THE MASTHEAD
Editor-in-Chief: James H. Wang
Publisher: Isabel S. Murray
Executive Editor: Amanda R. McNally
Managing Editor: Soo Jeong Kim

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.

Liz Canner, award-winning director of Orgasm Inc. visited Dartmouth to talk about the plot by big pharm to sell women on the idea that they need their drugs. Image courtesy of http://orgasminc.org/.

Ah yes, the weird and wonderful world of woman’s sexual health!

On Wednesday, award-winning director Liz Canner returned to Dartmouth College to present her first feature documentary, Orgasm Inc. For an artist who has already won the Visionary Award of the College, Canner has presented an insightful look into the way women feel about themselves (or feel themselves).
In the film, Canner exposes the pharmaceutical companies’ plot to create a new disease, Female Sexual Dysfunction (FSD) in order to create a brand new market for female sex enhancement drugs. Canner started this project hoping to film a piece on pleasure.

She took a job at a small pharmaceutical company editing erotic videos for drug trials. However, her interest shifted from porn to pills when she realized that the company’s efforts were just another drop in the bucket for America’s culture of excessive medication.

Shortly after Viagra was developed as a self-help sex-help for men, there was a rush to find an equivalent drug for women. Medical celebrities like Dr. Laura Berman used feminist language on Oprah and other media outlets, urging women to take hold of their withering sex lives and demand their own pill. Their intentions seem pure, but there is a catch. Said figureheads receive oodles of cash from pharmaceutical companies every time they mention the ills of FSD, and FSD is nothing more than a big pharma fairy tail.

Today, while people like Berman are still out there campaigning for a “pink Viagra,” the pharmaceutical companies are in a mad rush to find “the cure” that will generate billions of dollars. However, they are trying to “cure” a “disease” that exists only because of a mass misconception of women’s mental and sexual health.
Whatever “cure” big pharma concocts will at best, be ineffective, and at worst, endanger women’s health and possibly their lives.
Canner’s eye-opening film captures how the pharmaceutical companies are willing to cater to American sexual insecurities, take advantage of innocent women, and invent new diseases, all to earn a quick buck

Where should women look for help with their sexual problems? Not in the doctor’s office it seems. Doctors are paid for the number of patients they see and the number of prescriptions or procedures they order. Most doctors aren’t trained to sit down and slowly work with women (and men) with seemingly non-medical sexual problems. They just want to give you a pill, move on to the next patient, and maybe see you next month if that pill doesn’t work out. And doctors can’t give you a pill if big pharma hasn’t manufactured it yet. And big pharma can’t give you a pill if it hasn’t convinced the FDA that there’s a new disease to treat.
If women can’t go to the clinic for sex help where can they go? For one thing there are many non-medical experts who can help women rejuvenate their sex lives.
Psychologists are always good sources since most sexual hang-ups can be linked to things like stress or more serious problems such as abuse.

The bulk of the mental problems linked to poor sexual performance can also be traced to the media’s emphasis on perfect bodies, happily-ever-after hook-ups and wild, rip-roaring sex. If a random sampling of woman and teen magazines is any indication, society has unrealistic expectations for sex and the women who engage in sex. Women put down the glossy pages thinking they’re abnormal if they can’t orgasm on command, for God’s sake!

Those who believe they can’t compete with whoever is on the cover of Vogue will feel bad about themselves and their sexual ability. And those who feel bad enough will be willing to endanger their lives with whatever new designer drug is on the market.

Orgasm, Inc. is a great documentary if you want to know why women shouldn’t need a pill to have an orgasm. Instead of financing pharmaceuticals, money should be funneled into programs to help women learn to love themselves and learn about what turns them on. Such an approach would be a great alternative to a flawed sex education system that, for the most part, only preaches abstinence until marriage and leaves it at that.

