Sophia Do ’17 developed an interest in photography in her hometown, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam. “I just wanted to capture friends hanging out,” she explained. After telling her father about her new interest, he bought Do her first sophisticated camera, a DS-LR. Though she’d had no formal instruction, Do began frequently photographing her friends. Experience taught her everything she knows. In Vietnam, Do’s interest grew quickly, for she could easily travel to different countries on weekends and see a large variety of landscapes. “Back home, I was surrounded by very artistic, free-living people,” Do said. “Living in a very international and relaxed environment that encompassed many cultures, especially French art, helped me shape my style over the years.” As for artists who have inspired her interest, Do is strongly influenced by photographers Sally Mann and Annie Leibowitz. Do is also a talented self-taught Photoshop and online editor. “I rely on Photoshop,” she said. “If I make any mistake in taking my photos, I can always fix it.” Do uses Photoshop for editing out flaws and also for adding effects and themes to her images. “I like having the ability to manipulate something ordinary into something surreal,” she said. “Sometimes, I find just photography boring until photoshop can be used.” Photoshop plays a big role in Do’s style of photography, which she calls “surrealism portraiture.” She has always loved this particular style, because her passion began solely with a desire to photograph people. To make things more “surreal,” Do incorporates unique themes into her shots. One of her favorite theme-concepts involved using cotton, which she edited to look like clouds in the final photo. Do described her process for various shoots: “First I come up with a concept or a theme, and then I pick people who just look like the theme…not so much if they’re pretty or not.” Last year, during her first class in Photography (AP Photo), Do learned skills that helped improve her technique. The class also gave her some time to take a multitude of images. “Time is a huge hindrance in my photography career,” she said. At home, “It was easier to go out alone and explore to get more interesting subjects and backgrounds, but here it is difficult to even organize a single-person trip to the forests before fall foliage goes away.” Despite these limitations, Do captured a range of shots that include Deerfield students and settings, which can be seen on her Facebook Page – Sophia Do Photography. The 1,725+ likes on this page is one of Do’s proudest accomplishments. Do is also pleased to have had her work published on a prominent Vietnamese news platform, Businessboom’s website, Atlas Magazine, and most notably, photoVogue Italia. This year, Do is looking forward to continuing her creative projects and branching out to photograph male models. As for farther into the future, Do said, “I don’t know if my parents take photography seriously enough to let me pursue a career in it, but I’ll always do it on the side.” Look for her upcoming projects on her Facebook page, featuring models Lyric Perot ’16 and Pierson L’Esperance ’17.

After just a month, The Freshman Village has dramatically changed the social climate of Deerfield. Last year, The Village was first introduced by Dean of Students Amie Creagh during a Wednesday school meeting. The concept of The Village was to provide a shared living space for ninth grade boys and girls in order to address the gender divide on campus, to promote stronger class bonds, and to ease new sophomore integration by also establishing all-sophomore dorms. This announcement was met with resistance from the student body, mainly rising male juniors and seniors because The Village would be located in Johnson-Doubleday. Now, ninth grade girls live in Johnson, ninth grade boys live in Doubleday, and Crowe Commons acts as a buffer between the two. Many students expressed concern after the establishment of The Village. The community worried about females and males living in the same dorm, exclusive cliques forming in the freshman class, and new sophomores struggling in their respective dorms. However, many faculty and students are now pleased with the changes that The Village has fostered. “I’m hearing favorable reviews,” Mrs. Creagh stated. “They seem to enjoy their time together, and I think they’re forging class bonds.” She also mentioned that “the ninth graders feel at home in The Village.” Emily Henderson ’19 agrees. “We all have fun [in The Village], and I believe having all the freshmen together has helped us bond well as a grade.” Kento Yamamoto ‘16, a proctor in Doubleday, stated, “I was afraid there would be more cliques among the freshmen, but everyone is so friendly to one another.” Many believe that the biggest gain from The Village is the growth of healthy relationships among and between boys and girls on campus. Dr. Ivory Hills, a five-year dorm resident on Doubleday II, stated, “I see boys and girls hanging out in what appears to be a safe and productive manner.” Akya Evans ’16, a proctor in Johnson, believes these relationships were made possible by The Village’s joint common room: “I have seen many boy–girl friendships blossom just because of the common room they share. The Crowe has been an amazing outlet for them to be social and to just be normal kids. As a grade, they are extremely close, and I love seeing that the boys aren’t separated from the girls like in one of those awkward 80s movies.” Although the freshman class has forged unquestionably strong bonds in the past month, some upperclassmen and sophomores feel disconnected from the freshmen. Equally, the freshmen are worried about not knowing enough upperclassmen and sophomores. Yamamoto commented, “I have a lot of upperclassmen (and some sophomores) coming up to me saying that they don’t know any freshmen.” Alex Alijani ’19 added, “I find it harder to meet sophomores and upperclassmen because we don’t live in the same dorm and they never come to the Crowe.” Some have attributed the diminished amount of inter-class interactions to the misunderstandings between freshmen and upperclassmen. Christine Callinan ’16 has noticed this in numerous settings like athletics, saying, “[The Freshman] have a skewed perception of authority and they don’t always take instruction well from the senior captains.” Jacqueline Alvarado ’17 attributes the lack of respect from freshmen to their isolated location: “Since  [the freshmen] are so isolated, they don’t understand the school dynamic.” In addition to concerns of class relations being damagaed, parts of the community feel disgruntled by the seemingly unlimited budget for the freshman class. Over the past month, the freshmen have enjoyed a flat screen TV along with a special Netflix account in the Crowe and have been given special privileges like surprise feeds and games. Other grades have expressed  the feeling that the freshmen have been given special treatment. Katherine von Weise ‘17 stated, “I find [the unlimited budget] really unfair. Just because they’re new, it shouldn’t mean their class deserves more funding for their happiness.” Check out the Op/Ed page, where seniors Ballard Brown, Serena Ainslie, and Claire Petrus discuss their own personal views about The Village.

