The Scarlet & Black Horoscope: August 30, 2019

Unreliable Notes: Move-in day!

By Noa Goldman `22 [email protected]

An Unsolicited Opinion: On vaccine exemptions

By Katherine Moody [email protected]

At 3 p.m. on April 24, 2019, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a media statement reporting 695 cases of measles in 22 states. This is the highest number of cases in the United States since the disease was eliminated from the country in 2000. Measles has no known reservoirs in the United States; outbreaks occur when an infected traveler transmits the disease from abroad. Three large outbreaks – two in New York and one in Washington State – are responsible for the record high.

Because measles is a highly-contagious disease, outbreaks typically appear in clusters and occur in population groups with low vaccination levels. Both the New York and Washington State outbreaks are examples of this phenomenon. When individuals refuse to get vaccinated or to vaccinate their children, they jeopardize not only their own safety and health, but also that of their communities.

Babies cannot receive the first dose of the Measles, Mumps, and Rubella (MMR) vaccine until they are 12 months old, nor can they receive the second dose until they are at least four years old. Not everyone can receive the vaccination. Many individuals have health conditions, such as cancer, that suppress their immune systems and prevent them from being vaccinated.

In a society with a high vaccination rate, herd immunity protects those who can’t be vaccinated. Herd immunity defends the population because disease cannot spread if enough people are vaccinated. If the vaccination rate drops, those most vulnerable to the disease are left unprotected. In an interview published by Oxford Vaccine Group, Dr. Manish Sadarangani estimates that in the case of measles, at least 90-95% of the population needs to be vaccinated to maintain herd immunity and safeguard the young and the infirm.

It’s bad news, then, that the percentage of young children in the United States who don’t receive any vaccinations has quadrupled since 2001. While there is more than one reason for the increase, rising rates of vaccine skepticism are a contributing factor. This increase is likely the result of a vocal group of activists known colloquially as “anti-vaxxers,” who believe that vaccines can cause autism despite all scientific evidence to the contrary.

Study after study has shown that vaccines do not cause autism. Most recently, a study published just this month evaluated over 650,000 children over the course of ten years in Denmark and found no increased risk of autism from the MMR vaccine.

So why then, in the face of such definitive evidence, do people choose to put themselves, their children, and their communities at risk? And in the face of rising vaccine skepticism and recent outbreaks of vaccine-preventable disease, what action should the government take to protect public health?

The answer to the first question is fairly complicated, having to do with the public health apparatus, misinformation in the digital age and the psychology of conspiratorial thinking. The answer to the second question is simple: state governments should end nonmedical exemptions that allow parents to send their kids to school without having been vaccinated.

While all 50 states and the District of Columbia have laws that require students to be vaccinated before attending public school (some also require vaccinations to attend private school and day care facilities), the accepted reasons for an exemption to these laws and the ease of obtaining such an exemption differs from state to state.

All states have a medical exemption that allows students who cannot receive vaccinations for a medical reason to attend school. In California, West Virginia and Mississippi, this is the only exception that exists.

Some states allow for both medical and religious exemptions, and 17 states have even more lenient laws that allow for exemptions on the basis of personal or philosophical concerns.

Lenient laws that allow parents to obtain exemptions on the basis of non-medical concern are clearly a public health hazard. State governments should move to protect their communities by passing legislation that prohibits vaccine exemptions for both religious and personal reasons. The federal government should also move to restrict the ability of states to implement or maintain lenient exemption laws.

The United States Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of barring religious and personal vaccination exemptions. Lower courts have used the decisions of the Supreme Court in the cases of Jacobson v. Massachusetts and Prince v. Massachusetts to affirm that individual liberty should not contribute to the endangerment of public health.

