February 2017 by Counterpoint Magazine

COUNTERPOINT the wellesley college journal of campus life february 2017 volume 48 issue 1

Submit your opinions, thoughts, feelings, objections, reviews, art, shower thoughts, dream analyses, creative pickup lines, 2 am scrawlings, etc. to @alarcom or @cyu3 articles for the March issue are due by March 8, 2017 questions? contact alarcom or cyu3

Counterpoint categories for content warning: Implication of: for content that seems to be implied in any given article, but does not actually name or give a description or discussion of said content Mention of: for content that is named or defined in any given article, but does not provide specific details or descriptions in the usage of said content Description of: for content that is named and described in detail in any given article page 2

counterpoint / februar y 2017

Images: Photo by Samantha English '19 (cover), Photo by Charlotte Yu '17 (left)

Feeling vaguely subversive?

E D I TO R I A L S TA F F Charlotte Yu ’17 Allyson Larcom ’17

Editors-inChief Managing Editor Features Editor Staff Editors

Samantha English ’19 Roz Rea ’19 Urvashi Singh ’17 Lara Brennan ’18 Natassja Haught ’18 Alexandra Cronin ’19 Kelechi Alfred-Igbokwe ’19 Lydia MacKay ’19 Tiffani Ren ’19 Sarah White ’19 Madeline Wood ’19 Kimberly Burton ’20 Emily Prechtl ’20 Francesca Gazzolo ’20

D E S I G N S TA F F Midori Yang ’19 Roz Rea ’19 Jessica Maciuch ’20

Layout Editors

B U S I N E S S S TA F F Treasurer

Kelechi Alfred-Igbokwe ’19

C O N T R I BU TO R S

Tina Xu ’17, Allyson Larcom ’17, Kelechi Alfred-Igbokwe ’19, Huzaifa Ejaz ’20, Francesca Gazzolo ’20

TRUSTEES Hanna Day-Tenerowicz ’16, Cecilia Nowell ’16, Oset Babur ’15, Alison Lanier ’15, Kristina Costa ’09, Kara Hadge ’08, Edward Summers MIT ’08

COUNTERPOINT

THE WELLESLEY COLLEGE JOURNAL OF CAMPUS LIFE FEBRUARY 2017 Volume 48 / Issue 1

CAMPUS LIFE COUNTERPOINT STAFF, STUDENT BODY

CONTENT WARNINGS FOR DT

HUZAIFA EJAZ

SURRENDER MY UMBRELLA

POLITICS FRANCESCA GAZZOLO

BAD ACTIVIST

ALLYSON LARCOM

A WOMAN'S PLACE IS IN THE RESISTANCE

IDENTITY ANONYMOUS

INTERSEX AT WELLESLEY

A R T S & C U LT U R E TINA XU

THE VOICES THAT WILL NOT BE DROWNED

KELECHI ALFRED-IGBOKWE

LA LA LAND: ON RECONCILING ART AND ERASURE

SUBMISSIONS The views expressed in Counterpoint do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff. Counterpoint invites all members of the Wellesley community to submit articles, letters, and art. Email submissions to ofunderb@wellesley.edu and cyu3@wellesley. edu. Counterpoint encourages cooperation between writers and editors but reserves the right to edit all submissions for length and clarity.

F E AT U R E S COUNTERPOINT STAFF

POLL: FAVORITE ICONIC MUSIC MONTAGE FROM THE SHREK FRANCHISE

COUNTERPOINT STAFF

CROSSWORD: 2016 MEMES counterpoint / februar y 2017

page 3

CAMPUS LIFE

Content Warnings for Donald Trump Content warnings: description of Donald Trump; mention of sexual assault, mental illness, homophobia

he Counterpoint staff recently had a discussion about our Content Warnings Policy, specifically on whether or not we would provide CWs for articles that discuss Donald Trump. We decided as a staff that, as a magazine by Wellesley students for Wellesley students, we should open up the discussion to our campus readers via an anonymous poll and comment section. However, we also as a staff agreed that if just one Wellesley student said that they wanted CW for Donald Trump, we would provide them because we are a magazine for all Wellesley students. Therefore, we have come to the conclusion that we will provide CW for Donald Trump. In addition, though, we have decided to start having more detailed CWs overall. We will now provide three categories of CW, described below. These descriptions will now be available in the inside front cover of every issue of Counterpoint for our reader’s convenience. Implication of: for content that seems to be implied in any given article, but does not actually name or give a description or discussion of said content Mention of: for content that is named or defined in any given article, but does not provide specific details or descriptions in the usage of said content Description of: for content that is named and described in detail in any given article We have also decided to share the results of our survey, along with some anonymous poll comments and staff responses, below. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact editors-in-chief, Charlotte Yu (cyu3) and Allyson Larcom