Can a story about a boarding school in the thirties resonate with Deerfield’s students? answers this question as a play set in a girls boarding school in New England in the 1930s. Written by American playwright Lillian Hellman, the play deals with controversial issues such as bullying and sexuality, culminating in a piece of social art. “It’s a fantastic play because we ourselves are in a boarding school in New England; I thought that this would be something that a lot of our students could relate to,” said Theater Director Catriona Hynds. “Although this is set in the 1930s, an issue such as the one we find in regarding sexuality would still be an outrageous issue [today].” While the theater program misses the phenomenal actors that graduated last year, it has an exciting new cast to debut. is the first time where females have the majority of the roles in a play at Deerfield. The new dynamic is definitely something to look forward to. “It’s not a particularly easy play. It’s a wordy play. It’s quite a complex play as well, and keeps us on our toes, but perhaps my challenge as a director is always to make sure our performances are persistent,” said Hynds. “I must give opportunities to new faces, and sometimes they come with less experience, so my challenge is always to make sure everyone is on a pretty similar level with the other actors on stage, and there’s a lot to do. It’s a big play.” Focusing on two teachers who are irreparably harmed by malicious rumors that are based on groundless evidence, the play will incentivize talks on issues relevant to Deerfield. Following the performance, Greer chats and other community discussions will be held, facilitating possible productive discussion. The play has great potential to move beyond just an arts performance and open up an opportunity for the community to engage in important discussions.

Last year, Kinder Morgan (KM), a corporation with a net worth of $11.5 billion that constructs natural gas and oil pipelines across the country, proposed building a 188-mile long natural gas pipeline from Wright, New York, to Dracut, Massachusetts. The pipeline, labeled the Northeast Energy Direct (NED), would cut through the border of Western Massachusetts and would be controlled by one of Kinder Morgan’s subsidiaries, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co. With the project, KM seeks to bring more natural gas to New England and “significantly lower energy costs to the region’s homes and businesses.” The gas would come from the Marcellus Shale fields in Pennsylvania and would be extracted through fracking, a process in which multiple wells are blasted with water, sand, and gelling chemicals to access the energy stored in the pores of the rock. Originally, KM planned for the pipeline to be 36 inches in diameter and to deliver 2.2  billion cubic feet of natural gas per day, but the company has reduced that estimate to a 30-inch pipe transporting 1.3 billion cubic feet daily. Additionally, Berkshire Gas, a natural gas company that delivers gas to Deerfield Academy and throughout Western Massachusetts, called a moratorium on new natural gas customers until 2018, when the NED pipeline is scheduled to be in the ground. Berkshire Gas has signed up to purchase 1.6 percent of what the NED will carry. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), a government agency, has the final say on whether the NED will be built or not, and KM must prove that it will have enough natural gas customers before the pipeline, estimated to cost between $3 billion and $6 billion, can be built. FERC, which receives tax money from the companies it regulates, will review comments from other government agencies and the public before deciding on the NED. KM and other organizations have advanced a variety of arguments in support of the pipeline. They state that the NED pipeline will reduce gas prices in New England, will create thousands of jobs and generate revenue, and will reduce the region’s reliance on fossil fuels. KM’s website asserts that “New England had the largest natural gas price increase of any major trading location in the United States in 2013.” Additionally, Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, Inc. (KMEP) released a full statement regarding the pipeline, which shared that ISO New England, an independent electric system operator, reported that New Englanders paid over $7 billion more for electricity during the 2013-2015 winters than they did during the winter of 2011-2012. National Grid, an electricity and gas company based in the United Kingdom that delivers gas to the American Northeast, received approval to raise its prices by an average of 37% for the winter of 2014-2015 due to constraints on existing regional pipelines, “which decrease natural gas availability at times of peak demand,” according to KM’s Resource Report 1 to FERC. Additionally, the Beacon Hill Institute created two models to analyze the short and long term benefits to Massachusetts. The results from the so-called IMPLAN model indicate that the NED would “eliminate 70% of the natural gas shortage in Massachusetts and thus reduce energy prices.” In terms of jobs, the plan states that “the lower energy prices would lead to the creation of 9,420 jobs by 2020” and that the project would lead to “the creation of 1,713 temporary jobs that would pay $228 million in wages.” KM created a website dedicated to the NED pipeline, which asserts that the project would “generate an estimated $23.9 million in revenues to local and state taxing bodies in Massachusetts in the first year following construction, with gradual annual depreciation thereafter.” In terms of environmentalism, KMEP, Inc. stated that the NED is designed to supply “abundant and clean natural gas to help alleviate New England’s uniquely high natural gas and electricity costs” and explained that the NED is “essential to facilitating the region’s ability to continue to reduce carbon emissions by replacing existing older coal-and-oil-fired” energy sources. The KM NED website also states that natural gas “supports renewable energy growth by providing the cleanest possible power