Even those most weary of government power and intervention should acknowledge the rectitude of tougher vaccine exemption laws. Those who don’t receive vaccinations or choose not to vaccinate their children reduce herd immunity and increase the risk of illness and death of those around them. Unless you’re prepared to argue that illness and death don’t constitute harm, it’s difficult to justify government inaction. A call for a better conversation about antisemitism

By Dylan Caine [email protected]

Having gone to bed numb and speechless, once again, to the news that another Shabbat had passed with American Jews being gunned down in their Synagogue—occurring six months to the day after the deadliest antisemitic attack in American history—I ask my fellow Grinnellians to carefully consider ways that we can work together to improve and elevate our own discourse on antisemitism amid the steepest rise in attacks on Jewish people worldwide in decades. To begin, here are some facts: In 2017, Jews were the targets of 58.1% of “religiously motivated hate crimes” in the United States, according to the FBI. 2017 also saw a 57% increase in antisemitic incidents over the previous year, which included an astonishing 94.1% rise in antisemitic cases reported in K-12 schools. These distressing variables have been trending upwards for years now.

Lest one think it is purely an American phenomenon, however, CNN’s recent omnibus survey of European attitudes towards Jews yielded profoundly troubling results for the continent where one out of every three Jews on the face of the Earth was murdered by the Nazis and their local collaborators less than 80 years ago. In countries such as Poland and Hungary, over four in 10 respondents believed that “Jews have too much influence in business and finance around the world,” and over a third said the same in regards to political affairs, echoing long-established antisemitic myths and conspiracies. This parallels the resiliency of arguably the greatest global stronghold of antisemitism, North Africa and the Middle East, where a 2015 Anti-Defamation League Global Survey found that 75% of respondents held antisemitic views. In many ways, even after being targeted by numerous massacres in a matter of months, antisemitism still remains a slightly more distant, though increasingly close, reality in the United States when compared to the experiences encountered by the small Jewish communities in Europe and the almost non-existent ones remaining in North Africa and the Middle East, where daily, street-level hostility and threat has remained a fact of daily life.

With this troubling portrait of a global antisemitism in mind, I implore the Grinnell community, which prides itself on advocating for the safety and well-being of marginalized communities, to extend the same level of support to your Jewish peers. Though different in both its history and nature than other bigotries, the effects of antisemitism remain just as deadly. Antisemitism is a complex phenomenon which has existed in some form for over 2,000 years, transforming from a political into a theological, and then biological and racialized phenomenon over such time. It has lived on both the left and right historically, and on each side the Jew has served as a symbol upon which prevailing societal fears and myths are projected. Throughout history, Jews have been framed as both capitalist and Communist, political elites, biological bottom dwellers, and many other harmful stereotypes.

If you would like to learn more about antisemitism, and how the Jewish community seeks to confront it, I implore you to discuss, and, most importantly, to listen, to a large swath of Jewish peers, faculty, and institutional leaders, and consult experts on the subject, such as the pre-eminent American writers on antisemitism today: the historian-author Deborah Lipstadt, and journalist Yair Rosenberg of Tablet Magazine. I also encourage you to learn more about the history of antisemitism and the Jewish people, whose roots as an indigenous Middle Eastern people that were forcibly expelled from their homeland into two thousand years of exile, play a critical role in understanding the issues and endless persecution Jews faced throughout the Diaspora and continue to challenge today. But most critically, I ask that you take the easiest initial step to fight antisemitism, which is to merely acknowledge that it exists – that it actively harms and threatens the lives of our friends, families, and selves in 2019. I ask you to acknowledge that it is not made up or manufactured – that instead, it is all too real.

This does not preclude bad actors from cynically exploiting antisemitism as a political football, as attempts at manufacturing outrage are often accomplished on both the right and the left. However, the best way to combat this is to center Jewish voices in any conversation on antisemitism. These issues are not political wedges or social media “likes” for us. Antisemitism is a matter of life and death. Any time it is exploited for politics, no side wins. Only Jews lose.

As the Chabad of Poway, a synagogue very much the same as the Chabad shul I have attended my entire life, buries Lori Gilbert-Kaye, of blessed memory, treats its wounded, and works to repair its irreparable injuries, I ask that you take this opportunity to consider how we can lift up and protect the visibility of Jewish voices in our own campus community.

