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, April 13, 2015
Claire Bryan, Regan Detwiler, Rabab Jafri, Ben Keller, Payton Luokkala,
Aarica Marsh, Victoria Noble, Michael Paul, Anna Polumbo-Levy,
Allison Raeck, Melissa Scholke, Michael Schramm, Matthew Seligman,
Stephanie Trierweiler, Mary Kate Winn, Jenny Wang, Derek Wolfe
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
T
he University’s flip-flop deci-
sion last week to screen the
Clint Eastwood film “Ameri-
can
Sniper,”
a
biopic about Chris
Kyle,
the
most
lethal sniper in U.S.
military
history,
at a UMix event as
originally planned
received scores of
backlash from the
University’s Mus-
lim and/or Middle
Eastern and North
African
popula-
tions. These communities believed the
film was ill-suited for an event meant
to entertain, claiming that their safety
on campus has become jeopardized by
the University’s return to the decision
to screen the film as entertainment
instead of using said screening as an
opportunity to discuss the film’s over-
arching themes and depictions.
Since the release of this film, myri-
ad writers have taken myriad stances
both for and against Eastwood’s edi-
torial decisions in the telling of Kyle’s
story. Some have come to view Kyle
via his depictions as the typos of patri-
otic American bravery, a crusader of
freedom and liberty, a defender of the
defenseless from cruel, ill-intentioned
purveyors of violence. Others view
Kyle as a glorified murderer, a rac-
ist who dehumanized Iraqis and set
them on equal footing with extrem-
ists. These two considerations of Kyle
as both an individual and as a soldier
underlie opinions about the film from
two respective camps: the film is
either a compelling dramatization of
Kyle’s life or pro-war propaganda that
misrepresents facts.
As a gay man, I fully understand the
frustrations of Muslim and/or MENA
communities in feeling misrepresent-
ed and stereotyped by media portray-
als of their communities; as a student
of communications and media, howev-
er, I consider myself able to recognize
the editorial decisions of a text as pro-
pagandistic and misleading. As such, I
decided to do a close reading of the text
in hope of understanding the heated
controversy surrounding the film.
“American Sniper” undoubtedly
provides a narrative of the Iraq War
with only nominal stance in fact.
Never are the political considerations
of the invasion of Iraq in 2003 given
due weight in the film, and the plot’s
overly simplistic “Good vs. Evil” con-
flicts leave much to be desired if the
text were to be read as historical. The
ostensible weapons of mass destruc-
tion hoarded by the Iraqi regime are
never discussed. Indeed, it could even
be argued that editorial decisions
attribute the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks
as an overture to the American inva-
sion of Iraq. And the film’s aggressors
— “The Butcher,” a sociopathic child
torturer, and “Mustafa,” an enemy
sniper and foil of sorts to Kyle — are
depicted in stark, monochromatic
contrast to the Kyle’s values, falsely
depicting a war that was in actuality
much more hued. These hyper-dra-
matized caricatures of insurgent vio-
lence are really the only Iraqis shown
in the film. As such, it could be argued
that this editorial decision leads to the
categorization of Iraqis either as war-
mongering, inhuman perpetrators of
very gruesome violence (e.g. drilling
in a child’s head, or keeping a collec-
tion of dismembered Americans in the
walk-in cooler of a restaurant), or as
sympathizers to such people.
Were these aforementioned traits
to stand alone in the film, I would
wholeheartedly categorize it as pro-
pagandistic. The extremely narrow
scope of the film’s narrative perspec-
tive, however, leads me to believe that
these misrepresentations are used
with artistic license for the purpose of
conveying a message about the short-
comings of both a war-centered cul-
ture and Kyle as its product.
From childhood throughout his
military training, Kyle is indoctrinat-
ed to the mantra of human classifica-
tion into three categories: the sheep,
those who need protecting; the wolf,
those perpetrators whose goal is to
harm the sheep; and the sheep dog,
those who serve to protect the flock.
Kyle is told by his father from a young
age that every man should strive for
the latter classification. As told from
Kyle’s narrow view, every depiction in
the film is seen through the lens of this
simplistic metaphor: the American
people equal sheep; Kyle and the mili-
tary equal sheep dog; Iraqi insurgents
equal wolves. The Iraqi people don’t
fit into Kyle’s metaphor, so they’re left
unconsidered, explaining the mechan-
ical nature with which Kyle can kill
and dehumanize.
