Fall 2016 Issue 4

Tufts Observer

VOLUME CXXXI, ISSUE 4

November 7, 2016

A Sorority Struggles Against National Policies

Is Tufts Watching Your Online Activity?

Calling for the Abolition of Fraternities

Page 6

Page 24

Page 18

Seen & Unseen

Tufts Observer The Tufts Observer has been Tufts’ student publication of record since 1895. Our dedication to indepth reporting, journalistic innovation, and honest dialogue has remained intact for over a century.

Today, we offer insightful news analysis, cogent and diverse opinion pieces, creative writing, and lively reviews of current arts, entertainment, and culture. Through poignant writing and artistic elegance, we aim to entertain, inform, and above all challenge the Tufts community to affect positive change.

@tuftsobserver www.tuftsobserver.org

November 7, 2016 Volume CXXXI, Issue 4 Tufts Observer, SInce 1895 Tufts’ Student Magazine

Theme To be seen inherently gestures toward what is left unseen, illuminating the dependency of visibility on its inverse. What does it mean to be invisible? Whose stories go untold? What voices are often heard, and which have been silenced? We hope this issue can begin to intervene in those silences.

Staff Editor-In-Chief // Carly Olson Managing Editor // Eve Feldberg Creative Director // Chase Conley

Section Editors

Web Columns // Jordan Lauf Features // Sahar Roodehchi News // Will Norris & Claire Selvin Opinion // Julia Doyle & Ben Kesslen Campus // Greta Jochem & Emma Pinsky Web // Susan Kaufman & Misha Linnehan Poetry & Prose // MT Snyder & Liza Leonard Arts & Culture // Carissa Fleury & Jamie Moore Tech & Innovation // Lily Hartzell & Lauren Samuel

Art, Photo, & Design

Art Directors // Nina Hofkosh-Hulbert & Rachel Cunningham Lead Artists // Jake Rochford & Annie Roome Photo Director // Lily Herzan - Photo Editor // Kyle Scott Designers // Abigail Barton, Alexandra Benjamin, Josh Goodman, Caroline Smith, Hannah Vigran & Conrad Young

Multimedia

Publicity // Yumi Casagrande & Ashley Miller Video // Anastasia Antonova, Evie Bellew, Aaron Watts & Luke Zhao Interactive // Gabby Bonfiglio, Jade Chan, Danielle Kong & Kayden Mimmack

Writing & Copy

Staff Writer // Katie Saviano Lead Copy Editor // Dana Guth Copy Editors // Matt Beckshaw, Henry Jani, Julia Press & Sivi Satchithanandan

Contributors Elizabeth Brooke, Menglan Chen, Adriana Guardans-Godo

Contents

8

Arts & Culture

13

Photo Inset

24

Tech & Innovation

Making a Merger

seen

Spinning the Web

Katie Saviano

Lily Herzan & Kyle Scott

Lauren Samuel

FEATURE

2

Postering Hate Eve Feldberg

NEWS

6

Defining Sisterhood Julia Doyle

CAMPUS

10 The Price Some Pay Grace Segers PROSE

12 Secrets Through Art Dora Finkelstein

OPINION

18 Abolish Fraternities Ben Kesslen ARTS & CULTURE

20 Forging Famous Libby Langsner NEWS

22 Paid Family Leave in the

Political Spotlight

Sarah Gargaro NEWS

26 Conversations with Clowns Gabriela Bonfiglio

POETRY

PROFILE

17 Anonymous Musings

28 A Chat with Jonathan Garlick

COVER BY ELIZABETH BROOKE

Poste Hate Feature

Campus Activism and the Radical Right

By Eve Feldberg

2

Tufts Observer

November 7, 2016

ering

Feature

O

n Wednesday, October 19, Tufts students woke up to find defamatory and racist posters plastered around campus. One poster listed the names of 10 Tufts students and one professor, labeling them as activists in Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), as well as supporters of the tactic of boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) on the state of Israel. Bright red letters across the top of the poster read “HAMAS TERRORISTS.” Another poster uses arrows and images of shadowy figures holding puppets to imply links between SJP and Hamas. There is no evidence that members of SJP or JVP are involved with Hamas. Rather, these posters are emblematic of a trend in which right-wing organizations target activist groups on college campuses.

Listed at the bottom of the posters is the website for an organization called Horowitz Freedom Center, a group founded by David Horowitz. Horowitz has been named an anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim extremist by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a legal advocacy group whose program “Hatewatch” names and maps out “radical right” hate groups across the US. The Horowitz Freedom Center’s website says its mission is to “[combat] the efforts

of the radical left and its Islamist allies to destroy American values and disarm this country as it attempts to defend itself in a time of terror.”

The names on the poster seem to have been drawn directly from another website named Canary Mission, a database of students and professors whose stated mission is “to document people and groups that are promoting hatred of the USA, Israel, and the Jewish people, particularly on college campuses in North America.” The website compiles screenshots from personal social media accounts, as well as other personal information about students and professors who are active in organizations like SJP. Canary Mission has been widely condemned, including in a petition signed by 1,010 professors at universities across the US. The petition describes the site as “an effort to intimidate and blacklist students and faculty who stand for justice for Palestinians.” Despite this condemnation, Canary Mission is still very much active.

The Tufts students named on the posters reported feeling supported by faculty, staff, and other students, but seeing their names publicly listed was jarring for some. Senior Hannah Freedman, a member of Tufts SJP, was reminded of links to her family’s past. She said, “I remember as

a freshman...the first time that I published something [in support of SJP], I remember specifically thinking about the fact that I was sending this in with my real name on it, and I heard my mother and my grandmother’s voice in my head saying things they’d been telling me since I was little—to never put my name on petitions or to not have my name on things.” This fear, she said, came out of her grandmother’s history as an activist involved with the Communist party during the McCarthy era. She explained, “It hit me extra hard to see my name on the posters, because this really does feel like modern day McCarthy era stuff.”

Noah Habeeb, a second-year Urban and Environmental Planning student and organizer with JVP Boston, explained the implications of being targeted by the posters. “I think it’s kind of absurd that at age 22, as a graduate student in urban policy and planning, I have to have a lawyer,” he said.

Jonathan Moore, a senior whose name was also listed on the poster, said, “As a Black person who was listed…I’m obviously in a different place and space where I don’t feel corporeally vulnerable in the same way that maybe a White Jewish student or especially a Muslim student might.

I’m in a position personally where I feel that it’s… it’s encouraging. Not encourag-

November 7, 2016

Tufts Observer

3

Feature

ing in a superficial way, but encouraging in the sense that they’re worried about Black people supporting Palestinian liberation to the extent that they would prioritize it with the folks that they’re targeting.”

Though organizations like the Horowitz Freedom Center and Canary Mission claim to be fighting anti-Semitism on college campuses—multiple posters include the hashtag “#JewHatred”—Freedman posits that is not the case. “These posters are not designed to end anti-Semitism,” she said. “If they were designed to end anti-Semitism, they would start talking about anti-Semitism, but instead it’s very clear that it’s only meant to intimidate students and professors and scare people out of organizing.”

In an email exchange, David Horowitz, founder of the Horowitz Freedom Center, stated that the posters “are designed to expose the agendas of SJP and the BDS campaign to public scrutiny and hold the activists of SJP and BDS accountable for their actions. It’s called free speech.”

However, like Freedman, Habeeb identified the posters as functioning to intimidate students. “I think the point of something like this is to silence people. Some people seem to think that free speech means you can say whatever libelous, defamatory remarks you want without repercussions, but that actually acts to suppress speech. It intimidates students, it intimidates activists and faculty members, into remaining silent rather than speak out against human rights abuses. It’s a tactic of silencing,” he said.

Accusations of anti-Semitism have been lodged against students and professors by both the Horowitz Freedom Center and Canary Mission. Freedman reflected that as a Jewish student, it is often easier for her to rebuke those accusations than it is for Arab and Muslim students.

For Freedman, though, accusations of anti-Semitism are complex. She commented, “It feels really weird to have my name on a poster that says #JewHatred on it, but then it’s also really weird because

4

Tufts Observer

November 7, 2016

one of the posters has a shadowy figure of Hamas holding a [puppet], like somebody else is controlling SJP.” She went on to pinpoint the “anti-Semitic trope of the puppeteer that’s behind everything,” alluding to an image that has been deployed to suggest that Jews are a hidden, sinister, controlling force in society. She explained that on the posters, that imagery was used for “Islamophobic, anti-Arab, anti-Palestinian organizing purposes, so that’s also really confusing.”

The rhetoric employed by the posters is not limited to hate groups like Horowitz Freedom and Canary Mission. Radhika

“It hit me extra hard to see my name on the posters , because this really does feel like modern day McCarthy era stuff.”

Sainath is a staff attorney at Palestine Legal, a self-described “independent organization dedicated to protecting the civil and constitutional rights of people in the US who speak out for Palestinian freedom.” She said, “While Horowitz is viewed as an extremist, his tactics are in line with broader efforts by mainstream pro-Israel advocacy organizations, Israeli officials, and US government officials to suppress speech in support of Palestinian rights. The Horowitz posters fall in line with a pattern of widespread intimidation and censorship of students and faculty in the US who speak out for Palestinian rights, a pattern that Palestine Legal has documented.”

