.
wfi
a
4A - Thursday,April 16, 2009
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor MI 48109
tothedaily@umich.edu
GARY GRACA ROBERT SOAVE COURTNEY RATKOWIAK
EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR MANAGING EDITOR
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles
and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
Loaning for less
Federal government should control student financial aid
L ast week, President Barack Obama demonstrated his
commitment to providing affordable higher education to
all students. He put forth an ambitious proposal to Con-
gress that will cut funding to private lenders and redirect the
money to Pell Grants for students in need. This is a great way
to provide additional money to students who are having trouble
paying for college in the current economy. While this proposal
may leave students who rely on loans at a disadvantage, the govern-
ment could mitigate this effect by offering risk-free loans to college
students directly instead of working through private companies.
Congress should consider this solution to simultaneously offer Pell
Grants and affordable loans to students who need them.
The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com
a
We Afghans don't want a bunch of NATO commanders
and foreign ministers telling us what to do."
- Mohammed Hussein Jafaari, an Afghan madrasa senior cleric, blaming yesterday's women's rights protests on
foreign involvement in Afghanistan's affairs, as reported yesterday by The New York Times.
The hypocrisy ofgay actievism
a
Both Iowa and Vermont finally
ended their discrimination
against the gay community and
legally recognized
same-sex marriag-
es this past week.
As a gay person, I
celebrated this fact :
along with the rest
of my community
throughout the
United States. I -
was excitedto hear PATRICK
such positive news ZABAWA
just as it was look-
ing like progress
toward the legal
recognition of same-sex relationships
was being reversed - the most notable
example being California's approval of
a gay marriage ban this past fall. But
a recent Washington Post article has
made me less hopeful (Faith Groups
Increasingly Lose Gay Rights Fights,
04/10/2009). It describes situations in
which groups or individuals lost law-
suits or were discriminated against
explicitly because of their anti-gay
views. And though I am gay myself,
I'm very worried about how the nation
is treating those who don't agree with
gay rights.
The Washington Post article ref-
erenced several situations in which
people were forced by to act against
their beliefs by authorities who dis-
agree with their anti-gay views. One
such case was a lawsuit in which the
California Supreme Court ruled that
a group of doctors at a private medi-
cal clinic must artificially inseminate a
lesbian who had requested they do so,
even though it's against the doctors'
religious beliefs. In a more famous
case, a lawsuit attempted to force the
online dating site eHarmony, founded
by evangelical psychologist Neil Clark
Warren, to offer online dating services
to gay couples. Warren agreed to cre-
ate a separate online dating site for
same-sex relationships as part of an
out-of-court settlement.
The gay movement has been esca-
lating such lawsuits in order to pre-
vent discrimination against them.
But this makes the gay community
just as intolerant as the anti-gay big-
ots who discriminate against them.
Those who attempt to deny gays state-
recognized marriage and its benefits
because they have personal convic-
tions against gay relationships are
certainly being oppressive in trying
to force their opinion on others. They
are so strongly opinionated that they
not only believe that gay relationships
are wrong for themselves but that
others should be forcefully prevented
from having a recognized gay rela-
tionship. Imposing their views on the
gay community through the force of
law is wrong in itself.
But, at the same time, gays hold
the opinion that their relationships
are perfectly moral, and - just like
the opinion that gay relationships are
wrong - not everyone shares their
opinion. By using the courts to make
doctors inseminate a lesbian against
their beliefs or a dating service to serve
homosexuals against its will, the gay
community is being intolerant of those
who are intolerant of them. The com-
munity is sending the message that
while it doesn't like the law being used
against them, they will use the law to
force their opponents to accept them.
That's hypocrisy.
But gay rights groups don't seem to
understand this message. The Human
Rights Campaign, an organization
working for LGBT equal rights, recent-
ly published its annual "The State of
the Workplace" report, noting that
85 percent of Fortune 500 businesses
now have discrimination protections
based on sexual orientation up from 51
percent in 2000. This statistic shows
the positive effect the gay rights move-
ment has had - these companies all
changed their policies voluntarily.
Gov't should
tolerate even the
intolerant.
Buttomyshockanddisappointment,
the same webpage that contains this
report also has a statistic that "more
than 50 major businesses support leg-
islation to protect both gender identity
and sexual orientation under federal
law." The gay rights movement is mak-
ing so much progress toward being
accepted in business, and the next step
it wants to take is toforce businesses to
accept them rather than convince them
to? This is no better than using the law
to ban gay marriage.
As states throughout the nation
continue to debate gay marriage pro-
posals, gay rights groups should be
trying to win hearts and minds, not
court rulings. We should continue
to engage people about our views on
homosexuality, not force them by law
to accept us.
- Patrick Zabawa can be reached
at pzabawa@umich.edu.