The film, by use of outside perspec-
tives which stand in contrast to Kyle’s,
display the flaws of such a narrow way
of thinking, however. Kyle becomes
obsessed with defending the princi-
ples to which he’s been indoctrinated,
serving four tours in Iraq, effectively
abandoning his family in the process,
so that he can hunt his direct adver-
saries. He becomes drunk off glory,
especially after he’s been given the
nickname “Legend.” When a comrade
dies, a letter surfaces which poses the
question “When does glory fade away,
consume one completely?” Kyle views
this as anti-war rhetoric, although in
all actuality he is becoming consumed
by glory himself, even to the point
where he jeopardizes the lives of those
in his unit by taking an unbelievable
shot at one of his white rabbits with-
out acknowledging the dissent of the
group. Many die in the process, and
Kyle is almost left behind.
Once Kyle returns from war, he
struggles with severe PTSD, but effec-
tively finds refuge in helping veter-
ans and being with his family. This
could be considered a happy ending
sans Kyle’s death, yet the film’s con-
clusion mirrors depictions of Kyle’s
own upbringing with that of his son’s,
showing the cyclical process of indoc-
trination. Eastwood’s choices in doing
so show that Kyle’s narrow perspec-
tive is not necessarily an exception of
American culture, but rather a norm;
he is a product of a culture that glo-
rifies the idea of protectionism and
interventionism without understand-
ing the culture’s naiveté. Kyle accepts
this almost subconsciously, perpetrat-
ing these ideals and being affirmed by
those around him along the way.
Thus, the familiarity of Kyle’s views
is probably why so many from the
ultra-patriotic camp absolutely love
Kyle and the film. Furthermore, the
narrow, one-sided depiction of the
war via Kyle’s perspective is why so
many hate the film, condemn it even
as pro-war propaganda. But these con-
clusions are made without deeply ana-
lyzing the film’s depictions for what
they are: a critique of the system from
which Kyle came, and a use of his story
and patriotic perspective as a vehicle
of sorts through which to display the
absurdity of an American system
defined by protectionism.
— Austin Davis can be reached
at austchan@umich.edu.
Examining “American Sniper”
AUSTIN
DAVIS
A slew of recent news events
— along with allegations of rape,
destruction, racism and more across
campuses nationwide — have cast a
negative spotlight on Greek life. The
light is so bright it outshines all of the
positive contributions fraternities and
sororities have made and the positive
impact they have had on the commu-
nities around them. It’s time to shut
down that spotlight. It’s time to lift the
shadow and remind us the true reason
people join the Greek system: to make
a difference and to be part of a commu-
nity. There are many of us who joined
a sorority or fraternity to be a part of
something, to give back and to experi-
ence college life together. What once
began as groups aspiring for unity,
philanthropy and a familial-like bond,
has grown to have a negative conno-
tation due to isolated issues that get
out of hand. It is time take a stand and
start speaking up about bad behavior
before it gets worse. Let’s take a stand.
Let’s speak up.
In light of recent events involving
our sorority and many other houses in
the Greek community here at the Uni-
versity, as well as on campuses nation-
wide, the sisters of Sigma Delta Tau
are launching a campus-wide initiative
called “Speak Up! Michigan.” This ini-
tiative is intended to inspire students
to have the courage to speak out in
the face of a potentially dangerous
situation and mitigate the many issues
caused by a lack of bystander aware-
ness. Through this campaign, SDT is
hoping to forge partnerships with stu-
dent groups and the University to raise
awareness of bystander intervention
and to properly educate students on
how to react to threatening situations.
While the campaign is only in its
startup phase, the feedback has been
astoundingly positive. Campus and
student leaders alike have come togeth-
er to back the campaign and speak out
about this important issue. While we
all would like to say we would know
how to react when our peers are act-
ing inappropriately and putting us at
risk, we have never taken the opportu-
nity to equip ourselves with the proper
tools to take action during an actual
situation. Through a series of initia-
tives, Speak Up! hopes to foster open
conversation between groups and indi-
viduals alike about the negative conse-
quences of being a bystander. Change
never occurs unless you step up and
make it — it starts with a simple stride
in the right direction.
To launch this effort, we invited
producer-turned-campus
activist
Mike Dilbeck to campus. Dilbeck will
work to empower us with “Coura-
geous Leadership,” and show us how
to make a difference and intervene in
inappropriate situations. He believes
that seizing an opportunity to act can
dramatically change the campus com-
munity and allow students to make a
difference. We look forward to work-
ing with Dilbeck to gain the tools,
resources and confidence to make this
happen and to help others Speak Up!