Mina Brewer, a Tufts senior and member of SJP, echoed this point. She said the tactics used by the posters were not sur-

prising. She explained, “These are the same types of arguments used at any level of anti-pro Palestine activism. You know, people on the comments of Facebook posts... but then also people who are in government and the media and politicians—they all use the same type of rhetoric, and its just creepy to see that it’s so powerful.”

The appearance of these posters at Tufts is not an isolated incident. According to Freedman, “These posters have come up on, like, 10 different campuses around the country with literally just the names changed. So it’s somebody just going onto Canary Mission [and] sorting by school.”

Sainath said that in addition to Tufts, the posters have been put up on the campuses of Brooklyn College (CUNY), San Diego State University, San Francisco State University, UC Berkeley, UC Irvine, UCLA, University of Chicago, University of Tennessee Knoxville, and Vassar College. “It happened at 10-plus schools, it’s also within this huge pattern of suppression of outside groups but at universities as well,” said Habeeb. He continued, “I think it’s important that we contextualize an incident like this within a broader trend and pattern of suppression of Palestinian solidarity work on US campuses that mostly targets students and faculty just as these posters did.”

Moore pointed out that the posters are revealing in another way as well. “The thing that resonates most with me is the fact that I am not at all a prolific organizer or activist for SJP,” he said. “Their targeting is so disconnected from the ground.”

Moore observed, “They have no groundwork that is actually plugged into the work that activists are doing. Or at least they’re not public about it. I don’t think it exists.”

What remains unclear is what person or group of people might have put up the posters at Tufts specifically. Freedman doesn’t think that a Tufts student put up the posters: “It’s...clear that the people who put up these posters have no understanding of the Tufts campus community. When I first saw [the posters] it was very clear that [whoever put them up] didn’t go to Tufts, it wasn’t by

Feature

a Tufts student or anybody involved with Tufts, because who puts a poster at Dowling when you can put it at the Campus Center?

It was somebody driving around campus and putting it up near roads.”

Habeeb, on the other hand, thinks a Tufts student could be responsible. “After I reflected on this, what I found to be even more disturbing was the uncertainty to who did it. Because one can’t help but think that it could be students on this campus,” he said. “And I really would like to think that it wasn’t and I’d like to think this is a community in which that wouldn’t happen and that this was some outside actor, but you can’t help but think it’s possible that this was a Tufts student. And that’s kind of a shame.”

Regardless of what individual may be responsible for putting the posters up, it is clear that they are created by the Horowitz Freedom Center with information sourced from Canary Mission. David Horowitz has not denied responsibility for Horowitz Freedom Center and its actions, but anonymity still remains an important tool employed by both organizations.

Canary Mission’s creators have remained more or less anonymous since it first appeared in 2015, though journalists have speculated as to the identity of its creator. In a May 2015 article published by the Forward, Josh Nathan-Kazis writes, “The Web domain is registered in a way that hides its ownership. Though the site says that Canary Mission ‘is a non-profit organization,’ no group called Canary Mission is currently registered with the IRS as eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions, and the website indicates no fiscal sponsor through which it can accept donations.

The group’s MailChimp account identifies its ZIP code as 10458, a corner of the Bronx that includes Fordham University.”

A September 2015 follow-up article reported that a link on the Canary Mission website meant to link to the organization’s Twitter page temporarily linked to “the personal Twitter page of a South Africanborn resident of Israel named Warren

Betzalel Lapidus.” According to the Forward article, “Lapidus identified himself on Facebook as the editorial director of an online Israel advocacy operation called Free Middle East.” As of October 27, 2016, both Lapidus’ Twitter page and the website for Free Middle East, both linked to in the Forward article, no longer lead to active sites. Canary Mission, however, remains

“I think it’s important that we contextualize an incident like this within a broader trend and pattern of suppression of Palestinian solidarity work on US campuses that mostly targets students and faculty just as these posters did.” up and running.

Though Horowitz does not deny responsibility for the posters, he has refused to reveal the identities of anyone working for him. In an interview with the Tufts Daily published on October 21, Horowitz said, “I have people who make posters and they have people who put them up. I have no idea who they are so I can’t answer this question and I wouldn’t if I could.”

When asked again, by the Observer, who puts up the posters for him, or if he sees irony in protecting the identities of those people while listing the names of students

and professors on his posters, Horowitz refused to respond, only saying, “These are not reporter’s questions. They are more like a police inquisition in a totalitarian state, such as Gaza or the West Bank. They are accusatory and indicting.”

Habeeb said, “The irony is that the people behind these efforts of silencing prefer to remain anonymous...They want everybody to know who we are, and to link us to libelous claims that they cannot substantiate, but they refuse to reveal who they are.”

Horowitz also refused to answer questions about who he sees as his main supporters, where his organization receives funds from, and whether his goal is for students and professors to be verbally or physically attacked as a result of his posters. He did, however, deny that students were named on the posters. “First of all we did not name students and we did not ‘label them terrorists.’ That is false,” he said. “We identified them as supporters of BDS and SJP and of the terrorist regimes in Palestine and Gaza.” It is unclear what Horowitz thinks it means to name students. Regardless, students are listed by first and last name on the posters.

Despite all this, Moore still finds motivation in Horowitz’s tactics. He pointed out that the disconnects between the posters’ content and organizing happening at Tufts—naming people who are on Canary Mission rather than people who are most centrally involved with SJP—should “encourage folks that support Palestinian liberation at large, because there’s a disconnect between the threat and their capacity to organize,” he said. “So,” he continued, “in reading between the lines of their politics, I think we learn a lot about who they’re threatened by and the sort of alliances that threaten their cohesion, if you can call it that. And if we lean into that and we sort of take it as a sign that, you know, folks on the ground are doing great work, Black organizers like Kristian Davis Bailey and the reputation they’ve garnered for having these dualistic conversations, I think it’s encouraging in that way.”

November 7, 2016

Tufts Observer

5

News

Defining Sisterhood

By Julia Doyle With Reporting by James Gordon, Carly Olson & Aaron Watts

“S

isters. Living our Values.

Changing the Future,” is Alpha Omicron Pi’s Vision Statement, which is fitting considering it was the close friendship of four Barnard women that established AOII in 1987, according to the organization’s official website. Close-knit friendship still characterizes the sorority, particularly the Tufts AOII Delta chapter, which is committed to establishing community on campus.

These values drew Harper Hopkins to the Delta chapter. She was already friends with many of the members, and they encouraged her to rush this fall. “A lot of people actually thought I was already in AOII,” Hopkins said, but she had not previously considered joining because she is a trans woman, and “[trans women] don’t join sororities.” However, after conversations with her friends, who supported the idea, Hopkins participated in fall open bidding, which is a more informal process than the structured spring semester recruitment. According to former AOII President Kristin Reeves, a representative from AOII headquarters attended the September 14–16 fall recruitment events, one of which Hopkins attended. This representative, of her own volition, contacted the international organization (sometimes also referred to as Nationals) to find out if there was a policy regarding transgender women and if they are considered eligible for a bid. Hopkins added that part of the bidding process requires local chapters to send a list of all new members to the international 6

Tufts Observer

November 7, 2016

organization before the pinning ceremony for the pledges. The international organization researched the names of the potential new members, and an issue arose when they could not find Hopkins at Tufts. They only found records under her dead name (the name given at birth).

On the night of September 16, AOII’s International Headquarters responded that there was no official policy and requested that the Delta chapter refrain from extending a bid to Hopkins. Despite the request from AOII headquarters, “[Tufts Delta Chapter] all unanimously agreed to extend the bid out anyway,” Sally*, a former member of AOII, said. For Hopkins, this was a “great moment…finding out that all of Delta more or less decided that they wanted me there.” At no point in this process did Tufts Delta question Hopkins’ right to rush the organization, but supported and stood by Hopkins in the initial days and following weeks as AOII headquarters attempted to clarify a position.

The next day, September 17, Reeves spoke on the phone with another member of AOII headquarters who told Reeves that “by extending a bid to a transgender woman [they] would be putting the National Panhellenic Council and AOII headquarters at risk of losing their Title IX status as a singlesex organization.” When Reeves insisted the chapter would extend the bid, the representative remarked that she “hoped AOII would be able to continue to exist at Tufts,”

according to Reeves. Reeves called an emergency chapter meeting the same day, where everyone “still unanimously decided to go along with extending the bid.” The next day, after Reeves told headquarters the chapter was still committed to extending the bid, the AOII International President called her with a new announcement: “They had reevaluated their previous decision and that [Delta was] allowed to extend a bid.”

