The Associated Press standards regarding Palestine are political

By Karishma Ramkarran ’27

Copy Chief

The freedom of press has always been viewed as a cornerstone of democracy. Journalists seek out what is concealed, corrupt, and entirely animus to the well-being of a nation and shed light upon it; perhaps they do not carry out societal transformations, but they are certainly the stimuli which sparks it.

To say my journalistic career began with this belief may be to admit a starry-eyed sense of naivety that imbued my perspective of American journalism. For my high school newspaper, under my staff profile, I once wrote that one “appreciates journalistic writing because of its unique ability to protect democracy by keeping the people informed. Journalists have, since the foundation of America, played a pivotal role in holding those in power accountable.”

Under the tutelage of John Stuart Mill and greatly inspired by my AP U.S. history class, my younger self saw the brilliance of American journalism. Journalists such as Ida B. Wells or Upton Sinclair only seemed to prove the power of investigative journalism by exposing the insidious injustices of a dominant status quo. To me, Wells’ campaign against lynching as a form of socio-political terror against Black Americans or Sinclair’s exposé on the stomach-churning working conditions of immigrants in seedy meat-packing factories confirmed that journalism was the inertia that pushed America ever closer to a hazy dream of egalitarian democracy.

To me, journalism continues to hold a monopoly on justice and democracy today. Still, the Wells or Sinclairs will not be found locked away in a room at the New York Times: They are in Gaza, risking their lives to tell the stories of Palestinians.

One does not need a degree or experience to be a journalist. As I sit in the Williston Memorial Library and write this opinion, I do not think of myself as more qualified than Renad Attallah, a young chef from Gaza who not only shares Palestinian recipes, but also the experience of hunger as Israel blocks aid from reaching Gaza. People become journalists everyday as they are subjected to the most horrifying and heinous injustices. That kind of journalism is often more valuable than the work of the most qualified journalists in America, simply because oppressed people have nothing to gain from whitewashing their own experiences to fit a dominant narrative.

Do these American journalists not feel some semblance of shame when we censor Israel’s genocide of the Palestinian people, especially as journalists in Palestine are systematically targeted and killed? While we type away in an ivory tower of privilege, more journalists have been killed in Palestine than any other modern conflict.

On Aug. 10, Al Jazeera correspondent Mohammed Qreiqeh and cameramen Ibrahim Zaher and Mohammed Noufal, along with Gaza’s Chief Correspondent Anas Al-Sharif, were killed by Israeli forces in an airstrike on a tent near al-Shifa Hospital in eastern Gaza City. A statement by the Israeli military had confirmed that the killings were targeted; Al-Sharif was accused of being the head of a Hamas terrorist cell.

I cannot help but interrogate my own complicity in creating an environment in which journalists in Palestine — who are legally protected by international humanitarian law during times of war — are acceptably murdered by Israel. American journalism, through whitewashing and the policing the language around Israel’s genocide, has failed Palestinians.

Language is a powerful tool, and every word that we write has significant weight. No singular journalist has the superpower to be completely objective; our personal belief systems will always animate the spirit of our words. Yet the issue with American journalism is not a plurality of opinion, but a systematic and hegemonic framing that is subservient to a dominant narrative of American exceptionalism.

As copy chief of the Mount Holyoke News, I spend plenty of time making sure that articles adhere to a specific set of guides set by the Associated Press, a not-for-profit news agency headquartered in New York City. Although we often consult these standards for conventional grammar usage or how to refer to different subjects, things become murkier around the reporting of certain issues.

The Associated Press’ topical guide for “Middle East Conflicts” outlines how journalists should discuss the relationship between Israel and Palestine. Although it may seem like semantics, the way words are used always have political connotations to them, especially within the context of an active genocide.

As journalists, we are meant to refer to Israel’s genocide of Palestinians as the Israel-Hamas war. The term “war” in this context is meant to represent a period of armed conflict between two actors: In this case, the state of Israel and the militant group Hamas. The definition not only disregards the unique status of occupation that Palestinians have been subjected to since 1967, but also suggests that Israel only engages in war tactics with members of Hamas.

Israel does not engage in war with Hamas, but the Palestinian people at large. The ratio of civilians to combatants killed in Palestine is unprecedented in modern warfare: Five out of six Palestinians killed by Israeli forces have been civilians. Almost half of Gaza’s population are under 18 years old, and the U.N.’s Human Rights Office has reported that 70% of those who have been killed were women and children.

In a guest essay published in the New York Times, Feroze Sidhwa — a trauma surgeon in Gaza — described regularly seeing “a young child that was shot in the head or chest, virtually all of whom went on to die.” In the very same article, Sidhwa compiles the testimonies of 44 doctors, nurses and paramedics who had attested to seeing similar patterns in Israel’s war conduct.

To use the term “war” instead of “genocide” or “occupation” to refer to Israel’s actions in Palestine is to become complicit. Although the International Court of Justice has not made an official ruling on the case brought forth by South Africa, several human rights organizations, scholars of genocide and a U.N. commission have since found Israel’s actions in Gaza to amount to genocide.

On Sept. 16, the United Nations’ Human Rights Council reported that an Independent International Commission of Inquiry had found that Israeli forces committed four of five genocidal acts defined by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. On Oct. 22, the International Court of Justice itself had issued an advisory opinion on Israel’s obligation as an occupying force, including “safeguarding the rights and promoting the best interests of the occupied population” while protecting “its security interests.”

Additionally, the Associated Press warns journalists not to even say “Palestine” to refer to those territories which are historically part of Palestine. One may not say “Palestine” or “the state of Palestine” but rather “the Palestinian territories,” which refer to the West Bank and Gaza. Palestine may only be referred to as a “nation” within the context of “the international bodies which it has been admitted to.”

The ramifications of such language are clear: Not only does it serve to diminish the struggles of the Palestinian people for self-determination, but also, more insidiously, to deny Palestine the legitimacy of being a nation in its own right. To be referred to as a legitimate nation is to recognize that Palestine should be guaranteed the rights that the international community promises to a sovereign nation — it is to ascend from the status of being a mere “occupied population.”

When exactly will Palestine be internationally recognized as an independent state? When its occupying powers allow it to be? If a state must have defined borders, a government or a standing army to be considered sovereign, how shall Palestine ever achieve that under the present conditions of genocide and occupation? Regardless, Palestine is recognized as a state by 75% of U.N. member states, Israel and the United States excluded.

Although there has been a ceasefire in Gaza, Israeli strikes have killed over another 104 people, including 46 children, across Palestine.

Will we, as journalists, fall into line with America’s aiding and abetting of Israel’s genocide of the Palestinian people? Or will we begin to question the way in which the very language we use encourages complacency to a dominant narrative?

Cat McKenna ’28 contributed fact-checking.

Editor’s note: Mount Holyoke News’ style specifics have been updated to deviate from AP guidance, and will hereafter explicitly refer to the State of Israel’s ongoing campaign against Palestinians as genocide.

Courses at the College shouldn’t be restricted based on class year

By Quinlan Cooke ’29

Staff Writer

With course registration quickly approaching, many are scrambling to find courses that fit their majors — or prospective majors — and that align time-wise. As a first year, it seems that because of my intended major, my options are quite limited.

ENGL-199: Introduction to the Study of Literature is one of the only English courses available to first years, and I am currently in it. As someone who is interested in taking more English courses, and who intends to major in English, I was looking forward to taking another course in this subject for the spring semester. Looking at the course information told me that the next course many English students take, Intro to Creative Writing, is limited to sophomores and above.

I understand that this gives upperclassmen a better chance to get the classes they need for their major requirements, but some first years might also want to get ahead. I feel that a solution to this would be adding more courses for all years.

For almost any class I would want to take, I would have to email for instructor permission. This can get really difficult to balance alongside advisor meetings and planning out backup classes. Instructors might also have further questions, or might not be able to respond to prospective students before advisor meetings. As a result, courses might have to be changed during the add/drop period, and some students might begin courses after the start of the semester, setting them behind on work.

Other classes open to first years and listed under a certain department might have prerequisites that are outside of that department, so there is still a delay when it comes to being able to take them.

For myself, I am starting my second semester with the classes from my first semester, alongside other college credits that I have previously accumulated under my belt. I will have to email several professors to forego prerequisite introductory level classes that I have already taken elsewhere, and I will have to request permission to take classes that other first years might not have the opportunity to.

Of course, these scenarios mentioned are the exception and not the rule – but, at a school that generally prides itself on rigorous academics, I would assume it would be more encouraged for students to try to challenge themselves when the opportunity arises. If a student wants a challenge, it should be encouraged, no matter their class year.

Another aspect of this is that advisor meetings were not required to register for first years’ first semester classes, but they are for the second semester. Perhaps first year students creating their schedules over the summer should be assigned a temporary counselor or advisor, so they become familiar with the concept of having help with their courses.

The Mount Holyoke College website says, “Whether it’s across disciplines or around the world, one thing’s for certain: You will achieve more than you thought possible. Along the way, you’ll be challenged. ” Perhaps part of the challenge is advocating for yourself, to prove that you belong in the classes that might challenge you academically, and to push for your own education in such a safe environment.

Cat McKenna ’28 contributed fact-checking.

New “Party Policy” will produce, not reduce, unsafe party behaviors

By Paige Comeau ’26

Managing Editor of Content

Beginning on Oct. 20, 2025, the Division of Student Life instituted a new “party policy” for Mount Holyoke College students and residents, aimed at “clear and structured guidelines to host fun, responsible and safe gatherings that respect all residents and residential spaces.”

In sum, the Party Registration Policy mandates for students to use residential spaces for throw parties, they must first register as party hosts, complete a host training, request use of the space they intend to have the party at, and comply with a list of other provisions regarding the actual party, the hosts, and the attendees.

For instance, parties must be confined to the pre-approved space, end by 1:30 a.m.,comply with public safety, follow very specific rules around alcohol’s presence and consumption, and may not exceed the space’s capacity, or exceed four hours in length..

Hosts in addition to registering themselves as party hosts and completing a host training, must remain sober throughout the party and agree to hold responsibility for: Ensuring the party remains under the max capacity, following all alcohol requirements, cleaning spaces within twelve hours of the event’s end, working with public safety, and upholding any relevant state and federal laws as well as College policies. Attendees must have received a personal invite to the party, and therefore know the host, and agree to follow all party policy guidelines as stated above.

While I understand the College’s desire to somewhat regulate gatherings on campus, especially in an attempt to secure student safety, I cannot believe that this policy is going to do anything except push students to make unsafe decisions in fear of getting in trouble with administration. Students are going to want to experience “traditional” college parties where they are in a dark room, dancing with two hundred strangers, and drinking out of red solo cups. If they cannot experience this safely and openly at Mount Holyoke, they are just going to find some other way to do so.