when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine,” and says that “over 80 percent of [the pipeline] will be co-located along existing utility corridors or adjacent to existing pipeline, meaning that less new land will be affected.” The website states that without the expansion of more pipelines, the region will grow to depend on “expensive foreign gas and dirty energy sources.” Arguments against the NED have been presented by residents of towns near the proposed pipeline route. These residents raise concerns about their own health and safety, the difficulty of having to compete with foreign markets for gas, and the pipeline’s negative environmental impact. Because much of Western Massachusetts is made up of areas that have ten or fewer houses per mile, the NED pipeline would be ranked as “Class 1,” meaning it will have thinner-walled pipe and the least effective corrosion detection measures, which could lead to leaks and explosions. Therefore, residents have questioned why, as one Massachusetts resident wrote in the “My Turn” column of , their “health and safety is less valuable than those of folks who live closer to each other.” In the case of a catastrophe, such as a leak or a burst in the pipe, counties —such as Franklin County, one of the poorest counties in the nation—would be responsible for dealing with the emergency, with KM being liable for only $2 million in damages.  If the pipe were to burst, everything in the surrounding area might be destroyed, and there would be no way to address the disaster until the pipe emptied out back to its closest emergency shut-off valve. Next, eminent domain gives the government the right to take private property for public use, which means that KM, with government backing, can invoke eminent domain to use homeowners’ land for the pipeline, as long as those homeowners are compensated. Therefore, homeowners may encounter decreased property values and issues with mortgages and insurance. Furthermore, due to the pipeline’s length, compressor stations would be placed throughout the route to keep the gas moving. If there were to be an explosion, opponents argue, the heat from the machines would be strong enough to ignite nearby homes. In terms of DA, the end of Main Street, on the way to the Small Loop, would be considered an “incineration zone.” In addition, the Deerfield Board of Health released a document to KM ordering the company to stop all activity involving the pipeline in Deerfield after finding that “the proposed pipeline presents an unreasonable risk to the health and lives of the residents of Deerfield.” A further argument asserts that New England does not have an energy deficiency extreme enough to require a pipeline, prompting suspicions that the gas that would travel through the NED will be exported internationally. David Keith, an independent researcher and current member of the Deerfield Energy Resources Committee, explained this concern. Though some news sources suggest that New England has an energy shortage, he explained that New England actually gets a third more gas than is used. Electric companies in Massachusetts buy gas at “interruptible” rates, which means they are buying gas released from what local distributor companies have paid to reserve as uninterruptible supply. During peak days, when the temperature is very cold, homeowners crank up their heat, using all of the gas from local distributor companies, so those companies have no leftover gas for the electric companies to use. Keith explained that the “shortage happens for no more than 42 days” in the entire year, for one to two hours on those 42 days. “So, you’re literally talking about 84 hours when the electric companies cannot get enough gas from the leftovers, the cheap stuff,” Keith said. In order to meet these peak shortages, New England would need no more than an additional 22 billion cubic feet of gas by the winter of 2019-2020, according to ICF International;  this would be the equivalent of the NED pipeline running for just 17 days. The NED pipeline’s plan to deliver 1.3 billion cubic feet per day to New England would mean in a year, New England would be receiving 474.5 billion cubic feet. Additionally, Spectra Energy, a natural gas and pipeline company based in Massachusetts, has already begun expanding its pipeline called the Alogonquin Incremental Market. This line will be finished before KM begins to build, and the project would bring in at least five times the amount needed to prevent any gas deficiencies. Also, a company owning a pipeline that runs from Canada to Dracut, MA is filing for permission to reverse the direction of the pipeline, leading many to believe that the NED gas will be shipped to Canada. In an opinion article for , Keith wrote, “we are being manipulated,” and added that gas sells internationally for much more than current domestic rates: “If a company has the choice to export gas for $9 to $15 per thousand cubic feet, how long will it continue to sell to us for $3?” Finally, concerns have been raised about the implications that the NED pipeline could have on the pristine environment of New England, much of which is untouched by man made infrastructure, light pollution, and heavy industrialization. Also, the fracking extraction process KM’s suppliers employ can lead to raw methane leaks, which release a greenhouse gas 86 times more potent than carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, further compromising the ozone layer and environment. Others worry about altered air quality due to gas ventilation/compression stations, damage to wetlands, and contamination of water if the pipe bursts, among other things. Finally, some are concerned about the length of greenfield pipeline that will be involved in the project: greenfield pipe  is pipe that would cross land that is currently free of any natural gas infrastructure. The NED pipeline would be located a quarter mile from Deerfield Academy, Bement, and Eaglebrook. As of right now, Bement has taken a public stance against the NED pipeline, and Head Of School Frank Henry has written a letter to State Senate President Stanley Rosenberg, which has been forwarded to federal regulators, opposing