As Hopkins explained, “When someone a little higher up found out, they very quickly backpedaled and tried to mend bridges.” AOII headquarters informed Delta that they could extend a bid to Hopkins as there were no existing bylaws that “explicitly forb[ade] it,” therefore the chapter had the autonomy to “choose who…to extend a bid to.” Since there was no official policy, Anna Gooch, a former member of AOII, pointed out that “if AOII [headquarters] eventually decided that transgender women would not be allowed to join, [they] would have to revoke [Hopkins’] membership in the organization.” While these initial discussions occurred over the course of a couple of days, for Hopkins and other members—new and old—the conflict and uncertainty about AOII’s future stretched over weeks as the chapter discussed disaffiliation. Hopkins and Sally both emphasized a lot of the details surrounding this incident were unclear as they were unfolding, particularly for new members, like Hopkins, who did not have access to organization information. *Name has been changed

News

The Observer reached out to AOII International Headquarters, requesting more information about the situation. When initially questioned about the response to Tufts Delta chapter’s decision to extend a bid to a transgender woman, the assistant director of public relations, Courtney West, replied affirming the organization’s beliefs that “all individuals are unique, with inherent worth and dignity, and should be treated with respect.” She articulated their commitment to anti-discriminatory policies based on “race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, learning/physical abilities, or religion.” There was no acknowledgement of the incident at Tufts.

AOII headquarters’ failure to support Delta’s decision and affirm a transgender woman’s right to rush a sorority exacerbated dormant tensions between the local chapter and the international organization.

This is a recurrent theme on the Tufts campus, not only for AOII, but also for other Greek Life organizations at Tufts, which have disaffiliated or lost members who are uncomfortable with some National policies and their implementation. The superimposition of an international structure often leads to conflict; Hopkins clarified that Delta has a history of disagreement with Nationals, and while the majority of conflict occurred before she arrived at Tufts, she understood it to be conflict over some of National’s problematic policies that were “racist, homophobic, [and] very classist.”

This is not specific to AOII, but is an issue other Greek organizations have navigated and continue to navigate on the Tufts campus. This fall, while Hopkins was rushing, the Tufts chapter was already discussing disaffiliating from the international organization, a process that would result in establishing a “local sorority with its own bylaws and procedures,” and most importantly, “its own organizational structure completely free from the restrictions of nationals,” according to Hopkins. Tufts is already home to multiple local sororities and fraternities who have no affiliation with a national Greek organization.

While AOII headquarters did not ultimately explicitly forbid Delta to extend a bid to Hopkins, members could sense the organization’s “reluct[ance],” which just added “another thing on a laundry list of bad behavior and bad policy on Nationals’ part.” Even though the headquarters ultimately agreed to extend Hopkins a bid,

ART BY RACHEL CUNNINGHAM ART BY NINA HOFKOSH-HULBERT

many members were left feeling uncomfortable and upset from the entire exchange.

Aware of the ill feelings and frustration, Hopkins described how AOII International Headquarters sent a representative to the chapter this October. According to Sally, the Vice President of Executive Direction was sent to speak to new and old members of the Delta chapter, and an “ultimatum” was issued. Hopkins said that members had “two days to decide whether to remain a member of AOII Delta chapter and AOII international or to self-suspend,” which is member rescindment—no paying dues or attending organization ritual events.

Sally added that during this meeting, it was clear that the goal “was to convince [Tufts AOII members] to not leave the chapter and think everything was okay,”

“A lack of a position favors the oppressor in pretty much every situation.” without addressing the situation. Tufts University affirmed its support of any group that developed from this situation, as long as they accepted transgender students.

About three weeks ago, prompted by this meeting and earlier conversations, there was “an exodus” where “a large portion of the chapter” left, which included Hopkins and many of the newly initiated members.

Reeves confirmed that “40 women (of the 80-person chapter) elected to self-suspend.”

However, Nationals denies the existence of this ultimatum; in the same email exchange with the Observer, West responded, “At no time was [the Tufts] Delta Chapter threatened with the disciplinary action referred to.”

Many of the people who left Delta, which still exists as a local chapter of the international organization on Tufts campus, do not have a formal representative but are “hanging out” and communicating with those still in the chapter, all of whom acknowledge the behavior of AOII headquar-

ters as problematic. Hopkins emphasized that the decision to stay or leave was motivated by personal reasons and that she “absolutely respects everyone’s choice to stay or leave,” and is “great friends with many of the people who stayed.” “The problem,” Hopkins stated, “existed at a national level…that had control over policy and to some extent finances when it came to the local chapter.”

For Hopkins, it was AOII headquarters’ resistance to creating a “formal policy explicitly stating that trans women were allowed to be initiated into chapters” that ultimately prompted her decision to leave.

While the organization’s rationale was that they had “never defined a woman before and [did] not intend to start now,” which sounded “superficially…pretty good,” Hopkins pointed out that “there are chapters all over the country…at schools in more conservative areas…where if a trans woman wanted to join, they would say ‘well, no.’”

Reeves questioned the efficacy of the policy as well, as “it is now at the individual chapter’s discretion to decide whether or not they want to allow transgender women into the chapter.” And if there is no policy expressly requiring local chapters to accept trans women, then they can deny them bids.

This experience, Hopkins said, should be a “stepping stone,” to the understanding that “a lack of a position favors the oppressors in pretty much every situation.” Hopkins continued, “It is the ability and the responsibility of anyone in a position of power or privilege to acknowledge that and to work to make their positions as non-neutral and as nonoppressive as possible.”

The separation between the members who left and those who stayed was not dramatic or contentious; Hopkins stressed that those who stayed part of the organization were not against her joining the sorority and had valid reasons to remain. Those reasons were not to support an oppressive organization, but to commit to changing the environment. “The current and former women of Delta chapter were never anything but kind and loving to me,” Hopkins said. “[Those who stayed] are people who are using their positionality to change things for the better.” Similarly, members who left “are not people who are running away from a bad situation, they are people who have left an environment that’s unhealthy to them.”

“Those two roles,” Hopkins confirmed, “do not exist in opposition to each other.”

November 7, 2016

Tufts Observer

7

Arts & Culture

Making a Merger

By Katie Saviano

I

n September, the School of the Museum of Fine Arts (SMFA) students returned to their campus to find that the traditional SMFA red banners had been changed to Tufts blue. But for some, this change did not feel welcome.

“There is a lot of [positive] sentiment towards the ‘SMFA red,’” said dual-degree student Aidan Huntington. “The changing of the banners is a symbol of Tufts’ encroachment onto the school.”

On July 1, Tufts acquired the SMFA. The merger is a continuation of a partnership that was established in 1945, over 70 years ago, when the dual-degree program was established. With a shrinking enrollment size and severe deficit, Tufts’ acquisition of the museum school was designed to help revitalize it, as well as strengthen Tufts’ art programs. The response for students has been mixed— while some feel that the merger will cause the SMFA culture to be lost, others are excited to be more included in the Tufts community.

In part, Tufts’ acquisition of the school stems from necessity. “We are absorbing a school with a deficit,” said Jim Glaser, Dean 8

Tufts Observer

November 7, 2016

of Arts and Sciences. He continued, “The SMFA enrollment has diminished over the past several years, and it had diminished to the point that the school was in substantial deficit.” Nancy Bauer, Dean of the Museum School, also noted the shrinking enrollment. She stated, “The enrollment at the SMFA is now at 255 undergraduates… if the program was at full capacity there would be 400-500 students.”

Dean Bauer gave several possible reasons for the decrease in enrollment, pointing to national trends in dropping enrollments in independent art schools, as well as the tendency for students across the country to invest in degrees with a clearer career tract, or in a more expansive education.

For a school in crisis, with dropping enrollment and no independent accreditation for degrees, a university partner was a necessary choice for the museum.

And there are clear benefits for Tufts: an enhanced studio art experience and curriculum for Tufts students, as well as an enhanced reputation. “For Tufts to be connected to a world-class museum, this is quite incredible and very distinctive,” said Dean Glaser.

The merger will also affect the SMFA’s tuition. According to Patricia Reilly, Tufts’ Director of Financial Aid, “Students who enrolled at the SMFA beginning in the fall of 2016 or earlier will continue to be charged at the SMFA tuition rate with only a standard percentage increase on that rate. All students who enroll beginning in the fall of 2017 and going forward will pay the Tufts tuition rate.” This fall, the tuition for SMFA students is $41,326 annually. However, next year, the class of 2021, as well as subsequent classes, will enter under the Tufts annual tuition rate, which is $52,430 for the 2016-2017 academic year.

According to Dean Bauer, as full Tufts students, SMFA students now “have access to a wide array of curricular and extracurricular opportunities.” Allyson Blackburn, a former dual-degree student, disagreed, stating, “Post-merger, SMFA students theoretically have access to the same resources as Tufts students do [on the Medford/ Somerville campus], except they are all 45 minutes away from our gym, [from] our health services, from our counselors and from their administrators.”

ART BY CONRAD YOUNG

Arts & Culture

Dean Bauer stressed the benefits of a standardized financial aid policy for all Tufts schools, stating, “The way the SMFA worked before, students would get a combination of financial aid and merit aid, which is common at independent art schools. However, the total packages would not necessarily cover the full need.”

The demonstrated financial need of students is calculated based on students’ Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) forms. Tufts promises to meet this calculated need for all students. According to Dean Bauer, “This policy opens the door to a much wider range of students and ensures that all students are awarded the amount of funding they demonstrably need to attend Tufts—even if their financial situation worsens while they are here.”

An anonymous SMFA student voiced her frustration with the current monetary demands of Tufts. “All students with any unpaid bills for tuition (comprehensive fee, health insurance fee, etc.) received an email from Tufts last week stating that if they did not pay their owed amount within five days they would be charged an extra $300 as a consequence,” she said. “As this was an extremely unreasonable demand, many students were unable to come up with the owed money within that week. It was a very abrupt notification that is very new for SMFA students and we were never informed about this fee prior to receiving these emails.”

