Chicagomaroon050217 by The Chicago Maroon

MAY 2, 2017

THE INDEPENDENT STUDENT NEWSPAPER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO SINCE 1892

VOL. 128, ISSUE 43

Dorms to Have All-Gender Bathrooms BY JORGE ERNESTO CLAVO ABBASS NEWS WRITER

‘A Special Problem’ The University of Chicago’s Troubled History With Sexual Assault, Harassment, and Campus Safety BY JAMIE EHRLICH, EMILY FEIGENBAUM, AND SARAH ZIMMERMAN Editor’s Note: Personal narratives and stories were essential to this article in order to tell the full story of the history of sexual harassment and assault on campus. In interviewing survivors, the authors encountered several accusations of sexual harassment and assault that THE MAROON ultimately could not verify. For this reason, we have decided to eliminate identifying features of the accused. On March 10, 1952, a woman described as the “wife of a Ph.D. student” was abducted from Hyde Park and raped. The story was circulated widely in local papers and within the University community. University chancellor Lawrence A. Kimpton, successor to John Maynard Hutchins, wrote that the abduction threw the community into a “near-panic.” In the 1950s and 1960s, the University experienced a crime wave that increased the visibility of sex crimes in Hyde Park. The University, previously uncomfortable with discussing rising crime rates around the campus perimeter, was forced to acknowledge the increased press coverage and dropping female enrollment rates. While this encouraged the University to take action against sexual assault, it ultimately pushed the University away from acknowledging that, more often than not, such assaults happen within University gates. In 1952, the South East Chicago Commission (SECC) was formed, which contemporaries attributed to public indignation about the increase of crime in Hyde Park. On March 27, 1952, the new crime-busting commission was established at a meeting in Mandel Hall. According to a 1952 MAROON article, the mission of the new commission was to “drive crime and corruption from the neighborhood in which we live.” During the meeting, Chicago Police Department captain Michael Spatz admitted that prior to the SECC there was little cooperation between police districts, even though, he claimed, many of the crimes were committed by “out-ofHyde-Park thugs.” Hyde Park crime had risen 32 percent in three years. “We used a rather sensational kidnapping and rape case to bring the community together and announce a plan for the organization of the South East Chicago Commis-

Next fall, 37 of 38 college houses will have three gender desig nations for communa l bathrooms: male, female, and all gender. All 37 of these houses will have at least one bathroom of each designation. Shorey House in International House will be the only house without all three options, as it only has two commu n a l bat h r o om s . S hor ey residents will be able to use all-gender bathrooms on the fifth floor of Thompson House, also in I-House. Bath room gender designations will be announced to students returning to College Housing before the House lottery, so that students are able

to select rooms based in part on bathroom gender designation. This change eliminates the previous process of f loor elections to designate the gender of the bathroom. College Housing and Residential Services will determine and maintain the gender designations by floor for the 2017–2018 academic year. Single-user bathrooms will not be affected by this change, as it applies only to communal bathrooms. Bathrooms on single-gendered floors will be designated gender-binary men’s or women’s restrooms. According to the e-mail, College Housing reviewed the topic for several months with input from a student committee. Resident Heads and Resident Assistants were also consulted.

SG Candidates Speak on Campus Issues BY EUIRIM CHOI MANAGING EDITOR

Amelia Frank

sion,” Kimpton wrote at the time. The creation of the SECC was not only born from community-wide paranoia regarding the need for women to be protected; it also represented a long-told narrative of the University restricting black migration into Hyde Park. The logic was twofold: keep South Side residents out, and protect the female students at the University. Following the creation of the SECC, the number of sexual assaults, and the University’s handling of said cases, did not improve. But the dual narrative continued— first, that this was not a campus problem, but a South Side problem. Second, the women of the University had to be more cautious of their surroundings in order to not be raped. In a 1969 interview with the Committee on University Women (COUW), Richard Moy, the director of health services at the time, cited an incident after Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination where “two girls went into the ghetto to demonstrate their love and solidarity with blacks” and were raped. Moy estimated that between three

and six rapes occurred each year. He chalked the frequency of rape on campus to the “blatant stupidity on the [part] of the girl” and “bad luck.” COUW also interviewed James Vice, the assistant dean of students, in the same year. Vice was responsible for the security reports and claimed that there were only two to three rapes per year between 1967 and 1969, with the exception of a “special problem” at a building in the south of campus that experienced three rapes. Vice told COUW that some girls didn’t want their parents to know about their assaults, particularly if their parents had been “anti—U of C to begin with” and might make their daughters drop out. He also cited the “occasional problem” with the “pooh-pooh” type that would encourage undergraduate women to walk through Woodlawn at night “so they’ll ‘understand’ the neighborhood.” “[It] can’t be denied that there are a few hangers-on around campus who prey on gullibility of white, liberal, young women,” Vice said in the interview. Continued on page 5

Student Government (SG) voting will open this Wednesday at 10 a.m. A link to the ballot on Blueprint will be emailed to all members of the student body. After voting closes this Friday at

Continued on page 4

Try-Me Cafe Opens in School of Social Service Administration BY CAMILLE KIRSCH SENIOR NEWS WRITER

A new cafe opened in the School of Social Service Administration on Thursday, April 27. Try-Me Cafe is run by Lawrence Hall, a nonprofit that works with atrisk Chicago youth. Individuals are referred to Lawrence Hall’s programs by the Department of Children and Family Services, Chicago Public Schools, or the juvenile justice system. Lawrence Hall’s programs include a foster care program, a therapeutic day school, academic

Joffrey Ballet Proves Itself a Global Visionary

Women Back On Track After Weather Issues

Page 6

Page 8

Modern choreography takes over the Auditorium Theatre.

4:30 p.m., the Election and Rules Committee will tabulate the results. Upon tabulation, a press conference and cake-cutting ceremony will be held on the first floor of the Reynolds Club. Some of the candidates are featured after the jump.

The softball team hopes to close its season on a strong note with games against Elmhurst and Lawrence.

tutoring, and a job-training program. Try-Me is a branch of that job-training program. It aims to help teenagers who are in foster care or the juvenile justice system gain work experience. “We’ve been really trying to work on community expansion for the last two years,” said Kara Teeple, the chief executive officer of Lawrence Hall. “We’ve had the culinary arts program at Lawrence Hall for about 30 years, but now we’re able to expand in the community to actually have kids get work experience and mentoring.” Continued on page 2

Advertising in THE M AROON If you want to place an ad in THE M AROON, please email ads@chicagomaroon.com or visit chicagomaroon.com/pages/advertise

Speak of the Devil Page 2 Columnist Jake Eberts suspects that College Republicans’ invitation to Anne Coulter is little more than a publicity stunt.

CSO Program, Soloist Disappoints Despite Compelling Direction Page 7 A pop-up gallery in Harper Court showcased work by Chicago-based student artists.