Systematic ignorance has allowed women to be exploited for long enough. Society shrouds female sexuality in mystery and taboo but a pill is not going to help women understand themselves any better. If there’s one thing Canner focused on, it is that women must be allowed to understand themselves if they are ever going to have better sex and reach that coveted orgasm.

The Tabard, a Co-ed house located in the Montmartre district of Frat Row, hosts Lingerie every Wednesday before big weekends—Homecoming in the fall, Winter Carnival in the winter, and Green Key in the spring. The show sets the tone for the next three days of indulgence. But Lingerie isn’t just another glorified dance party. It has a purpose. “Lingerie is a celebration of the body. The goal is that everyone leaves the stage feeling beautiful,” says three-time lingerie host George Neptune ’10. Neptune feels that many don’t perform in Lingerie because they fear the audience won’t appreciate their nearly nude form. But heckling is, “not allowed at Tabard.” Indeed, one of the most fascinating aspects of Lingerie is the audience’s observation of protocol. No one is allowed to take pictures, except the official Tabard photographer, and for the most part nobody does. Well, at least they don’t surface on Facebook, which Neptune feels very strongly about “because we’re all friends with our Moms.”

Who even goes to Lingerie? Prospies? Jim Kim and family? The Sun God? Probably. No one can say for sure who’s in the audience, but it doesn’t really matter because they’re all part of the community. As soon as the audience members enter the Tabard’s cavernous theater, they sign an unspoken yet irrevocable contract to support each performer. Abby McCann ’11, who has performed three times in Lingerie, said “It’s interesting. Half of them are there because they don’t know what it is, and their jaws drop, and the other half are people you know. But by the end of the show, it’s much more of a homogeneous crowd. Everyone’s into it, everyone’s totally hooked.” The audience assumes this attitude independently, but it is Neptune’s job as host to get the energy up to the level the performers need to feel comfortable letting loose and enjoying themselves on the catwalk. His approach? “The first few minutes of the show are about me trying to figure out what the audience is about. You almost have to mold their response and find something that evokes a response. This term I found that they responded when I made dirty jokes about them.” The audience is an integral part of Lingerie, because without its energy the performers would wilt. In this sense, Lingerie is theater in its truest form. Christian Brandt ’12, who has performed in Lingerie twice bluntly said, “If there wasn’t an audience, there wouldn’t be any point.” McCann agreed, “When you’re onstage you’re relying on everyone in the audience to support you and not judge you, and if you’re in the audience, you’re completely connected to the performers.”

Dartmouth is a self-obsessed campus where “facetime” can feel like a fourth class. This might be the only place in the world where rainbow hair is a status symbol. Yet, we still blush when we hear that people actually get NAKED at Lingerie. Brandt attributes our embarrassment to an American phobia of nudity, which is more pronounced than in Western Europe. Brandt’s frustration with this taboo influenced his decision to go full frontal at this term’s Lingerie show. He also felt the need to spice up what he perceived to be a somewhat bland show: “The rest of the acts were more or less the same. What sets you apart is choreography and actual nudity. People have such an ‘issue’ with nudity that they don’t think people are actually gonna get naked, especially penis! Because there’s more of a taboo against genital nudity.” Continued Brandt, “I could have stripped naked in the basement of Tri-Kap, but nobody would have appreciated it.” For many, Lingerie is a release. It is their single chance to go buck wild in public and still be accepted at Dartmouth. Neptune echoed Brandt’s sentiment; saying, “if you’re going to make facetime, might as well make some asstime too!” It’s fantastic that Lingerie can provide individuals with such a confidence boost, but is making asstime at Lingerie the only opportunity we have to express ourselves fully in the Dartmouth social scene?”