Today, President Barack Obama is mov-
ing toward such a system. According to the
proposal, $94 billion will be saved over the
next 10 years by eliminating subsidized
loans from private banks and replacing
them with direct government lending. The
extra money saved from cutting the subsi-
dies to private lenders will also go to Pell
Grants. This means that the profits that
would have been collected by private lend-
ers will essentially be redirected to fund
aid programs for college students.
It's important that the federal govern-
ment takes a strong initiative to create funds
for students. This money - taken from the
profits of private loan companies - is better
spent on making higher education afford-
able for struggling students in a failing
economy. The proposal puts the focus back
on what's best for students who otherwise
wouldn't be able to afford college.
Despite these advantages, there is some
worry that students who don't qualify for
Pell Grants and instead use loans to pay for
college will lose out. For decades, private
lenders have heavily relied on up to 97 per-
cent guaranteed repayment from the gov-
ernment on these loans, accustoming them
to a risk-free process. Ending the govern-
ment subsidies could cause private lenders
to drastically raise interest rates. This could
potentially pose a problem for students who
don't qualify for grants but rely heavily on
loans, because the private lenders need to
make up for lost revenue. It could also limit
loan availability, since private lenders may
be more selective in choosing loan recipi-
ents.
The solution is to bring the federal gov-
ernment to the forefront of all student aid
programs. Instead of the government pay-
ing lenders like Citigroup, Sallie Mae or
Bank of America to loan money to students
for profit, the federal government could
take the role of a main resource for stu-
dents in need of a loan at a fixed, affordable
interest rate. Such an idea surfaced during
the Clinton days but didn't make it past
Congress. It's time to revisit this loan plan,
eliminating the middle-man and making
the loan process more affordable and reli-
able for students who will not qualify for
the increased amount of Pell Grants.
Congress should consider this plan as
the best way to provide students with the
financial aid they need for college.
Acknowledging anal sex
SEND LETTERS TO: TOTHEDAILY@UMICH.EDU
University should improve those of other schools. The CCRB has weights,
treadmills, machines, courts, etc. What more
education before CCRB do you need? If you want a health club, go pay
for a membership at one of the many pay-for-
use gyms in Washtenaw county. What I want
TO THE DAILY: from the University is a world-class education,
I have two questions in response to an article not state-of-the-art elliptical machines. This is
in yesterday's paper (The CCRB is out of shape, another example of the University wanting to
4/14/09). What is this $100 fee they might make itself look good superficially at the cost
charge for new recreation facilities? Would it of education. I wonder how the proposed new
be optional for students? Probably not. facilities might relate to the recruitment of bet-
We need to focus on improving access to ter athletes to improve the athletic programs
education here, or making it easier to register (read: money-making programs) here.
for the classes you want or reducing text book
prices, not improving our recreation facilities Erin Green
when they are already bigger and better than LSA junior
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS:
Nina Amilineni, Emad Ansari, Emily Barton, Elise Baun, Harun Buljina, Ben Caleca,
Satyajeet Deshmukh, Brian Flaherty, Emmarie Huetteman, Emma Jeszke,
Sutha K Kanagasingam, Shannon Kellman, Jeremy Levy, Erika Mayer, Edward McPhee,
Matthew Shutler, Neil Tambe, Radhika Upadhyaya, Rachel Van Gilder, Laura Veith
Despite some progress over the
years, people still aren't recog-
nizing anal sex as a legitimate
sexual act. In Leo
Bersani's 1987 essay
"Is the Rectum a
Grave?" he thinks of
anal sex as signify-
ing two deaths. The
first is the death of
the rigid masculine
ideal. The second is
the literal, biologi-
cal death that is the ROSE
potential result of AFRIYIE
AIDS. The latter
death, he argues,
"reinforced the het-
erosexual association of anal sex with
self-annihilation."
Our view of anal sex has certainly
evolved since the '80s, and now we
know that AIDS is no longer some-
thing exclusive to the gay community.
Neither is anal sex, for that matter.
And many a sexual activity can lead to
the transmission of STIs without con-
traception.
The vision of sexual tolerance we
must adopt is one where everyday peo-
ple acknowledge differences in sex-
ual relations while promoting public
health provisions that accommodate
our sexual diversity. We need a sexu-
ally tolerant healthcare system that
accounts for the various kinds of activ-
ities that occur in our sexual lives.
And although anal sex is here to
stay, it seems that people who practice
anal sex, both occasionally or exclu-
sively do not have access to the same
kinds of care as people who practice
vaginalsex.
This is partially because men have
no national guidelines for their sexual
and reproductive health care, meaning
their care is done at the discretion of
the physician or physician's assistant.
When considering women, despite the
fact that women have considerably
more guidelines, they simply aren't
asked about their anal sex practices.
As such, regardless of gender, care for
people who practice anal sex will only
happen if a patient volunteers infor-
mation.
This is odd, considering the preva-
lence of anal sex. The latest data
released in 2002 by the National Sur-
vey of Family Growth showed that 34
percent of heterosexual men and 30
percent of heterosexual women have
had anal sex at least once.
