02 12 15

VOICE the georgetown

By Graham Piro

Georgetown University’s Weekly Newsmagazine Since 1969 w February 12, 2015 w Volume 47, Issue 20 w georgetownvoice.com

the

Voice

Feb. 12, 2015 This week: Editorial ... Vote Luther/Rohan in next Thursday’s election, pg. 3

News ... Gtown Israel alliance alters endorsement criteria, pg. 4 Sports ... Men’s hoops beats Seton Hall, loses to ‘Nova, pg. 6 Feature ... The exciting future of LLC’s at Georgetown, pg. 8 Leisure ... That Face is a dysfunctional delight, pg. 10 Living learning communities The Voice explores Georgetown’s existing and new Living Learning Community programs and residences.

Page 13 ... GUSA gone wild, pg. 16 Voices ... Keep it on the DL: Politicians and the Privacy, pg. 13

The Georgetown Voice welcomes responses, questions, and opinions from its readers. Submit all e-mails to editor@georgetownvoice.com.

Please include your name, year, and school. Bear in mind that letters may be edited for length and clarity and may be published and used in any medium.

Last week’s key:

Cryptoquips – Kathleen Coughlin

Below you see two encoded messages. Each letter has been switched with another and it’s your job to decide which letters correspond. For example, B might equal A. Each puzzle has one letter provided. Note, that the letter correspondence is different in the two puzzles.

CLASSIFIED Beta Readers Wanted Physics and/or philosophy students and professors needed as beta readers for a book on the intersection of physics and philosophy. You’ll be provided a list of review questions.

Compensation: undergraduates: $15, graduate students and TA’s: $30, professors: $50. Please email me with your academic background and interests at skourangis@gmail.com.

georgetownvoice.com

VOICE the georgetown

Volume 47.20 February 12, 2015 Editor-in-Chief: Dayana Morales Gomez Managing Editor: Caitriona Pagni General Manager: Mary-Bailey Frank Webmaster: Maya McCoy Editors-at-Large: James Constant, Julia Lloyd-George, Ian Philbrick Contributing Editor: Chris Castano Blog Editor: Marisa Hawley Halftime Leisure Editors: Erika Bullock, Graham Piro Halftime Sports Editors: Alex Boyd, Rob Ponce News Editor: Lara Fishbane Sports Editor: Joe Pollicino Feature Editor: Ryan Greene Leisure Editor: Daniel Varghese Page 13 Editor: Dylan Cutler Voices Editor: Noah Buyon Photo Editor: Joshua Raftis Cover Editor: Christina Libre Design Editor: Eleanor Sugrue Spread Editors: Pam Shu, Sophie Super Assistant Blog Editors: Grace Brennan, Morgan Hines, Carley Tucker Assistant Halftime Leisure Editor: Michael Bergin Assistant News Editors: Courtnie Baek, Ryan Miller Assistant Sports Editors: Isabel Echarte, Kevin Huggard, Max Roberts Assistant Feature Editor: Shalina Chatlani Assistant Leisure Editors: Elizabeth Baker, Dinah Farrell, Sabrina Kayser Assistant Voices Editor: Leila Lebreton Assistant Photo Editors: Vicki Lam, Carolyn Zaccaro Assistant Cover Editor: Megan Howell Assistant Design Editor: Ellie Yaeger

Staff Writers:

Chris Almeida, Sourabh Bhat, Emilia Brahm, Emmy Buck, Brendan Crowley, Patrick Drown, Emmanuel Elone, Samuel Kleinman, Tyler Kranawetter, Joe Laposata, Brian McMahon, Maneesha Panja, Thomas Stubna, Manuela Tobias, Colleen Zorc

Staff Photographers:

Ambika Ahuja, Saman Asdjodi, Jen Costa, Megan Howell, Gavin Myers , Freddy Rosas, Taryn Shaw, Andrew Sullivan

Staff Designers:

Erin Annick, Lizzy Blumberg, Caitlin Garrabrant, River Davis, Katie Hyland, Johnny Jung, Erin McClellan

Copy Chief: Dana Suekoff Copy Editors:

Lauren Chung, Bianca Clark, Jupiter El-Asmar, Alex Garvey, Rachel Greene, Madison Kaigh, Suzanne Trivette

Editorial Board Chair: Kenneth Lee Editorial Board:

Shalina Chatlani, James Constant, Isabel Echarte, Lara Fishbane, Dayana Morales Gomez, Ryan Greene, Caitriona Pagni, Ian Philbrick, Daniel Varghese

Director of Finance: Allison Manning Director of Human Resources: Michael Sitcawich Accounts & Sales Representative: Suzie Park The Georgetown Voice The Georgetown Voice is published every Thursday.

Mailing Address: Georgetown University The Georgetown Voice Box 571066 Washington, D.C. 20057

Office: Leavey Center Room 424 Georgetown University Washington, D.C. 20057

Email: editor@georgetownvoice.com Advertising: business@georgetownvoice.com Website: georgetownvoice.com The opinions expressed in the GeorgetownVoice do not necessarily represent the views of the administration, faculty or students of Georgetown University, unless specifically stated. Unsigned editorials represent the views of the Editorial Board. Columns, advertisements, cartoons and opinion pieces do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editorial Board or the General Board of the Georgetown Voice. The university subscribes to the principle of responsible freedom of expression of its student editors. All materials copyright the Georgetown Voice. All rights reserved.

editorial

The georgetown voice | 3

no door knock needed on leavey 424

Vote Luther / Rohan for GUSA executive

It’s time for the Georgetown University Student Association to change.

In selecting its endorsement for this year’s executive election, the Voice had three main priorities: defending students’ voices on campus, advocating for student workers, and gaining substantive student input in the creation of the 2018-38 Campus Plan. However, after interviewing each ticket, we believe that GUSA itself needs a paradigm shift. For this reason, the Voice Editorial Board endorses Joe Luther (COL ’16) for GUSA president and Connor Rohan (COL ’16) for GUSA vice president.

In recent years, GUSA has drifted from its role as a vehicle for student advocacy, becoming a way for students to seek personal success.

Apart from those in the GUSA bureaucracy, most students on campus are uninvolved and uninterested in GUSA. Less than half of the undergraduate student body took the time to vote in last year’s executive election.

The current state of the Multicultural Council is another salient example of the disconnect between the student body and its representatives. In their interviews, all of the candidates expressed dissatisfaction with the council’s engagement of cultural clubs, suggesting that the previous executive pushed the implementation of the council onto the student body without first gaining students’ support.

At first glance, Luther/Rohan appears to be a joke ticket. Both candidates come from the popular humor publication, the Georgetown Heckler, seemingly destined to be the informed voter’s last choice. Yet, to our own surprise, they possess an earnest desire to bring about change in GUSA. The Voice believes the Luther/Rohan ticket has the capacity to turn student government on its head.

Luther and Rohan said that transparency and student advocacy would form the crux of their administration—two qualities that the Voice expects of every GUSA executive. They believe that the current methods that GUSA uses to get students involved are ineffective.

During their interviews, they attacked the platforms of past GUSA presidents, which were long-winded and took seemingly endless notes from individual students to secure single-issue voters. According to Luther and Rohan, this cycle of unfulfilled promises has left many students disillusioned with GUSA. By using humor and satire to capture students’ attention, their campaign draws the attention of a large portion of the student body that would otherwise would ignore the run-of-the-mill GUSA power struggles that plague every executive election.

The saga that has unfolded over the past two days between this year’s GUSA candidates and the Georgetown Israel Alliance exemplifies in real terms the new direction a Luther/Rohan administration would take GUSA. Weeks ago, GIA reached out to the GUSA executive hopefuls in an attempt to get them to sign a pledge taking a stance against the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement, a global campaign against the Israeli occupation of Palestine.

In typical GUSA fashion, most of the tickets quickly got on board, signing off on particular interests in order to secure more votes. Luther/ Rohan were the only ticket to consistently refuse an affirmation of GIA’s leadership statement.

As more students learned about the leadership statement, Luther and Rohan were transparent about their initial discussion on the

statement, replying to an inquiry by the Voice with original copies of all their correspondence with GIA. In addition to their commitment to transparency, Luther and Rohan demonstrated to us that they will not adapt their campaign to please student groups to garner a few dozen more votes.

A closer examination of the Luther/Rohan platform, beyond their humor, further demonstrates the new problem-solving paradigm they will bring to GUSA. In between gushing about the campus’ underground tunnels and poking fun at the arts, Luther and Rohan display a genuine passion for tackling mental health issues on campus, calling for a radical expansion of CAPS hours and services to suit student schedules. They also call for a reform of how sexual assault cases are handled and processed by all faculty and staff. As the Editorial Board has previously emphasized, a focus on students’ mental well-being and reforming sexual assault policy is especially pertinent during this election. Residential Assistants receive scant support from the university during times of crisis, as tragically demonstrated when Thomas Lloyd (SFS ’15) reported Daniel Milzman to the police for the possession of ricin in Mar. 2014. Last November, RAs alleged that they had suffered Title IX violations during their employment.

During their interviews, Luther and Rohan impressed the Editorial Board with their knowledge and eagerness to mobilize students on Aramark’s future presence in on-campus dining operations and the 2018-38 Campus Plan. They expressed praise for past movements such as the “One Georgetown, One Campus” campaign, which, during the 2013 fall semester, successfully pushed administrators away from discussions of building a satellite campus in Virginia. Luther and Rohan were keen to ensure that administrators consider the student voice when making major decisions.

At its heart, the Luther/Rohan ticket looks to create a sorely needed disruption in GUSA’s worn out culture and institutional character.

They reject the rhetoric and tired politicking that students have come to expect of GUSA members, and they plan to fulfill their goals and ambitions on important issues while remaining committed to keeping in touch with their electorate.

Considering the instant runoff system that next Thursday’s elections will use, the Voice encourages students to select Sara Margolis (COL ’16) and Ryan Shymansky (COL ’16) as their second choice. The pair displays the same genuine passion as Luther/Rohan, and they include proposals that align with the the ideals of advocacy for student workers and the 2018-2038 Campus Plan.

Margolis is GUSA’s Secretary for Transfer Affairs and Shymansky serves as the CoDirector of the Student Advocacy Office. The Voice believes that Margolis and Shymansky’s combined experience in advocating for marginalized students will serve them well in the role of GUSA executives. Furthermore, the Margolis/Shymansky ticket shows great commitment, expertise, and enthusiasm towards the campus plan. We support their dedication to institutionalize broader student input on the master planning process by continuing the Student Master Planning Working Group and ensuring that construction funds go to fulfilling student needs, not neighborhood complaints. “If tickets aren’t talking about it, it’s a

problem,” they told the Voice during their interview, and we agree. Our only concern with the Margolis/Shymansky ticket is that their platform spans 48 pages, which makes it difficult to discern how realistically they can fulfill all of their campaign’s promises.

Tim Rosenberger (COL ’16) and Reno Varghese’s (SFS ’16) presented simple and achievable goals such as expanding the “What’s a Hoya?” program, and they have a bottom-up approach to student government. They emphasized the importance of changing GUSA from a creator of change to a catalyst for change to more accurately represent student interests.

However, we believe that the candidates, while well-intentioned, did not share the same level of energy and enthusiasm as Luther/Rohan and Margolis/Shymansky to bring the needed shift to student government.

Abbey McNaughton (COL ’16) and Will Simons (COL ’16) prioritized supporting club life on campus, hoping to raise the Student Activities Fee by $44, up to $200 from $156. We disagreed with this approach. While they assured us that the increase would not affect financial aid recipients, the change would hurt those students who do not qualify for aid but still need to take out private loans because they cannot shoulder the cost of tuition. We prefer Margolis/Shymansky’s proposal to solicit donations from alumni in a capital campaign to shoulder the ever-rising costs of student activities.

Finally, Chris Wadibia (COL ’16) and Meredith Cheney (COL ’16), who focus on philanthropy, displayed a worryingly shallow understanding of the issues most relevant to the student body. Although they charm the campus with a campaign for “dignity,” they failed to convince us of any ambition to contend with administrators on behalf of students.

Particularly distressing was the fact that their platform makes no mention of the words “Campus Plan,” nor did they discuss substantive policies about it during their interview.

Ultimately, all of the tickets share the Voice’s concern that GUSA’s current direction is unsustainable. They recognize the imperative to represent all students and to block initiatives that could harm the campus community. But no ticket understands the need for a change as well as Luther/Rohan does. With wit and satire, they have proved themselves to have an informed passion to galvanize apathetic students, as they have done online with the Heckler. We see a Luther/Rohan administration connecting with diverse student interests and taking an innovative approach to mobilizing students towards not just mental health, but also free speech, pluralism, dining, master planning, and the campus plan.