the pipeline on behalf of Bement. Towards the end of last spring, Mr. Finan, Associate Head of School for Operations and Chief Financial Officer, and Head of School Dr. Curtis began discussing the potential pipeline and since Labor Day have begun to have “more in depth conversations” and do further research. Mr. Finan explained that he, Dr. Curtis, and The Board of Trustees need to discuss the position Deerfield will take on the potential pipeline. Finan explained that he is exploring three separate questions in regards to the pipeline: 1. Do we really need it? 2. If we do need the additional pipeline, what is the best route for it? 3. What are the safety precautions in place? “There are a lot of very legitimate concerns,” Finan explained, but added that he needs to find answers to the proposed questions in order to make an informed presentation to The Board of Trustees, who he described as “responsible for the long term health of the institution.” Finan cited that the reported energy shortages in New England is “a very strong argument for needing [the pipeline]” but that at the same time, Deerfield Academy “takes very seriously the safety and environmental challenges that this pipeline creates.” Explaining why the Academy has not taken any action or written a letter like Henry’s, Finan stated that in order to compose a frank note, he would have to know more about the pipeline. He stated, “Part of the problem is that we don’t know what taking a stance means at this point.”

Read the Pro-Village article  here . The Freshman Village has successfully created more problems than it has solved. The gender divide is an issue that deserves to be addressed, but a Freshman Village was not the correct way to fix it. The most notable effect that The Village has had on campus is to create a class divide. Many freshmen do not socialize with people in other grades, and sophomores do not socialize with people other than sophomores. The freshmen have also not become accustomed to Deerfield’s traditions and culture, and while there are plenty of community members who believe that traditions are not worth keeping, they are in this case wrong. One key issue with the lack of understanding of the Deerfield culture and traditions is that freshmen lack respect for these traditions. That respect goes beyond walking on senior grass and stepping on the seal, which I have seen freshmen do on multiple occasions. Those traditions are important to the school, but they also pale in comparison to the lack of respect for staff members. A trait that serves as a hallmark of our community is our kindness, especially to those who work to make our campus the wonderful place that it is. This includes respect and general humility to Physical Plant and Greer staff. I have heard many people talk about freshmen being directly or indirectly rude to Greer staff. Some have been directly condescending to people taking their orders or serving their food. In a more passive form, others leave messes for someone else to clean up. This lack of respect  is a result of the freshman class living amongst themselves, without guiding influences from sophomores in their dorm. Another problem seniors have voiced about The Freshman Village is that the freshmen were pampered in the design of Crowe Commons, giving them a perfect place to avoid interacting with the community. Those who have been here for four years know that it has taken years to get a new TV in the Greer. The freshmen got the largest TV that I have ever seen in their common room as part of the new campus design, and the rest of us got two Adirondack chairs per dorm, as if that is an equal trade off. And the freshmen that I know, even though my interaction with them has been made more difficult by the administration, have told me that freshmen do not even use the Crowe Commons resources frequently. The seniors have gotten nothing in the way of a reward for giving to the community for four years, and, in fact, we cannot even enjoy the things the freshmen were given. Last year, when Johnson-Doubleday was an upperclassmen dorm, I did homework in Crowe Commons. This year, though, I have been told by the Deans Office that I am not allowed there during study hours because I would disrupt the freshmen study hall, even though they are required to be in their rooms. So I was banned from Crowe Commons during study hours, which is the only block of time where the public space on campus in which I work most effectively is quiet. The grade divide that has been created by The Freshman Village is best exemplified when you look at recently organized student activities. The fact that the Student Planning Committee and  the administration found it not only appropriate, but necessary to have a Senior-Freshman Mixer shows that my prediction from last year has come to fruition. I predicted in an earlier Scroll article that there would be a grade divide created by The Village, and people did not think that it would happen. Yet there was an organized event to get the freshmen to leave their Village and come meet people in other classes, which is proof that freshmen do not mingle or become acquainted with people on campus. For my grade, getting to know people in other classes has never been an issue — until this year. The issues that have been created are too many to list in this article alone, and the problems that The Village was designed to fix still remain on campus. Now, on top of a gender divide, we have an issue with respect for traditions and staff, seniors feeling as though they have been in some way stiffed by the administration, and a very noticeable grade divide. I see The Village as an attempt to follow the lead of other boarding schools that house freshmen together; that attempt to fix the gender divide has backfired and created more problems than the administration can hope to fix. Deerfield is not St. George’s or any other school that houses freshmen together. We are different because of our strong, interconnected community, and The Village has shown itself to be something that is poised to destroy the very feeling of community that drew me to Deerfield in the first place.

