The Georgetown Voice, 02/14/2020

F E B R U A RY 1 4 , 2 02 0

On February 6, Georgetown became one of the first universities to pledge full divestment from fossil fuels. This marked the culmination of a decade-long push from students.

GEORGETOWN’S LONG PATH TO DIVESTMENT

By Annemarie Cuccia

Contents

February 14, 2020 Volume 52 | Issue 11

4

Celebrating 50 Years

editorials

Get Lost, Jack Evans Say No to Cashless Policies

5

news

Point in Time Count Surveys Homeless Population SARAH WATSON

6

cover story

Georgetown’s Long Path to Divestment ANNEMARIE CUCCIA

Editor-In-Chief Noah Telerski Managing Editor Katherine Randolph news

Executive Editor Features Editor News Editor Assistant News Editors

8 11

12

14

Ask That “Dumb” Question

Ethics Labs, Ivory Towers, and the Philosophy of Change

Looking Forward: What’s In Store For The Rest Of The Men’s Basketball Season

voices

SARINA DEV

feature

ELIZABETH PANKOVA

↑

Deadheads to Doctors PAUL JAMES

10 Lessons from Aristotle: The Accidents of Long Distance

“We often just think of philosophy as dealing with timeless questions...But even in dealing with timeless questions, we make innovations in our theory.”

sports

Despite Heavy Losses, Women’s Basketball Looks to Keep Competing TRISTAN LEE

sports

Executive Editor Sports Editor Assistant Editors Halftime Editor Assistant Halftime Editors

Will Shanahan Tristan Lee Nathan Chen, Jake Gilstrap Ethan Cantrell Arshan Goudarzi

design

Josh Klein Insha Momin, Cade Shore Sean Ye Allison DeRose, Alex Giorno, Neha Malik Staff Designers Deborah Han

Executive Editor Spread Editors Cover Editor Assistant Design Editors

copy

Copy Chief Sophie Stewart Assistant Copy Editors Maya Knepp, Julia Rahimzadeh Editors Christopher Boose, Jennifer Kret, Stephanie Leow, Maya Tenzer, Kristin Turner

multimedia

Sarema Shorr Panna Gattyan Anna Sofia Neil John Picker

online

Executive Editor Cam Smith Social Media Editor Eli Lefcowitz

business

on the cover F E B R U A RY 1 4 , 20 20

General Manager Maggie Grubert Assistant Manager of Alice Gao Alumni Outreach

support

On February 6, Georgetown became one of the first universities to pledge full divestment from fossil fuels. This marked the culmination of a decade-long push from students.

The opinions expressed in The Georgetown Voice do not necessarily represent the views of the administration, faculty, or students of Georgetown University, unless specifically stated. Columns, advertisements, cartoons, and opinion pieces do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editorial Board or the General Board of The Georgetown Voice. The university subscribes to the principle of responsible freedom of expression of its student editors. All materials copyright The Georgetown Voice, unless otherwise indicated.

contact us

2

photo courtesy of georgetown university dance company

THE GEORGETOWN VOICE

Executive Editor Juliana Vaccaro De Souza Leisure Editor Skyler Coffey Assistant Editors Emma Chuck, Anna Pogrebivsky, Abby Webster Halftime Editor John Woolley Assistant Halftime Editors Lucy Cook, Chetan Dokku, Samantha Tritt

Executive Editor Podcast Editor Assistant Podcast Editor Photo Editor

PG. 12

editor@georgetownvoice.com Leavey 424 Box 571066 Georgetown University 3700 O St. NW Washington, DC 20057

Leina Hsu Amanda Chu Paul James, Max Zhang Inès de Miranda Sienna Brancato, Delaney Corcoran, Annemarie Cuccia, Emily Jaster, Inès de Miranda, Lizz Pankova, Katherine Randolph, Cam Smith, Noah Telerski, Jack Townsend

leisure

LUCY COOK

carrying on

SAM HOAG

Executive Editor Voices Editor Assistant Voices Editor Editorial Board Chair Editorial Board

GUDC Spring Concert Creates Fervor Through Physicality

9

voices

opinion

leisure

SKYLER COFFEY

Caroline Hamilton Annemarie Cuccia Roman Peregrino Darren Jian, Ryan Remmel, Sarah Watson

GEORGETOWN’S LONG PATH TO DIVESTMENT

By Annemarie Cuccia

“Making History” SEAN YE

Associate Editors Tim Adami, Delaney Corcoran, Olivia Stevens Contributing Editors Sienna Brancato, Rachel Cohen, Dajour Evans, Brynn Furey, Anne Greer, Emily Jaster, Julia Pinney, Lizz Pankova, Jack Townsend Staff Writers Nathan Barber, Maya Cassady, Jason Cuomo, Steven Frost, Steven Kingkiner, Lily Kissinger, Jaden Kielty, Bella McGlone, Orly Salik, Anna Savo-Matthews, Isaac Solly, Timmy Sutton, Aaron Wolf, Katie Woodhouse

Page 3

An eclectic collection of jokes, puns, doodles, playlists, and news clips from the collective mind of the Voice staff.

→ TIM AND LIV'S QUIZ

→ OVERHEARD AT GEORGETOWN

Could you survive in France?

“And I was sitting there with a dead raccoon on my lap, totally out of my mind...”

1. How good is your French? a. Croissant b. I switched to Spanish in ninth grade c. Um, I’m in the SFS (proficient) d. Native speaker, my mom is from ~Paris~

3. Should you say hello to a stranger on the street? a. Absolutely b. Maybe? If they seem friendly c. Probably not d. Don’t even make eye contact; take your espresso à emporter and run

2. What is an appropriate time to eat dinner? a. 6:15 p.m. b. 7 p.m. c. 8:05 p.m. d. 21h30

4. How many rats do you encounter on a daily basis? a. None b. A couple c. Dozens d. Several have been living in my Vil A kitchen, inventing elaborate recipes #anyonecancook Check your results at the bottom of this page!

→ ALLISON’S ANIMAL DOODLE

Shelldon the Turtle → IM SPORTS

Photo of the Week

Despite losing to the men’s soccer team in the intramural final, Voice Sportz scored more in one game than the Hoyas allowed during their entire national championship season.

→ PLAYLIST

→ HALFTIME PROMO

Halftime's List of Loooove

Caroline O’Daly’s “A 14-Hour Journey Inside O’Donovan’s”

1. Lover Taylor Swift 2. Stupid in Love Melt 3. Love of My Life Queen 4. All My Loving The Beatles 5. Lover Come Back City and Colour 6. Cosmic Love Florence + The Machine 7. XO Beyoncé 8. Your Love The Outfield 9. Run Away With Me Carly Rae Jepsen 10. Your Song Elton John

Follow the spiritual journey (and gradual mental decline) of Caroline O’Daly as she narrates her experience in Leo J. O’Donovan Hall for 14 hours straight. This tale is not one for the faint of heart; if you think you’re prepared, witness her account at georgetownvoice.com

→ GOSSIP RAT

La Croix Crisis Despite the fact that La Croix is a FULLY FRENCH NAME, there is not a single can to be found anywhere in the country of FRANCE (or also Italy).

What the hell? How are we expected to hydrate ourselves with normal water? From the tap? Or a bottle? Like peasants? We think not.

The lack of La Croix in both Italy and France is a true travesty. We implore these countries to seriously rethink their beverage import priorities and get some lightly flavored sparkling water up in here—STAT. The audacity of Italy not to stock the brand’s new Limoncello flavor is, quite frankly, mind-boggling, and the absence of chilled cans of Pamplemousse sitting alongside Orangina and San Pellegrino in the refrigerated sections of Lyonnaise épiceries is, in our humble opinion, a betrayal of the utmost kind.

In the meantime, Tim and Liv will hydrate with, like, wine or something?

Espresso? Campari? We guess? Whatever, see you bitches in August.

You know you love hot people (us) and really, truly, hate that rat, xoxo Gossip Rat

Mostly a’s: You’re bound to tutoie someone you should really vouvoie within hours of landing at De Gaulle...just stay home. Mostly b’s: Maybe dip a toe in with Montréal first and save France for next year. Mostly c’s: Pack your bags. Mostly d’s: You’re already in France; put this quiz down and go buy a baguette!

turtle by allison derose; lacroix rat by tim adami; im photo by jake gilstrap; heart by katherine randolph; leo’s photo by the voice

Liv is living in Lyon this semester and the change in culture has been a true adjustment. Take this quiz to find out how long you would last in France!

FEBRUARY 14, 2020

3

EDITORIALS

Get Lost, Jack Evans

F

or 10 glorious days in January, Ward 2 and D.C. were rid of Jack Evans. Now, Evans is running for his old seat, and a split field of Democrats threatens to reelect him. It is up to them and the voters to send Evans packing.

Georgetown’s former member of the D.C. Council had been investigated twice for ethics violations. As chairman of the board of WMATA, D.C.’s public transit authority, Evans failed to report his conflicts of interest. When that information became public, Evans agreed to leave his post as chairman at the end of his term. After the Council’s investigation, which started after WMATA’s became public, the entire Council voted to move toward expelling Evans.

And still, he refused to resign.

Since Evans joined the Council in 1992, he has represented an older, more pro-business strain of D.C. politics than many of his colleagues. These investigations revealed that business dollars had infected his politics. Evans took money in exchange for information and the influence he had built over a three-decade career in D.C. politics.

On the cusp of expulsion, more than a month after the Council moved toward removal, he resigned on Jan. 17, already talking about running again. And once again, Evans’s name will appear on the ballot, running in the special election to fill the seat on the Council he just vacated.