Let me explain further.

The first, most obvious option that students will take is to simply party somewhere else, either locally, or at one of the other Five Colleges. I have already heard students talking about beginning to host parties in the woods around the College or other local structures, like the Amherst Water Tower. Neither of these would be safer for students, or easier for authorities to access in case of emergency. And, while some students already go to other campuses for parties, I imagine the implementation of this policy will lead to a major uptick in this. This will like leading students to risk driving drunk or high since the PVTA’s schedule late at night and on weekends is largely unpredictable.

As Hattie Nichols ’27, a Mount Holyoke student with experience in harm reduction, said to me, “If you're going to a party in like, a campus that you're not familiar with, that's inherently a lot less safe.” This is only magnified when students are intoxicated. Recently, I had a friend badly break one of her legs at a Hampshire College party while being only slightly tipsy, because she was unfamiliar with their woods’ terrain. I can only imagine what sorts of things students will get into if they begin to go off-campus consistently for parties.

The second option, however, is that students will resort to holding parties in secret, acting recklessly to avoid being caught, and putting themselves and their friends in more danger than they would be at a normal MHC party. While the current Amnesty Policy at the College states no student will get in trouble for having or consuming substances should they call for help for themselves or their friends, it also states that students may still be held liable for other violations outside of substance use, such as property damage or, I imagine, not following the new Party Registration Policy.

Students are going to be less likely to call for help for themselves, their friends, or fellow students if they fear retribution for being at an unsanctioned party. This fear will only be magnified by the fact that the policy encourages students to police each other's partying, something that was made obvious to me in one of the frequently asked question answers on Student Life’s website. It says under, “What will enforcement look like?” that “a secondary goal of this policy is to encourage autonomy and advocacy among students in respect to their peers. Therefore, we hope that this policy also sets students up to intervene between one another in the event that additional steps need to be taken.”

Knowing that Student Life is actively encouraging other students to monitor me and my partying, I feel pressured not to draw any attention to myself, including by calling for help. I’m rather certain that other students will feel the same way.

When discussing this new policy, Nichols voiced the same concerns, stating, “ I feel like a big part of harm reduction is making sure that what you are trying to do is not going to inherently oppose what people are hoping to … do, and that you have to kind of work with it and, like, meet people where they are … [and] saying, ‘Let's do things in a safe space,’ right, or … in a place where we know that the people around us would help us. And by trying to not have parties here, you're taking that away from people.”

“It's so frustrating,” Nichols said, “It's kind of like when there's a big drug bust of somebody who's dealing a lot, then there's a bunch more overdoses, because everybody's going and getting different products, right? And so I'm like, thinking different things, but the same principle … we want to have fun.”

Cat McKenna ’28 contributed fact-checking

First year’s lack of experience with live music on campus

Photo by Marri Shaeffer '29

Pratt Music Hall

By Quinlan Cooke ’29

Staff Writer

As a first year student who has been on campus for less than two months, I can’t help but wonder if the lack of live music is something I should expect for the remainder of my four years. So far, there has been one live music performance on campus this semester: MHC Alt hosted three bands on Oct. 4. This performance was in Chapin Auditorium, and hosted by a student organization, not the College itself. As such, I believe that the College itself should host more live music events for the community and students.

Live music does wonders for communities. It brings people together as they flock to the sound. Music has also been widely known to engage the brain and be very stimulating. This means that music fits right in when it comes to a college setting. Mount Holyoke College is based in community, so much so that on the first page of the school’s website, there is a tab labeled “Build a Lasting Community.” This tab showcases how tight-knit the people here are, and is a focal point for prospective students. More live music on campus would only further help to strengthen this sense of community.

The College used to host mainstream artists for the annual spring concert, and tickets were available for students. A retroactively poor example of this would be when Kanye West performed in 2004. The only live music I have been privy to so far has been student musicians at Orientation-related events.

Music should be readily available for students to hear. There is always so much positivity and conversation drummed up when WMHC has a booth and DJson Skinner Green, so it is clear there is space for music here. There have been many thrift and jewelry pop-ups on Green, so why not more music? How mood-lifting would it be to walk by live music on your way to class? Or hear someone playing instruments and singing as you eat lunch on the Green? How nice does it feel to hear the song you queued on Rockbot while eating lunch with your friends? Or hearing a song none of you knew you all liked and having something new to bond over?

I always see fellow students walking around with earbuds in or headphones over their ears; if there was live music playing, students would not have to resort to their headphones. People do not talk to each other when they have headphones in, but if they were all listening to the same music right in front of them, there would be an invitation for conversation and community.

When you look up “music” on the Mount Holyoke College events calendar, the next event coming up is a tea with the music department, not a performance. When you search the same prompt on the CampusGroups app, there is only one event in December. Both of these events are indoors, and you would have to actively seek them out in order to be included. Music should also be something to stumble upon; You don’t find new favorite songs by searching for them, you find them by chance.

Music should be encouraged by the College, even if they have to bring in outside resources for it to be present for students. The live music we do have on campus should be more highly promoted by the school, and there should be a spotlight put on it. I feel that Skinner Green has a lot of potential as a casual music venue, even just in passing. Students deserve to reap the vast benefits of live music, especially on a campus where community is encouraged and so foundational.

Cat McKenna ’28 contributed fact-checking

MHC has a responsibility to make psychology classes more available

By Danny Alajawi ’28 

Staff Writer

The class registration process is stressful for everyone, but it’s definitely more stressful for some majors than others. Psychology classes are some of the hardest classes to get into at Mount Holyoke College, as it’s the most popular major here. Undoubtedly, the College should offer more psychology classes to make this process easier on students.

Psychology majors, particularly second semester first years and sophomores, struggle to get into the classes they want and or need for their major. Many students end up on waitlists, and have to plead their case to get into classes. It’s not fair that psychology students have to go through so much stress to try to get into the classes they need. It shouldn’t be normalized to have to beg professors to let you into classes. It’s a lot more than dignity that’s at stake, as the ability to get into required classes impacts a student’s ability to do a lot of things like study abroad, early graduation, double majoring. The impact of this is profoundly felt by Springies. Though these things are still possible with the psychology major, the stress and weight of these things on student’s minds becomes overwhelming, and is clearly a fault within the College’s system.

So, things are even more stressful when people are trying to explore 200 levels in psychology. Students may not realize they want to major in psychology until later on, which can make it really stressful to complete requirements when classes are so hard to get into. Even if someone is in a situation where they know exactly what they want to do, they aren’t able to knock requirements out of the way very quickly.

In writing this piece, I wanted to get the perspective of the psychology department, to see if they saw the same problems. So, I interviewed the Co-Chair of the Psychology department and a Mount Holyoke College alum, Professor K.C. Haydon ’00.

Haydon and I discussed issues surrounding people getting into classes and the way the system is set up. She talked to me about how she has worked closely with the registrar and knows they have a massive job at their hand. Haydon also spoke about the fact that we are dealing with a “limited resource environment,” as any college is, which makes it really difficult to fix these kinds of issues.

I’m a firm believer that the College should open more classes, and in talking about that with Haydon, it was clear that the department has considered that option. However, there are limitations. Haydon shared, “If we had more faculty, we would offer more courses, and we would have more seats. But that's not a viable solution for the College. We can't just keep adding faculty unlimited in an unlimited way, because each faculty member costs the College a certain amount of money. You know, if we add a faculty member to one department, the College can only afford so many at a time, and so that means another department isn't getting that. So those are very difficult decisions to make in terms of the allocation of faculty positions across departments.”

It was clear to see that the department nonetheless works really hard to meet the needs of the students. Haydon discussed the survey program: “The survey was a pilot program that we developed with the registrar and the provost office. The survey is for any student who is waitlisted in our 200 level area courses … If you show up on our waitlist, you get a ping from us. Our department coordinator, Janet [Crosby], sends out a QR code and a survey link to say, ‘Hey, you're waitlisted on this course. Fill out the survey.’ That gets populated to a Google form, and every registration period in spring and fall, the co-chairs and our department coordinator. So …[we] sit down and look through those by hand, person by person.”

As they do that, they consider each student’s circumstance to determine who they should move into classes based on need. The program is incredible because it demonstrates the care faculty has towards their students and the dedication they have to get people into the classes they need. Part of the problem, however, is that even though it’s very helpful in the long run, it doesn’t seem to reduce the stress of the students.

Another issue I have noticed this brings up is increased class sizes. Haydon explained that classes are expanded based on the needs of the students and gave an example: “Our course is capped at 28 but look, we have these nine people who really need this class this semester. We request from the registrar to expand that course to 38 and then we've moved those people with the highest need for the class into those nine seats.”

That’s not only understandable, but is helpful for so many students. However, it does change the dynamic of the class. When asking about the professor's perspective of this, if it was fair to the professor to have to take on more students, Haydon explained that “fair” is a tricky word. She shared that handling different class sizes is a skill that is developed by professors over time. But she also stated that “the more students we have in classes, the more recommendation letters we're asked to write, the more office hours we need to have, you know, and so it becomes kind of like, how do we deliver the same quality of experience on a larger scale? That's really challenging.”

I believe the larger class sizes have an impact on the students too. Haydon said for psych majors “the first chance [they] might get for a small class is the 300 levels,” which I find to be concerning. Mount Holyoke College is a small college and a big part of that attraction is small class size with 9:1 student to facility ratio. Of course, I would take a bigger psychology class over no psychology class any day, but should I have to? I don’t think so. More classes should be offered so more people can take them within smaller class sizes.

There's a financial aspect to consider too. The classes and the class sizes are reasons people chose to go to Mount Holyoke College College. They’re one of the things students are paying for, so I think it’s only fair that they get it.

When classes are desperately needed, new sections should be added and new instructors should be hired to take that on. People should be able to easily take the classes they need.

But it’s not just the very essential classes that are a problem. I talked to Haydon in detail about what people want to take. It’s clear at this point that people love to take 200-level psychology classes. Some need it, but some people want to explore or take something fun! The way I see it, psychology is a really expansive field of study. It makes sense that people would want to explore its different areas, and they should be encouraged to do so.

One of the ethical considerations we discussed was the idea of “super majors,” which are people who take more classes than required within the major. As a psychology student struggling to get into classes, I understand how that can be frustrating. I understand that frustration from the department, too, because one of the ways they’ve tried to navigate the problem is by minimizing requirements for the major, yet some people are still taking a lot of classes they don't need.