McCann recounted her first experience performing in Lingerie: “[It was] terrifying, I was wearing these booty shorts and we had to bend over, and I was so worried that I was going to show everything to the whole world. But then I just got up there and I totally lost all my inhibitions. That’s what Lingerie is all about. The audience is screaming and the lights are all on you. And you feel totally safe even though you’re putting your body out there.” McCann feels that, particularly as a woman, to feel sexy and safe in a social space at Dartmouth is extremely rare. She attributes this contrast to the fact that Tabard is a Co-ed: “Especially as a woman, if Tabard were a fraternity, I would feel like I were performing for men, like in a real strip club. The fact that Tabard is a co-ed also encourages everyone to get up there and perform—same sex couples, same sex groups. I think also it would be hard for a fraternity not to advertise it as kind of a skeevy thing.”

Perhaps the embarrassment with which some students regard Lingerie stems not only from American cultural taboos but also from Dartmouth’s frat culture, which thrives on segregation of the sexes, unquestioned ritual and secrecy. Brandt remarked on the hypocrisy of Dartmouth students criticizing nudity in the Lingerie show, saying “People don’t seem to have any conception of how inappropriate or appropriate sex is in frat basements. People gratuitously make out in a basement, but then go to Lingerie and are like, ‘That’s gross!’” There is a lot of shame inherent in a society that appreciates sex and the human anatomy only in certain basement corners, only on certain weekends, and only after a certain amount of alcohol. Maybe if we appreciated each other’s bodies every day the way we do during Lingerie, campus date rape statistics would go down. Maybe we’d be one step closer to doing away with our Greek system.”

Performing in Lingerie is like flying. Underneath the blinding lights it’s just you, your snakeskin banana hammock, your whip, and your co-performer. You might remember your “routine” or you might just let the music and the cheering shape your movement for the next two and a half minutes. This is what it must feel like to be Jesus. The only mistake you can make is to believe that you can actually defy gravity on that creaky wooden box runway. It’s really narrow. Especially in four-inch wedges. But even if you fall, like I have, you’ll still feel sexier than you ever have before. And you know what else you’re not worrying about? Your muffin top. And that’s a beautiful thing. Lingerie is also one of the few activities at Dartmouth in which you can participate without having to go through a rigorous and ultimately demoralizing audition process. As a performer, it reminds you that you are beautiful and beloved by your community. And as an audience member, it reminds you of the fierce love that holds Dartmouth together, underneath the hard guy façade.

“It’s not about you,” said McCann. “It’s about what we’re doing together. It’s not about ego—it’s about glorification of the body.” So, ‘13s, don’t knock it ‘til you’ve tried it. Check out Lingerie next term. But a word of caution, you may soon end up on that stage yourselves. Butt. Ass. Naked.

But before you jump to the conclusion about that all those disgusting things are “men’s” concoctions, think again—most of the authors who pen these novels are female. Apparently, women need to prove to publishers that they’re “up to snuff,” literally—a serious consideration for authorship in these publishing houses, since sex, or at least violent rape against women, sells.

Society’s obsession with violence against women is hardly a new development. One website, Women in Refrigerators (http://www.unheardtaunts.com/wir/index.html), catalogues all of the female characters in comic books that “have been either depowered, raped, or cut up and stuck in the refrigerator.” As a society, we’ve been enjoying the humiliation, rape, and slaughter of women for decades. Staid Victorian novels, for all their sexual repression and sanitization, seemed to have no problems with depicting violent murder of women, for instance the murder of Nancy in Oliver Twist.

As popular media has become more liberalized, the amount of violence depicted against women has kept pace with other previously taboo topics. In fact, it has probably surpassed those other topics (such as “generic” sex and violence), which is not surprising considering that it started out with a much firmer base in canonical literature and culture.

What crime mini-series is complete without beaten, raped, or otherwise brutalized or killed women in at least a few episodes per season? (Good trivia question to ask: “What’s the one thing all of the many variants of CSI have in common?”)

