The IWC Chronicle Volume 1 Issue 1

i

ii

Dear reader, At Northeastern University’s Interdisciplinary Women’s Council (IWC), our mission is simple: to create and empower the next generation of female leaders on campus and beyond.

When we first created the IWC last January, our goal was to amplify female voices, regardless of discipline, racial or ethnic identity, political affiliation, et cetera. A year later, we believe that we do just that through our general assembly. Not only have we been able to hold meaningful conversations with hundreds of women around Boston, but we’ve done so while uplifting the voices that would otherwise been ignored.

As we began to brainstorm how we could expand our mission in each of Northeastern’s colleges, our team from the Collge of Arts, Media, & Design was the first to pitch publications as another avenue through which we could showcase female voices at Northeastern. That’s when the Chronicle, this magazine, and the Catalyst, our academic journal, were born.

We are beyond proud of the pieces in our inaugural issue. Our writers took the lead and were vulnerable in a way that many of them felt they couldn’t be when writing for other publications on campus. We could not be happier to provide a platform for them to share their stories and perspectives.

We could not do what we do without our fantastic team of women, each of whom is using her skills to contribute to our mission in the ways she does best. We want to thank our editorial team, writers, and graphic designers for contributing to the IWC the way they do best and for helping us produce something truly special.

Stephanie Luiz President and Cofounder

iii

Emerson Victoria Johnston President and Cofounder

In 2016, four lesbian women living in New Jersey filed a lawsuit against their insurance providers and state officials alleging that a New Jersey mandate regarding infertility to be discriminatory based on sexual orientation. Although the mandate requires insurance companies in the state to provide coverage for expenses associated with the diagnosis of infertility, it subsequently defines infertility as a “disease or condition that results in the abnormal function of the reproductive system such that a female under 35 years old who is unable to conceive after two years of unprotected sexual intercourse” with a male partner.

LESBIAN WOMEN IN NEW JERSEY DO NOT QUALIFY AS INFERTILE FOR PURPOSES OF INSURANCE COVERAGE.

Lesbians make up five percent of the American population and somewhere between thirty and fifty percent of those women wish to become mothers. Under the aforementioned definition of infertility, lesbian women in New Jersey do not qualify as infertile for purposes of insurance coverage. Since medical definitions drive diagnosis and diagnoses determine access to health care, the New Jersey mandate and similar legislation are discriminatory and represent institutionalized homophobia toward lesbians in the US, despite the rising

trend of lesbian motherhood. To solve this issue, we must change the functional definition of infertility to encompass the concept of social infertility in addition to medical infertility.

The lawsuit, known as Krupa et al. v. Badolato, involved Erin and Marianne Krupa, Sol Mejias, and Sarah Mills, all lesbian women living in New Jersey.

Despite receiving an infertility diagnosis from a medical practitioner, these women were denied insurance coverage under the New Jersey mandate because—as lesbians in committed relationships—they could not demonstrate that they engaged in unprotected sex with a male within the requisite period.

The official complaint explains that without insurance coverage, the cost of fertility treatments is exceptionally burdensome for couples to pay out of pocket, essentially forcing them to choose between starting a family and ensuring financial stability. The complaint directly cites the Supreme Court decision Obergefell v. Hodges, a 2015 landmark civil rights case that constitutionally protects same-sex marriage under the Fourteenth Amendment.

In the majority opinion issued for the case, Justice Anthony Kennedy quotes ancient Roman scholar Marcus Cicero in saying “the first bond of society is marriage; next, children; and then the family.” He later states that “the constitutional marriage right has many aspects, of which childbearing is only one.” Therefore under the Fourteenth Amendment, the New Jersey mandate would be deemed unconstitutional for denying married lesbian couples their right to bear children.

In making these statements, Justice Kennedy’s opinion prescribes itself as the framework of reproductive jus1

tice, advocating for one of its largest values: the right to parenthood for all.

Erin Krupa, one of the main plaintiffs in the lawsuit, walked into the fertility clinic with her wife Marianne for the first time in May 2013, excited to fulfill their dreams of motherhood. But when the reproductive endocrinologist told Erin that she had unknowingly been living with stage III endometriosis and had severe cysts on her uterus—rendering her infertile—things got more complicated. Although insurance will typically cover infertility treatments for women with endometriosis, insurance companies denied the Krupas coverage because of the New Jersey infertility mandate.

THE COST OF FERTILITY TREATMENTS IS EXCEPTIONALLY BURDENSOME FOR COUPLES TO PAY OUT OF POCKET, ESSENTIALLY FORCING THEM TO CHOOSE BETWEEN STARTING A FAMILY AND FINANCIAL STABILITY. Despite having medically diagnosed infertility, because Erin was a lesbian in a committed relationship, she could not show that she had engaged in unprotected sex with a man for the requisite period. Had she walked into the same clinic with a male partner, her medical diagnosis of endometriosis-related infertility would have been sufficient to qualify her for fertility treatment coverage. Erin was denied insurance coverage entirely because her sexual orientation did not fit the heteronormative state mandate.

The Reproductive Science Center of New Jersey states that recent updates were made to the mandate to allow single and lesbian women to qualify for fertility coverage. However, the fine print tells a different story; It defines infertility for any woman without a male partner as follows: “a female without a male partner and under 35 years of age who is unable to conceive after 12 failed attempts of intrauterine insemination under medical supervision.” The requisite then assumes that all single women and lesbian couples seeking fertility coverage in New Jersey are either financially capable of paying out of pocket for a dozen rounds of fertility treatments or have fertility coverage from their employer, but many do not.

One study of lesbian couples found that, of the twenty-eight participants who reported having insurance, eighteen percent received no coverage whatsoever for fertility treatments because it was an “elective procedure.” Many participants in the study also reported experiencing heterosexism at some point in the fertility process, which is not surprising when considering the market’s nature. The belief that fertility treatments for lesbian couples is an “elective procedure” is steeped in 2

homophobia and heterosexism. The same treatments wouldn’t be considered “elective” for heterosexual women in committed relationships who are diagnosed with infertility.

The fact of the matter is that all same-sex couples need some form of fertility treatment or assistance to have children; that’s just how biology works. Treating women with the same medical issue differently based solely on their sexuality is a disservice to not only lesbian women, but women everywhere. Legislators would be wise to capitalize on this momentous opportunity to transition American discourse surrounding lesbian family planning by adopting a more inclusive definition of infertility.

Social infertility is a concept that has gained traction in recent years among scholars, activists, and medical practitioners. They now urge policymakers to join them in adopting a more expansive view on infertility that creates space for lesbian women who don’t otherwise satisfy the current definition. In layman’s terms, social infertility describes people who have difficulty conceiving naturally due to social or cultural factors, such as sexuality.

As a society, we would benefit from modifying the clinical definition of infertility to incorporate the concept of social infertility, as proposed by bioethicist Lisa Campo-Engelstein and physician Weei Lo. Social infertility is defined as “a condition of an individual with [the] intent of parenthood but unable to produce conception due to social or physiological limitations within a period of twelve months.” This expanded definition would urge the medical community to recognize infertility’s social factors as a clinical diagnosis that is treatable with many of the same options already available for physiological infertility. Not only would this make room for groups that have traditionally been marginalized when it comes to the topic of fertility treatment—namely LGBTQIA+ people—but it would also inform and encourage policy-makers and insurance companies to cover social infertility under existing infertility insurance mandates. Theoretically, under this expanded definition of social infertility, women like Erin Krupa, Sol Mejias, and Sarah Mills would be granted fertility treatment coverage even without a medical diagnosis of infertility.

ALL SAME-SEX COUPLES NEED SOME FORM OF FERTILITY TREATMENT OR ASSISTANCE TO HAVE CHILDREN; THAT’S JUST HOW BIOLOGY WORKS.

The World Health Organization (WHO) tried to adopt more inclusive language regarding infertility in 2015 after a series of discussions were held in Geneva, Switzerland over the definition. Delegates were unsatisfied with the use of heterosexual sex as a reference point in the medical definition of infertility and decided to add an expansion: infertility is defined as “an impairment of a person’s capacity to reproduce either as an individual or with his/her partner.” The use of the term “impairment” was hotly contested, with many asserting that it was a demeaning nod to queerness's characterization as an impairment.

SOCIETY . . . WOULD BENEFIT FROM MODIFYING THE CLINICAL DEFINITION OF INFERTILITY TO INCORPORATE . . . SOCIAL INFERTILITY. Campo-Engelstein—bioethicist and a main proponent for normalizing social infertility—warned against

categorizing social infertility as a disease, as it would risk medicalizing homosexuality. “Medicalization is a double-edged sword,” she said in The New Yorker. “On the one hand, it gives you access, if you have a medical condition, to treatment. But, on the other hand, it may label something that you don’t think, really, is a disease as a disease.” The WHO’s half-baked attempt to adopt a more inclusive definition wasn’t entirely in vain, though, as the integration of social infertility into the medical sphere is vital to its acceptance as a valid definition and concept.

