101420

SECOND ROUND OF CARES ACT GRANTS ANNOUNCED

OCTOBER 14, 2020 THIRD WEEK VOL. 133, ISSUE 4

PAGE 4

adrián mandeville

Graduated Income Tax Goes to Voters PAGE 4

Athletes Drive Voter Turnout oren oppenheim

PAGE 12

Fall 2020–21 Student Government Election Results

By MATTHEW LEE News Editor Winners of the fall 2020–21 student government election were announced on Monday evening. In each class, the four candidates who received the most votes from their peers were selected for Student

ARTS: Off-Off Campus Has the Best Breakout Room on Campus PAGE 11

Council in an election that ran from Friday evening to Monday evening. The election’s winners are as follows.

Class of 2024: Ash Arian, with 159 votes; Connor Lee, with 166 votes; Julia Brestovitskiy, with 182 votes; and Nikki Solanki, with 192 votes.

Class of 2023: Lydia Martin, with 66

votes; Summer Long, with 99 votes; Tyler Okeke, with 137 votes; and Bianca Simons, with 138 votes.

Class of 2022: Harry Gardner, with 4 votes; John Fuentes, with 67 votes; Dinesh Das Gupta, with 84 votes; and Zebeeb Nuguse, with 90 votes.

Class of 2021: Kevin Yan, with 22 votes;

Katie DeLong, with 24 votes; Naa Ashitey, with 27 votes; and Firouz Niazi, with 27 votes.

All winners have accepted their positions, according to Student Government Chairman of the Elections and Rules Committee Max Freedman, and will serve on this year’s college council.

GREY CITY: Pair of Suits Allege Pattern of Discrimination in Facilities Services

VIEWPOINTS: What Makes a University Impartial?

VIEWPOINTS: UChicago Is Not Neutral

PAGE 6

PAGE 9

Like our Facebook page at facebook.com/chicagomaroon and follow @chicagomaroon on Instagram and Twitter to get the latest updates on campus news.

PAGE 8 chicagomaroon.com

THE CHICAGO MAROON — OCTOBER 14, 2020

2

Theoretical Physicist Robert Rosner Elected President of the American Physical Society

By MALENA SOLIN News Reporter Robert Rosner, professor of astronomy and Astrophysics and physics, was elected president of the American Physical Society (APS) in an election that ended on August 26. He will be the eighth University of Chicago scientist to serve as the president of APS when his term begins in 2023.

APS is a nonprofit organization that aims to advance physics research and promote physics education. Rosner will serve as vice president of APS in 2021 and president-elect in 2022 before beginning his term as president in 2023.

At the University of Chicago, Rosner primarily researches f luid dynamics and plasma astrophysics. He is the founding co-director of the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago and serves as the chair of the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists. He also served as the chief scientist, and later, director, of the Argonne National Laboratory, where he worked to promote cooperation between Argonne and the University.

Rosner told The Maroon that to him, the presidency is not only a high honor but also an opportunity to focus

on responding to two major concerns in the scientific community today: skepticism towards science and the underrepresentation of racial minorities and women.

In light of rising popular distrust in science with regard to COVID-19, climate change, and vaccinations, Rosner said that the role of scientists extends beyond research into the public sphere.

In his candidate statement for vice president of APS, Rosner said, “besides supporting research, we must be active in educating the public and in contributing our expertise to policy making, to be an advocate for fact-based and science-based policies.”

Rosner also criticized the racial and gender disparities in the natural sciences and suggested greater recruitment efforts to increase inclusivity in these departments at the University.

“There are a lot of minority communities that are underrepresented and in my view it reflects a deficit of our institution and of physics,” Rosner said in an interview with The Maroon.

Rosner acknowledged the challenges faced by women and students of color in predominantly white and male departments. “You come to a place and you look and your mentorsto-be and you don’t see anybody who

Robert Rosner was elected president on the APS in August courtesy of the university of chicago

looks like you. And that’s disturbing because it leads to the question, ‘Why am I here?’” Rosner said.

While Rosner emphasized the difficulty of changing institutions, he said he remains optimistic about the prospect of effecting change, noting that he and his colleagues agree on the importance of addressing diversity in the sciences. “I’ve been in touch with my colleagues at the American Physical Society and we are a like-minded bunch,” Rosner said.

Rosner also said he aims to make

physics and the insights the field can provide more accessible to the public. “I’ve always been kind of a science nerd,” Rosner said. “It’s not something that’s in opposition to other ways of thinking. It’s not in opposition to religion. That’s not what it’s about: it’s a mode of thinking about the world and I’ve always thought of it as a way by which we can figure out how things around us work.”

Joshua Wong, Hong Kong Democracy Activist, Talks at IOP

By MONICA GREIG News Reporter Joshua Wong, a Hong Kong democracy activist and 2017 Nobel Peace Prize nominee, spoke to the Institute of Politics (IOP) on Wednesday about his experience working on pro-democracy campaigns in Hong Kong. The talk was moderated by James Bennet, former editor-in-chief of The Atlantic and former editorial page editor of The New York Times.

At age 14, Joshua Wong began to advocate for Hong Kong’s democratic autonomy when the Hong Kong government planned to introduce the moral and na-

tional education (MNE) curriculum in 2012.

Wong and other activists viewed the MNE as a hijacking of education in Hong Kong by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and a breach of the “one country, two-systems” principle formulated with the United Kingdom over the return of Hong Kong. He founded Scholarism, a student activist group, in 2011, going on to emerge as a major figure in the Umbrella Movement in 2014 and then co-founded and co-led Demosistō, a political party.

Both Scholarism and Demosistō have been dissolved due to increasing risks of involvement in political activism in both

mainland China and Hong Kong.

Bennet opened the conversation by asking about Wong’s most recent arrest, which occurred just last month. He was charged for both unauthorized assembly and wearing a mask at a demonstration at a time that violated the 2019 anti-mask law despite the fact that people around the globe were encouraged to wear a mask.

Wong also said that in a worst-case scenario he could face a six-year prison charge for the assembly and one-year for wearing a mask.

When asked by a student how the current COVID-19 pandemic was affecting his movement, Wong said that he has been able

to continue his work online, through platforms such as Facebook Live and YouTube.

Wong said that even the Nintendo Switch game Animal Crossing has been used to get “protestors in [the Animal Crossing] islands to show our slogans” and as “a way to keep momentum.”

For Wong, the handling of the pandemic by the PRC has highlighted China’s lack of both transparency and checks and balances. This is reflected in the Communist Party of China behavior toward both whistleblowers and the global community, and is particularly evident in the government’s ignorance toward “the damage of the panCONTINUED ON PG. 3

THE CHICAGO MAROON — OCTOBER 14, 2020

3

Supporting Hong Kong is “a Matter of Right or Wrong” CONTINUED FROM PG. 2

demic to the rest of the world,” Wong said Despite efforts to continue activism online, Wong was frustrated with the Hong Kong authorities’ reluctance to allow activists to return to the streets despite the rapid drop in coronavirus cases in the past two months. Wong believes that “governments have used [the virus] as an excuse to stop our protests.”

When questioned about what the U.S. has done and what it should do to support the people of Hong Kong, Wong stressed that supporting Hong Kong is not “a mat-

ter of left or right but a matter of right or wrong” and that bipartisan support is crucial in the future regardless of the result of the upcoming election.

UChicago professor Johanna Ransmeier asked Wong about the belief that the movement was predominantly driven by the youth. He explained that since last summer, more than 20 percent of the population took to the streets. Wong said that in the protests from last year, the age of those arrested ranged from 11 to 84 years old, emphasizing the cross-generational importance of the movement.

Wong’s descriptions of police brutality included protesting high school students under fire of live rounds, the sexual assault of a young woman by riot police during protests, incidents of pregnant women being pushed down in metro stations, and arbitrary arrests of the elderly.

Commenting on the subject of democratic erosion around the world, Wong pleaded for all to exercise their right to vote. Wong said that despite arguable “retreats of democracy” in the U.S. and other western states, people in the U.S. and Europe still have the right to vote, while in

Hong Kong people “cannot even have the right to elect the administration.”

Wong stated that “coming out to vote shows that you care about the future of your country” even if you don’t support any candidates on the ballot. Bennet described Wong’s sacrifices for his commitment to democracy as “humbling,” particularly in a country where many take the right to vote for granted.

