The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Arts
Wednesday, April 8 2015 — 5
‘Dead’ end opens
onto new world
RADIUS-TWC
‘The Hunting Ground’ explores the facts and fictions of campus sexual assault.
Confronting sexism
in Greek life cinema
By REBECCA LERNER
Daily Arts Writer
Human beings categorize each
other for convenience; it’s a way
to make a complex world easier to
understand. When we stereotype,
we don’t take into account individu-
al differences. But how about when
the subjects of our daunting world
put themselves into uncomplicated
boxes for us?
Greek life in college does just
this. It allows people to have the
ability to describe 50 to 70 people
using a few derogatory words. “The
Hunting Ground,” a documentary
about the severity of sexual assault
on college campuses, devotes a
portion of its run time to illustrate
the problem of rape in American
fraternities. Sitting in the theater,
listening to statistics and personal
accounts of Greek life, the charac-
ters created realistic identities for
people whom I didn’t even know.
The classic sorority girl stereo-
types are often prevalent in mov-
ies, but few are so overwhelming
as “Legally Blonde,” a film about
Elle Woods, (Reese Witherspoon,
“Wild”), president of her soror-
ity’s chapter, who follows her boy-
friend to Harvard Law School.
Elle eventually realizes that she
is more than her sorority’s let-
ters, but her friends continue to be
portrayed as well-dressed, mani-
cured morons.
More recently, “The House
Bunny” and “Sydney White” cre-
ate an obvious binary between the
mean and exclusive sorority girls
who are portrayed as the “bitchy”
and “slutty” villains juxtaposed
with the sweet “I’m not like others”
girls who are allowed to care about
other things, but who are often val-
ued for their non-sexual innocence.
The female characters in these
movies encourage the sexism of
the system of Greek life. These ste-
reotypes let people say that they’re
all the same; they’re dumb; they’re
“basic.” Sometimes even women
who don’t participate in Greek life
fall into this trap; they don’t want to
be identified with what the “soror-
ity girl” has come to represent, so
they join the ranks of people who
look down on them.
Ask anyone on campus, even
someone not affiliated with Greek
life in any way, to give you one to
two words describing a certain
sorority and they can do it without
hesitation. But we can’t describe
“other” people in one to two words
as easily. And these stereotypes
perpetuate the idea that we can take
multi-faceted humans and turn
them into “basic” things that don’t
deserve respect. By taking away the
humanity of these women, we take
away incentive for others to treat
them like real people. This depreci-
ation of sorority sisters contributes
to hazy understandings of consent
– if someone isn’t seen as deserv-
ing of a voice, they are not seen as
deserving of control over their own
body.
Men also become victims of
misogyny in the cinematic por-
trayal of Greek life. In films like
“Neighbors,”
fraternity
broth-
ers are depicted as beer-guzzling
“basic bros” whose main objec-
tive in life is to sleep with as many
women as possible. However, their
stereotypes are fundamentally dif-
ferent from those of sorority girls,
because when they adhere to their
social norms, they are celebrated –
laughed with and not at. The main
frat boys are never characterized as
villainous or dangerous. The issue
of sexual assault is rarely touched
upon in the web of Greek life
interpretations. The most preva-
lent example is in the satirical film
“Animal House”, when, after much
internal debate, a fraternity charac-
ter does not rape a passed out girl
and he is lionized as a hero.
Greek life itself may or may not
be inherently sexist, but its por-
trayal in films almost always is. One
of the statistics in “The Hunting
Ground” points out that the popu-
lation of rapists is small in compari-
son with the number of people who
experience sexual assault, because
the majority of men who do rape
will be repeat offenders. However,
because of the stereotypes that
films perpetuate about sorority sis-
ters as being hypersexualized and
vapid, it makes it easier to not take
them seriously and guiltlessly com-
mit crimes against them.
The gorgeous houses in the
inevitable montages of films about
Greek life are built brick by misogy-
nist brick. The worst part is that
we take those constructions at face
value and we use them to judge
people in our actual lives. But with
films like “The Hunting Ground”
that tell the stories of individual
girls and frankly discuss facts about
the correlation between Greek life
and rape culture, we can see the
structure of sexism slowly crum-
bling.