We believe that, as they told the Editorial Board, they will take their jobs seriously, without falling into the trap of taking themselves too seriously.

Next Thursday, we encourage our readers to select Luther/Rohan as their top choice and Margolis/Shymansky as their second.

Members of the Editorial Board associated with a GUSA campaign recused themselves from the endorsement process, were not present during the candidate interviews, and did not have a vote in the internal selection process. Connor Rohan, Ryan Shymansky, and Chris Wadibia are past contributors to the Voice. With the exception of op-ed articles for their respective campaigns, none are contributing to the Voice this election season.

news

4 | the georgetown voice

FEBRUARY 12, 2015

Georgetown Israel Alliance amends GUSA endorsement criteria CAITRIONA PAGNI Early on Wednesday morning the Georgetown Israel Alliance altered its endorsement criteria for GUSA presidential candidates to remove all language about the Boycott, Divest, and Sanction Movement. The change came in response to outrage from Arab students over GIA’s original endorsement criteria requiring candidates to affirm their support for a democratic, Jewish Israel and oppose the BDS Movement.

BDS is a global initiative calling for universities to boycott, divest from, and impose sanctions against Israeli organizations or companies are alleged to support settlement construction in the West Bank and deny equal rights to Palestinian people.

When information leaked to the student body that GIA would only offer an endorsement to GUSA candidates that “firmly oppose any Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) resolution at Georgetown University,” many students—in and out of GUSA—responded with strong opposition to the GIA’s leadership statement on social media.

Nabeel Zewail (SFS ‘15), Zaid Saqr (NHS ‘15), and Aziz Saqr (NHS ‘15) co-authored an opinion piece posted on Facebook denouncing the leadership statement on Tuesday night, criticizing GIA for seeking the support of GUSA candidates for its statement in a process that “silences a much needed discussion on Georgetown’s campus.”

Zaid Saqr said, “Preemptively asking GUSA candidates to oppose any BDS resolution on campus, without the input or involvement of the student body, stands against the idea of fostering a positive dialogue around the Palestine-Israel conflict.”

GIA President Harper Weissburg (SFS ’17) said that the content of the statement was not made public because at the time it had not been finalized. According to Weissburg, GIA planned to release its finalized statements as well as a list of its endorsements at a later date. She also criticized the Zewail, Saqr, and Saqr for writing the op-ed without actually reading the content of the leadership statement.

“People have been acting on behalf of rumors,” she said.

Weissburg denied accusations from Zewail, Saqr, and Saqr that intent of the leadership statement was to stifle dialogue. She said that she sought support from GUSA on Israel-Palestine issues because the the Georgetown chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine observe, the organization’s national policy of “antinormalization,” which means that they refuse to collaborate with pro-Israel student groups. “Our entire point to this [leadership statement] is preserving open dialogue … even with the BDS language the intent of [the statement] was not to say that BDS could not come to campus.” She said she hopes that GUSA could serve as an intermediary between the two sides of the Israel-Palestine debate. “We are not politicizing GUSA... We [GIA]

SAXA POLITICA:

need GUSA. They now have to be out in between.”

After the op-ed was posted, GIA entered into a dialogue with Zewail, Saqr, and Saqr and amended the language of its leadership statement to remove language about BDS. The final statement released by GIA reads: “We affirm our support for students and student groups that advocate for Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish and democratic state. We will always stand for positive campus dialogue that brings different Georgetown communities together around a peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

Zewail said that the publication of the amended statement he had accomplished his goal in writing the op-ed. “At least now we’re pushing the conversation forward instead of silencing it before it even got started.”

Only Tim Rosenberger (COL ‘16) and Reno Varghese (SFS ‘16) affirmed GIA’s amended proposal. Rosenberger and Varghese, who signed on to statement’s original wording that included

CAMPAIGN VIDEOS CAMPAIGN FOR VOTES

BY JAMES CONSTANT

a tri-weekly column about CAMPUS NEWS AND POLITICS

Have you heard the shrill bleating of a freshman campaigner exhorting his roommate to “join us in building a new Georgetown”?

Yes, GUSA campaign season has begun. For the next week, campus will be assaulted by feelgood slogans and beset on all sides by the grandiose promises of GUSA hopefuls that have little chance of becoming reality.

One of the most important GUSA campaign tactics is the promotional video. Most students will never get to meet all the candidates in person and videos are a useful way for voters to get a brief taste of the flavor of a campaign. They’re also an indication of how seriously candidates take the race. A poor quality advertisement suggests that the team isn’t putting much sincere effort into their operations.

WHAT’S A GUSA ELECTION WITHOUT A BIT OF SCANDAL?

This year’s slew of introductory campaign videos are heavy on showcasing the candidate’s personality and skimp on any discussion of issues. This emphasis is a marked change from the 2014 GUSA campaign videos.

Last year’s winners, Trevor and Omika, launched their campaigns with a video that was pretty much just a rundown of their campaign platforms. In as far as the advertisements are a reflection of each campaign’s focus, it looks like this election season is going to be heavy on the charisma.

By far the worst of this season’s crop is Chris Wadibia and Meredith Cheney’s cringe-worthy “Dignity” video. It reminds me of one of those pseudo-inspirational Nike ads. A vague poem is recited over the “Lose Yourself” instrumental

track that’s been used in countless commercials. The audio quality is dreadful. People do things like play cello in the middle of a Healy hallway and go running by the monuments—in black and white, of course. The candidates also break into synchronized smiles towards the end in a shot that left me feeling more creeped out than inspired. I don’t know how this video is supposed to evoke the idea of “Dignity,” the ticket’s slogan.

Tim Rosenberger and Reno Varghese’s spot is just a bit better.

It actually make it clear that they’re running for GUSA, which is a step up, but the entire thing is one thirty-second shot of the candidates talking about the things they like the most about Georgetown. It’s boring as hell and doesn’t look like something anyone put actual work into.

FACEBOOK

opposition to BDS, said that despite their personal beliefs on BDS, they supported the proposal in the interest of protecting free speech on campus.

In a public statement they wrote: “Once BDS is officially sanctioned on campus, there is an end to free speech, dialogue is stifled.” Despite this, apart from the Rosenberger/Varghese ticket, the rest of the GUSA tickets decided that international politics was not within the purview of a GUSA election.

Some campaigns have accused GIA of misrepresenting the nature of their statement and of exaggerating the support their proposal had received in order to pressure other campaigns to sign on. In a public statement, the Wadibia/Cheney ticket rescinded its support of GIA’s statement.

“We were told erroneously that the BDS resolution would foster open dialogue on college campuses across America, but yesterday evening, we discovered our trust was taken advantage of and we as a ticket were lied to,” they wrote in an email to the Voice.

Abbey McNaughton and Will Simons made a simple video that gets the job done. They actually bring up their campaign focus— namely, amplifying marginalized voices on campus—and tell the viewer a bit about themselves.

Their video isn’t without its missteps—all their footage of Georgetown’s campus is sped up to an absurd degree for no good reason—but it’s sincere and demonstrates a refreshing clarity of vision.

The best-produced video has got to be Sara Margolis and Ryan Shymansky’s. The editing is seamless and whoever was behind the camera actually realized that they’re supposed to focus on the candidate’s faces. The writing really makes the two seem appealing— maybe it’s just the fact that they appear to have bubbly personalities, but there’s an element of charm present in the video that’s missing elsewhere. I wish it spent more time highlighting their campaign principles than listing their favorite

Weissburg called Wadibia’s response a “knee-jerk” reaction based on unsubstantiated information.

Both the Luther/Rohan and Margolis/Shymansky tickets received email requests from GIA to sign their leadership statement [Full disclosure: Connor Rohan is a staff writer for the Voice]. The email received by Luther and Rohan claimed, “The other GUSA tickets have all signed on already.” However, the email received by Margolis and Shymansky included similar wording.

GIA Board Member Ari Goldstein (SFS ‘18), who sent the emails on behalf on GIA, said that this was a misunderstanding because before Monday he did not know that the Luther/Rohan ticket was a serious presidential bid.

However, according to Abbey McNaughton and Will Simons, their ticket never signed onto GIA’s pledge to begin with. “We have not explicitly signed onto [GIA’s] pledge as a ticket up to this point,” They wrote in an email to the Voice. According to GIA, they had received affirmation of McNaughton and Simon’s support prior to this statement from McNaughton and Simon’s campaign manager.

Despite these discrepancies and miscommunications between GIA and GUSA tickets, GIA insists that its only intention in issuing the leadership statement was to foster dialogue.

“We are very appreciative of all the positive conversations we have had with GUSA candidates,” Goldstein said. “We hope that we can come to a solution that we can all stand for.”

colors and Wisey’s sandwiches, but it’s an excellent spot.

Judging by the number of YouTube views, though, there’s a clear winner in the this year’s crop of videos: the Connor Rohan/Joe Luther ticket. Their victory is deserved. It’s a biting satire of the ridiculous promises that GUSA candidates make. “We’re going to make Georgetown perfect,” says Rohan.

“You’ll never, ever have a problem again.” It’s a spoof, but isn’t it really the same as what every other candidate is saying? No GUSA president is going to accomplish everything they say they will in their campaign video. Luther and Rohan at least seem to realize that more than any other ticket. They are, after all, advocating that Georgetown’s “bone-chilling necropolis” (aka Jesuit cemetery) be replaced with an administrative building.

As a whole, although many of this year’s videos are aesthetically pleasing, most are lacking any form of substantial content.

news

georgetownvoice.com

the georgetown voice | 5

Student Employment Experience Committee strives to improve student worker conditions COURTNIE BAEK On Feb. 2, Vice President for Student Affairs Todd Olsen announced the creation of the Student Employment Experience Committee (SEEC). The committee hosted a listening session last Thursday in the Healey Family Student Center to hear directly from student employees about their experiences on campus.

GUSA partnered with the university’s division of student affairs, department of human resources, and director of business policy and planning to create the new ad hoc committee to assess the quality of employment experience of students who work on campus.

“This started because we administrators on campus … heard from some students associated with GUSA and particularly the

Office of the Student Worker Advocate that they wanted to start this conversation about what the student experience is as employees on campus,” Olsen said.

According to Olsen, the goal of the committee is to use student workers’ experiences to understand and address some of the issues they face. “In the first couple months of our work, we want to hear what some of these issues are,” he said. “We know some of this is around the clarity of their role, their training orientations, and what are the boundaries of their roles as a student employees.”

SEEC’s members currently include three undergraduate students, one graduate student, “six to seven administrators” according to Olsen, and an impending faculty representative. The members will work together to make recommendations for strength-

GU Fossil Free presents proposal to board of directors LARA FISHBANE After two years of working on its proposal for divestment from fossil fuels, Georgetown University Fossil Free presented the final explanation of its demands for full divestment from the top 200 fossil fuel companies over the next three years to the university’s board of directors on Feb. 11.

The board of directors only meets three times per year. According to Fossil Free member Caroline James (COL ‘16), Georgetown President John DeGioia was instrumental in creating Wednesday’s opportunity for Fossil Free to present to select members of the board.

“He said he would find five or six Board members who would be good to have in the room and who came from a variety of backgrounds,” James wrote in an email to the Voice. “I’m not completely sure how they were chosen; I think in part they self-selected based on their potential interest in the issue.”

At the meeting, Fossil Free gave a fifteen minute presentation on their proposal and then engaged in discussion with five members of the board. “Our presentation circulated mostly around the university’s moral and Jesuit imperative to act on divestment,” James wrote. “Then

we spoke a bit about our process with CISR and how their recommendation for engagement and partial divestment is insufficient to address this issue.”

According to Fossil Free member Graham Willard (SFS ‘18), the board of directors received the proposal well. “All five board members said that they enjoyed our presentation and appreciated our hard work and commitment that we have put into the process and the proposal,” he wrote in an email to the Voice.

The board’s finance committee will meet again on Feb. 12, where it will discuss the proposal as well as considering CISR’s recommendations on the issue.

According to James, Fossil Free will not be allowed to particpate in this meeting. “GUFF also asked in the meeting today for a meeting with the full board tomorrow since they will be discussing divestment anyway, and that request was turned down,” she wrote.

Fossil Free remains optimistic moving forward and expects the board to vote at the end of the semester. “We were given a tentative promise of a vote in May/June,” Willard wrote. “We will continue to engage with individual board members in the coming weeks so that the university commits to full divestment.”

ening the student employment experience on campus, with the goal of submitting a final report providing guidelines for employers and students by the end of September.