Wong finished with a plea to “encourage people of the world to fight against the autocratic Chinese regime.”

Climate Change, COVID-19, and Hope for Peace Headline the Third Annual Pearson Global Forum

By LUKIAN KLING News Reporter A group of notable professors, scholars and policymakers gathered virtually to discuss global conflict prevention at the third annual Pearson Global Forum. Spanning three days from October 6–8, the events showcased new research and provided commentary on global conflicts and issues. A different issue was covered each day, with the first day being dedicated to climate change, the next to warfare and pandemics, and the last to discussing weapons of mass destruction.

The Pearson Global Forum, hosted by the Pearson Institute, is an annual event that seeks to address global conflicts and issues using data and scientific research.

Climate Change Tuesday’s session focused on climate change. Alice Hill, a researcher at the Council on Foreign Relations, painted a bleak picture for humanity’s future if climate change remains unchecked. “The core system supporting global stability rests on that fundamental assumption that the climate is stable,” Hill said. “Climate change has the potential to alter virtually everything as we know it.”

Hill suggested, however, that the effects of climate change can be slowed if a concerted effort is made to counteract it. “Undertaking this task will require an overhaul in

our approach to development and diplomacy,” she said. World and organization leaders must be trained on climate change, according to Hill, and early warning systems must be improved. Emissions must also be cut drastically.

Water scarcity was another key topic.

785 million people do not have access to drinking water and 3 billion do not have basic hand-washing capabilities. In addition, according to Seth Darling, director of the Center for Molecular Engineering at the University of Chicago, “over the next 30 years, the world’s demand for water will rise 50 percent.” We are nearly “destined for conflict driven by water scarcity.”

Like Hill, Darling concluded his brief talk on an optimistic note. “No matter how dirty we make it, water can always be cleaned,” he said. The world can “mitigate conflict by investing to develop more efficient and effective ways to recycle water.”

The Pandemic The forum’s second day featured a focus on global pandemics and armed conflict.

Mark Koyama, Associate Professor of Economics at George Mason University, and Ada Palmer, Associate Professor of Early Modern European History at the University of Chicago, engaged in a discussion comparing the bubonic plague of the 14th century with COVID-19.

According to Palmer, during both the bubonic plague and COVID-19, individuals

tend to believe that a pandemic will show up, wreak havoc, and then quickly end. What societies fail to account for, however, is the way that viruses tend to stay around long after the initial outbreak. This often leads to a wave of mental health problems about five to six months later as people realize that life will not return to normal, though according to Palmer, the advanced medicine of today allows us to be in a position where “we’re not worried that we’re still going to be having shutdowns like this every couple of years.”

Koyama and Palmer both criticized the way that humans tend to narrativize major catastrophes by looking for a scapegoat, and compared the current response to COVID-19 to Europeans in the 14th century blaming Jews for the plague. “The Black Death was accompanied by terrible pogroms in many parts of Europe against Jews, because one of the initial myths of the Black Death was that Jews were poisoning the wells,” said Koyama. “We’ll see if there are similar stories of xenophobia during COVID.” “People find it much more comforting when there is a specific actor who is responsible for doing something. So we’re seeing a variety of stories about COVID that attribute it to some intentional thing that somebody did,” added Palmer. “It’s more satisfying to think it’s intentional rather than chaos.”

In addition, Palmer pointed to the influence of apocalyptic fiction and the way it can lead people to make dangerous decisions, because they view themselves as the protago-

nists of their own stories. “You, the [point of view] character, get to break the rules and it’s okay. If you break the quarantine but everyone else follows it, it’ll be fine, and that’s how everyone is behaving.”

The panel pointed to some precautionary measures countries can take to reduce the impact of another pandemic. Palmer suggested training more doctors and nurses, claiming that the countries handling COVID-19 with the most ease are those hit

by Ebola a few years back.

She added that the economic and societal impacts of the pandemic depend largely on the reactions of local institutions. “It’s going to depend on policy. It’s going to depend on the local institutions, the local culture, and the local decisions made by governments, just like it did with the Black Death,” said Palmer.

Global Peace Later that day, Zalmay Khalilzad, special representative for Afghanistan reconciliation in the U.S. Department of State, and Andrew Wilder, vice president of asia programs for the U.S. Institute of Peace held a Fireside Chat.

Despite ever-present violence in Afghanistan, Khalilzad is optimistic about the future of the country. “I am hopeful. I expect that we will make progress,” he said.

With the Taliban finally sitting down at a negotiations table, “Afghans have a historic CONTINUED ON PG. 4

THE CHICAGO MAROON — OCTOBER 14, 2020

4

Addressing Global Conflicts Using Data and Science CONTINUED FROM PG. 3

opportunity to agree on a formula that works for them.”

Thursday’s discussions focused on weapons of mass destruction. Thomas Countryman, chairman of the Arms Control Association, illustrated how pressing the issue of nuclear weapons is today.

“The threat of nuclear war is climate change at supersonic speed. In the worst of climate change, humanity will suffer greatly, but it will adapt and humanity will survive.

In the use of all out nuclear war, there will

not be sufficient time for humanity to adapt to a radically changed environment,” said Countryman.

Francesca Giovannini, strategy and policy planning officer at the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization, believes that the scenario Countryman described is avoidable. “There are a series of factors that make me quite optimistic about the fact that nuclear weapon states can in fact work together towards reducing nuclear risks.”

“If this restrained behavior [of nuclear

states not engaging in nuclear conflicts] becomes the norm,” said Giovannini, “then we can work on nuclear risk reduction strategies.” She added, “I think that challenges like climate change and pandemics have really demonstrated the need to prioritize other urgent matters.”

Robert Rosner, professor in the Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, brought up the question of how scientists can play a part in creating a safer future.

“Ultimately, if our goal is to eliminate atomic weapons altogether, [it] will require

trust, and trust comes along with the ability to verify, to detect cheating for example. And so this is I think a key role that scientists can play a part in, which is to develop the technologies that allow us to prevent going back to the arms race that was the result of our work during World War II,” said Rosner.

Pearson Institute Director James A. Robinson concluded the three-day event by thanking all those who put their time into it and expressed his hope that next year’s forum will be held in person, though that remains to be seen.

UChicago Announces Second Round of CARES Act Grants

By TONY BROOKS & MILES BURTON News Editor, Editor-in-Chief Dean of Students Michele Rasmussen announced that the University will again disburse funding from the CARES Act Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund (HEERF) to university students “with the greatest financial need who have been negatively impacted financially by the COVID-19 pandemic” in an email on Monday morning. The CARES Act is the economic stimulus bill passed by Congress in response to

COVID-19.

Title IV–eligible undergraduate, graduate, and professional school students are eligible to apply for HEERF aid through their my.UChicago portal until 11:59 p.m. on October 31, according to the email.

The new program appears to broaden the pool of students who can receive support from the CARES funding by allowing students to submit a Federal Application for Student Aid (FAFSA) by October 16 to show their eligibility under Title IV. In an email to The Maroon, University spokesperson Gerald McSwiggan said,

“The University is providing those students who don’t normally file FAFSAs with an opportunity to do so. Filing the FAFSA helps demonstrate Title IV eligibility, which is a requirement to apply for HEERF funding.”

In June, when the University announced the first round of CARES Act grants, some graduate students raised concerns that the requirement that students have a Federal Application for Student Aid (FAFSA) on file by mid-May would exclude graduate students—many of whom do not file FAFSAs because they do not receive financial aid— from eligibility.

“While the FAFSA requirement we had concerns about in the first round is in a sense rectified by the October 16 deadline, we remain concerned about a vastly oversimplified metric for need,” Graduate Students United said in a statement to The Maroon.

The University announced in June that it would allocate all of $6.2 million it was awarded in CARES money to financial aid.

The Department of Education required that at least half of the allocation be spent on financial aid. Several other iniversities, including Harvard and Princeton, refused CARES funding when it was offered to them in April.