At a time when white supremacists in the West are increasingly targeting Muslim, Latinx, Black, and other marginalized communities, standing in solidarity with targeted peoples could never be more important. Together, we shall work to fight this White Supremacist scourge that may take many forms, but whose effects are almost uniformly deadly.

May Lori Gilbert-Kaye’s memory be a blessing, and may we each strive to create our own corner of a more loving, understanding, and repaired world.

Phoebe Schreckinger ‘19: Dear Cheryl

Phoebe Schreckinger ‘19: Dear Cheryl

This Week in Wellness: The Science of Cognitive- Behavioral Therapy

Eva Hill [email protected]

One of the more common varieties of modern talk therapy, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is a non-medicine-based method of treating certain mental health issues, including depression, eating disorders and various anxiety disorders, among others. According to an article in Psychology Today, CBT “treats problems and boosts happiness by modifying dysfunctional emotions, behaviors, and thoughts.” The therapy is based in the idea that how people behave is affected by how we think. It focuses on interrupting destructive thought patterns, particularly through finding and identifying recurring problematic thoughts and allowing the client to evaluate those thoughts with a trained professional who can then teach them strategies to overcome them.

Strategies for overcoming thoughts and thinking patterns can take a wide variety of forms. Some people find it helpful to use visualization techniques, like imagining putting away the thoughts they no longer have into a mental storage box of some kind. Others may discover that an effective strategy for them is to “speak” directly to the thought pattern in question to dispel illogical worries.

Another technique is graded exposure, which helps clients overcome fears by exposing them to increasingly intense incarnations of their phobia while in a clinical setting. Therapists may also talk to clients about the ways that thought may influence their behavior. One specialized form of CBT is mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, or MBCT, which uses techniques based in mindfulness meditation to help reduce depressive symptoms. MBCT, unlike CBT, is generally practiced as a group program with eight weekly meetings.

But how, exactly, do these strategies work? It’s possible, according to some studies, that practicing CBT may actually cause physical changes within the brain. The amygdala and hippocampus are two parts of the brain shown to be overactive in people with certain mental conditions, but after a successfully completed course of CBT, the activity in those sections can return to normal. Additionally, there is some evidence that CBT can have a positive effect on the prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain that controls higher-level thinking like social interaction and complex decision-making. Relatively speaking, CBT is a low-risk form of therapy. It’s not necessarily an easy therapy — clients may feel uncomfortable or upset as they evaluate their own thinking patterns, and treatment can be very emotionally and physically draining. However, as long as the therapist performs their duties adequately, these feelings occur in a safe place where they can be discussed by the client and therapist afterwards. In addition, since it does not involve medication, CBT comes without the kinds of side effects sometimes found with medications used to treat mood and anxiety disorders, like selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs). As a result, CBT can be a good first step for people who do not immediately need to begin a course of medication but do want to try some form of treatment.

This week’s recipe:

Mixed vegetable pasta sauce

This is a family recipe, sort of; the point to which it can actually be called a recipe is debatable. It really doesn’t matter what vegetables you use, as long as you give them enough time to cook, but I’ve listed what we usually use when making this below. If you prefer not to cook with oil, it’s fairly easy to just use the juice from the tomatoes to cook the vegetables (in this method, add all the vegetables, including the tomatoes, at the same time).

Ingredients:

1 can tomatoes

1 zucchini

~1 cup mushrooms

½ yellow onion

Olive oil Pasta (cavatappi tastes especially good with this sauce, for whatever reason)

1. In a small saucepan, add the pasta and enough water to fully cover the pasta. Salt heavily and bring to boil. Cook 10 minutes.