At the same time, I do think other, non-psychology students have a right to explore their interests to the extent they want. They struggled with this process earlier and if the system isn’t working, why should they have to stop themselves from taking a class that they're interested in now that they have the chance to register for it?

This expands to the people outside the major too. Some seniors in different majors chose to explore a psychology class or two because they find it interesting. As upsetting as it is to watch them take seats in a class they don’t need, while having friends in the psychology major be turned away, it’s not those seniors’ faults. Students have every right to explore their interests without feeling like they’re taking away opportunities from other people.

With that said, I want to make it clear that I don’t think it’s the psychology department’s fault. In speaking with Haydon, I gained a lot of understanding about the way the system works. I never blamed them for the issue, but now more than ever I see the way that the department truly cares. To me, that’s part of why this is such an issue. Not only is psychology incredibly fascinating, but the professors in the department are truly wonderful and are involved in incredibly fascinating research. I have been very lucky to have gotten to know some of the facilities in the psychology department and I have nothing but great things to say. So, of course people would want to take their classes.

The issue at hand is that the College needs to give more funding to the psychology department. I believe the department should be expanded to allow students to fulfill the major with less anxiety as well as to give students the opportunity to explore their interests. The funding the psychology department gets should reflect the need and interest of the students.

Cat McKenna ’28 contributed fact checking

Administration should stop holding Mountain Day on Friday

Graphic by Hale Whitney ’26

Abby Paull ’28

Staff Writer

“I hope the rapture doesn’t happen so we can still have a Mountain Day!” was the internal monologue of many Mount Holyoke students during the week of Sept. 21. Fortunately, the rapture did not happen that week, but Mountain Day did, on Friday, Sept. 26. The reception for this was overall poor. Some rejoiced that it had finally happened, while others were left confused.

Many students do not have class on Fridays, so many spend this day off campus or sleeping in and resting. Over the course of my day I heard many disappointed conversations. President Holley’s choice of holding Mountain Day on a Friday leaves out students who typically use Friday as a day off.

Mountain Day is a well-loved college tradition where every year, the president of the College cancels morning and early afternoon classes. On the day of, the clock tower’s bells ring a hundred times at 7 a.m., commencing Mountain Day. Students and faculty alike hike to the summit of Mount Holyoke, Joseph Allen Skinner State Park. Historically, Mountain Day has been held on a weekday, giving students a break from their classes.

However, by holding Mountain Day on a Friday, the majority of students who have few, if any classes that day, and who may have already had plans are left neglected.

The various issues associated with this year’s Mountain Day likely come from poor planning on the administration’s end. For example, the week of this year’s Mountain Day was also the week of ​​Rosh Hashanah, a Jewish holiday in celebration of the Jewish new year. The administration would have known about this prior to booking Skinner State Park for the week: Calendars exist for this reason.

There was also a torrential downpour the night before Mountain Day, Sept. 25. Despite this, administration still chose to hike the mountain. The planners of Mountain Day should have taken proper precaution after the rainfall. Rainfalls like this in Western Massachusetts are pretty awful mud-wise, which could have endangered students.

To plan Mountain Day better, College administration should have booked the mountain for a week where there are no major religious holidays or significant rain showers, both of which present limits and challenges to student participation.

The College puts an emphasis on community on Mountain Day. But how are we to have true community when most of the student body is off campus, attending to other matters? You are not giving students a break by putting Mountain Day on a Friday, because most students have already finished their academic week. Mountain Day should be held on a weekday — not a Friday — to give students a true break.

Mountain Day’s true purpose is meant to bring students out of their stress and remind them of their community. Mountain day can’t be perfect every year, but instead of holding it on the Friday after a major rain storm and religious holiday, the College should have eaten the cost and rebooked it for the next week. Friday is not a major academic day, so most people already have a break and use this time to go home or catch up on well-needed rest.

Either way, Mountain Day should not be on Friday.

Karishma Ramkarran ’27 contributed fact-checking.

Queer operas and us: Representation is important

Photo courtesy of Anna Goodman ’28

The all-Korean production of “Bare,” an American musical from the early 2000s, inside a performing arts center in the heart of Seoul, South Korea.

By Anna Goodman ’28

Staff Writer

Content warnings: homophobia, transphobia, queerphobia.

(This article uses “queer” extensively as it is how the author identifies; if this makes you uncomfortable, please do not read.)

It’s already past 6 p.m. and I’m standing at an intersection in the middle of Seoul, conspicuously blonde and conspicuously lost, when I admit to myself that this was a terrible idea. I’m searching for a performing arts center, and in it the all-Korean production of a show most people haven’t heard of.

“Bare” is an American musical from the early 2000s, and in many ways, it feels like it. Set at a Catholic boarding school in 1990s America — MHN’s entire queer readership is already wincing — it follows two boys, Jason and Peter, who are secretly lovers, in their final semester before college. It’s moving, it’s heartbreaking, it features a bewildering amount of Bible verses and Shakespeare quotes for a two-hour show, and, like most queer media of its time, its ending is undeniably tragic.

But why go? In an era with hundreds of hours of media at my fingertips that make it a point to emphasize queer joy, why am I sitting in this theater, hoping for a happy ending when I know there won’t be one? Thinking, “maybe it will be different this time?”

Well, the first time I listened to “Bare,” at the ripe old age of twelve, I had been teetering on the edge of telling my parents the truth for at least a year.

“911 Emergency” is a song written so long ago that its main hook is about putting change into a payphone and telling the operator to connect you. But its message — that your parents will love you anyway, and that you deserve to live as who you are — is evergreen. I replayed it more times than I can count. Because, finally, someone understood.

Peter picks up the phone. And so did I.

I soon began wondering if other people also felt this kind of deep, immediate emotional connection when seeing themselves for the first time. So I asked twelve people, six Mount Holyoke students, six not, ranging from ages 15 to 68, to name me queer media that meant something to them as a teenager or young adult.

The difference in their responses — which amounted to 34 separate pieces of media — is telling. The four non-students I asked, aged 36, 40, 53, and 68, took much longer to answer and had far less to choose from. Every one mentioned at least one work with what I’d consider a “tragic” ending, where at least half of the couple dies or where they do not end up together because of societal pressure.

By contrast, my fellow students, and the two other interviewees younger than me could point to any one of a number of shows, movies, musicals, songs, video games, et cetera, that fit their specific experiences. “Red White And Royal Blue.” “Heartstopper.” “Our Flag Means Death.” “Alien Stage.” “She-Ra.”

My mother, who’s roughly the same age as the writers of “Bare,” said, “When I was in high school and most of college [from 1985 - 1992] it was the time of the AIDS crisis … I don’t think the word ‘gay’ was said in any of my high school or college classrooms. If I try to think back I just picture, hazily, a few caricatures on TV and very serious news reports and films about people dying.”

“The queer media representation that came out of the AIDS crisis can be seen as a double-edged sword,” scholar Lillian Joy Myers says in an overview of the changes in queer media. “On one hand, the representation of this time was incredibly powerful and influential … [in describing] how this crisis shook the queer community…[yet] these depictions continued to perpetuate the queer trauma narratives of years past, maintaining a one-dimensional, negative view of queerness and the association between queerness and trauma.”

The effect growing up in this environment has on a queer person can’t be underestimated and is palpable throughout “Bare.” To this day, I come back to Jason’s lines at the end of Act 1 of: “Not all tales have happy endings …‘cause there's no such thing as heroes who are queer”. To this day I wonder how many children still grow up feeling the same way.

The answer: Too many.

But, hopefully, because of media like “Bare,” less.

Speaking to Playbill on the 15th anniversary of the show, “Bare” writer Jon Hartmere said, “I came out while writing ‘Bare.’ I didn't learn I was gay. But I learned it was okay.”

Hartmere’s characters may not have gotten their happy ending. But he helped create a world that meant that he could. He’s now openly gay, and still with his partner of nearly 20 years.

Hilariously, despite all of my preteen angst, neither my parents nor I remember the specifics of when I came out to them. It ended up being so unimportant in the grand scheme of things that the most any of us could remember was that I was probably still twelve.

And, despite the fact that I (thankfully) had what was probably the least eventful coming out in history, “Bare” has held a special place in my heart since. Not only as the capstone of my own journey, but as my reminder not to grow complacent.

In a way, it’s heartwarming that a show made almost thirty years ago can still connect with someone who is lucky enough to have never experienced what its protagonists — or its writers — have.

But it’s heartbreaking too. Because when I watch “Bare,” I don’t just see Peter and Jason. I see the little kids in each of my friends that aren’t quite healed from that feeling of growing up on their own. I see the kids of generations long gone — and far too recent — that never even had the chance to live the lives they wanted.

And then I see my friend Ella, who I often call my ‘honorary little sister.’ When I asked her about what it was like growing up seeing people like her on screen, she said, “Seeing so much casual queer representation at such a young age was amazing for me and my girlfriend … Nothing to make a huge deal about, just something that you are and can be happy with.”

Clearly, we have made progress. We have made change. But I can’t and won’t sit here and argue that we’ve made enough.

In 2024, GLAAD reported that the number of explicitly LGBTQ characters on television was 468, which, while an incredible change from thirty years ago, is still a decrease of over 100 characters since the year before, and less than 1 in 10 characters overall.

When you consider that over 1 in 5 of Gen Z identify as LGBTQ+ today, it’s clear that our media still lacks the numbers that would allow the diversity and humanity really present in our community.

As Myers puts it, in the same piece as above, “Queer characters and storylines are still underrepresented compared to … non-queer plots … Many of them still center white, cisgender, affluent, able-bodied, adult, and/or male characters… [there’s also] the continued use of stereotypes and the prevalence of queer tokenization.”

It's easy, especially for someone like me, to get so swept away in how far we’ve come that we neglect the fact that we still have so far to go. I have two very progressive parents who, despite the time they grew up in, have always made it clear that their acceptance does not come with an asterisk. I go to Mount Holyoke, a very queer-accepting college. I am publishing this in their newspaper. I do not need “Bare” in the same way my twelve year old self did.

But that’s okay, because someone else always does.

Back in Seoul, when I look to my left in the theater, I see something stuck between realization and fear in the eyes of the boy next to me. When I look to my right I see the palpable guilt in the faces of nearly every person old enough to have kids. When I look down at the stage, I see tears on the faces of every performer as the actors who play Peter and Jason hold each other one more time as the curtain closes.

So, I turn to that boy, with fear in his eyes, and we talk. And we keep talking. He’s 15. He walks me home and he complains about his math classes and I gripe about how terrible my Korean is.

I want to ask. I’m scared to ask.