Evans’s most potent threat comes from the five Democrats who are running against him. But because there are so many candidates, Evans has a chance of squeaking by a divided electorate. For the sake of keeping Evans out of his old seat, the candidates should coordinate and coalesce behind one campaign. The Democrats must make sure voters understand the risks of supporting an underdog instead of someone who poses a stronger challenge to Evans. His corruption stretches from his service on the Council to his time on WMATA’s board. Now is our chance to end it, and we must not let it pass.

Evans served as chairman of the board of WMATA from 2015 until 2019. From the start, Evans took an interest in parking. But WMATA’s 2019 investigation revealed that a parking company had been paying him and that he had taken official actions on that company’s behalf.

In 2015, Laz Parking won a contract with WMATA to operate some of the authority’s parking operations.

Before long, Evans started questioning the propriety of the bid process Laz had won. He asked WMATA’s inspector general for a reinvestigation of the process after the first one did not vindicate him. When that investigation failed to return the result he wanted, he asked for yet another.

Meanwhile, the CEO of Colonial Parking, a competing parking company, was paying him $50,000 a year for “consulting” services.

Evans acknowledged that Colonial “prompted” his attempts to discredit Laz, the investigation report says.

By his own admission, he sold his influence to a private company and didn’t put his clients on his financial disclosure forms.

WMATA’s code of ethics bars this kind of pay-for-play and even the appearance that there might be a conflict of interest.

He deceived his colleagues and the public and used his office to extract money from companies eager to win public business. After The Washington Post leaked a report from the WMATA investigation in June 2019, Evans agreed to leave his position with WMATA at the end of his term as chairman. But on the Council, he carried on like nothing had changed.

4

THE GEORGETOWN VOICE

Following the WMATA scandal, the Council launched its own investigation. A flood of new examples of corruption emerged. Without listing his clients so that he would be forced to recuse himself from public business, Evans took at least $400,000 in consulting fees. In one instance, he accepted 200,000 shares of stock in Digi Media, which operates digital signs and media in the District, and then proposed legislation that would benefit the company. According to the report, Evans says he later returned the stock.

As his corruption was exposed, Evans’s Council allies abandoned him. Eventually, the Council voted unanimously on Dec. 3 to proceed toward expulsion. Before he could be expelled, he resigned.

While there are five other Democrats running for Evans’s old post, there is no clear leader. In a twist that stuns no one but should enrage us all, Evans—by the sheer power of name recognition—is the leading contender for the Council seat he vacated not even one month ago. His opponents are both his biggest threat and his way back to the Council. Their first priority must be denying Evans reelection.

They must not let an intra-party scuffle return Evans to the Council. Voters must be willing to compromise, to vote for their second choice candidate if necessary, to make sure Evans will not return to public office. Only with a touch of selflessness can these five candidates extend Jack Evans’s ten-day exile into a future free from his corruption. G

Say No to Cashless Policies

I

n the District, restaurants and businesses alike are following an increasing nationwide cashlessness trend, a move that has been met with backlash. At Georgetown, The Corp made the switch in 2018, with all seven campus locations exclusively accepting cashless payment in the form of a GOCard, credit card, or debit card. But some cities are fighting this trend—on Jan. 23, New York City became the latest to ban cashless businesses. D.C. might be next as a bill, the Cashless Retailers Prohibition Act, was introduced in the D.C. Council.

Companies like The Corp or Sweetgreen have claimed going cashless simply means faster transactions, better customer service, and more efficient accounting. However, this editorial board believes cashless business practices discriminate against those who do not have the resources to participate in such transactions and must be banned by the Council.

According to a 2015 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation report, at least 11 percent of D.C. residents do not have bank accounts, a higher proportion of bankless individuals than in most other cities in the country.

Moreover, 27 percent of people in D.C. do not have access to a credit card or any other form of credit. This means up to 190,000 people are unable to pay for goods or services at any business in the city that has gone cashless.

Businesses that do not accept cash discriminate against low-income individuals and people of color, who are more likely not to have bank accounts. The 2015 report shows that in D.C., 20 percent of black households are bankless, compared to just 1 percent of white households.

Whether or not a household has a bank account correlates closely with income. Thirty-five percent of the 55,000 D.C. households making under $15,000 a year do not have a bank account, whereas only 0.5 percent of those

making over $75,000 a year are bankless. Many formerly incarcerated or currently homeless individuals face colossal barriers when it comes to accessing financial institutions. Cashless policies magnify existing racial and socioeconomic inequalities by disproportionately targeting already vulnerable communities.

Those of us who do have debit or credit cards often do not realize how limiting cashless practices can be to those who are unable to obtain them. Without plastic cards, people cannot call a Lyft or get a Postmates delivery. They must pay bills in person or by mail. For many of us, hailing rides without an app seems like a thing from the past and we often do not see how it is a privilege that excludes others.

Cashless business practices also make life even more complicated for undocumented individuals. Immigrants who lack access to a Social Security number and stateissued IDs face tremendous obstacles to opening bank accounts. Even undocumented people who live in states that allow them to obtain official identification often choose not to give their information to financial institutions out of fear of the federal government, especially under this presidential administration, which has been hostile to immigrants since day one.

In a recent interview with the Voice, Hoyas for Immigrant Rights president Arisaid Gonzales Porras (COL ’21) spoke on the difficulties of being an undocumented student on campus. “When The Corp changed to all credit cards, that affects undocumented students because people that are fully undocumented can’t even get a bank statement or a bank account,” she explained. “That probably never even crossed their minds.”

The student-run company is supposed to serve everybody at this university. Instead, by imposing significant burdens on patrons who do not have access to credit or financial institutions, The Corp is ensuring its services are inaccessible to a sizable segment of the campus community.

They should reverse their cashless policy because it disproportionately impacts low-income individuals, undocumented people, and students of color.

Going cashless is a new way for institutions to discriminate broadly and it is not even necessarily to their financial advantage. Not only do cashless businesses risk alienating patrons, but the cost of going cashless might be higher than they realize. A 2011 study showed that when accounting for point-of-sale transaction time, back-office costs, fraud prevention, and the fees card companies charge, cash is actually a cheaper medium for retailers. So while cashless businesses like The Corp may point towards financial motivations for the switch, there is no guarantee that cashless sales result in higher profit motives.

We urge the D.C. Council to pass the Cashless Retailers Prohibition Act, which was reintroduced by Councilmember David Grosso on Feb. 5, 2019. The legislation seeks to prohibit retail establishments in D.C. from refusing to accept cash as a form of payment, and would go a long way in protecting those made vulnerable by cashless practices.

Almost two years have passed since the bill was first introduced in 2018, and it is high time for the Council to hold a vote on this important piece of legislation.

Councilmembers have the opportunity to ensure that marginalized communities do not have to face one more type of discrimination in the form of cashless business policies. We must make financial transactions more accessible for all, and allowing cash to remain an alternative to card payments is a crucial part of that goal. G

By Sarah Watson

V

olunteers shivered as they circled Glover Park, scanned dark alleyways, and scoped out Georgetown’s canal for the second time that night. Ahead, a group of bodies sits perched on a pile of cardboard. Instead of passing by in awkward silence, a volunteer approaches the encampment, sits down cross-legged next to one of the men, and asks “Hello, sir! I am a volunteer for the PIT count; would you be willing to answer some questions for a $10 gift card?” The man sits up, nods, and begins to talk.

Georgetown’s Center for Social Justice (CSJ) participated in the annual Point-in-Time (PIT) national count by surveying the unsheltered homeless population in the Georgetown neighborhood. Groups of volunteers completed routes twice from 10 p.m. to 2 a.m. on Jan. 23. The night of the PIT count was also under a hypothermia weather alert due to temperatures under 32 degrees Fahrenheit, so volunteers used the count as an opportunity to offer socks, hats, gloves, bottled water, and transport to warming stations and emergency shelters for homeless individuals.

Every January, an army of volunteers searches city streets, parks, and suburban areas across the country as part of the PIT count to gather data on homeless individuals and their living conditions. In 2017, approximately 554,000 people in the United States were homeless on any given night, and rates of national homelessness are increasing steadily. The PIT count is currently the foremost national source of information to combat a rising homelessness crisis, but is not without its problems.

Erica Menino, a student in the Nursing Masters program, volunteered with the CSJ census team for the first time this year. For her, the PIT count is the first step toward understanding more about the homeless population and advocacy efforts. “This is an important way to get a handle on the state of homelessness and the conditions people are living in,” Menino said. “To have a good argument for increased resources for homelessness.”

The data produced by the annual count, which began in 2001, is provided to Congress to determine the amount of funding for federal, state, and local homelessness prevention programs. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development requires all continuums of care, local bodies that receive funding for serving homeless populations, to report these annual survey results.

Lindsey Allcock, also in the Nursing Masters program and a volunteer with the university’s homelessness outreach programs since 2012, remarked that data collection is crucial to understanding the full breadth of America’s homelessness crisis.

“It is incredibly important to know how big a problem this is. In order to know what is going on in the District and the country, we need to have an accurate count,” Allcock said.

Brianna Ledsome, the director of the CSJ’s Homeless Outreach program, explained that the PIT count is not

just about funding, but helping communities combat homelessness at the local level. “Point-in-Time counts are important because they establish the dimensions of the problem of homelessness, and help policymakers and program administrators track progress toward the goal of ending homelessness,” she said.

To figure out demographic data, the PIT survey asks willing participants about the number of individuals in their household, how long they’ve experienced homelessness, their age, gender and sexual orientation, race and ethnicity, and veteran and employment status. These questions are not nationally standardized, and some communities may only count the homeless population without collecting more indepth data.

When individuals are unable or unwilling to complete the survey, volunteers report the answers to the best of their observable knowledge, Ledsome explained. They make assumptions about whether the person qualifies as homeless in the first place, as well as their age, race, gender, and other identifiable characteristics. However, Ledsome has found that, in several instances, survey participants are more willing to talk once they are made to feel comfortable.