It is undeniable that there have been great strides made toward equality for the LGBTQIA+ community over the past few decades. But there is still work to be done, especially at the intersection of reproductive justice and queerness. Lesbians are just a small percentage of a much larger marginalized population of queer people with dreams of starting a family but no tangible means to do so.

The recognition of infertility as solely a physiological condition defined by heterosexual norms is problematic and perpetuates homophobia and discrimination.

Adopting an expanded definition of infertility to include social infertility and physiological limitations will greatly elevate access to and quality of care. It would be the greatest attempt at creating a level playing field for reproduction among both straight and gay couples.

3

“WOMEN BELONG IN ALL PLACES WHERE DECISIONS ARE BEING MADE.” JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBURG Variations of this popular phrase frequented t-shirts and other merchandise after the 2016 election. Now, in the wake of the 2020 election, we see it ringing true with an influx of groundbreaking women rising to positions of power in government and leadership.

After President Donald Trump’s countless degrading comments about women and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death, powerful female politicians’s elections are more crucial now than ever.

Vice President Kamala Harris, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Delaware State Senator Sarah McBride are three key female players entering office or maintaining their positions in 2021. These women, who represent the Black, Asian-American, Latinx, and LGBTQIA+ communities, have all encountered various obstacles due to their backgrounds. Still, their perseverance and adversity have made them fiercely passionate and foreboding forces in their respective political offices. Harris, Ocasio-Cortez, and McBride will enter different levels of government, but the progress they can make for women and their communities cannot be understated.

Vice President Kamala Harris

In her November 7 victory speech, Harris proclaimed: “But while I may be the first woman in this office, I will not be the last. Because every little girl watching tonight sees that this is a country of possibilities and to the children of our country regardless of your gender, our country has sent you a clear message: dream with ambition, lead with conviction and see yourselves in a way that others may not simply because they’ve never seen it before.”

Harris is paving the road long denied to women and people of color. She is the first female, Black, and Asian American vice-president in US history. In 2003, she was the first Black woman to be elected district attorney in California. By 2010, she became the first female attorney general for the state and, in 2016, the first Indian American senator.

Throughout her tenure in these offices, she has made notable decisions that have affected the lives of many.

While serving as attorney general, she created Open Justice, a platform that made criminal justice data available online to constituents. She declined to ban the death penalty, which was a controversial decision on her part.

Additionally, San Francisco’s conviction rate went from fifty-two to sixty-seven percent while Harris was district attorney.

During her time in the Senate, Harris gained positive attention from Democratic supporters and the general public for her questioning of then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions regarding the role of Russia in the 2016 election and Justice Brett Kavanaugh about sexual assault allegations during his confirmation hearings. Despite that support, Trump heavily criticized Harris: “I thought she was the meanest, the most horrible, most disrespectful of anybody in the US Senate”—a sentiment which he continued to echo throughout his 2020 campaign.

4

Harris’s achievements are numerous, albeit controversial. Her stances on key issues provide insight into the steps she’ll take as vice president. Harris supports revamping the Affordable Care Act, the Green New Deal, and gun control; she also supports requiring companies to be equal-pay certified and decriminalizing illegal border crossing. These are all areas that have received little to no focus from the Trump administration. However, the varying support for these issues within the Democratic and Republican coalitions have caused controversy within the parties. While it is impossible to predict precisely what Harris will do once she and President Joe Biden are in office, it is undeniable that the eyes of the nation will be watching.

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

McBride aims to give LGBTQIA+ youth a political role model, particularly because that community is generally underrepresented. In being unapologetically herself, she seeks to inspire and reassure others who are conflicted about their sexual orientation or gender identity.

“I am hopeful that there’s a young person desperately in need of that message, who, just before going to bed, looked online, and saw this result. For that person, they know that change is possible and things can get better,” McBride said in her victory statement.

Harris is not the only woman in politics who has been under the media’s watchful eye. In 2021, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will be entering her second term for New York’s 14th congressional district in the House of Representatives. As youngest woman ever to serve in Congress, Ocasio-Cortez is a trailblazer for communities of color and women.

“Women like me aren’t supposed to run for office,” Ocasio-Cortez said in a campaign video while running for her first term. Just a year before her election to office, she was working as a bartender. She beat incumbent Joseph Crawley in a landslide upset, garnering 78.2 percent of the popular vote.

As for where she stands on key issues, Ocasio-Cortez supports universal healthcare, a federal job guarantee with a $15 minimum wage, justice and immigration reform, the Green New Deal, and free higher-education.

Ocasio-Cortez is a self-described democratic socialist, which has spurred severe opposition from the rightwing Americans. That said, the support she receives is substantial, especially from Generation Z. State Senator Sarah McBride While Ocasio-Cortez has been a spearhead for the Democratic party on a national scale, lower levels of government also have notable—and now nationally recognizable—women. The media does not typically focus on state senators; however Delaware State Senator Sarah McBride made headlines during the 2020 election when she became the first transgender woman to be elected to this position.

Twenty-nine-year-old McBride was also the first openly transgender White House intern and worked on both Beau Biden’s state attorney general campaign and Governor Jack Markell’s campaign in Delaware. She then became the national press secretary for the Human Rights Campaign, an organization that later heavily endorsed her campaign.

As the highest-ranking transgender lawmaker, McBride will become a champion for LGBTQIA+ youth. As an activist, in 2013, McBride lobbied for state legislation that bars discrimination based on gender identity in the Delaware General Assembly. She will likely continue to make strides for the LGBTQIA+ community during her time in the state senate.

Nasty Women Harris, Ocasio-Cortez, and McBride are just three women who are paving the way for future generations. They are inspirations to future voters, public office holders, and everyday citizens; this is especially true for people of color and members of the LGBTQIA+ community.

There is little doubt that these women will make lasting marks on history and do monumental things throughout their tenure.

“The importance of being a first is to make sure that you’re not the last and that others can stand on your shoulders,” McBride said to the HuffPost. With 2020 being the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage, these women’s achievements are even more special. As a country, we are making great progress, but there is still much ground to cover. After all, a woman’s place is in the House and the Senate.

5

“ONE THING THAT I DID FEEL IN LAW SCHOOL WAS THAT IF I FLUBBED, THAT I WOULD BE BRINGING DOWN MY ENTIRE SEX. THAT YOU WEREN’T JUST FAILING FOR YOURSELF, BUT PEOPLE WOULD SAY, ‘WELL, I DID EXPECT IT OF A WOMAN.’” JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBURG As president of Brazil, Dilma Rousseff flubbed. She was impeached and removed from office for manipulating official documents to cover up the government’s poor economic performance. Yet her involvement in corruption—while unacceptable and immoral—was tame compared to previous leaders and the men who constructed her impeachment.

Rousseff’s impeachment campaign was misogynistic, and its repercussions were even more severe, as it limited female representation in government and partly accounted for a rampant sexist’s election as president.

While Brazil’s culture of corruption warrants widespread condemnation, it is also essential to recognize the double standard that exists between female and male politicians.

adage described government corruption as “whoever steals a little is a thief; those who steal a lot are barons.” Even after the First Brazilian Republic’s formation in 1889, allegations of corruption persisted. The military dictatorship (1964-1988) suppressed evidence of its misconduct while in power, but journalists have since uncovered activities such as smuggling luxury goods and extorting companies.

The government’s history of misconduct continued unsurprisingly into President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s administration, which preceded Rousseff’s. In part this corruption is because the jeitinho Brasileiro extends to civilians, with bribery being a common practice for police officers, fiscal agents, and business owners.

Brazil’s History of Corruption

The Path to the Presidency

Brazil has a culture of corruption—known colloquially as the jeitinho Brasileiro or “Brazilian way”—that promotes bending the rules for personal gain. This deep, corrupt history dates back to Portuguese colonization in 1500. Corruption in Brazil began at the country’s inception: Pero Vaz de Caminha, in a letter informing Portugal’s King Dom Manuel I of his “discovery” of the territory, requested his son-in-law’s release from prison.

Rousseff was born in Belo Horizonte, Brazil in 1947.

After a 1964 coup d’état overthrew President João Goulart, seventeen-year-old Rousseff joined Comando de Libertação Nacional, a far-left militant group working to overthrow the new military dictatorship. She was arrested in 1970 for her advocacy, charged with subversion, tortured, and imprisoned for three years.

Colonial corruption persisted as the empire formed and, in the First Reign, the ruler’s lover sold public office positions. In the 19th century, a popular Brazilian 6

After her release, Rousseff received her bachelor’s degree in economics. As the dictatorship faltered, Rousseff entered local politics, working primarily in finance and economics, and eventually became Rio Grande do Sul’s Secretary of Mines, Energy, and Communication.