What to Know About the Illinois Fair Tax Law

By CAROLINE KUBZANSKY & TESS CHANG Managing Editor, News Reporter This November, Illinois voters will decide whether to adopt an amendment to the state constitution that would lift the current ban on a graduated income tax. If the amendment passes, it would clear the way for Governor J. B. Pritzker’s signature tax plan which passed last spring. Under this plan, the 4.95 percent flat income tax would be replaced with a progressive tax, meaning that residents with higher incomes would pay successively higher tax rates, ranging from 4.75 to 7.99 percent. Rates for net incomes over $250,000 will differ depending on whether taxes are filed by an individual or jointly. Out of the 43 states that tax wage and salary income, Illinois is one of nine

states with a flat-rate tax structure.

In an interview with The Maroon, Amanda Kass, the associate director of the Government Finance Research Center at UIC’s College of Urban Planning and Public Affairs, said she wanted voters to be informed about what the amendment would actually do. “Importantly, the constitutional amendment does not put in place rates,” Kass said. “What income tax rates are and what is subject to taxation is still up to the general assembly and the governor. The proposal to change the constitution is different from the rate structure that has been approved by the general assembly. Voters should really think of these two things as separate.”

While the new tax plan increases the tax rate for the highest income brackets, lower and middle-income households would pay

the same amount or less under the new plan.

The most recent government data estimates that the median household income in Hyde Park is $54,140 per year. Under Pritzker’s plan, only households making $250,000 or more would be subject to an increased tax rate.

According to data from the Illinois Department of Revenue via the Chicago Tribune, 2 percent of residents in the 60637 ZIP code would see a change in their tax rate, which covers households between East 55th and East 71st and from South State Street to Lake Michigan. That figure is 3 percent in the 60615 ZIP code, which spans North-South from East 55th to East 47th and East-West from South State Street to the lake.

Over the past few months, Pritzker has spent millions of dollars of his own money

on advertising for the graduated income tax. Proponents of the bill predict at least 97 percent of residents would receive a tax cut. Another argument in favor of the tax bill is that it would provide desperately-needed income for the state. Even prior to the financial strain of the COVID-19 pandemic, Illinois struggled with a hefty budget deficit.

The state has several billion dollars worth of debt and currently holds the worst credit rating of any U.S. state. Pritzker has made it a priority to fix these issues and has championed a progressive income tax as a solution that would only increase taxes for the most wealthy individuals.

Notable opponents of the amendment include prominent University donor and founder of hedge fund Citadel, Kenneth Griffin, and the Illinois Chamber of ComCONTINUED ON PG. 5

THE CHICAGO MAROON — OCTOBER 14, 2020

5

Amendment Proposes State-Wide Graduated Income Tax CONTINUED FROM PG. 4

merce. Critics of the bill argue that it would provide the state legislature unchecked power to increase taxes in the future, potentially causing businesses and high networth individuals to leave the state.

The evidence for this claim is mixed.

For instance, a study conducted by Stanford University on states with “millionaire taxes” showed that migration of high-income individuals was occurring, but not to a significant extent. The study’s report noted that, “millionaires are not very mobile and actually have lower migration rates than the

general population. This is in part because family responsibilities and business ownership are higher among top income-earners, which embeds individuals in their local regions.”

Yet even if a simple exodus of wealthy individuals is unlikely, others still argue that a progressive income tax could have other undesirable consequences. Paula Worthington, a senior lecturer at the Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago, pointed out that, “People who decide to stay may decide to make different choices about their work effort or their investments. They

may do so to limit their tax liability or protect themselves from these higher taxes.”

These more subtle forms of tax avoidance would lead to increased inefficiencies in the tax system. Worthington believes that this behavior would likely become more pronounced if the state continues to raise income taxes above what Pritzker is currently proposing. This possibility would impact the long-term success of a progressive tax system to fill the state’s budget hole.

However, if the amendment is not approved, Illinois’s dire fiscal situation may force Pritzker and the General Assembly

to pursue other ways to raise funds. If the amendment to allow a progressive tax structure is not approved, a flat-rate tax increase or a new tax on retirement income could be imminent.

The proposed amendment, Public Act 101-0008 , will be on the November 3 ballot. At least 60 percent of voters would need to approve this measure for it to be passed.

If enacted, the new tax system will go into effect on January 1, 2021.

Kam Buckner Reflects on First Year as Illinois House Representative

By HAMZA JILANI News Reporter Incumbent Illinois House Representative Kam Buckner is running unopposed for election to represent Illinois’ 26th state house district.

Appointed in January of 2019 to succeed Christian Mitchell, Buckner’s election platform is focused on workers’ rights, healthcare, education, and economic development. Before being appointed to the Illinois House of Representatives, Buckner worked in community relations for the Chicago Cubs, was the executive director of World Sport Chicago, and taught at the University of Chicago.

The Maroon sat down with Buckner to discuss issues in the communities he represents, what he hopes to achieve in his next term, and what he accomplished in his first term as a representative.

In his first term as state representative, Buckner voted to increase the minimum wage to $15 dollars an hour and sponsored a bill that would codify Chicago teachers’ rights to bargain for class sizes and school day length. Expressing that his background played a major role in his legislative work this term, Buckner noted “I come from a CTU [Chicago Teachers Union] FOP [Fraternal Order of Police] family, I come from a union family, and I come from a family that respects organized labor,” before outlining his legislative record on workers rights.

Buckner credited organized labor with making significant progress on wage equality, another central issue of his platform. He stressed, though, that the issue can only truly be addressed with legislative action.

“What the state of Illinois can do is punish those bad actors, punish those companies, those businesses in the state that have not made [wage equality] a priority, who have a clear and consistent record of running afoul of that principle and make sure that they pay.”

Buckner acknowledged the importance of housing legislation, such as the Woodlawn Housing Ordinance, to his constituents in downtown Chicago, Bronzeville, Hyde Park, Kenwood, and Woodlawn.

Despite being introduced to create legal protections that would prevent the planned Obama Presidential Center (OPC) from displacing Woodlawn residents, Buckner argued that the Woodlawn Housing Ordinance did not do enough to protect the residents of Chicago’s South Side from gentrification. Buckner instead expressed his support for the commonly cited community benefits agreement, which calls for the establishment of a community trust fund, stricter requirements for affordable housing, and a study that would assess the imposing of fees on large developers.

He also called for a neighborhood protection act that would prevent rent prices from rising too high in order to sufficiently address the issue of resident displacement

due to the OPC. “People should be concerned, because we’ve seen this before, and we know how this movie ends if the people aren’t heard, so I’m glad that people are continuing to speak up.”

Buckner said major issues with police recruitment entrenched departmental racism. “I know many people who are trying to get on the force who have not made it because they either failed a credit check or they failed a polygraph that asked them, ‘have they ever been gang affiliated,’ which, in Chicago, if you’re from a certain neighborhood, you were born gang-affiliated by virtue of where your house is. And these things really weed out young black men, young Latino men...the folks that know the community.”

Buckner went on to express the importance of reforming training, monitoring, and accountability. “I don’t believe that legislation can cure racism or intrinsic or implicit bias. But what I do know is that legislation can put up parameters that make sure that when these things happen, the consequences are there and the cadence is normalized.”

Buckner spoke of a recent discussion he had with the chief of police for the University of Chicago Police Department (UCPD).

“They came to me and said, ‘What can we do better? What have we done wrong? How can we change that?’ And I respect and appreciate any conversation that starts the way.”

He continued by asserting that the UCPD has an increased responsibility to be transparent, accountable, and sensitive.

“I know the history. I know why folks have been upset. I know why they’re protesting, even recently, about it.”

Buckner described his district’s relationship with the University as “a complicated one,” recalling that, “for years, the University of Chicago did not have a great relationship with the community of Woodlawn, other parts of Hyde Park and Kenwood, and Bronzeville.” Buckner said that the University has a responsibility to address this history and foster relationships with them by providing the communities surrounding it with help, relief, and resources.

“There is a real push now to create a more intentional symbiosis between the University and the community that surrounds it. So I think that there is still much work to be done, but I do applaud the efforts.”

Buckner hopes to focus on economic justice in his next term by funding social programs and giving people tools to build their businesses, neighborhoods, and communities. “The people here make Chicago special. And we’ve got to find a way to bolster that intellect, foster the creativity, the innovation, and find a way to get Chicago to a spot, not where we can be what we what we used to be, but to give us a chance to be the city that we’ve always deserved to be.”

