W

alking along State Street the other 
day, I noticed a bright big banner 
proudly displayed above the steps 

to the Michigan Union, 
advertising — for lack of a 
better term — the Counsel-
ing and Psychological Ser-
vices center. Glancing up 
at the sign, I remembered 
the first time I had gone to 
CAPS earlier this year.

I had decided I probably 

needed to see someone long 
before I actually called to 
make an appointment. A 
bunch of ridiculous, though 
probably common, fears prevented that initial 
phone call. What if my friends see me walk in 
there? What if this appointment shows up on 
my academic records? (It doesn’t, by the way.)

But mostly, I was preoccupied with what I 

thought registering for a CAPS appointment 
meant — that I couldn’t take care of my prob-
lems on my own; that I had a problem to take 
care of in the first place; that something about 
me was abnormal, problematic and in need 
 

of fixing.

Ironically, these were not concerns of mine 

when I went to the doctor to get antibiotics 
for a sinus infection or to the dermatologist 
for a skin check.

So instead of making an appointment when 

I knew that I probably should have, I waited 
until seeking help was pretty much necessary 
to deal with the stress that had accumulated 
as a result of harder sophomore classes and 

involvement in several organizations. And 
while I had done my best to keep all of this 
to myself, I finally told my mom what had 
been going on. She suggested that I “go talk 
to someone about it.” Eventually, I did.

It didn’t take long for the psychiatrist to 

figure out what was going on. She identi-
fied my sometimes-inability to get work 
done, sit through lectures and stay on task as 
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder — 
 

something I had been told before but didn’t 
want to hear.

I didn’t like the idea of a mental health 

“disorder,” and I didn’t really see the con-
nection between stereotypical images of dis-
ruptive, struggling 10-year-olds and my high 
GPA. One of the most helpful things CAPS did 
was help me challenge the negative picture I 
had developed about mental health issues and 
their treatment. A major focus of subsequent 
sessions at CAPS centered on the positive 
aspects of ADHD.

Recently, I came across a cover letter I had 

written earlier that fall. I recognized many 
of the self-identified “strengths” — quick 
thinking, problem solving skills, creativ-
ity — that I mentioned in the letter as some 
of the positive aspects that the CAPS worker 
had mentioned. Growing up in a culture that 
labels mental health disorders as a mark of 
abnormality, I had never thought to consider 
that there might be accompanying attributes 
 

as well.

Eventually, that first CAPS appointment led 

to an effective treatment plan and a reduction 
of many of the issues that had brought me 

TORI
NOBLE

Opinion

JENNIFER CALFAS

EDITOR IN CHIEF

AARICA MARSH 

and DEREK WOLFE 

EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS

LEV FACHER

MANAGING EDITOR

420 Maynard St. 

Ann Arbor, MI 48109

 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at 

the University of Michigan since 1890.

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.

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A — Monday, February 2, 2015

Not a weakness

W

e have to stop acting 
surprised when we hear 
reports of Greek life 

“misconduct.” 
When 
we 
hear 

about demolished 
hotel 
rooms, 

pledges 
forced 

to swim in pools 
of shit, women 
degraded, 
sexu-

ally 
assaulted, 

raped and so on, 
we tend to react 
in what we think 
is 
the 
humane 

and 
moralistic 

way. We say: “My god, how could 
this happen? How terrible! How 
disgusting! Whoever did this harm 
ought to be punished! How could 
this have happened?”

But do we consider the assump-

tions and prejudices already at play 
in our supposedly moralistic reac-
tion? Do we consider how our good 
liberal reaction to routine Greek life 
horrors actually supports the very 
organizations and acts that we think 
we’re opposing and denouncing?

Whenever we speak about Greek 

life “misconduct,” we have to put 
the “misconduct” in quotes. In the 
face of the regularity of the “mis-
conduct” (hazing, violence, sexual 
assault, etc.), one can no longer seri-
ously claim that these events are 
out of the ordinary for Greek life. 
When we react to these horrors as 
if they were scandals, as the Greek 
life organizations, universities and 
the media say they are, we’re imply-
ing that they are out of the ordinary; 
that these events deviate from the 
normal functioning of the Greek 
life system; and that Greek life as a 
whole (that is, Greek life as an insti-
tution and system) is innocent.

These horrors seem to occur so 

regularly that, ironically, the true 
scandal for Greek life would be if 
one weekend there were no binge 
drinking, violence, hazing or rape. 
The lack of “misconduct” would 
constitute a true Greek life scandal.

