Page 1

Issue 1o | Spring | 2021





20 21

Editor-in-Chief Haley Ayotte

Creative Director Brionna Poole

Editorial Director

Sean Herpolsheimer

Advertising Director Blake Roselle

Lead Graphic Designer Sam McNeal

Photo Director Daniel Square

Co-Public Relations Directors Ashlyn Delaney Avery Jackson


Mark Elgersma Michael France Isabella Gross Jason Mason Zachary Reynolds Jordyn Wilcox

Public Relations Staff Shianne McMillian

Advertising Staff Matt McNeff

Event Management Trever Lloyd

FOUNDERS: Jordan Moorhead Kaitlyn Lauer Alexis Kelly

Graphic Designers Sydney Belz Emmanuel Carter Madeline Morley Trey Raab Anessa Schweitzer


Audrey Balcom Cassidy Palmateer Devin Ricks Jillian Roberts Simone Thiede Hailey Urbane Laken Hoody


Brenna Klenk Kelly Klouw Brianna Maloney Alexa Monroy Ava Unti Mollie Wiltzius

THERAWMAG.COM Facebook: The RAW Magazine Instagram & Twitter: @rawmagcmu

Letter from the Editor

When I first started with RAW I was

a photographer, then made my way to photography director and now I’m proud to say that I’ve ended my last semester with RAW as Editor-in-Chief. It’s hard to find the right words to explain how thankful I am for having the opportunity of being Editor-in-Chief for CMU’s first and only fashion publication. I’ve learned so much working with my RAW family, from past years to now. Without the constant love and support from each and every member of our staff, we wouldn’t be where we are today publishing our 10th issue: The Dazed Issue. This issue was brought to life to help our staff step out of their comfort zone and think outside the box. We wanted to create an issue for our readers that steps outside the norm and pushes new boundaries. As we are an all-inclusive magazine, it only felt right to highlight our slogan: “Where Editorial Meets Edge.” As this is my last semester with RAW, I want to thank each staff member and reader for being a part of the RAW family. Not only does your hard work and support help us reach greater heights, but it makes us closer as a family. Leaving RAW is not going to be easy, but it will forever live on in my heart. I want everyone to remind everyone, especially my staff, to never give up on their dreams. I never thought that I’d be Editor-in-Chief, but here I am.

Haley Ayotte

Letter from the Creative D irector I started out at RAW as a member of the graphic design team and now, almost exactly 2 years later I’m finishing my second semester as creative director. I never dreamed of taken on such a big role but I’m incredibly thankful for the opportunity to step into this position. Thank you to everyone who took a chance on me and gave me the opportunity to be in a situation where I am encouraged to grow and test my creative limits. Thank you to the founders of RAW for creating a space for students to create truly amazing content and see themselves represented in the fashion industry. RAW has opened up a space to celebrate the beauty and talent of young creatives on this campus. This issue’s theme Dazed represents paying homage to those who did it before us. Zine culture of the 90’s was very inspirational for me. It gave people outside of the mainstream the chance to create content that spoke to them. Dazed magazine was created in the early 90’s by two college students and has gone on to grow into one of the most influential fashion magazines today. I can only hope that the staff at RAW can

Brionna Poole

CONT ENTS Growing Pains: 10

Happily Ever After!: 14 Duality: 18 Tinted.: 20 Rockstar Backstage: 26 Sublime: 36

Saturday Night Serenade: 40 My Pain is Ours: 48 Totally 90’s: 50 Fashion Has No Gender: 52 A Portrait In Negative Space: 56 Freedom To Dress: 64 Monochromatic: 72 Out Of Eden: 78 Sk8 Or Die: 83 Syd’s Place: 86

Photographed by Jillian Roberts Modeled by Zoie Vanderbush


Written by Zachary Reynolds




I exist between then/now

somewhere between here/there

in the middle of yes/no

It would be catastrophic if I was combustion is give/take.

separated from this

I am not safe.

even though I take up space



you insist that I am


you don’t realize that I’ve already tried

to pry apart my cells

like teeth from a wound

I unwound my skin

like bandages


Violent erasure of my how/when

leaves burns on my arms, pulps my skin like paper

pressed against why/why not.