While the semester is coming to a
close, the sisters of Sigma Delta Tau
and the sorority’s executive board plan
to work tirelessly over the summer to
plan events to run in the fall before
formal recruitment begins. The goal
is to educate members of Greek life,
as well as other student-run organi-
zations, such as Central Student Gov-
ernment, club sports and others, on
how they can appropriately respond
to issues that may arise during group
functions. Being prepared is your best
line of defense, and that is the message
that Speak Up! seeks to get across.
With all the crises occurring in the
world right now, it has been incredible
to be able to see an issue bring so many
differing minds together. It’s very rare
to find a cause we, as a community at
large, can get behind — which is where
the importance of the Speak Up! cam-
paign truly stems from. Bystander
intervention is a prominent issue
across college campuses, rarely getting
the amount of attention it deserves. It’s
a uniquely gender and politically neu-
tral problem which together we have
the ability to solve, and that’s what
makes Speak Up! so special.
No matter who you are, what you
believe or what issues you stand for,
you’ll undoubtedly find yourself a
bystander in a situation. Taking the
initiative and becoming proactive
is the first step of many to mitigat-
ing the situation before it gets out of
hand. So stand with us and we will
stand with you to Speak Up! and
make a difference. For more infor-
mation, visit www.SpeakUpMichi-
gan.com. Mike Dilbeck will discuss
“The Revolution of Courageous
Leadership” at 8 p.m. on Monday,
April 13 at the Michigan Union.
—Jordan Halper is a Business sopho-
more writing on behalf of Sigma Delta Tau.
One of the core values that guides the Sexual
Assault and Prevention Awareness Center’s
work is respect. And for SAPAC, consent is
respect. As we work toward a world free of sex-
ual assault, intimate partner violence, stalking
and sexual harassment, we promote equality
and respect for all members of our community
through our commitment to primary preven-
tion. Our primary prevention approach is cen-
tered on our vision and hope for a future where,
as a community, we expect consent for sexual
activity to be verbal, sober and enthusiastic.
This vision is our aspiration, and it exceeds
the definition of consent in the Student Sexual
Misconduct Policy.
In the Relationship Remix first-year work-
shop, in the online training, Community
Matters, and in the presentations delivered
by SAPAC volunteers, we teach the institu-
tional definition of consent and we also share
our aspirational goal for all consent to be ver-
bal, sober and enthusiastic. We believe this is
the very best way to ensure that you are treat-
ing another person with respect and that you
have their consent to engage in the desired
sexual activity.
It is an encouraging sign of a shift in our
campus cultural values that many students
desire for affirmative, verbal consent to be
included in the institution’s consent defini-
tion, and even more importantly, be fully
integrated into our behaviors and beliefs as
the expected, common practice of students
when they have sex. As a culture, though, we
are not there yet and SAPAC makes this dis-
tinction in our educational efforts. In order
to address the issue raised by the Daily’s
Editorial Board, SAPAC staff have carefully
reviewed our website materials and revised
the information provided on consent to make
this distinction clearer. You can read the
updated website language at http://sapac.
umich.edu/article/49.
Holly Rider-Milkovich is the director of the Sexual
Assault and Prevention and Awareness Center.
HOLLY RIDER-MILKOVICH | VIEWPOINT
How SAPAC defines consent
FROM THE DAILY
Improve laptop equity
The University should increase access to laptops for students
W
ith education now firmly planted in the information
age, laptops are becoming an increasingly crucial tool
for students on campus. For those who cannot afford a
laptop, there are short-term laptop loan programs available, which
can be extended long-term if the LSA student or faculty member
has the required paperwork. According to a recent article in The
Michigan Daily, the University is working to improve the current
program through a pilot laptop loan program that will launch in
Fall 2015, allowing students who need the most financial assistance
to borrow a laptop for the duration of their time at the University.
However, for this program to be successful, this program needs to
expand its eligibility and be more transparent to students.
There are significant disadvantages to not
owning a laptop on campus. First, the number of
available desktops for students to use is limited
largely to libraries and residence halls — which
for some students may not be conducive work
environments. This limits the flexibility in work
hours. For example, a student that must go to the
library for computer use may not feel comfortable
going there late at night. Furthermore, not being
able to keep up with taking notes during a fast-
paced lecture is more difficult, if not impossible,
for a student without access to a laptop. Trying to
work on group projects could prove challenging
without access to a laptop, mandating the group
to convene in places with desktops or for an
individual to be forced to constantly look at a
laptop over someone else’s shoulder.