“Immediately you are going to identify yourself as a volunteer. The first five words automatically change the demeanor of the conversation,” she said. “You are not a random person in Georgetown who is going to call the police on someone for experiencing homelessness. You are not going to criminalize their experience.”

The 2020 PIT census comes at a time of particularly tense relations between the District and its homeless population, with the forced displacement of homeless encampments in the NoMa neighborhood. Individuals experiencing homelessness may find their tents and property removed by police or be ordered to find a new place to sleep.

“Unfortunately, the relationship between the city government and police with folks experiencing homelessness is incredibly tense now,” Ledsome said. “If not more than ever because of the encampment clearings that are happening across the city.”

In addition to those living unsheltered on the street, the PIT survey tries to count all those affected by clearings and living in ninety-day emergency shelters or transitional housing. Unsheltered populations include people spending the night out-of-doors, in vehicles, or in substandard buildings considered unsafe for human habitation. The 2019 PIT count findings indicated that 6,521 people were experiencing homelessness in the District on Jan. 22. Of this group, 4,679 were in emergency shelters, while 1,234 stayed in transitional housing programs and 608 had no shelter at all.

While the PIT count attempts to provide accurate quantitative data, homelessness is more difficult to define than the survey might suggest. Allie Jania, a systems analyst

design by allison derose

and quality assurance specialist at Cherry Street Mission Ministries, argued that the PIT system fails to account for a large number of people experiencing homelessness nationally.

“Due to the transience of the population we serve, it does not break down the specifics. They could be here 360 days a year but because they are not here that one day, they are not counted,” Jania said. The fact the count is conducted in January, with the 2020 count conducted in hypothermia temperatures, may also cause miscounts as individuals are likely to be couch surfing on colder nights.

“They estimated that among 1,700 folks were couch surfing the night of the PIT count in 2019, so maybe they were surveyed the next day or maybe they were not surveyed at all,” Ledsome said.

Another limitation of the PIT count is the self-reported nature of the survey. While the CSJ’s survey offered responses for multiple gender identities, some organizations that conduct the survey only allow individuals to identify as male or female, which can exclude or miscategorize transgender and nonbinary individuals. “Since a lot of these organizations are Christian-based, people are trying to put them into their own boxes,” Jania said.

The survey also asks about a variety of sensitive topics.

The survey inquires if the individual has faced domestic abuse. Other questions may include whether the individual is suffering from mental illness, disability, addiction to alcohol or drugs, or has ever resided in a government institution such as prison, rehab, or a mental health facility.

“We are asking all these people very personal questions, about potentially traumatizing and triggering things. As someone who has worked with psych patients in recent years, I still don’t feel fully trained to deal with these things,” Allcock said. “Yes, we can offer them resources, but we are leaving within ten to fifteen minutes of interacting with this person.”

The PIT census has taken steps to update its system in recent years. The survey has added a component to add physical descriptions and locations in order to follow up with individuals and offer resources.

Jania worries that the PIT count, despite its goal of combatting national homelessness, is struggling to count the people who need to be represented the most. “One thing is that we never receive that data back,” she said. “So while the PIT count may be gathering useful information, we still do not really know the demographics of the local community we serve.”

However, the data the PIT census collects aids communities in combating their homelessness crisis.

Even those not required to participate, such as Cherry Street Mission Ministries, will submit their information because they know the information from the count will increase community resources that bring real help to those experiencing homelessness.G FEBRUARY 14, 2020

5

GEORGETOWN’S

Long Path to

DIVESTMENT

By Annemarie Cuccia G

eorgetown became one of the first private universities to introduce a plan to fully divest from fossil fuels on Feb. 6 following a board of directors vote. The university will phase out investments in publicly traded funds over the next five years and investments in private funds over the next ten.

The announcement from university President John DeGioia marked the culmination of a nearly decade-long push from GU Fossil Free (GUFF), urging the university to adopt a more environmentally friendly investment policy.

Divestment­ —which refers to the withdrawal of all stocks, bonds, or investment funds from an industry, often for ethical reasons—has historically been a tactic for political change. While the term divestment is now commonly used to refer to divestment from the fossil fuel industry, it has been used to generate economic and social pressure on a number of issues, even at Georgetown.

In 1985, students occupied White Gravenor for two weeks, and though 85 activists were arrested in the process, they won a partial divestment of the university from companies invested in apartheid-era South Africa. At that time, one-eighth of Georgetown’s $80 million endowment was in those companies. The university only ended up divesting two million, or about one-fifth of their total investment in the country.

Movements to divest from oil and natural gas industries kicked off in universities at the dawn of the last decade with the first university divestment from Unity College in 2011. More than $11 trillion in assets has been withdrawn from the industry by investors since the movement began.

Georgetown has an endowment of $1.9 billion, over 95 percent of which is invested. Though exact numbers for Georgetown’s current fossil fuel investments are not publicly available, a spokesperson said less than five percent of the endowment is currently invested in or involved with fossil fuels.

GUFF has been advocating for fossil fuel divestment since its founding in 2012, and in 2014 it secured a university divestment from coal. In January of last year, it submitted a proposal to the university to fully divest from all fossil fuel companies, including oil and gas. To expand on their January proposal, GUFF also presented the Committee on Investment and Social Responsibility (CISR) with a detailed policy memo in March 2019 outlining what the divestment process should look like. Given a lack of visible university response to the proposal since March, GUFF brought the issue to the student body in this year’s referendum.

“It seemed like we were being put to the side and stalled,” Victoria Boatwright (COL ’22), one member of GUFF, said. This semester, after they introduced the referendum, the club got their first substantive update in almost a year when university officials told them they would be presenting a modified version of GUFF’s proposal to the board of directors and expected it to pass. They did not tell GUFF when this new policy would be announced, only that the board meeting was also on Feb. 6.

The CISR group that created the proposal included students in the decision making process, a university spokesperson wrote in an email to the Voice. “As with prior

6

illustration by deborah han; design by insha momin

THE GEORGETOWN VOICE

issues, CISR took input from GUFF but ultimately crafted its own proposal that it deemed was feasible.”

When they met this fall, GUFF knew they wanted to show the broadest base of support possible to pressure the university. “Because we know that trying to pressure from all sides is important, with student support, we decided a student referendum would be a good way to do that,” Lucy Chatfield (COL ’22) said.

Hours after the university announced the divestment, voting closed on the student referendum on divestment from fossil fuels. Just over 90 percent of students voted in favor of the referendum, the GUSA Election Commission announced on Twitter.

While GUFF was overwhelmingly pleased to hear the university would be divesting, Boatwright said there was also a tinge of disappointment that the referendum results were overshadowed. GUFF members found out the divestment policy was being announced only 10 minutes before the email was sent out to students.

“The hope was that we would be involved with the entire process,” Boatwright said. “I think that process was just a little odd.” *** But working with the administration to put a proposal before the board would have been unheard of when GUFF was founded eight years ago. Celia Buckman (SFS ’21) described the original members as “radical activists.” In 2015, they interrupted an event with World Bank president Jim Yong Kim in Gaston Hall during a portion on climate change. The three students, who were charged with Code

of Conduct violations, wished to use the platform Kim had to spread their message. They regularly held rallies and sitins in the president’s office.

Eventually, the group’s tactics turned to the GUFF model seen today. The first full divestment proposal was submitted in 2014 and called for the university to divest from the 200 largest fossil fuel companies. In 2015, the university responded by announcing they would be divesting from coal. Most recently, the university announced they would divest from tar sands in 2018, following a proposal from GUFF. Through the experience of fighting for coal divestment, GUFF realized there were no concrete processes for submitting proposals regarding the endowment. The group helped write bylaws for CISR, which had been given almost no guidance since its founding 30 years before. The CISR website describes its mission as “making recommendations as to the university’s voting of shareholder proxies as well as considering written proposals from members of the Georgetown community on issues related to socially responsible investment.”

In accordance with this mission, the university implemented a Socially Responsible Investing policy which was approved in 2017. According to the Georgetown Investment Office’s website, the policy serves to ensure investments are aligned with social justice and the common good.

Though university officials said it was coincidental that they made the announcement on the same day as the referendum, they credited GUFF for bringing forth the proposal in its announcement, nearly every measure of which was adopted by Georgetown. “Many members of our community contributed to our ongoing conversations around the impact of climate change and helped to ensure many perspectives were brought to the dialogue about divestment,” the announcement read.

In addition to divestment, the university promised to actively seek investments in the renewable and clean energy industry. “The university will continue to make investments that target a market rate of return in renewable energy, energy efficiency and related areas,” a Feb. 6 press release on read.

A university spokesperson described these steps as part of a larger university effort to invest in sustainable energy use on campus, which also includes the addition of electric GUTS buses and solar panels for the downtown Capitol Applied Learning Lab center.

On Jan. 16, CISR unanimously recommended the university divest and largely adopted GUFF’s recommendations. It promises a full divestment in 10 years rather than the five the group originally demanded, due to the time it takes to remove funds from private investments, and allows for some exceptions to the policy on a case-bycase basis if an otherwise promising investment has limited exposure to fossil fuels. The university did not provide a specific percent that would be considered, but assured it would be limited.

The university said they would be defining fossil fuel companies as those whose primary business is the extraction and sale of oil and natural gas. It does not include the development of clean energy standards or include students in the decision-making process, as proposed by GUFF. But some students were skeptical about the effects divestment would actually make. In a Jan. 20 GUSA Senate meeting, Sen. Harrison Nugent (SFS ’20) questioned

the efficacy of the referendum in actually decreasing investment in fossil fuels. “At the end of the day, global demand for fossil fuels aren’t really decreasing drastically

by Georgetown University divesting,” he said.

“People will buy Exxon Mobil shares... it’s more that it should be socially unacceptable to buy Exxon Mobil shares.”