Excerpts from articles and comments published in T he Chicago Maroon may be duplicated and redistributed in other media and non-commercial publications without the prior consent of The Chicago Maroon so long as the redistributed article is not altered from the original without the consent of the Editorial Team. Commercial republication of material in The Chicago Maroon is prohibited without the consent of the Editorial Team or, in the case of reader comments, the author. All rights reserved. © The Chicago Maroon 2017

THE CHICAGO MAROON - MAY 2, 2017

At-Risk Teens to Train at Try-Me Cafe Continued from front

Janisha Jackson, an employee at the new cafe who has been involved with Lawrence Hall since she was a 7-year-old in the foster system, said she was thrilled to work at TryMe. Her first day on the job was “really, really fun,” Jackson said. “I love it. It’s not only the job, it’s the people you’re around.” Lawrence Barnes, another cafe employee, was also enthusiastic. “Working here is good,” he said with a smile. “It keeps me busy.” Barnes and Jackson, like the rest of the cafe’s employees, will work at Try-Me for a few months before moving on to more permanent placements. A new set of Lawrence Hall trainees will replace them. “This is a transitional job,” said Sean McGinnis, vice president of youth and community development programs at Lawrence Hall. “Ideally they’ll work here for six to nine months, they’ll get their customer service experience, and then we’ll help them find com-

petitive employment.” Jackson, though, hopes to be around for a little longer. Last year, she applied to the University of Chicago—and got in. Due to unexpected circumstances, she wasn’t able to attend. But this year, she is working on another application. She hopes to be accepted again. In the meantime, Jackson will show up to campus every day to serve students coffee, hoping that one day soon, she will be on the other side of the counter. Try-Me Cafe will be open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. every Monday through Thursday during the spring quarter, and is working to expand its hours for the new school year. It has partnered with Metropolis Coffee and Rishi Tea to offer a variety of caffeinated beverages as well as cold drinks, sandwiches, salads, and pastries. Prior to Try-Me’s opening, the School of Social Services Administration had not had a cafe for several years.

UNIVERSITY AVE. APARTMENTS

5124-26 S. UNIVERSITY 5 BEDROOM, 3 BATH “2,500 SQ FT” $2,300 p/mo 4 BEDROOM, 2 BATH W/ BALCONY “1,900 SQ FT” $2500 p/mo 3 BEDROOM, 2 BATH $2200 p/mo AVAILABLE JUNE 16th or Sept. 1st Modern appliances; laundry in unit 5422-24 S. UNIVERSITY LAST UNIT - GREAT LOCATION, GREAT PRICE! 5 BEDROOM/2 BATH - 3,000 SQ FT STEPS TO CAMPUS, JUNE 16TH Only $2,700 per month Contact Betsy at betnewton@msn.com Call/text 312.391.7203

Kasich Talks Religion, Self-Love, and North Korea at the IOP BY MICHAEL LYNCH NEW S W RITER

Ohio Governor John Kasich spoke with David Axelrod (A.B.’76) at an Institute of Politics (IOP) event hosted at International House on Monday. Axelrod opened the discussion by asking Kasich to comment on President Trump’s performance over his first 100 days. Kasich criticized Trump for his divisiveness. “If somebody’s a divider, I’m not interested,” he said. Kasich went on to say that the public is tired of partisan battles and that this will make people more willing to leave major parties in future presidential elections. “I think it is very possible for somebody who is very wealthy to be able to run as an independent,” Kasich said. He also suggested that the decline of religion is part of the reason for the partisan fighting he sees in America today. “Big societies cannot run without a sense of transcendence and without a sense of responsibility. All of us need to live a life a little bigger than ourselves,” Kasich said. Kasich added that this sense of transcendence can be provided by many different religions, and by non-religious philosophies as well. Kasich raised objections to Trump’s immigration policy in his first 100 days. “If you snuck in here 20 years ago escaping some drug cartel in Mexico but you’ve been working, started a pizza shop or a restaurant and every-

thing has been good since you’ve been here, the idea we’re going to ship you out of the country...that’s not acceptable to me,” he said. Responding to a question about health-care reform, Kasich defended the Affordable Care Act (ACA)’s expansion of Medicaid. He explained that in Ohio, “We are able to treat the mentally ill, the drug addicted, the chronically ill” because of the Medicaid expansion. Kasich also argued that the ACA needs fixing, highlighting problems with insurers leaving exchange markets. When asked about his foreign policy, Kasich discussed, among other things, his belief that the United States should take out the leadership of North Korea by using special forces to “grab them and move them out of that country” and said he thought the U.S. government was already planning this. “If you don’t think they’re trying to use special forces to remove these people from power,” he said, “then check under your pillow tonight for the money from the tooth fairy.” Responding to a student’s question about his political career, Kasich attributed his success to a significant amount of both work and luck, as well as confidence. “You have to like yourself,” he said. “Sometimes it means you have to uncover things that are not pretty or things that happened when you were a kid that you don’t like. But once you learn to like yourself, you will begin to accumulate pretty significant power.”

VIEWPOINTS Speak of the Devil College Republicans’ Invitation to Ann Coulter Is a Pointless Publicity Stunt

Jake Eberts In another universe, Ann Coulter is probably a gay icon. Maybe she’s putting her law degree to use as some sort of Gloria Allred or is in L.A. making a comfortable living as one of the ladies who luxuriantly swings her hair around for Dove commercials and has over 100,000 Instagram followers. I love that Ann Coulter. In our universe, though, she’s an esteemed representative of the radically xenophobic right, her rise to fame predicated at least partially on a thinly veiled disdain for non-white people. As of last week, she has been (informally) invited to speak at the University by the president of College Republicans. Thus, this self-righteous and indignant piece from me, some cuck college snowflake. This invitation will likely be justified by some pseudo-intellectual philosophizing about free speech. In reality, College Republicans is doing it just for funsies. The invitation reflects the hollow underpinnings of the University’s wider championing of free speech as an end in itself. The nominal reason behind extending this invitation likely runs along the lines of “something something discourse some-

thing Kalven Report.” This is a dubious claim at best, especially coming from the same leadership of College Republicans that has consistently refused to discuss or comment on, for instance, Donald Trump and his candidacy during the election (or after—since Inauguration Day, the UChicago College Republicans page has made a whopping zero references to Donald Trump). Think of all the lost opportunities for discourse! The shame! Regardless, Ann Coulter is not a particularly strong candidate for promoting debate or useful discourse. In many ways, she is another Milo Yiannopoulos; her only truly distinguishing features are her acerbity and striking blonde hair. If her sponsors at Berkeley wanted to truly ignite discourse and discussion on the issue of immigration based on substantive fact, they ought to have started by inviting qualified speakers who are not Ann Coulter. Much like the president she loves, she is severely underqualified. Coulter’s opposite at Berkeley was Maria Echaveste, a former Clinton White House deputy chief of staff and presidential advisor on immigration, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, Democratic National Convention Executive Board member, lecturer at Berkeley School of Law, and at one point, the nominee for ambassador to Mexico. For comparison, Coulter worked as an Eighth Circuit law clerk and corporate lawyer for six years before quitting in the early ’90s to start writing

books about how scared she is of Spanish speakers. Coulter is qualified to discuss immigration with people like Echaveste in the same way I am qualified to go to the Conservative Political Action Conference; as a hyper-partisan liberal snowflake, I am incapable of coherent reason given my religious devotion to progressivism, and my only contribution would be loud and self-righteous yelling. If not actual discourse, the goal of the invitation, then, besides that standard “generate outrage for PR reasons and maybe a Fox News piece” strategy, seems to be just…free speech and attention. In-

deed, that was what the wording of the College Republicans’s invitation implied— she should come to UChicago to talk about her experience at Berkeley, not immigration. And sure enough, here I am giving it attention. Ann Coulter should apparently come to campus because she could not go to Berkeley, and we want to show that we—UChicago, and Republicans—love speech (except when it involves criticizing “The Donald”). The University itself just eats this up. Who could forget that marvelous welcome letter? Ultimately, though, the University’s similar attitude toward Continued on page 3