There are ways the University is attempting
to help students who need them but for a short
period of time. According to the Instructional
Support Services Media Center Loan at the
University, a student can borrow a laptop for
24 hours. If no one else is waiting for it, the
student can renew it for another 24 hours. It
is possible to repeatedly check out computers
to extend the loan or override the 24-hour
rule with correct paperwork showing that
a student needs it for a project or a class, but
there is no direct way to acquire a laptop for a
long period of time. At the Media Center Loan
in the Modern Languages Building, there are
six PCs and six MacBooks available in total for
loan. As of April 11, there were two MacBooks
and four PCs available. There is also a loan
center in Mason Hall, where there are seven
PCs available and 10 MacBooks available.
On April 11, all PCs and six Macbooks
were available.
While effective for short-term solutions,
this program is lacking for students who
can’t afford a laptop and need one. The
new pilot program the University wants to
implement in Fall 2015 would be an effective
way to solve this problem. Currently, Stanford
University has a program which students on
financial aid can receive compensation for
certain purchases in relation to technology
and computers. The University should follow
this model; it provides students the help they
need while also allowing for flexibility in the
computers they decide to purchase. In addition
to a program for students on financial aid, as
a second component, the University should
work toward a rental program that is cheap
and accessible to all students — regardless of
socioeconomic status.
The University should work toward more
transparency in these old and new programs,
by sending e-mails at the beginning of each
semester, for example, that remind students
about these programs and what they offer. And
when the University begins the new Fall 2015
laptop loan program, the University should
include information about it in financial
aid packages.
Laptops may not have been a necessity in
the past, but today, they are essential to being a
successful college student. In order to level the
playing field for all students, it is crucial that
computers are accessible to all and that there
are measures to ensure that students who need
financial assistance to purchase them receive it.
SIGMA DELTA TAU | VIEWPOINT
Michigan, it’s our time to Speak Up!
WILL ROYSTER | VIEWPOINT
Running for CSG president has certainly
been one of the most rewarding experiences
of my time at the University. This campaign
challenged me to go beyond my realm of lead-
ership and community. The process intro-
duced me to so many different individuals
and organizations, each with a unique voice
and cause. The dialogues we held helped me
understand what campus truly needs, and I
sincerely thank all of those who believed in
the vision that The Team, Matt Fidel and I
created together.
Alas, the margin of victory was five votes.
Cooper and Steven worked tirelessly during
their campaign and I truly congratulate them.
It was a privilege to converse on so many differ-
ent topics, which often challenged me to think
critically about our campus. I am confident that
their work ethic and vision will be a driving
force for the University. I am looking forward
to watching you gentlemen move big rocks.
In spite of losing the CSG election, in reflec-
tion, I couldn’t be happier with the journey
overall. The Team was built on values, integ-
rity and a vision. 4,036 people shared that
vision. We were able to mobilize communities
and inspire others. We had the opportunity
to learn from each other and building lasting
and meaningful relationships. I cherish each
moment of this campaign because the expe-
rience shared with each and every person
is invaluable.
Given the amount of support in our vision,
I still hold a desire and responsibility to help
create change on this campus. Looking onward
and upward, I plan to continue to promote
cross-campus collaboration by working close-
ly with many student organizations through
#StandByBlue. #StandByBlue has been a pow-
erful agent for highlighting student organiza-
tions and diversity on campus. In addition, I
plan to expand the Michigan Institute for the
Improvement of African American Represen-
tation program, which brought 46 underrep-
Onward and upward
resented communities in Kalamazoo
to the University for a three-day resi-
dential
experience.
Giving
that
opportunity to students has certainly
been my greatest accomplishment
and with the help of the other found-
ers, I look forward to extending that
opportunity to more students.
Losing by five votes has taught me
that every single voice on this cam-
pus matters. It has shown me that
each and every narrative and story
contributes to this great institu-
tion. As a result, I plan to continue
to share my voice through poetry
to relate and connect with students
across campus. Together, each of
our voices creates one unified voice,
which represents the greatest uni-
versity in the world. As the leaders
and the best, it is on us to listen to
each voice, speak out, take action
and together, create the campus that
we want to see.
Will Royster is an
Engineering and LSA junior.