Buckman addressed this concern and others at the teach-in GUFF hosted on divestment and environmental justice a week before the referendum. She acknowledged that divestment may not reduce the profits of most fossil fuel companies. But she says that’s not the point of the movement. “People will buy Exxon Mobil shares,” she said, “It’s more that it should be socially unacceptable to buy Exxon Mobil shares.”

GUFF is used to responding to this argument. They’re also used to people asking if divestment will reduce the size of the endowment. According to Chatfield, in most cases, divestment does not make endowments smaller.

A 2019 study by C.J. Williams and Christopher Marsicano on the impact of divestment on university endowments bears out Chatfield’s claim. Though the study is fairly preliminary and cannot offer an analysis of longterm impacts, it found neither full nor partial divestment has any discernible effect on the endowment—either positive or negative. “Divestment does not appear to limit endowment returns in any of the institutions for which we conducted the synthetic control analysis,” Williams and Marsicano wrote.

This is potentially because oil and gas stocks have been decreasing in value over the past few years. According to a May 2019 Bloomberg article, clean energy has provided 50 percent returns to shareholders since January 2017, whereas oil has provided only 15 percent.

The University of California system credited this low return for its divestment from fossil fuels in September 2019. “We believe hanging on to fossil fuel assets is a financial risk,” wrote Jagdeep Singh Bachher, UC’s chief investment officer, and Richard Sherman, chair of the UC

Board of Regents’ Investments Committee, in an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times. “The reason we sold some $150 million in fossil fuel assets from our endowment was the reason we sell other assets: They posed a long-term risk to generating strong returns for UC’s diversified portfolios.”

While the finances were the motivating factor for the UC system, GUFF and their supporters were firmly focused on the environment. Sadie Morris (SFS ’22) explained to students gathered at the teach-in that GUFF’s driving motivation was environmental responsibility. “Our fight is about climate change, the climate crisis, and the fossil fuels companies that are making the crisis,” she said.

Though the movement began eight years ago, Morris sees divestment as an urgent issue. “Right now is such an important moment for divestment, because the climate crisis is intensifying, and that’s something we probably don’t have to tell you,” she said. “You can look around our world today and see it happening right before our eyes.”

In the week leading up to the referendum, GUFF members and their supporters blanketed the campus in blue and orange posters and chalked Red Square. A Facebook filter urging a yes vote on the referendum popped up on students’ profile pictures.

Before joining GUFF, Boatwright had seen change as something that originated with institutions.

“I had always thought that individual action was important but not what would instigate change,” she said.

“GUFF has taught me how to be part of a movement.”

In the last year, divestment movements have intensified at campuses around the country. Two hundred fifty students rushed the field at the Harvard-Yale football game, urging their universities to divest from all fossil fuels. On Feb. 4, the Harvard Faculty Senate decisively voted in favor of the university divesting from all fossil fuels. Student representatives from all 14 schools in the Big Ten passed a resolution in support of divestment in late January.

Chatfield said Georgetown is in a unique position to initiate a wave of divestments from universities. The university’s prestigious reputation, combined with its Jesuit foundation, means Georgetown’s divestment could start a wave, according to Chatfield. “Other schools and other movements get to use that as hey, Georgetown divested, and this was huge and it’s doable,” Chatfield said.

“That can lead a path for others.”

According to Boatwright, GUFF plans to share what they have learned about divestment advocacy with groups at other universities, passing on the knowledge shared with them.

Buckman highlighted the importance of the work that was done by previous GUFF members, from protesting to sitting in meetings.

“Even though we evolved a lot as a group, everything they did was essential for us,” she said.

Moving forward, GUFF hopes to clarify the process students must go through to propose changes to the endowment and ensure the university delivers on its promised divestment timeline. Though Boatwright acknowledges GUFF will have a bit of an existential struggle about their place at a fossil free campus, she wants to take time to just think about the progress that has been made. “This was the biggest hurdle that we as a campaign could have possibly cleared,” she said.

Two days after the announcement, Buckman was still slightly in shock. “I still can’t believe that we really divested,” she said. “Right up until our meeting with administrators, I truly believed I would graduate and Georgetown would still have this investment.” G FEBRUARY 14, 2020

7

LEISURE

GUDC Spring Concert Creates Fervor Through Physicality SKYLER COFFEY

T

he minute members of Georgetown University Dance Company (GUDC) take their places for rehearsal; they are no longer students. An intense focus grips their gaze as they immediately command the energy and focus of the entire room.

Whether two or 20 dancers share the floor, no space seems too large nor any movement too subtle. Performers and onlookers are rapt with the all-consuming power of dance.

On Feb. 21 and 22, GUDC will treat audiences to its Spring Concert in the Davis Performing Arts Center’s Gonda Theatre.

The concert aims to showcase the months of work members of GUDC put into honing their craft. In addition to hours upon hours of rehearsals, the group also takes two classes a week purely to work on technique.

“I think that overall it just makes us stronger dancers and keeps us moving on that preprofessional track, which is awesome,” dancer Courtney Smith (COL ’21) said.

Smith was abroad during the fall semester and managed to learn all of the choreography for the spring concert in a month. The ensemble consistently strives to polish, experiment, and innovate.

Their upcoming show features a diverse array of styles and genres, choreographed by professional guest choreographers, students, and faculty. From ballet to jazz to contemporary, dancers display all of the talent and ideas they have to offer.

Choreographer Olivia Kleier’s (SFS ’22) piece, “Row of Houses,” starts with four students huddled together on the ground.

Gradually, they rise and begin to push, pull, and lift each other, expanding and contracting with the melodic music. Abruptly, the piano and sweet voice stop as a rock-infused

track takes over. Kleier uses different styles of dance to show contrast and evolution: Imbued with fresh swagger, the dancers begin strutting in line, even blowing a jaunty kiss at the mirror once they reach the front. Their movements become jerkier, with large lunges and spinning kicks as the floor bounces from the newfound impact.

Student choreographers also experiment with a variety of styles to showcase their creativity. Student Director Ethan Knecht (SFS ’20) choreographed “E-Words, or Joy in Four Parts.” The playful, jazzy piece aptly radiates positive energy. “I have a personal life philosophy that even when you’re having a bad day, you can always find a positive no matter what,” he said. “I find that a lot when I listen to this music, this music instantly cheers you up so I want to channel that through the dance.”

The number starts uniquely, with each dancer seated on folding chairs arranged in a line. Before the music even begins, the performers have created their own upbeat, chaotic cadence by drumming on the chairs’ metal frames. Once they rise, each dancer beams as they execute the shoulder rolls, sudden jumps, and tight side-steps of Knecht’s Fosse-esque choreography.

Another experimental standout is Christina Dropulic’s (COL ’22) “Fjaka!”

The playful piece is set to an airy French song and celebrates family and community.

Partners take turns sharing the stage and commanding attention, orbiting around each other. In a lighthearted touch, some dancers peer out from behind their partners, and, as the piece nears its end, salute the audience and the rest of the ensemble.

Dropulic’s focus on partner work highlights human connection and relationships.

8

photos courtesy of georgetown university dance company; design by alex giorno

THE GEORGETOWN VOICE

She reimagines the general dynamic of an ensemble by presenting the audience with more intimate demonstrations.

The Spring Concert boldly takes on a more serious and complex tone as well, especially in pieces created by faculty and guest choreographers. The show begins with a number called “Lost and Finding,” which the ensemble worked on with their fall guest artist Tiffanie Carson, an assistant professor of dance at the Shenandoah Conservatory at Shenandoah University. The dancers begin hunched in a circle around one member of the ensemble standing straight up, and the group inhales and exhales around its center to a pulsating effect. Eventually, the formation grows apart, alluding to the image of a flower in bloom. This piece, like all of those to follow, expertly plays with different levels of elevation. Different groups within the number rise and fall—some spiral down, others resiliently ascend. Throughout the concert’s many numbers, the ensemble rarely acts in complete unison. Instead, dancers are given slight variations and mini solos, emphasizing that the group is cohesive but not monolithic.

Raina Lucas, GUDC’s faculty artistic director, also explores a combination of fragility and fluidity in her piece “The Container,” which starts off the show’s second act by immersing the audience in the visual dynamics of a life-sized music box.

In an eerily beautiful display, one dancer slowly turns in the midst of frozen bodies locked in their poses. Eventually, beat-heavy music consumes the original sparse music box theme. Even as the pace of the piece picks up, the dancers remain graceful in their ballet-based movements. Their arms arc upward before they fan out in unified diagonal lunges, all while maintaining a

sense of calculated grace. This seamless visual contrasts with the much harsher soundscape to fantastic effect, creating an engaging juxtaposition.

The concert closes with a piece choreographed by GUDC’s guest spring artist Stephanie Dorrycott, an artistic director at Motion X Dance DC, titled “Fate of Choice.” The number aims to examine questions of free will, destiny, and decision.

In one of the most fascinating performances, dancers use arm isolations to create a pulsating visual texture. The piece does not have a moment of explosion like some of its predecessors, but rather slowly builds an enticing tension. Eventually, dancers soar overhead in lifts while others rapidly move across the stage in an elongated period of heightened momentum.

Once the show comes to a close, the students’ heavy breathing is the only sound that remains as the music fades out. Almost like coming out of a trance, the dancers become students once more, clutching water bottles and discussing logistics for the next weekend. The members of GUDC have left everything on the dance floor. G

VOICES CARRYING ON: VOICE STAFFERS SPEAK

Deadheads to Doctors PAUL JAMES

“P

sychedelics are to the study of the mind what the microscope is to biology and the telescope is to astronomy,” transpersonal psychology pioneer Dr. Stanislav Grof said. A substantial contingent of psychologists and scientific researchers, Grof included, believe there are unplumbed depths to the potential of psychedelic-assisted treatment, specifically MDMA (“ecstasy” or “molly”), psilocybin (found in magic mushrooms), and mescaline (derived from peyote cacti), mainly for PTSD, depression, and anxiety. Over a dozen “psychedelic clubs” have sprung up at universities across the country, with students aiming to reopen the cultural discussion about these substances. These organizations, coupled with scientific results, will be responsible for rectifying the conservative attitude toward psychedelics.