Stephanie Dorris

THE CHICAGO MAROON - MAY 2, 2017

“I am personally opposed to inviting figures on campus for the sake of stirring the pot...” Continued from page 2 free speech, where we pretend to celebrate it regardless of content or form, just leads to policy positions that are both hilarious and embarrassing. Therein lies the problem. Case in point: When the free speech of literal neo-Nazis rode in on its blonde-haired, blue-eyed ponies through campus, leaving white supremacist posters in its wake, the University took action to remove the posters and punish those responsible, to the extent that it pushed for hate crime charges for the perpetrators. But if you ask Michele Rasmus-

sen, the dean of students, it’s not because we didn’t like the posters, really—we do love us some good ol’ free speech—but rather because the posters “used adhesive glue.” At least they draw the line at sticky Nazism, right? Maybe I’m just conspiratorial, but it seems that the University is only willing to champion the free speech banner until it hurts their image, at which point the publicity gained from any controversy outweighs that gained from being able to market itself as a less liberal version of the Ivy Leagues. That sounds remarkably familiar to the College Republicans’ re-

fusal to make any sort of public statement about Trump, ever, or their desire to invite Ann Coulter to talk about free speech without having to take responsibility for the speech she actually produces (or intended to produce at Berkeley). To be clear—I think there is some benefit to be had by having conservative figures on campus to articulate their views and engage in productive debate. That does not mean everyone who can be invited ought to be invited. I am personally opposed to inviting figures on campus for the sake of stirring the pot, as if to

make a point about free speech as its own exciting end. Free speech ought to be thought of as a commons—drawing from the “pool” of free speech to justify the ramblings of a vile liar who has been repeatedly accused of plagiarism to do so is detrimental to the broadly liberal value of free speech as an institution; the notion of “free speech” risks becoming like “family values,” a phrase that theoretically should carry little controversial baggage but has long since been weaponized to antagonize the progressive left. Both the University administration and College Re-

publican leadership would do well to realize this. The College Republicans have every right to invite Coulter just for the sake of doing so, but is it really in their best interest? Or in anyone’s best interest? Or is it just a publicity stunt? I’m all for publicity—why else would I write nauseatingly center-left think pieces—but can we at least not pretend it is for the substantive goal of advancing the First Amendment rather than just creating noise? Jake Eberts is a third-year in the College majoring in political science.

A House Divided College Housing’s Well-Intentioned Plan to Degender Bathrooms Might Actually Hinder Inclusivity

Soulet Ali College Housing has often hindered the quality of life for students living on campus, which perhaps partly explains the high percentage of students who opt to move off campus after their first and second years. This past week, College Housing attempted to respond to student concerns, publicizing plans to offer one male, one female, and one gender-neutral bathroom in 37 of the 38 houses for future school years. Expressed as an attempt to “create and sustain a residential living environment that supports and values all members of our communities,” these recently revealed plans are a welcome step forward. I applaud Housing for its well-intended move to foster an inclusive atmosphere, in order to support the heterogeneous campus community. However, the execution of this plan shows poor delegation of resources

and further reflects the consistently fraught relationship Housing maintains with Resident Heads and Resident Assistants. While this is seemingly a positive change for students, Housing has disregarded a number of issues that residential students will face on campus due to its very general sweep of how the bathrooms and floors will correspond. Now, regardless of what each house wants, there will necessarily be two rigidly gendered bathrooms in each house according to the stipulations clarified in Housing’s recent e-mail. Many houses this year have opted to degender many, or even all, of their bathrooms, whereas under these new provisions, such an inclusive move would be made impossible. As the e-mail clarifies, “There will no longer be a need for students to vote on bathroom des-

Adam Thorp, Editor-in-Chief Hannah Edgar, Deputy Editor-in-Chief Euirim Choi, Managing Editor Stephanie Liu, Managing Editor The MAROON Editorial Board consists of the Editors-in-Chief and editors of THE MAROON.

NEWS

GREY CITY

Emily Kramer, editor Sonia Schlesinger, editor Katie Akin, editor Lee Harris, deputy editor Eugenia Ko, deputy editor Deepti Sailappan, deputy editor Jamie Ehrlich, senior editor Emily Feigenbaum, senior editor Pete Grieve, senior editor

Wendy Lee, editor

VIEWPOINTS

Cole Martin, editor Sarah Zimmerman, editor ARTS

Alexia Bacigalupi, editor MJ Chen, editor Grace Hauck, senior editor SPORTS

Rhea Bhojwani, editor Emmett Rosenbaum, deputy editor DESIGN

Kay Yang, head designer COPY

Sophie Downes, copy chief Morganne Ramsey, copy chief Michelle Zhao, copy chief Katrina Lee, deputy copy chief Patrick Lou, deputy copy chief THIS ISSUE

Design Associates: Peng-Peng Liu, Priyani Karim Copy: Steven Cui, Whitney Halperin, Meena Kandallu, Aidan Lilienfeld, Olivia Shao

SOCIAL MEDIA

Jamie Ehrlich, editor ONLINE

Vishal Talasani, editor PHOTO

Zoe Kaiser, editor VIDEO

Kenny Talbott La Vega, editor Grace Hauck, editor BUSINESS

Andrew Mamo, chief financial officer Olive Lopez, director of development Antonia Salisbury, director of marketing Ross Piper, director of marketing Taylor Bachelis, director of operations Alex Markowitz, director of strategy Regina Filomeno, business manager Harry Backlund, distributor Editor-in-Chief E-mail: Editor@ChicagoMaroon.com Newsroom Phone: (773) 702-1403 Business Phone: (773) 702-9555 Fax: (773) 702-3032 For advertising inquiries, please contact Ads@ChicagoMaroon.com or (773) 702-9555. Circulation: 5,500. © 2017 THE CHICAGO MAROON Ida Noyes Hall / 1212 East 59th Street / Chicago, IL 60637

ignations.” Now, students that identify as gender-nonconforming may often be forced to travel multiple flights of stairs to use the bathroom of their choosing. This seemingly common-sense solution from Housing could actually impact gender-nonconforming disproportionately, ultimately revealing Housing’s efforts as simplistic and perfunctory. In the e-mail sent to members of the College, Housing also mentions its correspondence to the Resident Heads and Resident Assistants, clarifying that “College Housing & Residential Services also sought guidance from Resident Heads and Resident As-

sistants.” Because of their close connection to students, Resident Heads and Assistants frequently are able to provide information and suggestions conducive to improving the quality of life for the students they live among. However, Housing tends to place little importance on these recommendations in reality. It would better serve students if Housing were to delegate bathroom plans to the Resident Heads, so that students have more license over their preferences and inclusivity can also be maintained. Not only would this provide a better living environment for the students, but it could potentially help increase the retention rate of upperclassmen as residential students, sup-

posedly one of Housing’s primary goals. Too often, Housing seems to be set on ignoring the significant feedback that Resident Heads and Resident Assistants offer, ultimately culminating in confusing policies that turn students away from Housing. While immediately appealing, in their guarantee of one gender-neutral bathroom in each house, these plans nevertheless reflect a broader trend of Housing offering heavy-handed solutions to nuanced problems. Soulet Ali is a first-year in the College.