In fact, few popular TV shows or movies eschew adding “suspense” in the form of threatened (and usually somehow actualized) violence against one or more women. There is a wide range, but it has been an increasing trend. After all, even Battlestar Galactica, a show that I rather like and respect, includes two fairly graphic cases of rape and abuse of women. Admittedly, these women are “cylons,” but when they look like women, act like women, and scream like women, it makes little functional difference in the portrayal.

Perhaps violence against women is an appeal towards the primal male’s “protective instinct.” But how can we label it “protective instinct” and not male “sadistic tendencies” which form the thriving market for torture porn?

But perhaps “protective instinct” makes a bit more sense than the idea of crime novels being “female wish-fulfillment,” which one publishing director stated in the same Observer article. Her statement isn’t quite as bad as it sounds. It is referring to the enjoyment from being frightened and fulfilling that “wish,” but it’s a rather questionable assertion to say that women enjoy reading about other women being dismembered and disposed of. Visceral fright is one thing. Graphic depiction of violence against women is most likely going above and beyond to achieve that goal, if it does at all.

Violence against women is an age-old concept by this point. This variant of violence against women in media is only slightly more recent. Attempting to eradicate it will undoubtedly take colossal effort and require far-reaching societal changes. With those considerations comes the inevitable question of whether we should do something about violence against women in media at all. After all, in previous social crusades, liberals and conservatives have been one nation united under pornography, protecting it under the auspices of either the First Amendment or private enterprise. Obviously, there is some worth that society puts on seeing chainsawed women. As a publisher once told Mann: “Dead brutalized women sell books, dead men don’t. Nor do dead children or geriatrics.”

But perhaps there is something wrong with putting worth, either social or economic, on the depiction of dismembered and disposed women or the process of putting them in that state. Maybe there is something deeper in our society that is wrong when it becomes a key, indispensable ingredient in best-selling novels and top-grossing shows and movies—a key feature that forces producers and publishers to continue to push the boundaries as their audience becomes increasingly desensitized to the bloody messages.

Voltaire’s assertion that, “I will disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to death your right to say it,” is fine when you aren’t in the group that is being socialized as the victim. When the line has been crossed from political and social discourse to an escalating fetishization of the brutalization, rape, and death of women, it may be time to consider putting aside some of our free speech concerns and take a hard look at the society being built on the tortured flesh, blood, and bones of murdered women in modern media.

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.

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.

Did you have any prior experience nude modeling before you came to Dartmouth?
Yeah, I actually modeled in my high school. We couldn’t get completely nude because it was a high school so that was not allowed—you’d wear a form-fitting garment. So I was pretty familiar with it, plus I had worked with models before—I went to this summer program at the Rhode Island School of Design because I was originally thinking about going to art school. I’ve always been really fascinated by models. I found the job on JobNet actually because I’m on financial aid so I was trying to find a work-study job. I sent a bunch of emails and at first everybody was like, “Nah, we’re full”, so I kept sending emails and then finally there was an opening. I’ve done this since freshman fall actually.

Were you initially nervous about modeling?
I was nervous about it the first time partially just because I wasn’t sure what the models thought, because they’re standing there for like two hours. So I had no idea. What do you think about? What do you do? Where do you look? How do you figure out what the next pose is? It seemed like the models I had worked with previously would keep the time in their heads. So I actually had to start figuring that stuff out for myself. That was the hardest part, trying to figure that out. Plus obviously questions like, “Am I going to get cold?” [and] stuff like that.

Is it difficult to hold poses?
It’s really, really hard. It’s hard to know whether you’re going to be able to hold something immediately—you’re not going to know after the first few seconds, and you’re not going to know after the first five minutes, you’re pretty much going to start to know five minutes before you’re supposed to [come out of the pose], and then you’re just going to be like, “[O]h no, I really want to break out of this pose.” Sadly, I like to count or sing a song in my head. Sometimes if I’m really having trouble holding a pose I’ll let my eyes move as a substitute for letting my body move, because usually I’ll fix my eyes in one spot so I don’t move my head. I’ll try to move as little as I can, but I’ll try to move things that aren’t a big issue for the pose, so, I’ll compromise. Sometimes it’s really, really painful and I have to break the pose. One time I actually stepped off a platform because I was getting really dizzy. And that can be a really vulnerable moment. [Nudity] is not a problem when you’re doing your job but suddenly if you fall over—which I did once, I fell off a platform—it’s like, you’re naked, and now people don’t necessarily feel as comfortably helping you. They can’t come over and be like, “Hey, you’re dizzy, can I bring you some water, can I lift you up?” because they don’t feel comfortable touching you.