In 1999, she joined the Workers Party—Partido dos Trabalhadores (PT)—the major left-wing party after Brazil’s democratization. After Rousseff worked in Lula’s successful 2002 presidential campaign, he appointed her to two significant roles: Minister of Mines and Energy and chair of Brazil’s state-run oil company, Petrobras. By 2005, she was his chief of staff.

IF CORRUPTION IS ENTRENCHED IN BRAZILIAN CULTURE AND HAS GONE UNADDRESSED FOR GENERATIONS, WHY WAS DILMA ROUSSEFF PUNISHED WHILE OTHERS WERE NOT? Since Lula was limited to two terms, PT named Rousseff their official presidential candidate in 2010. Rousseff’s platform was consistent with Lula’s, as it focused on alleviating poverty and establishing economic ties with other Latin American countries. Despite polls predicting her landslide victory, Rousseff narrowly missed the fifty percent benchmark in the first electoral round. In the runoff election later that month, however, Rousseff won with fifty-six percent of the vote. On January 1, 2011, she was sworn into office as the first female president of Brazil.

Rousseff’s Reign Shortly after Rousseff’s inauguration, her party faced allegations of corruption that grew to become Brazil’s greatest political corruption scandal: the mensalão (large monthly payments) case. PT used funds from state-owned enterprises to bribe members of the Chamber of Deputies, Brazil’s lower house of parliament, to vote for favored legislation. Lula’s alleged involvement caused Brazilians to question Rousseff’s integrity. By the end of 2011, five of Rousseff’s cabinet members—all holdovers from Lula’s administration— had resigned. Six additional officials were arrested in 2012; Rousseff had fired two of them.

From 2010 to 2012, Brazil’s gross domestic product growth rate dropped from 7.5 percent to one percent, further diminishing Rousseff’s support. The central bank aggressively reduced interest rates and reserve requirements to keep unemployment low, but this only hurt the economy further. Middle-class Brazilians began protesting government corruption, poor economic conditions, and inaccessible public services.

Rousseff narrowly won the 2014 election but faced continued economic decline and a new corruption scandal. Between 2004 and 2014, Petrobras officials and members of PT and the Brazilian Democratic

Movement (PT’s coalition partner) received millions of dollars from prominent Brazilian companies in exchange for government contracts. Dozens of politicians and businesspeople were indicted for bribery in 2015.

Despite having been Petrobras’s chair during the alleged widespread bribery, Rousseff was found innocent by an attorney general investigation. However, Brazilians doubted these results because of the country’s extensive history of corruption. Consequently, Rousseff’s approval rating plummeted to thirteen percent.

Rousseff’s former involvement in Lula’s government spurred mass protests calling for her removal.

The Inevitability of Impeachment The Petrobras scandal was not the reason for Rousseff’s inevitable impeachment. In October 2015, a Brazilian appeals court unanimously found her guilty of manipulating the government’s financial statements and misusing state bank funds to mask budget deficits and facilitate her reelection. She hid the severity of Brazil’s debt by providing interest-free loans to the treasury. Both houses of parliament quickly impeached Rousseff, each with substantial male majorities.

Feminists protested Rousseff’s sexist impeachment.

Male politicians frequently used this type of illegal financial manipulation—called pedaladas—and the officials executing her impeachment were also under investigation for corruption. If corruption is entrenched in Brazilian culture and has gone unaddressed for generations, why was Dilma Rousseff punished while others were not?

While plummeting popularity contributed to Rousseff’s impeachment, her gender was undoubtedly a factor. The two presidents before Rousseff—Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Lula—faced even more severe charges that did not prompt impeachment hearings.

Both presidents allegedly stole from Petrobras for personal and political gain. There is no evidence that Rousseff has ever stolen public funds for personal gain, unlike the male elected officials who executed her impeachment.

The conversations surrounding Rousseff’s impeachment built on the misogyny she faced throughout her presidency. Members of parliament consistently criticized her for her femininity (or lack thereof). Those outside of public office were equally sexist in their critiques. Crude images of Rousseff circulated online.

Some Brazilian cars had stickers depicting her legs open around the petrol tank so drivers could penetrate her as they fueled up. A blogger shared an image of her captioned “The Lying Prostitute of the Planalto” while ignoring male politicians who used state money to hire prostitutes. In response, multiple gender advocacy organizations—including the United Nations Office on Women’s Rights—issued statements condemning “sexist political violence” against Rousseff.

7

While Rousseff broke the law, she experienced more severe consequences than male elected officials who committed the same and worse crimes. The sexist implications of Rousseff’s impeachment have been pervasive, undermining female autonomy and leadership in Brazil.

The Fallout of Female Failure The gendered implications of bad female leadership impact women at every level. The public often responds to female failure by censuring future leadership opportunities for women regardless of individual skill, education, or merit.

Rousseff’s successor and former vice president Michel Temer illustrates the gendered double standards of Brazilian politics. Despite also being formally accused of corruption, Temer aggressively lobbied for Rousseff’s impeachment. His administration then spearheaded the greatest consequence of Rousseff’s impeachment for civilians: the rollback of women’s rights.

Brazilians and the media harshly criticized Temer for creating a cabinet of only White men, fifteen of whom faced criminal charges for corruption. Temer also cut ministries that promoted equality, namely the Ministries of Racial Equality, Human Rights, and Women.

Just weeks after his inauguration, his administration’s sexist policies had already prompted widespread protests.

According to Rousseff, “It’s a government of rich old White men, or at least those who want to be rich.” Temer’s administration ended in 2018, as courts barred him from running for president because of corruption allegations.

REGARDLESS OF HOW VOTERS JUSTIFIED THEIR DECISION, THE COUNTRY’S FIRST FEMALE PRESIDENT WAS FOLLOWED

BY THE SEXIST BOLSONARO BECAUSE OF HER FAILURE.

Jair Bolsonaro—a far-right populist—succeeded Temer by presenting himself as an alternative to the radically left PT. While Bolsonaro is a self-proclaimed “defender of the Constitution, democracy, and liberty,” he is most known for his rampant sexism. His sexist comments range from “I had four sons, but then I had a moment of weakness, and the fifth was a girl” to telling congresswoman Maria do Rosario, “I wouldn’t rape 8

you because you don’t deserve it.”

While some Brazilians voted for Bolsonaro as a protest against years of PT’s corruption, his election also reflects Brazilian culture’s conflation of sexism and humor. Regardless of how voters justified their decision, the country’s first female president was followed by the sexist Bolsonaro because of her failure. His election was a consequence of her poor female leadership that resulted in Brazilians turning to her foil.

ALL BRAZILIAN WOMEN WERE HURT BY ROUSSEFF’S IMPEACHMENT, PARTICULARLY THOSE IN PUBLIC SERVICE.

The Future’s Not Female Brazilians reactionary discussions surrounding gender and sexuality were largely bigoted, partly accounting for Bolsonaro’s election. More importantly, it hindered the potential for future female leadership. All Brazilian women were hurt by Rousseff’s impeachment, particularly those in public service. Research on gender discourse indicates that female leaders face harsher consequences when they make mistakes, and those consequences trickle down to future female leaders.

The 2018 election—the first since Rousseff’s impeachment—saw limited gains in female representation.

There were two female presidential candidates and five running mates, but none were elected. Sixty-two female candidates ran for the Senate, but only seven won. In the Chamber of Deputies, female representation increased to just fifteen percent from ten.

Female representation continued to grow in 2020, but the sexist tone of Rousseff’s long-planned impeachment illustrates the challenges women face in the political arena. Elected male officials spent years attempting to impeach Rousseff before finding a legitimate concern (and using a sexist campaign) to make their case.

The citizenry then readily joined in, criticizing Rousseff’s physical appearance and public mistakes.

We need female politicians to face the same consequences as men when they fail, but for male-dominated fields to achieve gender equality, women need to be allowed to flub, regardless of their position.

One woman’s failure should never reflect on her entire sex.

If someone asked you to list female leaders, you might recall those who have made strides in politics, such as Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Hillary Clinton, or Kamala Harris. Maybe you’d reference historical leaders of the American feminist movement like Susan B. Anthony or Gloria Steinem. But while these women are certainly trailblazers, there are countless more who are not recognized enough, or even at all, for their monumental national and international impact.

What is a leader, and more specifically, what is a “traditional” one? What criteria must women meet to be considered a leader? A leader is “a person who has commanding authority or influence.” However, those that we consider leaders in American hHowever, American history tends to consider "leaders" as those with widespread recognition. As such, many women who have a had a more low-key yet equally considerable impact are denied the credit they so rightfully deserve.

Simply because of their gender.

Take Audre Lorde, a Black lesbian poet who used her writing as a tool to combat racism, sexism, homophobia, and classism. She grew up in New York City and attended Catholic school. As a young Black woman in the 1960s, she used poetry to communicate her thoughts and emotions. After many years as a librarian, Lorde moved to Mississippi in 1968 and taught a poetry workshop at Tougaloo College.

In this position, she experienced firsthand the deep racial divide in the South. Through her writing, she emphasized that people’s differences should be a reason for celebration and growth, rather than division.