THE CHICAGO MAROON - MAY 2, 2017

Executive Slate and Undergraduate Liaisons to the Board of Trustees speak to THE MAROON EXECUTIVE SLATE Rise (third-year Calvin Cottrell, second-year Sabine Nau, third-year Chase Harrison) C HICAGO M A ROON : What is your position on SG’s recent budget? How would you have balanced the $195,000 shortfall between last year’s budget and this one? Rise: We agree with much of SG’s recent budget. Cutting SG support for administrative services and providing parity for graduate student funding were both necessary measures we are proud to see included in the budget. We also reluctantly support the cuts to the New York Times Readership Program. While we understand how beloved the crossword is, the cost of the paper was substantial. We encourage interested houses to use their house funds to purchase a paper subscription. We disagree with cutting the Uncommon Fund. Chase voted against the budget because he felt money could have been moved from other lines of the budget to at least ensure the Uncommon Fund can support a few projects next year. Unlike what the current Executive Slate stated, the Dean’s Fund is not a proper substitute for the Uncommon Fund. Ending this campus tradition for a year because of recent problems is not the right solution for rehabilitating it. We plan on bringing back the Uncommon Fund next year. Finally, we still have questions about how rollover funds will be used. We support the principle of spending student life fees as close to the student paying them as possible. But we question the requirement to spend those funds by November 1 of each academic year. We can foresee problems in the future with rollover funds being spent on ill-thought-out projects because of the looming deadline. We plan to carefully watch the amount of potential rollover funds from the summer funding pool and to be thoughtful about potential funding options should there be sizable rollover going into the fall. CM: Are there any situations in which you would support calls for the University to divest for political or moral reasons? Rise: Student Government is most effective when dealing with localized student issues. We maintain that SG is not the correct forum for most forms of divestment campaigns and that divestment campaigns should not be an SG priority. Additionally, we are opposed to all academic boycotts or plans to limit research topics. That being said, we understand many students have strong feelings about how the endowment should be spent. We have been growing increasingly uncomfortable with the administration’s use of the Kalven Report to avoid discussing the political implications of the endowment. With divestment campaigns occurring on campus, it is clear that the endowment is undeniably political. The University needs a stronger, more contemporary rationale to ground its arguments against divestment. Thus, we would be interested in speaking with the administration about eschewing the Kalven Report. With more clear guidelines around how the University handles political issues, students can engage in a more civil and productive discussion over the endowment. CM: Are there speakers who ought not to be allowed on campus? Are there circumstances under which you would support either administra-

tive cancellation or protests designed to prevent invitees from speaking?

UNDERGRADUATE LIAISON TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Rise: This slate firmly believes in freedom of expression. The only instances where we believe speakers should not be allowed on campus is if they pose insurmountable security and/or pressing privacy concerns. Speaking at the University of Chicago is a privilege. Thus, groups should carefully consider who they invite and only bring speakers that meaningfully add to campus discourse. Speakers with a history of harassing specific students or undermining closely protected privacy rights should not be brought to campus. A few examples of this include speakers that would out trans students, reveal a student’s private immigration status, or attack individual students’ racial and ethnic identities. Speakers that would not pass this bar include Milo Yiannopoulos. Still, most of these issues are out of our purview. Registered Student Organizations [RSOs] can now, rightly, invite a huge range of speakers, and we support this. Our slate does support Chase’s efforts to encourage President Zimmer to communicate his freedom of expression policy more directly with students. Efforts to instill the responsibility that comes with the power to invite speakers, in RSO and other student leaders, would also be welcome Further, we also plan on helping empower the student body to lead effective counter-programming to speakers they may find unsavory. Any RSO that approaches us with concerns about a speaker will get support. We will help make sure they are aware of protest tactics that don’t violate University policy. They can then make their own decisions from there. We will also help direct RSOs to funds for counter-programming. The University is willing to provide money for counter-speakers and counter-events. We think that this is a group’s best way to challenge a speaker’s presence on campus. Shutting down speakers is often counterproductive. The media attention controversial speakers get subsequently allows their message to spread much farther than letting them speak. If the goal is to limit the spread of destructive ideas, then it is often better to counter those ideas with scholarship and public advocacy than to provide it a larger platform through censorship. We as a slate, however, will call out hate speech on campus and call on the University to uphold its own policies on protecting students.

Questions:

CM: Calvin, you left SG after contentious debates over divestment and SG pay. Do you think you’ll be able to work with members of SG who opposed your position on those issues as student body president? CC: My positions on divestment from Israel and SG Executive Slate pay were guided by a dedication to listening to diverse student groups, to maintaining a safe campus climate, and transparency. The proposals offered last year didn’t fit those values in my view. I fully expect values of inclusion and transparency to be shared by all of SG next year. I plan to be a student body president that makes everyone feel heard and understood. I will not agree with everyone all the time; however, I want my reasoning to be clear on why I take the stances I do on any given issue. I hope to be viewed as an approachable partner to all students on campus and will do everything possible to make sure that is true. Governing effectively is a team endeavor, and I look forward to working with all SG members on areas of agreement

Q1: Three of the 52 members the University’s Board of Trustees are African-American; nine are women; more than half work in finance. Would you encourage the Board to adopt a selection process that resulted in a broader range of experiences on the Board? Q2: How do you think that Student Government could better work with the Board of Trustees? Are there any particular SG initiatives right now that could benefit from increased collaboration between SG and the Board? Q3: What do you think of the changes to the liaison position? Do you think the Student Perspectives Series will ultimately lead to a better relationship between the Board and campus?

can be the fine-toothed comb that filters the most important issues to bring to the Board in the hopes of tangible change—but this can only be achieved with an open minded, unbiased SG. Current SG initiatives regarding student employment wages and health initiatives could benefit from an increased and positive collaboration between SG and the Board. A3: The Student Perspectives Series provides a platform for interested and involved students to meet directly with the Board of Trustees to voice their concerns and visions for a better University of Chicago. This is a great initiative that increases access to the Board. However, the liaison position serves as both a liaison between students and the Board and the Board and students. I think that the Student Perspectives Series is instrumental in furthering the mission of students to the Board, but the liaison being present in Board meetings will also allow for the Board to be properly represented to the students.