“We had five or six testimonies. Some were sent by paper,” said Esmeralda Huerta (SFS ’17), an undergraduate member of SEEC. “One of the girls who came in shared her experience in being an RA, and how being that position was a vulnerable position.”

Huerta believes that the testimonies were helpful for administrators because it gave them an intimate connection with the students’ work experiences. “I think it was really helpful for them and the committee in general. We’re still figuring out the logistics of how to assess student employment experience,” she said. “From this meeting, we got the realization

SEEC SEEKS BETTER WORKING ENVIRONMENTS FOR STUDENTS. that we might want to do more face-to-face interviews.”

According to SEEC member Steven Orozco (MSB ’18), the focus of the committee is to develop guidelines that can be distributed across different employers. According to Orozco, current guidelines are specific to each job and there tends to be significant variation.

The SEEC student representatives have a few ideas, includ-

SAMAN ASJODI

ing establishing guidelines to help students find replacement jobs and rules standardizing how many absences student workers are permitted.

“I would say the experience that I had at my job brought me to this committee,” said Orozco.

“So now it’s more about figuring out how my experience as a student employee can improve other students’ experience as employees.”

Student Health Center encourages student vaccination BASSAM SIDIKI Last Friday, the Student Health Center sent emails to unvaccinated students on Georgetown’s campus reminding them of the mandatory vaccination requirement. The email appeared amidst a revival of the vaccination debate across the United States owing to an outbreak of measles in California earlier this year.

“Measles is now showing up in many other states,” Director of the Student Health Center Dr. James Marsh wrote in an email to the Voice. “It is not clear whether all those cases are related to the original outbreak in California.”

This outbreak has again sparked the debate about whether parents should be allowed to exempt their children from vaccinations because, according to Marsh, such outbreaks can “pose serious risks to unvaccinated or immunocompromised individuals.”

According to Dr. Christopher Loffredo, professor of oncology and biostatistics and an internationally known researcher in cancer epidemiology, parents were not as concerned about vaccines until 1998 when a report was published in a prestigious medical journal, The Lancet, linking autism in children to receiving the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine. That report is now completely discredited

upon an investigation that found the author had falsified the data, and the report was withdrawn by the journal.

It took about a decade for the investigation’s findings to be made public and, according to Loffredo, by then the damage had already been done. Many believed the false findings linking vaccines to autism and continue to be suspicious of vaccinating their children, as evidenced by high rates of “personal-belief exemptions” in many states. Numerous territories, including the District of Columbia, allow these exemptions from immunization based on medical reasons or religious beliefs. The California Department of Public Health noted that about 2.5 percent of kindergarteners have these exemptions statewide.

Although the Catholic Church objects to the use of vaccines that are made in descendant cells of aborted fetuses, Dr. Kevin Donovan, Director of Pellegrino Center for Bioethics, does not believe Georgetown’s Catholic identity conflicts with the moral imperative of childhood vaccination.

“Georgetown, being a Jesuit institution, exactly reflects the position of the Catholic Church,”

• •

Donovan said. “The Church, following a somewhat different controversy, taught that the risk to public health, if one chooses not to vaccinate, outweighs legitimate concern about the origins of the vaccine. Parents have a moral obligation to protect the life and health of their children, as well as those around them who might be infected by an unvaccinated child. It would take a severe moral conflict to override that obligation.”

According to Donovan, Loffredo, and Marsh, vaccination is particularly important on college campuses due to high population density and the increased risk for infectious diseases to spread rapidly. Measles can spread quickly if the rate of the people vaccinated among a population falls below 90 percent, a phenomenon known as poor herd immunity.

While some students remain unvaccinated, Marsh was optimistic about immunization rates at Georgetown and said the emails were intended as an extra precaution. “The Student Health Center tracks vaccination rates very carefully and compliance rates among Georgetown students are safely higher than 90 percent,” Marsh said.

READ MORE ONLINE:

The Georgetown Heckler reaches new levels of popularity National Society of Collegiate Scholars begins spring recruitment

sports

6 | the georgetown voice

February 12, 2015

Men’s hoops blows by Seton Hall after losing to Villanova CHRIS ALMEIDA

Over the past week, the Georgetown men’s basketball team (16-8, 8-5 Big East), came away with a win and a loss, far from playing to their potential.

Traveling to then-No.7 Villanova (21-2, 8-2 Big East), the Hoyas were looking to follow up their performance from less than three weeks earlier, in which they throttled the Wildcats 78-58 at the Verizon Center. Unfortunately, after falling behind early in the first half, the Blue and Gray would never come close to sweeping the season series, losing 53-69.

Early in the game, senior guard Jabril Trawick hit a three from the corner to put the Hoyas ahead 5-2. The Hoyas would miss their next 16 shots from deep, shooting under six percent from behind the arc on the day. The Wildcats also held the Hoyas to 30 percent shooting from the field.

Freshman guard L.J. Peak led the Hoyas in scoring with 15 points, but on 6-18 shooting from the field. Junior guard D’Vauntes Smith-Rivera, freshman forward Isaac Copeland, and freshman guard Tre Campbell combined for three baskets on 19 attempts. Though senior center Josh Smith proved effective on the offensive end, he was limited to 15 minutes after picking up two fouls early in the first half.

“When you play a good defensive team, like they are—a team that has their size and ability to switch everything—you are not going to get a one-pass, twopass open look,” head coach John Thompson III said. “You have to have the discipline to stay with what we’re doing and keep executing and hopefully some-

thing will open up later. In both halves, we went down because we weren’t disciplined enough on the offensive end.”

Villanova thrived from behind the arc, making 12 threes, including seven during a ten minute stretch in the first half which put the game out of reach before halftime. Senior guard Darrun Hilliard led the Wildcats with 15 points. Sophomore guard Josh Hart added 13 points and senior forward JayVaughn Pinkston contributed 10 points to go along with 8 boards.

“We’ve got to play harder,” Trawick said. “We got to know that we just can’t come out and think that we’re going to win games like this. Playing against these teams in the Big East is really hard. This is really a grind.

We have to grind out the game for the whole 40 minutes. And we didn’t do that today. We just have to come together, play together, and play as hard as we can the next couple of games.”

The Hoya team that took the floor in Philadelphia was not the same one that had knocked off a top-five program just a few weeks earlier.

“They looked like we did last game and we looked like they did,” Villanova head coach Jay Wright said.

Following the Villanova loss, the Hoyas traveled to Newark to play Seton Hall (15-9, 5-7 Big East) having lost three of their last four games.

The Blue and Gray looked to shake their poor form, jumping out to a quick 27-7 lead, only to let the Pirates pull the game back to 44-44 early in the second half.

With over 15 minutes to play, both senior forward Mikael Hopkins and Smith had picked up four fouls and the Hoya offense looked to be losing steam.

Freddy Rosas

The Hoyas snapped a two-game losing streak with their win at Seton Hall.

The Blue and Gray were saved by Copeland, who started in place of Hopkins and scored 12 straight points to help the Hoyas go on a 17-4 run. The freshman had a career-high 20 points, his fifth double digit scoring performance in the last eight games, as well as eight boards.

“He played like a man today,” Smith-Rivera said. “That’s how we need him to play for the remainder of the season. We need him to continue to rebound for us like that.”

Joe o’s Pollicin

Copeland’s play helped the Hoyas pull away and cruise to an 86-67 victory, despite only receiving 28 minutes as Hopkins and Smith combined for only four shot attempts.

The Blue and Gray have relied on Copeland a great deal in his first season on the Hilltop, but he is undaunted by the rising expectations.

“Going into the game, I knew I was going to start so I felt like I had to make up for the last game when I started,” Co-

peland said. “I wanted to come out and be aggressive, do what my team wanted me to do. I think I did a good job of that.”

The Hoyas, now sitting just above mid-table in the Big East, and three losses behind league-leading Villanova, will have little room for error as the regular season comes to a close, with only five more games remaining. Their next matchup will take place at home against St. John’s (15-8, 4-6 Big East) on February 17 at 7 p.m.

SPORTS SERMON---

“There’s nobody coming into my little room to join me.”-Real Sociedad Manager David Moyes on his post-match drink ritual.

“Will the person responsible please step forward?”

This refrain is often heard coming from a coach who isn’t happy with his team, but doesn’t know who to blame. If the culprit doesn’t come forward, everyone will be forced to run laps or no one will be able to leave until someone pays the piper. This all comes to mind while pondering the recent developments surrounding the Syracuse men’s basketball program.

This past Wednesday, the school announced a self-imposed ban from this year’s post-season play in order to alleviate some pressure from an NCAA investigation surrounding alleged academic fraud, irregularities in its drug policy, and an improper relationship with a YMCA staff member. School officials stated that none of the possible improper conduct occurred after 2012 and that no current student-athlete was involved. The school hopes that such self-imposed actions will help lessen the degree of punishment doled out by the NCAA when it discloses the results of its investigation in the coming weeks.

After announcing the ban, Syracuse head coach Jim Boeheim said, “I am very disappointed that our basketball team will miss the opportunity to play in the post-season this year. However, I supported this decision, and I believe the university is doing the right thing by acknowledging that past mistakes occurred.

Our players have faced adversity and challenges before.”

The problem is that the only person who can be held responsible for bringing this

adversity upon his players is Jim Boeheim. In that passive statement, Boeheim sounds almost as if he’s speaking as a program outsider, instead of the day to day CEO of the multi-million dollar enterprise that is Syracuse basketball.

This kind of statement gives the idea that some distance separates the coach from the alleged violations of his program. It’s as if he’s trying to deflect blame from himself.

In the end, the wrong people end up receiving the punishment because no one, especially the head coaches of these college programs, wants to stand up and take responsibility. Players will be barred from earning a spot in March Madness this season. Syracuse fans will be deprived of the prospect of rooting for their team in March and experiencing the thrill ride that is the NCAA Tournament.

And every fan of college basketball will miss out on the opportunity to watch a team that boasts some of the best athletes in the country. But they all had nothing to do with committing the violations. Why then should they be forced to pay the price?

Will Boeheim lose his job over what is now the second time that the NCAA imposes sanctions on his program for recklessness? No. In fact, with his contract set to expire at the end of the season, it seems that he will receive a lucrative contract extension.

Will he be suspended for his actions? Probably not.

NCAA violations have occurred at other schools with other high-profile head coaches.

Kentucky Head Coach John Calipari’s pre-

vious two stops as a college head coach, UMass and Memphis, had sanctions imposed due to violations committed when Calipari was the head coach, and he did not serve any suspension for either transgression.

Will he even see the possibility of a pay cut or some other form of punishment?

Almost certainly not. Instead, he will probably have the court at the Carrier Dome renamed after him, and he will be forever praised as a man who brought Syracuse a national championship, not the man who brought embarrassment upon a school that has found itself investigated by the NCAA now for the second time in his tenure.

We do not know definitively whether Boeheim himself personally committed any violations. Only time and further investigation by the NCAA will reveal his role in these infractions. Still, the responsibility must ultimately fall on Boeheim’s shoulders, as he is both the overseer and public face of the Syracuse basketball program.

Boeheim should be held accountable for what occurs within his program, but it should not take an NCAA ruling for this to happen. He should own up to the transgressions of his program and accept this responsibility along with the punishment that should follow. Instead, however, Boeheim acts like the fifth grader who threw the paper airplane in class when the teacher wasn’t looking, causing everyone else to be subjected to the punishment, rather than have himself take responsibility.

sports

georgetownvoice.com

Softball wins two in opening tourney JOE LAPOSATA The Georgetown softball team went 2-2 in its season-opening weekend, winning games against Indiana State (2-2, 0-0 MVC) and South Dakota (1-3, 0-0 Summit League) and losing to the University of Missouri at Kansas City (2-2, 0-0 WAC) and Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis (2-2, 0-0 Summit League).

Playing in the Music City Classic in Nashville, Tenn., the Hoyas faced Indiana State behind the strong arm of senior Megan Hyson, who pitched a 12-strikeout complete game.

The Hoyas were tied 2-2 heading into the 7th inning, when a six-run frame blasted the game open.

Hyson was quick to deflect credit, though, saying of her teammates play that, “Everyone in our lineup hit this weekend, especially when we had runners in the scoring position. I have confidence that if the person up to bat does not get the job done, the others behind her will.”

