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 — Friday, November 6, 2015
Claire Bryan, Regan Detwiler, Ben Keller, Payton Luokkala,
Aarica Marsh, Victoria Noble, Anna Polumbo-Levy,
Melissa Scholke, Michael Schramm,
Stephanie Trierweiler, Mary Kate Winn, Derek Wolfe
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
Still no justice
AUSTIN MCCOY | VIEWPOINT
I
was expecting the cat-calls.
The double-takes. The stares.
I was expecting the aggres-
sion. The con-
versations.
I
was dressed in
a bikini top on
Halloween.
A
bikini top made
to look like a
pair of boobs.
And let me tell
you,
on
first
glance, it really
looked convinc-
ing. I wore a
sign around my
neck saying in bold letters, “Free
the Nipple.” I didn’t include the
hashtag symbol, the main way this
2014
film-turned-equality-move-
ment is usually publicized these
days, but it was all the same.
I was both excited and terrified
to go out into the world. I would
not be blending in that weekend.
When I told my housemate Mack-
enzie about my costume, she was
just as excited as I was. She took it
an ingenious step further, creating
a costume of a boob (composed of
nude clothing and a paper-mâchéd
nipple), bound by various shackles,
with her own “Free the Nip” sign.
We were glad to have each other
for what we viewed as a fun way
to spread awareness, as well as our
own little social experiment.
To complete our costumes, we
both had second signs, mine on
my back, reading “Still Not Asking
For It,” in hopes of also spreading
the message that no matter what a
woman is wearing, she is still not
“asking for it” (“it” being any form
of sexual contact or aggression),
unless she is literally asking for
it. Leaving all shame at the door,
we walked with some friends to
Necto. It was Pride Friday, which
made us feel at least a little safer;
there wouldn’t be as many creepy
guys, right? Maybe I was naïve.
There were some things I knew to
expect but others I was entirely
unprepared for.
When I arrived at Necto, I was
amazed at how quickly the compli-
ments rained down. People from
all ranges of the sexuality and/or
drunkenness spectrum told me they
loved the costume. However, some
of the compliments quickly turned
to touching or groping, one man
even partially pulling my top off.
Apparently they didn’t understand
the whole “Still Not Asking For It”
thing. Yet, had I known at that point
what the next night would bring, I
wouldn’t have thought that Necto
was so bad.
Saturday night, Mackenzie and
I went to Rick’s American “Café”
(hey, we wanted a large subject pop-
ulation for our social experiment).
With vastly more heterosexual men
in the room, compliments changed
from “I love your costume!” to “I
agree for a totally different rea-
son!” followed by their awkward
laughter. I lost count of the times
that guys said some version of
“Well if you want to free the nipple,
then show me your real ones!” in
tones ranging from light-hearted
to indignant and demanding. (To
which I responded, “No dude, that’s
not the point,” or in one instance,
Mackenzie and I responded by
simply singing the then-playing
song “I Don’t Fuck With You” over
his protests.)
I was not expecting the level of
direct physical and verbal aggres-
sion. Maybe I’m naïve. Or maybe
some people really need to figure out
basic human respect. But the thing
that threw me off the most that
night wasn’t this overt aggression.
It was a question I never expected to
hear: “What does that even mean?”
Sometimes, especially around the
people I surround myself with, it’s
easy to forget that some people still
don’t understand that being a femi-
nist isn’t something to be ashamed
of. I figured that everyone kept up on
this stuff — I mean, Miley Cyrus and
Matt McGorry talk about it, right?
But here I was at Rick’s, explaining
to people what “Free the Nipple”
even meant.
Here’s what it means: Women’s
bodies,
especially
their
breasts
and nipples, are constantly sexual-
ized in our society. When we see a
man’s nipples, it’s seen as normal or
OK. But as soon as we see women’s
nipples, it’s immediately perceived
as sexual. Even mothers trying to
breastfeed in public must go to great
lengths to ensure they are properly
covered. The sexualization of wom-
en’s bodies is so deeply rooted in our
society that most of us don’t even
think about it.
“Of course women shouldn’t
show their nipples,” people (like my
parents) say. But why should men’s
nipples be OK and not women’s? The
fact that they are so taboo just goes
to show that they are not viewed as
just another body part, but some-
thing sexual. That women’s bodies
aren’t just bodies, they are some-
thing sexual. I mean, I agree that
women are freakin’ beautiful cre-
ations. But we’re also so, so much
more. Free the Nipple isn’t about
walking around naked. It’s about
nudity not meaning “asking for it.”
It’s about wanting to be seen as peo-
ple, instead of sexual objects. And
that’s it
— Rachael Lacey can be reached
at rachaelk@umich.edu.
Almost one year ago, Ann Arbor
police shot and killed 40-year-old
Aura Rosser in her home. In the final
hour of the night on Nov. 9, 2014,
Ann Arbor police officers Mark
Raab and David Ried responded to
a call for assistance from Rosser’s
partner, 54-year-old Victor Ste-
phens, who claimed she attacked
him with a knife. Within five to 10
seconds of entering their home,
Raab discharged his taser and Ried
discharged his firearm, striking and
killing Rosser. They claimed she
charged them with a kitchen knife.