Intimacy at Deerfield has always been a hot topic. In order to accommodate physical proximity, comfort, and the bonding of couples, a system labeled “Parietals” was created to sanction and regulate dorm-room visitation. The logistics of parietals often require that labels be ascribed to couples, whether same-sex or not, that indicate a relationship that is more than platonic. Placing a trashcan or shoe in the door is sometimes regarded as a heralding or inauguration – a public announcement of a non-platonic relationship. With such pressure placed on the two individuals getting parietals, whether romantically involved or opposite-sex, one might understand why same-sex couples at Deerfield are wary of requesting and receiving parietals. Dane Scott ’16 expanded on this complexity, “You have to be out to all the faculty residents in your dorm, not to mention everyone on your hall, by placing a shoe in your door and announcing your sexuality to everyone. You, or your partner, or both, may be deeply uncomfortable with revealing this information to practical strangers when you maybe haven’t yet told your parents. Putting this kind of legitimate pressure on a relationship is enough to ruin a relationship and make it deeply unhealthy.” The current parietals system language in the student handbook states, “Deerfield’s dorm room visitation policy acknowledges some students who share the same gender identity are engaged in relationships that are more than simple friendships—just as there are platonic relationships between students of opposite gender identities. The closeness of our community and our biological-gender based housing system requires a degree of trust in students—regardless of their sexual orientation and identification.” Following this explanation is a set of rules that students must adhere to that are applicable to both same-sex and opposite-sex couples. Valentina Connell ’16, officer for the Gender Sexuality Alliance, posited that “the nuances of same-sex couples and their situations necessitates a different set of rules that should govern parietals. Simply placing same-sex and opposite-sex parietals rules under one general hood does not offer adequate solutions to the unique and specific problems that same-sex couples encounter.” Connell elucidated a few questions that arise from this ambiguity: “What if your significant other is in the same dorm, or on the same hall?” “Can you even be in the same room together without getting parietals?” “Can you be in the same room if there are multiple people in the room?” Another issue the current same-sex parietals policy raises is in faculty LGBTQ awareness and comfort. There have been instances in which faculty members have felt uncomfortable or unsure of granting same-sex parietals. This could be attributed to the vague set of rules that govern the parietals system or personal viewpoint and bias. To combat this perplexing issue the GSA and Dean of Students Ms. Amie Creagh are collaborating and are in the process of brainstorming viable solutions to the shortcomings of the current policy. A possible point of reference in solving this issue may be emulating other schools’ policies. Scott reported, “To do this, we’re looking at other boarding school policies regarding LGBT parietals.” Connell added an open invitation, saying, “Both Ms. Creagh and the GSA are interested in hearing any ideas that members of the Deerfield community come up with.”