Reader responses • I think it is more productive to have trigger warnings about the actual ideas and concepts that Trump is propagating than about the man himself. DJT is not the type of thing to warrant a TW in my opinion. His ideas are what are most harmful about him. • Sometimes it's all just too much, you know? It seems like all news media has dissolved into a constant barrage of negativity, and I just can't pay attention to it sometimes. Stress from this election has on occasion made me dissociate or unable to function, and I'm seeing it happen to my friends too. And as someone who believes that one of the best ways to be patriotic is to be an informed voter, it kills me that I have to purposefully ignore the news sometimes for my own health, but I'm going to survive this presidency if it kills me. • He is our President and it is important to understand that not all of the students at Wellesley feel negatively about this Administration. Not page 4

everyone will always agree with the current President, and it is unfair to make grand assumptions about students at Wellesley, when a group of us already feel uncomfortable enough with the political climate on campus. For the last 8 years President Obama was a democrat in office, and Republicans were respectful of this and stayed quiet. Now it is time for liberals to respect President Trump and provide us with the same courtesy. • but like not if his name is just mentioned in an article. if an article is dissecting or discussing his history, his actions, one of his policies, etc. in detail, then yes, a content warning to fight the normalization of his disgusting crap would be great. thanks y'all • I think the other content warnings are much more about trauma and triggers that people can have relating to experiences they have gone through. Those content warnings are important to have to keep members of the community safe from reliving

counterpoint / februar y 2017

past traumas (I myself am triggered by certain content due to my panic disorder). But I personally do not believe Donald Trump fits into this category of triggers. Rather, he is something that may be more uncomfortable to read about than triggering. I don't think ceasing such practices normalizes Donald Trump and his behavior. More often than not(I assume), the articles on Counterpoint will be criticizing him. • I think it would diminish the gravity of other content warnings. Donald Trump being president (ugh) is a fact, and I think we need to face that (myself included). I think we should continue using content warnings about misogyny, racism, homophobia, etc when we talk about Trump, but not specifically give him his own content warning. Giving him his own content warning acknowledges him as a dangerous person, which gives him power. Really, the only dangerous things about him are his followers and what he's saying to encourage

•

• •

•

him, so I think we should put content warnings on that, not Trump himself. Just my opinion! :) I just want to know that the piece is going to be about Donald Trump or include something about him before I read it. Thank you so much for your thoughtfulness, Counterpoint! I think it's worth brainstorming other ways (instead of using cw) of not normalizing trumps actions—maybe adding a small note at the beginning of all articles related to trump saying "*note: we continue to recognize the abnormality and outrageousness of all this" ok bad example but even stating explicitly like that as a tiny note ? Thinking about Trump is very stressful for me and I would just appreciate the heads up before I read about him I worry about the normalization of shutting out voices we dislike. The Trump presidency is our unfortunate reality for the next four years and we have to learn to deal with it. Trump's actions, beliefs, and behaviors resonate with a large portion of our society, and it's up to us to figure out why. Content warnings for Donald Trump will not keep students safer - they will only keep people deeper in their smug bubbles, out of touch with our country's reality. I am wondering, however, if you really are keeping this decision open to the campus community, when you plan on providing warnings if even a small fraction answers this poll "yes". This doesn't keep our community safe. This keeps our community ignorant and unprepared. I wasn't going to fill this out because I don't use content warnings. But because I am not "ignorant" I can understand that there are people who are different than me who might need them. And in that case, if you also provide warnings for rape, homophobic or racist language, ect,

•

then yeah, it logically makes sense to provide a warning about someone who does those things. And for people like me who don't need the warnings, it incidentally serves as a reminder that the leader of our country is someone who says and does things that should not be acceptable. The warning's primary function is just that, a warning, but it has the added bonus of being a call to arms. I don't think there's any harm in it serving two purposes, as the warning is well deserved. As a queer woman of color i already have to take time to emotionally engage with trump related news elsewhere. it would be fantastic if counterpoint could include these content warnings on a publication centered around the experiences of wellesley students so we can opt to skip over the content without becoming more exhausted. thanks for all the work you do—keep it up! :) Yes, I think Trump is something very triggering to some people's mental health and there should be a warning that content will be there. However, perhaps different language should be used instead of using the same language or presentation as other issues like rape and and eating disorders. Thinking about the Trump presidency fills me with an overwhelming sense of fear. A content warning will help me judge whether I want to confront those feelings or not over the course of reading a Counterpoint article that mentions him. I just read an angry response to this and I think it's really important for people to have these content warnings for mental health support, specifically, because Donald Trump is a person who has bragged about sexually assaulting women and it is really hard for lots of women to read about things he says

because it brings back very painful and uncomfortable memories. Besides even if there's a content warning, the content is still there for people to read so it's a good measure to take care of people during this very scary time. • I don't read Counterpoint, but I feel it is fair to say that to live by content warnings, is to avoid the fullness of the reality we live in. It makes us weaker in the way we approach situations and information, and it fosters a culture where the feelings of the individual surpass the general necessity for transparent and unfiltered communication, which is already scarce nowadays. In other words, let's grow up folks. The world ain't gonna give content warnings. • The debate surrounding inclusion of content warnings in general as well as on this poll only serves to illustrate their importance to me. The hateful, discriminatory rhetoric and actions connected to and perpetuated by DT cause destruction to the minds and bodies of many people, including members of the Wellesley College community. Including these content warnings acknowledges the damage that his and his supporters' behaviors cause and emphasizes that people who are hurt by this rhetoric have a right to do what is best for their mental health. People do not heed content warnings to stay ignorant and avoid things that make them uncomfortable—people use them to avoid topics that might be damaging to their mental health, whether at a particular moment in time or perpetually. People do not have to read things that will make them uncomfortable, and people do not have to read things that are detrimental to their mental health. People who want to resist the actions of DT can do so in ways that they feel are safe for them, but not everyone has the ability or energy to consume

counterpoint / februar y 2017

page 5

as much media about DT as others and that is to be respected. Including content warnings does not serve to stifle conversation on the basis of disagreement. Some people will not be heavily affected by the actions taken by the administration, but this administration has and will continue to take actions that some people simply will not be able to "deal with." People are not morally obligated to listen to voices that deny their humanity, nor is every person morally obligated to listen to opinions that they “dislike” if this “disliked” opinion is detrimental

Staff responses:

to their well-being. I very much appreciate Counterpoint bringing up this debate and attempting to do what they think is appropriate for the Wellesley community. I recognize that the debate was initially referring to the inclusion of DT as a content warning and whether including him as a content warning makes light of the other content warnings Counterpoint includes. The actions that the administration has carried out, even only two weeks after taking power, have caused incredible damage to the minds and bodies of people around

the world. In my view, his actions have been severe enough to warrant the inclusion of content warnings. • what's the harm in providing them? Most people will read anyways, and it will just save the people who actually need the warning from potentially being triggered. There's a difference between "not caring about politics" and specifically not wanting to read about someone that is profoundly damaging to your mental health (and I think people can make this decision on their own).