Though students are frustrated about tuition increases, the merger has the potential to increase the number of knowledgeable administrators and faculty members at both schools regarding their program. Conor Ward, a dual-degree student, said that, in the past, the dual-degree program was flawed by “a lack of successful and meaningful advising.”

However, for Patrick Mahaney, a sophomore dual-degree student, the merger has only complicated their SMFA enrollment. They stated, “I’m not currently taking any courses at SMFA this semester, because the merger was so confusing and I felt really uninformed as a student.” Huntington also noted that there has been little to no transparency and communication from the administration to the students as to the future of the program. He said,

“There is a concern that the SMFA might be morphed to become more like Tufts, which I am worried about. I think that there is value in both types of student bodies and both types of cultures.”

“It’s hard to know how I feel because I don’t necessarily know what is going to happen.”

Blackburn agreed. She stated, “It speaks volumes that Tufts managed to put up new banners, and repaint the Atrium ceiling ‘Barnum blue’ before figuring out a way to integrate SMFA students into SIS, or find a way to merge Tufts and SMFA transcripts, or find someone to truly coordinate the dual-degree program.”

Some students have decided not to participate in the program due to the transition. Blackburn said, “I am sure that in 10 years, the Tufts/SMFA phagocytosis will be an incredible opportunity and program for both academic and art students alike. But, so far, the transition has been incredibly frustrating. I am dropping the program, in part, because I don’t want my last year of college to be a poorly planned experiment.”

Huntington also expressed concern that the merger would have long-lasting consequences on the values of the SMFA as a school. Unlike many other art schools, SMFA students are not required to choose one medium. Rather, students often do work that is interdisciplinary and collaborative, putting the SMFA on the forefront of contemporary fine art. He expressed concern that Tufts will try to up the prestige of the SMFA, “making it more of a RISDesque arts school.” He continued, “At RISD [the Rhode Island School of Design] you have to pick one major, you can’t be an interdisciplinary artist.”

An SMFA student who wished to be quoted anonymously stated that a downside for him personally was the changes in the overall aesthetic and vibe. He commented, “The school feels like a fake or forced ‘art school.’” Conor Ward elaborated, stating, “There is a concern that the SMFA might be

morphed to become more like Tufts, which I am worried about. I think that there is value in both types of student bodies and both types of cultures. At the SMFA, fitting a certain kind of procedure of success is basically not there at all. Every student kind of works their own process.”

Catherine Armistead, a dual-degree student, believes that the SMFA’s culture will be affected most by the requirements for acceptance to match those of Tufts and the changing cost of admission. She commented, “The acceptance into SMFA has largely been based on students’ portfolios and essays, and less so on GPA and academic success, which allows a lot of people who are passionate about art but struggle in other areas to get into the school.”

However, other SMFA students expressed excitement over recognition by the Tufts community. “A lot of what seems to be changing is the Tufts community’s attitude towards us,” stated Marshall. An anonymous SMFA student explained that he had never felt welcome on the Tufts campus, and felt that the merger would mean others would see him as a Tufts student. Hannah Marshall, a full-time SMFA student, believes that the merger will ultimately be a positive thing for both schools.

Already, she has noticed that the shuttle schedules are more reliable than they have been in the past. And equipment and studios are visibly being improved.

Students who are affected by the merger have conflicting feelings about how it may affect them; ultimately, Ward said, “The crux of what I’m getting at is that it’s too early to have any profound effect on my experience as a dual degree student. This is not necessarily a bad thing, I think these things take time.”

November 7, 2016

Tufts Observer

9

Campus

The Price Some Pay Navigating Financial Aid at Tufts

By Grace Segers

“S

ixty thousand dollars a year for this?”

It’s common to hear this joke at university events with free meals or entertainment. Someone inevitably makes a sarcastic comment about their “tuition at work,” with the underlying assumption that every student is paying the $68,500 fee to attend Tufts in the 2016-2017 academic year. Yet for many students, including myself, this tuition is more than one or both of their parents’ annual salaries. The unspoken truth at Tufts is that many students can’t afford to be here, and that can seriously impact one’s Tufts experience.

In the 2014-2015 academic year, a little over 40 percent of students received financial aid of some form, whether from the federal government or Tufts itself. According to Patricia Reilly, the director of financial aid at Tufts, the university ensures that every admitted student can afford to attend.

“Tufts meets 100 percent of the calculated financial need of every accepted student, and promises to continue to meet full need for four years,” Reilly said in an email. “Our goal is that our need based financial aid program will allow every qualified admitted student to be able to afford to attend Tufts, regardless of their family’s financial situation.”

Dakota LeRoy, a sophomore studying Computer Science, doesn’t believe that Tufts responded to her family’s financial need with enough assistance. Dakota’s mother is going back to school, and her father is in and out of employment.

She wrote in an email that her family still struggles to pay for her to attend college, despite the costs defrayed by Tufts.

“Tufts definitely makes it possible for me to attend, however, I will have debt 10

Tufts Observer

November 7, 2016

when I graduate and my parents have to make drastic lifestyle changes in order to afford tuition year to year,” Dakota wrote.

Reilly explained that the university has launched programs to try to respond to the calculated need of families like Dakota’s.

She described the Financial Aid Initiative, started by President Monaco in 2012, to raise $90 million in scholarship funds. After concluding in June, the initiative had surpassed its goal and raised $95 million.

Life at Tufts is more than just academics, and many students have limited access to social experiences on campus because of financial restraints. Moreover, conversations about how socioeconomic status affects students’ lives are rarely had.

“There’s definitely a sense of misunderstanding,” said Tim*, a Tufts senior majoring in International Relations. Being on financial aid doesn’t make you lower class or poor.”

He described his frustration at some of the misconceptions towards students receiving scholarships. As there is no real conversation surrounding financial aid on campus, this misinformation may stem from a lack of understanding as to how many people are receiving assistance.

“It’s not something people talk a lot about,” said Charlie Zhen, a sophomore whose tuition is almost entirely covered by the university and grants from the federal government.

“I need to schedule my life around shifts at work,” Charlie explained, adding that his financial situation precludes him from going out on weekends with the same regularity as many of his peers. Charlie has a wide range of commitments on campus: in addition to working at the Campus Center, he’s the office manager for the Leonard

Carmichael Society and a TCU senator for the Class of 2019. He is also a tour guide and participates in the Chinese Students Association, Tufts Dance Collective, and the Tufts University Social Collective Entertainment Board.

While his financial situation clearly hasn’t inhibited his involvement on campus, Charlie admitted that some extracurriculars such as sports or Greek life are inaccessible to him, given the expenses that often accompany these groups.

Dakota was forced to drop out of Greek Life because of the expensive dues. “From attending tuition hike rallies to dropping my sorority because nationals forces out students who cannot afford dues, I feel monetary pressures in many ways,” she said. “Leaving campus, paying for campus events, or making plans with more affluent classmates, I constantly feel restricted by the number on my bank account.”

Madeline, a junior majoring in Peace and Justice Studies, expressed the same frustration at having her social life inhibited by financial limitations, and further by the lack of acknowledgement on campus that many students come from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds. “I am not in a position where I can ask my parents to borrow money for a ski trip or a trip to the Loj or whatever and I obviously can’t pay for it myself,” Madeline said. “I don’t even like going out to dinner.”

Charlie also expressed an inability to eat off campus regularly, saying that he needs to be “wary” about going to restaurants because of his financial situation.

The cost of other living expenses can also impact the student experience. As a sophomore, Charlie worries about paying for housing next year. He has already had ART BY NINA HOFKOSH-HULBERT

Campus

to purchase a smaller meal plan because meals at Tufts are so expensive.

“Breakfast doesn’t exist anymore,” he shrugged.

Madeline said that she can “barely afford” to live off campus, as her rent this spring will be $875 a month. If she lived on campus, however, she would be separated from her friends; this creates a cost-benefit analysis of living that students who aren’t receiving financial aid never have to make.

For students like Madeline, sometimes maintaining a social life precludes financial efficiency. Staying connected to friends can require spending more money, whether through off-campus housing or going out on weekends. It’s a difficult choice between saving money and social isolation. “Just thinking about it stresses me out,” Madeline confessed.

The students also spoke about their inability to accept unpaid internships due to financial constraints. Madeline was upset to pass on numerous opportunities over the summer, taking a paid retail job instead.

“Internships have become a necessity in university, but a huge privilege for those who can afford to take them, as so many of them are unpaid,” she explained.

Dakota also discussed her limitations in accepting internships, as compared to other students who can afford to be more exploratory in their career decisions.

“I have always accepted low-ranking paid positions in areas neither affiliated to my major nor that I am interested in simply because I need to be paid, whereas my more affluent peers are able to explore a more creative job search,” she said.

The experience of a student on financial aid is complicated by other aspects of identity, such as race and gender. Madeline is a first-generation American, and she talk-

ed about the pressures she faces from her family to succeed, as well as the judgments she faces from other students at Tufts.