THE CHICAGO MAROON — OCTOBER 14, 2020

6

Two Lawsuits, Five Internal Complaints Allege Discrimination Within UC Facilities Services Department

By LAURA GERSONY & MILUTIN GJAJA Grey City Reporters

An ongoing lawsuit filed in 2019 against the University of Chicago claims that, “since 2014, UChicago has been served with more than six internal complaints of race, gender and/or religious discrimination in Facilities Services as well as multiple EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) charges and a federal lawsuit. It has chosen to do nothing about it.”

The lawsuit is not the first to allege a hostile, discriminatory work environment within the Facilities Services (F.S.) Department at UChicago. Another suit, filed in 2017 and settled in 2018, made similar complaints about the same department.

Both lawsuits accuse the University and various F.S. employees of multiple counts of race- or gender-based discrimination, and retaliation.

The most recent lawsuit claims that six employees have filed similar internal complaints with F.S. since 2014, five of whom The Maroon has identified.

University spokesperson Gerald McSwiggan declined to answer any specific questions about The Maroon’s investigation, writing in an email that, “diversity and inclusion is one of the core values of the University of Chicago, and the University is dedicated to ensuring that people from a variety of backgrounds and experiences can thrive on campus.”

“Unlawful race discrimination:” Olandreia Walton and Valerie RiChard

Facilities Services, the department responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of campus, is staffed with a local Human Resources (H.R.) representative who, according to the 2019 lawsuit, reports directly to the leadership of F.S..

The lawsuits describe a pattern that has outlasted one H.R. representative’s tenure; there are allegations of discrimination that name both Jay Chesslo, who held the position until 2014, and his successor, Adrian Velez.

Chesslo was the Senior Human Resources Manager for the first two of the five complaints that The Maroon was able to identify: those of Senior Facilities Manager Olandreia Walton, a Black woman who went on to file the 2017 lawsuit, and her former coworker, Director of Maintenance Valerie RiChard.

According to Walton’s 2017 lawsuit, both women made “very similar” complaints of race and sex-based discrimination to the University’s local H.R. department.

Walton declined to comment, and The Maroon was unable to reach RiChard for comment.

According to the lawsuit, one thing became immediately clear to Walton when she began her employment in 2013: that “Caucasian men she worked with were treating her differently because she is an African-American woman.”

The suit discusses how within Facilities Services, her white male coworkers “ignored her, they excluded her from business communications, and they were openly hostile toward her, all of which made her job much more difficult.” It adds that Walton had never encountered this kind of conduct elsewhere in her career. She singled out a director within F.S., Kevin Austin, as the main instigator of this behavior.

This behavior is also documented in Spencer’s lawsuit: it was so “extreme” and “public” that Spencer noticed it, having just started working at the office, the 2019 lawsuit says.

Austin, who is a current UChicago employee, declined to speak with The Maroon.

According to the 2017 lawsuit, Walton repeatedly complained of a hostile work

environment to Chesslo and to her supervisor, Assistant Vice-President for Facilities Services Joel Schriever, to no avail.

This was first due to the alleged behavior of Kevin Austin, and later because of a letter of performance deficiency Walton claims was unjust and inaccurate.

Chesslo opted not to initiate an H.R. investigation, the lawsuit narrates, despite the fact that “one of Ms. Walton’s African-American female colleagues [the former director of maintenance, Valerie RiChard] had previously complained to central human resources about the race and sex discrimination she was experiencing.”

Walton decided that she wanted her complaints investigated by UChicago’s central Human Resources department rather than the local H.R. representative. According to the lawsuit, she made her request one morning in July of 2014, and Chesslo said he would take it up with department leadership.

Later that same day, the lawsuit narrates, Chesslo and Schriever called Walton into a meeting; they informed her that her employment was terminated, effective immediately.

The lawsuit claims that UChicago did not investigate Walton’s complaints after she left. The University did not respond to questions about this allegation.

When reached for comment, all of the defendants named in Walton’s lawsuit either declined to comment or did not respond.

“I waited, nothing happened”: Janet Spencer Adrian Velez replaced Chesslo as the department’s H.R. representative in 2014.

He was the point of contact within H.R. for two other complainants that The Maroon was able to identify: Janet Spencer and Sara Popenhagen, the two plaintiffs on the 2019 lawsuit.

Janet Spencer told The Maroon that

her experience with H.R., like Walton’s, was largely characterized by inaction; she made complaints, repeatedly, and felt that no resources were mobilized in her defense.

“I reported my harassment over and over,” Spencer said. “I went to internal H.R.; I waited, nothing happened. Then I went to central H.R.; I waited, nothing happened.”

In October of 2013, Spencer was hired as a maintenance program manager. When Austin was promoted the following year, “Austin began harassing Ms. Spencer in exactly the same way he had previously harassed Olandreia Walton,” the lawsuit says. “He stopped speaking to her, he interrupted and spoke over her at meetings, he disparaged her around the office and he undermined her to her subordinates.”

As the behavior continued, Spencer sent a letter to Austin’s superior, Gerry McGillian, alleging a hostile work environment in February of 2016. McGillian did not respond to the letter, the lawsuit says, nor did he forward the letter to his superiors or to H.R..

The lawsuit also claims that while Spencer was working under McGillian, from 2014–17, her workload increased while her annual pay raise decreased from 4 percent to 2.5 percent to 2 percent to 1 percent. The number of staff members reporting to her also decreased from five to zero employees over this span of three years.

According to the lawsuit, Spencer complained to both UChicago’s central H.R. department and to Adrian Velez, the H.R. representative within F.S., who both dismissed her allegations.

Following repeated attempts to work with HR, her lawsuit reads, Ms. Spencer “recognized the futility of continuing to remain in her job when UChicago had repeatedly been apprised of the discrimination and harassment yet had chosen to do nothing about it.” Spencer left the job on CONTINUED ON PG. 7

THE CHICAGO MAROON — OCTOBER 14, 2020

7

“H.R. was concerned only with protecting management and the University.”

CONTINUED FROM PG. 6

November 30, 2017, claiming that it was a constructive discharge: a form of contract termination in which a hostile work environment effectively coerced an employee into leaving.

Spencer described how, like Walton, the work environment at UChicago was unlike any past experience in her career.

She worked for almost 35 years in similar positions at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, where she estimated that 95 percent of the 1300 employees in her department were men, but found the work environment vastly different.

“My whole career I’ve spent in a male-dominated field and have had no problems whatsoever,” she said. “I was always treated with respect, and I never filed a complaint or even visited H.R. about any behavior. When people did behave poorly, they were reprimanded, and it immediately stopped—which is not the case at all at the University of Chicago.”

Another former employee in F.S., who spoke with The Maroon on the condition of anonymity, said that Spencer’s complaints about H.R. rang true.

“H.R. was concerned only with protecting management and the University,” the employee said. “It was almost purposefully ineffective…They were interested in making sure that people at a certain level and higher were not to be questioned nor bothered with any issues whatsoever.”

The lawsuit also alleges that F.S. has faced multiple EEOC charges. The Maroon was unable to confirm or deny the existence of such charges, as the results of such an investigation would only be available to the University, who declined to answer questions, and the aggrieved party, whose identity is unknown.

When reached for comment, all of the defendants named in the 2019 lawsuit either declined to comment or did not respond.

A “Good Ol’ Boys’ Club:” Sara Popenhagen

The second plaintiff in the 2019 lawsuit is Sara Popenhagen, the current Sustainability Specialist at UChicago. Her attorney, Johanna Raimond, declined The Maroon’s request to interview Popenhagen.

Popenhagen’s allegations center around the disparity of pay and job opportunities between men and women within F.S.. The

lawsuit claims that when she and a male colleague both requested promotions or pay increases when their workload increased, her male colleague was given a promotion, but she was not—despite the fact that her direct supervisor had also advocated in her favor.

The lawsuit alleges that the former Assistant Vice President for Facilities Operations Gerry McGillian often invoked concern for how “the guys” in the department would react to her holding a higher position than them. He offered this as a justification several times, including when he initially denied her a pay raise and promotion, as well as when he eventually agreed to give her this pay raise, though he still denied her request to make the promotion retroactive.

