. 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,