“I’ve been told before by a White male student that he, in his words, ‘basically owns me because I pay for your tuition,’” Madeline said. Moreover, he made this comment without even knowing that she was on financial aid—it was based on her skin color alone. She described her anger at feeling as if she is “sub-human” in the

The unspoken truth at Tufts is that many students can’t afford to be here. eyes of her peers, as if she “owes” something to those who pay the full tuition.

“It’s disgusting, it’s degrading, and too common for my comfort,” she said.

Charlie spoke about the difficulties that students of color on financial aid face at Tufts. He said that an operative difference between race and class is visibility.

“You’re not walking around with a money sign on your head,” he said. “With race, it’s much more obvious.” Because of this, Charlie believes that he is more often judged based on race, not class.

The students also spoke about how receiving financial aid has affected their friendships. On one hand, Tim said that he has had the same social life as most other students.

“I’m not aware of differences in background,” he said about his experiences when hanging out with his wealthier friends, although he acknowledged that he

can’t afford to go on trips over winter or spring breaks like some of his peers.

However, Madeline painted a different picture, explaining that the gap in experience between her and her wealthier friends became too much to bridge.

“My friends who are not supported by financial aid don’t have to do this. They don’t have to buy groceries for their family,” she said. “They don’t have to take care of their siblings financially, and sometimes even their parents.”

Charlie spoke of the “little things” he wished people realized about his background, such as why he has to work so many hours per week.

Madeline also described some of the aspects she wanted people to understand about the financial aid experience, such as choosing between buying textbooks or food. There’s a difference between what she called “college-broke” and “broke-broke.”

“I wish they knew the stress and anxiety that comes with constantly worrying about your financial stability,” she said about wealthier students on campus. Regardless of the university’s initiatives to raise funds for scholarship students, Madeline was unimpressed because of rising tuition costs.

“I wish they knew just how horrible Tufts’ continuous hiking of tuition costs is and how damaging it is to us, especially with their lack of clarity as to why this institution needs more money,” Madeline said.

This financial strain has also affected Dakota. “There is much to the Tufts price tag that is not included in your SIS bill,” she wrote. “It saddens me to think of the silent struggle the socioeconomically disadvantaged minority feels while navigating life at Tufts.” *Name has been changed by his request

November 7, 2016

Tufts Observer

11

Prose

Secrets Through Art A Note from the Artist

By Dora Finkelstein In Art as Process, we are assigned open-ended projects related to a theme or task. This week’s was secrets. We talked about our relationship to secrets—ours, others’, if we are good at keeping them, or not. The class was given a spread of all different mediums to use in their work. Secrets have a seductive quality—they tend to be “juicy.” Maybe having one is easier than keeping one, though. And maybe telling one person is easier than being the one person that is told. I think lips are a good symbol of secrets—they represent this seductive quality as well as the way secrets are transferred. While I was making this piece, I was cutting holes in the cardboard to form the windowpane, and I didn’t notice that my mesh screen was underneath. My knife accidentally cut a hole in the mesh, which prompted my idea of having various scraps pour from the mouth out through the window. This reminded me how often, secrets aren’t spilled intentionally, nor created intentionally. Despite this, we love to have them, and maybe we also love to spill them. Perhaps, the fabric coming from the lips can be perceived as coming from the outside, into the window, representing the creation of secrets and how they don’t remain secret for long.

12

Tufts Observer

November 7, 2016

PHOTO BY LILY HERZAN

Feature

seen

November 7, 2016

Tufts Observer

17

Feature

18

Tufts Observer

November 7, 2016

Feature

November 7, 2016

Tufts Observer

19

16

Tufts Observer

November 7, 2016

Poetry

Anonymous Musings

A woman crosses the footbridge, beating back the sunshine with her umbrella water lilies bobbing white below her She grips a halfempty jar in her other hand brown fluid sloshing in time with her steps and I strain to read the label as I pass “Herring in wine sauce”

have you noticed the way an olive drapes off its pit like skin on tongue? there’s a line i can’t read in my grandmother’s recipe and so i peel olive by olive and stare at her worn page

PHOTOS BY MENGLAN CHEN

November 7, 2016

Tufts Observer

17

Opinion

Abolish Fraternities

By Ben Kesslen CW: extreme sexual, physical, and gendered violence, explicit sexual content.

T

ufts tour guides will tell you that fraternities at Tufts are different, they are full of nice guys, and are nothing like frats at state schools.

Yet, I know a woman who was sexually assaulted at Zeta formal and a trans person who was called a faggot by DTD brothers as they walked down Pro Row. I know people who have been turned away from 123 parties because they weren’t blonde, White women, and someone whose rapist was protected by Phi Rho Omega for over a year, until it was discovered that he had over five pending assault cases against him. I know people who have had to bear witness to parties that openly mocked their marginalized identities.

Fraternities have, and will continue to be, hotbeds for campus violence: racialized violence (Tufts fraternities historically denied Black students entry), sexual violence (fraternities protect rapists under the guise of brotherhood), gendered violence (foundational to fraternities is misogyny), and physical violence (the hazing that I and countless others experienced can be categorized as assault).

Fraternities claim to be founded on values like “brotherhood” and “loyalty” and “trust,” but in reality are institutions rooted in White supremacy, queerphobia, heterosexism, and transphobia.

For these reasons, Tufts needs to follow the path of the other NESCAC schools and abolish fraternities—once and for all.

(I should note that in this piece, both because of my own direct experiences and because it’s impossible to cover everything

18

Tufts Observer

November 7, 2016

wrong with fraternities in one article, I will focus on how fraternities at Tufts objectify women, reinforce compulsory heterosexuality and cisheteropatriarchy, and enact physical abuse on people during pledging.)

My first year of Tufts I rushed a fraternity. The majority of my friends were White cis women, most of whom had just joined sororities. I hadn’t found community yet, and while I had friends— even mentors—I felt like I needed something else. I was seeking validation in all the wrong places. So instead of investing in my already-established relationships, in my clubs and interests, I decided to join a fraternity. I wanted to be included in an organization and a system that I had previously thought would never accept me.

I wanted approval from the men who had rejected me all my life. And, they wanted me too! My queerness became a token status for the straight brothers, a way for them to seem progressive and accepting.

I joined what was supposed to be one of the “good” fraternities, one with nice guys and low-key parties—only now do I realize there is no such thing as a good fraternity.

The first night of pledging I was blindfolded and brought into a basement of an off-campus house where I took a shot of what I think was Fireball and then was

welcomed to the brotherhood. That night was supposed to be a “fun night;” it wasn’t when the “real pledging” began. I had to serve brothers beer and get to know their names. Then, they brought two women— neither of whom were Tufts students—into the basement, who proceeded to disrobe and have sex with each other on a mattress on the basement floor while we were all told to watch. When I asked to leave, I was told I could step towards the back but couldn’t exit the basement. I was pressured to stay, and too afraid to defend myself.

Forcing someone to watch sex acts can be categorized as assault under Tufts policies.

I stood there watching 18-year-old boys perform oral sex on these women. I watched as they were told to see who could bring one of the women to orgasm first.

I watched on the outside, often turning my eyes away, horrified and disgusted, standing next to seniors in the fraternity enraptured by the scene, standing next to Tufts alumni who had returned to this offcampus basement to watch this “tradition.”

I stood there knowing this would be the last night of my membership in the fraternity.

If this was the night when nothing “bad” was happening to us, I couldn’t even begin to fathom what the rest of the process looked like. (It is important to note that a member of this fraternity has told me that this tradition no longer takes place.)

When it was all over and the women left, the brothers brought us into a room upstairs. They sat us in a circle and told us to memorize—in a moment that felt unbelievable—everyone’s names and allergies. We weren’t allowed to leave the

ART BY RACHEL CUNNINGHAM

Opinion

room until we completed this task. They brought in a garbage can and told us if we had to pee or puke, do it in the garbage can. We were told to name the garbage can and the other pledges decided to name it “Mia Khalifa.” Mia Khalifa is a porn star; these boys named a bucket of urine and puke after a woman.

I dropped the fraternity the next morning and was warned that I could not tell anyone what I had witnessed the previous night. And the truth is, I didn’t tell anyone. I didn’t tell anyone because within just 12 hours of being inside I had already internalized the mentality they were trying to create. I was scared of the brothers, scared of the house, scared of everything it represented. Within 12 hours, I was already silenced—my values and morals and beliefs already placed behind the fear I held for these boys. After all, this was a good fraternity. I didn’t want to ruin their image.

When I stepped into the basement of that off-campus house that night in January of 2015, I sought normalcy and normativity. But it took me a while to realize that even though I thought normal meant good and right, it actually means violent, and oppressive, and queerphobic, and there shouldn’t be anything normal about being fed shots or forced to do homoerotic and homophobic tasks or made to eat other pledges’ vomit. There should be nothing normal about sexual

assault. But, here at Tufts, this is the norm.

This happens every winter when boys rush fraternities.

So, I have to come to the conclusion that fraternities must be abolished. That I will not and cannot stand to have this culture pervade my campus, a culture that propagates violence, that enforces rape culture, that administers binaried ideas of gender, that tokenizes and fetishizes queerness, simultaneously using it as a way to seem progressive and as a tool of hazing. I cannot walk down Pro Row without thinking about what has happened on that street, who has been harmed, who has been violated, who has been abused, and how my university has continued to let this happen for over a century because the majority of the men who join fraternities are White, because they are often wealthy and cisgender and straight, because they are ones who donate after graduation and fund the new buildings that seem to be popping up everywhere these days and comprise the Board of Trustees.