Yesterday in the bathroom and sparrows flew out.

We live between the earth/sky


The harmony

of our voices cannot be untangled from one/


Bow your head with me in this sensational nowhere

let the last of your wrinkled petals

float away in the wind

all we have is here/now me/you/me/you/me


According to a psychological study at Barcelona University, to identify a person and get the maximum amount of emotional connection, we look at the person’s eyes. The brain is able to identify a person’s face from the eyes alone more than any other feature on the face. So much information and so much character are in the eyes alone, and the way we choose to decorate them says a lot about our character.

. ed

t n i t

son te a M yot n o s ey A is a J y Hal Sala b en by abi t t i Wr aphed by G gr eled o t d Pho Mo


Think of Audrey Hepburn, and you’ll likely think of her iconic Manhattan sunglasses worn in the film, Breakfast at Tiffany’s. Hepburn looks through the glass and right at the camera for one of the most famous fashion moments in film history. In the iconic romantic comedy, Hepburn plays Holly Golighty, a young woman who desperately longs for a luxurious lifestyle. This desperation affects her fashion identity as well as her choices as a character. Although she isn’t wealthy, she can be seen wearing designer dresses and overt upper-class clothing. In the picture she wears a black Givenchy dress, pearls around her neck, but the strongest piece of the outfit are the famous Manhattan sunglasses. She’s stylish and exquisite, but what is she trying to say?

The sunglasses are the most meaningful piece because the protagonist in question is questioning her identity, which for her means reevaluating her priorities on love and material things. The sunglasses play the role of hiding the truth that the character is struggling with and replaces it with the characters value of, and obsession with material things. She trademarks herself as upper-class, because that’s what she so desperately wants. Both the photograph and the film itself create a social commentary on materialism.

Then there was Kanye West in 2007, reimagining the shutter shades. The unorthodox glasses have bars of metal or plastic running horizontally across them, which are part of the frames like blinds or shutters. The sunglasses were so exclusive to West that they were referred to as “Kanye West glasses.” West debuted these shades in his music video for “Stronger”, the biggest hit and second single from Kanye’s third studio album, Graduation. The meaning and lyrics of the song are uplifting and feel-good, and the video is distinctly futurist. The glasses look like something that maybe a Star Wars character would casually wear, or really any character in a typical futuristic sci-fi movie. The video has the same confident, futurist, robotic inspiration that go hand in hand with the character of the sunglasses. Like Hepburn’s glasses, West’s alter his identity to fit perfectly with his artistic display. The shades are extremely overt and very different from any other, which pretty much sums up the identity of Kanye West. No matter what the era in the Kanye West evolution, whether it be as Jay-Z’s producer or modern Christian billionaire, he’s always been larger than life and very impactful to the general culture. But not only does it line up with the general idea of Kanye West, but the theme of the “Stronger” video they were introduced in as well.

The weight that sunglasses have on fashion is tremendous. The small accessory changes our persona unlike any other clothing article we can wear. This has changed fashion in films, hip-hop, runways, and everyday streetstyle. Think of the sunglasses you wear- why do you wear them? What do they say about you? Though every element of personal fashion makes a statement, there’s nothing like a trusty pair of tints.

Written by Isabella Gross Photographed by Cassidy Palmateer Modeled By Joelle Beauchamp






Written by Isabella Gross Photographed by Cassidy Palmateer Modeled by Khushpreet Kaur



T O T A L L Y 9 0 S’

Photographed by Hailey Urban


Mo de l: C assidy Palmateer


Photographed by Laken Hoody Modeled by Mark Elgersma &Jesse Bair

Fashion Has No Gender


Written & Photographed by Mark Elgersma Modeled by Laken Hoody

Four circles, each with a quarter of their body freshly carved out, turn to show each other their wounds. They discuss how and to what end they’ve been injured, and they find that their scars are identical. The cuts have been made with surgical precision. They have been made into partial circles, or “sectors.” Their meeting, as shown from a bird’s eye view, can be seen to the left. Their bodies are changed, but their perception is the same.