Second-year Steve Berkowitz Third-year Christina Uzzo A1: I think diversity is incredibly important and should definitely be a goal as new members are selected. The more experiences and viewpoints present on the board will only increase efforts in strengthening the long term future of UChicago. A2: Certainly greater transparency in the Board’s abilities and capacities would help Student Government better facilitate a relationship with them. If the student body had a better understanding of what is feasible and not for the Board to achieve, the ideas and solutions communicated could better be aligned to result in more tangible outcomes. A3: Yes, I think it is a step forward in the right direction. Allowing more students to have their voices heard will only help strengthen the relationships between the Board and the student body. From here, working on ways to keep the student body engaged in this dialogue can take priority. Second-year Zander Cowan A1: To become a member of the University’s Board of Trustees one must make significant financial contributions to the University, as well as have an interest in the direction of the University. It is important to recognize that these financial contributions are relative to income, so measured percentage of contributions to income is what is evaluated. I think that this current system is what has allowed for the existing diversity within the Board of Trustees, and not just a select few high-income earners. However, I think that more work can be done to further foster diversity. Trustees should also be evaluated on their contributions to other charitable interests, as well as involvement in cultural and social causes to evaluate if new points of view and identities are being included in the Board of Trustees. A2: Student Government plays a key role in the bridge between students and the Board of Trustees. Students, as a whole, have a variety of concerns in both breadth and depth, and each concern is valid. However, it is also important to realize that sometimes the approach of “throwing a lot of darts and hoping one sticks” is not always applicable. In the case of the SG–Board relationship, it is imperative that the most important issues be brought first to the Board to ensure that implementable change is achieved. I think some of these issues include providing more mental health services to students, reducing wait times within student health, working to restore aggregate graduation ceremonies, and pushing for more climate-sustainable investments by the University as a whole. SG

A1: The Board has final decision-making power over many issues that affect our diverse student body. Beyond this, their decisions regarding University policy and expansion affect many people in surrounding Chicago communities, and decisions regarding opening new centers in other countries affect people throughout the world. I believe that you cannot have a truly diverse set of opinions and perspectives without having a diverse group of individuals. Diverse perspectives will result in a more robust discussion and therefore stronger outcomes. Because of the vast power and impact of the Board, I believe they should strive to achieve greater racial, gender, and professional diversity so that they can make the strongest decisions possible. A2: Many of the current SG initiatives work to engage the student body and are separate from issues where the Board has direct decision-making power. Therefore, we should work to increase engagement with the Board regarding issues where they do have more direct control—such as funding issues. One initiative where I think the Board should be more directly engaged is the RSO Accessibility Program—currently aiming to make all RSO events accessible to every student. The program appears to be connecting RSOs to the Office of Disability Services. However, this places the onus on already busy RSOs to reach out to the highly understaffed Office of Disability Services. I think it would instead be more productive to address accessibility on a University-wide level and work towards solving the root of these issues. One way that we could work towards this would be hiring more staff for the Office of Disability Services. There are also many campus issues that fall under the Board’s jurisdiction that are not currently being addressed through SG initiatives. I think one way to fix that is to work with University administrators to create a formal petition process. My vision is for students to have an avenue to deliver a letter to the Board outside of the quarterly meetings. A3: I am in support of the changes with the liaison position. In my opinion, a lot of current ill feelings towards the Board are the result of students feeling that they are not being heard by the Board. Previously, when the liaison could only sit in on the Board meetings, the liaison did not have the capacity to make students’ voices heard. I know that within this first year of the Student Perspective Series there have already been productive conversations between members of the Board and undergraduates. I hope that we can continue towards greater collaboration in the future.

THE CHICAGO MAROON - MAY 2, 2017

“It is time to turn the lens inward.” Continued from front

Vice pointed COUW to the orientation training that the University provided to incoming freshmen—much like the Campus Life Meetings the University now hosts during O-Week, in which students are taught about safety and awareness in Chicago. “Counseling starts in orientation week: where to walk, not to go and come at night… But a more conscious effort by women themselves would help the most—in the past few years, the number of stationary guards, foot police, and car police has multiplied. Now there are new, white telephones.” At the end of the interview, the interviewer noted that Vice told COUW to keep the numbers on rape confidential. As Vice pointed to the threat of sexual assault as something that lived outside of campus, students during that time tell a different story. One alumna (A.B. ’65), who wishes to remain anonymous, described the atmosphere of the College as oppressive to women. When she arrived on campus in 1961 from a New York suburb, she said that she remembered “all the upperclassmen showing up at orientation—checking us out.” Men would quickly separate the new first-years into two groups: those who were “girlfriend material” and those who weren’t. Those in the latter group would often be taken advantage of, invited to fraternity parties with the expectation of sex. “I remember younger [fraternity] brothers would invite me to something, but then I would just be taken up [by the brothers] somewhere to somebody’s bedroom,” said the alumna. “I was avoiding [sexual assault] by giving in and keeping myself safe that way.” Younger brothers would “deliver” her to older, often wealthier, brothers. She detailed other hostile encounters with male students, including an incident in which she was kicked out of a fraternity house at 3 a.m. and forced to find her way home. Throughout all of this, she said that she felt completely isolated from other students, especially women. Part of this had to do with the fact that she placed into sophomore classes and felt out of place speaking to her freshman housemates who were meeting in study groups for classes she wasn’t taking. But she also mentioned that she felt intentionally isolated from other women; there were no all-women support groups at the time, and she can hardly remember other women at attendance at other social events. “I have no memory of other women being [in fraternity houses], which makes no sense,” she said. “All I remember is the men. I do not remember other women. I think we were really isolated from each other. “The things you read about fraternities and rape culture today were in place then,” she added. Yet, despite an oppressive atmosphere on campus, University officials focused on threats beyond campus walls. The alumna said she was made very aware of “hazards in the neighborhood” and that one of the major issues for the University at the time was the “possibility that local people from the nearby neighborhoods [would come] into Hyde Park.” In the 1970s, the University community continued its focus on possible threats from

Richard Kornylak | THE CHICAGO MAROON University of Chicago students participate in a candlelight vigil in front of the Regenstein Library in solidarity with victims of sexual violence in 1992.

the local community. After a rape in the basement of Snell Hall by a non-affiliate of the University in April of 1973, student groups began to call for armed guards to be stationed within the residence halls. Unlike cases of student-on-student violence, the University was quick to publicly respond to the Snell Hall assault. In the month after the rape, the University held a public panel to discuss security concerns on campus. Though the locks were changed in Snell Hall, campus security officials decided that armed guards in residence halls were not the right course of action and that a “large, welltrained, highly mobile force,” was sufficient to protect students from crimes. However, students persisted in calling for increased security. “Students’ attitudes about security have changed since 1968. We no longer see a guard as a restriction on our freedom. Now we recognize the need,” a Snell resident said at the forum. The resident who was raped in the dormitories wrote to THE MAROON in the week after the forum, accusing the University of negligence on the part of the housing system and the security office. “I will readily admit that it is impossible to absolutely guarantee safety in any building on this campus, particularly if we do not wish to go back to the old days of ‘hours’ and ‘bedchecks.’ However, given that the University has some responsibility, one would assume that it would go to some expenses to make things very difficult to enter a dorm illegally,” she wrote anonymously in 1973. There was even less support for those who experienced sexual assault outside of the standard narrative of forcible penetration. As Clover Carroll (A.B. ’75) noted, sexual harassment was simply part of the culture at the time, and women were expected to tolerate it. “It’s hard for you to understand, but the entire culture at that time supported [sexual harassment],” she said. “So people just didn’t talk about it because it was a part of life for a pretty girl. That’s just what happened.” Carroll transferred to the University of Chicago from George Washington University in 1973. Having never left home before, she said that she was “in over her head” when she