How does the art department at Dartmouth differ from the Rhode Island School of Design in terms of nude models?
I think in terms some of the practices I’ve seen within the department, I guess it is kind of—I wouldn’t say puritanical—but more conservative. In Rhode Island, we would work with multiple models but I think that’s a price issue.

Do you think Dartmouth kids have a more conservative attitude towards nakedness?
In terms of nudity on campus, I think the attitude among the student body is that nakedness is a joke. There are people flashing and streaking, and I feel like [nakedness] used as a joke underscores the fact that it’s taboo. Because I do lingerie at Tabard and stuff, I feel like the consensus around campus isn’t “Don’t be naked” but “Only be naked if you have the perfect body”. And that’s not what people impose on each other—I feel it’s what people are imposing on themselves. I’ve heard so many people be like, “Will the modeling department take me, I don’t know if I’m that attractive?” But actually, the art department wants people whose bodies are interesting to draw, and so that means sometimes having people that have a ton of wrinkles or a lot of body hair, or something that wouldn’t be considered conventionally attractive. You can sit anyone down and say, “Draw the ideal of beauty” and people don’t need a visual reference anymore, they can just actually draw it. But when you sit them down and say, “draw a ninety-year-old woman naked who’s given birth four times”, they have no idea. That’s part of the reason why I think the art department strives for a range of bodies in terms of every demographic: young, old, fat, skinny, etc. That’s what you’re trying to break the students out of— that ideal. But I feel like people on this campus think, “If I don’t look a certain way, maybe I shouldn’t take my clothes off.”

Do you think this attitude toward nudity is unique to Dartmouth or rather something widespread across our generation?
I think it’s a larger issue as a whole, but I mean, I feel like at Dartmouth there’s more pressure because you’re among people your own age. Sometimes people skimp on expressing themselves in high school because they feel when they get to college they will become the people they’ve always wanted to be. But people are so concerned with status. It becomes this big thing that fucks them up.

Do you have any advice to someone who has never modeled before but is interested?
I would say don’t do it because you’re interested in being naked in front of other people, because there are so many opportunities to be naked with other people that don’t require a having a job. If you want to express yourself and show off your body, do it immediately. Don’t wait for someone to hire you in the art department. Part of the issue is that there is this taboo against nudity—people are trying to find a way to sanction it. “I just want to get naked” is not an acceptable reason.

As a model, I’m just as comfortable working in clothes—a lot of the poses I take aren’t “Tyra-Banks-smiling-with-your-eyes” poses. I’ll be down on all fours or something because the point is to show people something that they don’t see, something that they don’t have access to. Also, being persistent is the biggest thing because I was really persistent, but if you want to be a model because you want to start learning your own body, you could set it up yourself. Be in lingerie. I guess you probably can’t be naked all the time because there’s public nudity shit, but there’s always people running around basements naked. Be that person [and] join them. Have a big naked crusade.

In 2007, 40 percent of North Korea’s known budget was spent on his family’s deification. One of the most sacred places in Pyongyang (the capital of North Korea) is a 60-foot bronze statue of the Eternal President, Kim Il-Sung, beneath which all visitors are expected to lay flowers. Unlike the Party in 1984, the DPKR likes to keep up the facade of democracy. The Korean Worker’s Party (KWP) has been in power since 1949 through single candidate “elections.” The party elite and those loyal to the KWP are in fact the only people allowed to live in Pyongyang, North Korea’s largest city. So-called “Pleasure Brigades,” made up of women ages 13 to 40, are forced to provide high-ranking party officials with dances, massages, and sexual services.