A current leader in the field, Rick Doblin, founded the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies in 1986 and spent decades developing data to convince the FDA of the validity of these treatment methods. The current model Doblin puts forth involves three doses of MDMA, with each dose followed by three counseling sessions. The trips last hours, and counselors carefully guide the patient through the experience by asking questions aimed at targeting the root cause of their problem. Doblin believes this method of macro-dosing is more successful than the extended use of smaller doses. In one of his studies about PTSD patients, after 12 months, 68 percent of the group that received these doses of MDMA no longer suffered from PTSD, compared to a 23 percent success rate for the control group.

The need for advanced treatments is painfully evident. According to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, veteran suicides exceeded 6,000 every year from 2008 to 2017 (16.8 per day in 2017), attributed to PTSD. Suicide in the general population has risen to the second-leading cause of death for those aged 10-34, attributed to depression, anxiety and more.

Many of those who live with depression require daily doses of medication that alter their mood and can

Paul James, who wrote this with one hand while strumming his guitar, thinks it would be groovy if Hoyas would go a little more with the flow.

illustration by allison derose

have damaging side effects: increased risk of internal bleeding, insomnia, and bad drug interactions with lithium, which is used to treat bipolar disorder.

This is not the first time the medical field has dedicated itself to proving the viability of these more experimental treatment options. In the 1950s and ’60s, psychedelics were actively used to achieve a variety of results: promoting mental health, conducting research on treatment for trauma and depression, and fostering a sense of connection outside oneself to combat apathetic tendencies associated with some mental illnesses. When these substances, most notably LSD but also mescaline, leaked out of the labs, the hippie counterculture of the anti-Vietnam War movement began to use the drugs recreationally. The U.S. government overreacted, quickly criminalizing psychedelic drugs both in recreational spaces and laboratories, and MDMA began to drop from therapeutic practices as well. The result was a halfcentury setback in research to alleviate some of the most damaging plagues to American society.

An essential component to developing a strong foundation for future studies and treatments are initiatives on college campuses, both professional efforts and university-sanctioned extracurriculars.

Beginning in 2014 with the club at the University of Colorado Boulder, other club chapters have spread as far as UC Santa Barbara and Harvard University, as well as unaffiliated clubs at Princeton, UPenn, and more. With passionate groups of students devoted to the study and discussion of psychedelic substances, these clubs provide a forum for them to openly discuss psychedelic experiences. The clubs’ existence aims to de-stigmatize psychedelic use and dispel misinformation, especially among the age group most inclined to use (and abuse) illicit substances. At the same time, they educate members and advocate for research into the medicinal benefits of these substances, as well as instituting harm-reduction efforts. According to a 2017 poll, the percentage of people in favor of research into psychedelics for medicinal use increased with higher levels of education, a 23-point difference between those with some high school education or a high school diploma and those with postgraduate degrees.

Psychedelics as a whole carry a complicated history. Conservative attitudes in the late ’60s followed by Nixon’s 1971 declaration of a War on Drugs—since then widely accepted as unsuccessful—turned public opinion against further research. Educational initiatives and an increasing number of studies with promising results are beginning to shift the tide. The psychedelics club at CU Boulder, for instance, has sought to explicitly counter this historical narrative, describing its mission as focusing on the “redefinition of our cultural relationship to psychedelic substances. A failed War on Drugs has littered the narrative field with propaganda, stigma, and bad policy.”

Two elements of the club’s safety measures include substance testing and “trip-sitting,” where they provide supervision to guard against potentially dangerous drug experiences. One analysis of MDMA revealed a vast majority of the product was cut with methamphetamines. Safety-promoting efforts like this one, with a genesis in the student community,

have the potential to radically alter the stereotype of irresponsible youth drug use and are the doorway to a culture where the properties of psychedelics can be fairly evaluated alongside those of “conventional” medicines. The club has also focused on creating a space for students to discuss their experiences without judgement. More clubs engaging in these activities, coupling a scientific with a social approach, could give rise to a broad-based support movement and change the way we engage in these conversations today.

Universities also continue to be an important link in the professional research chain of psychedelic substances. Last September, Johns Hopkins University received $17 million in donations to construct a Center for Psychedelic and Consciousness Research, following a similar effort at Imperial College London that led to the first such center worldwide. Centers like these at elite research universities lend legitimacy to the “alternative” approaches for which college students and researchers alike advocate.

Even these advances fail to convince some prominent skeptics. According to the New York Times, Guy Goodwin, who teaches psychiatry at Oxford, remains critical of these approaches and reportedly wrote, “Timothy Leary was a research psychologist before he decided the whole world should ‘Turn on, tune in, and drop out.’ It is best if some steps are not retraced.” Goodwin draws on the cautionary tale of Leary’s research into hallucinogenic substances; his actions, seen as extreme, eventually led to his firing from Harvard and the termination of the Harvard Psilocybin Project. Hopefully the legitimacy of centers such as those at Johns Hopkins and Imperial College London will be able to shift the narrative at higher levels of scholarship, while at the same time, student organizations address the deeprooted cultural falsities.

If the mainstream comes to accept these measures and the FDA approves therapies involving psychedelic substances, psychedelics could fundamentally change the lives of people suffering from depression and other mental illnesses. These drugs remain illegal for recreational use and the FDA only recently classified them as breakthrough treatments. A one-time, three-dose program, though not entirely without its own risks, would replace daily pills, which often have severe side effects and make people feel like lifelong patients. This needn’t be normal; instead, we could use psychedelics as a stimulus for internal examination and personal growth, an aid in helping us better understand ourselves and our connections to the world.

Cultural change is never a solely top-down process, and meaningful scientific advances will also require grassroots support. Academic institutions, where students inevitably encounter these and other substances, seem like an ideal place to begin discussions on the subject.

Georgetown students should be next. With access to a medical campus and its location in an area that has at least legalized marijuana for medical use, it is a logical addition to the growing national network of students motivated to change the conversation about psychedelic treatments.G FEBRUARY 14, 2020

9

VOICES

Lessons from Aristotle: The Accidents of Long Distance SAM HOAG

K

eeping your high school relationship when you go to college is like shuffling a deck of cards. I’ve heard that because there are 52 unique elements to a deck, each time you shuffle you’re creating an order the universe has never seen before. But the deck remains the same, with the same makeup, used for the same game. Just like the deck of cards, your relationship gets mixed up in a way that is impossible to predict, but its core substance remains the same. As I reflect on Valentine’s Day, I’d like to share some lessons I’ve learned through having a long distance relationship for the past six months with the help of Aristotle.

I met my girlfriend Mia the summer before senior year of high school. We went through the college selection process together, editing each other’s Common Application essays, celebrating acceptance letters, and brushing off rejections.

It was always in the back of our minds that we would end up in separate places. Once we decided to attend schools 400 miles away, though, the elephant in the room was born. Throughout the summer, that elephant only grew. What were we going to do come August?

We decided to give long distance a shot.

When we said goodbye for the last time that summer, I found solace in a surprising place: Aristotle’s philosophy. In Categories and Metaphysics, Aristotle describes his theory of substances and accidents to explain the world around us. According to him, the universe is made up of things that go beyond, that supersede reality, originating from true nature: substance.

He calls the concrete apparitions, characteristics, or qualities of these substances “accidents.”

The substance of an object has existed since the beginning of the universe, but its accidents might change throughout time. Take a chair. Maybe the chair is red, or perhaps it is blue. The chair (the substance) is an entity and the color is a feature of the chair (the accident). If you change the color of the chair, it does not stop being a chair.

While his theory no longer holds in modern science, I think it can be used to express truths in the intangible aspects of human experience. Being 400 miles away, it is not the partnership with daily shared experiences that it was during the summer.

However, we still share music through Spotify playlists, just like we’re still in the car together.

The accidents of our relationship changed, but the substance did not.

College is a transformative experience: freedom, personal responsibility, the ability to explore yourself as a person, the last real period 10

THE GEORGETOWN VOICE

of insulation before self-reliant adulthood. She goes to a massive public school in Columbus, Ohio, while I’m at a small, elitist private school in D.C. Though our college experiences in many ways are different, this doesn’t mean we can’t find similarities. Abstract emotions like excitement, nervousness, or loneliness speak to the substance of a relationship, not the accidents. Sharing these feelings through text, FaceTime, or the occasional letter has allowed us to connect, breaching the gap between our location and experiences.

This idea of change over time was one of the first things I learned through my longdistance relationship: Appreciate similarities in different experiences. For example, neither of us is following the path we originally anticipated in college. I came to Georgetown wanting to major in Science, Technology, and International Affairs, and now I’m interested in political writing.

Similarly, she was planning on being a mechanical engineer, but now has found a passion for city planning. We’ve talked a lot about this uncertainty and change. Although our personal accidents may have changed, our substance remains, and it remains connected.

Another way we have dealt with this change is rephrasing how we ask questions, another lesson I’ve learned: communicate intentionally. We say “How are you feeling?” instead of “What are you up to?” We thought it was important to choose a phrase that both conveys care for the other’s well-being while simultaneously respecting their independence. If you’re constantly asking, “What are you up to?” it can seem like you are trying to monitor the other’s actions, or that you’re entitled to a regular report on the other’s status.

By asking “How are you feeling?” you are still able to share feelings and experiences without any subconscious irritation.