Popenhagen then reported to H.R. that she was experiencing discrimination—first in May 2017 and then again in April 2018— at which point the promotion and pay raise she was promised were revoked, the lawsuit says. “It was not until three months later, on June 29, 2018, and within a few hours of UChicago receiving a letter from Ms. Popenhagen’s lawyer threatening legal action, that UChicago agreed to honor the previously promised promotion to manager and pay increase.”

The lawsuit also argues that Popenhagen was promised, and then denied, the opportunity to attend a professional development program, the “Chicago Booth’s Emerging Leaders program” at the Booth School of Business.

The combined effect of this has been to create what Spencer called a “good ol’ boys club:” “an organization that hires and promotes almost exclusively white, Christian men,” and in which “women, non-Christians and employees of color are harassed, paid less, passed over for promotion or fired.” In an interview with The Maroon, Johanna Raimond, Spencer and Popenhagen’s lawyer in the 2019 suit, described this as a continual cycle of displacement.

“Every time a woman and minority gets pushed out [under] the regime of McGillian and McConnell [the head of F.S.]…they install a white male in their place,” she said.

Spencer said that there were several employees who “weren’t minorities” and “weren’t female” who acknowledged that this discrimination was taking place. One of these employees was her supervisor, Sumit Ray, who declined to speak to The Maroon.

However, not everyone in the department was aware of or acknowledged such discrimination. When reached for comment, one employee who worked at F.S. during this time could not confirm any such conduct.

Ignacio Tagtachian, a former employee who worked in the Sustainability Office until 2014, told The Maroon that “in terms of generally acknowledged discrimination, all I can say is that I did not witness it. The Office of Sustainability was always a bit separated from the rest of Facilities, so it is hard for me to say.”

Another employee, who spoke with The Maroon on the condition of anonymity, was surprised by the allegations against Austin, saying that “I’ve always seen him to be nothing but very professional.”

The discrimination alleged within F.S. was not limited to the workplaces of the four aforementioned complainants: there are also allegations of discrimination within the Central Utility Plant (CUP), a branch of F.S. located in a different building from the rest of the department.

“H.R. is not your friend”: Benjamin Ashkenazi

Velez was also the H.R. point of contact for Benjamin Ashkenazi, the fifth complainant that The Maroon has identified.

Ashkenazi, who is Jewish, said he experienced anti-Semitic behavior while working as an engineer in the CUP, but he did not bring his complaint to H.R. for fear of retaliation by his coworkers. “I knew if I said anything, my career was over,” he told The Maroon in an interview. It wasn’t until 2015, when Ashkenazi decided to quit his job and move to Israel—in part because of the way he was treated at UChicago—that he complained to Velez via email.

This email, obtained by The Maroon, outlines a pattern of anti-Semitic comments within the CUP. The email alleges that when Ashkenazi got a promotion and raise, his supervisor Mike DeSoto told him to “live like a Jew,” not knowing that Ashkenazi, whose legal name was then Allen Langlois, was Jewish.

“He told me to live like a Jew because they are ‘cheap’ and that’s why ‘they have lots of money’ among other extremely unsettling things,” Ashkenazi’s email to Velez reads. “The story was extremely antisemitic and I was relieved he didn’t know I was

Jewish.”

Ashkenazi wrote that DeSoto, who declined to speak with The Maroon, “bragged about” this exchange to another CUP employee, Fred Fuller, shortly after it occurred. Fuller confirmed this account in an interview with The Maroon.

Furthermore, Ashkenazi complains that he was repeatedly given menial jobs such as taking out the trash and changing the light bulbs, despite having 10 years of experience at the CUP and several technical certifications. Ashkenazi claims that supervisors opted to give the more challenging work to less qualified individuals, who subsequently had to be trained, rather than give it to him.

When Ashkenazi emailed Velez detailing his complaint, he provided Fuller’s contact information, saying that “if you are serious about conducting an investigation Fred Fuller would be a good place to start,” and that “[Fuller has] been wanting to blow the whistle for years but didn’t because he felt it would make the situation worse.” Fuller told The Maroon that no one from H.R. ever contacted him on the matter.

In addition to his formal complaint, Ashkenazi gave his supervisors, Mike DeSoto and Dan Kerry, “exceptionally low reviews.”

Fuller also agreed with Ashkenazi’s broader diagnoses of a problematic environment. Asked whether he observed an anti-Semitic and toxic work environment within the CUP, Fuller responded, “Absolutely.”

Ashkenazi believes that Facilities Services’s H.R. department plays a role in perpetuating the problematic workplace environments.

“There’s no corrective mechanism,” he said. “That’s the problem. You go to H.R. and you complain; nothing changes.”

Ashkenazi was adamant that the complaints within F.S. point to a systemic issue within the department.

“If there wasn’t something that was going on, why would you hear all of these people say this?” said Ashkenazi.

“It’s not all disgruntled employees. I left, and then I said it [reported discrimination],” he said. “You can see, I’m not getting anything out of it. I’m not trying to sue the University. I’m not trying to get any money out of it. I’m just saying this behavior is wrong and it needs to be addressed.”

THE CHICAGO MAROON — OCTOBER 14, 2020

8

VIEWPOINTS The University of Chicago is Not Neutral President Zimmer’s latest email feigns political neutrality, but his continual veneration of the Kalven Report is a bucking of responsibility

By MAX SERVETAR Earlier this week, I received an email, as did all the members of the University of Chicago community, from President Zimmer.

At first, I was relieved to find that the correspondence was a reprieve from the constant stream of coronavirus information that floods my inbox. However, as I began to read, I was frustrated, but entirely unsurprised, to find that Zimmer was once again trotting out the Chicago Principles and the Kalven

Report to give himself and his administration cover under the guise of neutrality from any questions about their political priorities. In reality, the University is far from neutral and consistently takes political positions to serve its corporate interests.

President Zimmer laid out two views on the on the English department’s decision to only accept Ph.D. students “interested in working in and with Black Studies.” One opposed to the decision says the “exclusive disciplinary commitment

Miles Burton, Editor-in-Chief Emma Dyer, Editor-in-Chief Caroline Kubzansky, Managing Editor Jessica Xia, Chief Production Officer The Maroon Editorial Board consists of the editors-in-chief and editors of The Maroon.

NEWS

Tony Brooks, editor Matthew Lee, editor Pranathi Posa, editor Justin Smith, editor GREY CITY

Alex Dalton, editor Avi Waldman, editor VIEWPOINTS

Gage Gramlick, editor Ruby Rorty, editor ARTS

Wahid Al Mamun, editor Alina Kim, editor SPORTS

Alison Gill, editor Thomas Gordon, editor Brinda Rao, editor

DESIGN

Suha Chang, head of production Matthew Chang, head designer R.E. Stern, design associate BUSINESS

Gianni LaVecchia, chief financial officer Charlie Blampied, director of strategy Trent Carson, director of marketing Yeewin New, director of marketing Victor Doddy, director of development Kenneth Chu, director of operations ONLINE

Firat Ciftci, software engineer Editor-in-Chief: Editor@ChicagoMaroon.com Newsroom Phone: (312) 918-8023 Business Phone: (408) 806-8381 For advertising inquiries, please contact Ads@ChicagoMaroon.com or (408) 806-8381.

COPY

James Hu, copy chief Cynthia Huang, copy chief Jason Lin, copy chief Olivia Shao, copy chief

Circulation: 2,500. © 2020 The Chicago Maroon Ida Noyes Hall / 1212 East 59th Street Chicago, IL 60637

effectively represents a political test for admission”; the other defends it as “the natural exercise of the prerogatives of an academic department to make decisions about the choice of scholarly directions it wants to emphasize.” In his entire email, not once does he support the department’s decision or even go so far as to share the administration’s position on the issue. He even concedes that if the department’s purpose was to impose a political test on applicants, “this action would stand in direct opposition to both the Kalven Report and the Chicago Principles.”