In her poem “Who Said It Was Simple,” Lorde wrote “There are so many roots to the tree of anger/that sometimes the branches shatter/before they bear.” Referencing the struggles she faced due to her race, gender, and sexuality, she wrote “But I who am bound by my mirror/as well as my bed/see causes in color/as well as sex.”

Lorde played a fundamental role in many social movements as a fierce activist for second-wave feminism, civil rights, Black culture, and LGBTQIA+ equality. She wrote about her experiences of overcoming breast cancer and having a mastectomy. In doing so, she broke the silence on cancer and the struggles of women. Although she was a significant Black poet, American history fails to recognize Lorde as much as Black male writers from the same time.

In a speech she gave at Amherst College in 1980, Lorde said she felt “otherized” because she was part of multiple minority groups. She spoke of society’s expectation for the oppressed to educate their oppressors. In turn, those oppressors evaded responsibility for their actions. Lorde explained, “Too often, we pour the energy needed for recognizing and exploring difference into pretending those differences are insurmountable barriers, or that they do not exist at all.” Because Lorde was the opposite of the American "norm"—the White, thin, heterosexual, Christian man— she was not respected as an American poet as heavily as her male counterparts were.

Alternatively to Lorde, journalist Marie Colvin gained success in a male-dominate field, but did not 9

receive wide recognition for her contributions. In 2012, the year Colvin died, women made up only thirty-six percent of all American newspaper staff.

There were similar gender disparities in the United Kingdom—where Colvin worked until her death.

Without Colvin, the United States would likely not have known crucial details regarding the Syrian civil war. Colvin’s reporting from the Middle East defined her career because she often put herself in physical danger to report on the effects foreign wars had on civilians.

Colvin became a foreign correspondent in London in the 1980s. As a writer for The Sunday Times, she covered conflicts for almost thirty years, including those in East Timor, Zimbabwe, and Somalia. Colvin also covered the Iran-Iraq war during the late 1980s, two U.S. wars with Iraq, and revolutions in the Middle East in 2011. She felt a moral obligation to those impacted by war, and her writing often focused on civilian populations that did not have a voice.

Journalism itself is already a male-dominated field.

Colvin specialized in war reporting, a subsection of journalism that is even more male-dominated.

result of a hunting accident in which she shot herself in the foot while working in a clerical position in Turkey. Despite her physical restrictions, the British Special Operations Executive (SOE) hired Hall as a spy. She worked in France to organize spy networks, run safehouses, and deliver vital intelligence to the British government. Although she was an American woman with only one leg, she was one of the first British spies sent into Nazi-occupied France in 1941.

MANY INCREDIBLE AND NOTEWORTHY FEMALE LEADERS DESERVE RECOGNITION; HOWEVER, HISTORY BOOKS LEAVE THEM OUT SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THEIR GENDER.

Hall was always able to circumvent the Gestapo and was a wanted woman, with posters labeling her as Colvin was easily recognizable by her signature black “The Enemy’s Most Dangerous Spy.” At one point, eyepatch. In 2001, Colvin lost her left eye when her she was nearly captured and had to flee France. Eatraveling group came under attack in Sri Lanka. They ger to return, she joined the US Office of Strategic were passing through the rebel-controlled territory Services (OSS). She often went to great lengths for to evade government troops when a rocket-propelled her job. Before she returned to France, Hall learned grenade suddenly hit them. The blast struck Colvin how to use makeup to draw wrinkles on her face. and grenade shrapnel lodged into her brain, damagShe also had a dentist grind down her teeth so she ing her hearing as well as her sight. looked like a French milkmaid. While in France, she even stayed in a convent and convinced the nuns to In 1999, Colvin stayed with 1,500 women and chil- assist her. She befriended a French brothel owner dren trapped in a United Nations compound in East and gained intelligence from prostitutes about GerTimor under siege by Indonesian-backed forces. She man soldiers. remained in the building with the civilians, even after the UN evacuated their staff and journalists. She After the war, Hall worked for the Central Intellicontinued to write about the UN’s shortcomings gence Agency, where she faced sex-based discrimwhile in the compound, which led them to come ination. While Hall proved essential in gathering back and evacuate the innocent women and children. intelligence for Britain and the United States during The civilians credited Colvin with saving their lives. the war, the spy community forgets her heroism and leadership. The British and American governments Similar to women’s scarcity in war reporting, spying is privately recognized Hall’s service, but her story reoften considered too dangerous an occupation mains within the intelligence community. Although for women. she was limited in some ways because of her gender, it enabled her to be a more effective spy. The GerVirginia Hall traveled through France gathering mans she evaded while spying during the war did not information on German intelligence during World think a woman could gather intelligence.

War II while dressed in one of her many disguises, including an old woman and a nun. Hall originally Lorde, Colvin, and Hall are just a few of the many wanted to join the US Foreign Service to become women who became leaders without a spotlight on an ambassador. Despite applying several times, she them. Their actions and abundant individual impacts could not get the position, and potential employers solidify their roles as female leaders, even though and her male coworkers belittled her throughout her they may not have traditionally earned that title. lifetime because of her gender.

Nicknamed the “limping lady” by the Gestapo, Hall earned that title because of her wooden leg, the 10

In 2021, our education looks vastly different from the typical in-person experience. As we’ve turned to Zoom meetings for our classes, club meetings, or even virtual co-ops, I’ve found that I’ve grown more self-conscious of my speech, especially as our discussions are now permanently digitized. Wary of appearing overly assertive, arrogant, or just “too sure of myself,” I frequently end sentences with quasi-apologetic statements like “I’m not exactly sure” or “I could be wrong.”

These characteristics of timid speech are prevalent amongst a majority of young women, but not without reason. It is emblematic of a larger patriarchal culture in which men and women must lead in styles that align with their gender roles.

WOMEN GENERALLY COMMUNICATE THEIR “SOCIAL SUBORDINATION” WHEN SPEAKING.

In The Art of Conversation, Peter Burke posits that men and women use language differently. Women generally communicate their “social subordination” when speaking, as exemplified in their choice of vocabulary, intonation, and the frequency and volubility with which they speak. However, these differences are not innate

and are instead a byproduct of our gendered social conditioning. As a result, it becomes even more crucial to analyze how female leaders can reject these norms and manipulate their rhetoric to aid their leadership rather than impede it. As semantic scholars, Gail Fairhurst and Robert Sarr write “leadership is a language game, one that many do not know that they are playing.”

Consider the recent 2020 Vice Presidential Debate during which Vice President Kamala Harris countered former Vice President Mike Pence after being continuously interrupted and spoken over. Women across America recognized that this interruption was an all too familiar experience. Her line, “Mr. Vice President, I’m speaking,” immediately went viral. Social media users everywhere praised Harris for confronting Pence’s “manterruptions.” Feminists claimed the term instantly and in less than twenty-four hours, merchandise already featured Harris’s one-liner. However, as we celebrate Harris for setting an example of unapologetic female rhetoric with crewneck sweatshirts and coffee mugs, we must also look at it as a prime example of how rhetorical choices dramatically affect how we view female leaders, especially if their position was historically for men.

One of the most significant differences between our perception of a female leader’s language versus that of a male leader is in the privilege of rhetorical autonomy each side holds. With less agency over their rhetoric, women in leadership positions need to be particularly careful when observing their authority, especially because women who have power are more vulnerable to being vilified. A man who might say the same things is “taking charge” and rightfully asserting his position of power.

11

This rhetorical difference has been called “the trump card of privilege.” For men, talking back can be a sign of power and resolve. But for women, it suggests insanity and misdirection. As a result, women must choose whether to speak up and be perceived as “angry” and “irrational” or stay quiet, losing their autonomy and power. It seems that either way, female leaders are inevitably at a loss when it comes to being heard, forcing them to be more conscious of the language they use in fear of reaping the consequences.

A common misconception is that women with seniority or titles may be more immune to this gendered linguistic gap. However, a 2017 study by Northwestern University’s Pritzker School of Law found that while female justices represented less than a quarter of the members of the Supreme Court, they were still interrupted thirty-two percent of the time by their male colleagues.

The number may seem small, but these interruptions are still highly disproportionate compared to the court’s men. Even women who hold higher positions of power remain likely to be interrupted and condescended by the men around them. So what will it take for us to be respected in our conversations and discourse?

IT IS UNREALISTIC TO TOPPLE THE PATRIARCHY OVERNIGHT, BUT WE MUST BE MORE COGNIZANT OF THE LANGUAGE WE USE WHEN SPEAKING TO MAINTAIN CONTROL OF OUR RHETORICAL AUTONOMY. Over time, female justices avoided using traditionally female linguistic framing to reduce the extent to which the court’s men dominated them. While learn-

12

ing how to adapt our rhetoric is important, shifting it to meet the standards created by men is damaging; it simply reinforces the idea that the only way to be an impactful leader is by adopting masculine characteristics in discourse.