There is a fundamental misunderstanding as to what content warnings even are in many responses. gonna scream I understand why some people feel a Content Warning (CW) for him as a person specifically undermines the value of other CWs. But I also feel like comparing the problems “liberals” have with DT and problems conservatives have with Obama is ridiculous. Yes, you may not have agreed with his policies and kept “quiet” during his presidency, but Obama was not a reality star running for president for shits and giggles. CW are not so people can stay “ignorant” and “protected” and “coddled” from the real world. They’re to keep people safe, both mentally and emotionally. You cannot tell me that as a conservative or a liberal or a whatever, you don’t get tired from the constant news cycle bombarding you every hour. To say that your Wellesley Sibs are “weak” and “need to grow up” for wanting a warning if they need a break is disrespectful and honestly pretty gross. How about you grow up and realize that everyone has the right to absorb whatever information they choose, and that no, we don’t have to absorb information about a inherently awful man if it’s going to cause us emotional or mental harm every single time his name pops up somewhere in our day to day life. It does not make you weak to take a break sometimes. It gives you time to recuperate, build up strength, and rejoin the fight when you’re ready. I understand the argument that giving his name itself a warning is giving him a kind of power. I think it would be best for us to give a content warning for the awful things he stands for in regards to him. Like “racism: Trump” so that way students know this subject will be in the article and directly related to him. Francesca: Content warnings are ubiquitous: we bold ingredients on food products that people may be allergic to; we write “Do Not Lean On Railing” so people don’t fall off cliffs; we rate movies so parents don’t bring their kids to something explicitly violent, sexual, or otherwise “inappropriate.” So no, trigger warnings are not an invention of the liberal media. Some might say we put the aforementioned warnings in place because those situations are life-threatening. This is where the perceived illegitimacy of mental illness comes in: sometimes, trauma is life-threatening. Originally I was against content warnings for Trump, thinking that they would undermine more “serious” triggers. But the reality is that for many people, Trump poses a threat to their existence—because of their race, or their gender, or their religion, or their immigration status. The possibilities of the future can be just as traumatic as any memory of the past. Nina-Marie: If a content warning is requested by even one person, it should be respected. The arguments against content warnings are inherently flawed; letting a reader know that a topic contains a certain subject is not censorship or a situation where “the feelings of the individual surpass the general necessity for transparent and unfiltered communication,” as one reader put it in our survey. Content warnings do not hinder a person from continuing to read the piece, nor do they filter communication. They simply provide an easy-to-ignore piece of information that can help some people avoid panic attacks, flashbacks, or other harmful situations. I will never understand how a person can feel validated in any argument against trigger and content warnings, knowing that adding one causes essentially zero effort and can stop a person from re-experiencing their trauma. I’m proud to be part of a publication that prioritizes the mental health of its readership. page 6

counterpoint / februar y 2017

Image: Kyle J. Thmopson (right)

Kelechi: Midori: Rachele:

CAMPUS LIFE

SURRENDER MY UMBRELLA BY HUZAIFA EJAZ

t times like these, let us all come together. Let us all come together to acknowledge that it’s not always sunshine, rainbows, and Honor Code adherences at Wellesley. Even at Swells, bad things happen. Hearts are broken. Tears are shed. Trust is lost. And umbrellas are stolen. For all the stickers that read “I <3 the Honor Code,” where’s the love when someone does the one thing worse than stealing your thunder? When they steal what would ideally protect you from it? It comes as no surprise that tensions are high at Wellesley right now. To my sibs who have lost their beloved umbrellas to this storm, I reach out to you. Let me know if you want to talk and know that we are always here for you. To those who bring such pain and wrath to this beloved community, know that karma doesn't discriminate between umbrellas and good grades/other valued items. Know that when things run a full circle, you might be at the losing end. Know that unless your name is Ted Mosby, running off with someone’s umbrella unannounced won’t end all too well. It’s been quiet lately. A little too quiet. Which is why I am inclined to suspect that another unsuspecting Wendy will be hit with this conundrum soon. To protect

all my sibs from future incidents of this sort, may I include a tried and tested Three-Step Guide to retrieving your lost umbrella: 1. Send out an aggressive email ASAP. That’s right. There’s no “passive” before that aggressive. Ain’t nobody got time for that! LOCK THAT PAIN IN. 2. Threaten the perpetrator to bring it back immediately. I mean you don't want them to hesitate to reach out in case they do repent and reconsider. Am I Right? 3. Always remember the cardinal 20% rule. When your umbrella is delivered to your doorstep, know that it is only fair that you tip them accordingly. Determine the sentimental value of your lost item on a scale of 1-toumbrella, and give them a token of appreciation for their service accordingly. In case none of these suggestions get your umbrella back, maybe just CASH ‘EM OUTSIDE. HOW BOW DAH?