Hyson’s faith in her teammates was well founded in the following day’s game against South Dakota, but she herself contributed greatly to the team’s success again. Up 4-0 in the bottom of the 6th, Hyson hit a grand slam to give the Hoyas an 8-0 lead, triggering the 8-run-rule surrender when South Dakota failed

The Georgetown women’s basketball team (4-20, 2-10 Big East) dropped their eighth consecutive game, falling 4864 to Villanova (14-10, 8-4 Big East) this past Sunday night at McDonough Arena.

“I was proud of our team’s fight. I was proud that we played hard,” Georgetown Head Coach Natasha Adair said following her team’s loss.

Villanova jumped out to a commanding lead early in the game, taking a 23-9 lead midway through the first half.

Georgetown attempted to claw their way back into the game but Villanova’s offense would not let up, piling on 12 points in the paint in the first half compared to Georgetown’s paltry two points. A 13-3 run for Villanova closed out the

– Buckwild –

emmy buck’s TRI-weekly column about sports

Promance: Star Athletes that make it work

SOftball went .500 during its season-opening trip. to score in the bottom of the half of the inning.

The South Dakota game, which ended an 8-0 shutout, was pitched by Lauren O’Leary, who called the game a “great win.” O’Leary pitched 4.1 innings of two-hit, shutout baseball against South Dakota.

In the second game of that day’s doubleheader, however, things began to go downhill, when the Hoyas lost despite scoring 8 runs for the third consecutive game. Giving up a seven-run 3rd inning to take the lead 9-4, the Hoyas would go on to lose to UMKC 11-8.

“UMKC put the ball in play and took advantage of quite a few errors and the inexperience of our freshman pitcher,” Head Coach Pat Conlan said after the game.

The last game of the weekend was a 5-3 lost to IUPUI. With Hyson pitching once more, the Hoyas put up three in the bottom frame of the 1st, only to surrender three of

Georgetown Sports information

their own in the top of the second. The Jaguars then scored twice more on the Hoyas in the 3rd inning, seizing a 5-3 lead that they would not relinquish. The Hoyas failed to recover, bringing them to an even 2-2 over the weekend.

The Hoyas ended the weekend having outscored their opponents 27-18. Hyson and sophomore Alessandra Gargicevich-Almeida in particular had very good weekends, with the latter hitting two of the Hoyas’ three home runs.

The Hoyas will spend this upcoming weekend in Wilmington, N.C., where they’ll play in the UNC Wilmington Invitational. Of the five games, two will be against the hosts of UNC-Wilmington, another two will be against Saint Joseph’s, and the opener will be against UMBC. The Hoyas play no home games until March 17 against Princeton, which will kick off a nine-game homestand.

Women’s hoops falls to Villanova MAX ROBERTS

the georgetown voice | 7

first half and the Hoyas entered halftime down 17-38.

Despite the disappointing first half, Adair’s squad came out significantly sharper in the second half. Despite five quick points from Villanova’s senior forward Emily Leer on consecutive jump shots, the Hoyas offense managed to pick up. The Hoyas proceeded to go on a 9-0 run in the middle of the second half, capped off with a three pointer from junior forward Logan Battle.

“The second-half effort showed a lot of what we can do,” said Adair.

But after Georgetown’s impressive run, Villanova’s potent offense woke back up and scored seven unanswered points to push their lead back up to a more than comfortable 25 points with just over five minutes remaining in the

game. Although the final outcome was decided, the Hoyas refused to quit and closed the game on an 11-2 run.

Despite the apparent blowout loss, the Blue and Gray’s eight straigth, there were many positive takeaways for the Hoyas that the disappointing final score would not show. They actually outscored the Wildcats 31-26 in the second half and outrebounded Villanova 38-32 over the course of the contest.

Speaking about the future of her squad, Adair said, “We just have to make sure we come out ready and we put it all together.”

The Hoyas will remain home as they face Xavier University (14-10, 6-7 Big East) Friday at 8 p.m. for their Hail to the Kale night and then Butler University (12-12, 8-5 Big East) Sunday at 4 p.m.

The fatal day of chocolate kisses and giant red hearts is upon us—Valentine’s Day, the day when our thoughts turn to the love and relationships in our lives. But as my thoughts stray, I cannot help but think of those men and women who stand at the forefront of their athletic fields. These notable men and women have succeeded in their realm of expertise. But how do they fare when it comes to love?

The news is flooded with stories of break-ups and ugly divorces, leaving us wondering if there is any hope for romantic happiness for professional athletes.

LeBron James met his match in Savannah Brinson, who has been a steady presence for LeBron throughout the years. They met at a high school football game in Akron, Okla. Although they attended different schools, they formed a close relationship—so close that Savannah became pregnant during her senior year of high school. Their first child, LeBron James, Jr. was born in 2004. Then three years later, their second child, Bryce Maximus, was born—the same year LeBron played in his first NBA Finals with the Cleveland Cavaliers. Savannah stood by LeBron for eight years before he finally popped the question. On a starry New Year’s Eve night in 2011, LeBron proposed to Savannah in front of all his Miami teammates. The couple married in 2013, celebrating with 200 guests including Beyonce and Jay-Z. From Akron, Okla. to the bright nights of Miami, LeBron and Savannah have remained together throughout the entirety of LeBron’s career. They even started a furniture line together, probably so that they have comfy couches to sit on after LeBron retires.

Although he jumped from Toronto Blue Jays to the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim finally to New York Yankees, Vernon Wells has remained faithful to Charlene.

They met in high school and were friends for a period before formalizing their romantic relationship.

The couple married in 2001, just one year before Wells was given the chance to be an everyday player for the Toronto Blue Jays. You could say that the Wells family landed the jackpot when Vernon signed the 6th largest contract in MLB history in 2006. He now has a net worth of about $75 million, and has the free time to dedicate to his family and the Vernon Wells Perfect 10 Charity. Charlene and

Vernon Wells have two sons, tens of millions of dollars in the bank, and a relationship that has persisted for over 20 years.

Then there is Deron Williams, who met his wife Amy in the second grade. But when they reached high school, their childhood friendship blossomed into something more. The couple fostered a love for one another and for basketball, as they both played on their high school basketball teams in Texas. They married in 2006, just one year after Williams was drafted by the Utah Jazz. Deron Williams currently plays for the Brooklyn Nets and Amy cares for their four children. They have three daughters and an adopted son, Deron Jr. In spite of his busy career as an NBA player, Deron has maintained a strong relationship with his childhood love.

But the couple that has been romantically exclusive for probably the longest amount of time is Philip and Tiffany Rivers.

They began dating in the 7th grade. From Decatur, Ala. to the big leagues in the NFL, Tiffany and Philip have remained committed to one another. So committed that Tiffany converted to Catholicism to align with Philip’s faith. The two married after their freshman year of college in 2001 and promptly started building a family. In 2002, their eldest daughter, Halle, was born. Having entered the league in 2004, Philip Rivers can boast one of the longest relationships and the largest family in the NFL, with one lovely wife and seven kids.

What is one common thread throughout all of these successful marriages? Most started out as high school sweethearts— some even younger than that.

It seems that in the face of fame and glory and million dollar contracts, the relationships which maintain a steady presence are the ones that begin prior to fame. For those who reside in the limelight, it can be difficult to distinguish true friends from fame seekers. In the case of these professional athletes, they have been successful in their relationships because they were lucky enough to find them before they achieved wealth and glory.

Here’s a piece of advice: before you make it big, marry one of your fellow Hoyas so you won’t have to worry about a future significant other smashing your car with a golf club.

feature

8 | the georgetown voice

LIVE

Joshua Raftis

Former Jesuit Residence under construction.

ANd LET

LEARN The next phase of the living learning community program By: Graham Piro

February 12, 2015

“We want to give people the ability to express themselves,” Michael Marino (COL ’15) a student leader of the Renaissance House said. Sitting in a living room adorned with paintings of famous Italians, Marino discussed how much the Renaissance House has come to mean to him. “It’s about finding mentors and finding people that you can relate to,” he says. “In that sense, the house became an open space.”

One of the 11 living learning communities on Georgetown’s Magis Row, the Renaissance House sits just outside the front gates of campus. Each painted a different color, the 11 townhouses make up a collective of LLCs and, at first glance, do not stand out from the rest of the neighborhood. Their windows are decorated with the occasional picture or sign, but nothing so unusual as to draw attention to the houses. Despite their relatively simple appearance, these communities are a burgeoning part of Georgetown’s residential communities and are about to partner with Georgetown’s soon-to-be largest and newest LLC in the renovated Jesuit Residence.

As a major part of Georgetown’s current round of campus construction, the former Jesuit Residence, made up of Ryan and Mulledy Halls, will become one large LLC: the Spirit of Georgetown Residential Academy, with 148 spots open for students.

Ed Gilhool, director of Residential Education and a major planner for the new residence hall, said that the Spirit of Georgetown Residential Academy concept was a result of student input and is designed around nine tenets that encapsulate Georgetown’s spirit, which include Jesuit educational mottos such as cura personalis and being “contemplatives in action.” “[In the former Jesuit Residence] students will have the opportunity to reflect, engage in dialogue and deepen their awareness of our shared values through community programs, small-group cohort reflections, [and] engagement with faculty and Jesuits,” Gilhool wrote in an email to the Voice. “We are impressed with the quality of applications.”

Applications to join the Spirit of Georgetown opened last December. Prior to applying, students had the opportunity to take tours of the new facility and see its apartment-style living spaces. Applications for the community closed at midnight on Wednesday, Feb. 11, and Gilhool said that they expect to receive well over 200 applications for the academy.

According to Heather, Although LLCs have existed since the mid-90s, their popularity and diversity have grown steadily over the past few years, even before the old Jesuit Residence was in the works. Gilhool added that approximately 300 students are currently part of LLCs, and that number is expected to grow dramatically with the addition of 148 students in the Spirit of Georgetown community and the creation of a new community for transfer students. Heather said that 11 percent of the on-campus population will be a member of a community at the beginning of next semester.

Starting fall 2015, there will be twelve LLCs, with themes ranging from Culture and Performance to Justice and Diversity in Action to a floor dedicated to French living. Although the LLCs have a wide variety of subjects, they all attempt to add another level of involvement to the typical Georgetown residential living experience.

“Living learning communities provide a unique opportunity for residential students to connect their academic coursework with their co-curricular involvement,” Heather said. “LLC participants live in an environment that is focused around a common interest.”

Of the twelve LLCs, five are available for incoming freshmen: the Living Well community, Culture and Performance, Justice and Diversity in Action, Explore D.C., and the Entrepreneurship community, giving freshmen the opportunity to cut across divisions between years and connect with upperclassmen.

Caitlyn Cobb (COL ’18) joined Justice and Diversity in Action before she even started her first year at Georgetown. “I applied to JDA in order to be in a community that pushed me to become involved in community and social justice projects I otherwise would not have been exposed to,” Cobb said.

As a complement to Georgetown’s emphasis on service, the Justice and Diversity in Action community chooses one social issue per year for the entire community to focus on. This year, the LLC’s theme is inequality, with events including service commitments, fundraising for the homeless, and programs about violence against black males in America, according to Marilyn McMorrow, the faculty advisor to the community.

Cobb said that she enjoys the connections with upperclassmen that she’s formed in the community

georgetownvoice.com and praised Justice and Diversity’s ability to foster an environment that was simultaneously supportive and productive.

One potential downside to joining an LLC as a freshman is missing out on noteworthy freshmen experiences, such as living in one of the four iconic freshman dorms. Regardless of this concern, McMorrow said that the retention rate for Justice and Diversity is impressive.

“The students have to decide whether or not they may miss out on the first year experience, but usually only two or three end up moving out,” she said. McMorrow said that the program’s success stems from its reputation among the student body and that some students stay in the program for all four of their years at Georgetown.

Cobb said that while she enjoys living in Justice and Diversity in Action, she realizes that she has not had a typical freshman year because of it. “It’s easy to feel cut off from a common freshman experience at the beginning of the year,” she said. Cobb added, however, that she enjoys being on a more relaxed floor and being able to meet upperclassmen.

Other LLCs, such as Bayit, the Jewish living learning community, and the Muslim Interest Living Community, serve as outlets for religious life and devotion on campus.

Bayit consists of 25 Jewish students living in five apartments in Henle Village. The community provides an opportunity for these students to practice Shabbat, celebrate High holidays, and open their apartments to the entirety of the Jewish population at Georgetown for dinners.

Josh Levitt (MSB ’17) said that living in Bayit gives him a much more tight-knit community experience than his freshman floor did. “[The] sense of community helped me get in touch with the Jewish community at Georgetown,” Levitt said. “I felt like I missed out on an opportunity freshman year.”