And while all gay men do not prac-
tice anal sex, many are particularly
hampered when providers do not take
them into account. To further explore
the healthcare disparities, consider
this story. I spoke with a male LSA
senior who asked for anonymity to
protect the identity of his partner.
After developing an anal wart, it took
him four months to actually receive
adequate care. He noticed a small
bump on his rectum one night during
anal sex but thought nothing of it.
. When he and his monogamous part-
ner decided to stop using condoms, he
went to University Health Services to
get tested. He explained to a physi-
cian's assistant that he was a gay man
who was a receptive partner for anal
sex. The PA conducted a visual inspec-
tion of his penis, took a urine sample
and called him a few days later saying,
"Everything came back negative."
But soon after, the bump started to
itch, and upon a second look, his part-
ner recognized it as a wart. He drove
an hour and fifteen minutes to his fam-
ily's physician, onlyto receive no rectal
exam and a referral to a colon and rec-
tal surgeon. On his third appointment,
he received a full examination and ful-
guration - the most effective way to
treat warts so they don't return.
While the LSA student did not feel
personally mistreated by the UHS PA,
he did have this to say: "At the mini-
mum, if the PA at UHS had given my
anus a visual inspection, he may have
identified that the alleged bump was
instead a wart, a symptom of human
papillomavirus (HPV)."
UHS medical director Dr. Robert
Ernst supplements this viewpoint.
When asked about the standard test-
ing protocol for someone who was
practicing anal sex, he replied, "There
are no national health guidelines for
men, regardless of sexual orientation,
and further, there is no standard pro-
tocol for anal sex."
Anal warts are a symptom of HPV
and, as I mentioned in previous col-
umns, men can't get tested for HPV.
But there are more thorough visual
inspections available at UHS to con-
firm if one has anal warts. The main
procedure is the digital rectal exam
or an anoscopy, where the physician
inserts a small tube in order to better
visualize the anus with the naked eye.
So why didn't our anonymous man
receive this when asking for an STI
test? Dr. Ernst explained that rectal
exams "are not otherwise done unless
they are prompted by a concern or an
irregularity." The take home point is
that if you are practicing anal sex and
want a rectal examination along with
your testing, you have to ask for it.
Women aren't that much better
off. During annual Pap smears, UHS
doesn't specifically ask whether they
are engaging in anal sex. Although
there are guidelines for looking for
changes on the cervix, there are no
such guidelines for changes in the anal
area. As such, the main circumstance
under which women would be checked
for anal warts is when they are positive
for HPV, have confirmed symptoms or
cervical changes that have taken place
as a result of HPV or have volunteered
information confirming that they
practice anal sex.
It's important to note that the major
differences between the way men and
women receive sexual health care
exacerbate the situation. It's true that
women have significantly more regi-
mented sexual health care than men.
National health guidelines assert that
three years after women become sexu-
ally active or by age 21, they should be
tested annually. While socioeconomic 4
factors prevent some women from
accessing sexual health care, the insti-
tution of annual Pap smears means
that women have their risk assessed
annually and other STI testing can
take place.
Considering that there are no sex-
ual health guidelines for men, their
testing is done entirely on a voluntary
basis. It's also important to mention
thatheterosexualmen canrely ontheir
female partners' annual Pap smears to
get a rough sense of their HPV status.
This is a luxury gay men don't enjoy,
since they are usually diagnosed after
warts - or worse, cancer - appear.
ToUHS'scredit,Dr.Ernstinformed
me that representatives from UHS
will soon be attending a health forum
wheremedicalcolleagueswillexplore
what guidelines should be considered
for anal Pap smears, which involve
culturing the anal area to detect can-
cer. Still, I have recommendations
on improving the sexual healthcare
Doctors need
better standards
for anal checkups.
system here at the University. First,
in the absence of sexual health guide-
lines for heterosexual men, the Uni- 4
versity has set their own informal
guidelines to account for the male
population. In previous columns, I
have noted that UHS administrators
have recommended that heterosex-
ual men who are regularly sexually
active should get tested annually for
chlamydia, gonorrhea and HIV. As
such, the University should consult
with experts in the field of gay men's
sexual health and create guidelines
for gay men like visual inspections
of the anal area for men who are the
recipients of anal sex.
Secondly, UHS should support
student efforts to advocate for clear
national guidelines for gay men,
men in general and for non-vaginal
sex activities. More printed materi-
als should be made available in UHS
on anal sex health care. Women and
people who seek STI testing should be
asked if they are having anal sex dur-
ing their annual examinations and
provided information accordingly.
I have already started writing
grants for a campus organization that
will conduct educational programs
that reflect sexual tolerance and
inclusion, and I am now constructing I
my leadership team. E-mail me if you
want to join.
- Rose Afriyie is the Daily's sex
and relationships columnist. She can
be reached at sariyie@umich.edu.
HARUN BUJINA
E-MAIL HARUN AT BULJINAH@UMICH.EDU.
H q TAIT $R ti
THAT OlY
A
A,