It’s past midnight and I’m standing at an intersection in the middle of Seoul, when this boy tells me, quietly, half through a translator, half through hesitant English, about his best friend. When he stumbles over the words, and he just can’t say it. I hug him. I tell him I understand. That it’s going to be okay.

He’s just a kid. He should be allowed to just…live.

When my parents’ plane lands the next morning, I hug them harder than I have in a long time.

The truth is, I know how the story of “Bare” will end every time it starts, and still, every time, I think to myself: maybe it will be different. Maybe it’ll have a happy ending. And then I realize: Who says it can’t?

My mom grew up in a world that gave her stereotypes and fear; Ella is growing up in a world that gave her “She-Ra.” I’m not naive. I know it’s not easy. It’s a scary world out there, and it’s only getting scarier.

In just a few months, the Trump Administration has rolled back Biden’s protections of LGBTQ+ youth as a whole, made it even harder than it was before for trans youth to access gender-affirming care and surgery, cut federal funding for HIV research and treatment, and issued an executive order stating that that there are only two genders, based on “biological sex.”

They tried to erase us before, and they’re trying again.

But it will be different this time. Maybe not for Jason, or for Peter. But for Ella. For every friend who’s ever called me late at night on the edge of something they don’t understand or told me they were scared to go home. For the boy who hugged me in the middle of Seoul because he had no one else to tell.

For me and for you.

The people who came before us fought tooth and nail for us to be where we are today. And there is no way on this side of the grave that anyone is going to tell my children that “there’s no such thing as heroes who are queer.” Don’t let someone tell yours either. Call your mom. Hug your friends. Tell someone you love them.

Be brave. Be loud. And live.

Karishma Ramkarran ’27 contributed fact-checking.

Fizz goes against the Mount Holyoke Honor Code

Graphic by Brianna Stockwell ’28

By Abby Paull ’28

Staff Writer

“I will honor myself, my fellow students and Mount Holyoke College by acting responsibly, honestly and respectfully in both my words and deeds.” For those who are not aware, this is the Mount Holyoke College Honor Code pledge. Students during their first year are expected to sign the honor code in order to show their commitment to the school’s ideals. It was put in place to hold the students of Mount Holyoke to a certain standard that reflects the College. But due to the rise of anonymous social media apps, students are no longer able to be held accountable for breaking certain aspects of the code. The only way we can prevent this in the future is to get rid of this pathetic anonymity. 

Fizz is an app that allows Mount Holyoke students to sign up through their school email and post their thoughts anonymously, similar to apps such as the University of Massachusetts’ Yikyak or Smith College’s Confesh. The problem with Fizz is its anonymity; allowing students to engage with each other namelessly gives them the opportunity to cyberbully each other without consequence. 

Over my first year, I saw Fizz users express Islamophobic, antisemitic, homophobic and transphobic sentiments. And, Fizz doesn’t have a limit on how much you can post, making it possible for these controversial comments to be created by one student or a collective of like-minded students. The effect of this is that it floods the app with these comments, setting a standard for the conversations the students are having, and distorting the overall image people have of the campus community 

One may argue that the app’s anonymity is actually helpful because it allows students to share resources and ask questions about campus they might’ve not been able to or comfortable doing before. One student can ask another the easiest way to get back to Mount Holyoke from Smith on a weekend. Though this is helpful, it is few and far between. More often, Fizz being anonymous allows students to ragebait each other and target individual students without consequence from the school. 

The Honor Code  tells us that: “A Mount Holyoke student demonstrates their respect for individual freedom by conducting themselves with maturity and honor, and by showing due concern for the welfare of other members of the community.” I ask this question: How are Fizz and other anonymous apps helping the welfare of the community? To help the welfare of the community, we should work on students being able to respectfully confront people and communicate instead of brewing hatred and letting it explode online.

It is urgent that we hold students at Mount Holyoke up to the standard of The Honor Code. Hiding behind anonymity creates the opportunity for ragebaiting, discrimination and bullying to come into the community. There is enough discourse outside our college. If you as a student are going to use your Mount Holyoke College email to spew hatred about your community that you CHOSE to be a part of, you owe it to your fellow students to reveal who is spewing that nonsense.

The College’s community fears confrontation, and some believe that anonymous platforms such as Fizz will heal our ailments. But what good will getting into an argument with your classmate online do for your mental health? I urge the Mount Holyoke community to address this and find different ways to express their emotions.

Quill Nishi-Leonard ’27 contributed fact checking. 

Jimmy Kimmel's suspension is a threat to free speech

Graphic by Mari Al Tayb ’26

By Angelina Godinez ’28

Opinion Section Editor 

Sept. 17 marked the suspension of Emmy-winning late night show, Jimmy Kimmel Live!, after the host, Jimmy Kimmel, made comments regarding the shooter of Charlie Kirk and his affiliation to the far right. Shortly after MAGA media personality Charlie Kirk was shot and killed, outbursts from both the left and right sparked debate on not only the Second Amendment, but also the first: The right to free speech, regardless of your political viewpoints. After weighing in on the debate, and calling out Kirk’s shooter for his affiliation with MAGA, Jimmy Kimmel was temporarily suspended from ABC, a television network that is widely controlled by President Donald Trump's censorship. 

This suspension is quite ironic, considering Kimmel’s comments on Kirk's death are also a form of free speech, something Kirk has been celebrated for posthumously; yet, Kimmel was not glorified nor promised a Presidential Medal of Freedom by the president as Kirk was. The fearmongering influence Trump holds over big news and broadcasting companies should be no surprise, as censorship and bribes have been seen within The New York Times, ABC, PBS, and even The Washington Post, which is owned by right-winger Jeff Bezos. 

Kirk was a close confidant of Trump and a great supporter of his agenda. He was very passionate about traditional, all-American ways of living, such as the right to own firearms. Prior to becoming a victim of gun violence, Kirk once stated, “I think it’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the second amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational.” This rationale seems to only be true, however, when the violence is not being perpetuated against the far right, but against marginalized groups such as transgender youth and people of color.

Minutes before losing his life, Kirk was being questioned about gun violence. He continued to voice biases against supposed gang members and trans youth, painting them as the stereotyped perpetrators of gun violence. Despite these beliefs, Kirk was ultimately killed by a white and cisgender man. This discovery led left- and right-wing politicians alike to debate the glorification of a man who once preached that gun violence — which is most commonly perpetrated against minorities and children — is in fact necessary in order to maintain the right to bear arms. 

Most American late-night television shows use lighthearted rhetoric to discuss politics, so it is in no way shocking for Kimmel to speak on recent events in this way himself. He said, “We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them, and doing everything they can to score political points from it." This comment is nothing more than a mere observation, especially when compared to the radical and violent threats that MAGA participants commonly make. Regardless, Kimmel was temporarily suspended for his comments criticizing the United States government. It is clear that the current administration would not only rather protect access to firearms over protecting its own supporters, but also has no hesitation in using dystopian censorship to silence anyone who even attempts to rebut their statements. 

It is alarming to see the amount of coverage given the shooting of one cisgender white wealthy man by another, as opposed to the paltry amount given to the Colorado school shooting that occurred the same day as Kirk’s. Or to the teachers, students and international advocates who continue to face daily threats for advocating against what the United Nations Human Rights Council has recently deemed a genocide in Gaza. Prior to this declaration from the U.N.H.R.C., even mentioning genocide and Palestine in the same sentence came with extreme risk, a hypocrisy that is a perfect example of the dictatorial administration we are forced to live in silence under. 

Although it is unfortunate that Kimmel was suspended after such minor comments about the right wing, the same is happening every day on a much smaller, but nevertheless important scale; something that is failing to be covered by news outlets out of their own fear of censorship and lawsuits from the Trump administration. 

It is no doubt that, regardless of Kimmel’s suspension status, he still holds great status and voice within American news outlets. Now, how he and other white men respond to censorship still remains a question. In a day and age where even wealthy white men are at risk of censorship, who will be the first to cross the line and speak up for the years of silencing and threats that marginalized groups have faced? 

Quill Nishi-Leonard ’27 contributed fact checking. 

Without memory, there is not a future: Fascism and you

Photo courtesy of Steve Goodman

Anna Goodman in a former Portuguese prison.

By Anna Cocca Goodman ’28

Staff Writer

“You know,” my father said, “Portugal is supposed to be sunny.”

But instead, it’s 2 p.m. on a rainy Sunday in January 2024, and I’m tumbling into a museum whose entrance is tucked into a Lisbon street corner, with soaking wet hair, rudimentary (at best) Portuguese, and an umbrella broken in ways I didn’t know umbrellas could break.

To be honest with you, I agree to go inside partly just to get dry.

But once there, ticket in hand, I find myself faced with a deep red wall, painted with the words: sem memória, não há futuro. I ask the first person I see to explain. “It means,” the woman replies, “without memory, there is no future.”

When someone says “fascism,” what do you picture?

I asked three Mount Holyoke College history professors who specialize in different time periods and continents to see what they thought.

“In Ghana, around the …'70s and the '80s, there were several revolutions and what a lot of people may consider authoritarian rule,” Professor of Pre-Colonial African History Ishmael Annang said.

“I mean, there's a lot of oligarchies in history,” Professor of Modern African American History, Caleb Smith replied. “But if you're talking about a dictatorship, I mean, Putin … that's as good an example as there gets.”

“Especially as a Jewish studies professor,” Yiddish Book Center Director and Professor Madeleine Cohen said, “when I think of fascism, of course, I tend to think of Nazi Germany.”

Whatever you think of, I don’t think it’s Portugal.

So let me change that.

The story of Portuguese dictatorship officially begins with a military coup in 1926, when António Salazar came to power; a man, who, according to the Huxley Almanac, was “a rather strange dictator … Despite being an autocrat, he didn’t build any palaces for himself, nor did he wage any wars … [but] he remained at the top for 36 years, becoming the longest-ruling dictator in Europe.”

Salazar’s reign of terror was marked not only with extreme violence but with a widespread suppression campaign which was nicknamed “Lápis Azul,” or “blue pencil,” after the tools his censors used to strike out content deemed unsuitable for publication.

In 1936, after drafting a new “constitution,” Salazar made a speech whose most famous lines were as follows: “We do not discuss the fatherland and its history. We do not discuss the family and its morals. We do not discuss the glory of work and its duty. We do not discuss authority and its prestige. And we do not discuss God and his virtue.”

“It sounds like a really good, almost textbook example of dictatorship,” Cohen said, later in our interview, “So what it makes me think of is, why in the U.S. do we only talk about Hitler?”