Craig Levites (COL ’17) and John O’Neill (COL ’17) both credited the community for helping them to become more comfortable with their religious identity and praised the open culture Bayit fosters. This sense of community exemplifies the central objective of LLC’s: creating a common space for similar groups of students who live on an extremely diverse campus.

Sydney Brooks (COL ’18) applied to live in Bayit next year because she was drawn to this sense of community. “The idea of having a Jewish community within a Jesuit university was a concept that really appealed to me,” she said. “My community at home was primarily Jewish, so to possibly have a community similar to that at Georgetown definitely [appeals to me].”

While LLCs like Bayit and Justice and Diversity have set themes, the Magis Row LLC collective offers students the opportunity to create their own LLC theme, which can change from year to year. Opened in 2009, Magis Row now includes 11 townhouses, a decrease in the original number of 14 townhouses.

According to Chris McCarty, the community director for Alumni Square and the townhouses, each Magis Row house is required to put on two programs per semester, one based on the particular house’s theme and another that is a service piece to go along with the mission of Magis Row and is afforded a $300 budget for the projects.

“We want them to give back,” McCarty said. This year, one house is doing a feminine napkin drive for homeless women in D.C. Other houses are extensions of programs on campus. The Meditation House is an extension of the John Main Center for Meditation. “[The house] integrates the concept of meditation and contemplative living

feature throughout college life,” Meditation House resident Anthony Buonomo (COL ’16) said.

As part of their efforts to achieve this goal, members of the house lead meditations on campus and host gatherings to spread awareness about the importance of meditation. “We want to get other people in the Georgetown community who wouldn’t otherwise meditate to understand what meditation is and the benefits of it, ” Meditation House student resident Edward Percarpio (SFS ’16) said.

The Justice as a Movement house is one of several of social justice houses on Magis Row. “We’re interested in social justice from all angles, whether it’s law, education or art,” Justice as Movement resident Esther Owolabi (COL ’15) said. “We wanted to come together to bridge the gap between social justice and art.”

Khadijah Davis (NHS ’15), one of the student heads of Justice as Mpovement, discussed how the application process made sure that the house had a clear plan for its programs, including a trip to the protests in Ferguson, Mo. Although the LLCs have grown considerably over the past few years and many members are excited for future partnerships with the Spirit of Georgetown, others remain conscious of a general lack of awareness of LLCs at Georgetown.

Jake Bercow (COL ’16), the former president of Bayit, acknowledged that although Bayit is wellknown in the Jewish community, other students are unaware of it. “[Applicants] hear more about [LLCs] in the three months leading up to college than when they actually get here,” he said.

Amy Dorsey, the program coordinator for the International Student and Scholar Services and adviser for the Global Living Community, echoed Bercow’s sentiment and said that she hopes to take steps to broaden the pool of applicants for her LLC. “I want to make sure that everyone at Georgetown knows [the GLC] exists. A lot of students find out about it later and they think it’s a cool idea, but by then it’s too late to apply,” Dorsey said. Dorsey praised the fact that the GLC has numerous transfer and international applicants, and she reiterated that she wants to get in touch with more American students as well.

Despite many hopeful outlooks for the future of LLCs, some members dislike their current LLCs. Lilah Burke (SFS ’18), a member of Justice and Diversity in Action, said that joining an LLC has extremely limited her social life at Georgetown.

“It was pretty isolating for me when everyone else I knew was eating dinner, texting [in] groupchats, and going out with their floor,” Burke said. “I just didn’t have those relationships.”

Burke also said that her LLC lacks initiative in living up to its mission statement, noting that it does only a small handful of programs each semester. “I constantly get the question ‘What do you guys do?’”

Burke said. “The answer is ‘Really, very little.’”

McCarty said that the LLC program has oversight measures to prevent a community from failing to live up to its own goals.

Spirit of georgetown communal space.

the georgetown voice | 9 “We remind them that how they act now and what they’re doing now can affect the reapplication process,” McCarty said. “If it gets to the point where they’ve done nothing for the whole semester, which hasn’t happened yet, my supervisor and I will step in to have a deeper conversation about what’s going on.”

Dorsey said that her students have always been committed to the LLCs’ mission because they get to choose the yearly plan and programming themselves.

“We have a spring retreat where we evaluate how fall semester went, pinpoint issues on the floor from the fall, and come up with solutions for them, so that generally prevents any mid-year slack,” Dorsey said.

Certain programs also have had to deal with insincerity in their applications. Specifically, the Bayit community has attracted some rising sophomores to apply, even if they’re not committed to the program, in order to get a Henle apartment, according to Maddy Budman (COL ’18), an applicant to Bayit.

“I know that they significantly changed the application this year, namely increasing the questions from two to five essays, to try and dissuade those types of applicants,” Budman said.

As administrators are becoming more aware of problems with the system, they’ve taken steps to combat insincerity on the part of applicants. Bayit’s changing of their application from involving two essays to five essays is just one measure.

McMorrow, the faculty advisor to Justice and Diversity in Action, spoke further to this issue. “The desire for a single room motivates some applicants who then quietly disappear when a single does not come through,” she said. “My approach is to take applicants at their word.”

As the LLC system continues to grow and develop, its proponents recognize that they must give attention to the potential flaws and issues, but most remain optimistic. Professor Guy Spielmann, head of the Culture and Performance community, put it best when he said that LLCs are not just about getting a certain apartment.

“They’re about giving incoming and current students residential options that are more than just a room,” Spielmann said. Students are brought together by their common interests and passions. “That evolves into personal bonds and friendships.”

Joshua Raftis

leisure

10 | the georgetown voice

FEBRUARY 12, 2015

Black Theater Ensemble’s That Face a bold, bed-ridden journey ANDREA KEKLAK “Rahhh!

Euuugh!

Aghh!

Nooooo!” Fifteen minutes before showtime, alarming shrieks and cries ring out of the Walsh Black Box Theater.

Whether this is some bizarre pre-show ritual, or last-minute practice for one of the scenes (after all, That Face is a modern-day take on Oedipus) remains to be seen, although it does make the wait in the lobby considerably more entertaining.

As it turns out, this disturbing series of screams are a fitting prelude for what would come in the actual performance.

That Face is, in a word, intense.

With the audience only a few feet away from the action, the show is in-your-face to the point of actual discomfort.

“You know when you’re at a friend’s house, and their parents are fighting right in front of you, and you’re like ‘wow, this is really awkward?’” Audrey Imbs (COL ’16), the stage manager said. “That’s pretty much what we were going for.”

That Face, indeed, delivers on the promise of close-up familial angst and unhealthy relation-

ships. At the heart of the play lies a twisted, toxic, incomprehensible, and yet somehow endearing bond between a mother, Martha, and her son, Henry. The latter, played by Nick Phalen (SFS ‘16), is the steady voice of reason throughout the play—patient with his mother, stern with his

under the covers as she makes nonsensical phone calls and smokes a cigarette.

“I’ve never seen someone with so much natural instinct in my life,” Imbs said of Farrell’s performance. The show’s director, Alice Neave (COL ’16) agreed wholeheartedly, recall-

AINHOA HARDY

“Mommmm, can you get me a glass of water?!” sister, and furious with his father for his continual absence.

Henry’s sister, Mia, played

by Natalie Caceres (MSB ‘16), is convincing as the spoiled, snarky private-schooled girl who gets caught up in a prank gone horribly wrong. Izzy, played by Salma Khamis (SFS ‘17), her co-conspirator in the

Under the Covers: A bi-weekly column about literature by James Constant

Sometimes, the bits that go nowhere are the most important ones.

I’ve been reading Stieg Larsson’s The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. I know, I know. I’m about seven years late to the Swedish murder-mystery party. I’m only two hundred pages in—not even close to where blood starts getting spilled and the going gets exciting—but I’m already loving it.

Lisbeth Salander—that’s the tattooed (and pierced and hair-dyed) girl of the title—is reeling me in.

I wondered what in her past has landed her in such a precipitous state. I wondered how she became such a talented personal investigator despite “closing her ears and refusing to lift a pen to write anything” straight through her nine years of schooling.

I’ve caught myself pondering questions like these while waiting at the bus stop or frying eggs in the morning. Salander is both an intriguing vision of female

prank, is deliciously sinister; one moment taking savage delight in “initiating” (torturing) a fellow schoolmate, the next, seducing Henry into her bedroom with vile delight.

It is Martha, however, played

by Michaela Farrell (COL ‘18), who absolutely steals the show.

empowerment and a funhouse agglomeration of twisted manic-pixie traits. Whenever she’s on the page, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is electric.

She and the great characters in Larsson’s novel keep me reading—even though the twists haven’t even started yet. I’ve covered a substantial amount of text so far, but the novel’s plot up to this point has been decidedly anti-thrilling.

But I don’t have a problem with it. I’m getting to know Lisbeth and her counterpart, disgraced journalist Mikael Blomkvist, and I’m picking up details about the bleak Swedish world they inhabit. It feels like Larsson is setting me up for a version of the classic lockedroom murder mystery—only with an isolated northern island taking the place of the Orient Express.

Reviewers complained about the book’s slow beginnings when it was first published. “Not a

With her hair in a perpetually disheveled bun and wearing only a rumpled nightgown, she could not fit more perfectly into the role of the indisposed, addicted mother: hysterical and whiny at the thought of Henry leaving her, pacing around the room looking desperately for her jewels, giggling insanely

ing the first time she saw Farrell audition. “She absolutely blew us away,” Neave said. “She’s just a freshman, but she just had such amazing instincts. And she’s only grown since then.”

Without a doubt, it is the bold authenticity and risk-taking cast, combined with beautifully-written characters, that takes

Books should begin at the beginning breakneck page-turner,” crowed the Independent. “It takes Blomkvist almost half the book to make any kind of breakthrough.”

There’s dozens of Goodreads forum threads asking the same question—“How long until I get to the good part?”

I’ve often found, though, that the slow moments towards the beginning of an exciting book are my favorite. They’re comforting for readers, and allow authors to develop a world to set their story in without the pressure to deliver whirlwind plot points and pump the story forward.

Whenever I think about luxurious expositions, the first thing that comes to mind is Harry Potter. The first six books all began by introducing new characters, allowing for entertaining antics, and placing me firmly in Hogwarts, a place I felt comfortable inhabiting. I was always able to get my bearings before the adventure really began.

But Deathly Hallows, the last Harry Potter, ripped that security blanket away from me. There was no going back to Hogwarts, and the plot began taking hectic turns from the get-go. I felt a bit betrayed that Harry, Ron, and Hermione weren’t going back to the place I’d grown so fond of for one last comfortable introduction to a new story. It meant no more quidditch games and classrooms tricks from Fred and George, no more galavanting through Hogsmeade, no more of what brought me to the series in the first place.

Stories that start in the middle of things have alienated me in the past. I don’t know why the conflict is happening, just that it’s there. The action that the reader is forced into often isn’t as meaningful as it would be if the I had a better grasp on the characters involved. Faulkner’s Light in August threw me off for just this reason. I wish I knew a bit more

That Face to a level not often seen in student productions.

“The relationships are just so real, there’s this rawness to it,” Neave observed. “And it pertains to issues that are very common ... one of them being the destructive nature of addiction and the issue of mental health.

And that’s something we don’t often talk about at Georgetown.

I’m hoping that it makes people think, or maybe even start a dialogue.”

Walking out of the theater, there certainly is a lot to feel: relief, amazement, curiosity, exhaustion. That Face is an intense performance, and takes almost as much to emotional energy to watch as it must take to perform.Yet, as Imbs noted, the storyline is ultimately comforting in some ways, because “it’s really a play about family—something everyone can relate to.”

She continued, “At any rate, if you feel like your family’s dysfunctional, you’ll feel a little better after watching this.”

Walsh Black Box Theatre Feb. 12, 8 p.m.

Feb. 14, 2 p.m. and 8 p.m. performingarts.georgetown.edu

about Lena Grove before getting thrown on the road with her in a quest to find the father of her unborn child. I put the book down within the first 50 pages because I didn’t feel much of a connection to the characters.

That early in the book, the characters were just vessels for the events transpiring and not real people. It rang hollow.

Books with lengthy introductions don’t face the same problem. They generally give me chance to meet a character in their daily life and understand how they deal with mundane challenges before they’re confronted with the extraordinary.

It’s a delicate balancing act. Too much background detail, to be sure, can bore me to tears, but too little runs the risk of throwing the reader into a plot without a favorite character to cheer for.