While we had discussed long distance quite a bit before move-in day and had come up with some strategies to make this shift in accidents a little easier, it still wasn’t a pleasant transition.

Saying goodbye to the person you had spent every day of your summer with, knowing that the next time you’d be together is Thanksgiving, is impossible to prepare for.

Changing the accidents of most things is usually not an easy process. It’s probably why people think long distance relationships are doomed from the start. Change is frightening and it’s easy to be overwhelmed by accidents shifting around us. People frequently confuse the substance and accidents of relationships in life.

It’s an easy trap to fall into in all relationships, to

Sam Hoag is a first year in the SFS from Cleveland.

Usually a political writer, he decided to write something more personal for Valentine’s Day. Happy Valentine’s Day, Mia!

construe accidents as substance, to lump them together and try to mold something genuine out of it. Some may find themselves in long-distance relationships because they want to go back to the past, or they want someone to talk to when all their friends are gone. These are accidents, not substance.

To avoid this error, I think it’s better to look at the processes of change and try to identify what’s changing: is it something essential, core, immutable, or is it the appearance of that? In the case of my relationship, I knew my surroundings, my tastes and interests, and the people I spent my time with would all change. But none of that was going to change my love for Mia. When I ask Mia how she’s feeling or listen to a song on our shared playlist, I am reminded that the substance of a true relationship is an ever-present and transcendent connection, a partnership cemented in shared experiences. It brings you an understanding of another person while deepening your self-awareness. This is the kind of thing that lives independent of distance, the reason my relationship with Mia remains the same despite the miles between us.

This brings me to my final lesson: grow as we go. For me, this is the most important one, and the hardest. To grow as we go is to believe in what Aristotle has to say, to have faith in the substance of our relationship as the accidents morph. It can be a trying task to paint the chair or shuffle the deck of cards, but the work can bring a new, beautiful view of substance. G

illustration by deborah han

VOICES

Ask That “Dumb” Question SARINA DEV

O

n Feb. 5, the Senate acquitted President Donald Trump. By the end of this sixmonth process, I found myself thinking back to early September, when I Googled seemingly simple questions because I was too afraid to ask them out loud—“What is a whistleblower?” and “Does impeaching a president automatically mean he’ll be removed from office?” The first person I came across who was brave enough to ask these questions aloud was a third grader named Leo. Leo appeared in The New York Times’s podcast “The Daily” in mid-November 2019.

Throughout the 30-minute episode, “A Third Grader’s Guide to the Impeachment Hearings,” host Michael Barbaro and Leo worked their way through his long list of questions concerning the upcoming event. Barbaro repeatedly insinuated that many of the questions Leo posed were questions many adults were too afraid to ask from fear of seeming stupid or ill-informed. He suggested that most people were so uncomfortable with the idea of feeling inferior or making a mistake that it limited them, not only from being politically informed, but also from growing as individuals.

As a Georgetown student, I could relate to this feeling. Arriving on campus, I was instantly overwhelmed by the pre-professional and elitist motives that seemed to propel this student body towards exclusivity for the sake of exclusivity.

Rather than being driven by the unknown, my courses, even the introductory ones, only seemed like opportunities to establish oneself in an academic hierarchy. It was as if I was supposed to have the answers ready before I even knew the questions.

I’m sure I was not the only one. The intellectual curiosity and intrinsic motivation that drives this student population is widely suppressed by a competitive academic environment that adamantly demands perfection. It’s not at all surprising that 30 percent of Hoyas reported stress that hindered their academic performance.

The fear of failure keeps us from dropping that class, leaving that club, and writing about that topic we are genuinely interested in in favor of the one our peers and professors would like more. It pushes us to become resume climbers and stress Olympians. So we take notes, do the work, and subsequently leave our classes behind without remorse, only remembering them by their impact on our GPAs.

Listening to the podcast episode forced me to reflect on my first semester at Georgetown. They say your first year is the time to figure out what you’re interested in. I arrived undeclared in the College, excited to immerse myself in uncertainty and focus on self-improvement and growth rather than the competition that had defined my high school experience. I looked forward to the freedom to be able to change my mind.

Within my first week, however, every new face asked me what my major was, if I was applying to The Corp, to The Hoya, to Blue and Gray, if I wanted to go into investment banking, if I knew what I wanted to do with the rest of my life. As I reused college application essays for club forms, printed a copy of my CV, and never heard a single person reply “undeclared,” I realized that along with making new friends, everyone was also sizing each other up.

As I listened to Leo voice each curiosity with enthusiasm and sincerity, I reflected on why I was so caught up in this mass academic mentality. In a place where asking questions and making mistakes should be the norm, they were taboo.

Third-grader Leo inspired me to pursue my academic curiosities and re-engage with my classes in a more meaningful way. I began to write my final term paper for my World War II history class less concerned about the grade and more mindful of answering the questions I had been dying to ask all semester and turning in an essay I was genuinely proud of.

When I received the paper, I was disappointed with my grade, a natural reaction. However, I soon recognized that just because I didn’t get the score I wanted didn’t mean the words I wrote weren’t worth reading, that all my hard work didn’t count, or that being extremely satisfied

illustration by allison derose

Sarina is a freshman in the College and talks about her home state of Minnesota at least once a day. She is a New Girl and New Yorker enthusiast.

with the content I produced wasn’t enough.

More important than a singular grade, writing that term paper convinced me I wanted to take more English and history courses during my time at Georgetown, even if I ended up in STEM. Contrary to the common assumption that arises in such a cutthroat environment, this shift in mentality doesn’t mean I’ve suddenly become satiated by averageness. Now, instead of measuring my progress solely by my grades and my performance compared to others, I’ve learned to see failure as a learning opportunity rather than an embarrassment. I’ve found this has allowed me to push myself further than I thought I could.

Now, almost a quarter of the way through my second semester, I’ve come to understand that stifling curiosity can endanger the classroom. Given the cost of a college degree, we should be in a place where we make mistakes, learn, and become better people. We regress as an academic institution when people are too afraid to speak up in what should be the safest place to do so.

Being too afraid to ask questions and fail makes us grossly unprepared for the rejection that is an innate part of life. We need to prioritize self-awareness and value ourselves and our work ethics in a way that extends beyond a 4.0 scale. The smartest thing to do may just be to ask the dumb question. G

FEBRUARY 14, 2020

11

ETHICS LABS, IVORY TOWERS,

AND

PHILOSOPHY A

single glance at the Georgetown University Ethics Lab is enough to know it does academic philosophy differently. Their pamphlets, the website, the lab itself all show intentional, consistent branding—sleek, Applestore white, accented with bright neon circles. The Ethics Lab plucks words like “innovation,” “deep learning,” and “industry disruption” from their homes in business school textbooks and startup company mission statements and applies them to a 2,500-year-old tradition of studying the human capacity for goodness.

Maggie Little, director and founder of the Ethics Lab, disagrees. “We often just think of philosophy as dealing with timeless questions,” she said. “But even in dealing with timeless questions, we make innovations in our theory.”

The Ethics Lab is only one effort within Georgetown attempting to grapple with pressures to modernize a traditionally insulated and theoretical discipline. With cash flows to humanities departments drying up, preprofessional pressures rising, and established canons losing authority, philosophy must now reinvent itself.

Philosophy has always been about responding to the messy, granular world, Little says, but the job of the Ethics Lab is to turn those responses into “R&D” (Research and Development, another business term that may not fit familiarly in the mouths of humanities majors). The Ethics Lab was founded in 2012, an offshoot of the Kennedy

Institute of Ethics (KIE). The KIE began asking moral questions about medical research early on, in 1972. As the scope of bioethics has grown, the KIE has also expanded its research to environmental ethics, disability issues, and big data.

In the United States, universities are ambitious about their goals. They aim to unite the opposing objectives of public service and economic growth with enriching intellectual experiences and socially engaged research. But they also churn out future entrepreneurs, financiers, and CEOs, who will elevate the status of their alma mater and compete in the global economy.

But as public funding for higher education shrinks, as universities embrace business principles, and as tuition costs grow, intellectual enrichment without concrete dividends becomes harder to justify. The number of philosophy majors has dropped 15 percent in the past 10 years. It’s become painfully clear that philosophy, along with all the other humanistic disciplines, was birthed in the minds of people who didn’t have to worry about their student loan debt or health insurance, within institutions that knew nothing of endowments and U.S. News & World Report rankings.

In recent years, dozens of think pieces have lamented the impending doom facing the humanities. And while the headlines can be dramatic (“Making Philosophy Matter—

12

design by insha momin

THE GEORGETOWN VOICE

THE

OFI CHANGE

BY ELIZABETH PANKOVA

or Else,” “The Humanities are Dying, Poisoned by Faculty,” etc.), they’re responding to a real problem. In 2011, the University of Nevada, Las Vegas came close to eliminating its philosophy department due to budget cuts. In 2018, Claremont Graduate University closed its department.

According to the American Philosophical Association (APA), at least nine philosophy departments have been threatened with restructuring or elimination since 2010.

The Ethics Lab attempts to address this dilemma by serving a dual purpose—as an educational program within the philosophy department, and as a think tank that advises policy and government organizations and tech companies on various ethics-related issues, from the use of artificial intelligence to political polarization on the internet. The Lab’s courses range from bioethics to political epistemology to environmental ethics, sharing the common denominator of an emphasis on practice, solutions, and real-world applications.

Beyond the trendy aesthetic, the Ethics Lab seems an evolutionary triumph, a display of traits ideal for adapting to the pressures facing philosophy and the other humanities in today’s academic landscape.