For the past three years, Deerfield students have traveled abroad to attend Round Square, an international conference on environmental stewardship, democracy, leadership, internationalism, service, and adventure. Participants come from 150 secondary schools from throughout the world. This year, six Deerfield students departed in late September for the bustling island of Singapore. Despite the 23 hour long trip, upon arrival they were all excited by the cultural differences they encountered and diverse people they met. Jeffrey Sun ’17, who attended last year’s conference in Jordan, described the conference as “a valuable opportunity for students to step out of the boundaries of school life and gain more insight into the intricate mechanism of a foreign society. At the same time, students share with each other culture-specific knowledge that will help build essential skills for intensive application in global development.” Students attracted to the trip share an interest in fixing the world’s problems and are aspiring leaders. Ally Edwards ’17, who also went to Jordan last year, said, “I knew it would be a great opportunity to meet students from all different parts of the world that shared my same interest in improving significant global conflicts.” She also noted how knowledgeable the students she met in Jordan were on pressing international issues. This year’s International Round Square conference was held at The United States World College of South East Asia. The conference featured a variety of languages, ethnicities, key-note speakers, and barazas (Swahili for “council” groups). The speakers inspired the audience to take steps to change the world and think of strategies to solve global issues. “The key note speakers talked about themes that revolved around sustainability and how there was an adventure in sustainable development,” said attendee Kiana Rawji ’18. “They were all really different but had similar messages.” The topics ranged from climate change and the ocean to poverty and developing states, all tying around the conference’s theme, “Act Today, Change Tomorrow.” The baraza groups were council meetings and roundtable discussions, which consisted of about fifteen delegates working together to find tools to solving global problems. “The discussion was about how to solve a problem and the steps that need to be taken in order to make sure the system is maintained,” Connor Finemore ‘18 says. “One of the most valuable parts of the baraza groups is that many different people from many different backgrounds bring their ideas to the table. Everyone is willing to share how they feel and to debate with others.” The students who attended Round Square this year look forward to bringing back what they learned and engaging even more students in solving the world’s problems.

This year, Brian Ravish holds a new title as Deerfield “School Resource Officer.” He is responsible for all five town schools: Deerfield Elementary, Frontier Regional High School, Bement School, Eaglebrook School, and Deerfield Academy. Though this position is new to Ravish, he has “done just about everything [else]” in law enforcement, he said, including teaching classes for other policemen. Now settled into his new post, Ravish said, “So far I love it—absolutely love it.”

Should our intimacy be controlled? Voices from the community on parietals, sexual assault, and moving forward. (Previous: Part I: Administration Perspective ) Faculty Perspective : Dr. O’Neil I am not the only faculty member on campus who thinks that managing parietals is the worst part of my job. It is particularly acute for those of us who live in large upperclassmen dorms. On a weekend night in Rosenwald-Shumway, there can easily be more than ten parietal requests, meaning that the faculty member on duty is checking on the status of teenage intimate relationships sometimes as many as fifty times a night. I know that many of us take a deep breath before knocking on the door, hoping as we open it that there is nothing on the other side that we don’t want to see. Violations are not only embarrassing for the students, but excruciatingly so for the faculty. To be clear, I do not have a problem with productive discomfort in an educational setting; what I have a problem with, rather, is the awkwardness that derives from having to deal with situations that are uncomfortable in ways that are neither appropriate to nor productive in an academic and educational context. And while I am, like many of my colleagues, relieved that the Dean of Students’ office has issued clear guidelines streamlining expectations for both students and faculty across the different dorms, I am unconvinced that this useful change addresses the more fundamental problem: that parietals do not contribute to the sexual education of our students or coincide with the educational objectives of the Academy. Adolescence is undoubtedly a period of sexual curiosity and development. It is not the responsibility of Deerfield Academy or its faculty to change that, first and foremost because to do so would be impossible. It is, however, our job to work to ensure that campus life, from the classroom to the athletic field to the dorm room, is shaped by and in response to meaningful pedagogical objectives. In the case of adolescent sexual development, that means preparing our students to make informed, deliberate, and healthy decisions about sexual relationships, not providing them with at best semi-regulated spaces for experimentation that has no place at a school. Perhaps what I am saying can be framed in terms of Cindy Pierce’s excellent presentation earlier this term. While several students I spoke with saw a contradiction between Pierce’s encouragement to proceed with confidence in their sexual relationships and the news that their private interactions would be more closely monitored, I would argue that there is in fact no contradiction. In order to best provide you with the knowledge, resources, and support you need in order to develop such confidence, we must work within boundaries appropriate to an educational setting. In both her book and presentation, Pierce uses the Thatcher School as a model for how boarding schools can create communities that teach students to make smart decisions about sex without condoning sexual relationships