WITH LESS AGENCY OVER THEIR RHETORIC, WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP POSITIONS NEED TO BE PARTICULARLY CAREFUL WHEN OBSERVING THEIR AUTHORITY. How, then, can we spin these gendered roles of rhetoric assigned to us to be more effective leaders? It is unrealistic to topple the patriarchy overnight, but we must be more cognizant of the language we use when speaking to maintain control of our rhetorical autonomy. We can start by eliminating the aforementioned quasi-apologetic phrases from our everyday language.

It is critical for young women who aspire to fill leadership positions in their own fields to find a role model in respected female leaders. We must pay careful attention to female leaders of color. Unlike their White counterparts, women of color face unique barriers in career advancement opportunities, such as exclusion from informal networking, beneficial mentorship, and sponsoring, making the need for guidance from social and professional networks even greater. Finally, we must educate ourselves about the various systems of power at work in our society. By understanding what these systems are and how they manifest, we have a better chance of picking which battles to fight—and preparing for them.

Pop culture is constantly changing.

With emerging fashion, music, and television trends, it seems as if new content is popping up on our feeds every day. For the most part, celebrities have a large role in this process: people are often consciously or subconsciously influenced by celebrities's choices. Recently, female celebrities have introduced new and exciting approaches to fashion, music, and television that have impacted audiences worldwide. However, one does not have to be mainstream to make a change, and women who are less visible to the public eye are also making waves in their respective industries.

Through their nuanced perspectives, women from all backgrounds have been able to redefine aspects of pop culture that compliment the world’s ever-changing social climate.

When thinking of today’s music scene, Billie Eilish is one of the first female artists that comes to mind. Now nineteen years old, Eilish gained stardom at just seventeen, though her 2015 debut track, "Ocean Eyes."

Her music quickly gained popularity for its unique style, reflecting a darker, more dimensional edge. She established herself early on as an alternative image of the typical teen performer.

Her music is grounded in rhythm while dealing with serious topics such as drug addiction and mental health. Eilish is unafraid to mix different music styles, such as electronic dance music (EDM) and pop, and it is apparent that she puts a lot of thought and effort into each of her songs. This different approach successfully engages audiences; as noted by Vox, Eilish is the first artist born in the 21st century to top the Billboard 200.

The power of Eilish’s music surpasses the typical Spotify playlist or radio station listening. People have used

Eilish’s music in TikTok trends—her song “Therefore I am” was featured over three million times—and social media covers, showing one way her music impacts listeners globally. Eilish’s music has transformed the way people perceive alternative music. To produce a “different” kind of sound, Eilish has created pieces with intricate musical and lyrical components—such as using a dentist’s grinding tool in her song “Bury A Friend”— that have engaged audiences young and old. As she continues to develop her musical style, avid listeners have learned about more than just their musical interests; many have been able to make personal connections to Eilish’s stories of heartbreak and self confidence, enabling them to explore their own identities in the process. Eilish has not only redefined music as an art form but also the way audiences perceive popular songs.

WOMEN FROM ALL BACKGROUNDS HAVE BEEN ABLE TO REDEFINE ASPECTS OF POP CULTURE THAT COMPLIMENT THE WORLD’S EVER-CHANGING SOCIAL CLIMATE. Moving to visual representations of pop culture, the world of television has made great strides since its introduction nearly a century ago, especially regarding its representation of women. Laverne Cox has been a trailblazer in the industry, especially for those who identify as members of the LGBTQIA+ community. A transgender woman, Cox gained popularity for play13

ing Sophia Burrset in the Netflix series Orange Is the New Black. Her performance made her the first openly transgender person to be nominated for a Primetime Emmy Award. She is also the first openly transgender person to win a Daytime Emmy Award as an executive producer for Laverne Cox Presents: The T Word.

Through her television work, Cox has been able to amplify other LGBTQIA+ voices. Laverne Cox Presents: The T Word centers on the experiences of trans youth and how they navigate bullying and anti-trans violence. She was also the executive producer of Disclosure: Trans Lives on Screen. This Netflix documentary focuses on how transgender people are depicted in Hollywood and how these portrayals impact the transgender community and American culture.

WOMEN CONTINUE TO CONTRIBUTE THEIR UNIQUE, CREATIVE IDEAS TO THE WORLD AND SHOW PEOPLE HOW THEY CAN PROMOTE CHANGE. Cox uses her work as a platform of advocacy and acceptance, spreading awareness through her performances and behind-the-scenes roles. Her work’s motivation is clear: to continue the conversation surrounding LGBTQIA+ individuals and give the community a greater voice in popular culture.

While music and television are often at the forefront of pop culture, fashion is an area of equal significance.

When it comes to fashion, it seems as if new styles appear out of thin air. More frequently, designers are finding new ways to change what people already know about fashion, whether through new materials or nuanced designs. These designers are unafraid to take risks with their work. People have become so used to the typical cotton t-shirt or linen pants that these changes are becoming all the more necessary. Elena Velez, a 2019 Teen Vogue Generation Next designer, certainly fits into this category.

A recent graduate of the Parsons School of Design, Velez finds inspiration from her experiences with her mother—who works as a ship captain—and her upbringing in the Midwest. She utilizes materials typically used for sailing, including ship lines and repurposed sails, and creates wearable pieces of art such as dresses and gloves. As Teen Vogue describes, her designs “play on the ideas of femininity, challenging with the ideas of what can be beautiful by using materials that are deemed for grunt work and transforming them into ethereal garments.”

14

Velez’s technique is undoubtedly out of the ordinary, as she does not rely on typical materials to create her iconic looks. She brings a nuanced edge to sustainable fashion and, with her unique pieces, forces people to reconsider what fashion and femininity mean to them.

Although Velez may not be as well-known as others in the fashion world, this does not diminish her impact on the industry and its changing perception.

These three women have all worked to redefine pop culture through their respective industries. In a world where COVID-19 seems to halt almost all activity, these women continue to contribute their unique, creative ideas to the world and show people how they can promote change in even the darkest of times, with some continuing to create throughout the pandemic. In a society dominated by men, having women in these positions is important in showing the potential that future generations can bring to pop culture. As they—and others in the world of pop culture—continue their work, pop culture as we know it can only advance from what it is today.

“WHILE YOU LIVE, THE REVOLUTION LIVES.” SUZANNE COLLINS [ABOUT KATNISS EVERDEEN], CATCHING FIRE Any political science major or historian who has read 2008’s The Hunger Games should be no stranger to the impact the novel and its protagonist, Katniss Everdeen, have had on empowering youth activism. The book has become a touchstone for young-adult fiction and dystopian media, from its three-fingered salute becoming a global symbol for unity to its central character’s association with several young female activists.

In this adaption of my thesis, “Untitled: An Analysis of Modern-day Dystopian Media as it Relates to the Political Momentum of Today’s Youth,” I explore how Katniss Everdeen became and remains a global symbol for resistance.

2008’s The Hunger Games Narrated by Katniss, The Hunger Games takes place in a post-apocalyptic world. The novel explores how the Capitol, a highly advanced metropolis, exercises political control over the rest of the nation: the Hunger Games. This annual event takes one boy and one girl (called tributes) between twelve and eighteen from each of the twelve surrounding districts to compete in a televised battle to the death. Katniss is the female tribute from District Twelve.

In a genre dominated by the Harry Potter series and The Twilight Saga, The Hunger Games is a profound critique of the social and political issues that plague the world. The book pushes readers to see parallels between Panem’s war-ravaged world and their own.

Whereas Harry Potter and Twilight laid an important

foundation for new young adult (YA) fiction in movies and books, The Hunger Games gave YA direction. It pinpointed female leaders who took control of their destiny as the center of the genre, further conflating strong young women with dystopian literature.

I cannot overstate the success of The Hunger Games.

Over one hundred million copies of the books have been sold worldwide. Their accompanying film adaptations have done equally well, amassing over $3 billion in worldwide box office sales. Many point to the series’s engaging prose and natural relatability to explain its unprecedented success. As for the movies, critics point to a captivating love triangle and memorable leading actress.

THE HUNGER GAMES GAVE YA DIRECTION. IT PINPOINTED FEMALE LEADERS WHO TOOK CONTROL OF THEIR DESTINY AS THE CENTER OF THE GENRE. While these are all great reasons why the movies and books achieved commercial success, they fail to account for the novel's political impact. Why is The 15

Hunger Games, instead of any other politically and socially conscious YA novel, seen as a worldwide symbol for resistance? Not all politically-themed novels have inspired protest symbols. Moreover, because other politically-minded novels mirrored its commercial success without similar impact, that does little to explain Katniss’s political symbolism.

Games, such as the Harry Potter series or The Giver, were either numerous and arguable or purposely vague, The Hunger Games shares a clear, almost unequivocal message. Collins does so by incorporating the oppressive regime into its plot, making its protagonist notably flawed and markedly teenage, and emphasizing her characters’s ignorance.

