passionately hate the subordination of those in a weaker position, especially women.

Slowly, through seeing Dartmouth’s deeply entrenched institutions, especially the sports and fraternity power centers, I have been repulsed by this Dartmouth facet. I have become more and more convinced that there is something wrong, even if I can only approximate causes and its symptoms because the true reasons inscribed in the social interactions are often invisible and difficult to grasp.

There are many reasons to be proud of being a son or daughter (or other) of Dartmouth, and I have not regretted my decision to come here. But others, ghosts of our past, deserve to be firmly put to rest. I myself know the allure of some of the mythos and have heard much more now about the darker side of Dartmouth from those who have been hurt by it most.

For our own sake—and Dartmouth’s—we need to bring out the best in our college, and ruthlessly stamp out the worst. It is why we had to bring back Untamed, one of the strongest feminist voices on campus, and why we still must strive to cover these issues. And we will continue to do so, not as detractors or bomb-throwers against this place that has become our sanctuary and our home, but as those who love it and hate the weeds that choke and diminish it.

HELP, run out of the Thayer School of Engineering, work to try to help people with their innovative solutions.

Amidst the legions of student groups on campus, there are few who truly stand out for their devotion to philanthropic issues. Humanitarian Engineering Leadership Project—HELP, for short—is a group comprised of both engineers and non-engineers striving to bring widespread electricity, clean water, and reliable sanitation systems in various African nations.

The organization is entirely student-led out of Dartmouth’s Thayer School of Engineering. Although it is led by the graduate school, there are about 30 core undergraduate members. HELP aims to partner non-governmental organizations with interested students and find applicable and practical solutions to their projects.

Currently, HELP is working on two ongoing projects: the Tanzania Global Health Initiative and the Rwanda Micro-Hydro Project.

They also recently completed three projects: the Rwanda Biogas Project, the Kipingi Water Project, and the Nyamilu Clean Water Project. The Tanzania Global Health Initiative, in collaboration with the John Sloan Dickey Foundation at Dartmouth, is researching to find better ways of producing clean water and sanitation systems in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania’s capital.

The Rwanda Micro-Hydro Project designed their first hydro-electric system during the summer of 2008, aiming to create an inexpensive and sustainable solution to the lack of electricity in many Rwandan areas. Turbines propelled by running water are connected to battery sources that manufacture energy. While overall a simple concept, its implementation requires months of research and testing before taking the plane ride over to Rwanda for trials.

The Rwanda Biogas Project,in collaboration with Comprehensive Community Health Initiatives and Programs gives Rwandans gas for cooking, reduces the environmental damage of constant wood burning, and better sanitizes animal waste.

In Kipingi, Kenya the dry seasons leave many citizens without adequate sources of water. HELP is trying to solve this by planting a powered water pump and a large holding tank. The Nyamilu Clean Water Project, originally formed by Dartmouth Engineers Without Borders, built a solar-powered water pump and a temporary holding tank in yet another part of Africa in dire need of a reliable source of clean water.

Recognizing their immense humanitarian efforts, the Justmeans organization recently awarded HELP $200,000 to further their research and projects. With increased visibility on campus, HELP has seen greater turnout this year. “Although HELP consists primarily of engineers, implementing a project reaches beyond purely engineering solutions… HELP relies on students from multiple disciplines in order to approach every project from an environmental, anthropological, and economic perspective,” says Annie Saunders, an executive member of HELP.

With a promising future ahead, this seven-year-old student group is filled with students eager to dedicate themselves to complex causes with no easy answers but extremely rewarding results.

It all started with Count Dracula, a supernatural sharp-fanged, blood-sucking, humanoid predator, who simultaneously frightened and titillated the masses.

Although neither Vlad the Impaler, nor the original Count Dracula from early films was terribly appealing, over time vampires have certainly undergone an intense transformation. Long gone is the bald, corpse-like and sexually impotent Count Dracula of film, and in his place stands a host of virile young hotties, sure to cause many a romantic and sexual fantasy. Personally I’ve never really had much of an interest in vampires. I can’t seem to get over the dead thing, even if it’s moving while it’s dead, it’s still necrophilia. Give me a hot blooded, brawny, beast of a man and you’ve got me hooked. Regardless of what side of the vampire versus werewolf divide you are on, I think we can all agree that the current obsession in the young adult fiction market with the supernatural character of the vampire has gotten out of control. I am not against new ideas, but glittering vampires? Seriously, I don’t think I am the only vampire fan confused by the new sexually repressed, glittering vampire of today.