arrived on campus and called herself almost “pathologically shy.” To try and find her footing at her new school, Carroll immediately joined the choir and signed up for voice lessons. Her mother was a singer, and she herself had sung all her life. She didn’t know that her first voice lesson at the University would also be her last. “I can picture the whole situation, I can picture the room and everything,” Carroll began. Halfway through her one-on-one lesson, her music professor began to fondle her. Unsure of what to do or say, Carroll stood there, paralyzed. “I’m sure I didn’t say anything to him or push him away,” she said. “What I did was leave after it was over. “I never sang again, I quit the choir, I never told anybody, I was so ashamed and scared that I never did anything about it. I didn’t tell anybody—not even my friends.” For years, Carroll struggled to call what she faced an assault, instead blaming the incident on herself. Shame eventually gave way to anger as she realized she lost the one thing that mattered to her most—singing. “It’s just so sad that I didn’t sing throughout those years,” she said. “I just dropped it because I was so freaked out. It was really tragic in a way.” The general silence around sexual assault Carroll pointed to continued well into the 1980s. In an e-mail to THE MAROON, an alumnus who was at the College from 1982 to 1988 said that although there was no conversation on the reality of campus sexual assault, there was a significant emphasis on campus safety. “Students were warned [on a] number of occasions to be careful when we were walking around outside at night. But among us students, there was never any discussion that I can recall about sexual assault.” Michele Beaulieux (A.B. ’82) recalled a similar emphasis on neighborhood crime. “There were definitely more boys than girls at the University, and one of the reasons was because parents were reticent to send their girls to the urban, South Side campus,” she said. A fellow student pressured her into a ro-

mantic relationship and subsequently raped her in her dorm room. She told no one. “I cannot tell you now when I really realized it was rape,” she said. In what she calls an incredible form of irony, it was the man who raped her who taught her how to defend herself when walking the streets of Hyde Park at night. “I remember him showing me how to protect myself by putting my keys between my fingers,” she said. “Which is just so ironic to think about now.” The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act, known as the Clery Act, was signed into law in 1990 after the high-profile rape and murder of a Lehigh University student. Colleges and universities receiving federal aid are now mandated by the Clery Act to publish annual security reports, maintain a public crime log, release “timely warnings” for threats that pose a continuing threat to campus communities, and keep an archive of the past eight years of Clery crimes. These requirements, however, only extend to “Clery geography.” Clery geography can be broken down into three categories: on-campus property, non-campus property, and public property. Crimes committed external to Clery geography, on public property, are not required to be included in security alerts. Sometime after the Clery Act became law, Leah Harp (A.B. ’92) and Alix Burns (A.B. ’93) decided to restart the Womyn’s Union at the University of Chicago. They thought they were creating a general space for women to come together and communicate with other like-minded women about important issues of the time, such as sexual health, sexuality, and relationships. “It was a social group to create a place for women to come together,” Harp said. “We had a lot of potlucks and fun social stuff.” However, in 1992, the group began advocacy work after administrative silence in the wake of a widely-publicized assault, in which a student was abducted while walking down East 57th Street between South Woodlawn Avenue and South University Avenue. The victim told police that she was forced into a car and driven to an abandoned building west of Hyde Park where she was assaulted by at least two men. She eventually found her way back to campus when she was able to stumble across a #55 bus stop. She wasn’t the only one in danger that night. Another student reported to the University of Chicago Police Department (UCPD) that she was being followed while walking up East 57th Street. Her descriptions matched those given by the abducted student, and Jonathan Kleinbard, vice president for University News and Community Affairs at the time, confirmed to THE MAROON that it was “very possible it was the same guys.” Despite the fact that the 1992 abduction took place on campus, only two blocks from the Regenstein Library, no security alert went out. In fact, up until this incident, the University had not sent out any security alerts whatsoever, instead reporting general crime statistics each week in THE MAROON. Continued on Friday or read in full online at www.chicagomaroon.com/greycity

THE CHICAGO MAROON - MAY 2, 2017

ARTS Joffrey Ballet Proves Itself a Global Visionary in New Program BY ALEXIA BACIGALUPI ARTS EDITOR

A leather corset with hot pants. Nude spandex straight off the Yeezy runway with stilettos and monochrome bodysuits out of an American Apparel ad. With nary a tutu in sight, the Joffrey Ballet opened Global Visionaries last Wednesday evening: The program at Auditorium Theatre included the Chicago premiere of The Miraculous Mandarin, the world premiere of Joy, and a revival of Mammatus. The first of 10 performances, Global Visionaries celebrates modern choreography through an art form still heavily associated with the 18th and 19th centuries. Resident choreographer Yuri Possokhov of the San Francisco Ballet adapted The Miraculous Mandarin from Béla Bartók’s 1918 score. The only narrative piece of the performance, its plot required a Wikipedia search during intermission: A gang of thugs sets up a honeypot trap with their female member (Victoria Jaiani) to fleece unwitting men. After a number of penniless targets, she lures in a wealthy Chinese mandarin (Yoshihisa Arai). Undeterred by the loss of his valuables, the mandarin continues to pursue the girl as her accomplices deter him with escalating violence. They eventually string him up on a noose, but the girl has second thoughts and cuts him down. They dance together before he collapses on her lap, like Michelangelo’s Pietà, dead. The Chicago Philharmonic sat on stage, performing a score that was at times tense and roiling with prominent brass and frantic drums. The staging was

minimalist: a large steel-frame cube used as the setting of the girl’s beckoning performance and three heavyweight ropes hanging from the ceiling around which the thugs twined themselves. Jaiani was a sinuous dancer, limply tossed around by the gang members with a hidden coiled defiance. The final duet with Arai was energetic as the two moved in each other’s negative spaces like yin and yang. Joy—titled Episode 47 until the morning of the performance—was created by Alexander Ekman in collaboration with Joffrey. A dismembered voice (presumably Ekman’s) preceded the dancing, asking, “What creates joy?” As the dancers hopped on their hands, skipped, somersaulted, and moonwalked onto the stage, the voice continued: “Can you see the dancers truly feeling joy? Or the ones who’ve had a shit day and must dance joyfully?” The stage was bare with the exception of a single tree, and a high ceiling bathed in bright white light evoked a feeling of endless space—an Eden where self-consciousness had not yet been discovered. A giant flamingo light hung suspended in the air as a female dancer, soon joined by half the cast, declared, “This is a shoe drop” and dropped her pointe shoes noisily. The music—a mélange of blues, psychedelic club, and pop—floated in as the dancers moved across the stage in unison, leaping, stomping, and rolling on the floor. Stilettos dropped from the ceiling and the dancers clomped around the stage in heels, thrashing spastically. There was an unbridled freedom to it all—the greedy joy of fully inhabiting one’s body. It was hyperbolic and over-the-top and campy, but