And yet out of the circles, we see a shape, each sector denoting a corner. We see the circles as still being whole, with a stark-white parallelogram superimposed onto them. It is by simplification and shortcuts that our brain builds its world—both external and internal. The human brain seeks order and patterns in the subjects it perceives. It’s why we denote some of our shirts as being “lucky,” and it’s why we throw a pinch of salt over our left shoulders if we happen to tip over the shaker. We are constantly data mining, searching the static and noise of our world for a comprehensible and clear pattern or consistency, even if none exists. A mind makes assumptions to fill what it cannot understand or see. It is by this same process that we see a rectangle appear out of the sectors’ congress. Although there are no concrete edges of the rectangle, the mere suggestion of the nonexistent shape’s vertices allows us to see more than what appears to an objective eye. A brain, trawling for information, latches onto whatever pattern it can find. Although less ink appears on the page than if the circles were whole and unharmed, we comprehend more.

Our brains are very bad at understanding what they see, and, despite my telling you that no rectangle exists, you and I both know that we’re cursed to continually see it. The way by which we create our own personal identities reflects the illusion of the sectors, although the victims who have been cut are not circles, but instead real people and communities with real lived experiences, each made into a corner or curve of our own being. That is, by recognizing and trying to exemplify how other parties are different from ourselves, we enforce and reinforce perceptions about ourselves and others. In this process, we try to learn and show who we are by learning and showing who we are not; we make non-identity that is to be avoided rather than focusing on the self and discerning who we are.


When one’s self-perception is based on avoiding some non-identity, their sense of self is fragile and unstable, and it is often framed by societal expectations. A popular example can be seen in heteronormativity, wherein a person, being taught that anything outside of heterosexuality is the undesirable “other,” may repress parts of themselves that they identify as “non-heterosexual” (whether these are actually homosexual urges or simply stereotypically “gay” things is inconsequential) to avoid that, and they may discriminate against or oppress others to further divide and distance themselves from that community. They are attempting to create their portrait in negative space rather than coming to terms with any actual identity. It’s by this same process that people further internalize racisms and sexisms. The question then becomes how we disengage from this—even when such assumptions have been long-encoded in us. Painting ourselves in negative space encourages bigotry, and it must be struck down. We have to purposefully seek the ways in which we lie to ourselves internally.

An example: the figure that appears to the left is called a café wall illusion. It’s a common example of perception being misaligned with reality—jagged blocks are locked between parallel lines, but their placement forces our brains to see angles and tapers where none exist. What we see and what our brains understand does not match up. We will never “see” parallel lines here, no matter how hard we try, but we can measure them and understand how our brain fills in those gaps. It’s only by recognizing the pitfalls in our thought patterns and intentionally considering the data—free of fallacies or assumptions—that we can begin to really interact with our world as it is rather than the world as we understand it at a glance.

This may include charting out your own beliefs and critically thinking about each thought or decision that faces you—do I believe this because I want to believe it, or do I believe it because I’ve considered it and the alternatives equally?—or it may consist of deconstructing your own biases and discriminations—am I considering this person as they are, or am I using a manipulated version of them to reinforce my view on my identity and the world?—but whatever it is, we must define ourselves with careful consideration. If we do not, we run the danger of carving out the identities of others to shape ourselves rather than considering them as individuals.


to dress

Written by Michael France Photographed by Hailey Urbane Models: Michael France, Sean Herpolsheimer, Avery Jackson & Blake Roselle

The December issue of the most popular fashion magazine in the world, Vogue, saw Harry Styles grace the cover. The contemporary superstar looks on in the seductive way that only he could pull off. His look is as provocative as his song-writing. Styles radiates sexuality in both his music and his wardrobe, but the latter came under fire soon after the issue was released. The reasoning for this was his grossly offensive style choice: a dress.

