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 — Thursday, December 3, 2015
Non-traditional needs
The label of non-labels
T
he diversity, equity and
inclusion effort initiated by
the University is centered
around the goal
to
create
an
environment
where
each
member of the
community
can
thrive
intellectually,
personally
and
professionally.
From
Nov.
4
to Nov. 13, the
University hosted
the
Diversity
Summit, a series of panels, open
forums and lectures that exposed
institutional policies and cultural
stigmas hindering the University’s
mission to achieve this desired
environment.
Though
people
representing an array of racial,
religious, academic, economic and
physical-ability
identities
shared
their
experiences,
one
small
community at the University was not
accounted for in the conversation:
non-traditional students.
According to a 2002 study by
the National Center for Education
Statistics, non-traditional students
possess at least one of the following
seven characteristics:
1. Delays enrollment (does not
enter postsecondary education in
the same calendar year that he or
she finished high school)
2. Attends part time for at least
part of the academic year
3. Works full time (35 hours or
more per week) while enrolled
4.
Is
considered
financially
independent
for
purposes
of
determining
eligibility
for
financial aid
5. Has dependents other than
a spouse (usually children, but
sometimes others)
6. Is a single parent (either not
married or married but separated
and has dependents)
7. Does not have a high school
diploma (completed high school
with a GED or other high school
completion certificate or did not
finish high school)
There’s
a
continuum
from
minimally non-traditional to highly
non-traditional,
depending
on
how many of the characteristics a
student possesses.
Educational
attainment
is
an
element of diversity.
To gain a glimpse
of the experiences
of
non-traditional
students
and
inquire
about
inclusive
efforts
for that population
on campus, I spoke with Michael
Seifert
and
Justin
Villanueva.
Seifert, 34 years old, is a senior
majoring
in
political
science.
Villanueva, 35 years old, is majoring
in general studies. Both men are non-
traditional undergraduate students
at the University. Both had a love for
learning, but didn’t quite realize this
interest until later in life.
Trials to traditions
Though both men have achieved
their goal of enrolling at the
University, attending school has
not come without its challenges.
Transportation, generational gaps
between students, professors and
graduate student instructors, and
schedule conflicts between work and
class are a few of the trials Seifert and
Villanueva have had to face.
Seifert
feels
he
could
have
received more institutional support
in learning how to navigate the
University. He taught himself how
to maneuver through campus and
Ann Arbor on his own. Though
the financial aid office was helpful
in
providing
Seifert
financial
assistance, he didn’t know where he
could find other specific resources
that would cater to non-traditional or
transfer students.
“I don’t feel there is a structured
support system, because I don’t know
where to go,” Seifert said.
He suggested that a monthly
or semesterly meeting for non-
traditional students would help.
“I don’t even know who non-
traditional students are. It would
be nice to have a non-traditional
student space or center. I don’t
want to be outcast as a second-class
student.”
Villanueva feels he has had
a generous amount of support
throughout his process.
“The University has been great
about grant money,” he said. “I feel
very supported from the faculty.
Professors will alter their office
hours sometimes to meet with
me in the evening
to
accommodate
me and my work
schedule.”
However,
he
suggested that the
University
offer
more
evening
classes
and
schedule
family-
oriented events to demonstrate that
the campus is welcoming to various
student lifestyles.
“I would really love it if there
were a group or organization that
had an event where students like
myself, with families, could bring
our partners and kids to U of M. I
would love if the University were
to create more avenues for that,”
Villanueva said.
Villanueva understands why the
University may not be focusing its
efforts on non-traditional students:
“I can see (the University) is not
paying attention to people like
me because there are not many
students like me … I feel like they
are not trying to attract students
like myself. (But) there are so
many talented people that are
in my situation that would love
to come to U of M. There are an
overwhelming amount of students
who fit my demographic who are
going to college, but they are not
going to U of M. They are going
to the Phoenixes,
the Easterns, the
Oaklands
and
the
Walshes
of
the world.”
The
University
must
consider
increasing
efforts
toward places for
non-traditional
students. An increasing amount of
young people are attending two-
year
institutions
and
working
prior to pursuing enrollment in a
four-year university. The National
Center
for
Education
Statistic
report that 38 percent of the 17.6
million undergraduates enrolled in
higher education are over the age of
25, and 25 percent are over the age
of 30. The proportion of all students
over age 25 is projected to increase
by 23 percent by 2019.
Tangible
solutions
to
increasing inclusivity
Michigan-Pursuing Our Dreams,
a program under the Office of
Academic Multicultural Initiatives,
offers the opportunity to create
connections
among
transfer
and
non-traditional
students.
Currently, Christine Wylie is the
coordinator for M-POD. The state,
the University and Washtenaw
Community College collectively
fund the program.
Though
the
marketing
for
M-POD caters to students coming
from WCC, the program aims to
attract diversity to the University
from various outlets by supporting
academically
and
economically
disadvantaged
students.
This
includes students from non-college
preparatory high schools, people
who have been in the workforce
prior to attending postsecondary
education, students with families,
first-generation
students
and
students who come from low-
income
backgrounds.
These
students, though non-traditional,
have the academic skills to attend
the
University,
and
M-POD
provides the support to ensure
retention and graduation for their
unique situations.
M-POD
offers
one-on-one
counseling
to
assist
in
the
admissions
process such as navigating the
Common Application, bi-monthly
meetings about topics like financial
aid, student organizations and
study
abroad
options, and events
that
encourage
networking among
current and former
transfer
students.