Tufts should abolish fraternities and invest in true community building, communities not founded in violence but rather in love and shared values.

First years who come into their second semester feeling without community should be able to find it without turning to hazing and institutions rooted in oppression.

Zeta could become Rainbow House, which has been trying to get an independent house (instead of an

apartment) for over 20 years. DU could become a collective. 123 could become a first-generation student center, ZBT could be a Mixed Race student center, and Pi Rho could be an Indigenous student center. The Group of Six could become the Group of Nine.

My narrative alone warrants the abolition of fraternities, and so many other things happen that are just as terrible or even worse. This should scare us. If what I went through happened in a “good frat,” one that first years aren’t warned about, what is happening in other frats? What is happening on Pro Row when we go to sleep and frats haze? What have the frat brothers we all know done to each other, and done to themselves?

I’m sure everyone reading this has a story or a rumor they have heard about a Tufts fraternity, one they don’t want to believe. I think its time we start believing the rumors, we start acknowledging the fact that fraternities’ presence on this campus cannot be justified, and that every time we step into a fraternity, or defend a friend’s presence in a fraternity because they are “nice,” we are only serving a system that has proven itself indefensible.

We are beyond a point where these institutions can be reformed. Next time you find yourself in the basement of a fraternity on a Saturday night, I ask you think to about what happens there when you aren’t invited.

Fraternities claim to be founded on values like “brotherhood” and “loyalty” and “trust,” but in reality are institutions rooted in White supremacy, queerphobia, heterosexism, and transphobia.

November 7, 2016

Tufts Observer

19

Arts & Culture

Forging Famous

By Libby Langsner

20

Tufts Observer

November 7, 2016

ART BY CONRAD YOUNG

Arts & Culture

F

orgery has existed alongside art for as long as 2000 years. We are reminded of this even more acutely now that $255 million worth of old European “masters” are suspected to be forgeries. While the monetary value of these works alone is shocking, the art world and its main proprietors remain unfazed. Art forgery has become part of the business, and forgers’ methods have become harder to detect. Perhaps more importantly, forgeries force consumers to question what makes art legitimate and what is being paid for.

From an academic perspective, Tufts Art History Professor Andrew McClellan remarked on how forgery makes it tricky to teach about art since we are unsure if a work is real or not.

Fake works of art disorient us and challenge our notions of credibility.

The standards for what makes a work original or authentic carry with them anthropological and philosophical implications. In Chinese art, each work in a series is considered a copy or gao. Although gaos are technically copies, it does not make the work any less original. Professor McClellan astutely concludes that when we go to museums, “We pay to tap into the brilliance of an artist’s genius.” Knowing that a work came directly from an artist’s hand is one of the main assumptions that affect how we engage with a work.

Lynn Catterson, an art history professor at Columbia University, questioned why copies are so looked down upon when they present almost identical images to original works. “If the distinction between an original and a copy cannot be discerned by eye and, in some cases, touch—why do we care?” Dr. Catterson said, “We assign value to work on account of their rarity and age, which makes certain objects a commodity. Hence stakeholders care about authenticity.” Dr. Catterson explained that the authenticity of the work is what gives it value, as opposed to merely the image itself.

It makes sense then that art dealers are often the ones making fakes. Professor McClellan points out that when a client buys art, they are not only buying it for its physical presence, but for the concept and execution of the artist. Since forgeries are made purely for profit, art salespeople are

known to take advantage of this system for financial gain.

In the same vein, art works without identifiable artists are less widely appreciated. When a work does not have an attributed artist, such as those from historicalcultural contexts where artists did not sign their pieces, their value for a typical museumgoer is negatively impacted.

Our culture’s obsession with the life of the artist plays a critical role in forgery and why we find it so offensive. So many of the contemporary greats, as well as old household names, have had whole fields of academic study dedicated to their lives outside art. How would Rothko’s emotionally controlling works be experienced differently if they were not colored by his tragic suicide? Many of Pollock’s works seem an all-too-fitting backdrop to his Bipolar disorder and alcoholism.

More recently, as McClellan notes, “The cult of genius has only picked up momentum and has raised the stakes for authenticity.” The persona and genius of an artist is almost as important as—if not equal to—the work itself. Artists’ lives have become a crux to understanding the work.

As a viewer, the easiest interpretation of a work can be a biographical one. When buying a work of art, one is also buying a piece in the narrative of an artist’s life; the work is not only a fixed, physical object to be viewed, but also takes on a relative dimension, with cultural significance and an element of autobiography.

For anyone who loves, appreciates, or studies art, forgeries are rampant enough in art institutions that they deserve considerable discussion. Professor McClellan noted how the Tufts art history major, and any art history class in general, discusses the content of an image—students are never taught to step back and wonder if the image is real.

As Professor McClellan pointed out, the art that is most often forged receives the least media attention, particularly works from Central and South America, Africa, and Asia. Susan Vogel, executive director of the Center for African Art in New York, stated to the New York Times, “I have seen the fakes become progressively more sophisticated. There is a level of fakes that can fool everyone.’’ The lack of media coverage and experts who study Af-

rican art can be observed by even a quick Google search. Trying to find a specific case of African art forgery that reached the prominence of cases involving the European “masters” is nearly impossible. The lack of academic attention being paid to African art, paired with the phasing out of connoisseurship in art schools will only make it increasingly difficult to detect fakes from the non-Western world in the future.

Art history students are not taught to be connoisseurs. All the knowledge any given art student at Tufts could gain on how to detect quality and craftsmanship that goes into a work would have to be learned in the storage facilities of galleries, while working at jobs or internships.

As technology advances, the rate at which these fakes are made is only going to increase, but it should serve as a solace that our knowledge, as noted by both Professor McClellan and Dr. Catterson, is also expanding. However, the gap between art academia and connoisseurship is dwindling.

The only way forgeries can be detected is if there is an active shift towards the study of connoisseurship, and if academia clearly defines what is and isn’t fake.

...forgeries force consumers to question what makes art legitimate and what is being paid for.

November 7, 2016

Tufts Observer

21

News

Paid Family Leave in

By Sarah Gargaro

I

n a speech on September 13, Donald Trump became the first major conservative voice to advocate for a federally funded paid maternity leave policy. He gave the speech flanked by his daughter Ivanka, who he thanked for “her work and leadership on the issues facing working moms in our country.”

Trump’s speech reflects a cultural shift—never before has a conservative presidential candidate advocated for what was considered a niche progressive issue.

For the first time in history, both presidential candidates have developed policies on paid family leave, and while the plans differ substantially—Clinton’s covers not just maternity leave, but paternity, medical and family care leave—both are unequivocal in their calls for increased governmental support of a work-life balance. This shift reflects changing gender dynamics in this country; both in the ever-increasing role American women play in our workforce and with the historic visibility of Clinton’s candidacy.

The Federal Government took its first steps towards granting family and medical leave for workers with the signing of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) in 1993. This law, passed by Bill Clinton, was the first national-level attempt to protect American workers who became sick or who needed to care for a family member. The FMLA guaranteed 12 weeks of protected but unpaid leave from work for workers who had recently become parents (either through adoption or birth), who

22

Tufts Observer

November 7, 2016

were ill, or who needed to care for ailing family members. This was a groundbreaking expansion of workers’ rights in the US. It is also, in many ways, inadequate.

To begin with, the FMLA only created an unpaid leave system. Workers can take 12 weeks for medical reasons or to care for a family member without penalty, but they will be offered no financial support during that time. Those unable to afford living without an income for 12 weeks are unable to use the available FMLA leave time.

Additionally, the bill was designed to benefit only employees of traditional white collar jobs—eligibility was limited to employees of large companies and to employees putting in at least 25 hours at a business who had employed them for over a year, which is just 40 percent of the workforce.

Wage workers, part time employees, and employees of small businesses (ironically, America’s most vulnerable workers) are left unprotected.

This low standard of protection is unique to America among economically advanced countries. The US ranks at the bottom of every measure of paid family leave compared to other Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries—it is the only OECD country without a federally mandated paid maternity leave, one of only nine without paid paternity leave, and one of only two with no guaranteed paid sick days.

Natalie Masuoka, a Tufts political science professor conducting research on family leave policy in the United States,

bemoans the gap in coverage. “The US looks super rudimentary when compared to other advanced economies which have always been supportive of family leave, or at least of leave for women having children,” she said. “European countries have had job-protected paid family leave as part of their social welfare programs starting in the late 1960s, back when Americans were just beginning to define what constitutes pregnancy discrimination.”

Despite this low federal standard, some Americans do have access to some form of paid family leave. Residents of California, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and New York have some form of paid family leave guaranteed by state law—when workers in these states are forced to take time off of work for medical leave or to take care of an ill family member they are eligible to receive a portion of their income, paid for by the state, for a set number of weeks.

This state level paid family leave is funded through statewide disability insurance funded by income tax. Workers in these states pay a portion of their income into a fund that they can draw from in time of need, similar to Social Security.