The assertion that because the department’s new policy is political it is wrong must be interrogated. A coalition of faculty recently went on a diversity strike against the University’s failure to address systemic racism. The English field has marginalized Black studies and scholars for a long time. A lack of diversity often harms epistemic work. The English department’s statement announcing its decision made it clear that its decision was intended to help address those problems: “we believe that undoing persistent, recalcitrant anti-Blackness in our discipline and in our institutions must be the collective responsibility of all faculty, here and elsewhere.” Even if those are political aims, they are necessary for the University to take given its role in perpetuating those problems. As the department’s statement said, “Our discipline is responsible for developing hierarchies of cultural production that have contributed directly to social and systemic determinations of whose lives matter and why.” However, Zimmer’s lat-

ter argument on the Kalven Report and the Chicago Principles should still be sufficient to end the debate.

I do not understand why Zimmer would put out an email, acknowledge both positions, but not state the administration’s support for the English department. In fact, he did not even state the administration’s position on the issue. He resorted once again to the University’s narrative of neutrality.

President Zimmer seems to put the University’s alleged commitment to neutrality before anything else. The Chicago Principles, which I’m sure we’re all familiar with after various writing surface situations, emphasizes UChicago’s commitment to free speech on campus.

The Kalven Report, which he cites and has driven much of his administration’s policy, recommends that the University remain neutral on social and political issues. It seems that Zimmer never misses an opportunity to stress the University’s commitment to neutrality. Yet, that neutrality is a myth.

This myth banks on one of the great fallacies institutions use to deflect responsibility: supporting and maintaining the status quo is somehow apolitical. Since the inception of the Kalven Report, the University has used it to justify continued investment in South African apartheid, fossil fuel companies, and companies with stakes in occupied Palestine. The administration claims it cannot change its financial allocations, as doing so would stake a political position. It is correct, in the sense that what an institution decides to put its money toward is inherently a political statement. Investing

in polluters who are destroying our planet constitutes a political position. Despite all their appeals to neutrality, UChicago cannot escape politics. The administration must either change its investments or acknowledge it is willing to destroy our planet for profit; it cannot hide behind its reports.

To bring the conversation closer to campus, the University’s continued funding of the UCPD shows its misplaced political priorities.

The way an institution, especially one with as direct an impact on a community as the University of Chicago, decides to spend its money is a declaration of its priorities and beliefs. The administration puts forth its position on social and political issues by choosing to continue to put so much money toward the UCPD while denying funds for more expansive mental health services and cultural centers.

Yet, the University says it is neutral. And, sure, the University is an honorable institution. The Kalven Report describes two instances in which the administration can intervene in a political debate. The first is when “the society, or segments of it, threaten the very mission of the university and its values of free inquiry. In such a crisis, it becomes the obligation of the university as an institution to oppose such measures.” If the University truly followed this principle, many of the prior complaints would have been addressed.

However, the report also states issues may arise when the University “must act as an institution in its corporate capacity.” Finally, a principle with which the adminCONTINUED ON PG. 9

THE CHICAGO MAROON — OCTOBER 14, 2020

9

“It seems that Zimmer never misses an oppor-tunity to stress the University’s commitment to neutrality. Yet, that neutrality is a myth.”

CONTINUED FROM PG. 8

istration’s actions are consistent. Refusing to divest from fossil fuels, maintaining the strength of the UCPD, and refusing to negotiate with the Graduate Students Union serve the University’s interests as a corporate entity; continuing to invest in companies that are major polluters or operate out of occupied Palestine ensures their endowment returns remain steady; preserving the UCPD protects their property; refusing the GSU main-

tains their bottom line. The administration, despite what it says, cannot simply bifurcate the University of Chicago’s corporate and academic functions. Any issue that affects the University of Chicago-as-corporation affects the University of Chicago-as-academy, and vice versa. Yet, it is only in the interest of the University-as-corporation that the administration will take a stand.

The administration wants to only concern itself with politics when it’s in its inter-

est. It creates false dichotomies and narratives to do so. Zimmer’s email is yet another example. Framing its stances as a matter of neutrality has allowed the administration to shift the topic of debate from its policies to whether or not a university should be “apolitical.” Instead of having to defend its choices, the University pushes the false narrative that it does not involve itself with social issues. Student organizers have done a great job of pushing the University on these

issues, but we must continue to force Zimmer to address the harmful policies of the University and not allow him to divert our energies any further with fallacious talking points. The University of Chicago can no longer use a report from 1967, one written in response to students protesting the Vietnam War, to guide or justify its approach to political issues.

Max Servetar is a third year in the College.

What Makes a University Impartial?

President Zimmer’s recent message on nonpartisanship at the University leaves room for interference with essential social science research

By ANONYMOUS In an October 5 message to members of the University community, President Robert Zimmer emphasized the importance of “Reinforcing the Chicago Principles and the Kalven Report” in an apparent effort to restate the University’s commitment to free expression amid a national conversation about racial justice. He states that the Kalven Report’s guidance that “the University should not take institutional positions on public issues that are not directly related to the core functioning of the University” applies “not only to the University as a whole, but to the departments, schools, centers, and divisions” within the University. He then discusses this guidance as it relates to the recent strategic decision by the Department of English Language and Literature to admit only Ph.D. students focused on Black Studies to the 2020-21 class. It is unclear why President Zimmer decided to respond to public criticism of the Department of English Language and Literature by explicitly reinforcing the Kalven Report’s relevance to internal components of the University. However, his choice to emphasize institutional neutrality toward public issues—“particularly with emotions high”—could have profoundly toxic and tangible consequences for sponsored research at the University.

Given the current state of social science research funding in the United States, President Zimmer’s statement could harm “the core functioning of the University”—another value he espoused in his October 5 message—by having precisely the chilling effect he claims we must avoid. Both public and private funders of social science research now typically expect proposals to demonstrate policy relevance. In fact, some calls for proposals explicitly require the inclusion of a clinical trial. A clinical trial is an experiment to test the efficacy of an intervention. Within the social sciences this almost always means development of an intervention to address a public issue.

Specifically, interventions tested in a social science context tend to take a position on a potential solution to a public issue.

For example, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is a form of clinical trial commonly used in the social sciences that randomly assigns participants to experiment or control conditions: A professor might propose an RCT to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) that fully subsidizes the health care of a subset of students and then, 10 years after graduation, compares their health outcomes to students whose healthcare was not fully subsidized. In this case, the intervention represents a position on a public issue—that socialized healthcare could produce better health outcomes than the current system.

Proposing an RCT is different than actively lobbying for social policy in the name of the University, but it is functionally similar: Since funders want researchers to demonstrate that their proposal has policy relevance, and an intervention inherently represents a position on a public issue (that is, a potential solution to the issue), research proposals have to take indirect but testable positions on public issues in order to be competitive.

Here is where Zimmer’s insistence on University impartiality makes little sense: The University must officially endorse research proposals. What does this mean?

First, it means that proposals by University of Chicago researchers must go through a lengthy review process where administrators evaluate whether to endorse the proposal based on a variety of documents to ensure institutional review board (IRB), budgetary, and statutory compliance, as well as the availability of institutional resources. Proposals must be endorsed before the funding agency will even consider reviewing its merit. Second, it means that chairpersons and deans—part of the presumed audience for President Zimmer’s message—must also endorse the proposal. For instance, in order for the NIH to conduct a peer review of the research in the example outlined above, the University would have to endorse the project and, by extension, the potential viabili-

ty of socialized health care. In other words, the University of Chicago would have to take an institutional position on a public issue. President Zimmer’s emphasis on the Kalven Report as it applies to “departments, schools, centers, and divisions” could be reasonably interpreted as a warning against endorsement of any activities that might be construed as taking a position on a public issue. Such an interpretation, even applied unevenly across the University, is a threat to social scientists’ ability to apply for the funds necessary to conduct their research since virtually any competitive proposal could be construed as taking such a position.

Is President Zimmer suggesting that the University may now decline to endorse such a proposal due to its content? If so, then he is suggesting the abandonment of peer review as the basis for advancing social science research. This would represent not only a direct threat to the University’s core mission but also an abandonment of the Chicago Principles: It would run contrary to the notion that “it is not the proper role of the University to attempt to shield individuals from ideas and opinions they find unwelcome, disagreeable, or even deeply offensive” as well as the imperative that the University community “act in conformity with the principle of free expression.”

If he is not suggesting that the UniverCONTINUED ON PG. 10

THE CHICAGO MAROON — OCTOBER 14, 2020

10

“Zimmer’s choice to emphasize institutional neutrality toward public issues could have profoundly toxic and tangible consequences for sponsored research at the University.”