Rick Grimes goes
all the way in
season five closer
By MATT BARNAUSKAS
Daily Arts Writer
Early in season five of “The
Walking
Dead,”
Abraham
(Michael Cudlitz, “Band of
Brothers”)
wrote,
“The
new
world’s
gonna
need
Rick Grimes.”
But, can Rick
(Andrew Lin-
coln,
“Strike
Back”) survive
in
the
new
world?
That’s
the
question
that drove the
second half of AMC’s hit series
as it found its group of survivors
struggling to adjust to the set-
tlement of Alexandria, a place
mostly untouched by the hor-
rors outside.
If any quote encapsulates Rick’s
philosophy in the apocalypse, it
would come from fellow AMC
series “Breaking Bad” ’s Mike
Ehrmantraut (Jonathan Banks),
who said, “I chose a half measure,
when I should have gone all the
way. I’ll never make that mistake
again.” Rick has learned this les-
son more than once. He lost his
wife (Sarah Wayne Callies,”Prison
Break”) when he left an enemy’s
fate to chance and then his men-
tor (Scott Wilson, “In Cold Blood”)
when he let the Governor (David
Morissey, “Extant”) get away
at the end of season three. This
message continues to resonate as
the threat of Terminus returns to
attack an already weakened group
in the first three episodes of season
five. All this leads to a pragmatic
leader, unafraid to take the brutal
steps needed to survive. However,
within the sheltered community of
Alexandria, Rick is a product of a
completely different world.
Set in the aftermath of Rick’s
violent confrontation with the
abusive Pete (Corey Brill, “The
Normal Heart”) and his sub-
sequent gun-waving rant, the
season five finale, “Conquer,”
questions Rick’s place in a civi-
lized community. Glenn (Steve
Yeun, “The Legend of Korra”)
openly questions Rick’s resolve
to violently take Alexandria
if he is voted out, comparing
his plan of butchery displayed
by the residents of Terminus.
However, “The Walking Dead”
could have looked even farther
back into its history to find the
strongest comparison – season
two’s Shane (Jon Bernthal, “The
Wolf of Wall Street”), Rick’s for-
mer friend turned rival. Shane
displays many of the traits that
Rick currently possesses: Aha-
rah survival instinct, the need
to strike first and a problematic
relationship with another man’s
wife. The show paints Rick in a
light compared to the eventual
condemnation
Shane
faces,
which demonstrates how far
characters have been pushed.
In
particular,
“Conquer”
pushes not only Rick, but Glenn
and Sasha (Sonequa Martin-
Green, “Once Upon a Time”)
to points they could never turn
away from. Glenn faces death
at the hands of the cowardly
Nicholas
(Michael
Traynor,
“Rectify”) while Sasha, who
struggles to come to grips
with the deaths of her brother
and boyfriend (Chad L. Cole-
man and Lawrence Gilliard Jr.,
“The Wire”), is confronted by
the hypocritical Father Gabriel
(Seth Gilliam, “The Wire”).
Both confrontations conclude
with Glenn and Sasha point-
ing guns at their attackers, and
both times, the show walks
them away from the ledge. It’s a
mixed-bag in term of dramatic
results; while it’s enjoyable to
see the usually nihilistic series
give hope to its characters,
there’s a sense of anticlimax,
much like the downbeat mid-
season finale, “Coda.”
On a lighter note, it’s awesome
to see the return of Morgan
(Lennie James, “Low Winter
Sun”) and his newfound Zen
warrior philosophy and fighting
style. Back on Rick’s side, there
is sometimes a little too much
justification on its protagonist
side. The show has seen Rick
walk the line between sanity
and insanity multiple times, as
Lincoln gives the character an
undercurrent of dark madness
that always risks coming forth.
However, the show’s writers
seem to be more cautious in
embracing that darker side.
Several characters defend Rick,
like Abraham eloquently says
to the Alexandrians, “There’s
a vast ocean of shit that you
people don’t know shit about.”
But, the show might go a little
too far in its defense of Jessie
(Alexandra
Breckenbridge,
“American
Horror
Story”),
the woman Rick is at times
disturbingly attached to, which
only solidifies his importance.