And it isn’t just the U.S. either. The Museu do Aljube, the museum I mentioned at the beginning, says in their mission statement, “[We] intend to [take] on the struggle against the exonerating, and, so often, complicit amnesia of the dictatorship we faced between 1926 and 1974.”

The museum itself is actually located in a building that was once used to imprison and torture political dissidents, and it is a hauntingly immersive experience. There are the sudden flashes of camera light. There are the cell bars criss-crossing the ceilings. There are the telephones that ring through the loudspeakers, making your heart race out of your chest before you can remind yourself that you haven’t done anything wrong.

But the most affecting part is a dark, silent space, a seven foot by four foot room, kept pristine from its days as an isolation cell. Inside, there’s just enough room next to the wooden pallet and flea-bitten blanket masquerading as a bed for seventeen-year old me to walk up to the opposite wall and see, scratched with some kind of sharp rock, 12 tally marks and the words: “João, 1940.”

It is an image that will never leave my mind. And, really, that’s the point.

“Sem memória, não há futuro,” or, as the stranger I met kindly translated, “without memory, there is not a future,” is a quote all over the museum. Its mission statement, as it says on its website, is “[to preserve] the memory of histories and active citizenship, and [to break] the silence in which everyone was submerged and rescue them in order to educate the younger generations.”

But who are those younger generations? Who are these people that the museum is fighting for?

I’ll tell you.

It's the Angolan teenager in the cafe who showed me a video of him playing fútbol with his team and said with a wink, “Promise you’ll look for me on the TV one day.” Fifty years ago, they wouldn’t have let him play.

It's the German waiter who bartends part-time for fun, and, in between spouting cheesy pick-up lines and unserious marriage proposals, tells me about his gay brother and what he said when he came out to him. (“The way I see it, if everyone only liked rice, nobody would buy pasta. And then all of Italy would be out of business. You need variety!”) Fifty years ago, he would have been arrested.

It's the Korean exchange student in the Museu do Aljube, who managed to teach me the little phrase in Portuguese that made this article come to life with her own alphabet. (“No-no, ha, ha, like laughing in Hangul.” Ah! Jaraesseoyo!). Fifty years ago, she wouldn’t even have been there, and she definitely wouldn't have been allowed to study journalism.

It’s the seventeen year-old American girl who complains when her father drags her to some museum because he remembers when he was her age and hearing about a revolution half a world away, not knowing that she’ll be just as moved by the story as he was in real time. She’s also a reporter. But she hasn’t written this story yet.

And it’s you too.

Because knowledge, protest, dissent – it isn't just important for those at the highest level. From the dissidents imprisoned in claustrophobic isolation cells to the journalists who printed their calls to action in secret, to the people marching in the streets, to everyone who had the strength to keep living anyway, their actions matter.

After thanking each of my interviewees for their time, I asked if I could read a short quote from a poem by Manuel Allegre, drawn on the museum’s walls. “Mêsmo na noite mais triste, em tempo de servidão, há sempre alguém que resiste, há sempre alguém, que diz: não.” Even on the saddest night in times of servitude, there is always someone who resists, there is always someone who says: no.

“It is so true,” Annang said. “I think society has created the false notion that those who do not get on the streets or those who do not gather on the field are probably not in some form of dissent or resistance. But just saying no is resistance.”

It’s 2 p.m. on a sunny Wednesday in May 1974, and a waitress is walking home from work. When she passes a young soldier, she hands him a carnation, which he puts in the barrel of his rifle. Within hours, every soldier has a red flower in his gun, and thus, because of Celeste Caeiro, the day the Portuguese dictatorship crumbled is known as the Carnation Revolution.

And I would be lying if I said all this and didn’t tell you that, in writing this article, I was a little scared. I’m still scared. Just a little over a week ago, ABC was intimidated by the White House into pulling Jimmy Kimmel’s show from the air after he even dared to insinuate that President Donald Trump was not as broken up about Charlie Kirk’s death as he claimed. I’m eighteen now, and we are watching a fast-paced descent into fascism in real time in our own country.

But I’ve seen change happen with my own eyes, from the women’s marches in 2016 to the Black Lives Matter movement in 2020, and, on a smaller scale, on campus, with the protests over fair wages for our staff.

Change wasn’t just made by the members of the Mount Holyoke workers’ unions striking, but by the students who marched with them, by the choir who turned their backs during Commencement, by the speakers who took pains to show their support, by the people who painted signs even if they couldn’t walk, by the photographers who documented the protests and by the journalists here at MHN who wrote so beautifully about them.

“The museum is what taught me that you can do something small,” I said to Smith during our interview. “I'm kind of curious what you think, say, an average person could do?”

“I would challenge the word ‘small,’” Smith answered. “I would use everyday acts of resistance. Truth is, no act of resistance is small ... And so that has been something [constant] throughout, especially looking at the American Civil Rights Movement [in the] African American context. Everyday resistance has always been a thing. And collective organizing, whether it is pickets, boycotts, or even, putting on stage shows. It all counts.”

“I think that there is so much that students can do,” Annang said. “You have the ability to educate yourself and educate your peers so that when we have people protesting, it's not just because they're following the crowd, but they really know and have a conviction of what exactly they are protesting about.”

Sem memória, não há futuro. Without history, there is no future. Without history, there is no us. And without us, there is no history.

Quill Nishi-Leonard ’27 contributed fact checking.

Controversy arises with Mount Holyoke’s usage of Gemini AI and promises of sustainability

Photo courtesy of MHN

Angelina Godinez ’28

Section Editor

On Aug. 19, 2025, Mount Holyoke College made a public announcement to students that Gemini, Google's AI software, is now one of the many softwares available to Mount Holyoke students. This announcement instantaneously brought to surface the frustrated voices of students on campus. Within just a few days, flyers appeared around campus saying “Keep AI out of MHC. Support freedom of thought. Protect artists and scholars.” Despite Mount Holyoke’s administration’s controversial and contradictory compliance with artificial intelligence, it should be no surprise to students, as the College continues to use artificial intelligence through Workday, our campus hub for student and staff employment.

When attempting to apply to an on campus job students are pushed to complete what is known in Workday as a “quick apply,” where you upload your resume and experience will be uploaded automatically as opposed to manually entering it. In addition to the application process, AI is widely used in the hiring process making it almost impossible for students to get hired, whether they are on work study or not. If students don’t use nonsensical keywords that AI can understand, good luck getting hired. Last fall and spring semester I applied to over 25 campus jobs and despite qualifying for work study as a first-generation low-income student, it took months before finally finding a job.

Recently graduated alums face this issue as well, since AI is commonly being used to complete tasks that many entry level jobs may require. For instance, with one quick look on Workday, I found a position asking that students “collect data primarily through internet research,” a job that quickly becomes riddled with AI — specifically Gemini AI — as those using Google can’t avoid the AI-generated summary of several sources, which are often uncredited or fact checked. Not only does this pose a threat to job positions such as this one, but to all students in academia.

This is especially true at a liberal arts college that has made sustainability their mission. It is widely known that the creation and use of artificial intelligence has a negative impact on the environment, discrediting the College’s mission of carbon-neutrality by our bicentennial year of 2037. One does not cancel the other out. In addition to the use of AI being generally contradictory to the College’s mission of carbon neutrality, it is an outright insult to students who have purposely chosen to pursue higher education at a private liberal arts college where learning and curiosity should be our driving factor, uninterrupted by generative AI.

The College has tried to battle these accusations by insisting that “All users should continue to use AI in accordance with college policies and guidance including the MHC Guidelines for the Ethical Use of Generative AI.”

Within these guidelines the College makes an effort to acknowledge how AI is growing rapidly and argues that in academia it is best to get a grasp on it and its errors. They also note their awareness of its negative environmental impact and issues with privacy, security, academic integrity and equity, as AI is often coded with implicit biases against historically marginalized groups. This should be no surprise, as a majority of its creators are wealthy white men. These so-called guidelines then end with the cherry on top: they were created using ChatGPT. “These guidelines were developed by using ChatGPT to draw on best practices observed at peer institutions including Bucknell University, Wellesley College, and Iona University with substantial editing by faculty and staff at Mount Holyoke College,” the webpage states.

How can the College ask students for academic integrity when they can’t even create their own guidelines on AI usage without using AI?

This question of artificial intelligence in class leaves students wondering how Mount Holyoke intends to respect its students and honor the unique work of a gender diverse liberal arts institution. When using em-dashes is a so-called “tell” of AI, will every humanities and English major be flagged, considering how available the College has made AI for students? In published writings such as the newspaper, research papers and theses, will students continue to read beginning to end for information, or summarize with Gemini AI?

As of now there are over 150 signatures collected on a petition titled “Keep AI Out of MHC,” and no response from the administration on students’ concerns about their ChatGPT generated "guidelines." These petitions can be found on most billboards around campus, hoping to collect signatures from like-minded students.

Karishma Ramkarran ’27 provided fact-checking.

Reads of Moho: the summer 2025 round-up

By Cameran Steiger ’26 & Honora Quinn ’27

STAFF WRITERS

For some Mount Holyoke students, the summer of 2025 was the summer of Labubus, “Love Island,” and Lady Gaga. For others, it was all about that other L-obsession: Literature.

As platforms like “BookTok” and “Bookstagram” take off and garner thousands of views, a top-notch reading list is just as much of a summer must-have as L.L. Bean’s classic Boat and Tote. However, an internet search reveals only a fraction of what the real-life literati actually have on their shelves. So, in search of some cool-kid recommendations for what to read and how to read it, we turned to patient zero: The Mount Holyoke student body.

As it turns out, when they are given time away from seminars and the packed lecture halls of campus, MHC students read widely across genres, follow both whims and strict lists of books-to-be-read, and mark their spot with anything from a special bookmark to a crumpled receipt from the depths of their bookbags or totes. Read ahead for a breakdown of how Mount Holyoke students like to read.

The Stats

Our search goes far beyond the more impersonal facts and figures. In addition to crunching the numbers related to their bookish habits, participants in the survey were also asked to recommend their favorite reads from the summer.

For example, Stella Rennard ’27 recommends Edith Wharton’s “House of Mirth,” summing it up simply with, “Beautiful writing, devastating tragedy.” Meanwhile, Sarah West ’26 described Paul Murray’s “Skippy Dies” as “an enthralling read” with “so many twists and turns!”

But the recommendations only start there.

Fantasy, Sci-Fi, and Dystopia

“Don't Let the Forest In” by C.G. Drews

This young adult horror-fantasy novel follows two teenagers who begin to see real-life monsters pulled straight from the twisted fairy tales they’ve been writing together. Mia Kysia ’27 wrote, “I was so obsessed with this and read it in a matter of days, unable to put it down. I cannot stress how beautiful the writing and characters were!!”