FREE AND OPEN TO THE PUBLIC

Malcolm Gladwell The Brown Decision and the Trouble with Psychology Appearing on the Time Magazine’s 100 most inﬂuential people, Malcolm Gladwell is a Canadian journalist based in New York. In addition to being a bestselling author of four books, Gladwell is also a speaker and has been on job as a staff writer for The New Yorker since 1996. His books, The Tipping Point: How Little Things Make a Big Difference (2000), Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking (2005), Outliers: The Story of Success (2008), and What the Dog Saw: And Other Adventures (2009) have all appeared on The New York Times bestsellers list. His works deal with research in the areas of psychology, social psychology and sociology.

discernibly self-aware. Above all, the joy was contagious as the audience laughed along and gave a standing ovation. The final piece, Mammatus, is named after an opaque cloud formation associated with severe thunderstorms. Choreographed by Annabelle Lopez Ochoa, the precise lines of movement were matched onstage by a branch-like light installation and a simple, colored screen. Imbued with a subtle fierceness, the dancers moved in near-perfect synchronization with controlled purpose. The storm gathered strength as the throaty violin and electronic beep slowly came to a crescendo. The dancers, in black-gloved leotards, massed as a dark thundercloud with a

moody red background. Release later came as a white-clad pair performed a duet, clinging to each other as the music softened. Like the sweet smell of rain after the storm, the two moved in delicate harmony, accompanied by the humming whoosh of the wind. Classical ballet, with its clearly defi ned positions and delicate strength, is a study in carefully calibrated control, a constructed artifice of precise pirouettes and grand jetés. Although somewhat uneven in execution across the program, Global Visionaries showed the breadth of the Joffrey’s range and the possibilities of the human body’s expressivity.

Courtesy of Cheryl Mann

Victoria Jaiani and Yoshihisa Arai in a passionate duet in Yuri Possokhov’s adaptation of the early 20th century ballet The Miraculous Mandarin.

No Soggy Bottoms at Off-Off BY KARDELEN SERTSOZ MAROON CONTRIBUTOR

This past Friday night, The Revival thronged with students and Hyde Parkers alike for Off-Off Campus’s latest revue, La Land Land, featuring the improv group’s 31st generation. This show featured two “pre-glows,” or opening acts, and an improvised mainstage musical based on a single word given by the audience—“baker.” The opening acts included four songs by first-year student Trish Zulueta, and rap comedy by second-year Jacob Johnson, alias Average Johnson. Zulueta’s performance was laid-back, yet her solid vocals held the audience’s attention. Her act was balanced by Johnson’s more boisterous set. Teasing his upcoming album, Views From the Reg, Johnson had the audience collapsing in laughter at tropes and observations to which every UChicago student could relate.

Improv comedy is, by its very nature, a shot in the dark. With Off-Off Campus, you never know what you’re going to get, but you will be entertained. Working to keep the musical to its “baker” theme, the night included skits about a bakery run by toddlers and a romance gone wrong—the latter ended in a girl-power song performed by the entire cast. The 31st generation is sharp, witty, and leavened: Awkward pauses were few, and laughter was consistent. The show integrated musical numbers to great success. At their best, they lent the evening cohesion and added whimsy to the slower skits. My only criticism would be that the show was not wholly a musical— performers broke out into song only sporadically. Considering that this was my biggest critique, the show was a good bake. Off-Off Campus performs weekly shows in The Revival.

Thursday, May 4, 4pm Rockefeller Chapel, 5850 S Woodlawn Ave, Chicago, IL 60637

SPONSORED BY THE CENTER FOR COGNITIVE & SOCIAL NEUROSCIENCE Questions about the event and persons with disabilities who need an accommodation to attend this event should contact bsawyer@uchicago.edu

ccsn.uchicago.edu

Brooke Nagler

THE CHICAGO MAROON - MAY 2, 2017

Abandon All Hope: CSO Program, Soloist Dissapoints Despite Compelling Direction BY BRYAN MCGUIGGIN MAROON CONTRIBUTOR

I have to admit that my expectations going into Thursday night’s concert at the Chicago Symphony Orchestra (CSO) were extremely high. Radu Lupu has been a hero of mine for a long time, particularly on account of his legendary 1987 DECA recording of Brahms’s Op. 79 Rhapsodies and late piano pieces, Op. 117–119. His is known to be gold standard piano playing: poetic, intelligent, and thoughtful. This weekend’s program gave him every opportunity to showcase these qualities. Beethoven’s fifth piano concerto (aptly subtitled The Emperor) is a masterwork of the genre with extraordinary emotional range, from its declamatory opening to its heartbreakingly beautiful slow movement to its ecstatic rondo in the finale. Typical of Beethoven’s heroic middle period, the concerto draws inspiration from Napoleon (specifically, his invasion of Vienna), contrasting military rhythms with spiritual intimacy. I was similarly excited to hear Franz Liszt’s Dante Symphony for the first time. In general, I love the music of Liszt: Contrary to the stereotype that his music is one of empty virtuosity, it embodies to my ear the Romantic spirit with its power and expressivity. It pains me to write this, but Radu Lupu’s performance on Thursday felt lazy. I have

great respect for his past work; however, what I heard at Symphony Center was an exception to this rule. I caught some buzz in the lobby after the performance about missed notes. Honestly, that doesn’t bother me: Some of the greatest recordings of all time have technical errors, including those by pianists from Kempff to Schnabel to Rachmaninoff himself. Mistakes don’t matter if the playing itself has integrity, depth, and consideration. I wouldn’t describe what I heard on Thursday with any of these words. The opening cadenzas were lethargic, and the entire first movement lacked the faintest energy—let alone grandeur or passion. Lupu’s sound in the middle movement was inappropriately fuzzy, and the melodic arc was all but nonexistent. Perhaps the most offensive moment was at the very end of the piece. Lupu again flubbed the final run (a point which would not necessarily ruin a performance for me) and excused himself with a wave of his hand at the keyboard and audience—as if to say, “Who cares?” It brings me no pleasure to write such things about a musician of the highest caliber (and in every aspect, a better pianist than I), but this apparent disregard in front of a great orchestra is a real shame. Yet under music director Riccardo Muti, the CSO delivered stellar performances of both pieces. Often criticized for his interpretations of core German masterworks, Muti’s

success with the Emperor concerto was especially noteworthy. On Thursday, the maestro brought subtlety to a piece that risks a rash performance: His direction was considered, drawing vitality and nuance from the orchestra in certain passages and sensuous beauty in others. The second and third movements were nothing short of exceptional. In particular, the strings’ full, luscious sound owes much to Muti’s direction: The violins sang with elegance in the slow movement and played with engaging bite in the finale. Likewise for the winds, who played with sweep and exuberance. Even the timpanist distinguished himself in a normally nondescript part.