However, when Rick comes
forth with the body of a walker
who sneaks in, the show states that
the new world needs Rick Grimes,
because in the words of “True
Detective” ’s Rust Cohle, “The
world needs bad men. We keep
the other bad men from the door.”
That’s why Rick kills Pete after he
kills Reg (Steve Coulter, “The Con-
juring”). In “The Walking Dead,”
survival can’t be compromised.
This is a lesson Rick knows, and
Alexandria needs to learn.
A-
The
Walking
Dead
Season Five
Finale
AMC
TV REVIEW
AMC
Brought to you by Band-Aid ®.
FILM NOTEBOOK
Barnet and Reuben not responsible
for the criminal sexual assault of
Emily Campbell is unfathomable.
I could not respectfully disagree
more with the final findings of the
OIE investigation.”
When contacted by the Daily,
Cavanaugh said he wanted to
discuss the case for this article,
but his supervisor and Diane
Brown, the Division of Public
Safety and Security spokeswoman,
prevented
him
from
doing
so.
Brown
said
University
Police Chief Robert Neumann
was
unavailable
to
answer
questions
Tuesday
afternoon
regarding the role of UMPD in
these types of investigations or
whether detectives are used as
expert witnesses in University
proceedings of this nature.
Timothy Lynch, University vice
president and general counsel,
wrote a letter to Campbell — which
was reviewed by the Daily — in
December 2014, stating that the
OGC, OIE and OSCR had reviewed
all
the
documents
submitted
by both the complainant and
respondents “in light of continuing
objections” raised by both parties.
“Detective Cavanaugh’s personal
opinions on the findings of OIE,
the credibility of the parties or the
ultimate issue before the Appeals
Board are neither relevant nor
appropriate,” Lynch wrote. He
elaborated to say Cavanaugh acted
outside of University policies as an
impartial investigator by sending
his letter, and that his letter
“cannot be characterized as new
information.”
In the letter, Lynch briefly
explained what types of evidence
are and aren’t used in University
investigations.
“The University of Michigan’s
sexual misconduct policy and
procedures are not designed to
mimic the criminal justice system
or civil litigation; they are student
disciplinary
proceedings,”
he
wrote.
Lynch’s letter continued that
while “formal rules of evidence do
not apply,” the University attempts
to keep the investigation fair to
all parties, which might mean
“disallowing proffered information
from being considered.”
Other documents presented by
the respondents in advance of the
appeals process were also blocked
from consideration.
Jane
Briggs-Bunting,
an
attorney and former director of the
Michigan State University School
of Journalism, said University
disciplinary proceedings are often
less formal than a criminal case,
and standard rules of evidence do
not generally apply. However, she
said if the University is allowing
one party to bring in extra
witnesses, the other party should
be notified.
Lynch could not be reached
for comment on Tuesday, and the
University’s Office of Public Affairs
declined to make him available for
an interview.
During the appeals process,
Mortellaro said the respondents’
lawyers were meeting with various
University
officials
and
staff
members to discuss this case.
The Daily attempted to confirm
these meetings with Lynch, but he
was unavailable for comment. The
respondents’ lawyers also declined
to comment on this matter.
“I think it’s highly unusual for
generals counsel to be involved in
student disciplinary proceedings
and talking to attorneys on one
side and excluding the party on the
other side,” Briggs-Bunting said.
Following a meeting with Stacy
Vander Velde, associate director
of OSCR, Mortellaro said she left
with more questions than answers.
“I had a long conversation with
(Vander Velde) and I just asked
her what policy and procedure
they were using to make these
determinations and she said she
had no idea, that it was all coming
from the general counsel’s office,
and later we found out that the
respondents’
attorneys
were
having undue influence over the
counsel. We were never made
privy to that or allowed to respond
in any way.”
The
University’s
Office
of
General Counsel is not mentioned
in the University’s Policy on
Student Sexual Misconduct, which
lists offices such as OIE and OSCR
that are traditionally involved in
the proceedings.
An OSCR staff member said
Vander Velde was unavailable for
comment on Tuesday, and the
Office of Public Affairs declined to
make a representative from OSCR
available for comment.