“Philosophy is kind of a sinking ship for a lot of reasons, one of those being that it’s existing within this capitalistic university system,” said Shelbi Nahwilet Meissner, an assistant professor in the philosophy

,

E

A

department. Coming from public universities, Meissner knows the pressure budget cuts place on university administrators. “Some administrators will talk about philosophy and how it’s not bringing in money to the university,” she said. “Whether we want to say that’s an ethical way of valuing something doesn’t really matter, because it’s the way the system does it.”

Many professors pointed out that these economic pressures affect students as much as they impact departments and scholars, and they’re right. Students are encouraged to be curious and passionate about learning, but are also constantly reminded of the need to turn themselves into attractive future employees. This makes even the students who go in wanting to study the humanities prioritize economic and practical value.

Though the forces of marketization are doing their fair share to undermine the value of studying philosophy, the crisis in the humanities is not just a financial matter. It’s also a reflection of a deeper moral and epistemological identity crisis about the way philosophical knowledge is produced, by whom, and for what purpose.

“Philosophy is documentedly still the whitest and most male-dominated discipline, and that’s not a coincidence,” Nahwilet Meissner said. “It doesn’t have anything to do with student preferences or student abilities. It has much more to do with the very particular type of tradition and the ideas that it has uplifted.” In 2018, members of the APA were 73 percent male and 75 percent white.

“When people talk about ancient philosophy, someone who works on Buddhist philosophy or maybe teaches Native American philosophy doesn’t usually count, because that’s not what they mean,” she added. By a recent informal count, Meissner is one of only four Native American scholars in the entire U.S. university system who works in a philosophy department.

The homogeneity of the people producing philosophical work throughout history makes it hard for professors to add diverse voices in a genuine way, and students have noticed. “We all have to take ancient and medieval philosophy, which is Plato, Aristotle, and a bunch of Christian monks writing in the Middle Ages,” said Mark McNiskin (COL ’20), a philosophy major. “And then we take early modern philosophy, which is like Kant and Descartes. My professor tried to include some women, but there honestly just weren’t that many writing at the time.”

As many academics have acknowledged, it would be naïve and dishonest to maintain focus on a canon that has been widely accepted as valuable while knowing how many people’s ideas have been excluded from it. It feels equally wrong, however, to reject theory completely and resign philosophical endeavors of defining goodness and ethical behavior to matters of subjectivity or individual taste.

Injecting some empirical certainty and application into theoretical inquiry, then, seems like a good way out of this dilemma. Real-world engagement claims a legitimacy that narratives and theories do not, and Georgetown’s mission of marrying this theory with practice has positioned its philosophy department to weather the pressures of staying relevant.

The humanities have always been a pillar of Jesuit intellectual tradition, but so has service to others.

Engagement with concrete societal problems has permeated the philosophy department through the development of bioethics and the idea of “people for others.”

“I think a lot of the push in our department for focusing on practical problems comes from Georgetown’s social justice

commitments,” said Karen Stohr, an associate professor of philosophy. “There’s this idea of our moral imperative to use whatever skills we have to help people, to alleviate suffering.”

Indeed, activism is an important and growing facet of philosophical research at Georgetown. Philosophy professor Mark Lance, who also helped found the Justice and Peace Studies program, is currently writing a book for activists on how to build a movement that’s actually meaningful and revolutionary. Meissner explores meaningmaking mechanisms in indigenous language activism, and Quill Kukla, another professor in the department, works on issues of sexual consent and agency.

But McNiskin recognized that traditional texts can serve as springboards for perspectives only philosophy can provide. “As much criticism as there is of the canon, it can be an interesting way for people to distance themselves from current discourse on issues and see them in a new light,” he said.

Asking questions about real examples of injustice and being in conversation with marginalized communities certainly helps address the crisis of intellectual legitimacy and dispels tropes of a disconnected and insulated discipline, but it hardly makes philosophy more marketable for students or lucrative for Georgetown.

The Ethics Lab, on the other hand, does. Kevin Berning (COL ’20) spoke to the practical edge Lab classes have. “Bioethics was probably the reason I decided to be a philosophy major. It was really practical,” he said.

“Whenever I go home I get the typical ‘Oh, philosophy, what are you going to do with that?’ And I ask myself the same question. So actually getting to apply the ideas to real issues was nice.”

Empirical reality and application are part of the Lab’s brand. Everything can be counted, and is in a report on the think tank’s first three years—from the number of books in the Lab library (650) and number of visitors to Lab events (1,632), up to the number of Post-it notes “put to good use” over the past three years (68,357). This presentation of smarter, better, faster philosophy is alluring, and not only to students like Berning.

Georgetown alumni have consistently donated to the Ethics Lab, and many of them work in the fields the Lab examines. Past donors include Silicon Valley venture capitalists, insurance company executives, branding consultants, and, perhaps most notably, the CFO of Facebook. The Lab returns the favor by sending graduates to advise the industries they’ve been studying. “We want to help develop the next generation of people that should go into Silicon Valley and be leaders,” Little said.

For Twitter CFO Ned Segal (COL ’96), the budding relationship between philosophy and Silicon Valley is mutually beneficial. “Technology companies can benefit from the knowledge that ethicists can apply to difficult decisions that these companies can be faced with,” he said.

“Ethicists benefit because tech companies help challenge and introduce new issues for the ethics field to consider.”

Little acknowledged the importance of outside donors to the Ethics Lab. “We have ambitious hopes for the Lab and for its capacity to train students in the most pressing ethical issues,” she said. “But it’s all soft money. It’s donor money. So it depends on how our campaign for it goes.”

As technology continues to permeate the most intimate parts of our lives, philosophers and ethicists could indeed provide some useful input. The fact that research on the ethics of data and artificial intelligence is being funded is overall a good thing, Stohr said. “It’s clearly a huge ethical

issue and people haven’t been thinking about it much and there’s a lot of public concern about it.”

But the closer this relationship becomes, the more philosophers have to consider conflicts of interest and financial connections that haven’t historically been worries in their discipline. “In the past, no one has been dying to give philosophers grants, and that’s kind of liberating because it does leave us a little bit freer to do what we want,” Stohr said. “Once there’s money involved, people’s priorities can definitely shift, even if it’s not consciously, it still shapes the questions that are funded.”

With issues surrounding Silicon Valley, journalists and scholars have pointed out that soliciting their own philosophy research and creating internal ethics review boards allow companies to avoid more impartial scrutiny and regulation by the government.

Underlying these concerns is the fear that philosophical inquiry and the internal mechanisms of businesses are incompatible. Tech companies are driven by profit, fast solutions, and the affirmation that their products are ultimately good for society. This doesn’t always mesh well with ethical inquiry, which takes time and often can’t be condensed into a digestible algorithm.

Perhaps most importantly, tech companies mostly ask ethicists to fix bias or problems within their programs, rather than question whether these programs should exist in the first place.

And just like that, the ivory tower is dismantled only to reveal a completely different set of problems, leaving philosophy in a perpetual balancing act.

“Engaged philosophers need to be able to keep an eye on the risk of becoming too one-sided, of not being reflective and critical enough of what they’re engaged with,” said Blattner. “But there is no abstract formulation of the golden mean between rigorous independent research and real-world social engagement with the issues.

The individual scholar needs to find that balance, and that can be tricky.”

Behind these conversations about application and profitability looms the great question: Why study philosophy? Because of the critical thinking skills? Because it sparks a conversation with a consulting company recruiter?

Because of the high starting salary statistics? Because it makes you a better person? Because if you’re going to be working a corporate office job for the rest of your life, you might as well spend four years doing what you love?

All of these were mentioned by students and professors, but no one had a definitive answer.

Perhaps society is past the point of justifying higher education on the grounds of inherent goodness, aside from practical application. The traditional defense of philosophy—that it makes those who study it better, happier, more fulfilled people—fits awkwardly with the current conceptions about the purpose of academia. It gets accused of elitism, of selfishness, of disconnection from reality.

But there is something deeply tragic about this idea that learning itself is no longer a project worth pursuing.

“Getting the chance to think about things is part of being an autonomous flourishing person. And when you give up on the humanities, you’ve given up on that, you’ve said all you matter as is an instrument to some economic engine,” Lance said.

“Should you have no chance to study music unless you’re going to actually be a recording artist who makes money off it? Fuck that.” G FEBRUARY 14, 2020

13

SPORTS

GEORGETOWN MEN’S BASKETBALL WANTS TO BEAT THE ODDS

LUCY COOK

T

he Georgetown men’s basketball team is in the midst of the most tumultuous season in recent history, filled with countless highs and lows and marked by scandal.

In an up-and-down year, Georgetown has struggled to break out of the bottom three teams in the Big East and make their mark on the conference. Georgetown will need to significantly improve their play and put up a more united defensive front in order to make a bid for the NCAA Tournament in March.

In early December, sophomore guard James Akinjo and sophomore forward Josh LeBlanc announced they were leaving the team. In the following days, court documents were made public implicating LeBlanc, freshman guard Myron Gardner, and junior forward Galen Alexander in a series of assault, sexual misconduct, and burglary charges. A few weeks later, Gardner and Alexander announced their decision to transfer from the program.

At the time of LeBlanc and Akinjo’s departure, the team was a mediocre 4-3 on the season, with only one substantive win against then-No. 22 Texas. The season seemed on the verge of collapse. In spite of national scrutiny and internal upheaval, the Hoyas notched two statement wins on the road against competitive opponents in Oklahoma State and Southern Methodist University. And then they kept winning: six games in a row, to be exact.

In the absence of the former point guard and second leading scorer Akinjo, senior guard Terrell Allen stepped up in a big way—dishing out assists, nimbly handling the ball, and efficiently scoring. Similarly, sophomore guard Mac McClung and senior center Omer Yurtseven did stellar jobs of leading Georgetown’s offense. With the dramatically shortened bench, other players had opportunities to fill the gaping holes left by Akinjo and LeBlanc’s departures, and senior guard Jagan Mosely (a constant, solid presence on the team) shined in these moments. Junior guard Jahvon Blair also had several games in which he hit his stride and scored over 20 points. The Hoyas gelled well and they looked strong heading into Big East play. They were even on the verge of breaking into the AP Top 25.