“Sunrise on the Reaping” by Suzanne Collins

Many readers are already familiar with the dystopian “Hunger Games” series, but dedicated followers of the series may be thrilled to explore this recently released prequel. This installment offers a particularly canny perspective on “media and what may be fed [to] or withheld from audiences,” Beka Henderson ’26 wrote. “ I think ‘Sunrise’ really tries to make the audience aware that … what’s happening in these books, what’s happening in the world, is something that can and will happen to us if we aren’t aware and actively working against it.”

“Get in Trouble” by Kelly Link

Jane Prusko ’28 wrote, “It’s a magical realism short story collection. The stories are very thought-provoking and have stuck with me [for] the entire rest of the summer since reading them in June.”

“Annihilation” by Jeff VanderMeer

This sci-fi novel follows a nameless female biologist who, alongside her academic colleagues, traverses into the classified Area X to investigate mysterious creatures. Caitlin Frarie ’28 said, “It is the first in a series, but works very well as a standalone, and is so well written!!”

“Piranesi” by Susanna Clarke

“Piranesi” revolves around an extraordinary house and its inhabitants in a speculative fiction extravaganza. “This book was incredibly beautiful and wonderfully strange,” wrote Ada Morrison ’29. “I fell in love with the main character and all his quirks and flaws, especially as the story unfolded and the mystery progressed. It definitely made me consider more deeply how my perception of the world shapes my identity.”

Contemporary and Literary Fiction

“My Friends” by Fredrik Backman

Translated from Swedish, Backman’s latest novel centers three teenage friends and a summer of rebellion, through the eyes of an aspiring artist twenty-five years later. Kennedy Olivia Bagley-Fortner ’26 recommends it, saying, “Backman is such an amazing writer! He writes as if he is experiencing each moment himself. ‘My Friends’ captures the growing pains, nostalgia and the grief of life.”

“The Poisonwood Bible” by Barbara Kingsolver

Yasmeen Miloua ’28 called this read a “really interesting depiction of the experiences of the wife and daughters of an overzealous American Baptist missionary in the Congo, following the nation's independence from Belgium.”

“The Heart's Invisible Furies” by John Boyne

“This book covers the entire life story of a gay man from Ireland. It is absolutely hilarious yet also full of touching scenes and heart-wrenching tragedies. I could not put it down and found myself cackling in public over certain scenes,” said Abigail McKeon ’26.

Romance

“The Seven Year Slip” by Ashley Poston

Romance meets time travel in this spooky and special book. Naomi Biber-Bishop ’27 vouched,“It was a really sweet story that works forwards and backwards in time — including some drama and intensity — but it concludes with the typical rom-com ending in which all is right in the world.”

“The Invisible Life of Addie Larue” by V.E. Schwab

Spanning centuries and yet just one lifetime, “The Invisible Life of Addie LaRue” follows the journey of one woman who bargains to live forever, but never be remembered. Madeline DiFazio ’29 wrote, “It was just such a good depiction [of] the fear of being forgotten.”

“Just Another Epic Love Poem” by Parisa Akhbari

Lily Mueller ’26 wrote that this book is a “Really beautiful love story told in a mixture of narrative chapters and poems with wonderful representation that doesn't feel like ‘a thing.’”

Poetry

“The Hocus-Pocus of the Universe” by Laura Gilpin

Ella de Beauport ‘’27 found this book after reading Gilpin’s poem “The Two-Headed Calf.” She was so moved by it that she looked into her work and found the collection that the poem was included in. “The Hocus-Pocus of the Universe” won the Walt Whitman award in 1976. Beauport said, “Each poem was better than the last. Many of her descriptions of loss, grief, and the wonder of life will stick with me forever.”

Abigail McKeon ’26 provided fact-checking.

Why ADHD goes underdiagnosed and underrecognized in girls

Graphic by Brianna Stockwell ’28

By Anna Goodman ’28

Staff Writer

Usually, when you sit your parents down and say “I have something to tell you,” it’s one of three things: “I’m dying,” “I’m gay,” or “I have just committed a murder.” But, as I have no intention to die or commit felonies for a while and have already come out to my parents— accidentally and on purpose — more times than I can count, when I FaceTimed my mom and dad on Friday, Feb. 21 at around 10 in the morning, it was none of the above.

Instead, I said, “So, I think I have ADHD.”

Here is the moment where you, dear reader, say, respectfully, “Well, duh.” If you’ve met me for more than fifteen minutes — yes, me, with my eye-watering color schemes and my unending rambling and my unhealthy obsession with my Notes app — then, well, of course I do.

And who could blame you? It’s hilarious. But it’s also, in a way, quietly heart-wrenching. Because the next question to ask is, “How is it that people who have known me for a matter of months were less surprised than me, the person who’s lived in this brain for almost twenty years?”

And it’s not just me.

“Experts believe clinicians often miss ADHD in girls, for a few key reasons,” Healthline says. “They more often have internalized symptoms[,] they’re more likely to use coping strategies [and] parents and teachers are less likely to refer girls for diagnosis and treatment.”

While ADHD is very common — in 2022, the CDC reported that more than 1 in 10 children were diagnosed with it — boys are almost twice as likely to receive said diagnosis.

I interviewed several of my classmates who have ADHD and/or autism regarding this issue to get some other perspectives on the topic.

“There’s a lot of stereotypes shared between autism and ADHD,” Ari Kaufman ’28 said. “It’s just a little white boy with his trains and a little white boy who can’t sit still. And when you’re not that, you just don’t have those things.”

Instead of the aforementioned “boy who can’t sit still,” girls report being perceived as spacey, careless or overly chatty, as well as experiencing long periods of burnout followed by moments of inspiration, cycling between intense emotion and apathy or having difficulty staying organized or managing time, according to the ADHD Centre. Besides that, in girls, it’s likely to present with comorbid conditions, such as anxiety or depression, or even to be misdiagnosed, especially as bipolar disorder.

And there are other things that comorbidity doesn’t take into account either.

“My doctor told me about this phrase,” Ivy Bailey ’28 said. “[It’s] 2E, [or] “twice exceptional”: when you’re developmentally disabled and gifted, and your talents make up for being disabled. In both ways, it’s hard to get help and hard to succeed.”

Writing for newspaper The Hechinger Report, Rachel Blustain said, “[Twice-exceptional students are] believed to make up at least 6[%] of all students who have a disability … [and] often, their intelligence masks their disability, so they are never assessed for special education … [or] they’re placed in special education classes tailored to their disability but grade levels behind the school work they’re capable of.”

For as long as I can remember, my brain has felt like it’s on fire. Ideas whiz by like it’s a choppy 1984 video game, and I’m lucky if I can write a tenth of them down before they leave me again. It’s like there's a dozen leap frogs ribbiting under my skin. I am a spectator in my own mind. But none of that is visible. To the uninformed outside observer, I appear calm, maybe a bit distracted, but usually intelligent once I start speaking.

The issue is that I just never stop speaking.

I talk people’s ears off about things they don’t care about. I circle around what I try to say. I go on fifteen side tangents before I reach the crux of my argument. In the past, I ended up alienating myself from peers and possible friends with the way I expressed myself. And I never realized that I shouldn’t, because my speech was just an outward manifestation of my brain, and nothing was unusual with my brain. Right?

“The fun thing about having your brain,” Kaufman added, speaking on her own autism, “is you think your brain is normal, even when it’s not.”

And when it’s communication with others that you struggle with the most, is it any wonder that millions of girls spend countless years suffering unnoticed and wondering what the hell is going on with them, when they could have been getting support? That they sit in silence when they witness the reactions trusted adults or peers have to people who do fit the more stereotypical symptoms of autism or ADHD? That they then internalize that it’s wrong to be “like that”?

So, in the days before telling my parents I had ADHD, I was nervous. Would they roll their eyes? Would they tell me I was looking for excuses? Would they say that they had understood the autism but this was a step too far? But, when I FaceTimed my mom and dad, it was actually none of the above.

They listened calmly, looked at each other, and then my mom said, “Well, that would make sense. They have a high comorbidity.”

And then my dad added, “You know, you don’t have to justify it. We believe you.”

It would be easy for me to spin this into a feel-good story, but the truth is, I am very lucky to have parents who do grow and who do listen, and to go to a school like this that is committed to bettering the lives of disabled students. I’m also lucky that, as of now, neither of my conditions require medication or that much extra care from other people. As incredibly uncomfortable as it is, I have the ability to mask, to hide. I am also not formally diagnosed at the moment, a decision I made for safety and travel purposes. Millions of people don’t have that safety, and I’m not blind to the fact that all of these things are privileges.

But as with every privilege experienced by someone from a disadvantaged group, the downsides remain.

At Mount Holyoke College we have Disability Services, but, as they themselves say on the College’s website, a student must submit “appropriate documentation of [their] disability from a licensed provider/clinician”, meaning that students who are unaware of their own disabilities, or are unable to, or do not want to get a diagnosis — which includes me — cannot receive help from them.

The decision is a double-edged sword; you cannot be hurt if no one knows, but you also can’t be helped.

But there’s also the Accessibility Justice Club, which, according to their official “About” section on Embark, “facilitates community for students with disabilities and attempts to compensate for the institutional marginalization and isolation that is caused by systemic ableism and, even sometimes, by accommodations.”

They’re an excellent reminder that when all systems fail, oftentimes it falls to the people most affected by them to organize for a better one.

A question that I get asked a lot about autism from people that don’t have it is, “Don’t you hate it?” or “Would you really choose to have it?” like it’s some kind of infectious disease that they can’t comprehend being saddled with. I’ve always answered that I would not be me without it, and over the last few months, I’ve come to the same conclusion about my ADHD.

I'd be lying if I said there weren’t days where I hate it. I’d be lying if I said there aren’t people who spend their lives hating it, which is completely understandable, and not my place to judge. Like any disability, there are undeniable difficulties to living with it. But for me, I think of the things I’ve created because of it, of the interesting topics I’ve become obsessed with due to it, and of the community I’ve found through it. I think of all of the friends I’ve made with ADHD or autism, whose perspectives you’ve heard throughout this piece, and without whom my life would be so much less fun.

“A lot of people with it seem to gravitate towards each other,” Kat Brown ’28 once told me with a grin.

Whether you need medication or not, whether you get assistance from Disability Services or not, whether you curse its existence or not, it’s important that you know you aren’t alone. You aren’t crazy. You have a community that’s here, arms open, waiting for you, to let you know that they understand. You just have to knock on the door.

So, have you realized you have ADHD? I’ve been there. It’s gonna be okay.