Right-wing commentators treated Styles’ attire as a threat to civilization in its entirety. That our enemies would see this behavior as a weakness. One pundit said it was Marxist. How intuitive, really, that clothing can advocate for an eco-political theory. Why is this rock star in a dress so controversial? The obvious answer is internalized insecurity (on behalf of the critical party), accompanied by the dangerous quandary the United States finds itself in as it enters a post-Trump era.


Four years of fearmongering and the reversal of social progress sees the return to a toxic time when femininity among macho-presenting persons is being subjugated. Apparently, Harry Styles is not the first man to don clothing items that challenge gender constructs. The realm of music is acquainted with the idea.

The red carpet’s fashion sense was colorless until the 1960s saw a new breadth of life. In music, it was Mick Jagger in his starkly feminine attire, whether it was on stage or strutting around the streets of a metropolitan borough full of reverent mortals. Bob Dylan, with his slimming black suits and scarves, was far from norms as well. In the 1970s, David Bowie was a chameleon when it came to fashion, his alter-egos keeping the public perception guessing and perpetuating the look of an androgynous oddity. Elton John was similar in this vein, especially with his onstage flamboyance.

The 1980s, perhaps the rebirth and height of modern conservatism, saw the biggest genre-bending (rock, funk, and what we now know as modern pop) and culture-blending superstar in Prince, who was extravagantly sexual and homoerotic in his personality and look. The star unfailingly dominated popular culture in the decade of Reagan while donning outfits consisting of revealing chaps and high-heels and the most impressive collection of jewelry this side of Elizabeth Taylor.

Even the hyper-masculine arena of sport saw one of its biggest stars completely shatter the hetero-normative ideas of dress. A basketball player, no less. Dennis Rodman did it all from piercings to a wedding dress to painted nails to a new hair color every other week. It all trickled down to the latest generation's pop culture icons. The hip-hop platform has two of its most recognizable faces, Lil Nas X and Lil Uzi Vert, breaking barriers in a genre of music known for toxic masculinity than a progressive sense of fashion.

In the film industry, Ezra Miller plays a superhero on the big screen while wearing a cape made of feathers and high heels and exotic makeup looks on the red carpet. Yet the norms still exist. Expectations for gendered clothing among boys are still there and looked upon harshly by prior generations. It begs the question of these red carpet regulars and superstars of popular culture are actually helping or hurting the progression of androgynous fashion. Especially if Harry Styles isn’t safe from the toxic masculinity of gender expectations.

The red carpet’s fashion sense was colorless until the 1960s saw a new breadth of life. In music, it was Mick Jagger in his starkly feminine attire, whether it was on stage or strutting around the streets of a metropolitan borough full of reverent mortals. Bob Dylan, with his slimming black suits and scarves, was far from norms as well. In the 1970s, David Bowie was a chameleon when it came to fashion, his alter-egos keeping the public perception guessing and perpetuating the look of an androgynous oddity. Elton John was similar in this vein, especially with his onstage flamboyance.

One would think that the pioneers of previous generations would have paved the way for today’s androgynous dress among the average person. And yet trickle-down androgyny is non-existent with the common self. There needs to be a complete normalization of androgynous wear, skirts and dresses for boys, earrings, and painted nails for the average male.

Not just the gatekept red carpet superstars. Skirts for outdoor activities instead of jeans, the ability to wear a dress in public without a judgmental gaze from onlookers. The acceptance of parents and elders. Clothing simply has no gender, nor sexuality. Self-expression is one of the most essential parts of living a truly fulfilled life, regardless of social constructs created by patriarchal cultivation.