And to be honest, I’d rather go nowhere with someone I know than to the ends of the earth with someone I don’t.

Develop your character with James at jcc286@georgetown.edu

“I’ll have what she’s having.” — When Harry met sally

georgetownvoice.com

After Peacock Room’s cuisine soars MIKE BERGIN Imagine Ernest Hemingway, Jay Gatsby, and a Portland hipster collaborated to create a restaurant. Mirrors fill the room to give the illusion of a grand space within an intimate café.

The restaurant’s prussian blue walls and chandeliers over long communal tables demonstrate the true colors behind this local eatery’s vision: comfortable elegance.

Suddenly, you might have a pretty accurate idea of what the After Peacock Room looks like.

The restaurant was quiet for a Saturday night—besides an elderly couple across the room, I was the only one dining here for the evening. After perusing the somewhat brief menu, I decided upon the Hamachi Crudo with green apple, lime, benne, and jalapeno pepper for my appetizer. Small portions of Hamachi surrounded by

fresh greens contrast against the black, square plate. The finely sliced apple blended with a unique soy gel and sesame seed for a refreshing feeling.

A friendly staff fostered a warm atmosphere. But the overly personable, hovering staff was almost as bad as crappy service. Having someone waiting to refill my water every time I pick the glass up is not in my top dining experience. The restaurant thrives off of exotic combinations and flavors while maintaining a homelike feel. The porcini stuffed chicken with arrowleaf spinach, roasted apple, and natural jus was an absolute treat. The apple and chicken combination reminded me of a nice, home-cooked meal with an adroit use of spices that rivals 5-star dining. Thinking of this dish in comparison to the appetizer, I admired the cooking range the chefs displayed.

It became clear that the simplistic underlying concepts behind the

“SHAKE YOUR TAILFEATHER FOR INEXPENSIVE FANCY FOOD!”

After Peacock room

menu were reflected in the restaurants decor. Brass-colored wire lined parts of the wall, and the paint lines of the rich blue unevenly hit the gold lines on the walls. The restaurant felt intentionally unfinished in this way, which broke the tension of a complex menu and decor in a cafe-like setting. This, thankfully, reflected in the restaurant’s pricing. The check was a relief at the end of the evening; a reasonable cost for any Hoya looking for a new place to dine.

Overall, the After Peacock Room deserves to be packed with customers every night. It’s quiet charm and affordable gourmet food puts it on the list of Georgetown’s finest restaurants.

The After Peacock Room has already had a positive influence on the community. Beyond providing a wonderful dining experience for patrons, the restaurant contributes substantial portions of its revenue to charity. According to their web page, “We will be open for coffee take-out service only from 9 a.m. to noon every Sunday. All profits from the takeout service will be donated to local charities.”

With great food and great causes, the After Peacock Room is quickly rising to culinary prominence.

After Peacock Room 2622 P Street N.W. Closed Monday and Tuesday afterpeacockroom.com

the georgetown voice | 11

Roses are red...

Roses are red So is my hand Oh god I’m bleeding Someone call for help

Roses are red Dinosaur droppings come in piles If I’m Taylor Swift, Will you be Harry Styles?

Roses are red And other colors All roses are equal Don’t discriminate

Roses are red So is the square We’ll all be gone soon I don’t really care

Roses are red Oranges are orange I really dug myself Into a hole with this one

Roses are red Holidays are stupid We’ll be in bed If I play Cupid

Roses are red It’s cold in winter I met my Valentine Through swiping on tinder

Roses are red I like the view On the fifth floor of Lau When I give it to you

Roses are red Oxygen is gas I just wanted to say that You’ve got a nice ass

Roses are red So is my heart I hope you don’t mind If I let out a fart

Roses are red Violets are blue I don’t like fracking Unless it’s with you

Roses are red Violets are blue Fossil fuels are dirty But cleaner than you

Roses are red Violets are blue Door knocking is banned Left shark for GUSA

Roses are red Ronan was a brute Of course I’m not dead I am Groot

Roses are red Pizza has grease If you keep calling me I’ll call the police

Roses are red Violets are blue I’m using my hand But thinking of you

—Jon Block, Noah Buyon, Jason Cardinali, Kenneth Lee, Ian Philbrick, Graham Piro, Emily Wendt

Vaughn’s Kingsman: The Secret Service proves worthy of crown BRIAN MCMAHON Much was made of director Matthew Vaughn’s departure from X-Men: Days of Future Past in late 2012. Many wondered if his issues with Fox would stall his promising career. As it turns out, we need not have worried, for he had something far more exciting up his sleeve.

With Kingsman: The Secret Service, adapted from Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons’ comic book, Vaughn delivers one of the most captivating action movies in recent memory. The film follows “Eggsy,” a young British tough guy played by Taron Egerton, as he is swept up in the world of espionage at the insistence of superspy Harry Hart, played by Colin Firth.

Led by Vaughn’s inventive camerawork, the story plays out at a crackling pace, filled with flashy action sequences bordering but never leaping into absurdity.

Vaughn has done excellent work in this realm before, balancing surreal action with sharp wit in the underrated films Kick-Ass and Layer Cake. Kingsman meets every unrealistic physical move with tongue-in-cheek humor, nodding to the James Bonds and Jason Bournes of the world without trying to become one.

One moment might bring a bone-jarring fight, but the next contains references to everything from Pretty Woman to Hemingway to Iggy Azalea. Like Edgar Wright and Guy Ritchie, Vaughn thrives in mixing self-aware superheroics with a charming British style—sophisticated but accessible.

Vaughn needs a talented cast to execute this framework, and he has one with the likes of Egerton, Firth, and an engaging Samuel L. Jackson. Egerton proves more than capable of bearing the leading man’s burden, able to convince as a puppy-wielding softee, tough-talking street urchin, or

dapper-dressing spy in equal magnitude. Firth delivers perhaps the most enjoyable performance of his illustrious career, maintaining his dapper Britishness but also thrusting himself into zany combat with playful vigor. His Harry feels indebted to Eggsy’s fallen father, and the actors’ chemistry is clear in moments of all types.

Jackson, though, may be the highlight of the movie, despite his character’s cruel intentions.

As an internet billionaire bent on cleansing the world, he lisps and curses his way into a perfectly farcical antivillain: intelligent and clever, but never a true threat to the good guys, flamboyant and personable, but lacking the mean streak to give his dastardly plans any real weight.

Kingsman, as a whole, serves as a refreshing entry in the modernizing world of the action genre. “This ain’t that kind of movie,” multiple characters recite when faced with archetypal

scenes witnessed in countless other movies. This one fits into a more pleasing place, standing far from the mindless violence of many a blockbuster but also stopping short of making any profound statement regarding the global politics it gently mocks and undermines.

Jackson and Firth find themselves discussing action movies in one scene, and with tongue dug deep into his cheek, the latter remarks on the matter:

“Nowadays, they’re all a little serious for my taste.”

Vaughn, through his players and with his camera, makes this opinion abundantly clear. He’ll leave the Jupiter Ascendings, and maybe even the X-Men, of the world to other directors. They can blitz their audiences with overzealous action and heavy-handed morals. Vaughn takes a subtler route, his love for the action clear, but never without a wink and a smile.

“YES, I AM MUCH COOLER THAN YOU.”

IMDB

leisure

12 | the georgetown voice

CRITICAL VOICES

Ricky Martin, A Quien Quiera Escuchar, Sony Music Latin No matter what language you speak, Latino pop star Ricky Martin’s latest creation is sure to strike a beat. With the release of his tenth studio album, A Quien Quiera Escuchar (Spanish for “To Those Who Want to Listen”), the Puerto Rican singer songwriter has successfully modernized the Latin pop genre with classy, smoldering ballads infused with a wide range of complementary musical styles.

Father John Misty, I Love You, Honeybear, Sub Pop Father John Misty—Joshua Tillman since leaving Fleet Foxes—is not your average priest. He pushes disenchantment with love rather than a higher power. In his sophomore album, Tillman confirms his gifts of wit, vocals, and style.

With sardonic lyrics throughout I Love You, Honeybear, Tillman captures love in all of its chaotic beauty. He personifies the character of Father John Misty—beard, blazer, and sunglasses

Martin first revolutionized Latin pop with his 1999 single “Livin’ la Vida Loca,” which helped bring the genre to the attention of U.S. audiences. His newest LP transforms the genre once again, incorporating a multitude of diverse musical styles and elements into existing Latin pop to produce an innovative and contemporary charm.

The album starts off with the powerful, beat-driven “Adiós,” which leaves a lasting first impression. This dance track explodes with a heavy rhythmic beat and a catchy chorus.

Composed of lyrics in Spanish, English, and French, “Adiós” exemplifies Martin’s new worldview and contemporary style.

The album’s second dance anthem, “La Mordidita,” boasts a much heavier Latino influence while managing to remain equally catchy and inspiring. Featuring Latin rapper Yotuel Romero, the track presents an infectious, fast-paced rhythm perfect for getting everyone moving at any fiesta. Meanwhile, the soulful lyrics

and smooth grace of the album’s most prominent slower track, “Matáme Otra Vez,” elegantly combine a rich, jazzy rhythm with electronic elements of EDM and dubstep to produce a passionate and driving sound.

Sadly, though, the majority of the album’s tracks lack any signature appeal that might otherwise set them apart from one another. Despite their uniformity, Martin’s captivating and confident vocals nevertheless empower even these tracks to convey a deeply sincere emotional vulnerability throughout. Despite many tracks’ failure to stand out, the album’s few diamonds in the rough successfully rise to distinction. The LP more than lives up to its name—bringing fresh, multicultural sounds and dance-worthy Latin beats to anyone who wants to listen.

in tow—but his music boasts anything but fiction. In the surfeit of albums that claim to depict love and glamorize its details, this album’s intentionally truthful interpretation confuses but also inspires. This work’s titular ballad, “I Love You, Honeybear” develops a ceaseless string of pounding drums and swelling orchestra to complement the longing in Tillman’s persistent vocals. These elements contrast with the song’s unforgiving rhetoric, ultimately revealing Tillman’s critical stance on life and love.

He sings “Everything is doomed/ And nothing will be spared/Oh I love you honeybear.” Using the familiar framework of a love ballad and verbose cynicism, he overcomes the ordinary expectations of such a track.

Thus, the album simultaneously has appeal at its surface and at a deeper level. But you must listen closely in order to dive beyond the music and appreciate the allure of Tillman’s brutally honest speech. That being said, Tillman’s artistry establishes the

album’s success. Elaborate musical arrangements layer upon his rugged, yet pure vocal performance to achieve a precious amalgam of country, folk, and psychedelic influences.

“The Night Josh Tillman Came To Our Apt.” merges these together in the sincere, folksy twang of Tillman’s voice, the ease of upbeat notes on acoustic guitar, and the lingering echoes in the background. This song covers a wide range of styles, shifting between the tenderness of its instrumentals and the passionate tone in Tillman’s voice.

I Love You, Honeybear shines with a cherished musical approach while exposing further what it means to tell the truth. Tillman blends this sparkling charade with a candid authenticity together smoothly, like honey.

Voice’s Choices: “Adiós,” “Natural Pearl” —Tyler kranawetter

Voice’s Choices: “The Night Josh Tillman Came To Our Apt.,” “Chateau Lobby #4 (in C for Two Virgins)” —dinah farrell

CONCERT CALENDAR THURSDAY 2/12 Ari Cordero Kennedy Center, 6 p.m., Free

FRIDAY 2/13 Love Cannon Gypsy Sally’s, 9 p.m., $15

SUNDAY 2/15 Theophilus London U Street Music Hall, 6:30 p.m., $26

THURSDAY 2/12 Phox 9:30 Club, 7 p.m., $15

SATURDAY 2/14 Dead Professional Rock and Roll Hotel, 8 p.m., $12

TUESDAY 2/17 Dawn Richard Howard Theater, 8 p.m., $17.50

FEBRUARY 12, 2015

deadbeats

The Persistence of Sub Genres

A bi-weekly column about music by Ryan Greene

One of the biggest rules of the internet is “never read YouTube comments.” Often bigoted and hate-filled, YouTube comments are the world’s new-age heckling, where one can find the loudest, most ignorant people on the internet. I recently made the mistake of scrolling down and reading the YouTube comments on the music video for “Rose of Sharon” by Title Fight. Some of the interactions are jaw dropping, with fans cursing each other out and making ad hominem attacks all in the name of defending their stance on whether the indie rock band’s newest material lives up to their older style.