The Ann Arbor to Ferguson
movement was born in the city’s
streets on Nov. 25, 2014, the night
after St. Louis County Prosecutor
Robert
McCulloch
announced
Ferguson, Mo., police officer Darren
Wilson would not face charges for
shooting and killing 18-year-old
Michael Brown. Hundreds of people
from Washtenaw County and the
University gathered on the Diag
in solidarity with people fighting
against oppression in Ferguson,
Palestine and Mexico.
Most importantly, we gathered
and
marched
for
Aura
and
her family.
While
we
were
organizing,
Michigan State Police investigated
Ried’s use of lethal force. On Jan.
30, Washtenaw County Prosecutor
Brian Mackie declared that Ried
“acted in lawful self-defense.” Ann
Arbor Mayor Christopher Taylor
released a statement on his Facebook
page
the
evening
of
Mackie’s
announcement. He continued the
city’s policy of evasion in response
to the killing. He also denied that
racism played a factor. Taylor called
Rosser’s death a “tragedy of mental
illness and drug abuse unabated.”
Then he claimed that the killing was
“not the tragedy of racism,” which
was “loathsome and unacceptable to
everything Ann Arbor and the Ann
Arbor police stands for.”
Ironically, as Taylor denied that
race played a factor in Rosser’s
death, his actions only illustrated
how much the city and county
government’s response to her death
resembled that of the authorities in
St. Louis, Cleveland and New York
City, all of which exonerated police
officers for killing Black Americans
and then downplayed the fact that
police officers kill Black Americans
at a disproportionate rate.
It has been one year since Aura
Rosser’s death. I wish I had more
positive news to report. Unfortu-
nately, I do not. The city has not
apologized for Rosser’s death. The
city did not take any responsibility
for her death. Ried was not fired.
Rosser’s family is still waiting
for justice.
Last December, the city of
Ann Arbor announced it would
invest $174,000 in body cam-
eras and upgrades to in-car vid-
eos. Then-Police Chief John Seto
also announced he was reviewing
diversity training programs for
officers. The AAPD has neither
publicly acknowledged whether or
not these trainings were instituted
nor whether the trainings would
be mandatory for all officers. The
cost for body cameras comprises
less than 1 percent of the city’s pro-
posed $25 million police budget for
2016. And while body cameras are a
step in a positive direction, no one
should forget that police cameras
caught police officers shooting and
killing Samuel DeBose in Cincin-
nati, Ohio, Ricardo Diaz-Zeferino
in Gardena, Calif., and in Sandra
Bland’s arrest in Texas.
The City of Ann Arbor has failed
to take any measures that could
further illuminate how it can prevent
future police shootings of Black
Americans. The city has dragged
its feet considering whether or not
it would establish a civilian review
board to oversee law enforcement.
We protested. We organized. We
know city leaders were aware of our
presence. They heard us protest, but
they failed to listen.
The city’s unwillingness to apolo-
gize to the Rosser family and the slow
pace of policy change provokes one to
ask: Does Aura Rosser’s life matter?
Did her life matter to the mayor who
refused to allow a community activ-
ist to use her three minute speaking
time at a city council meeting for a
moment of silence? Did it matter to
the prosecutor who declared that
her killing was justified? Does it mat-
ter to the local government who has
moved too slowly to reform the city’s
police practices?
I also wonder if Rosser’s life
mattered to the University. Ried
shot Rosser on Seto’s watch, the
same person who the University
recently hired as director of housing
security.
Meanwhile,
Rosser’s
family waits for justice.
Some may ask what justice would
look like after a police officer shoots
and kills a citizen. Ultimately, if
the City of Ann Arbor wants to
lead on the issue, it must do so by
reorienting its justice systems away
from punishment to restorative
measures. This would include the
city formally apologizing to Rosser’s
family for her death, paying for
Rosser’s funeral costs to relieve the
family of undue burden and firing
Ried. Doing all, or a combination of
any of these tasks, surely would not
resurrect Rosser from her grave. But
performing these acts of contrition
could have gone a long way toward
healing the family and rebuilding
trust between the police and the
Ann Arbor community, especially
the city’s Black residents.
The absence of restorative justice
is why we have marched, blocked
intersections, and shut down city
streets and City Council meetings.
One does not perform these acts if
authorities listen and take citizens’
demands seriously. One does not
engage in civil disobedience if the
system is just. We will continue to
act to keep the spirits of Rosser and
other Black women who have died at
the hands of police and armed citi-
zens in Southeast Michigan, such
as 7-year-old Aiyana Stanley Jones
and 19-year-old Renisha McBride.
We will not stop until Black wom-
en’s lives matter to the University,
Washtenaw County and the state of
Michigan. Authorities should rise to
the challenge of #BlackLivesMatter.