The vampire is an explicitly sexual creature that has been haunting the female psyche for generations. Who hasn’t had a steamy sexual fantasy involving a good ‘ole tumble with a bit of supernatural beefcake? The lure of the forbidden is certainly something human beings have never been able to resist. However, I think of all of the odd sex-related things I have seen in my short lifespan, the new so-called Twilight dildo is by far the least appealing. Even the lure of the forbidden isn’t enough to tempt me to get a taste of frost-bitten crotch. Frost-bitten crotch, how might you ask does one get frostbite in such an odd area? Well if you happen to be one of the legions of the vampire-obsessed who really has a thing for the living dead, perhaps the slightly shimmery alabaster dildo named the Vamp that is being produced by Tantus is just the thing for you. Although it may look like your ordinary dildo, being very phallic in shape, according to Tantus you can just “Toss it in the fridge for that authentic experience.” Did I neglect to mention that it sparkles? If the authentic experience of a vampire’s cold, dead penis was not enough, perhaps that little bit of sparkle is a bonus feature that will have you wet and wanting more. Mmhmm ice in my snatch.

So, was Richard Nixon a hero of the queer movement? This, and associated topics, was the subject matter of this year’s annual Stonewall lecture delivered by Professor John D’Emilio of the University of Illinois at Chicago, at Dartmouth on Thursday, October 29th.

In his speech, “Queering the Past or: Richard Nixon: Gay Liberationist?” D’Emilio suggests that forces beyond gay and lesbian groups helped to end Chicago police raids on gay bars.

D’Emilio began with an overview of the current literature on LGBT history. The LGBT movement has been described as being primarily grassroots in recent history. As D’Emilio said, most stories in the literature are about “gays and lesbians… taking control of their own destinies” and working against the theme of silence associated with homosexuality, which largely fosters invisibility and isolation. Essentially, D’Emilio states that LGBT history constitutes stories of resistance, initiated and conducted by gay and lesbian people.

He points specifically to homophile groups in the 1950’s who sought to improve life for gay and lesbian Americans. While these homophile groups focused more on cultural privacy rather than visibility, they did help to break the silence about homosexuality.

The two major homophile groups, The Mattachine Society and the Daughters of Bilitis, began publishing magazines, holding demonstrations, and creating slogans such as “Gay is Good” and “Gay Power.” There was some visibility, but it was limited. However, these were not the only groups working towards early gay and lesbian rights. D’Emilio also describes a large social network among butch lesbians in Buffalo, NY during World War II. These women wanted to dance in bars with other women or hold their girlfriend’s hand in public, and were very aware of their oppressive lifestyle.

These stories, in addition to the Stonewall Riots, helped to write this history of resistance. But D’Emilio takes issue with retelling all of the stories to fit this history.

Most historians look to Chicago to explain trends in major cities. LGBT historians, however, have largely ignored Chicago in favor of studying San Francisco or New York. D’Emilio, having lived in Chicago, discovered evidence of an LGBT community in the 70’s, but also a different kind of history.

D’Emilio explains, “The 50’s and 60’s were the worst time for gays and lesbians.” During this time, McCarthyism targeted not only potential communists and Hollywood-types, but also the supposed “sexual deviants,” i.e. homosexuals. The Chicago Tribune, a somewhat conservative publication, referred to gay and lesbian Americans as “nests of perverts” and “moral degenerates.” In the city, women could not wear pants with the zipper in front without risking some penalty for dressing as men and gay men were arrested for cruising for sex.

But the worst of these grim times, and what D’Emilio focused on, was the gay bar raids. Gay bars were meant to be a safe haven at a time when it was dangerous to be out of the closet. When gay bars were raided and forced to close, gays and lesbians found it more difficult to meet gay and lesbian friends and sexual partners.

D’Emilio would like to say that pressure from gay and lesbian groups helped to end the raids and constant harassment on gay bars in the early 70’s. However, upon further analysis, he could not find compelling evidence for this view. Instead, it was a change in government—specifically, the election of the Nixon administration—that solved the problem.

To understand how this occurred, one must understand that Mayor Richard Daley ran Chicago at the time. Daley, a Democrat, established a corrupt political machine where other Democrats (police chiefs and city attorneys, for example) bribed Daley to obtain certain political positions. Because they were a part of the corruption, they saw no reason to end it.

When Richard Nixon, a Republican, was elected in 1968, he appointed Jim Thompson as U.S. Attorney to investigate corruption in Chicago. The Justice Department inevitably found evidence of police corruption; for six weeks, there was continuous news about the investigation of Chicago police officers. Over 30 police officers were eventually found guilty of using their power to illicitly raid bars.

When the bar raids and harassment stopped in the early 70’s, change occurred quickly. Out gay entrepreneurs opened their businesses with at least partial success. D’Emilio explains that knowing this story, we should be cognizant of a new kind of a history, what he calls “top-down history.” While I mostly agree with D’Emilio, I find problems with his approach and some of his speech’s implications.

Firstly, D’Emilio finds only one instance of top-down history in earlier LGBT history. He says that we must be aware that these kind of stories happened too, and he does a fair job of elucidating this kind of history.