Huzaifa Ejaz '20 is starting a support group that will meet at whichever dining hall is serving fries for late dinner.

counterpoint / februar y 2017

page 7

Bad Activist

POLITICS

BY FRANCESCA GAZZOLO

he Saturday before I came back to Wellesley, I went to the Women’s March in my hometown of Chicago. I drove to the city with my mother from our current residence in Michigan, our adrenaline rushing at the prospect of being part of something so revolutionary. We drove back a few hours later, awe-inspired and compelled to action—both of us knew that the fight had only begun. On Sunday, I got on a plane to Boston. Amidst unpacking and saying hello to old friends, I typed rapid responses to comments on a Facebook post I made about violence in social justice. That night, I had a conversation with my boyfriend about his experience at the Women's March—he got to go to the big one in Washington. He said the crowds swallowed the city. On Monday, I went to the community organizing conference Wellesley hosted, "Together Towards the Dream". I listened to impassioned women speak about issues of race and class in climate justice, building bridges amidst political division, and having conversations with peers that yield committed relationships. The keynote speaker, Liz Miranda, talked about her experiences in Roxbury and at Wellesley and reminded us that it is an extraordinary privilege just to attend this school. By Monday night, I was burnt out. I have had clinical depression since the sixth grade and generalized anxiety since the ninth. These diagnoses are so common now, half the people in America must have a Zoloft prescription—but knowing others share my pain does not page 8

always lighten the burden. I consider myself extremely fortunate: I have had a therapist since middle school, access to healthcare through all my father’s jobs, and a loving network of family and friends who are willing to lend endless support. Though my thoughts sometimes threaten destruction, I always beat them back. Despite the winding roads and hairpin turns of mental illness that I navigate, there are many paths laid straight for me: I am a white, cis, able-bodied woman with cash in my pocket that I did not earn. I have a male partner, and although I am queer, my parents were never anything but open-armed about it. All of these identities open doors for me that are closed to others. Each day, I find new ways to check myself, to challenge the lingering shreds of racism, transphobia, ableism, and classism that persist in my mind. Sometimes they are more than shreds, and some serious deconstructing is in order. I feel terrible for saying that this work is exhausting. How can something as simple as acknowledging my privilege be draining when others live far more terrifying realities? How can I feel this way when black men and women do not feel safe walking down the street in a white neighborhood? When many trans folks panic every time they use a public bathroom? When the Standing Rock Sioux are losing a fight for water, a basic human need? When first generation American students fear for the fates of their immigrant parents, now in the hands of a white fascist and his inept band of losers?

counterpoint / februar y 2017

But it is exhausting. It is—otherwise I would not be writing this. Often this difficult, empowering, impossible, allimportant work pulls me into a spiral of self-doubt and crisis. As I watched these courageous women take the podium at the Monday conference, I was inspired. I was uplifted. My mind ran a mile a minute, sprinting back and forth between different visions for my next step. But now I am depleted, bereft of energy, and I must sit down to write. It is incredibly disheartening to realize our limits—especially when we need activism more than ever. Instead of ploughing a wide-open field, I can only afford to tend a small garden before my back becomes weary, and I must sit down. I hit a wall. I have often pushed myself to do more, to ignore my exhaustion and face the problem with a hazy mind and a heavy heart. But I—and you, and anyone else who has bumped up against the edge of their field and tried to pole-vault over it—cannot help this way. We must give ourselves permission to rest so we can be ready for the work to come. I cannot promise I will heed my own advice. What I can promise is that the work will always be there, infinite and unforgiving. So go ahead, go inside, and drink a cold glass of lemonade. Dangle your feet over the edge of your field. Rest awhile, and then come back to it. The work will be there waiting when you do. Francesca Gazzolo ‘20 (fgazzolo@wellesley. edu) is a first-year and potential history major. Her hobbies include hiking and having existential crises on the reg.

Image: chicagotribune.com (left), blackgirlnerds.com (right)

Content warnings: descriptions of mental illnesses, transphobia, and racism

A Woman’s Place is in the Resistance:

ON CARRIE FISHER, PRINCESS LEIA, AND THE WOMEN'S MARCHES

B Y A L LY S O N L A RC O M

hen I was nine years old, I had a small selection of fictional characters I liked to pretend were my best friends. Most of them were girls—girls with big, loud personalities; girls who were infinitely more competent than the boys around them and weren’t afraid to let them know it; girls who were tough and a little scrappy and felt their feelings deeply. Girls I liked to think were a little bit like me. My favorites, the ones with whom I spent the most time in my imagination, were Hermione Granger and Princess Leia Organa. As I grew older, my understanding of these characters grew with me: I became less attached to Hermione, but more attached to Leia. This evolution came partly from growing up and outgrowing Harry Potter a little, but also from learning more about the creative forces behind these characters. The more I learned about J.K. Rowling, the less enchanted I became with Hermione, but the more I learned about Carrie Fisher, the more I cared about Leia. As I grew, I learned that Carrie Fisher was a fierce advocate for the mentally ill, a woman who herself battled bipolar disorder and a resulting addiction. I learned, too, that she was funny and dynamic and outspoken and opinionated, the kind of adult I more and more saw myself wanting to grow into. When she passed away in late December, I was devastated. She was the