This nation is always looking for
inspiring leadership. But if local
leaders continue to fail to act with
urgency, then we will push them.
The longer Rosser’s family has to
wait for justice, the longer we wait
for changes to the local justice sys-
tem, the more we will demand. That
is how protest movements work.
Austin McCoy is a Rack-
ham student and an organizer
with Ann Arbor to Ferguson.
RACHAEL
LACEY
Pretending to “Free the Nipple”
FROM THE DAILY
Michigan must ban the box
Disclosure of criminal history shouldn’t deter employers
O
n Nov. 2, President Barack Obama announced a new executive
order to “ban the box,” a check-off on federal job applications
that requires job seekers to disclose their criminal history.
Without having to make a stigmatizing confession that often
causes employers to eliminate applicants before even considering
qualifications, former prisoners are able to reenter society with greater
ease. Unfortunately, there’s a direct statistical link between “the box”
and the under-employment of former convicts, which encourages
recidivism. While background checks would still happen, employers
would conduct them late enough in the hiring process that they
would not be preemptively disqualifying applicants. Eliminating this
disclosure requirement exemplifies good policy on behalf of the Obama
administration — the kind that produces positive change.
All of the 2016 Democratic presidential
candidates have endorsed banning the box,
and at least one of the Republican candidates
supports the initiative. New Jersey Gov.
Chris Christie (R) signed a “ban the box”
bill into law in 2014. A recent article in the
National Law Review reported that 19 other
states and more than 100 cities have passed
similar legislation.
The National Employment Law Project
estimates that 70 million Americans have
a criminal record — almost one-third of all
working-age adults. The United States, which
represents 5 percent of the global population,
possesses one-quarter of the world’s prison
population. More than 600,000 inmates
are released from prison every year, and
according to the Department of Justice,
between 60 and 75 percent of them will still
be unemployed one year later.
The box Obama proposes to ban — as some
of the largest employers in the United States,
including Wal-Mart and Target, have already
done — is just one thread in the fabric of
systemic racism within the U.S. judicial system.
In 2003, an experiment by Devah Pager,
a
sociology
professor
at
Northwestern
University, showed how that works. In her
study, two-person teams of Black and white
men from Milwaukee applied for entry-
level jobs with 350 employers. Each pair had
equivalent resumes and qualifications, the
salient difference between them being that
one of them had a criminal record. Pager’s
finding, which should surprise no one, was
that those with criminal records were half
as likely to be asked back for an interview as
those without.
The
data
from
Pager’s
experiment
produced shocking results about race. Of
those with no criminal history, employers
asked 34 percent of white applicants back for
another interview, but only asked 14 percent of
Black applicants — an even lower percentage
than the 17 percent of white applicants asked
back despite admitting to a criminal record.
Of Black applicants who admitted having a
criminal record, only 5 percent were called
back for another interview.
On top of the persistent racism that Blacks
face in applying for jobs, flaws in the criminal
justice system make it more likely for Blacks
to be incarcerated and have to check the
box in the first place. According to figures
compiled by the NAACP, African Americans
are six times more likely to be incarcerated
than whites. Five times as many whites
as African Americans are drug users, but
African Americans are sentenced to jail for
drug offenses at a rate 10 times that of whites.
African Americans and Hispanics, who make
up only one quarter of the total population,
represented 58 percent of the U.S. prison
population as of 2008.
The reasons for such statistics are manifold
and well known, a product of discriminatory
practices such as mandatory sentencing,
“three strikes” policies and the legal disparity
between crack and powder cocaine.
The good news is that the American system
of mass incarceration is no longer a partisan
issue. Three of the leading conservatives in
the U.S. Senate — Chuck Grassley (R–Iowa),
Mike Lee (R–Utah) and Rand Paul (R–Ky.)
— support sentencing reform that would, at
least, begin to reduce the prison population.
Without limiting the ability of employers
to hire the best candidates, the federal
government has the duty under the law to
prevent discrimination in hiring practices.
The
Equal
Employment
Opportunity
Commission’s Guidance on the Consideration
of
Arrest
or
Conviction
Records
in
Employment
Decisions
states
that
“an
employer’s use of an individual’s criminal
history in making employment decisions may
… violate the prohibition against employment
discrimination under Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964.”
In other words, directly disregarding an
application based on criminal history can
bring about legal action by the EEOC.
State governments, including Michigan’s,
must accept the same responsibility. Banning
the box is only a start, but it’s an important step
— not only for those who lose out when they
have to check the box, but also for those who
are discouraged from even applying for a job
because they know that their criminal record
will prevent them from being considered.
As citizens, we share that responsibility
with our elected representatives, and as
University students, we should, at the very
least, urge the adoption of “ban the box”
legislation for both public and private
employers statewide. Detroit, Kalamazoo,
Muskegon County and Saginaw County
have already adopted “ban the box” policies.
The state legislature should lose no time in
following suit.
E-mail GabriElla at GabsmEy@umich.Edu
GABRIELLA MEYER