2. While pasta is boiling, peel and dice the zucchini and onion into small chunks

3. Wash and slice the mushrooms

4. In a skillet, sauté the mushrooms, onion, and zucchini in olive oil until the onions are translucent, then add the tomato sauce

5. Stir well with a wooden spoon, then add the pasta once cooked.

6. Remove from heat and serve immediately. Grate parmesan on top, or add salt and pepper, if desired. The Gray Area: A review of “Stairway to Heaven” Henry Gray [email protected]

Live contain either whole or pieces of concerts that are reformatted and sold as complete albums for home consumption. Live albums have existed for quite some time. I went digging through my music library for my favorite live . The result? Led Zeppelin’s “The Song Remains the Same Live at MSG 1973.” It is an indisputable fact that Led Zeppelin is one of the greatest rock bands of all time. Jimmy Page on guitar, Robert Plant on vocals, John Bonham on drums and John Paul Jones on bass combined to form the pinnacle of rock music. Commercially, they are one of the bestselling bands of all time with their studio album Led Zeppelin IV certified at 23x Platinum by the RIAA for selling 23 million copies in the United States alone.

The live album is a patchwork of recordings made over a three concert engagement at Madison Square Garden in July 1973. After being released several times – even once as a movie with footage from the concert – the album reached its final form in September 2018 when Jimmy Page remastered the recordings.

The depth of this album is absurd. From the opening track “Rock and Roll” to the 30 minute rendition of “Dazed and Confused” and the 14 minute “Whole Lotta Love” closer, Page’s guitar rips, Bonham’s cymbals crash, Plant’s vocals pierce and Jones’ bass punches. It would take a full dissertation to give adequate thought to the entire concert and album, so instead, I will restrict my focus to the one song on the album that any person with ears has heard — “Stairway to Heaven,” a rendition that is a whole other beast.

Plant opens the ballad by casually reminding the crowd that he thinks “this is a song of hope” while Page gently plucks the 12 strings on his Gibson EDS-1275 double neck guitar. It is a calm and collected song to this point; the gentle mood of Page’s guitar is highlighted by Jones’ careful piano notes. Critically, Bonham lays off the kit completely to give space to the ethereal composition. The introduction of the song creates an open and wide space in one’s imagination.

After two minutes, Page quickens the pace. The force of his guitar gets a bit heavier, though, again, he is careful not to overpower the vocals and the receding piano. Where Plant sets accents on some lyrics, Page matches the tone with his 12 strings. The tempo of the song grants Plant the opportunity to inlay improvised lyrics between planned verses, like when he casually asks the crowd, “does anyone remember laughter?” four minutes into the song. On the studio album version, most people notice the song’s transition from folk music to rock and roll when Bonham comes in with the percussion and Plant memorably sings “If there’s a bustle in your hedgerow / Don’t be alarmed now.” Now, the direction of the song changes; where the song was wide and open before, here it has tightened to a sharp point. Something is building, and Page is getting ready to release it. And then, Plant braces us with his words “Dear lady, can you hear the wind blow.” Page lets us know exactly what that wind is and how hard it is about to blow. From here on out Page makes a one-man assault on the guitar that results in the greatest solo in the history of stringed instruments. Please, slam that volume selector all the way up.

From 6:08 to 6:33, he builds the solo on the top 12 strings of his double neck guitar. He is thoughtful and unhurried. His sound is clear and the motion is upward both sonically, as the notes build higher, and visually, because at this point he physically brings the entire neck of his guitar vertical to his cheek.

And then there is magic. At the precise moment of 6:35, Jimmy Page holds his note while he changes the output on the guitar from the 12 string neck to the traditional 6 string one. At this precise moment there is an audible gap in the sound which takes the form of a quick, but somehow warm, pop, and the song takes a most deliberate turn to an unforgettable rock masterpiece.