Additionally, the Department of Labor reports that 12 percent of Americans get paid family leave through their employer. Benefits-eligible Tufts faculty members (which excludes part time faculty and staff ), for example, may receive 12 weeks of paid family leave after having a baby and six months of paid leave for illness. But, just as with vaca-

ART BY ADRIANA GUARDANS-GODO

News

the Political Spotlight tion days and life insurance, paid family leave is offered to employees at the discretion of employers.

There is a dramatic disparity in what benefits different states offer. The federal baseline is low, but some states and employers have progressive programs nonetheless.

At the state level, family leave policy grew independently of federal family leave policy; the policies of California, Rhode Island, New York, and New Jersey grew out of existing disability funds (programs that worked like insurance for workers injured on the job) established as early as the 1940s. In response to activism led by workers’ rights and feminist organizations, these funds were then expanded to protect not only those injured on the job, but also to workers who needed time off of work to care for family members, as well as new parents and ill workers. In these states, the funding existed before policy was written.

The FMLA never had financial backing to begin with.

The motivations for employers to offer more generous policies to their employees vary. Some, like Netflix, boast of their progressive corporate policies to attract strong candidates and to cultivate an image of being a moral and decent business. In other cases, policies are written in reaction to employee activism and scandal. Massachusetts Institute of Technology now has some of the most progressive paid leave policies in the country, but this policy wasn’t written until Professor Nancy Hopkins collect-

ed data about gendered discrimination at the university, proving that their lack of a paid leave policy was just one of the many ways women were kept out of the academy, a part of a greater culture of exclusion.

It is also true that some employers have always understood the importance

The low standard of protection afforded by federal family leave laws is unique to America among economically advanced countries. of paid family leave and their corporate culture intentionally created progressive policies. Political science Professor Elizabeth Remick, a co-chair of Tufts’ AS&E Committee on Faculty Work/Life, explains that this is true of women’s colleges, where faculty often enjoy disproportionately progressive paid leave policies. Paid family leave is technically a gender-neutral policy, but women have historically taken on more caretaking responsibilities as our society continues to put the burden of family care onto women. A 2015 report commissioned by the Department of Labor

confirmed that women are more likely to take FMLA-style leave than men. It is not surprising, then, that institutions created by and for women offer more supportive paid leave policies.

This gendered understanding of paid leave might explain the presence of paid leave as an issue in the 2016 election. Masuoka explained the particular discourse of this year’s election, saying, “I don’t think there has been a time like this before, where we are talking about paid leave, or the social safety net in general, on the national platform.”

Clinton has supported a national paid family leave policy since her 2008 run for president, and Trump followed suit in September of this year. This would be a remarkable change to American political culture, which seems to be shifting to hold paid leave not as a privilege for workers, but as a right. This is in no doubt in part due to in part to changing American gender norms. As fewer women stay at home and are able to act as caretakers and as more households are becoming reliant on two incomes, American families need access to paid leave more than ever. Additionally, paid leave is only now being seriously considered in this election, the first ever to include a female candidate from a major party. As American women become full participants in the labor force and have a seat at the legislative table, it seems more than likely that we will see the development of a more robust paid family leave policy.

November 7, 2016

Tufts Observer

23

Tech & Innovation

Spinning the Web Navigating Tufts’ Wireless Networks

By Lauren Samuel

W

hen students, staff, and faculty wander onto campus, they cross not only a physical but also a digital border into Tufts University. The latter is what connects smartphones, tablets, computers, and other devices to the Tufts wireless network. Providing service to thousands of users each day, campus Internet systems are extensive feats of digital architecture. And, as with all wireless networks, there are rules and expectations of conduct within these intangible communities.

“Computer access—so common as to seem a right—is, in fact, a privilege and is conditional upon responsible and ethical use.” This is the first sentence of Tufts’ Computer Ethics and the Appropriate Use of Electronic Resource section, located in the Student Handbook. The handbook emphasizes that it is each individual’s role to comply with policy, not Tufts’ obligation to supervise activity. “A good rule of thumb,” according to the handbook, “is that conduct that would be illegal or a violation of University policy in the offline world will still be illegal or a violation of University policy when it occurs online.”

Copyright law, libel, invasion of privacy, cyberbullying, obscenity, child pornography, and indecency are among the eight laws and policies that Tufts explicitly highlights. Nevertheless, enforcing these codes of conduct can leave room for subjectivity.

The vagueness of what is defined as rulebreaking can make it challenging for students and the administration to maintain a relationship of trust.

While most campus networks have common goals of providing solid coverage and speed to their users, their means of ensuring security vary. For example, Tufts states a precautionary warning in its Information Stewardship Policy, a central component of its overall IT policy, that, “The University, may, at its sole discretion and without notice to the individual: monitor 24

Tufts Observer

November 7, 2016

the activity of individuals without notice whenever there is reasonable cause to believe that a law, contract, or any Tufts policy is being violated.” It continues to explain that such results are allowed to be used in university disciplinary proceedings, and may be disclosed for legal purposes, such as a subpoena. In short, the university has total jurisdiction to maintain its technological infrastructure.

Still, not all campuses articulate the same ethos towards their Internet users.

According to Cornell University’s Internet Technology FAQ page—a feature absent from Tufts’ IT domain, but common among many other universities’ websites—“CIT does not monitor or ‘sniff ’ individual data to examine the content of any data sent or received,” and does not restrict or impose bandwidth allocation, a common way of locating high amounts of streaming activity.

However, exceptions deemed appropriate by breaches in campus policy can still result in compromised user privacy.

Beth Knauss, Tufts’ Information Security and Compliance Program Manager, helped clarify monitoring concerns. “Tufts and TTS [Tufts Technology Services] do not actively monitor users’ email or internet traffic for content,” she said in an email.

“The only time attention may be drawn to a person’s machine would be if they are

passing large amounts of data out of the network, their computer is reported to us as launching malicious activity, or if their machine is reportedly serving out copyrighted material.”

Such indeterminate contractual agreements are an inevitable reality of most private and public networks. Whether or not a student is on campus Wi-Fi, torrenting is still an illegal act. The difference then lies in the level of threat to each network. Unlike home networks, which typically require a high amount of traffic to cause a legal stir, copyright agencies commonly watch universities where these acts are frequent and saturated.

In the Student Handbook, Tufts is open about the increased frequency with which students face consequences for unauthorized activity: “Each day the university receives complaints from copyright holders bringing these infringements to our attention.”

Copyright companies’ stronger emphasis on university networks leads to consequences for individual students. Last fall, junior Jordan Lauf received two emails from Brendan Sullivan, the Senior Customer Support Representative at Tufts Technology Services. The emails detailed two specific accounts of DMCA violation, one from Fox Copyright, and the other from NBC Universal.

The vagueness of what is defined as rule breaking can make it challenging for students and the administration to maintain a relationship of trust.

ART BY RACHEL CUNNINGHAM

Tech & Innovation

“I was using a streaming app called Popcorn Time, and, supposedly it is just streaming movies and content, not downloading. I guess they had modified the app so that you had to turn off some setting that was automatically downloading [movies] to your computer. And I was not aware of that,” Lauf said.

About a month later, Tufts Tech Services emailed Lauf saying that Fox Broadcasting System had notified them of an illegal download of one of their films over Tufts Wi-Fi, and that disciplinary action would be taken. Shortly after, she received another email, this time regarding NBC Universal.

But she says the most interesting part was that for the whole week after receiving these emails, the Wi-Fi on her phone was not working. Initially presuming that it was just trouble connecting, Lauf only learned that her phone had been restricted when she received an email from Tyren Freeman, Tufts’ Student Affairs Coordinator.

The email detailed her consequence: a warning, which is a non-disciplinary sanction. Lauf was still in good standing with the university, and would not have any permanent note on her disciplinary record. However, similar to disciplinary actions involving alcohol and drugs, the email warned that if a second DMCA violation occurred, she would face a reprimand, and a third could result in probation or expulsion. The email closed with a confirmation that Lauf ’s phone had, in fact, been blocked. “TTS restricted your access to the Tufts network when the violation came to their attention in order to prevent any further violations, however a copy of this letter has been forwarded to TTS, who will now restore your access to the Tufts network,” the email said.

“You get an email saying that it’s been reinstated and not that they turned it off. I literally thought my phone wasn’t working. That’s sneaky,” Lauf said. She also noted that the entire situation was

handled over email, and that she never formally met with anyone about the matter.

While Lauf ’s case exemplifies a course of action Tufts has taken to address issues of copyright voiced from the outside, other students are concerned with Tufts own surveillance of perceived misconduct. Nicole Joseph, a member of Tufts Labor Coalition (TLC) and Tufts Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), discussed group practices that aim to avoid using Tufts wireless Internet and email services. “There’s been a lot of TLC events where we were like, ‘Wow we really didn’t talk about this anywhere.’ We don’t understand how [the administration was] ready at the time we were going to be there, kind of thing. Which really could be anything, but also it’s never a bad idea to keep your forms of communication secure so that doesn’t have to be a potential threat,” Joseph said.