We all know — that is, anyone 

even remotely familiar with today’s 
Greek life knows — that the horrors 
we read about in the newspapers 
constitute only a small fraction of 
the total “misconduct.” Aren’t we 
all aware that the prohibitions 
against certain “misconduct” in 
Greek life are a joke? Don’t we 
know that within the prohibitions 
against, say, hazing, is the expec-
tation that the prohibition will 
 

be violated?

It insults the intelligence of the 

public when Greek life and univer-
sity spokespeople react with their 
phony shock and surprise at the 
most recent hazing “scandal” or 
whatever. They know fully well that 
hazing goes on. But it’s this false 
surprise on the part of the organi-
zational leaders in response to the 
incriminating reports that allows 
the hazing to continue.

A major step forward for the 

reformation of Greek life would be 
if, in response to the next report 
of University-affiliated Greek life 
misconduct, University President 
Mark Schlissel stood on his podi-
um, shrugged his shoulders and 
just said, “Yep, this is how Greek 
life works.”

This, I claim, would be the truly 

compassionate 
and 
progressive 

response: not pretending that the 
plight of these victims (e.g., the vic-

tims of hazing, sexual assault, etc.) 
is out of the ordinary; not pretend-
ing that it’s shocking or surprising 
that this happened to them; and not 
pretending that we don’t know that 
this supposed “misconduct” really 
happens all the time and that these 
horrors occur because of the normal 
functioning of the Greek life system.

For example, we all assumed 

that when the University Greek 
life chapters left for their “ski trip” 
they brought gallons of alcohol and 
ounces of drugs with them (refer-
ring more so to hard drugs, not 
marijuana, which I believe, if used 
without alcohol, might have actu-
ally prevented the extensive prop-
erty damage). Though it’s not every 
year that Greek life at the Univer-
sity causes more than $80,000 
worth of damage to a hotel, most 
of the underlying causes of that 
destruction, like binge drinking to 
the point of belligerence, do happen 
every year — indeed, every week.

What’s most disturbing about 

resort-gate is not the damage 
to property alone: it’s what the 
destruction of property signifies.

Compare this instance with the 

extensive destruction of property 
that took place during the protests 
in Ferguson, Missouri, following 
the grand jury’s failure to indict 
Officer Wilson for the killing of 
unarmed Black teen Mike Brown. 
How did we react to the destruction 
of property in Ferguson?

For many of us it almost consti-

tuted reason to denounce the pro-
test as a whole. Some Conservatives 
even used the looting and rioting to 
argue racist or racialist claims, like, 
“This just goes to show that these 
people (Black) can’t be trusted; 
they deserve their lowly lot in life; 
we need more and stricter policing, 
not less,” etc.

And what about the “ski trip”? 

Why not conclude that these people 
cannot be trusted? Why not more 
policing for them? Shouldn’t we 
be more afraid of rich, white frat 
brothers than of poor, Black urban-
ites? Rich, white Greeks feel they 
are invincible and cause $80,000+ 
worth of property damage without 
even trying.

The protesters in Ferguson who 

destroyed property did so deliber-
ately. What’s more, these riots, even if 
one disagrees with them as a political 
tactic, were at least partly redeem-
able because they were founded on 
legitimate 
discontent 
(economic, 

political, social and otherwise).

The carelessness, ease and non-

chalance with which the Greeks on 
“ski trip” destroyed $80,000+ worth 
of property scares me far more than 
the deliberate destruction of prop-
erty in Ferguson. There is no purpose 
— political or otherwise — and hence 
no excuse for the Greeks’ destruc-
tion of property. The sheer nihilism 
and cynicism of it, and the nihilism 
and cynicism throughout Greek life 
that it exemplifies, is what scares me 
— scares me far more than, say, the 
 

Ferguson riots did.

This seems to fit the larger cul-

tural paradigm of white America’s 
greater fear of the hooded Black 
man robbing a gas station clerk at 
gunpoint than of Big Banks ripping 
off hundreds of thousands of peo-
ple with subprime loans. The clerk 
loses, at most, a few hundred dol-
lars. The victims of aggressive sub-
prime lending lost millions. Who 
are the real degenerates? Who are 

the real criminals?

But — and this may seem coun-

terintuitive given my writing about 
it — I claim that we need not worry 
too much about Greek life. The 
institution cannot survive for long 
in its current form (friends of mine 
in fraternities tell me pledging will 
basically be over within 10 years). 
Greek life depends on high levels 
of organizational secrecy in order 
to function, much like big corpora-
tions do. As we move further into 
the age of social media and smart-
phones, Greek life’s organizational 
secrecy will become increasingly 
difficult to maintain.