Fitzgerald declined to discuss
policy used to determine admissible
evidence or testimony, referring
the Daily to the University’s
Student
Sexual
Misconduct
Policy. He also declined to discuss
standard
language
used
for
advising students on hiring an
attorney during the process, citing
the Student Sexual Misconduct
Policy’s provision that students
may have a “Support Person”
participate in the process. The
policy does not stipulate whether
the University is required to
notify the other party when
a
complainant
or
respondent
involves a support person, such as
an attorney.
“It’s just about equity, and that’s
why we filed with the federal
government,”
Campbell
said.
“Their rule is that the University
can decide either way as long as it is
equal, but it wasn’t. You can’t pick
and choose what evidence is seen.”
Part
Four:
Communication
concerns
Campbell did not hire her own
lawyer until November 2014, 11
months after the alleged assault,
when she decided to file a civil
suit against Barnet and Reuben.
The decision not to hire a lawyer,
Mortellaro said, was made based
on trust in the University’s process
— trust she and Campbell said they
feel the University abused. Because
they were advised that they did
not need a lawyer, Campbell and
Mortellaro said, the investigation
and appeals process was filled with
miscommunication and confusion.
“They told us it was completely
unnecessary to have a lawyer
to work through the University
process,” Mortellaro said.
Nacht, the attorney representing
Barnet, said he regularly represents
women and men in the University’s
sexual assault process.
“It is normal for a student or for
that matter a university faculty
member or staff member going
through the process to want the
assistance of counsel,” he told the
Daily in a statement. “The fact
that women and men continue to
contact our firm indicates that the
need is there.”
Mortellaro
said
the
status
of Campbell’s case was always
unclear during the appeals process.
“All of the sudden, this had gone
up the chain of command, and no
one could tell us why or who was
making decisions, or what they
were basing those decisions on,”
Mortellaro added.
Prior to submitting Campbell’s
request for appeal, however, the
University was clear about its
policy. As is publicly stated, the
process did move in a predictable
way, Campbell said. When the
incident was originally reported,
Campbell was offered a resolution
by OSCR, which would have been
to have the respondents complete
an essay or come to some other
informal agreement to solve the
conflict, which Campbell rejected.
Once the University found the
respondents not responsible for
sexual assault, and after Campbell
requested an appeal, both she
and the respondents were able
to submit any new, relevant
information for the appeals board
to review. After this, Mortellaro
said everything seemed to come to
a stop.
“There came a point in the
appeals process where we went
off of that flow chart and no one
could answer why, and that’s
when we discovered that the
respondents’
attorneys
were
having
private
meetings
and
e-mails and conference calls with
the general counsel’s office with
the University,” Mortellaro said.
The University’s Student Sexual
Misconduct Policy states, “Upon
receipt of a report, the University
will strive to complete its review
within sixty (60) calendar days.”
Campbell reported the alleged
assault on Dec. 6, 2013, and the
review was completed on June
26, 2014. The final report from the
appeals board was issued on Dec.
22, 2014 — more than a year after
the alleged assault. The suggested
timeline
for
completing
the
appellate process is within 15 days
of the appeals board’s receipt of the
appeal, and Campbell submitted
her request for appeal on Sept. 29,
2014, and received a final decision
on Dec. 22, 2014.
“I think the respondents have
great legal representation and that
they played the system beautifully,”
Mortellaro said.
Mortellaro said she made
numerous phone calls during
the three-month period of the
appeals
board
deliberations,
including e-mailing and calling
the office of University President
Mark Schlissel multiple times
asking to reflect on Campbell’s
experience with the University’s
process. The Daily could not
confirm this, and Fitzgerald
declined to comment.
While motions to dismiss the
civil case are pending, Barnet
and Reuben are able to return to
campus as soon as January 2016.
Their return to campus is pending
their submission of a 2,000-word
essay — which is to be based on
a series of required readings
provided by the University —
and their attendance at multiple
mandatory, individual meetings
before and after their return
to campus. They will be on
disciplinary
probation
and
are
prohibited
from
having
contact with Campbell for the
remainder of her enrollment at
the University.
POLICIES
From Page 3