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