Highs hit unexpected lows, speed meets unanticipated delay, and red-hot power gives way to necessary relief. There is one certainty, though. This improvisation is not on the studio album. No, this genius is live and in the flesh — it something which cannot be bottled in the recording booth of a lonely studio. This is human energy that comes only through the heat of a thirty thousand person crowd channeled through a genius with insanely loud amplifiers. Of course, the final verse wraps up the song perfectly with force and beauty. The song that began with a whimper ends with a bang powerful enough to bring down the Hindenburg. The Gray Area: A review of “Midnight Bloom”

By Henry Gray [email protected]

There is something special about tension in music that makes us sit up in our chair and lean into the sound. , composed of British guitarist and American vocalist , are expert crafters of this component and deliver it to us time and time again in myriad ways, both in live performances and recorded albums. Their 2008 album , is a case study of sonic tension and its many forms.

Stated plainly, Hince is one of the most underrated guitarists in the post-classic rock era. From his Höfner 169 to his Supro Ozark 1560S, he commands attention with snappy rhythms that contain thick layers of his trademark sound. Hince has adapted his style out of necessity; between the band’s most recent two albums, Hince lost the use of his fretboard middle finger. The guitarist retooled his playing style to avoid using that finger, and he now plays with an iconic middle finger raised perpendicular to the fretboard. From his vintage boots, tight leather pants, gorgeous scarves and shimmery jackets, Hince is the quintessential modern British rockstar who knows precisely how talented he is.

There is no better match for Hince than Mosshart. With a powerful voice and dynamic range, Mosshart commands attention at center stage during the band’s performances. While managing to belt out lyrics with precision, she dances erratically and feeds the crowd endless energy. When one sees Mosshart on stage, one understands there is absolutely nothing she’d rather be doing than performing her art with Jamie on her right-hand side. From their earliest concerts when they performed as VV and Hotel, the pair has owned the stage with music and a feeling unlike any other group. Experiencing the Kills live is akin to getting an expensive dinner comped by the chef — you know it was going to be incredible, but it somehow exceeds your expectations in ways words fail to adequately describe.

More than any other album in their discography, Midnight Boom recreates the experience of the band’s live performances in a pre-packaged album format. The album’s defining trait is tension. If you blink you might miss it.

The record beings with “U.R.A Fever,” which intentionally mimics the mysterious overtures that general kickoff rock concerts. In fact, it was their go-to concert opener for several years. The dial tone that introduces the song quickly devolves into a quiet, line for line exchange between Hince and Mosshart. It feels like an energetic lover’s quarrel that crests and recedes with every chorus. Periodically, Hince breaks from the lyrical pattern to let steam off with his guitar. He unveils his now-classic “machine gun” guitar distortion that vividly reminds listeners of vitriolic fights with a partner. The final verse resolves the tension in the first part of the song, as Mosshart and Hince sing together in the plural first person to show that their tense fight has been resolved, even if simply band-aided over.

On the up-tempo and memorable “Cheap and Cheerful,” Mosshart is stunningly plain spoken about their fighting. With a characteristic hair flip, she lets her boyfriend know “I want you to be crazy / Cause you’re boring baby when you’re straight / I want you to be crazy / Cause you’re stupid baby when you’re sane.” It almost feels like she’s picking a fight for the sake of having a fight. It’s as if she’s saying, it doesn’t matter what you are, I need you to be different to keep it interesting, to keep that rock and roll passion.

But, again, the tone of the album recedes, just as it did with “U.R.A Fever,” on the track “Last Day of Magic.” Generally, the song is performed live with Mosshart and Hince locking eyes and taking the sincerity of their music to the next level. The song appears to be the thoughts of someone in a relationship who is considering what a break up would look like and how it would feel. Evidently, it wouldn’t feel great given her imagery of hurricanes and tornados. “Last Day of Magic” is a critical moment in the album where the tension is most palpable. There is strain, there is anxiety, there is love, and there is doubt. What other ingredients could you ask for in a modern relationship?