Its first enemy is itself. I’m not 

afraid of generalizing the Greeks as 
a bunch of drunk idiots. As drunk 
idiots who (when drunk) don’t 
understand the necessity of secrecy 
for their institution’s survival, they 
expose and incriminate themselves 
and bring themselves closer to their 
own destruction.

There’s a video — we’ve all seen it 

— shot on a cellphone camera by an 
anonymous Pike brother, showing a 
drunk woman giving the brother a 
blowjob as he asks her, “What’s the 
best fraternity at MSU?” She says, 
“Pike.” What did we learn from this 
video? Ironically, that, by any and 
all standards, Pike is definitely not 
the best fraternity at MSU. Not just 
because the girl, being drunk, could 
not legally give consent, but that 
this brother violated the highest 
imperative for a “good” fraternity 
in our era: secrecy.

A “good” fraternity, by which 

I mean a fraternity with a good 
chance of survival, is one that 
does all the normal frat stuff (dis-
respects women, sexually assaults 
them, etc.), but does so in secrecy. 
The Greeks, it seems, are having 
difficulty accepting the fact that 
our world no longer accepts such 
violence, misogyny and sexism. The 
Pike video, I claim, exemplifies the 
reason why the ideology of Greek 
life will be Greek life’s own ulti-
mate destruction. Greek life can-
not reconcile its need for secrecy 
with its own stupidity (brought on 
largely by routine alcoholic stupor). 
So, while we should continue to 
resist Greek life and advocate for its 
reform, we should not be too con-
cerned, because, in the long term, 
Greek life will likely destroy itself.

Now — and, again, this will seem 

somewhat surprising to my reader 
— I am not totally opposed to Greek 
life. To clarify, I’m not condemning 
or accusing every chapter or every 
Greek of rape, hazing, etc.; I’m 
condemning the institution that 
systematically produces these hor-
rors. I have many friends in Greek 
life and they tell me — and I’ve also 
seen it for myself — that the institu-
tion is not all bad.

When we talk about Greek life, 

we have to make certain abstrac-
tions and generalizations, and, in 
doing so, I fear that we may too read-
ily dismiss the genuinely good ele-
ments of this institution — such as 
friendship — and the genuinely good 
experiences of many of the Greeks. 
Nonetheless, I maintain that the 
institution as a whole is sick. I advo-
cate for reform and resistance to 
Greek life while also knowing that 
the system is already on a trajectory 
toward its own destruction.

— Zak Witus can be reached 

at zakwitus@umich.edu.

ZAK
WITUS

Farcical frat life

Claire Bryan, Regan Detwiler, Devin Eggert, David Harris, 
Jordyn Kay, Aarica Marsh, Victoria Noble, Michael Paul, 

Allison Raeck, Melissa Scholke, Michael Schramm, Matthew 

Seligman, Linh Vu, Mary Kate Winn, Jenny Wang, Derek Wolfe

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

FROM THE DAILY

M

arijuana has become a modern crusade for some, with 
medical marijuana rights and a growing number of 
advocates for the free use of the substance across the 

nation gaining traction. To certain lawmakers and drug enforcement 
advocacy groups, it’s the proverbial thorn in their side that doesn’t 
seem to be going away anytime soon. Further adding to the debate, 
the American Academy of Pediatrics recently revised its policy 
on marijuana, with its main concerns targeted toward marijuana 
usage among adolescents. The AAP advocates that pediatricians 
should be extremely conservative with prescribing marijuana to 
teen patients, except in the case of debilitating conditions; they are 
also calling for the removal of marijuana from the federal Schedule 
I drug classification. However, they advise against legalization. 
The AAP’s stance is cautiously optimistic, with the potential to 
help many people throughout the nation. Similarly, the effects of 
removing marijuana from Schedule I could potentially lead to the 
legalization of marijuana in the United States by increasing research 
and reducing stigma.

Because marijuana is classified as Schedule I 

— meaning there’s no accepted medical use and 
it has high potential for abuse — there has been 
very little research done on its effects. This fact 
is specifically cited in the AAP’s report as the 
leading contributor to the medical community’s 
ambiguity on the substance’s benefits. The 
reason why there hasn’t been sufficient 
research on marijuana doesn’t have to do with 
the medical community, but rather the federal 
government’s refusal to remove marijuana from 
the Schedule I substance list, created as part 
of the 1970 Controlled Substances Act. Under 
this legislation, which was the forerunner of 
Nixon’s “War on Drugs,” Schedule I substances 
are “the most dangerous drugs of all the drug 
schedules with potentially severe psychological 
or physical dependence.” Schedule I includes 
dangerously addictive drugs such as LSD, 
heroin and ecstasy.