With the ambiguity surrounding what warrants Internet monitoring, and what consequences may arise—from formal disciplinary hearings to surprise blocks on mobile Wi-Fi—there is rationale behind Joseph’s words. Ander Pierce, also a member of TLC, echoed these sentiments of circumventing campus Internet. “It helps our organizing, and also in the real world doing communications securely is a good idea, it’s just good practice to go through means of communication that they can’t monitor.”

While some remain distrustful of Tufts’ networks, Knauss is working to clear up user expectations. “Using information technology comes with the obligation that requires all of us to follow the applicable laws and regulations, as well as Tufts’ policies,” she said. “TTS and Information Stewards at Tufts are helping to expand the awareness in our community of how to use IT services effectively and responsibly.”

November 7, 2016

Tufts Observer

25

News

Conversations Entertainers Cope

By Gabriela Bonfiglio

D

avey the Clown, who runs his personal entertainment business out of Roslindale, MA, has been receiving a lot of phone calls lately. “I’m getting, like, 10 a day,” he said, explaining that the calls were mostly pranks. “It’s primarily kids…they think it’s funny.”

These calls, Davey explained, are a result of the recent phenomenon of clown scares that has swept the US—people dressed as clowns, some with weapons, have appeared on roadsides, at people’s bedside windows, outside college dorms, and on the edge of the woods. In some cases, people have been violently attacked.

Coverage of these incidents has reached Time Magazine and Rolling Stone, reflecting paranoia in communities across the country. Reactions have ranged in magnitude, from mass “clown hunts” at schools like Penn State, to death threats aimed at professional clowns, to bans on clown costumes, to prank calls like the ones Davey has received. Without question, people who entertain professionally as clowns have been impacted by this phenomenon.

For Davey, the calls have been the most tangible effect of the nationwide clown scares. He pointed out that they are more than an annoyance—he has a “payper-click” subscription to Google, meaning he owes money every time someone clicks on his ad to call, and he is therefore paying for every prank.

In response to this sudden attention, Davey said, “I try to deal with it in as positive a way as possible. I say thanks for the call, and generally I say I only discuss business with adults.” He added, “It wouldn’t do me any good to do anything about it, partly because it would be bad for my business.”

This is one of Davey’s efforts to remain positive, despite the large influx

26

Tufts Observer

November 7, 2016

of joke calls and the media frenzy. As a clown entertainer, he tries to carefully consider people’s reactions to his behavior. Davey understands the clown costume and presence as one “close to the human psyche” and therefore “a very powerful position.” He expressed disappointment in the way ordinary people are abusing this power.

The fear clowns invoke, Davey said, is more than a reaction to media like Stephen King’s It—he explained that many children he meets are already afraid of clowns. Sometimes, he said, it’s the makeup. “They’re trying to figure out which of my faces to focus on. Because in clown face you can see the other one if you look close enough.” At other times, though, Davey has even provoked fear without makeup. He recalled being in Faneuil Hall in costume but no makeup; when parents tried to carry their kids over to him, the kids cried more and more as they got closer. He added, “So I would walk backwards, you know, because I don’t want them to be scared.”

In contrast, Davey referenced a time when he was hired to dress up as a witch, provoking a very different reaction from his audience. “They wanted me to be scary, so I dressed up…but the kids couldn’t stop laughing at me.”

Another part of the clown performance that intimidates people, Davey said, is their power. “I play the accordion—I get kids to back me up while I’m playing and we make a parade. I’ve had an adult comment to me afterwards that the kids are so into it, they would follow me into the woods or whatever.” Here, Davey alluded to one of the widely circulated testimonials of the clown scare phenomenon: that clowns in rural areas were attempting to lure children into forests.

ART BY ANNIE ROOME

News

with Clowns With Clown Scares Judy “Jujubee the Clown” Johnson testified to a similar responsibility. Jujubee is based in New Hampshire, and has run a full-time business as a “children’s entertainer” for 29 years. “There’s a clown code of ethics…there’s a whole set of guidelines we live by,” she said.

Davey and Jujubee are both frustrated with how the people dressing as clowns are

The hardest part for Jujubee is a concern for her safety. “I do have to be careful when I go out which is really frightening, because I drive in full clown,” she said. choosing to disregard the responsibility that comes with it. “What people need to understand,” said Jujubee, “is that they’re not clowns. These people are not clowns.

They are impersonating a clown. Clowns don’t go out and deliberately try to scare people—that’s the big thing.” Davey agreed that these people are abusing the power that comes with clowning. Jujubee called the scares “foolishness.”

Besides striking them emotionally, the clown phenomenon has also affected Davey and Jujubee’s finances and wellbeing. Davey had a brighter outlook of the two, saying, “I don’t think this phenomenon has destroyed anyone’s business. In

fact, they say all news is good news.” He has had a number of gigs recently, which is typical around Halloween. He has a few friends who are also clowns or entertainers for whom he can attest. (Although, he added, he doesn’t know many clowns because they “don’t know how to stop being a clown, you know, they think because they have to be telling jokes all the time… after a while you feel like you need a drink.”)

Jujubee, on the other hand, said, “It’s sad. It’s been truly, truly a sad situation. It has affected me financially.” She added that she is lucky to be able to entertain in other ways, too, through puppetry or balloons.

The hardest part for Jujubee is a concern for her safety. “I do have to be careful when I go out, which is really frightening, because I drive in full clown,” she said. “There are people out there who have made criminal threats to my life. I have a friend who did an interview with TV and radio, and she had death threats.”

Of course, Jujubee and Davey both are looking forward to a time when the hysteria surrounding the clown scares dies down. They talked about immediate solutions—“I wish they would put a ban on the rubber masks,” said Jujubee. “It would deter a lot of what’s going on. You don’t ban clowns, you ban the rubber masks.”

Davey thinks that it is mostly the media “keeping the phenomenon alive.” Jujubee agrees, referencing movies and even the Food Network’s “scary clown”-themed competition. But both expect things will calm down in the time after Halloween.

For now, professionals like Davey and Jujubee are doing their best to maintain and project positivity. Jujubee joked that she’s “only 4’11,” so couldn’t be intimidating to anyone. Davey added that on Halloween, he would hang a sign on his door that reads, “Davey the Clown lives here, he’s a nice clown, please trick-or-treat.”

November 7, 2016

Tufts Observer

27

Profile

Dr. Jonathan Garlick is a Professor of Oral Pathology at Tufts Dental School and teaches Science of the Human Experience for undergraduate first years. The Observer sat down with him to talk about his life and interests; everything from working as an artificial turkey inseminator to his favorite midnight snack to engaging in science.

I’m a stem cell scientist, a science educator, a pathologist, a dentist, and a rap and hiphop artist. I’m a father, I’m a husband, I’m a son, and I’m a brother.

After that, I got a seed grant from the university to develop a new course, and the entire intent of that course is to help students engage in the science conversation in a way that was going to be personally meaningful and would help them understand that science issues that impact their lives are relevant, personal, and most importantly, accessible.

How did you start all of that?

What’s your favorite thing about Tufts?

I lived in Israel for a decade and I was an artificial turkey inseminator and I did that on a collective farm called a kibbutz. After inseminating turkeys, I studied geology, I studied dentistry, I became a pathologist, then I did my PhD. Working as a dentist specializing in cancer and seeing a lot of people getting very terrible diseases with unexplained reasons, I realized I wanted to try to figure out why people were getting these terrible diseases, so I went back and got a PhD in molecular biology and started my own research lab.

Its students. I have the most incredible sense of wonder about how Tufts students are so open-minded and so experiential and willing to explore and also willing to work together to support each other. I’m really blown away by that.

Profile

What do you do?

Jonathan Garlick 28

Tufts Observer

November 7, 2016

I realized I had to change. I became aware that I needed to understand, through a personal lens, the value and impact of the research I was doing in terms of its ethical, political and moral consequences.

The next key transformative moment transformed me from a scientist in the lab to a scientist in society, and that is where I am right now. This happened when I was doing government-funded research using human embryonic stem cells. One day in 2010, I got a call from a Boston Globe reporter asking me what I thought about a decision made by a judge in D.C. that placed a complete ban on the use of stem cells in government-funded research. I said to the Globe reporter, “I have no idea what you’re talking about.” I was only thinking about the next experiment, the next paper, the next grant. I was not aware that there were ethical, moral, political, and legal issues that were impacting the very work I was doing in my lab. And in that moment

What’s your favorite midnight snack?

Are you up at midnight?

I am just getting started at midnight. I weaned myself off of sleep years ago because there are just too many exciting things to think about. Right now my favorite midnight snack is my wife’s amazing homemade granola with milk. But what I’m really proud about is that I used to have a bowl of Cocoa Puffs at midnight and the fact that I weaned myself off them is a major accomplishment.

What’s an insecurity you’ve overcome?

I would say a fear of flying, which I overcame by realizing that I didn’t have a fear of flying, that I actually had a fear of crashing.

I’m in awe of flying. When people get off the plane I think everybody should be ushered into a reception room and we should have an incredible buffet with food, music, dancing, just to celebrate. Not to celebrate that we’ve survived this, but to celebrate that we’ve just experienced this miracle.

PHOTO COURTESY JONATHAN GARLICK

Feature

November 7, 2016

LILY HERZAN

Tufts Observer

31

Tufts Observer Since 1895 www.tuftsobserver.org observer@tufts.edu @tuftsobserver

please recycle