The societies of many dystopian works of fiction are entirely isolated from the outside world, which is believed to be inhospitable and dangerous. In the 1976 cult classic movie, Logan’s Run, a physical barrier in the form of an enormous bubble encapsulates the “known world.” In North Korea this barrier is less conspicuous, but no less palpable.

The Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) runs along the North-South Korean border with armed soldiers lining both sides. Along the Chinese border, soldiers in military installations and watchtowers are always on the lookout for people coming in or out. In Ayn Rand’s 1938 novella, Anthem, a Council of Vocations chooses a person’s career regardless of personal preference.

Likewise, children of Pyongyang train intensely at whatever skill has been selected for them in preparation for the Arirang Festival, the world’ largest human performance. In North Korea, every aspect of economic life is planned, coordinated, and restricted. Not only is trade with foreigners restricted, even private markets are, on the whole, forbidden. Luckily, underground markets and informal economies have begun to emerge as a result of the dire economic conditions North Koreans faced during the 1990’s famine.

Alan Moore’s graphic novel and the recent 2006 blockbuster of the same name, V for Vendetta, modernized the dystopian genre using contemporary London as its setting. In V for Vendetta, the Norsefire government uses mass surveillance through closed-circuit television and news networks to promote its propaganda.
While they don’t go as far as monitoring your home, the North Korean state completely controls the media, which is rated the least free in the world by Freedom House, a Washington-based research institute. All news that is circulated through magazines and newspapers originates from the state-owned Korean Central News Agency. These networks advance Kim Jong-Il’s personality cult. They regularly report on his daily activities and offer daily prayers to him.
In Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, the American government of the future has outlawed books in order to eliminate critical thought. In this novel, “Firemen” have the responsibility of locating and burning any such contraband.

In today’s North Korea, owning a Bible will result in your execution. Any book that can be perceived as subversive to the North Korean government or socialist system is strictly forbidden. As in Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, North Korea holds faux religious ceremonies through its four state-run churches. Genuine religious freedom in North Korea simply does not exist.

In the 1973 science fiction film Soylent Green, food shortages spur the development of soylent green, a food substitute made from the processed remains of deceased humans. As a result of great famine of the 1990s which resulted in the deaths of an estimated 300,000 to 2 million, North Korean defectors have reported stories of people being driven to cannibalism, eating their starved children or bodies dug up from graveyards.

Jonathan Swift was being ironic when he suggested eating infants in his “Modest Proposal”, and yet neither he nor Hollywood could have predicted that modern people would have to resort to such survival methods.

Due to these grim conditions, many North Koreans attempt to flee into China. However, if they are caught, they will be repatriated and sentenced to up to 15 years in prison. In these prison camps, prisoners are beaten, tortured, starved, or executed. Defectors report that few prisoners survive their entire sentence.
John Stewart Mill could not have considered contemporary North Korea when he called his fascist-inspired dystopia was “Too bad to be practicable.” In North Korea, the elites have absolute control over the people. The poor have not been reconciled with the elite as in Fritz Lang’s Metropolis, nor has a hero been able to topple the authoritarian regime like in Logan’s Run or V for Vendetta.

And yet, there are signs of hope. North Koreans have established black markets to trade freely amongst themselves. Some farmers are now allowed to sell a portion of their own crops at farmers’ markets. Most recently, there has been talk of educational training programs in the West for elite North Korean students.
If you would like to learn more about the human rights crisis in North Korea, see what you can do to help, or have any stories or information on North Korea you would like to share with us, please blitz “The North Korea Project” (also feel free to visit http://nkp.tumblr.com). The North Korea Project is a new student organization committed to raising awareness of human conditions in North Korea.