Photographed by Hailey Urbane Modeled by Sophie Belletini & Davina Archempong


d e n E Out of

The fierceness in his eyes followed by the strained muscles in his arms. The fiery red hair with detailed tundra-like curls and the soft yet infinite sky. The piece, titled “The Fallen Angel,” by Alexandre Cabanel, presents the fallen angel Lucifer as he is kicked out of Paradise by God. Art is a reflection of history, and history always repeats itself. Furthermore, this art evolves alongside historical timelines to apply to new ideological contexts.

Written by Jordyn Wilcox Photographed by Simone Theide Modeled by Emmanuel Carter

Classical paintings from the Renaissance period have remained timeless over the years. Artists like Michelangelo and Leonardo Da Vinci managed to perfectly capture the society of the 17th century in terms of how people behaved, believed, and what they valued. Post-Black Plague, Europeans entered a phase coined the “Renaissance,” which was, by definition, a “rebirth.” I believe the same can be said about today’s culture. At the core of the European, the Renaissance was freedom of thought, and I would dare to say that we are experiencing a 21st century Enlightenment period. In the past five years, many social identity topics have taken the front stage of everyday discourse between individuals. The exploration of gender expression and the gender-binary has become a normalized (and at times, necessary) part of many individuals’ introspection. More and more people have started to identify as a sexuality different from heterosexual, defying the statistic that most of the world is straight. The negative connotation connected to polyamorous relationships has been challenged in recent years, along with romantic relationships as a whole. “Who wears the pants in the relationship?” is no longer a viable question like it was in the 1800s as women too wear pants- or maybe they both wear skirts!


Freedom of expression is not reserved for one gender in particular. Romantic relationships have become less about courting in the security of starting families and continuing a bloodline but more about personal connection and human companionship. Traditional values are what kept people “safe.”, yet society has seemingly broken away from these traditional values. Safe from rejection, safe from judgment, safe from isolation, breaking free from social norms is a sign of human rebellion and growth. Humans were created with full autonomy; thus, revolution is expected. This is perfectly captured with Alexandre Cabanel’s painting titled “The Fallen Angel,” in which Lucifer himself is depicted as he was cast out of his safe realm of Paradise. In a modern context, we can sympathize with feeling trapped in a reality not cultivated to match our ideals. The consequences of creating our own existence are not as dramatic as being cast into an alternate dimension filled with pain and eternal suffering, but it sure as hell can feel like it when you’re vilified for having an alternate reality. In the image, Lucifer sheds a tear; this can represent how we are viewed once we break away from the social norms we have for years been pressured into following. Breaking away from social norms can be a painful and lonely journey, thus just like Lucifer, we weep at the thought of separation.

We weep at the thought of separation from our friends, from our family, from our social circles. We weep at the thought of rejection from opportunities given to us, had we just blended in and suppressed our individuality. We all want to live in Paradise – but whose Paradise? If “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” then wouldn’t that mean that “Paradise resides in the mind of the individual?” What if my Paradise is different from yours? What if your vision of Paradise completely erases my existence?

None of this is to say that breaking apart from traditional society turns us into the likeness of Lucifer, and we are being punished for not partaking in societal norms. This expresses that Paradise represents the perfect utopia in one’s mind where they feel safe, appreciated, and valued. Many people do not fit into the Paradise of others’, and while people deserve to experience their own versions of Paradise, society has blocked certain people from doing so. This leads people to break from the traditional view of Paradise being heteronormative, capitalist-driven, homogenous, with nicely cut grass and white picket fences, and create their own Paradise. A Paradise where they feel free to live as they are because maybe Paradise is not the goal but the reality we create, and while breaking from the norm can be a euphoric experience filled with freedom and possibility, the weight of the world comes with it. How much do you value the perception of others – and how much would you risk to express your own self-perception?