Liszt’s Dante Symphony was also played with gripping conviction, despite the piece’s problems. A musical representation of Dante’s Divine Comedy, the work itself was kitsch at its most tedious, dragging on for nearly an hour. Worst of all, it ended with a truly vomit-inducing Magnificat appropriate for the soundtrack of a C-list direct-to-VHS Christian flick. None of this is to say that the concert was entirely without merit. The CSO played convincingly and beautifully, and Riccardo Muti showed Chicago how lucky we are to have him. But for all my expectations entering the hall, I left it disappointed.

Courtesy of Todd Rosenberg

STUDENT HEALTH ADVISORY BOARD (SHAB) Do you want an opportunity to influence student health on campus? Are you interested in working on a team that is focused on enhancing mental health, health promotion and wellness, and clinical services on campus? This is your opportunity to provide input to members of the senior leadership team and Student Health & Counseling Services (SHCS) about our health and wellness services and the University of Chicago’s Student Health Insurance Plan (U-SHIP).

Join the Student Health Advisory Board! We are currently accepting applications for the Student Health Advisory Board for the 2017-2018 academic year. You can go to our website https://wellness.uchicago.edu/page/student-health-advisory-board-shab or click on the QR code to apply! Deadline to apply is May 5th, 2017 The Student Health Advisory Board (SHAB) is comprised of undergraduate and graduate students, Deans of Students, campus partners, and SHCS Leadership. SHAB x x x

Members will Play a key role in collecting student feedback. Influence the ongoing development of our programs and services Assist in gathering feedback from students to inform our campus needs assessment

THE CHICAGO MAROON - MAY 02, 2017

SPORTS Senior Spotlight: Blaine Crawford MEN’S BASKETBALL

BY MICHAEL PERRY SPORTS STAFF

The University of Chicago men’s basketball team (16–9 overall, 8–6 conference) was lead by an impressive group of seniors, and among them was First Team All–UAA selection Blaine Crawford, who started at the center position for the Maroons. Crawford, known for his competitiveness on the court and friendliness off of it, dominated his competitors this year en route to posting averages of 15 points and 9.5 rebounds per game, both tops on the team. Crawford will graduate with the second highest season field goal percentage (61.7 percent) in Maroon history, as well as having the eighth highest free throw (103) and ninth highest rebound (229) season totals in team history, dating back more than 100 years. “Blaine’s experience and developed skill set inside and out made our team so much more deadly than if we didn’t have him,” second-year guard Noah Karras said. “His hard work and hustle rubbed off on all of us. He was a great teammate to look after and follow. With his dominating presence underneath, that created lots of open looks and scoring opportunities for outside threats like Jake [Fenlon] and myself.” First-year center Sam Sustacek spent

the year playing behind and learning from Crawford. “Blaine was a great mentor to have for my first year on the team,” Sustacek said of the center. “He is a tough player to guard, and I was definitely baptized by fire. I grew as a player trying to stop him in practice, and I got a lot tougher. He never took it easy on me, and in the long run, I’ve gotten better from it.” The Maroons won 64 games in the four years Crawford played for them. After seeing limited action as a first-year, Crawford played steady minutes off the bench as a second- and third-year behind incumbent starter Nate Brooks before breaking out as a regular starter his fourth year. A double-double machine, Crawford put up double digits in points and rebounds 11 times in his 24 appearances this season, as well as dropping at least 20 points six different times this year. Among Crawford’s many accolades this season was that he took the title of UChicago Tournament MVP and UAA Athlete of the week on two separate occasions. A political science major, the 6’8” Crawford is originally from St. Paul, MN. He will return home after graduation to work for Accenture, a global management consulting and professional services company. Crawford is beloved and respected by his teammates in what is a very close-knit

University of Chicago Athletics Dept.

Crawford throws down a contested dunk during his senior year. locker room. “He’s friends with everyone on the team,” Karras said. “Everyone enjoys hanging out with him. He’s very knowledgeable and intelligent so he generates lots of conversations with a variety of topics.” “He was definitely our motor,” Sustacek added. “He came to every game and

produced and shot a high percentage that helped us to our successes. He’s a great friend, endearingly nicknamed ‘Guwop’ by the team, and someone we’re really going to miss having around next year.”

Women Back On Track After Weather Issues SOFTBALL

BY MAGGIE O’HARA SPORTS STAFF

After Saturday, Sunday, and Monday’s games were postponed, the Maroons will be back in action on Wednesday and Thursday to take on Elmhurst (17–18) and Lawrence (14–20). The Maroons look to continue their six-game winning streak through the completion of the regular season. Chicago (22–11) is coming off a 4–0 weekend against Case Western and is 7–1 against UAA teams this season. The softball and the baseball teams do not compete in the UAA, so they are looking to secure an at-large bid since they do not have the opportunity to claim the conference title. The Maroons are ranked fi fth in the region behind four UW schools:

Whitewater, Oshkosh, La Crosse, and Eau Claire. In order to feel more secure going into Monday’s selection show, the Maroons will need to add some more wins to their overall total. The team will have a unique opportunity to play at the Ballpark at Rosemont where Chicago’s professional softball team, the Bandits, play. The Maroons will take on Elmhurst at the Ballpark on Wednesday for their last regular season away competition. This game will act as Elmhurst’s senior day as well as likely their last game of the year. Elmhurst did not make the CCIW tournament that will take place this coming weekend, and thus are not likely to be awarded an at-large bid. While Elmhurst is not a powerhouse team, the Bluejays have some impressive

wins to their name, including a win over UW–Stevens Point and splits with both North Central and Wheaton. They’re a team that can’t be taken lightly, as they’re perennially tournament-ready. Chicago will host the Lawrence Vikings the following day, Thursday, for senior day. Chicago will honor its two seniors, Anna Woolery and Maggie O’Hara. This will also serve as the Vikings’ likely last game of the season, as they will not play in the MWC tournament this upcoming weekend. While Lawrence also doesn’t have a record to boast, they have been playing quality ball all season and could pose a serious threat to the Maroons’ pitching staff. The Vikings come into this weekend sporting 76 extra base hits to go along with a team .402 slugging percentage. The

Maroons will need to keep their hitters off balance to keep them off the scoreboard. “We’re on a roll right now and have found our rhythm. We’re playing really well as a team which is exciting as we make our fi nal push for regionals,” second-year Colleen Bennett said. “These next four games represent an opportunity to put some distance between our wins and losses, which is incredibly important with the selection show coming up next week.” The Maroons will suit up next on Wednesday for a doubleheader starting at 3 p.m. at the Ballpark at Rosemont. They will return home for their last home game of the season on Thursday for a doubleheader, also at 3 p.m. Editor’s Note: Maggie O’Hara is a member of UChicago’s softball team.

M AROON

SPORT

SCORE BOARD W/L

Opponent

Score

Baseball

Grinnell

4– 2

Baseball

PPD

Grinnell

N/A

Baseball

PPD

Grinnell

N/A

Softball

PPD

Kalamazoo

N/A

Softball

PPD

Kalamazoo

N/A

UPCOMING GAMES

Zoe Kaiser

Second-year Maeve Garvey throws the ball from the outfield.

SPORT

DAY

Opponent

TIME

Softball

Wednesday

Elmhurst

3 p.m. 5 p.m.

Softball

Thursday

Lawrence

3 p.m. 5 p.m.