Sofia Ramon ’27 contributed fact-checking.

Watched or made? History and what it means to us

Photo courtesy of Anna Goodman ’28

Photos of, from left to right, Anna’s grandparents in 1969, Anna’s grandmother and her mom in 1989, and Anna’s grandmother with Anna herself in 2019.

By Anna Goodman ’28

Staff Writer

It's about 10 p.m. on July 20, 1969, and my grandparents, who had just turned 20, are watching TV. Normally at this time of night they’d be watching the Ed Sullivan Show or listening to Creedence Clearwater on the radio –– if my grandfather had his way –– but not tonight. Instead, they’re watching some very fuzzy footage broadcast from over 200,000 miles away. They’re watching history be made through a screen.

We all know this story, right? “One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind?” You’re rolling your eyes already. You’re flipping your paper over to the interesting things in the Horoscopes section. You’re wondering: Why am I wasting your time?

So, instead of talking about this, let’s talk about you. What is “history” to you?

“I’d define history as a particular memory ... what people remember to be the past. As a student of history, sometimes I think of it as an academic way to understand the lives we’re living right now,” Asmi Shrestha ’26 says.

Or, as Sophia Baldwin ’26 puts it, “[History is] a collection of events from the past that we remember and pass down from generation to generation.”

For Mila Marinova ’27, history is “all of the past events and people and their actions that have led to where we are now.”

“[It’s] both something very personal and a collective phenomenon. It’s generational too, it depends on what’s shared from grandparents to parents to children. It depends on what’s taught in schools, in science and English and history classes. It depends on personal interpretation too,” Sophia Hoermann ’25 says.

Many of the interviewees talked of their first “historical memory,” ranging from the COVID-19 pandemic to the 2008 financial crash to the fall of the monarchy in Nepal.

My grandmother, it seems, had her pick. In 1969, a man walked on the moon, the Vietnam War became more unpopular than ever, the Woodstock music festival drew crowds of thousands, and the Stonewall Uprising birthed the modern queer rights movement. And all of those generation-defining moments happened in the span of less than two months.

And so, after asking how each person would define history, I asked another question: Can you name three people involved in the moon landing? No one could do it. Most could name was Neil Armstrong — or “Neil” or “Armstrong” — but the closest anyone came was one and a half people.

It’s fascinating that here we are, with people who clearly think deeply about history and gave all different yet all detailed and introspective answers to the question of how to define it — who could likely all recite the line, “One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind” from memory — and yet the name of the person whose step it was eluded them.

It’s fascinating that so often, when we think of Big Moments In History, we forget about the people behind them. Things don’t just happen. People make them happen. People made Stonewall and Woodstock happen. And as for the people who made the moon landing happen –– besides thousands of engineers and mathematicians and geologists, not to mention those in mission control or landing crew –– the names of the three astronauts from Apollo 11 were Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Michael Collins.

So, it’s about 10 p.m. on Nov. 5, 2024, and I, having just turned 18, am watching TV. Normally at this time of night I’d be watching Netflix, or, to be honest, cramming over an assignment, but not tonight. Instead I’m ten years old again, remembering my own first historical memory, feeling just as horrified and just as powerless. I’m watching history through a screen.

Because 77 million people voted for Trump. My grandfather voted for Trump. Buzz Aldrin endorsed him. Because of people like him, we landed on the moon. Because of people like him, all of our lives are in danger.

You all know this story, right? You’re really wishing you turned to the Horoscopes section ten minutes ago. But before you roll your eyes, know that I’m not going to tell this story. I’m going to tell a different one.

My grandmother was three months past 20 when she watched a man walk on the moon. My grandmother was three weeks away from succumbing to Stage 4 lung cancer when she signed her ballot for Joe Biden in 2020 with an “X.” She watched history be made and was determined to make it until the bitter end, determined that she would make a better future even if she couldn’t be part of it.

And maybe you don’t want to make history. You’re exhausted. You’re terrified. You just want to pass chemistry and not think about the looming threats to healthcare or the constant school shootings in the news. And that’s not your fault; it shouldn’t be dependent on a bunch of teenagers and 20-something sleep-deprived college students to try to keep themselves alive when the people in charge of our country seem committed to watching us die.

But we don’t have the luxury of watching any longer. We don’t have the time to deliberate on whether we want to be here. The fact is, the time for deliberation was months ago and the choice has been made. The fact is, here we are.

The question is, what are we going to do about it?

I’ve mentioned many responses to “What is history?” but not my own. So, for the record, I, Anna Cocca Goodman ’28, say that history is change. History is the bridge from the past to the future, and the people who carry it on their shoulders, forgotten or celebrated, from Neil Armstrong, to protestors at Stonewall, to journalists far better than me.

My grandmother did not live to see a world where Trump was not president. But I will. I will survive the men who walked on the moon, I will survive the queer ancestors who fought for me at Stonewall, and I will survive the last vestiges of Donald Trump’s regime, not on a screen, but with my own eyes.

It’s about 10 p.m. on April 16, 2025, what would be my grandmother’s 76th birthday, when I decide to write this article. When I decide to say that I hope you will be there when we land on the moon again. I hope you will be there when we see authoritarianism crumble again. I hope you will be here, now, when we need you, when we have the chance to make both of those things happen.

So, please, don’t go. And, please, whatever history means to you, come and make it with me.

Leah Dutcher ’28 contributed fact-checking.

Staff editorial on student press freedom

To our readers:

On March 25, 2025, a graduate student at Tufts University was detained by the Department of Homeland Security while leaving her apartment in Somerville, Mass. The student, Rümeysa Öztürk, is a Turkish national whose visa was revoked the same evening. In March 2024, Öztürk had co-authored an editorial for The Tufts Daily student newspaper; it is widely believed that this editorial was used as the basis for her detainment. In response, the Student Press Law Center issued an alert for student media organizations on April 4, warning that “[Immigration and Customs Enforcement] has weaponized lawful speech and digital footprints and has forced us all to reconsider long-standing journalism norms.” In response to these circumstances, Mount Holyoke News would like to reaffirm our commitment to press freedom and emphasize the importance of protecting our student journalists and their right to expression.

Öztürk’s contribution to The Tufts Daily, alongside her co-authors, did not violate any Tufts University policies and was a sound exercise of the students’ First Amendment rights. Mount Holyoke News condemns the use of intimidation and extralegal action to silence constitutionally protected free speech. Student editorials are vital to cultivating an open and productive discourse on campuses, and any disciplinary federal action taken in response to Öztürk and her collaborators’ statements is an infringement on their rights.

Mount Holyoke News remains committed to providing a platform for students and community members to express their beliefs and engage in respectful dialogue. We stand with The Tufts Daily in advocating for the protection of free speech, a fundamental right that forms a core tenet of American democracy. Mount Holyoke News will continue to exercise its right to provide readers with informative journalism and a diverse array of viewpoints, and will advocate for our writers’ ability to contribute to our publication without facing unjust retaliation. 

– Mount Holyoke News Executive Board

Student newspaper editorials are more important than ever

Graphic by Isabelle Peterson ‘28

MOUNT HOLYOKE NEWS STAFF MEMBER

Amidst detainments, censorship and protests on campuses around the country, the importance of an uncensored opinion section in student newspapers is more crucial than ever. However, since President Donald Trump has returned to office, there has been a constant attack on the First Amendment rights of many publications — particularly student publications — especially when concerning the Israel-Hamas war. On March 25, Tufts University graduate student Rümeysa Öztürk was detained in broad daylight in Somerville, Massachusetts by Department of Homeland Security officers in plain clothing. It is widely believed she was targeted for her involvement in Tufts’ student journalism.  

On March 26, 2024, Öztürk co-authored an op-ed featured in The Tufts Daily, calling for Tufts to adopt Tufts Community Union senate resolutions regarding the Israel-Hamas war. Öztürk and her collaborators asked directly that Tufts acknowledge the Palestinian genocide.. This may have made her appear as a threat in the eyes of the U.S. government as the usage of the term “Palestinian genocide” may have been conflated with antisemitic terror; the phrase may also have been linked to the vocabulary of student-led protest. This perspective would put Öztürk, and various other currently detained student advocates, out of alignment with the current U.S. government’s perspectives on foreign affairs.

This idea of certain speech posing a threat to U.S. interests is born from a World War II-era law, the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Originally created to prevent Nazi propaganda in the United States,  its broadness is now weaponized in characterizing any declaration of “genocide” in regards to the Israel-Hamas war as not only antisemitic, but as criminal. The broadness of this decades-old law allows for detainments like Öztürk’s. Therefore, student visas across the country are being revoked for supposedly inciting “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States” through their use of free speech, according to the Immigration and Naturalization Act: Specifically speech expressed though op-eds.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in a press conference on March 27, was asked by a reporter “what [was] the specific action [Öztürk] took [which] led to her visa being revoked?” 

Rubio answered that  "Oh, we revoked her visa … [If] the reason why you're coming to the United States is not just because you want to write op-eds, but because you want to participate in movements that are involved in doing things like vandalizing universities, harassing students, taking over buildings, creating a ruckus, we're not going to give you a visa." 

This statement is not only inhumane, but illustrative of the further censorship to come concerning foreign policy, criticism of the U.S. government and the ability to publish free speech. 

This censorship is not only seen in universities, either, but in the wider journalistic community, including at The Washington Post. 

On Feb. 26, Jeff Bezos, owner of Amazon and The Washington Post, posted on X about a message he shared with The Washington Post opinion staff. It reads, “We are going to be writing every day in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets. We’ll cover other topics too of course, but viewpoints opposing those pillars will be left to be published by others.” While claiming that newspapers may have benefitted readers by providing a diversity of opinions in the past, Bezos said, “Today, the internet does that job. ” 

As much as Bezos claims otherwise, it is clear how this stark change in the publishing guidelines of The Washington Post, which had previously worked to advocate all sorts of different views, is now being censored. It is certainly interesting to note that he did publish this on X, owned by Elon Musk, who has been known for utilizing his free speech to promote Nazi symbolism: Something the government did not censor from the public, despite Musk being a immigrant himself and his speech being directly in disobedience of the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which was conceived to oppose Nazi propaganda.  

This clear abuse of power very obviously affects everyone in America, particularly journalists, but is especially harmful for students. In the U.S., higher education is a largely international venture, with 6% of all U.S. students, 1.1 million people, coming from abroad. This means any student journalist or activist who wishes to use their free speech to be critical of U.S. actions is  at risk of being targeted by the Trump administration’s agenda, which is entirely anti-immigrant.