Revolutionaries are Hard to Write

Harry Potter—arguably the only more successful YA series of the 21st century—fails to do the same. Thus, the Harry Potter series’s exploration of the dangers of fascism, nationalism, and the need for equality is lost on its younger readers. Moreover, while the series’s parallels to World War II might be a staple of scholarly discussions of the books, this connection is lost among most of its general audience who read its message far differently.

The Hunger Games series’s cultural impact stems from its realism and nuanced take on dystopia from the young-adult perspective than others in the same genre.

Collins has something to say, and she says it well.

Not all dystopian YA novels published after 2008 are knockoffs of The Hunger Games, but Collins’s work clearly influenced many YA books. Divergent capitalized on the success of both The Hunger Games and the budding YA-dystopian subgenre. If an author writes a book to profit off the success of a trend, they are unlikely to write to share a message. Even if there is a message, it is less likely to be as strong or purposely conveyed. The Maze Runner series and the Ender’s Game film illustrate the purposeless production of media. The latter’s source material was written in the 1980s but was released after The Hunger Games.

In contrast, Collins wrote The Hunger Games to share a message. The series’s world is intentionally simple to allow Collins to explore the larger themes of exploitation, war, greed, and pride. Her Capitol does not just represent the “one percent;” it depicts the readers.

These characters represent First World America and those who live in relative luxury, ignoring the rest of the world’s problems. Readers don’t look at the Capitol as a representation of the government alone, but as an allegory for the blind eye that most Americans turn toward the impoverished. Lines like “nobody decent ever wins the Games’’ and “your job is to be a distraction, so people forget what the real problems are” from Catching Fire prove this point perfectly.

HER CAPITOL DOES NOT JUST REPRESENT THE “ONE PERCENT;” IT DEPICTS THE READERS. THESE CHARACTERS REPRESENT FIRST WORLD AMERICA AND THOSE WHO LIVE IN RELATIVE LUXURY, IGNORING THE REST OF THE WORLD’S PROBLEMS. Collins’s writing is also explicit, so unlike many of the novel’s predecessors, The Hunger Games’s message never falls through the cracks. Whereas the messages of popular YA novels that preceded The Hunger 16

Additionally, the Harry Potter series suffers from the lack of attention paid to its main three characters’s ages. In this series specifically, the main character’s ages are a character trait more than a plot point.

While the books serve as a coming-of-age story for its protagonist and its supporting characters, it is often forgotten that they’re only eleven in the first novel.

Their behavior is uncharacteristic of their age. Most eleven-year-olds cannot lead relatively normal lives without parental supervision, nor can they withstand the same amount of trauma and harm without lasting effects. What The Hunger Games does differently in this respect is making its protagonist a teenager both in name and practice.

However, The Hunger Games series’s impact on the youth can be credited almost solely to its main character, Katniss. Unlike any protagonist that came before her and many that came after, she is a staunch rejection of the stereotypical literary revolutionary leader.

Not only is she a young woman—already a notable difference from most of her predecessors—but she also rejects leadership. She doesn’t want to lead and, for the most part, she doesn’t.

Instead, she is constantly directed by more experienced adults who have to tell her that she will get people killed. Collins writes Katniss as a traumatized teenager with true-to-form emotional reactions that are uncharacteristic of the type of revolutionary leader readers became accustomed to in YA. She is not calculating or overly educated; her decisions prove that. Her imperfection differentiates her. She leads as a teenage reader would— it is what makes her more relatable than her counterparts.

An example of this unrelatability post-The Hunger Games is Divergent. While both series have unrelatable worldbuilding (there is no real-world equivalent to Divergent’s choosing ceremonies or The Hunger Games’s hunger games), the differences between their protagonists is what makes the latter more relatable.

Katniss’s actions are relatable because they are driven primarily by her desire to protect her sister. Collins

intentionally portrays her as a child, so readers are constantly reminded of how little experience she has in leadership. Conversely, Tris, Divergent protagonist, is seen as selfish and has far less relatable motivations.

In the novel, she rarely gives others the benefit of the doubt she expects for herself and will let hundreds of people die for Tobias, her love interest. As relatable a young love can be, this seemingly didn’t resonate.

Additionally, Collins’s depiction of Katniss’s trauma and post-traumatic stress disorder was—and continues to be—almost unheard of in dystopian YA literature. Often, dystopian novels get so caught up in the protagonists’s incredible actions that they forget to be realistic. Any child forced into experiences like those of Katniss Everdeen or Harry Potter is bound to be traumatized, but Harry does not reflect trauma like Katniss does. Collins plays into Katniss’s trauma in Mockingjay by having her decisions reflect it. Her other characters also directly address it, even asking if it’s possible for someone traumatized for so long to be an effective revolutionary figure. This acknowledgment of Katniss’s trauma further cements her as one of the few realistic young leaders in literature.

Katniss Everdeen as a Political Symbol

Real-life comparisons of both The Hunger Games and its protagonist are plentiful. In North America, look no further than to Elizabeth Warren in 2014, then a first-term US senator from Massachusetts. Her reluctant approach to political leadership, such as the presidency, had her compared to Katniss Everdeen.

Dubbed the Warren-as-Katniss campaign, this comparison did loads to garner support for a potential 2016 bid for the presidency. Though Warren insisted she wasn’t running for president that year (in true Katniss fashion), this depiction of her as a woman of and for the people was a powerful message that boosted her significantly against political adversaries.

Warren isn’t the only political figure to be compared to Katniss. Activists like Malala Yousafzai, Emma Gonzalez, and Greta Thunberg have all received similar praise: Yousafzai, for her work with educating young girls; Gonzalez, for her leadership in the March for Our Lives Protests; and Thunberg, for leading the fight against climate change.

These parallels aren’t completely uncalled for. The Hunger Games series’s focus on economic inequality and the upper class’s ignorance resonates with Senator Warren’s political playbook. Pushing for “big structural change,” Warren’s 2020 presidential campaign focused on breaking up big banks and “toobig-to-fail” corporations and conglomerates, and she similarly emphasized her proposed “wealth tax.”

Likewise, Yousafzai, Thunberg, and Gonzalez—all women who share Katniss’s and Warren’s reluctant ascent to leadership—each fight for their causes because of an innate passion, not because they are special. This fervor, along with their young age, makes the comparison ring true.

ACCORDINGLY, KATNISS EVERDEEN’S LEGACY HAS EVOLVED FROM AN INSPIRATION FOR YOUNG GIRLS TO LEAD CHANGE TO A SYMBOL FOR GLOBAL YOUTH REBELLION That said, Katniss Everdeen has become a political inspiration beyond these comparisons. Across the Pacific Ocean, Everdeen’s three-fingered salute became a symbol of resistance in Thailand. In response to the 2014 military coup, Thai protesters adopted Everdeen’s salute as their symbol of resistance. Time Magazine reports how “scores of those proffering the salute during weekend street protests [were] dragged off by troops, in scenes eerily reminiscent of the Suzanne Collins novels and movie franchise.” Similarly, during the height of 2020’s Black Lives Matter protests across the United States, teenagers took to social media to post videos and pictures of the protests scored with a notable Katniss Everdeen monologue from the final movie.

Accordingly, Katniss Everdeen’s legacy has evolved from an inspiration for young girls to lead change to a symbol for global youth rebellion. Katniss has not only become a moniker given to powerful young female activists but also a political symbol, a figure that has and continues to inspire millions to act against oppression and toward a collective cause.

I cannot say for certain when or if this will change.

The Hunger Games series will soon become a classic of dystopian media because it changed YA fiction and impacts real-life politics. For those reasons alone, regardless of whether her legacy ends with Generation Z, Katniss Everdeen will go down in history as one of the most influential literary characters ever written.

17

Greek life has been a cultural focal point on many campuses across the United States throughout its history. Recently, however, these institutions have sparked novel and juxtaposing national conversations on the role of Greek life in modern America. Keeping up with the racial reckoning the country has undergone over the past several months, sororities and fraternities have joined in the confrontation of their sinister underpinnings through the #AbolishGreekLife movement.

On a national scale, Greek life has attempted to combat systemic racism within sororities and fraternities.

Groups at Northeastern University have recently adopted similar rhetoric.

The #AbolishGreekLife movement has become a new leg of the national discourse on racism. At schools like Northwestern University and Swarthmore College, the campaign has gained support and countless fraternities and sororities have already disbanded.

“I couldn’t anticipate an abolish Greek life movement or having to meet with this reckoning of our history, but now that I’ve arrived at the role and I’ve done it, I think we’ve needed this time to reevaluate our priorities and values,” said former Northeastern Kappa Delta President Rebecca Powell. A participant in a tradition spanning almost 250 years, Powell is just one of many who has utilized this movement as a jumping off point for assessing the historic implications of their practices.