14

THE GEORGETOWN VOICE

And then the ball dropped. With McClung sidelined with an eye injury for the conference opener against Providence, the Hoyas were shaky and vulnerable. They lost by 16 and couldn’t seem to get back on their feet. At the moment, Georgetown is 4-7 in the Big East, scoring two of those wins against a dismal St. John’s team sitting second to last in the conference.

Despite their conference record, overall, the Hoyas have not been playing terribly.

They have played highly ranked teams like Seton Hall aggressively, but have failed to secure wins. For example, in their loss to then-No. 11 Butler, Georgetown led by double digits at the half only to collapse in the homestretch of the game.

What dooms the Hoyas time and again is a crippling lack of steady gameplay. For veteran Hoya fans, this is an old, persistent wound. The team cannot consistently pull a lead through to the end, or close a meager gap when it matters. It seems they can only play one half on any given day. With a critically shortened bench, this years-long problem is exacerbated. So then, what does the rest of the Hoyas’s season look like? Are hopes of an NCAA tournament appearance dashed?

After a narrow loss to Seton Hall and an even narrower win against DePaul, Georgetown has seven conference games remaining. Eight of the 10 Big East teams are currently in the top 60 teams in the nation according to the NCAA NET ranking, and five of those teams are in the top 25.

While the strength of the Big East may have damned Georgetown’s conference record, it means their tournament hopes are not entirely lost. Any win in the Big East is a solid win in comparison to other conferences, and as Georgetown prepares to face No. 13 Butler, No. 19 Marquette, No. 21 Villanova, and No. 24 Creighton, there are lots of opportunities to pick up quality victories that could push the team over the line on Selection Sunday.

As seen in Georgetown’s first-half performances against Butler and Villanova, the Hoyas are capable of competing with these highly ranked teams. To be successful, however, the Hoyas need to focus on keeping their momentum and shots flowing throughout the entirety of the game—high

shooting percentages are key in a shootingdominant conference.

Ball movement is crucial to the Hoyas’s offensive success. They need to use their speed and guard-heavy rotation to their advantage: when Blair, Mosely, Allen, and McClung are on their game, the Georgetown offense is fast-paced and effective. In regards to individual play, junior forward Jamorko Pickett needs to step up and into his potential as a flexible forward. In a conference with lights-out shooters like Myles Powell, Saddiq Bey, and Markus Howard, Georgetown also needs to play much more unified team defense that respects the need to guard the 3-point line without leaving the sole responsibility to Mosely, who is generally tasked with guarding these players.

Most significantly, as Big East play continues, Georgetown players must remain healthy. McClung has sat out each of the past three games due to a foot injury and Yurtseven fell in the second half against DePaul, spraining his ankle. Both McClung and Yurtseven are integral to Georgetown’s game play. As the team’s two leading scorers, they drive the offense, and McClung in particular has a knack for making difficult shots when the game demands it. Yurtseven is one of the Big East’s top rebounders and a central feature of the Hoyas’s rotation.

To beat teams like Butler, Creighton, and Villanova, Georgetown does not just need Yurtseven and McClung to be able to play; they need them to bring the assertiveness and aggression they showed in the team’s six non-conference games. While the win against DePaul in the absence of McClung and Yurtseven (in the second half) was impressive and exciting considering the circumstances, if the Hoyas are without these two key players for an extended amount of time, the team is in a bad way for the rest of their conference games. Put simply, all of the stars need to align. If Georgetown can step up its gameplay and stay healthy, they have the potential to snag a couple more wins before the Big East Tournament in March—and beyond.

The NCAA Tournament is not, as many cynics may say, a lost cause. Every year, the Tournament takes the 68 best teams in the country, eight of which have to “play-in” to

the first round of the tournament.

After their strong non-conference wins in December, the Hoyas have not dropped below the 70th rank.

Currently, they are ranked 52nd after their loss to Seton Hall. With a few more conference w i n s — particularly against top-25 teams—and a decent Big East Tournament showing, the possibility of making the NCAA Tournament is not as far-fetched as it may seem.

Head coach Patrick Ewing points to the team’s heart as evidence that the season isn’t over yet. “They haven’t quit. They haven’t stopped. They keep fighting,” he said at the post-game press conference after DePaul.

After a season of setbacks, rewards, and failures, this is the mentality the team needs to maintain in order to be a competitive force.

Beyond this year, which has been significantly more chaotic than most, the future of the program has strong potential with freshman center Qudus Wahab playing solid minutes this season and two promising recruits in point guard Tyler Beard and wing Jamari Sibley on the horizon. Despite their circumstances, this year’s Georgetown men’s basketball team will strive to earn their first NCAA Tournament berth since the 2014-2015 season, continuing to fight and look ahead, even if they come up short. G

photos courtesy of manu tasca and fernanda vallois; design by allison derose

LEISURE

DESPITE HEAVY LOSSES, WOMEN’S BASKETBALL LOOKS TO KEEP COMPETING

TRISTAN LEE

T

he 2019-20 season has been one of hardship for the Georgetown women’s basketball team. After losing their top three scorers from last year, the program knew the year ahead would be a rebuilding one, and the results have shown as much. The Hoyas are 2-11 in the Big East in Head Coach James Howard’s third season, but he isn’t looking as much at statistics and results as he is at the effort his players are displaying on a day-to-day, game-to-game basis.

“That’s the thing we’re always looking for: effort,” Howard said after a loss to Seton Hall on Jan. 31. “If we take the loss, we take the loss but what was our effort?

Did we compete?”

Through the first six games of the season, the Hoyas sat at 2-4 with victories over Pittsburgh and Loyola Marymount.

Considering the significant losses of Mikayla Venson, Dionna White, and Dorothy Adomako, this might have been an expected start for a young team still figuring things out.

From there, however, the results have been even less encouraging. The Blue & Gray dropped four of their final five nonconference games to enter Big East play with a 3-8 record. After taking a loss in the opener against Creighton, Georgetown notched a morale-boosting victory at McDonough Arena over a Providence squad that was 9-4 at the time. On the back of 14-point performances from graduate student guard Taylor Barnes and sophomore guard Tayanna Jones, it seemed the Hoyas might be peaking at just the right time.

Unfortunately, Georgetown lost 10 games in a row before defeating Xavier on Feb. 9, and hold a 5-19 record with five games to go in the regular season and the Big East Tournament looming.

The most significant indicator of the Hoyas’ troubles has been their poor shooting. Thus far, they have shot 34.9 percent from the field, the worst in the Big East. It’s proven difficult to find any good looks without the playmaking abilities of White in the lineup, and it’s nearly impossible to win Big East

photo courtesy of tori swiacki

contests when nothing is falling.

The Hoyas are shooting a paltry 29.7 percent from 3-point range, compounded by a pedestrian 72.2 percent clip on free throws.

The rest of the traditional statistics suggest the Hoyas are otherwise competitive—Georgetown has averaged 38.4 rebounds per game with just a -0.3 average rebound margin, and 14.2 turnovers per game, barely more than their opponents’ average of 13.8.

The women’s basketball team knew this season would have its bumps and bruises. In October, Howard said this year was always going to be a rebuilding campaign.

“When you lose so much p o w e r and experience—that’s the key: experience—you don’t have those expectations.”

Still, there may be hope for Howard’s program. There are certainly positives to be taken from this year. Perhaps the main bright spot has been sophomore guard Nikola Kovacikova’s emergence as a primary ball handler. Though she has only started nine of the Hoyas’s 24 games, the Slovakian is averaging 25.3 minutes per game, fourth most on the team, up from 15.6 minutes per game a season ago. In her sophomore season, the statistics are strong across the board.

Kovacikova’s 51 assists and 29 3-pointers made rank second on the squad, while her 7.6 points per game rank third. Her performance thus far bodes well for the program’s future, as she projects to be the starting point guard next season with the impending departures of Brianna Jones, Taylor Barnes, and Marvellous Osagie-Erese.

“If we can get Nikola to continue to be aggressive in her scoring and her rebounding, then that will help,” Howard said. “It will help for the future and the progression of our team.”

F e l l o w sophomore guard Tayanna Jones has also seen a

considerable bump in playing time, averaging 16 minutes per game after just 4.9 last year. The Selma, North Carolina native’s 5.4 points per game is good for fifth most on the squad, a promising contribution

considering this is her first year getting significant minutes. Jones has shot 55 3-pointers this season, fourth most on the team, and, despite hitting just 27.3 percent of her shots from deep, her accuracy projects to improve through Big East play and into next season as she gets more comfortable with increased playing time.

Not to be overlooked by Kovacikova and Tayanna Jones, sophomore guard Cassandra Gordon and freshman forward Graceann Bennett continue to acclimate to their increased roles in Big East play.

Howard believes this will be key to their performance moving forward.

“We want to get their feet wet against good teams and let them know, confidence-wise, that they can play with them,” Howard said.

For the remainder of the season, the Hoyas will continue working to improve and be competitive in each and every game, regardless of the opponent or outcome.

With college basketball programs, it is imperative to keep an eye on the future, while also focusing on immediate competition.

“My goal for this team, in my vision, is to continue to work each and every day to get better as a team,” Howard said when asked about the team’s goals for the rest of the year.

“If we do that, I think the upperclassmen will go out with some pride of knowing that we gave it our all.

Underclassmen will come back knowing, hey, this is what it takes to play against some good teams and we can play with them. Confidence is the key.” G

FEBRUARY UPDATE PUB 14, DATE 2020

15

878-6576

202-

We will always be your Valentine.

202-878-6576 2218 Wisconsin Ave NW