first celebrity whose death I truly cried over. I remember sitting with my mother in the basement and her telling me to save this kind of grief for the death of a family member, not for the death of someone I didn’t even know. I tried to articulate how much Carrie Fisher had meant to me—as a role model, as an activist, as a creative talent, as a champion for women living with mental illness. By the time Carrie Fisher passed away, she had become so much more than Princess Leia. It turns out Ms. Fisher and her most iconic role were important and meaningful to many people. In the wake of the presidential inauguration and the various marches and protests that followed, her image was omnipresent. Women dressed in Leia’s buns and white dress and held posters with Carrie’s defiant expressions. They marched the streets of major cities throughout not only the United States, but the world. I came across the same image on every one of my social media accounts: Carrie as Leia, staring directly into the camera, with the words “A Woman’s Place Is in the Resistance” emblazoned in red beneath. Carrie, or perhaps Leia, was a symbol of revolution behind which people could rally. Most of me was excited. I thought Carrie would be proud that this was her legacy. I was deeply touched to find that there were people out there who cared about her the same way I did, who saw her for both the hero she played onscreen and the hero she was in real life. Watching her become a symbol of hope and rebellion for so many other women was heartening and inspirational. At the same time, there were certain

Content warnings: mentions of mental illness aspects of this outpouring that made me concerned. It worried me to see many people reduce her to a character she played. I didn’t—don’t—want people using the fictional Leia as a symbol without recognizing Carrie for being the incredibly honest, tenacious, real person behind her. I also didn’t love the fact that most of the pictures used of her were pictures from her early roles in Star Wars, when she was young and thin and lovely, and that recent pictures were scarce. There was another layer of iffiness there, too, and one I noticed with people’s use of my other childhood favorite, Hermione. While I understand that books and media are a mirror meant to help us examine our own reality, there’s a danger in conflating fiction with life. Like I said, I’m glad that Carrie Fisher meant so much to so many other women out there, specifically women with mental illnesses and neurodivergent women. I really do like to believe that this is how she would have wanted to go down in history—an uplifting symbol of revolution against tyranny. I just think we ought to be careful about how we remember her and how we use her image. We can’t forget the person that Carrie was, the way she lived her life, the causes for which she fought in favor of Leia. In my adult eyes, Carrie Fisher is ten times the hero that Leia is for the real effect she had on the real world. She’ll always be one of my greatest inspirations, and I hope others will remember her the way that I do, too. Allyson Larcom ’17 (alarcom@wellesley. edu) thinks you're a little short for a Stormtrooper.

counterpoint / februar y 2017

page 9

IDENTITY

Y E L S E L L E BY

W T A X E

Content warnings: mentions of gender dysphoria, descriptions of medicalization of intersex bodies

Are trans men eligible for admission? No. Wellesley is deeply committed to our mission to educate women and the College is proud of its history of graduating women who demonstrate the value of women’s leadership. Wellesley does not accept applications from men. Those assigned female at birth who identify as men are not eligible for admission. Are trans women eligible for admission? Yes. Wellesley accepts applications from women. Those assigned male at birth who identify as women are eligible for admission. Are individuals assigned female at birth who identify as non-binary eligible for admission? Yes. That said, Wellesley is a college dedicated to the education of women. The College provides students with a uniquely empowering learning environment—one designed specifically to prepare women to thrive in a complex world. This singular focus on women is a critical part of the Wellesley experience. Wellesley accepts applications from those who were assigned female at birth and who feel they belong in our community of women. —from the Mission and Gender Policy FAQ

hen Wellesley changed its admissions policy to allow trans women to attend, it also codified the attendance of nonbinary people who are designated female at birth. As one of the nonbinary students already here, I found this aspect of the policy change both affirming and page 10

disconcerting. By creating a distinction between designated female at birth (DFAB) and designated male at birth (DMAB) nonbinary students, Wellesley again ties gender to genitalia. I’ve pointed this out time and time again, publicly and in private conversations, but in the past year it has become even more personal.

counterpoint / februar y 2017

Long story short, if my hormones were only slightly more irregular than they are now, I would have been designated male at birth myself. I recently found out I have Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia, or CAH, known for being the most common cause of intersex conditions. These conditions widely vary,

Image: Kyle J. Thmopson

S R TE

N NO

U MO

with some, like mine, not apparent at birth. In my case, my body externally appears to be what doctors consider “female,” but my hormones and some related physical characteristics are very far from those of the typical person who is designated female at birth. This has some far-reaching consequences, with the majority being cosmetic. My hair is thinning, and I have dark hairs on my upper lip and chin. I got my first period before I knew what a period was, and I stopped growing around age 10 or 11. By that point, my braces had already come and gone. At first, I just sort of shrugged off the diagnosis; okay, so here was a condition that could explain a lot of things that had happened to me in the past, but it wasn’t life-threatening and really wouldn’t interfere much with my future, right? The medical community looks at it very differently. When my doctor called me with the final test results, she seemed to be nearly in tears. She wanted to immediately put me on two different types of birth control, regardless of the fact that I would need to be taken off of medications important to my mental health. She made me swear I wasn’t having sex. She repeatedly told me that even though chances were low that I could even have my own biological kids, I would need to have an abortion if I ever did get pregnant. The reason? If I was to have a child, that child would most likely have full-blown CAH resulting in ambiguous genitalia. In other words, any of my future kids would most likely be visibly intersex. It took a few minutes after that phone call to digest what had just happened: my doctor was telling me it would be absolutely necessary to abort any potential kids of

mine, on the off chance their genitalia did not match the medical definition of male or female. Honestly, I’m so glad this happened after I’d at least briefly educated myself on intersex issues, or I would have believed her out of fear and misunderstanding. Instead, I found myself scared by the level of ignorance within the medical community. My new diagnosis led me to another train of thought, too: was this why I’m nonbinary? In my case, it seems as if all signs point to yes, and while I don’t subscribe to the thought that all transgender people have an underlying medical condition (nor do I think that “correcting” my condition would magically make me cis, nor do I want to be cis), I have found some personal comfort in an answer. When I last went to the doctor, she prescribed me a medication that is typically taken by trans women, only at higher doses, to “feminize” my face (read: get rid of all hair growth). While in my younger years I would have clamoured for that prescription, now that I know myself better, I have mixed feelings about it. For now, I’m choosing to just keep a stockpile handy in case the current political climate leaves some trans women unable to access it in the future. Finding out my body doesn’t fit into the medical box of “female” has made me like my body more. I feel more confident and find myself binding less often, more comfortable with the