CONTINUED FROM PG. 9

sity can now decline to endorse proposed research based on its content, then he must clarify his position immediately. Failure to do so would imply that, to quote the Report of the Committee on Freedom of Expression, administrators, chairpersons, and/or

deans “may reasonably regulate the time, place, and manner of expression to ensure that it does not disrupt the ordinary activities of the University” by actively determining what constitutes the “ordinary activities of the University” through not endorsing research with potentially uncomfortable

implications for the University, its affiliates, and/or its individual members. In other words, President Zimmer’s message implies that any person involved in the review of proposals for institutional endorsement can decide, based on the Kalven Report, that the research might be construed as the University

taking a position on a public issue. They can then prevent the review of that research for potential funding by…simply doing nothing.

The author is a member of University research staff and has requested anonymity out of fear of retaliation by the University.

ARTS I’m Thinking That I’m Too Stupid to Understand I’m Thinking of Ending Things

By TIMMY LEE Arts Contributor The following film criticism contains major spoilers for the film I’m Thinking of Ending Things as well as references to suicide.

Netflix’s I’m Thinking of Ending Things is without a doubt one of the strangest, most out-there films I have seen in a long while, not just in 2020. I watched the film with a couple of friends, and once the end credits rolled, all we could say to ourselves was, “What the fuck?” This is a film that can be incredibly frustrating and confusing at times. It is also a movie that will stick with you, and something I will most likely revisit in the future.

I’m Thinking of Ending Things, written and directed by Charlie Kaufman (Being John Malkovich, Adaptation, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind) follows the story of an unnamed woman (Jessie Buckley) who travels with her boyfriend Jake (Jesse Plemons) to meet his parents (David Thewlis and Toni Collette) while she contemplates ending her relationship with him.

This is a film that I have been looking forward to for quite a while, given the involvement of Charlie Kaufman. Kaufman is a deep, surrealist writer who explores themes relating to identity crises, mortality, and the meaning of life. The movies he writes demand multiple viewings if one wants to fully understand them and the messages they express. Whether it’s

understanding what it truly means to be John Malkovich, how to get over a breakup with someone you thought was the one, or dissecting Kaufman’s mind and what goes through his head, Kaufman is very methodical and intelligent when it comes to his writing, and I’m Thinking of Ending Things is certainly no exception.

While I’m Thinking of Ending Things may present itself as a simple road trip story with surrealist elements, it actually tells a story about a man contemplating suicide. Throughout the film, there are several scenes that focus on an unfulfilled, depressed janitor (Guy Boyd); by the end of the film, the audience realizes that the janitor is the most important character in the entire movie.

I’m Thinking of Ending Things follows an old, depressed janitor who struggles with suicidal thoughts. To combat it, the janitor fantasizes about what his life could have been like if he had asked out the woman he sees through the window in the opening scene. Events in which the janitor’s physical appearance is uninvolved are all inside this janitor’s fantasy, with Jake (the boyfriend) representing the janitor’s younger self. Everything that happens within this fantasy is a series of hypothetical situations of the janitor’s life had it not been for his timid nature, a character trait that his mother mentions in a scene where the girlfriend talks to a younger version of the mother. Grasping this twist completely changes how you view the events that occur in the film, especially

upon a second viewing.

This fabricated fantasy explains the strange, abstract events that occur throughout the film. The girlfriend possesses multiple names—Lucy, Amy, Lucia—because the janitor hasn’t really come up with one.

Jake’s parents’ ages fluctuate because the janitor is not entirely sure at what point in his life he will get the chance to introduce his hypothetical girlfriend. Jake fears the basement because the basement contains everything that symbolizes the janitor’s failures and grim reality: the janitor’s uniform in the washing machine and the abandoned paintings labeled “Jake,” which indicate that the janitor’s past artistic aspirations are now lost forever.

I’m Thinking of Ending Things is described by some as a horror film, and while I believe there is some truth to that, it is much darker than any conventional horror movie like The Conjuring. The sinister force in Kaufman’s movie isn’t a ghost or a crazy murder cult, but something much more sinister and grounded in reality: the feeling of loneliness and worthlessness. Throughout the movie, the janitor seems incredibly unfulfilled with his life as he lives in solitude.

He hates working as a janitor at his school because no one notices all the good deeds he has done, as mentioned by his fantasy self.

Instead, he is either ignored or sneered at by students at the school (who, interestingly enough, also appear in his fantasy at the ice cream store). This is all conveyed by the janitor, who, despite not saying much in

the movie, managed to break my heart by the end of the film. The only thing that gives the janitor any purpose in life is the arts, which is why elements of musicals, movies, and poems are either incorporated into his fantasy (e.g. music from the musical Oklahoma!) or explicitly referenced (poems by William Wordsworth). The janitor finds fascination with art that people treasure because of its sense of timelessness, something that the janitor wishes he had.

The janitor eventually gives in to his suicidal thoughts. The janitor (not Jake) later encounters the girlfriend who is trying to look for her boyfriend. When the janitor asks what he looks like, the girlfriend says she doesn’t really remember his appearance. Instead, she reveals that nothing happened between her and Jake on the night they met, claiming she was made uncomfortable by Jake staring at her. After the girlfriend gives this confession, the janitor/ Jake finally comes to terms with himself, which is indicated by the sad smile the janitor gives to the girlfriend before Kaufman transitions to a beautifully choreographed ballet scene.

Through Kaufman’s writing, direction, and the janitor’s performance, we, the audience, understand that no matter how much the janitor fantasizes, he cannot change the reality of his situation, and while a younger man may have done something to change his life, the janitor/ Jake is now too old to do such a thing.

CONTINUED ON PG. 11

THE CHICAGO MAROON — OCTOBER 14, 2020

11

“This is a film I have been looking forward to for quite a while...”

CONTINUED FROM PG. 10

The janitor is forced to face his wasted potential, which is symbolized by a ballet sequence that follows the girlfriend’s confession. More attractive-looking versions of Jake and the girlfriend begin engaging in a ballet, and right when they are about to get married, another dancer, dressed

as the janitor, tries to steal the girlfriend.

The girlfriend runs away from this janitor dancer, causing the dual Jakes to fight one another before the real Jake stabs fantasy Jake to death, ending the janitor’s imaginary sphere for good. After cleaning the school one last time, he goes back inside his truck, sets the key down, and decides to let

himself freeze and die of hypothermia rather than continue to live in his depressing, grim reality.

Movies like I’m Thinking of Ending Things are why I love Charlie Kaufman. The movies he writes and directs have relatable messages I enjoy. Admittedly, I was a bit frustrated after watching the film the first

time because I simply did not understand what Kaufman’s message was. However, I better understood the meaning after the second viewing, and I also appreciated it more. Not only do I recommend you watch this film, I recommend you watch it twice.

I would give it a 9 out of 10.

The Best Breakout Room on Campus (and No, It Isn’t Run by the University)

By KAYLA MARTINEZ Arts Contributor Quarantine can be a bummer, but not if you’ve got Jo Blankson, Liva Pierce, and Anne Lim around! Over the course of the pandemic, these three members of OffOff Campus’s 33rd generation have put on Breakout Room, a Zoom-based comedy show, for hundreds of people looking for a laugh. While the name might hearken back to some semi-painful contemporary online school experiences, the show is anything but.

In fact, it’s the perfect escape from the inevitable panic-inducing headlines of these past weeks. The hosts open with a slideshow explaining the theme, which can be anything from “Black joy” to “slumber party.” Before getting into the comedy, they highlight a few organizations they are raising funds for, and, before you know it, they’re whizzing through a slideshow and introducing guests from across the country.

So how does the magic happen? According to them, none of it feels like work, but setting up the event requires quite a bit of back end effort. Excluding the actual performance, which runs for about an hour, the trio spends about two hours booking guest performers via an online form, four or five hours coming up with a theme and preparing the slideshow, and another hour running tech. Their hard work clearly pays off—50 or so people show up for each performance, and one Breakout Room generally raises about $200 for their chosen cause. (Their inaugural show raised about $600.) Jo, Liva, and Anne attribute much of their success to their ever-changing guest list, which includes a diverse array of 20-something comedians.