Photographed by Audrey Balcom Modeled by Carson Brewer



Written by Jason Mason Photographed by Devin Ricks Modeled by Jazymne Radford , Corinne Bass , Avery Joseph, & Nolan Henson

UNDERSTANDING THE COLLEGE FRIEND GROUP THROUGH SITCOMS College is a land of newfound independence. As students come of age and fly the nest for the first time, a new place can seem like a scary one. Though college life presents countless challenges and opportunities, the first thing you to navigate in college isn’t your education, but your sociality. As students move into school for the first time, new faces are around every corner, and there’s no telling which face might wind up being a friendly one. Whether it’s the kid down the hall who first knocks on your door, or the first dininghall buddy who shares a table with you, it’s only a matter of time before a new student starts to develop the cast of vibrant characters that form the narrative of their college years.

Any close-knit friend group, whether it be adults or college students, has all the same elements of any classic sitcom: a cast of beloved characters, a memorable set, and uniquely relatable storylines. Because the concept of a sitcom is so universal, the best way to analyze the value and purpose of our college relationships is through a general, proverbial lens of a hypothetical show called Syd’s Place. Although Syd’s Place isn’t produced by a studio, or aired on any broadcast networks, it’s as real and relatable as any other show on TV because it’s the one that we live in.


Syd’s Place revolves around three college juniors at Central Michigan University: Sunni, a tough girl from the Bronx who gets herself out of sticky situations with her tenacity and street smarts. Miracle, eclectic and laid back, whose lax nature finds herself fired from different on-campus jobs every other episode. Finally, there’s Sydney Green, the passionate campus activist whose unyielding resilience for social justice issues gets her into constant trouble with the university administration. Syd’s Place’s characters all benefit each other in one way or another, and like any tight group, the cast finds themselves in a “set”, the one place where characters frequently converse and create some of their most memorable scenes.

Think of Central Perk in Friends, or Sheldon and Leonard’s apartment in The Big Bang Theory. In Syd’s Place, the characters frequent the living room area of the main protagonist, Sydney Green’s, dormitory on the campus of Central Michigan University, titularly referred to in the series as “Syd’s Place.”



Here, our characters laugh, cry, share stories, and bicker; it’s the place where the friends can show up unannounced and always expect to find somebody to spend time with. Many college students have a place just like this, whether it’s a dormitory, dining hall, or study roomsome place where the cast can join up and face each day together. This set provides a foundation for our character’s college memories. More often than not, the cast of characters inevitably begins to form a storyline, and this storyline might often resemble that of our favorite sitcoms. Maybe in one episode, the goofy, eclectic character goes on an adventure and has a story arc with the funny and charming archetype, or the dim-witted friend gets into an altercation with the overly neat, control freak of the series.

These are the stories that form our memories of college, memories of love, laughter, hardship, but ultimately, companionship. In Syd’s Place, the characters have a mutual goal of completing their education, but many subplots add beauty and complexity to the larger story. The cast runs into all kinds of trouble, but like in all great sitcoms, there are overarching themes and stories that outlast all others and viewers look forward to the most.

The greatest thing about college life is that everybody’s got their own sitcom. They’ve got their own cast, own storylines, and own set. Though these stories are unique to the individuals involved, they’re also universal because everybody needs these groups to get through the intimidating and challenging lifestyle of college. Although this experience is largely mutual, it doesn’t take away from the distinct meaning and value that our personal sitcoms hold in our lives. From the set/location where everyone goes, to the unique cast of characters/friends, and the adventures on which these groups embark, our stories bring us closer together in a time where it’s more necessary than ever.







For new students, the start of the college journey is nervewracking at best, and terrifying at worst. It’s crucial to establish a “home away from home”, and the first step in doing so is finding a makeshift family who will support us along our individual journeys. Syd’s Place is just one of these stories, but it’s the story we all know and love due to its relatability to the college friend group and the elements these groups share.



Where Where Editorial Editorial meets meets Edge Edge

Profile for RAW Magazine

Issue 10 : The Dazed Issue  

Issue 10 : The Dazed Issue  


Recommendations could not be loaded

Recommendations could not be loaded

Recommendations could not be loaded

Recommendations could not be loaded