“womanly” parts of me now that I know neither my gender nor my body carries all traditional signs of womanhood. While I remain unsure of whether I will pursue hormone therapy or top surgery in the future, I now am more comfortable putting off that decision for a bit longer. Even before my diagnosis, I knew that, as a nonbinary person, I have a nonbinary body. The difference now is doctors can see it that way, too—it’s only my college that has not yet come around. Binary sex categories are just as ridiculous as binary gender categories, and it’s time for Wellesley to abandon the idea that a person’s body must influence their gender. We need to give all nonbinary people who feel Wellesley is a good fit for them, no matter their genitalia, the opportunity to apply.

For information about articles published anonymously, please contact the EditorsIn-Chief (alarcom@wellesley.edu, cyu3@ wellesley.edu).

counterpoint / februar y 2017

page 11

ART & CULTURE

OCEANS, FATHERS, AND LOVERS TEACH PAINTER MAGGI HAMBLING HOW TO DIE

Content warning: descriptions of death

hen Maggi Hambling was a toddler, she would talk to the ocean. “I don’t know what I said and I don’t know what it said to me,” she admits. But there was something about the water that held her captive. More than half a human lifetime later, a month after Hambling’s 57th birthday, the ocean spoke powerfully to Hambling again. It was a November morning in 2002; a violent storm swept over the seawall on the eastern coast of England, whipping the ocean into an angry tumult. The water roared like the voice of a slighted god. Hambling beheld the storming ocean and something inside her rattled. The sea was a “primeval force” both “beautiful and terrifying … I realized that what was inside me was that storm.” For a period thereafter, Hambling woke up early every morning to draw the waves. “Now that I am older, I listen to it,” she says of the ocean. Although Hambling has been drawing, painting and sculpting her entire life, it has taken decades for her work to gain an elemental force. Much like an ocean swell that finally crests into a wave, Hambling’s artistry is now crashing down over the London art world. A fully-ripened artist in old age, Hambling has churned out canvas after page 12

canvas of urgent, swirling brushstrokes. She paints like a servant of an elemental power—furiously, relentlessly, as if possessed: “the sea still has me.” Now 71 years old, posed (or rather, un-posed) in a self-portrait with a cigarette in the corner of her mouth and a riot of white curls frothing over deepset eyes, Hambling possesses a corpus of drawings and paintings unified by their kinetic energy. Whether it is ocean waves, the blazing fire and ash of a battlefield, or a careening bullfight, her works are variously explosive. Under Hambling’s hand, even a portrait of a resting female nude feels like it is somehow writhing. The thighs of a woman lying on her stomach disappear into a mass of brushstrokes that could just as easily be messy sheets, storm clouds, or bubbling water. The goal of fine arts, Hambling says, is not just to freeze time as in a photograph, but to capture the immediacy of a creative moment as if it were forming before the viewer’s eyes. Standing in the center of Hambling’s exhibit “Walls of Water” at the Tate Modern, one is dwarfed by eight six-feet-tall oil paintings of curling waves writhing with daubs of yellow, red, brown and magenta. The impression is not that you are inhabiting Hambling’s memory of a November day over a decade ago, but that you are walking through the veritable eye of a storm. However, art doesn’t require a room full of gargantuan oil paintings to inspire wonderment. Sometimes it is

counterpoint / februar y 2017

the scribbles that speak the loudest. In Hambling’s exhibition “Touch: Works on Paper” at the British Museum, we see the artist staggering through her darkness and feeling out the contours with asking hands. Strewn on the table are ordinary sketchpads with light pencil sketches taking up less than half of each page. In Hambling’s style, there are few straight lines. “Drawing is the beginning of everything for me,” says Hambling. “It is the most immediate, most intimate thing an artist does, like handwriting.” On one sketchpad, we see faint grey smudges to the right of the portrait, as if the edge of Hambling’s palm had just rested there. One almost wonders if the paper is still warm. The first page that catches my eye features the profile of a head arched backward, mouth ajar and gums toothless. The man looks like he could be yawning, but a curved line behind his head suggests a pillow. Wisps of hair begin far back from the forehead. The cheeks are sunken in and the skin hangs slightly loose from the bones. An old man snoring? Perhaps about to sneeze? I glance down at the placard, and it reveals that the subject is from the “Father sketchbook, 1998.” The location is Ipswich Hospital. The placard reads: “Fluid but precise marks capture him in the strained pose of death, his mouth a mass of intense blackness.” Although the portrait tapers off at the neck, suddenly you can sense the white bedsheets, incandescent hospital lights, and bedside

Images: The Scallop by Maggi Hambling, 2003 (left), Wave Returning by Maggi Hambling, 2009 (right)