Looking past all the rude and abrasive language, however, it’s clear that one kind of argument in particular underlies a lot of the disagreement. Most of the commenters seem very concerned about genre labelling.

“Rose of Sharon” and the rest of the tracks off Title Fight’s newest LP, Hyperview, are quite unconventional. With its multi-layered musical ambience, spacey guitars, and ample reverb, Hyperview is a sonic departure for Title Fight, who earned their fame as an intense, more or less straightforward post-hardcore band. But rather than discuss the strengths and weaknesses of Hyperview and what it stands for as a musical work, all anyone wants to talk about is what music label they should slap onto it, and how they can rank it among Title Fight’s discography.

Based on the comments on Title Fight’s YouTube, anyone who’s ever listened to My Bloody Valentine is some kind of expert on shoegaze and is going on and on about how cool it is that Title Fight made a “shoegaze album.” On the other side of the argument are the old school Title Fight fans, the ones who like the old “aggressive” and “hardcore” Title Fight and want to stay in that comfort zone.

They feel betrayed by Hyperview’s genre shift and dismiss it almost out of hand for being different.

Any time a band puts out a new album, there are fans who embrace it and others who reject it. However, in the context of indie rock music this sort of argument is an especially dangerous problem because of how inextricable it is from genre labelling. I find that placing too much importance on genre labels only distracts a music

community from the real discussion at hand: the specific merits of an album itself.

Independent rock bands are as diverse as they are niche, and often what attracts people to a band’s particular brand of indie rock are their similarities to previous, perhaps more easily identifiable bands. This is where sub-genre labels come in. Rock music subgenre labels give music fans an unofficial shorthand for describing a band’s music. “They’re a pop punk band” is a an easier idea to convey than “They’re upbeat and loud with simple chord progression, punk music instrumentation, and pop-style melodies like Blink-182.”

Labelling saves time.

But the labelling game has gotten out of hand, and every online fan community obsesses over what to call a new album so much so that it overshadows whatever elements of an album don’t fit neatly into just one sub-genre. Sure, Hyperview is more or less a shoegaze-y album, but that’s truer of some songs than others. By labelling Hyperview as a shoegaze album and by focusing their discussion on the qualities of shoegaze, Title Fight fans miss the point and avoid exploring the album’s unique themes and style.

Additionally, an overemphasis on genre-labelling leads members of the indie rock community to treat rock music sub-genres less like helpful descriptors and more like a sports team, whereby fandom is exclusive and unconditional. Fans of this nature only follow bands when they conform to whatever their favorite sub-genre label is—any sonic departure from that label is treated as a grievous betrayal. Bands aren’t expected or even allowed to evolve.

A sub-genre is just a way to describe an album or a band at a particular point in their career.

It is not a 100 percent accurate encapsulation of that album, nor should it be. That’s not a problem. The problem is in caring so much about a genre label that it prevents a listener from truly experiencing an album.

In the end, Hyperview is supposed to sound like Hyperview, and it’s what the album actually sounds like on its own—just as it is for any other album—which matters most.

Categorize Ryan’s music at rcg63@georgetown.edu

voices

georgetownvoice.com

THE GEORGETOWN VOICe | 13

The public doesn’t need to know: Politics and privacy CHARLES EVAIN The GUSA presidential and vice presidential campaign has begun, which marks the beginning of a long period of badgering from dedicated candidates.

I can’t watch a minute of The Walking Dead in peace without having another candidate knock at my door. Not everyone shared my stance towards the campaign: I was surprised to find that some people outside of the Georgetown community took interest in this year’s GUSA race. Unfortunately, their motives were less than commendable.

I was disgusted by the way a Catholic news website called “PewSitter” recently preached against GUSA candidate Tim Rosenberger. Calling him a “militant gay republican,” they advocated for a “real Catholic” alternative.

They then provided the letter written by a female Georgetown student which described the situation.

To briefly summarize it, she made a case against this “militant homosexual activist” in favor of a “Catholic who is committed to protecting Georgetown’s traditions.”

What frustrates me the most about this isn’t the existence of such bigots in this country, or the realization that one of their number is

ERIN ANNICK

POLITICIANS ARE PEOPLE BUT ELECTIONS SHOULD BE ABOUT POLICY NOT PERSONALITY

CARRYING ON

in our very university. What infuriates me is the importance given to people’s private lives in politics even when there is no proof that it affects their performance in the public sector. Unfortunately, this isn’t just an issue on campus—it’s also prevalent in national politics.

It’s no surprise that there has never been any openly homosexual presidents in the United States (although apparently Buchanan may have been a closeted homosexual), and no non-Christian presidents either. JFK was the only Catholic president this country has had, and only one president, Ronald Reagan, was ever divorced.

Our desire to know everything about the lives of politicians is enabling a large part of the population to consciously or unconsciously judge them, and has hurt the diversity in this country’s government.

When has it become imperative to be identical to the majority of the population to get elected? To ask them to be exactly like you is only asking to be lied to: atheists will call themselves deists and homosexuals will stay in the closet.

I am tired of the hypocrisy surrounding the living standards of politicians. No politician can seem upper class without it hurting his or her campaign, so they all sugarcoat reality by calling themselves “middle class” and talking about

The Cognitive Dissonance of False Independence

BY CLAIRE ZENG

A rotating column by senior Voice staffers

Wednesday evening in Leavey 424 is always a party.

But it’s not the typical kind of party. For instance, we do shots, but of espresso. There’s loud music, but we usually play hipster, alternative jams, not clubbing themes. We lie on the floor and on the tables, but it’s out of exhaustion and mental implosion rather than inebriation since we’re often at the office until 3:00 or 4:00 a.m.

We do it willingly because we enjoy journalism. Some of the more exciting news stories we’ve investigated in the last year include Aramark workers’ rights, oppression of residential assistants, and Daniel Milzman’s criminal production of ricin. It’s especially fun to scoop our friendly competitor The Hoya on a juicy story.

But when it comes time for our budget meetings with Media Board, Georgetown’s funding arm for student publications, we are reminded of the irony that we are heavily funded by the university. In some recent years, ironically, we have even been funded by The Hoya’s revenues.

The journalism industry in general is contracting. The traditional print newspaper is vanishing as it loses its share to online media. Student journalists too face the crunch, owing to falling ad revenues and an enduring focus on printing hard copy instead of going digital.

The Voice and The Hoya have never been financially independent from the university. We are funded

by Media Board, which is paid for by the Student Activities Fee. The Hoya recently attempted to break free from university funding, but was blocked from gaining independence in 2010.

This means our papers’ decision-making is beholden to approval by Media Board. The Voice faces this less because we don’t have much money in the first place. In its bid to go independent, however, The Hoya was vocal about not being able to reinvest its profits back into the paper to create new initiatives.

In terms of editorial content, we student media often toe the line in terms of when the university will assert its authority. Technical-

their times of hardship to placate the electorate. The public has no place in knowing how wealthy candidates are, and while inequalities remain high, electing a “middle class” candidate isn’t necessarily the way we reduce it—only by electing a dynamic candidate will we get anything done.

However, politicians aren’t always victims of the intrusions into their private lives. Practically all of them have attempted to appear as “all-American” during campaigns, using well-staged family photos to boost their image. Because they’re dragging their families into the limelight, they can’t reasonably attack journalists for reporting on their family dealings. Politicians’ sense of what is and isn’t private is warped by the public’s demands, and journalists can’t ignore their duty to report—so it’s up to us to set a standard of privacy since we decide to make it relevant.

By pushing politicians to open up every aspect of their lives to the public, we have moved from a politics of ideology and action to a politics of identity. What you stand for should be the main determinant in who you vote for, not who you are. The public can’t ignore the content of a candidate’s character, but a clear line has to be drawn. Sure, gross indecencies like criminality can’t be a private mat-

ly, as Georgetown is a private institution that voluntarily funds us, we could be subject to prior review by administrators—but the university keeps us on a very long leash.

I was never directly pressured to change or pull an article. In recent memory, the closest we have gotten to ticking off administrators was a Page 13 comic that drew Erika Cohen-Derr and Jeanne Lord as harpies, and Dr. Lord, the good-humored human being she is, requested a framed copy of it.

That Georgetown has given us free reign in content is not surprising to me. The university is a place to debate and discuss, and this is emphasized in Georgetown’s mission and Jesuit values. For instance, although we are not allowed to run contraceptives-related ads, we have run prochoice editorials and opinion pieces without university restrictions.

Nevertheless, we feel the impacts of being the often irreverent child of the university in other ways.

In 2011, the Voice lost its office as punishment for the mistakes of staff members who trespassed on uni-

versity property. Even though they were not acting in their capacity as staffers, we have since been in a much smaller office down the hall (our favorite inside jokes include “Stuck in the Closet since 1969.”) We always overflow into the hallways and recently gained a little breathing room in a small unused “satellite” office (named for the hot issue of the time, the “satellite campus” proposal) down the hall. But if we continue to depend on the university, it is likely we will never get a larger space.

Both we and The Hoya also face the conundrum of making our living from reporting on the university. It’s a catch-22 that the people we want to expose and hold accountable are the ones who we depend on for information. For example, the writers who have the toughest struggle of this may actually be our sports writers, who regularly are frustrated by the precarious balance between staying on the good side of Sports Information (the Athletic Department’s PR wing) to ensure access to university coaches and athletes

ter in a campaign, because they show a candidate’s true colors, but, aside from acts that shock the conscience (what exactly that means is something we as a society need to figure out), a candidate’s private life is his or hers and must be respected as such.

It’s too easy to be affected by the identity of the candidate, which is why we should simply stop asking questions. It’s a sad truth that some things cannot be ignored: we can’t, for instance, ignore that Hillary Clinton is a woman, and the dream of having a female president will be a factor at the polling station. However, whenever we can, we should simply avert our eyes.

When you vote in the GUSA election, I hope most of you will ignore as much as you can of who the candidates are, and instead look at their ideas and what they can do for us. Whether they are black, gay, or Catholic shouldn’t matter. Part of our Jesuit heritage is a dedication to tolerance and diversity, and what better way to respect it than by electing a candidate based on merit no matter their identity?

CHARLES IS A SOPHOMORE IN THE SFS

for interviews and investigating important stories.

This is an obstacle that exists regardless of whether we are financially independent or not, but our financial dependence severely complicates our frustrations from trying to create quality works of journalism.

Many student newspapers, such as those of Harvard, Northwestern, Yale and the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, have succeeded in remaining independent even in tough economic straits. George Washington University’s The Hatchet, which has been independent since 1993, previously paid about $4,300 a month in rent to GWU before successfully fundraising from alumni for the purchase of a townhouse in 2013.

The Voice doesn’t have that kind of alumni fundraising base, and is limited by an under-developed business section. Gaining financial independence means successfully running a business, which is a tough task for full-time students to take on.

But if our ethos is to be “committed to providing campus with critical journalism that doesn’t give defer to those in power,” we need to aspire to the excellence, financially and editorially, of the examples set by fellow student journalists at other universities.

voices

14 | the georgetown voice

The

FEBRUARY 12, 2015

2015 GUSA CAMPAIGN PITCHES FROM FIVE PRESIDENT / VICE-PRESIDENT TICKETS

Rise Together for Georgetown: Abbey and Will for GUSA Abbey McNaughton & WILL SIMONS Bring on the platitudes. It’s that time of year again.

As this election season continues, you’ll hear that GUSA is out of touch, that those involved are the worst kind of slimy, résumé-padding political operators, and that they’re so far removed from normal student experience that they have lost the ability to effectively channel real student desires to administrators.

That kind of language is easy, because substantive discussions are hard.

This election, at a historic time for our university, demands better than inauthentic moralizing and trite slogans—it demands a loud, pluralistic, uni-

fied student voice rise to give every Hoya the representation they deserve.

We have seen GUSA expand access to benefits to more student organizations. We have seen it help stop the consolidation of the CMEA, LGBTQ Resource Center, and Women’s Center.

And we have seen it prevent housing and dining requirements that students strongly oppose. But sometimes GUSA falls short. Sometimes Georgetown falls short.

In reality there is not one Georgetown, but two—two Georgetowns separated by socio-economic privilege, by racial privilege, by ableism, and by a disgusting apathy towards the reality of sexual assault on this campus.

We know that sometimes GUSA doesn’t hear the concerns of marginalized students. Our

personal meetings with Hoyas from every corner of campus have demonstrated the need for an inclusive, representative GUSA—a GUSA that actively engages every student.

And we know that the issues we face cannot be solved without everyone joining the chorus for student rights.