The moments of tension are plentiful on this album. Absolute gems like “Black Balloon,” “Sour Cherry,” and “Goodnight Bad Morning” all deliver this trademark brand of The Kills’ love and hate, paired with a guitar that is one-part explosive and one-part serene. Hince and Mosshart have an indescribable and real love for music and one another. We’re lucky that their relationship manifests in incredible music that is built for live and at home experiences. Phoebe Schreckinger ‘19: Dear Cheryl

An Unsolicited Opinion: On .05 BAC Laws

By Katherine Moody [email protected]

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 10,874 people died in 2017 in motor vehicles crashes involving drivers with a BAC, or blood alcohol concentration, of .08 g/dL or higher. Those 10,874 people amounted to almost one third of the traffic deaths in 2017.

That more than 10,000 preventable deaths occurred is a tragedy, but the number also reflects the success of a decades-long national effort to reduce alcohol-impaired driving. In 1983, Utah and Oregon became the first states to lower the legal BAC from .10 to .08. In 2000, Congress followed suit and required states to adopt the .08 standard by 2004 or lose federal highway funds. By 2005, all states had instituted the .08 limit.

But more can still be done. The risk that drivers with a BAC between .05 and .079 will be in a fatal single vehicle crash is seven times that of drivers with no alcohol in their system, and NHTSA has endorsed further lowering the legal BAC to .05. It cites research that shows that lowering the legal BAC from 0.10 to .08 resulted in a 10.4% reduction in alcohol- related crash deaths and research that estimates that lowering the legal BAC to .05 would result in an 11.1% reduction in fatal alcohol crashes.

Utah has repeated history by becoming the first state to lower the legal BAC to .05. The law took effect on December 30, 2018.

The legislation caused controversy when Republican Representative Norm Thurston proposed it. The most outspoken opposition came from the restaurant industry.The American Beverage Institute, a trade group that lobbies on alcohol- related issues for restaurants and breweries, has been particularly vocal in its objection; the Institute’s website proclaims it is “leading the fight against 0.05.”

Critics of a lower legal BAC limit often allege that it will hurt the economy and waste police resources, and that the policy is evidence of the ever encroaching “nanny state.”

Members of the restaurant industry worry that a lower legal BAC will cause people to drink less or deter them from drinking entirely when they go out, hurting their bottom line. However, NHTSA notes that while lowering the legal BAC to .08 was associated with fewer alcohol-related traffic deaths, there was no observed change in alcohol consumption. NHTSA also points out that many countries have .05 or lower BAC limits and fewer alcohol-related traffic deaths even though their alcohol consumption per capita remains similar or greater than that in the United States.

The recent proliferation of ridesharing platforms like Uber and Lyft should also reassure those in the hospitality industry. It’s never been easier to go out, drink, and get home safely. There doesn’t seem to be much evidence that a lower BAC limit will deter people from drinking in their local bars and restaurants. As Thurston’s website says, the law “is not about drinking; it is about separating drinking from driving.” And that separation doesn’t require people to change their level of alcohol consumption, just their way home.

Critics of the lower BAC limit also argue that the law will waste police resources and draw police attention away from those drivers who pose the most threat to public safety, the drivers with a .15 BAC or higher. Police in Utah don’t seem concerned. Troopers and officers in Utah are already arresting based on evidence of impairment says Sgt. Nick Street of the Utah Highway Patrol in an NPR report, “that standard is not going to change.” Street believes the law has already begun to work by keeping impaired individuals who might otherwise drive off the road.

The specter of the “nanny state” has also been invoked by some in opposition to the law. But is a lower BAC limit really government overreach? Ultimately, I don’t think so. While I think it’s prudent to be wary of the expansion of government power, I think Utah is acting appropriately in its attempt to save lives and that other states should follow its lead.

The fact of the matter is at .05 BAC, you are impaired. According to the NHTSA, a 160 pound man who has three drinks in an hour will likely reach a .05 BAC. At that level, drivers have, among over things, difficulty steering, reduced ability to track moving objects and a reduced response time to emergency situations. Why are we so comfortable with letting people hurtle down highways driving 4,000 pound cars at this level of impairment? We shouldn’t be. You have every right to go out and have several drinks with dinner, but the facts say that if you choose to drive home, you’re likely a danger to yourself and others. Why should that be your right?