ES C I VO

BY TINA XU

chair. One imagines Hambling sitting there, her characteristically defiant air softened, clutching this sketchbook and recording the face of her father in his last days of life. Although some have nicknamed her Maggi “Coffin” Hambling, her fixation with deathly portraits comes from a deep appreciation for the ephemeral joys of life. “It’s a positive way of grieving,” she explains, “a natural thing for me to do. Artists are lucky: that person goes on being alive inside them.” To see that celebration not in death, but through death, we only need to look to the series “My Father from Memory” from the year of his death. The black, white and burgundy oil paint portraits are titled “Father Flirting” (chuckling at something, mouth curled like a feline) and “Father Laughing” (all teeth showing, nose crinkled, eyes squinting, cheeks taut). “You’ve got to have a laugh,” says Hambling. “I couldn’t exist without laughing and I don’t have much to do with people who don’t laugh. I don’t know how they go on living.” As much as some of Hambling’s portraits of the dying are sober or joyful, others are absurdist. One sculpture on display at the British Museum that critics have called “pivotal” is a mass of white plaster in rollicking curls in gaps and swells. When I first saw this sculpture in a corner of the British Museum, I admit that I had no idea what it was. It took reading the label, “Henrietta Eating A Meringue,” to decipher a gigantic pair of lips and a cookie entering. The sculpture is far larger than life, seeming to lend grave drama to the consumption of this meringue. Why

the lips? Why a meringue? Why any of this? My gut reaction was to laugh. Then I read more. At the time that Hambling made this sculpture, Henrietta was old and her health was deteriorating. “When she was told she had diabetes,” Hambling explains, “she took to cream cakes in a big way.” Perhaps this sculpture is a middle finger to death, a monument to grasping small pleasures from the clutches of time. (Yes, even a meringue.) Although the sculpture is grotesque in its form, resembling a tangled ball of worms reminiscent of Hayao Miyazaki’s tatarigami demons, the sculpture does what much of modern art does: make a point. The viewer feels a connection not to the art but with the force driving the artist’s hands: a desire to triumph over death. Hambling believes that she does not pick her subjects. Like all artists, Hambling is concerned with capturing the truth of a person, place, or thing. For her, that truth is attained through sensual experience. “Eye and hand attempt to discover and produce those precise marks which recreate what the heart feels.” The bisexual Hambling developed a relationship with Henrietta Moraes, who posed for Francis Bacon and Lucien Freud in her younger years. “We fell in love,” says Hambling, “and the work became a product of our relationship.” In the end, art, for Hambling, is an act of love. In portraiture, “the challenge is to touch the subject, with all the desire of a lover.” Hambling recalls of her sessions with Henrietta, “I was trying to get her

intensity. I was also discovering her.” Henrietta passed in 1999. Recalling the features of her face, Hambling notes, “the right side of her face was optimistic, the left more tragic.” Finally, Hambling adds, “Henrietta, who died with style and panache, asking for a hug and a cigarette, taught me how to die.” On the shores of Aldeburgh beach in Suffolk, where Hambling grew up, sits a three-meter-tall stainless steel oyster shell. Glinting silver like the eternally churning sea it faces, the shell echoes with the roaring of the waves. “You could come to Scallop when you’re miserable and have a conversation with the sea.” Across the rim of the shell, Hambling has engraved lyrics from Britten’s opera Peter Grimes: “Hear the voices that will not drown.” At the end of the end, with art as with love, Hambling’s work is an attempt “to make some pathetic little human marks that might have something to do with the mystery of this great, great thing in front of us.” Standing on the shore and squinting out over a cold grey sea, one can imagine Hambling picking up a pencil and beginning to sketch. She has no fear. On the precipice of the unknown, a cliff before a great nothingness, Hambling chooses art. When asked what her five-year plan was, the septuagenarian Hambling responded, “To stay alive.” When asked what the point was, she replied, “Beauty.” Graphite cascades onto the page. Seagulls squawk and soar. “It’s coming towards me, there’s nothing I can do about it,” Hambling says. “There’s nothing any of us can do about the fact we’re going to die.”

Tina Xu ’17 (txu2@wellesley.edu) used to think that she would turn into a dolphin the first time she swam in the Pacific Ocean. counterpoint / februar y 2017

page 13

La La Land I

ART & CULTURE

ON RECONCILING ART AND ERASURE Content warning: mentions of racism B Y K E L E A L F R E D - I G B O K W E

watched La La Land over winter break, in a mid-sized movie theater in the suburbs of Houston, Texas. During this cinematic experience, I felt transported to Los Angeles, California in a flurry of music and wonder. I’ve always loved musicals, and La La Land was no exception. The song-and-dance routines were infectious in their energy, and I felt my spirits being lifted to new heights watching from the audience. The whole film was whimsically charming. I’m an ardent romantic at heart, so I fell in love with the romance at the center of the film between Mia (Emma Stone) and Sebastian (Ryan Gosling). The chemistry between the two is palpable. I like how they started out with a battle of wits, before succumbing to their love with a sort of exhilarating artistry. The tap dancing while singing “A Lovely Night” with the city of Los Angeles as the backdrop was so pure and wholesome. Later on, “City of Stars” tugged at my heartstrings. Gosling’s piano playing was entrancing to watch. The entire film was immensely aesthetically pleasing. The scenery was unrelentingly soft in pretty blues, purples, and pinks. The wardrobe of the cast was striking in bold, bright splashes of color amid classic, tailored style choices. The choreography was performed to sharp perfection. The visuals and cinematography certainly appealed to purist Hollywood. The most profound moments of the film, however, were at the end. It was then that the movie came to an intriguing intersection of art, music, and film, as an impeccably crafted story of “what if?” unfolded before our eyes. The film crushed my heart with the wistfulness of love lost over the course of chasing dreams, of the page 14