on campus. The Thatcher School does not allow parietals, but does include as part of its curriculum an obligatory four-year Human Relations and Sexuality program that deals in-depth with topics including intimate relationships, sexuality, and sexual assault. The school also explicitly details the appropriate amount of physical contact between students—hand holding, hugging, and kissing are acceptable at certain times but not at others, and sexual intimacy is never allowed—and makes it clear that violations of those policies are grounds for discipline and possibly dismissal. Students, consequently, learn about sexuality and learn to define and embrace healthy sexual relationships the way one should learn in a school: through a combination of study, conversation, and clear institutional boundaries. It should be noted that the successes of the Thatcher School’s approach have not been merely pedagogical: surveys have shown that while on-campus sexual activity has significantly decreased, students’ satisfaction with campus culture and social life has increased. As I believe our primary concern should be preparing our students to live curious, healthy, and productive lives, I advocate implementing a similar policy at DA. Part III: Student Perspective

Should our intimacy be controlled? Voices from the community on parietals, sexual assault, and moving forward. (Previous: Part II: Faculty Perspective ) Student Perspective : Lucy Binswanger Spring term last year, my teacher took our English class out to the diner as a chance to bond and eat good food before finals came around. Trying to come up with topics of conversation, I asked around the table if anyone had any funny first date stories. None of them did, because every single one of my 15- to 16-year-old classmates had never been on a date or even anything remotely close to one. I then asked one of the boys in my class why he had never taken someone he liked on a date, and he responded that it was “way too much effort.” My first thought was: dang, are you missing out! What happened to all the gentlemen who took us out to dinner at Chipotle before hooking up with us and never speaking to us again? At least we’d get a free meal out of it. However, I wasn’t surprised. After a year in the Deerfield Bubble, these encounters with cultural difference were to be expected. When I first arrived at Deerfield as a new sophomore, I was immediately informed by my peers of the unspoken rules and regulations about hooking up and “dating.” I’d wanted to ask someone out who I’d met a few days before and had a nice conversation with at ukulele club (hubba hubba). A senior told me that in theory I could, but she advised that I didn’t. That would be “weird.” Being in public school for most of my life, this came as a huge shock. If you were interested in someone romantically or sexually, you either cowered in a corner yearning over their sweet embrace in your daydreams, or you mustered up the courage to ask them out. Going to movies, walking around town, or even just hanging out at a SO’s house was always a typical and enjoyable part of life. Boyfriends and girlfriends were equally as common as “things” or “hookups,” and people knew that because they were able to define these relationships pretty easily. Sexual assault was real, but not necessarily common. Students were well educated on sex and consent, and students could talk to trusted faculty about these matters because… well… sex was allowed. College campuses are now dealing with what many call an “epidemic” of sexual assault and rape, but the real question is: are boarding school campuses any different? Rape culture is real at Deerfield for many reasons. Lack of communication, social pressure, reputation, and bottled-up hormones make for one big lump of suck. This culture of casual sexual encounters is a subset of an overall flawed social structure. Deerfield culture is already very sexist and there is little female initiation when it comes to these encounters. After a hookup has taken place, the couple’s sexual privacy is almost always compromised because of the size of this community, usually at the girl’s expense. When you ask someone of the opposite gender to get parietals, or “leave the Greer,” or go for a walk, the assumption is that you are going to hook up. However, hooking up can mean anything from a kiss on the lips to having sex, so there’s already an extreme lack of clarity there. If a couple does happen to want to do something besides kissy-kissy cuddle time, they either have to “find a spot” and risk getting caught by security, or they have to get parietals and risk having an intimate moment interrupted by their resident, if they can’t finish by the next “knock knock, everything okay in there?” Therefore, almost all sexual encounters at Deerfield exist under a time limit. When speaking of sex education, the general faculty response is to “wait for the right person” and “to make sure you’re comfortable.” These statements come with good intentions. However, the reality is that most students don’t have time to make sure both people are consenting every step of the way when Mr. Applebottom could be back any minute. Due to this unfortunate arrangement, I am sure that by definition a lot more sexual assault goes on here than is talked about openly. The faculty response to this dilemna is to impose stricter parietals guidelines to make sure everyone involved feels safe. In RoSho, we were informed that when the on-duty faculty checks in (which will be every 30 minutes) we are prohibited from being in a lying down position, and we must come and answer the door ourselves. Residents may as well tell us to set a timer for 30 minutes and “have at it,” but to make sure we’re in an upright position once the time is up. I can guarantee that if we didn’t have parietals at all, sexual activity would increase by 100%. But if we had somewhat looser policies, would sexual assault be less likely? My answer is yes. And isn’t that what the administration is most concerned about when constructing these policies? With more freedom and less “couple shaming” (yes, faculty, we see those judgmental stares you give us when we check in) our school would be taking a step in the right direction in developing healthier relationships and changing the culture at Deerfield.