While to some it may seem laughable that 

marijuana is regarded in the same light as 
hard drugs by the federal government, it’s a 
serious concern for patients across the country 
who are waiting with bated breath for any 
new research on marijuana that could be 
potentially beneficial for a litany of different 
medical concerns. On a smaller scale, more 
research could also be constructive for our 
own university and its hospital system. With 
a plethora of research tools on or affiliated to 
campus, ground-breaking marijuana studies 
could be conducted if the drug were removed 
from the list of most dangerous controlled 
substances in the United States.

There are other gains from removing 

marijuana from the Schedule I list, such as 
removing 
unnecessary 
stigma 
associated 

with the substance. The description of 
Schedule I substances is clearly not indicative 
of marijuana’s true nature. If marijuana 
were to remain on the Schedule I list, then 

any and all offenses related to the substance 
could carry undue ridicule from potential 
employers or anyone who would have access 
to an individual’s records. For those with petty 
misdemeanors on their record, this kind of 
attention and unwarranted scrutiny can be 
hugely detrimental to the job search, forever 
damaging their career prospects. Moreover, 
the horrible racial disparity in our nation’s 
prison system could be alleviated, at least in 
part, as well as the overall overpopulation of 
jails across the United States with the removal 
of marijuana from the Schedule I substance list. 
Since offenses related to those drugs typically 
carry the worst sentences, some of which are 
required to follow harsh federally mandated 
guidelines and cost taxpayers billions of dollars 
every year.

The AAP’s new position on marijuana is 

certainly a step in the right direction, but more 
action must be taken by the government to help 
increase the amount of information about this 
highly contested drug and to allow its seemingly 
numerous benefits to be enjoyed by the adults 
of this country. The AAP recognizes, along 
with many others, that marijuana can have 
detrimental effects on the developing mind; if 
marijuana were to be decriminalized or even 
legalized, only adults who are 21 and older should 
be allowed to possess and use the substance.

The onus is now on the federal government 

to remove marijuana from the Schedule I 
controlled substance list to allow for more 
research that will help remove incorrect 
notions associated with the drug and allow 
for patients to reap the medicinal benefits of 
a substance that has already been legalized 
for medical uses in 23 states and the District 
of Columbia. With these reforms, the United 
States will certainly be better off and reach a 
new high in the ongoing dismantling of the war 
on drugs.

there in the first place. To say I’m 
glad I went is an understatement 
… but at first I didn’t want to, and 
absent encouragement from my 
family, I probably wouldn’t have.

According to the National Insti-

tute of Mental Health, 19.6 percent 
of adults ages 18 to 25 had a mental 
illness in the United States in 2012. 
If your eyes are blue or green, it’s 
more likely that any given student 
your age has a mental illness than 
shares your eye color. But despite 
its prevalence, mental health issues 
aren’t among the things that most 
people — including myself — are 
comfortable talking about. There is 

still so much judgment, stereotyping 
and negativity surrounding mental 
health illnesses and their treatment.

Which is exactly why I decided to 

write this column. I know that some 
people reading this column might 
view me differently once they’re 
done. But, despite that, many, many 
students could benefit from mental 
health care even though it’s rarely 
talked about in social situations. I 
know that I don’t talk about it with 
most of my friends. I also know that 
many of them have, at one time or 
another, really needed someone to 
talk to about the plethora of pres-
sures that come with being a stu-

dent at such a difficult, oftentimes 
 

competitive school.

And because so many of us don’t 

talk about mental health, it’s easy 
to presume that it isn’t an issue 
that affects a significant number 
of students. So if you think you 
might benefit from an appointment 
at CAPS, please make one. It’s not 
a sign of weakness, lack of capabil-
ity or abnormality — it’s a resource. 
And though they may not want to 
discuss it, many of your peers are 
using it, too.

— Victoria Noble can be 

reached at vjnoble@umich.edu.

HAD AN EXAM TODAY? WELL NOW YOU DON’T! CLASSES HAVE 
BEEN CANCELED, BUT THE DAILY IS CHUGGING RIGHT ALONG! 

Keep up with columnists, read Daily editorials, view cartoons and join in the debate. 

Check out @michigandaily to get updates on Daily content throughout the day.

One small step for marijuana

Loosened regulations may increase research and understanding