sacrifices of creative drive. Throughout the film, however, my mind was bogged down by an incessant observation: all the people of color (except John Legend’s character) were in the background as amorphous jazz music machines. The thing is, they had presences as brilliant jazz musicians, but they had almost no speaking roles, didn’t drive the story, and were only there to supplement the main characters, who were almost all white. The film was centered around two white characters, while subsequently using people of color as musical props. This is concerning, because jazz originated from Black Americans, and traditionally, jazz was a genre centered around Black Americans, not White Americans. It is understandably troubling to then watch Ryan Gosling’s character, Sebastian, a white man on a quest to return jazz to its roots as a “Traditionalist.” It is a slap in the face to the pioneers of jazz to have this form of white saviorism be so prevalent in the film. The gender politics of the film are also worth noting. Emma Stone’s character, Mia, is at times overshadowed by Sebastian in the story of pursuing your

counterpoint / februar y 2017

craft at all costs, and Sebastian spends much of the movie mansplaining art in general, and jazz in particular, to her. He drives much of the story forward, from his initial pursuit of her, to pushing her to continue auditioning, to joining the band that rocks their relationship. Art is often political, and La La Land isn’t a film with a political statement. It’s pretty to watch and lovely to appreciate from an entertainment and artistic perspective. Still, the film’s fatal flaw is in its total lack of self-awareness in its furtherance of the same dominant narrative. This year’s Oscars may be incredibly contentious, with La La Land (an industry favorite) up against films that blend the arts and the political, and tell fresh, much needed stories, such as Moonlight, Fences, and Hidden Figures. La La Land is a hat tip to the grandeur of Old Hollywood, but it is more important to honor the marginalized communities that have, for so long, been erased from the archetypal Hollywood narrative. Kele Alfred-Igbokwe ’19 (ialfredi@wellesley. edu) is a lover of pretty things, sometimes at her own expense.

POLL

68 63

favorite iconic music montage from the Shrek franchise 43

“All Star”

“I N eed a

Images: shutterstock.com (right) pngmart.com (left)

“The “I’m Othe “Liv “Hal a Be r Imm in’ L leluj lieve igran a Vid Hero ah” r ” t Son ” a Lo ca” g”

OTHER RESPONSES: I’m On My Way • in the morning, i’m making waffles! • In Shrek 2 there’s this scene where they do a “Far Far Away Idol” and if you picked a winner who they didn’t want you to pick and so Simon Cowell would get up and declare himself the winner and sing the Sinatra song: “My Way” and THAT is clearly the most iconic music scene •from the Shrek franchise. BY. FAR. • Uh Funkytown. Obviously • CSECA WROTE THIS DIDN’T SHE (Cseca’s response: You bet your swamp I did) • This question is unfair, they are all my favorite • The bonus scene from the end of Shrek 2 I think is called Far Far Away Idol • For Shrek 1 it is definitely I’m a Believer, but for Shrek 2 I would have to pick Accidentally in Love (how did you leave this off the list???) • Everything Donkey says • I always submit more than one response in these polls :O • All Star ofc (also, this is the best counterpoint poll ever) • CHANGES!!!!!!!! HATE U • How is this even a question- I need a hero is the best music montage of all time, let alone in the Shrek anthology • My Beloved Monster • Accidentally in Love • Playa please... Funky Town • We are a broken people. Our once noble generation has fallen into a bottomless pit of despair. Only memes may briefly soothe the terrible pain of this burdensome existence. • fuck this poll every music montage in the Shrek franchise is equally iconic • All of the above! • Ever Fallen in Love counterpoint / februar y 2017

page 15

CROSSWORD

2016 memes ACROSS 1. The clenched fist of this beloved cartoon aardvark 5. Dang Dionysus 7. This meme now rests in peace after Leo finally won this award 9. Cats with girth 10. What Terry will do when this bitch empty 12 Don’t talk to me or my ever again 18. Hanging out with Rebecca leads to deadly conflict in this Vine 21. “So what are your talents?” is a question that can be answered with a water bottle 23. This small fluffy dog has starred in countless flashy remixes 24. _____: ____ I am forcibly removed from the premises 25. The one question you have for your buddy in the funky shoes 26. The brothers behind “take a fucking sip babes” 30. From sipping tea to donning an evil black cloak, this versatile frog memes all 31 But every ______ time they say a certain word it gets faster 32. Often confused with primitive sponge, a loinclothclad yellow sponge in an unfortunate predicament 33. Coming out of my cage and I’ve been doing just 34. He likes to sing, dance, pretend, and play an obnoxious noisemaker

DOWN 2. RIP _____, aka the meme that never dies 3. It was the longest ever 4. The occupation of the mastermind behind “What the fuck did you just fucking say about me you little shit? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the…” 6. 20 mins into _____ ___ ___and he gives you this look 8. The number one villain of Lazytown 9. Bone app the teeth? Bone apple tea? No it’s 11. A viral video about the history of an east Asian country 13. This iconic swimmer put on quite a grumpy face 14. The most Iconic Billy Ray Cyrus tweet 15. Reach into your local trash and you will ﬁnd a _____ and a ___! 16. The lyrics to this song are: “ah oh ah, ah oh ah, ah oh ah, ah oh ah ah, blululululu, ah oh ah” 17. Throw your arm over your face at a 45 degree angle 19. Bromance at the White House 20. How Jeb Bush politely asks for applause 22. Here he comes… 27. It’s not the walking boy challenge 28 How you feel but LARGER 29. The Zodiac Killer