This summer, Gavin Kennedy ’16 started a project to help combat sexual assault at high schools and colleges. A large part of Kennedy’s mission is to “educate kids our age about [sexual assault], because it’s extremely complicated.” Kennedy explained that he wants people “to understand the issue.” Kennedy believes that the number of cases of sexual assault can be lowered if students are educated about what it is and what its consequences are. The creation of Kennedy’s project coincided with a trial that occurred this summer after a senior boy at St. Paul’s School was charged with the rape of a freshman girl. The girl, aged 15 at the time, claimed that the senior had sex with her, while the senior pled innocence, claiming that they had sexual contact but not intercourse. In the end, the senior boy was convicted of a felony charge and four misdemeanors. When asked about the events that took place at St. Paul’s, Kennedy stated, “Some people just don’t realize how rigid [the statutory rape] law is. People don’t understand that if someone is under the age of consent, they literally cannot give consent.” Kennedy continued, “If [an upperclassman is] about to go hook up with a freshman, they should [be thinking] ‘I should not be doing this.’” Kennedy stated that sexual assault is “a complicated issue with a lot of parts,” and that students’ full awareness of each part is necessary in order to make high schools and colleges safer. He explained that Title IX is the principle sexual assault policy of many universities and that at universities that abide by Title IX, all sexual assault cases go to the Title IX officer at the school, “who is inclined to side with the victim.” Kennedy continued, “Title IX is about gender discrimination, which raises a philosophical question about whether or not sexual assault is discriminatory towards a certain gender.” He added, “Also, the idea of consent changes everywhere you look at it. Schools define it, states define it—there are definitions everywhere.” The first step of Kennedy’s project is to educate students on the issue. He plans to give sessions at DA to detail sexual assault laws. At a school meeting, for instance, he will describe how these laws affect us in the Deerfield community and beyond. Looking ahead, Kennedy said, “I think I want to have students [discuss] their own policies, and see what kids our age think about the issue and how it should be handled, and from there we can see what policies need to be changed or implemented.” Through conversation and surveys he has created, Kennedy hopes to gain a sense of students’ attitudes towards the Deerfield policies and gauge whether or not they feel as if these policies are sufficient. He also plans to offer his own solutions to the community about how to best manage issues and confusion with sexual assault. Since last year, Deerfield’s Sexual Assault policy has changed slightly. For the first time, the administration has defined the word “consent” in the Sexual Intimacy Policy to read, “It is never legal to engage in any intimate contact without another’s full consent. Consent is more than “no means no”–it represents an affirmative, unambiguous, and conscious decision by each party to engage in sexual activity.” Additionally, freshmen and seniors are now officially prohibited from getting parietals with each other, unless they are visiting in groups. One in four girls and one in six boys will be sexually abused before they turn 18, according to usnews.com. Additionally, according to

Deerfield alumnus Alex Killorn ’08, now a center on The Tampa Bay Lightning, made a name for himself this summer during the NHL fight for the Stanley Cup. Killorn was born in Halifax, Nova Scotia, although his family moved to an area just outside Montreal when he was very young. Later, he found his second home at Deerfield Academy. Looking back on what he imagined for himself and his future as a student at Deerfield and later at Harvard University, Killorn reflected, “I didn’t really have many expectations when I first arrived at Deerfield. I was hoping that I would get recruited to play hockey at a division one college. Once I got to Harvard, I really focused on having a career in professional hockey and committed myself to that.  I had a great senior year and everything fell into place.” Killorn always knew that he wanted to play hockey, and as he moved up from high school to college, he became more ambitious and sought to excel. However, Killorn did not always feel fit to play. He explained, “I was undersized and had a tough time adjusting to a sport that was so physical. I really worked hard in the gym… working out nearly 6 times a week. This helped me once I grew. I filled out.” Speaking of his achievements, in 2012, after finishing his time at Harvard, Killorn went on to play for the Tampa Bay Lightning in the NHL. While it was an incredible accomplishment, it was also an immense adjustment. Going from high school hockey to college hockey is one thing, but transitioning from college to a national league is “a lot different,” Alex explained. “Playing professional hockey is a grind,” he said. “Instead of 30 games a year you play sometimes over 100. That wears on your body… but you get used to it” Killorn’s opportunity to play for Lighting was not one he was willing to pass up, regardless of the heightened intensity and pressure. Alex became the first ever Harvard graduate to score a goal in the Stanley Cup, but his “biggest goal to date was scoring the game-winner in game 7 of the eastern conference finals against Lundqvist,” a Swedish goaltender for the New York Rangers. Killorn believes that his time at Deerfield prepared him well for an academic and athletic career. He noted, “I think [Deerfield] helped me out a lot academically in preparing me for Harvard… As a hockey player, it was a chance for me to really be showcased to different colleges… I also met a ton of friends who I am still very close to today.” Not to mention, the highlight of his Deerfield experience was “probably beating Choate at home.” Throughout his hockey career, the best piece of advice that Killorn has received is “don’t worry about the big picture, just focus on what’s in front of you right now.”  However, Killorn himself has his own advice for current Deerfield students that can apply to any realm, whether it be academics, arts, or athletics: “Have confidence in yourself. I try to have the mindset that I’m the best player on the ice whenever I play.”