However, it seems almost too random. D’Emilio admits that the title of the lecture, in which he calls Nixon a potential “gay liberationist” was in jest. Nixon, like his Democratic opponent, did not support gay and lesbian rights. Ending corrupt police raids of gay bars was simply a bi-product of larger political strategy.
While this top-down history might have taken place, it does not mean it is worth noting. If we are to learn from history, then this suggests that gay and lesbians are powerless to a larger political system.

But this is not true. Gays and lesbians had to get people thinking about homosexuality by breaking the silence. Had they not, gay bars wouldn’t have formed in the first place. If we took D’Emilio’s account as a typical scenario, this would suggest that gays and lesbians must simply passively wait for political opportunity instead of acting independently; protests and grassroots activism are worthless.

D’Emilio claims that this is the opposite of what he wants to happen. Top-down and bottom-up histories should both be seen equally and gays and lesbians should feel as if they have power as part of a larger political context. However, I think isolating this random occurrence helps no one. When it comes to obtaining fair and equal law (i.e. achieving marriage equality, eliminating Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell), a random political occurrence will not help the LGBT community.

Someone or some group will have to spearhead a movement to change the current discriminatory laws and most politicians require pressure from LGBT groups to make change.

Top-down history might have been true for this one instance, but I don’t see it becoming the main history of the LGBT movement. If LGBT people are to ever achieve equality, it will be a story of resistance and not one of random fortuitous events miraculously handing us equal rights on a silver platter.

Baker-Berry, proud home of several many potential candidates for the Dartmouth 8. Photograph by Candais Crivello.

The reason why Dartmouth is better than any other Ivy League school is the fact that you can have sex on it’s mascot. The green may be a risky place to bump uglies, but then again, that is precisely the reason why it has earned a spot on the Dartmouth Seven.

In case you have no life, the Dartmouth seven is a list of places where you have to have sex before you graduate. Some may think (and by some I mean I) this list harkens back to the seven deadly sins, or sailing the seven seas, or the lucky number seven, and for that reason they may be attached to that number.

But please, allow me to retort. After all, its sinking the 8-ball that wins you the game, 8 is the Chinese lucky number, are 8 planets in the solar system (fuck you, Pluto). In fact, the Dartmouth “7” is actually not completely agreed upon in some of the worse educated echelons of Dartmouth society, and frequently a stray 8th will slip in there (usually golf course). For the record, the agreed upon Dartmouth 7 as of now consists of:

President’s Lawn
The Green
Bema
Stacks
Steps of Dartmouth Hall
Top of the Hop
Football Field

This pivotal decision is obviously not up to the DFP. The Dartmouth 8 should be for the people, by the people. In a recent interview with Dartmouth community members, I asked what location they would add to the Dartmouth seven.

These were their responses:

Inside an SNS truck – FoCo Grill guy

The Climbing Gym – unknown

In the pool – Alyson Picket ‘11 “bathing suits allowed, water jets not included”

The Tower Room x4 – Jacob Batchelor ’12 “Make sure she’s not a screamer”

Golf course – Riley Kane ‘12 [get a hole in one]

The pendulum in Fairchild – Santiago Romero’11 (for that slow, gentle sex)

First Floor Berry – unknown

Graveyard – unknown (so totally blasphemous)

Foco x3 – Mandy brasher ’12 (mmm…)

Dick’s House – unknown {as long as you’re both sick…}

On the swing of the metal beam sculpture behind the Hood Museum – Nathaniel Seymour ’12 (so postmodern)

Novack x2 – Chistopher Valleu ‘12 (extra point during finals)

The pond when its frozen over – my personal fave

On a pong table x2 – unknown (extra points if it doesn’t flip over)

Dr. Seuss room – Anonymous (where the fuck is that?)

We think a lot of these places blow the Bema and the Steps of Dartmouth Hall away. If you agree, send us your opinion (blitz “DFP”) and we will tally your votes for the next issue.

Homecoming. It’s a special time. Teary-eyed alumni are coming back to their old alma mater. Frat boys are even more drunk than usual. And freshmen are about to run many circles around a tower of flaming deadwood. Ah, traditions at Dartmouth.

Putting aside for now the rich commentary we could have on all of these festivities, we’ll be bringing you coverage of issues that you won’t find anytime soon in other campus publications or even many national publications. Next issue, we will debut the return of Untamed, the feminist publication at Dartmouth, as a section of the DFP. Our coverage of feminist issues will increase with this addition, and also help give more focus for our articles on feminism and society. It’s a trend that we’ve been following. Even this issue, we covered the recent talk by one of the most prominent feminist legal theorists alive, Catharine MacKinnon.

Now is a special time for many movements. The Franken Amendment is finally casting light on a part of the war effort that has been hidden for far too long. The National Equality March, even if mostly ineffectual, demonstrates the growing political significance
of the LGBT community in the American social landscape.

This is an exciting time, and with the changes at the DFP, we will continue to work to bring you coverage of these issues. Feel free to give us feedback on how things are going and what you want to see in this paper.