Conceived in 1775, Greek life originated as literary societies or collegiate social groups made exclusively for wealthy Anglo-Saxon Protestant men. It began as a way for the elite of higher education to discuss academia, but quickly transformed into an expansive networking system that gave college graduates a legup in their careers.

18

“Most of these organizations had White clauses at some point in the constitution saying who could be members, and then we get to the rituals and traditions and recognize that so much of them are embedded in whiteness,” said Kathleen Gillon, a researcher and associate professor at the University of Maine.

With a foundation as a highly exclusive institution created to serve the White men of higher education, there are inherent qualities within Greek life that are entrenched in White supremacy, classism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, and discrimination according to “Race and Racism is Fraternity and Sorority Life: A Historical Overview” by Gillon.

Northeastern’s Greek life system has over thirty-five organizations and around 2,700 active students.

It consists of ten Panhellenic sororities, a National Pan-Hellenic Council of seven sororities, a Multicultural Greek Council of seven chapters, and an Interfraternity Council of eleven fraternities. Surveying these organizations’s social media pages, there is evidence of a trend towards anti-racism work in its posts, but investigating the reality of this work from chapter to chapter reveals something much more complex.

“I am the only White-passing woman of color on the leadership team of fifteen people, and thinking about how minorities are treated in Greek life is something that I was hesitant about when I joined,” said Northeastern Chi Omega President Miranda Nimmer.

Anti-racist activism is a new responsibility of sorority leaders that came suddenly to chapters across the country with the cultural shift in the U.S. to focusing on instances of racial inequity. Its urgency in the context of Greek life meant that they had to move quickly.

“The first thing that we wanted to do was not just say ‘oh we’re not racist’s because that was not true,” said Nimmer. “It was [a question of] what measures

can we take to ensure the sustainability of the chapter over time, including a lot more education and self and group reflection.”

Chi Omega launched multiple initiatives, including an anti-racist book club, resource awareness on literature and foundations, a Diversity in Greek Life panel, and an intersectionality week that included discourse between its sisters on language and implicit bias.

“I think reading and getting more information is always a good place to start,” said Gillon, “It’s ‘what are we going to do,’ ‘what is our action plan,’ after we’ve finished the book.” She also highlighted discussion as a key component of beginning anti-racism work.

There is no real blueprint for what the future of Greek life should look like if it wants to separate from its racist roots, so there is a wide variety of approaches to reformation from organization to organization on campus.

“The kind of racism we’re fighting is not really people rampantly saying the n-word; it’s a much more insidious under-the-surface thing of policies that you don’t realize are exclusive or things in our language,” said Sasha Shenk, Vice President of Standards in Kappa Delta at Northeastern.

Initiatives that Shenk headed as her chapter’s Social Justice and Education Committee include creating a mandatory anti-discrimination agreement and reforming positions to decrease exclusionary activity. They also worked to reform their initiation rituals and protocols on a national level.

“I would say it’s like a stool, so if we’re going to get any structural change to happen around fraternity and sorority life, you are going to have to deal with the chapters themselves, the alumni, and the national organization,” said Gillon.

Communicating and forming unity between chapters in sororities or fraternities can prove difficult when many organizations have thousands of members at dozens of different colleges across the nation. The collaboration of chapters in vastly different geopolitical climates can prove challenging, according to Shenk.

“I see changes within our Nationals every day, but I think it is going to be slow progress, and I think it is going to come when women within this sisterhood grow up and decide to take on those leadership roles at a national level,” said Powell.

Creating a widespread course of action in fighting the problems that Greek life faces hits barriers when people are not all coming from the same social and political context. For fraternities and sororities reaching out to their adjacent organizations, this reality becomes especially evident.

“The political makeup of our country is so stratified and polarized that a lot of people interpret these discussions differently, so working with all the different sororities can pose challenges,” said Lily Rupert, former president of Tri Sigma at Northeastern. Many Northeastern sororities have fostered discussions through social media with adjacent chapters across the country in attempts to unify their efforts.

Another leg of inclusion and anti-racism within Greek life is how the organizations are showcased to Northeastern’s student body, and social media is a massive part of this. Greek life must reflect that ideal in its outward image.

“As public relations chair for Pan-Hellenic, I make an effort to repost infographics and links to organizations that support anti-racism, and make sure to depict not just white women on the Instagram page,” said second-year Northeastern student Lacie Foreht. Creating an image on social media where BIPOC sisters feel represented is key to moving the community forward, according to Foreht.

Tri Sigma primarily focused on financial inclusivity by setting aside a $1500 fund for scholarships, advocating for need-based scholarships amongst all chapters, working to allocate money to pay for anti-racism training, and promoting discourse on dues and financial transparency for potential new members.

WITH A FOUNDATION AS A HIGHLY EXCLUSIVE INSTITUTION CREATED TO SERVE THE WHITE MEN OF HIGHER EDUCATION, THERE ARE INHERENT QUALITIES WITHIN GREEK LIFE THAT ARE ENTRENCHED IN DISCRIMINATION. “That’s a real critique around the sheer cost of these organizations and how they become exclusionary from a class perspective, but in the US, we also know that race and class are very connected,” said Gillon.

Current efforts by sororities and fraternities at Northeastern to amend their exclusionary practices and history are a far cry from a fully reformed Greek life, but the organizations that have stepped up to the mission of anti-racism are not backing away from the pursuit of a more just and inclusive community.

“Especially in Greek life where there’s already such a lack of diversity and representation,” said Meadows, “not taking on that role of doing the work of anti-racism just does a disservice to your sisters and tells them you don’t value them in the same ways.”

19

The 2020 election ended with a record number of women destined to serve in the next Congress.

However, there is one societal issue of female leadership, specifically in the higher ranks of politics, which trickles down to America’s everyday citizens: likeability. Qualities that are assets for men—such as aggression or direct communication—are condemned in women, bogging down the possibility of female leadership.

Take September 2020. On the subject of now Vice President Kamala Harris, Donald Trump said “Nobody likes her. She could never be the first woman president. She could never be.” Instead of critiquing Harris for her history in the US Justice Department and how this could affect her future policy, Trump argued against her likability.

This type of criticism and pressure faced by female-identifying leaders extends beyond the highest levels of governance to all female leaders at Northeastern. It carries down to the Northeastern Women’s Interdisciplinary Society of Entrepreneurship (WISE) student program directors and The Huntington News’s section editors at Northeastern.

Tobe Chima, a second-year and vice president of Northeastern’s WISE WeSupport mentorship program, has her own view of female leadership and how to combat expectation.

“I feel like [the word female] has a negative or different connotation or expectation that I will lead differently in a way that can be negative . . . I tend to work best in situations where I’m empowered,” she said.

20

According to Chima, there is a silent pressure to be liked in the workplace that women must combat together. To her, it’s quite a let down when other wimen don’t feel the same comradery.

“You want to prove that you deserve a seat at the table because as females, we’re inclined to approach things like we don’t deserve them,” Chima said.

“It’s hard because you don’t only have men [oppressing women] but also other females who don’t want to empower you, but who think you’re competition.”

THIS TYPE OF CRITICISM AND PRESSURE FACED

BY FEMALE-IDENTIFYING LEADERS EXTENDS BEYOND THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF GOVERNANCE TO ALL FEMALE LEADERS AT NORTHEASTERN. Women pushing down other women is often attributed by experts to internalized misogyny. According to a study by Utah State University undergraduate student Audrianna Dehlin, “This study supports several conclusions regarding the connection between sexism and internalized misogyny and a variety of psychosocial and political factors.”

Chima believes the way to gain respect in a space

where there is a lack of women is to “walk in with confidence and humbleness because people really appreciate that … You don’t arrive a scrambled mess even though your day has been horrible.”

Clara McCourt, a new first-year section editor for The Huntington News, says that for women, likeability correlates with traditionally feminine qualities.

“Female leaders feel the need to soften themselves so they’re not labeled like a bitch or just pushy or aggressive,” McCourt said. “Women often avoid being perceived as aggressive because it can hurt them in the long run. Even though when a male does the same thing, he’s seen as a good leader; he gets the job done.”

These fears and worries about perception are often unfortunately validated in the media. Just one example from earlier this year mislabels passion and drive in female leadership as aggression, which does not fall under the stereotypical view of feminine leadership. According to US Rep Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), “Representative Yoho put his finger in my face, he called me disgusting, he called me crazy, he called me out of my mind … In front of reporters Representative Yoho called me, and I

quote, ‘a fucking bitch.’”

To women consuming media that places limitiations on female leadership, it seems the scope of femininity is closed off to women who wish to act in ways that include being outspoken and passionate. Feminist discourse identifies this phenomenon as “the likeability trap.”

I THINK IT’S INEVITABLE JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT TO PROVE THAT YOU DESERVE A SEAT AT THE TABLE BECAUSE AS FEMALES, WE’RE INCLINED TO APPROACH THINGS LIKE WE DON’T DESERVE THEM. “Female leaders tend to use a lot of modifiers like ‘if you want to,’ [or] ‘if that’s ok,’” McCourt said, referring to workplace language found in emails or meeting rooms.“And I think that women should be allowed to be as abrasive as they want,” she continued.