Letter to the Editor By Carlos Piedrasanta Jr. [email protected]

This past week I was walking to the JRC after class when I ran into someone that I had met a few days ago. We began chatting, asking how each other’s days were going, even though it was only 10 a.m. and I had woken up an hour ago. I don’t remember how we got on the topic, but somehow we began talking about Posse. I told them what it was, who was in my Posse, and my experiences so far. Then, right as they crossed 8th Avenue to go to class in Noyce, they asked me, “what’s it like being the only white person in Posse?” Unable to answer, I pretended not hear them amid all the noise and walked into the JRC. I immediately began to feel an emotion I was all too familiar with, so I frantically began to look for a distraction, repeatedly telling myself “don’t let it happen…don’t let it get you” — but it was too late. Desperate to regain control, I reached into my pocket and grabbed my phone. With blurred vision and trembling hands, I quickly tried to call my father. Voicemail. I try again. One ring. “Please pick up.” Three rings. “Please, dad.” Five rings. Pause, and a second later I hear my father’s familiar greeting, “Hola, Carlitos.” We proceeded to have a conversation we have become far too acquainted with; one that concerned not only the consequences of my parents’ decision to bring me into this world, but also a challenge they raised me to confront.

I have talked about my “racial ambiguity” with my parents quite often, and every conversation ends with the same piece of advice: “Don’t ever let the need to fit in keep you from being proud of who you are.” I often forget my parents’ simple words and allow myself to get stranded in the ebb and flow of my racialization, lost in the thought that I will never be “Latino enough” or “white enough.” But the point is not to find where I belong or seek a group that will accept me. Rather, I am responsible for giving voice to the complex history of my family that is often masked by my ever- racialized skin color.

My father is the eldest son of two and lived most of his life in Retalhuleu, a small town in Guatemala. My mother was born and raised in rural New Hartford, Connecticut. She is a middle child of five, and lived with her two parents on an apple orchard for much of her life. Both my father and my mother overcame the financial and educational hardships they faced growing up and accomplished their dreams of becoming the first people in their families to go to college. After finishing her Master’s degree, my mother joined the Peace Corps and was placed in Guatemala. It was during her time in Guatemala that she would meet my father and eventually get married, despite everyone’s disapproval. Around their mid-30s, my father received an award to study at Cornell University, so my parents temporarily moved to Ithaca, New York and lived there for two years before returning to Guatemala. It was during these two years that I was born, and it was only be a few years later until my brother, Stefan, was born in a small hospital in Antigua, Guatemala. My family lived in Guatemala for six years before moving to Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, where we would live for two years. After these two years, we all moved to Maputo, Mozambique, where we would stay for two and a half years before moving to the United States in 2009.

After years of hard work, underserving support, and a little bit of luck, I became a Posse scholar and actualized my dream to go to college. Yet, I was unaware of how challenging Grinnell was going to be. Semester after semester, I struggled to endure the pain as my family’s story and sacrifices, which I so proudly carried on my back, were violently stripped away by the relentless grip of racialization.

Grinnell College often feels like a place strangled by race — a force that disguises inequality and racism by dominating the way we perceive the world and each other. It’s like a coloring book, where we try to fill in each picture day by day, disregarding the nuance and importance within each page. However, my skin color speaks little for my lived experiences. As long as you racialize my existence, you will forever fall short of getting the answer you so desperately want. I guess that’s why I frantically try to escape anytime someone tries to categorize my existence; I want to hold onto to the story of my family and the sacrifices they made to give me this opportunity. I don’t fulfill the illusion of race that filters your perspective, but I’m tired of feeling like I must. Next time I’m walking with you to the JRC, look at the picture before you start coloring it in, or better yet, put down the crayon and just listen.