In negotiating with administrators, and engaging and including historically and currently marginalized students—students of color, LGBTQIA students, disabled students, student veterans, and students who do not come from economic privilege—it’s time to Rise Together to ensure GUSA deals frankly with privilege and exclusion.

We can only expand speech on campus if we Rise Together for groups like H*yas for Choice when the university denies individuals and student organiza-

tions the fundamental right to free expression on our campus.

We can only ensure fair wages and benefits for campus employees if we Rise Together in solidarity with campus workers.

And we must Rise Together for an equitable campus plan.

In 1996, the Advisory Neighborhood Commission, Georgetown’s local government body—which had no student representatives—took away student rights to parking passes, and tried to push Hoyas out of the neighborhood. When it looked like students would begin to oppose these policies, ANC members tried to bully the student voice into silence.

Our response? A diverse and unified coalition of Hoyas rose up and elected two of our own qualified candidates to the ANC. Georgetown will face a similar crossroads next year. The

only way we can defend student interests from neighbors who think we are, as one newsletter wrote: “individuals running (or even worse: driving) around the neighborhood under the influence of alcohol or drugs, knocking down stop signs, yanking metal railings, damaging private property, urinating in public” is by linking arms and including all Hoyas in a representative movement for student rights.

It’s time for a unified, inclusive student movement to ensure the rights of all Hoyas and defend the future of this campus.

It’s time to Rise Together with Abbey and Will on Feb. 19.

ABBEY & WILL ARE JUNIORS in the COLLEGE

Don’t stop believing in Georgetown: Vote Sara and Ryan SARA MARGOLIS & RYAN SHYMANSKY We know that GUSA doesn’t have the best reputation on campus, and we know that it’s easy to see GUSA campaigns as little more than relentless assaults on Facebook News Feeds. But when the campaigns are over, and the chatter and chaos dissipate, there is real work to be done. We know firsthand the importance of advocating for the issues that don’t make it into campaign videos or profile pictures. Throughout our time on the Hilltop, we have dedicated ourselves to doing real advocacy work on behalf of students—work that has resulted in tangible changes for the entire Georgetown community.

This year, our work has consisted of founding the GUSA Transfer Mentorship Program,

establishing the first ever Admitted Transfer Students Day, convincing GAAP to extend welcome calls to all admitted transfer students, and creating a Transfer Student Living and Learning Community. Our efforts have also included doubling the caseload of the Student Advocacy Office to serve more students than ever before, with issues ranging from unwarranted off-campus noise violations, on-campus alcohol infractions, and a wide array of other student conduct issues. Furthermore, we have pushed administrators to address student conduct violations within 30 days of becoming aware of them.

We’re running for GUSA President and Vice President to expand our advocacy work—and because at its core, GUSA ought to be an advocacy body. We should be focused on improving fundamental aspects of student life at Georgetown and we’ve

developed a comprehensive platform that works toward that end.

Though we can’t cover each item here, we want to highlight three major areas of focus.

First, we are committed to advocating for marginalized student groups. There are communities across campus that are simply disenfranchised by university administrators, oftentimes because there is no point person to work on their behalf. Undocumented students, students from communities of color, students of less privileged socio-economic backgrounds, students who identify as LGBTQIA, and countless others can find themselves playing on an inherently unequal playing field at Georgetown and we want to change that.

Second, we want to ensure that students are fairly considered during the rollout of the 2017 Campus Plan. We will strongly oppose any contin-

ued attempts to move more students onto campus. We will push administrators to complete long-deferred maintenance projects in Henle and Village A before any new construction projects are undertaken. Furthermore, we will negotiate a Green Space Agreement with university administrators that limits the replacement of on-campus green space by new buildings.

Third, we will ensure that student groups are able to fund programs and initiatives through a Student Activities Capital Campaign. By encouraging alumni to donate to individual student group cost centers and to a general gift fund, we will raise $5 million over the next five years to put into the hands of student groups. This capital campaign will also allow the current GUSA Fund to provide more money to unrecognized student groups, fostering more

participation in a variety of activities across campus.

Our platform is rooted in our shared belief that Georgetown students can do incredible things when they are given the resources to succeed. Our advocacy experience will allow us to affect real change for every Georgetown student, and we are excited to pursue every priority listed in our platform. We know that GUSA campaigns can be overwhelming and that it’s easy to shrug off platform items as nothing more than promises waiting to go unfulfilled. But our commitment to this community is real. We know that, with your help, we can change the Hilltop for the better.

SARA & RYAN ARE JUNIORS in the COLLEGE

voices

georgetownvoice.com

THE GEORGETOWN VOICe | 15

Do it for the love of Georgetown: Tim and Reno for GUSA TIM ROSENBERGER & RENO VARGHESE Every year during GUSA campaigning you hear a lot of candidates tell you how great they are, how many clubs they have been in, and how many leadership positions they have held. We are not going to lie to you, we, Tim and Reno, are pretty great by these standards, but that is not why we are running and we are pretty sure you are sick of hearing about it. Instead we want to focus on what we are going to do especially as most of our platform focuses on you.

We will take the power that GUSA

has and put it behind students and student groups.

For years, GUSA has used liaisons to determine what programs are worthy and which ones are not, with the result being that numerous students and student groups have been forced to pander to GUSA’s interests; we would like to change that. We want to decentralize, moving the money and power to student groups and using GUSA’s weight to back those groups and their ideas.

Funding has been one of the sources of the most heartache for student groups. Last year alone $1.7 million was requested for groups, with less than $1 million of that actually being allocated. This has to change, and it will under a

Rosenberger/Varghese executive.

One way we want to do this is through an examination of all student expenses including the Yates and language fees.

The Student Activities Commission (SAC), which is responsible for funding most student groups on campus, also needs more help to execute their duties. Every SAC commissioner will tell you that they are overrun with work; adding another SAC commissioner should help to alleviate some of this, and create a more efficient body. Along with this comes what should be done about unrecognized student groups. One way to help these student groups is by allocating them a position on the Council of Advisory Boards. This

way they can be assured a seat at the table, at the very least. It is this and other ideas on unsanctioned groups that helped earn us an A- ranking, the second highest of all tickets, from H*yas for Choice.

Finally, we want to make sure Georgetown resources are being used to their full capacity. Georgetown has so many resources, yet constant inefficiencies in the system continue to exist. For example, the CSE and OCAF systems for renting university equipment and space still operate separately, even though students use them in tandem. Furthermore, while Georgetown has incredible programs within each school, students are forced to segregate based on their

school. This is unacceptable. Students should be able to enjoy the richness of programs in all schools by being able to minor across each.

We would like to finish by giving you our elevator pitch, so here it goes: as GUSA executives we would represent the students and the best way to do that is to let students speak. We want to make the university a better place, first by expanding the resources it has and then going further. So, for the Love of Georgetown, let’s get to work.

TIM is a JUNIOR in the COLLEGE RENO is a JUNIOR in the SFS

Building a Hilltop You-topia: Joe and Connor for GUSA Joe Luther & Connor Rohan During the course of our campaign, two questions have frequently arisen. The first: “Is your campaign real?” The answer is yes, and we will be on the ballot. The second: “Are you guys just Trevor and Omika wearing masks so that you can get re-elected? Come on, Tromika, take those off! Guys, stop playin’ around!” The answer is a resounding no, so stop pulling on our skin. We are not Trevor and Omika in masks. Rather, we are just two devoted boys trying to make Georgetown a “Youtopia.”

Sure, we share many of the same ideas as Trevor and Omika.

We will continue pushing for tiered access to benefits, which would allow for more student activities with individually suited funding structures. Yeah, we see addressing sexual assault as a top priority, and, of course, we seek to extend free speech policies to create a campus-wide free speech zone. However, none of that means that our faces are actually spray-painted cardboard, and that one of us is a woman of Indian descent.

Since we announced our candidacy, countless individuals have approached us with thanks for what we’ve accomplished during our 2014-2015 term and have expressed enthusiasm for our upcoming re-election. “We can’t wait

for you to navigate the upcoming 2017 campus plan and foster an environment where students are actively engaged in the process through the creation of a Master Planning Working Group composed of students and working in conjunction with various student organizations,” noted throngs of long-winded, adoring, and ultimately mistaken constituents.

“We’re going to vote for you, because we believe in your ability to give us students a voice again!” Just to be clear, yes, we’re going to do all of that, but no, we’re not Trevor and Omika hiding in plain sight following extensive vocal cord surgery and height adjustments.

People: we have not been working with Monsanto day in and day out to reconfigure our genetic make-

up, because we’ve been too busy working for you as GUSA President and Vice-President. Wait, no.

Forget we ever said that.

What do you mean we smell like Trevor and Omika? Oh, that’s probably just the smell of transparency through GUSA executive office hours, advocacy for Georgetown administrator office hours, and full voting status for the student representative on Georgetown’s Board of Directors. Listen, it has nothing to do with the fact that the Luther-Rohan ticket and the current GUSA executives have molecularly indistinguishable sweat and pheromones. We all just smell good, I guess.

Hey, you know what? Trevor and Omika aren’t too shabby.

They have a lot more that they wish they could’ve gotten done,

and I bet that they’ve learned a lot from their first terms in office.

Hell, they’ve probably learned so much from their failures and successes that, if they were to run again, they would write a whole new platform with new ideas! It’s just too bad that they aren’t running again as two young men with a keen vision for this school and a logo featuring Darnall. Too bad.

Anyway, if you share our Hilltop Youtopian vision, then please reele... oh, sorry. “Elect” Joe and Connor for 2015 GUSA executives.

JOE & CONNOR ARE JUNIORS in the COLLEGE

A dignified students association: Vote Chris and Meredith CHRIS WADIBIA It is no secret that GUSA does not have a good reputation on campus. It is known for elitism, a lack of transparency, and being distant from Georgetown’s student community.

Most Hoyas look down upon GUSA because they feel GUSA pretentiously looks down upon them. But this reality does not have to endure for much longer. Meredith and I are passionately committed to transforming the nature of GUSA by refashioning it into a student-focused, transparent, and inclusive organization dedicated to making practical differences in the lives of Georgetown students.

Unlike any other GUSA ticket this year, Meredith and I met with eleven of Georgetown’s leading ad-

ministrators (including Todd Olson, vice president of student affairs and Rosemary Kilkenny, vice president for institutional diversity and equity) in order to compose a platform of achievable and pragmatic initiatives we believe are in the best interests of the student body. Further, in addition to meeting with eleven administrators each for approximately an hour, we also enlisted the thoughts and wisdom of Georgetown’s many student leaders so that we may stay intimately true to our grassroots, all-inclusive approach.

Traditionally, GUSA tickets create 50-page platforms full of unrealistic promises that sound good to the ear, but lack the down-to-earth and authentic nature to actually be implemented. Meredith and I understand this, and as a result, com-

posed a platform of three pillars with six points underneath each. In total, 18 accomplishable points comprise our platform, which can be read in a quick three minutes. The succinct yet potent nature of our platform, in addition to our commitment hearing the advice of our fellow students, testifies to the transparent and honorable nature of our campaign and vision for the student body. For we don’t want students to simply vote for our names, but for our faces, hearts, and character as well.

Moreover, Meredith and I are keenly aware of my decision to run for student body president despite having no GUSA experience. We view my lack of GUSA experience, and hence, lack of exposure to the elitist, inwardly-focused forces that surround GUSA as one of our great-

est strengths. It will take a fresh mind with tremendous experience in aspects of the community that students care most about (like cultural groups, funding boards, diversity training, etc.) to refashion GUSA as an institution for others.

In this regard, as in numerous others, Meredith and I stand far above all other tickets running for the GUSA executive. For too long, GUSA has failed Georgetown students by prioritizing resume building over meaning-making in the lives of Hoyas. Meredith and I understand this. In fact, this understanding is the very motivation behind our decision to run together in the first place.

True leadership is and will always be people-focused. Yet for too long, GUSA has perverted this ideal to its own ends at the expense of countless

Hoyas. Meredith and I do not dream of becoming career politicians. Rather, my dream is to become a theology professor here on the Hilltop, where I’ll dedicate much of my life to impacting future Hoyas. If I lose this election, I’ll simply go back to my manifold other involvements on campus. But if Meredith and I win this election, GUSA will never again stand aloof from Georgetown students—through making practical differences and a people-focused approach, it will become, in the hearts of Hoyas both now and in the future, a GUSA with Dignity.

CHRIS IS A JUNIOR in the COLLEGE

Page 13 presents:

—Dylan Cutler