McCourt believes that because women dominate The Huntington News lifestyle section, “It’s taken less seriously ... even though we’ve had some good reporting this semester and we’re pushing towards good reporting next semester.”

In an interview with National Public Radio, Alicia Menendez, author of “The Likeability Trap,” said the solution to these kinds of effects on women is clear: changing the workplace and changing your individual mindset.

“Based on gender, based on race, based on ethnicity, there all of these ideas about who a leader should be and how that leader should act that is keeping so many people out of positions of leadership - that if we could really push back and expand our notions of what leadership looks like, it could change the entire game,” Menendez said.

The individually-based solution, according to Menendez, is to always ask questions and use language that empowers women rather than take swipes. Instead of saying she’s “helpful,” focus on the impact of her work. Instead of using “emotional,” use “passionate.” Women should use language that builds each other up. These changes will empower the next generation of female leaders to make strides for the next generation of women and the next generation of innovation.

21

“My daughter won’t ever have to question her sexuality, because she won’t be raised thinking it is a choice.”

No, this is not something my parents said to me (thank God, and thank you mom and dad). It’s something an old friend from my hometown posted on Facebook in response to an article about Veronica Ivy, a professional cyclist formerly known as Rachel McKinnon. She was dominating the cycling world at the time and set a world record in 2019 for the two hundred meter sprint within her age group. But it wasn’t the records Ivy set that made my friend so frustrated—it was the fact that she was even allowed to compete at all.

I’ve always thought of myself as a very fluid person in all senses of the word—I am a water sign, after all! So in true indecisive Pisces fashion, one of the things I’ve always hated was the writing prompt that college essays and job applications have beaten to death: “What’s one word you’d use to describe yourself?” That’s probably the toughest question you could ask me, and I guarantee I’d have a different answer for every day of the year. I could use a lot of words to label myself and my personality — dramatic, loud, charming, amazing, hilarious — but the idea of choosing just one descriptive word about myself to share with the world has always seemed way too finite for my liking.

Veronica Ivy is a trans woman.

That was enough for this (former) friend of mine to share the article with a caption: “I don’t wanna be on this Earth anymore.”

So I’ve decided to use that brilliant logic to come out in the best way I know how: using a one thousand word essay to explain something that can be boiled down to just three.

Well then! There is a lot going on there and—not to quote John Mulaney but—we don’t have time to unpack all of that. Beyond the grave implications on trans rights, the post got me thinking about something that I’ve spent months trying to find the words for. I have always supported and been completely enthralled by the LGBTQIA+ community and it took me until I was twenty-one to admit a truth that I had subconsciously known for years — that I was a part of that community.

22

I’m not straight!

So now that we’ve cleared that up, let me explain—not because I feel like I have to, but because I want to.

College really changes a person.

Actually, scratch that—college helps foster change within a person. Moving away from your home and

your family will do that. Living on your own in a big city for the first time, surrounded by new opportunities, pushes you to learn who you really are and can help you figure out who you want to be.

I’ve had my fair share of relationships: the good, the bad, the whatever. I was in an abusive relationship that drowned out my last two years of high school, and that experience changed me forever—in ways that I’m still learning how to deal with. But it also forced me to face a lot of meaningful truths about myself, my life, my relationships, and most importantly, my happiness. And in a way, it feels like it changed me entirely because when it was over, I had no choice but to reevaluate, heal, and start over again.

I left for Australia a month after high school ended as part of Northeastern’s NUin program, living there until Thanksgiving. I left what felt like everything I knew from my old life in the rearview mirror and threw myself into the midst of a new country, a new era of my life surrounded by all new people—all while still figuring out how to exist on my own for the first time.

Trying to heal and find myself again in the wake of trauma was a long, painful process and probably one of the hardest things I’ve ever had to do. But I wouldn’t change it for the world. It helped me grow, evolve, discover new things about myself, and experience the world in ways I wouldn’t have had if I never left my hometown.

The most important thing was that I came out the other side stronger, more confident, and unapologetically myself. For instance, I still love sports, but I prefer writing about them instead of playing. The idea of tattoos and putting something on your body forever used to freak me out, but here I am today with seven tattoos and counting. I used to be scared of being home alone, but now living alone is the most serene part of my life. I love taking daily naps. Black coffee is very good. And, you know, I like women.

AND THAT’S WHEN IT HIT ME—WOW, MAYBE I’M NOT FULLY STRAIGHT?!?!

A CONCEPT.

If you introduced 2021 me to circa-2014 me, she would probably faint or do something equally as dramatic, but only because of how different I look.

Once the two Calli’s started talking, I think the old me would be pretty dang proud of where I ended up and what I overcame to get there. A devout feminist and successful journalist who’s published articles in the Boston Globe, interviewed professional athletes, and served on the executive board of her sorority and countless other campus organizations? Not bad for a twenty-two-year-old, eh?

The biggest part of that self-discovery for me wasn’t about my sexuality—I think I figured that out in third grade when I had a crush on my best friend—but when I realized that I was ready to embrace this part of my identity. Women had always been beautiful and breathtaking to me, but the problem was boys were kinda cute too! I was overwhelmed and didn’t understand how I could possibly appreciate and be attracted to both. I wasn’t ready to deal with that in middle or high school, and I ultimately decided that it was better to stick with what I knew (boys) and not make waves—because if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, right?

I never even entertained the idea of actually liking girls. It was too much, too complicated. And honestly, I thought that it was pretty normal for straight girls, like myself, to have massive girl crushes like I did—until a few months ago, when I was telling my three best friends from home about a girl that I had been talking to and was starting to have feelings for. This wasn’t super out of the ordinary; I’ve never been a stranger to calling it like I see it when talking about a boy or girl who I think has blessed genes.

But my moment of reckoning came when that con23

versation turned to my friends, who all agreed that they have never and probably will never be romantically or sexually interested in women in the same way they are with men. And that’s when it hit me—wow, maybe I’m not fully straight?!?! A concept.

I’M BEING ME TO THE FULLEST EXTENT IN THE MOST AUTHENTIC WAY I KNOW HOW, AND I’M GAYER THAN I’VE EVER BEEN (IN ALL SENSES OF THE WORD)!

There’s a reason I say I’m not straight, instead of calling myself bisexual or a lesbian or pansexual or another identity used to classify sexualities. The reason is: I don’t know which one I am, and I don’t want to pick a word to describe something as complex as love and feelings and sex. I like boys, I like girls, I like people. I can meet someone of either gender, and if I find them physically attractive, vibe well with them, and think they’re a good, fun person, then sure, pencil me in for a date! Because I don’t care what I am and that’s okay. It’s okay to be unsure; it’s okay to not know how to boil yourself down to just a few descriptive words so people can try and define you. I’m being me to the fullest extent in the most authentic way I know how, and I’m gayer than I’ve ever been (in all senses of the word)!

Over the past few months, I’ve been able to fully embrace, explore, and express who I am, and that has changed everything for me. I’ve been able to be honest with myself and the world about who I like and want to kiss and get butterflies for. I’ve made amazing new connections—romantically and otherwise—and have been on dates with girls who have made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside, the way you read about. I have felt more comfortable and at home in my own skin than I ever have before. It’s not that I was uncomfortable before or living some kind of lie, but I was limiting myself to only experiencing half of my life. I was too wrapped up in my own head about what admitting I liked girls would change for me. But I’ve been able to rewrite my story, and this time, reinventing a version of Calli that

24

I’m truly, honestly, down-to-the-core happy with.

And now it’s time to share her with the world: my friends, co-workers, classmates, followers, but most importantly, my family. So consider this my coming-out story; because my life up until now has been some kind of perfect storm of hits and misses and ups and downs that have somehow led me right to where I am now, which is right where I should be.

Dear reader, First and foremost, we want to thank all the people who made this magazine possible. To you, reader, thank you for taking the time to listen to the perspectives of all the amazing women who worked on this magazine. To the editorial board, thank you for the hours you devoted to reading over articles.

To the authors, thank you for contributing to our magazine and for raising so many critical issues that too often are forgotten. And to the rest of the IWC, thank you for allowing us to put together this magazine to highlight the female leadership that is so often overlooked.

As we considered themes for our inaugural issue, we were struck by how many nuances of feminist theory are often overlooked. Whether that be intersectional feminism or discussions of the male gaze, few mainstream publications focus on these conversations unless they are relevant to the news cycle.

While there are many concepts we could have discussed, we chose female leadership as an ode to the IWC’s mission: to create and empower female leaders at Northeastern and beyond. We hope our magazine begins conversations on our campus that have been neglected for too long and look forward to the impact it will bring to our current campus community and beyond.

Best, Stephanie Luiz Editor-in-Chief

Ivy Saltsman Assistant Editor-in-Chief

25