Columbia University, for instance, has for months been filled with students advocating for the same justice Öztürk asked for from Tufts University. Here, Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia graduate student and one of the lead negotiators in Columbia's student-led pro-Palestine movement, was detained on March 8 due to his advocacy on foreign policy. On April 4, after nearly a month of his detainment, Khalil published an opinion article in the Columbia Daily Spectator addressing it “To Columbia—an institution that laid the groundwork for my abduction—and to its student body, who must not abdicate their responsibility to resist repression.” He then goes on to not only continue to criticize the university for its stance on  the Israel-Hamas war, but to also acknowledge the concerning rate at which students — like Leqaa Korda, Dr. Badar Khan Sufi, and Rümeysa Öztürk — “have all been snatched by the state.” Khalil describes these detainments as “oddly reminiscent of when I fled the brutality of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria and sought refuge in Lebanon.” 

Despite student detainment, many independent, student-owned newspapers continue to fight for their right to free speech, particularly within op-eds. The opinion section of a news organization is deliberately made separate from the other sections of the news, because, unlike non-opinionated journalistic reporting, op-eds strive to share the opinions of those directly in a community, and serve as a platform to allow an abundance of varying views to enter into debate with one another. Opinions are not to be taken as a unanimous forced belief, but to celebrate different ways of thinking. In this political climate, unique and critical ways of thinking channeled through free press are viewed as a threat to oligarchies, monarchs and tyranny as they emphasize what is known as the fourth pillar of democracy: Free press. 

Mount Holyoke News, similarly to Columbia and Tufts’ student newspapers, remains a platform where students may publish and share their opinions. As popular news outlets crumble in submission to financial intimidation, it is important for not only opinions, but all newspapers to continue to report on the unjust political climate we are forced to live in. As more and more students’ visas get revoked, it is important that students stand and write in solidarity with their classmates. Execute your right as not only a birthright citizen, but as a student who doesn't have to live with the constant debilitating fear that their every movement is being watched in the hope of removing them from the U.S. 

Sofia Ramon ’27 contributed fact-checking.

MHC should have a balance of vegan and non-vegan dessert options

Photos by Tara Monastesse ’25

Blanch’s Harvest station often has a preponderance of vegan options and few non-vegan choices, leaving some non-vegans feeling underrepresented.

Dela Dzimega ’28

Staff Writer

If you check the Harvest or M&Cs sections of the Dining Commons menu, you’ll realize that most of Mount Holyoke College's desserts are vegan. From cookies and cakes to even brownies, most desserts are made without animal products, likely in an effort to be inclusive of all students’ dietary needs and restrictions. Despite the College's valuable effort to create dietary inclusivity, certain aspects of the food cannot be replicated through a vegan recipe. Eliminating ingredients such as butter, eggs and milk fundamentally changes the texture and flavor of most baked goods. As such, completely ignoring other options affects the enjoyability of desserts for all students. To balance this issue, the College should keep offering vegan desserts, but provide more non-vegan options alongside them.

Some may ask, “What makes non-vegan desserts important to the students when vegan options are available?” Eggs, butter and milk are fundamental to baking for a reason. Take a classic chocolate chip cookie, for example. Eggs combine with sugar to provide a perfect blend of crunch and chewiness. Then, butter provides saltiness, moisture and a rich complexity to the cookie's flavor. Even the melty chocolate chips usually contain milk. Regardless of what dessert you're baking, non-vegan products like eggs, butter and milk are essential in the consistency of baked goods. Whipped eggs create a light airiness for cakes, milk prevents dryness, butter is responsible for flakey pie crusts and dairy can be found in many popular frostings like buttercream, cream cheese and whipped cream. A chocolate chip cookie, like many other desserts, certainly can be made vegan, but loses many of its desirable qualities when ingredients are replaced.

While there isn’t public data on Mount Holyoke students’ dietary habits, Gallup’s latest Consumption Habits Poll reports that, as of 2023, only 1% of Americans are vegan. Though it is a small percentage, this is still millions of people. Additionally, vegan desserts are also accessible for people who have restrictions with dairy and eggs for other reasons, like lactose intolerance. Considering these factors, it is clear vegan options should not be removed entirely from the menu because they benefit a substantial chunk of our student body.

With this being said, in order for the College to accurately represent the entire student body, our desserts don’t have to be exclusively vegan. As I described earlier, there is a trade off to the all-or-nothing way the College is currently handling this. To truly represent the College’s needs, vegan desserts should be one option of many. M&Cs, one of our school’s oldest traditions, could be more popular with other options. If the school offered a more balanced mix of vegan and non-vegan options, it would inevitably achieve its goal of creating a dietary friendly menu while also remaining inclusive to all students, including those without certain dietary restrictions.

Leah Dutcher ’28 contributed fact-checking.

Importance of community amongst fears of ICE raids

Graphic by Audrey Hanan ’28

Angelina Godinez ’28

Opinion Editor

It’s been a little over a month since the last, and only, public statement made by Mount Holyoke College President Danielle R. Holley concerning Immigration and Customs Enforcement and deportation raids in Massachusetts. President Holley spoke at a community forum on Jan. 28, where she addressed students’ concerns following recent executive orders regarding financial aid, the Department of Education and ICE raids. As previously reported by Mount Holyoke News, Holley stated in an interview following the forum that “ICE is like every other law enforcement agency.”

“In order to enter a private space … They need a warrant that is signed by a judge.” Holley said. “They would need to have probable cause related to a student, staff or faculty member … We plan to try to fully protect our students.” She added, “once someone is swept up by federal detention, it becomes very hard. But our plan for the college is to work to protect our students, faculty and staff, even if they are in federal detention for immigration.”

In a recent interview with Mount Holyoke News, Professor David Hernández, the College’s Critical Race and Political Economy co-chair and an expert in immigration enforcement, praised Holley for these strong statements given what little information is truly known about the effects of ICE raids in Massachusetts.

“Compared to 2016-17, you know, with the first Trump administration, it's a much stronger statement than the previous leadership at the College around protecting students. And not only a much stronger statement, but a much more informed statement than our previous leadership had around immigration rights.”

But despite Holley delivering an informed statement on immigration policy and how it affects the College, the vagueness of her comment due to the limited information and reliable data on deportations available at the time allows room for lingering anxiety on campus. As the end of the semester comes near, many students prepare to make travel plans, but for others, it is still unknown what the school will do to provide affordable and safe housing throughout the summer to students in need.

In addition to the uncertainty on campus, on Jan. 30 and 31, Instagram was flooded with panicked stories reading. For instance, one post stated, “ICE has raided Garcia’s in Amherst, MA and are currently in the Amherst and Hadley area. Please be careful and safe out there and warn all your loved ones.” Another user posted, “A family friend has a friend that works at Garcia’s and she told [cause] this just happened tonight, sadly 5 [people] ended up getting deported.”

On Jan. 31, similar messages were shared with a bright red background reading, “Western Massachusetts people you NEED to be SHARING THESE REPORTS OF ICE … these are your neighbors, friends, teachers, classmates, fellow human beings - no one deserves this.”

Despite the panic, these alleged raids in the Amherst-Hadley area were later confirmed to be false by the Daily Hampshire Gazette, which stated that Garcia’s, a popular Mexican restaurant in Amherst, Massachusetts, temporarily closed due to rumors of ICE raids and to protect the safety of their workers. Since the inauguration of U.S. President Donald Trump, there have been countless rumors of ICE raids within multiple Western Massachusetts cities, all of which have fortunately been proven false. Regardless of the false alarms, it is important that students, staff and families remain vigilant, know their rights and do not give in to the fear this cruel administration has unleashed.

ICE, and the oppressors known as the U.S. government, thrive off of the fear they create through these false numbers, rumors and statistics. President Trump promised to deport millions of migrants, but within his first month back in office has deported fewer migrants than the Biden administration’s 2024 monthly average. According to Reuters on Feb. 21, “President Donald Trump deported 37,660 people during his first month in office … Far less than the monthly average of 57,000 removals and returns in the last full year of Joe Biden’s administration.”

Nevertheless, there is a significant difference in press covering mass deportations between the administrations, which proves that Trump's administration depends on theatrical antics that incite chaos and fear. That is not to say these mass deportations should be scoffed at or ignored in any sense. One human being’s displacement affects hundreds of others, so any comparison between the effectiveness of past and current administrations concerning deportation is the comparison between thousands of human lives being put in danger.

Hernández said it best: “The thing to remember about migration and deportation is that the unit of analysis is a human being. So any one person gets deported from our community, that's going to disrupt something, it's going to disrupt the family, it's going to disrupt a workplace. It's going to be harmful, so [remember] never to minimize that.”

Mass deportation has been, and will continue to remain, a part the Eurocentric agenda President Trump upholds. There is no lesser of two evils when comparing statistics that represent thousands of human lives. The oligarchy that now takes form as the U.S. government will only continue to displace migrants, treating them like disposable objects. The only way to attempt to fight against these Eurocentric ideals is to look out for your community.

Our government has been flooded by rich businessmen whose only concern is filling their pockets. They will not stop placing human lives in direct harm, because they are not for the average hardworking person trying to make ends meet in America. We have long since lost the narrative of “We the people”; not only are we separated from our dystopian government officials by tax brackets, but by the general concern for and value of a human life. Thus, we have to take the burden of caring for each other upon ourselves.

With the average cost to deport one person being over $10,000 according to the Center for American Progress, and it potentially costing nearly $114 billion to deport 11.3 million humans, not even the collective bank account of Trump’s cabinet can cover the expense of their promised deportation and the trillions of dollars of debt the U.S. government is drowning in.

The only way these millionaires dressed up as government officials can create the damage they promise is through fear. This fear is what causes people to act rashly, making them vulnerable pieces in this sick exchange of human lives known as mass deportations.

This is echoed by Hernández, who states that “They want us to feel nervous. They want us to get depressed, because they can't get everyone. They know that. They know they don't have the capacity to get people, and they've even complained about in Chicago about the community, knowing their rights and stuff. They've attacked [Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] for saying, ‘Know your rights…’”

The government does not want us to be informed, let alone united against their oppression. Despite targeting sanctuary cities such as Los Angeles, New York, Chicago and Boston, the power lies with the people. This includes Mount Holyoke College. By uniting, sharing notices about current and future raids and distributing “know your rights cards,” we can attempt to continue to slow down this cruel administration and protect our community in the face of anxiety and adversity.

Like Professor Hernandez says, “You don't have to be a lawyer to fight for immigrants’ rights, you know, you can be a lot of things, and fight for immigrants. You can be a professor, you can be a student. You can write things to the newspaper. You can write for the newspaper.”

Leah Dutcher ’28 contributed fact-checking.