Some of them are Twitter mutuals, some are

best friends from home, and some are just folks who heard about the show and wanted to get involved. My personal favorite bit was when UChicago third-year Joey Cipriano did a shot of fish sauce at the end of his set about buying an absurdly large quantity of it on Amazon. Heart healthy? Not a chance, but it definitely made me smile.

Breakout Room does an incredible job of balancing goofy, timeless, and absurd bits like Joey’s with humor tied into this political moment. This is highly intentional: Jo mentioned that comedy often has a political function, and Breakout Room comedy is clearly tied to leftist, abolitionist values.

At the same time, comedy doesn’t always have to offer heavy, thoughtful analysis.

Anne believes that it’s often about building community and making people feel joy in a world that sometimes feels like a never-ending series of crises. Their show on restorative justice toed the line between politically relevant criticism and lighthearted humor excellently, making audiences feel comfortable chatting about a topic that generally wouldn’t be easy to discuss with 50 strangers. After introducing the topic, they went through a PowerPoint highlighting different “wrongs” done to society at large, encouraging the audience to vote on the proper mode of restorative justice. I was a big fan of their response to the Wicked promotional image put out in the wake of the Black Lives Matter movement (because quite honestly, this image was made to be made fun of).

Audiences got to choose from three ways to “restoratively address this harm,” including: A. Punch Idina Menzel in the jaw. She should have spoken up.

B. Force the Wicked P.R. team to sing the

Breakout Room is equal parts goofy and political. courtesy of off-off campus high “oowoahoohoh” in Defying Gravity.

C: Hold a Broadway town hall, cast Black leading actors.

Discussion was riveting, and everyone tried to add their two cents before moving onto the next slide.

In addition, Breakout Room doesn’t force preexisting notions of stand-up onto a virtual platform. Instead, the hosts emphasize the virtual aspect of the show, utilizing screen share and the chat feature and laughing through any technical difficulties that may arise. Anne sees it as an opportunity to try new things, noting that “you can have a joke that’s just words, or words on the screen but you’re saying something different, or a song is playing…there are so many layers… the medium adds another place for jokes.”

The group also mentioned that a Zoom show is more accessible, drawing crowds from across the country, making the event feel more communal in the process: It isn’t three performers staring at a dark audience. The platform ensures that the comedian speak-

ing is the same size as an audience member munching on Cheetos in bed. For that reason, Jo says it feels much more relaxed, almost like a “congregation of friends.”

That sense of community has inspired all three of them to consider pursuing comedy, which is exciting for them and for us, because I personally would love to see more of their content. While going into comedy was never much of a question for Liva, who attended a program geared toward future comedians during her gap year, Jo and Anne have both been reassured by the show’s success. “Maybe it’s Breakout Room. And maybe it’s just getting older, but I believe a little bit more now that it’s possible,” says Jo. “Now, we have so much evidence we can do it.”

If you’re curious about what exactly their show looks like, all I can say is that you should check it out for yourself: you won’t regret it. Generally, the shows are advertised on Twitter. At the very least, I can guarantee you’ll have a much better time than you’re having in your Classics breakout room.

THE CHICAGO MAROON — OCTOBER 14, 2020

12

SPORTS Athletic Community Seeks to Increase Civic Engagement

By ALISON GILL Sports Editor

Student-athletes at the University of Chicago are joining their peers to increase voter registration on-campus and within the athletic department. These efforts are a carry-over from a summer that spotlighted athlete activism, from the postponement of NBA playoff games to collegiate marches protesting for social justice.

The voter registration initiative has been a collective effort from UChiVotes, the student-led organization based out of the Institute of Politics, and individual team members. Ashley Gao, a second-year on the women’s basketball team, had initially become involved with voter engagement to help bring an organization called Voice in Sport to the UAA conference, along with a student-athlete at conference rival New York University. Gao began appointing leaders on each varsity team to track their team’s registrations, but she soon recognized that a part-

nership with UChiVotes Outreach Director and women’s soccer third-year Anna KenigZiesler, who was reaching out to coaches, could be helpful.

“The goal of the athletic department initiative is to have 100 percent voter registration across athletic teams. We want to make sure that all athletes have the resources and information at their fingertips to know how to vote and what the voting options are [for] this election,” said Kenig-Ziesler.

The athlete initiative at UChicago mimics initiatives at other university athletic departments and within professional sports. From the University of Missouri to the University of Portland, athletic departments and teams have made voter registration a central emphasis for the fall of 2020 with the goal of 100 percent registration among student-athletes.

Campuses are opening up arenas and athletic sites as polling places, and the NCAA has mandated that every Division I program give student-athletes the day off on Election Day. “By providing this day dedicated to civic

dog show

By THE MAROON CROSSWORD SECTION Across 1. Brunch- places 6.FDR loan org.

9. Intro, say 14. Pass again 15. End dais?

16. Salt Lake City native 17. Glacial ridge 18. D.C. baseball player 19. Garb for Romans 20. Pugilist 21. Hustlers star 22. Tussle 23. Opposite of reg.

24. Artsy magazine 26. 100 percent 27. Henry Huggin’s dog 29. Charles Darwin’s ship 32. Slippery one 33. Long-running crime drama 34. Diplomat (Abbr.)

35. Bus pass 42. Switz. land

43. U.K. espionage team inside occupied Europe 44. Over in Greece?

45. Floor decor 49. Ed Sheeran song 51. ___-mo 52. Home on the steppes 53. Doo-___ 54. Overflows (with) 57. (When duplicated) hip-hop dance 58. Gravel-voiced 61. Button on some power outlets 62. It’s about one- quarter A 63. Tehran resident 64. Luxury Honda 65. Start of the XXth century 66. Russian Revolution figure 67. Sick one 68. These (Fr.) 69. Hebrew land Down 1. Japanese spider, e.g.

engagement each year, we are making a clear distinction that our American student-athletes will always be citizens before they are athletes. The student-athlete voice continues to grow louder and louder every year, and we can see that through this action,” said Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee chair Ethan Good at the time of the announcement in September.

While Division III athletic programs, including at UChicago, have yet to mandate a similar department-wide or division-wide measure, UChicago athletic administrators and coaches have been receptive to the voting initiative.

“The reception on teams and across the department has been incredible…. I’m really excited by how many coaches have engaged with this initiative, and I think it’s a great indication of what it means to be a student-athlete at the University of Chicago. This is about more than sports,” said Kenig-Ziesler. Her team has already achieved 100 percent voter registration in part due to the support and

2. Dynamic prefix 3. Loose 4. Ant___ 5. Boat shoe brand 6. Japanese combat art 7. Premium service?

8. Sink like ___ 9. Positions 10. Stub ___ 11. Scrappy, as a team 12. “___ do” 13. It supports an arch 25. Online discount 27. The ___ 28. Suffix of comparison 30. Label for Iron Maiden and Queen 31. Child’s letters 33. Platitudinous 36. Slangy assent 37. Mulan’s surname 38. Sled pullers in winter 39. Assuage 40. Clean air org.

41. Director Burton of 2019’s Dumbo 45. Celestial

focus of her coaches.

The attention on voting initiatives has come with a broader, national conversation about voter suppression and civic engagement. In 2016, just 46 percent of eligible voters between the ages of 18 and 29 voted, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Those numbers are even lower among communities of color, where voter ID requirements, automatic voter purges, and inconvenient polling sites disproportionately prevent voter turnout.

Gao decided to work as an election judge for the November 3 election in order “to simplify the voting process and make up for the shortage of volunteers…. If volunteering in the place [of older volunteers unable to work due to COVID-19 concerns] will help even just one person get their vote out, I am happy to do it.” A Mandarin speaker, she was assigned to a site near Chinatow. “[I] realized that the Asian community, specifically, often has lower voter turnouts and…I hope to increase that number,” Gao said.

46. Sheep’s wool 47. Appreciates 48. Pioneering rap trio 49. For a bit 50. Musician on the road 1

2

3

4

5

55. Insignificant 56. Space heater?

59. Handmade, in a way 60. Pittsburgher’s “y’all” 6

7

8

9

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23 27

24

35

36

37

54

48 52 55

39

43

51 56

13

40

41

59

60

31

38

47

12

34

42 46

11

26 30

33

32

45

25

29

28

10

44 49

50

53 57

58

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69