Wylie
hopes
transfer
students
can
utilize
all
that M-POD and
OAMI offer to make the transition
process smoother.
“When
students
feel
more
comfortable about a university,
they are more likely to apply and
maximize their experience,” Wylie
said. “We want them to know
that OAMI is their home away
from home.”
In the context of the University’s
diversity,
equity
and
inclusion
efforts, Wylie noted, “There has
been some consideration for non-
traditional transfer students, but
there is much, much more that we
can do. Even having a dedicated
space. (I believe) they are working
on it in LSA. We (OAMI) have the
space here, and those coming from
WCC know about it and like it.”
The University is the home
away
from
home
for
many
students, and it’s important that
the administration is inclusive
of the various communities that
exist on campus. Existing means
of institutional support for non-
traditional
students
should
be
promoted
more
frequently
and intentionally.
Non-traditional
students,
like Seifert and Villanueva, have
important contributions to make to
the University. Creating a gathering
space, promoting the accessibility
of
institutional
support
and
encouraging a culture that accepts
and is amenable to differences are
steps the University can take to better
include non-traditional students in
our community. Having a support
system is important for all students,
especially non-traditional ones.
“Everything doesn’t happen how
you expect it. If you are persistent
and don’t give up, you can still
achieve success no matter what age.
I did it. I’m 34 and I will graduate
in December. Don’t let anybody
discourage you,” Seifert said.
Similarly, Villanueva concluded
our interview by stating, “The one
thing the University should know
about me is that I am willing to
work just as hard as everyone else.
I just really need the opportunity …
For other non-traditional students:
Keep going. Don’t ever stop. Don’t
ever give up.”
Read more online at
michigandaily.com
— Alexis Farmer can be reached
at akfarmer@umich.edu.
T
he first time I went on a date with a
girl was during the summer of 2014.
I prefaced our date with something
like, “Soo, I’ve only been
into guys for literally my
entire life, but recently I’ve
been feeling like I need to
‘explore my sexuality’ or
whatever — please help a
girl out.”
She agreed to meet me
later that week. We found
each other in the Arb,
awkward bottles of bright
red “Smartwater” in hand,
and sat down to get to
know each other. For me, it
immediately didn’t feel right. No matter how
hard I tried, I couldn’t imagine her as anything
more than a friend. After she nervously smoked
half a pack of cigarettes in front of me and
asked where she could buy $500 worth of weed,
I decided it just wasn’t going to work. I went
home feeling slightly uncomfortable, and we
never talked again. I thought, “Yep, I guess I’m
straight,” and moved on with my life, content
that I had at least tried.
I spent the next year never
thinking twice about that day.
But over time, it swam back
into my consciousness, and
that tiny doubt — that tiny
desire — was all that I could
think about. I spoke to some
of my friends about it, letting
them in on my little secret.
That I was even considering
this other side of me had to
mean something, right? But I was also confused,
because don’t people just know these things?
Every story I’d heard from non-straight
friends was that they had “always known,” or
at least had known way before the summer
they turned 20. I felt like a fraud, because I
hadn’t spent my entire life struggling with self-
acceptance, or hiding my true self for years,
afraid to tell anyone. I couldn’t understand how
something like this could just suddenly happen
to me. But I didn’t know who to talk to. The only
bisexual women I knew were the brave ones at
the Ann Arbor Poetry Slam who wrote poems
about feeling invisible.
I figured that this was probably the answer:
I was bisexual, and for some god-knows-why
reason, I was just now figuring it out.
The second time I went on a date with a
girl was last month. I gave her the same run-
down, and she graciously decided to take the
“straight girl” out. We met at a coffee shop, and
then made our way to \aut\ Bar — a gay bar in
Kerrytown. It was fun. We bonded over being
from California. I showed off my incredible
dance moves. It was the first time I kissed a
girl who wasn’t my drunk best friend. It felt
natural. But it didn’t feel like this awesome,
life-changing experience. It didn’t feel as if all
my questions had been answered. There was no
“Aha! This is what I’ve been missing!” moment.
Mostly I just felt more confused.
Being a writer, the only way for me to sort
through my feelings was, naturally, to put
them into a poem. I performed in the poetry
slam this past weekend, and exclaimed to
a room full of strangers that I had finally
figured it out: I was bisexual! But as the word
lurched from my mouth, it got tangled in my
teeth. It felt forced — like a lie. It didn’t feel
right. It didn’t feel like me.
The next day, almost as if it were coming to
me in a dream, a single word bubbled to the
surface of my mind: fluid. I knew I had heard
of people identifying as “sexually fluid” (and by
“people” I mean Miley Cyrus), but I had never
actually known what it meant. After some help
from Google and an author named Lisa M.
Diamond, it was as if all of my questions were
finally, finally answered.
Diamond, who wrote a book called “Sexual
Fluidity: Understanding Women’s Love and
Desire,” writes in the first chapter: “Sexual
fluidity, quite simply, means situation-
dependent flexibility in women’s sexual
responsiveness. This flexibility makes it
possible for some women to experience
desires for either men or women under
certain
circumstances,
regardless of their overall
sexual orientation … women
of
all
orientations
may
experience variation in their
erotic and affectional feelings
as they encounter different
situations, relationships, and
life stages.”
I read these sentences
again. And again. A smile
stretched across my face. These were the
words I had been looking for for more than a
year. These were the only words that finally
made sense. The book goes on to talk about
women who had been married to men for 15
years, then suddenly dated women, and then
went back to dating men.
It wasn’t a new story, after all. I wasn’t alone.
Diamond states that “in general, the degree
of fluidity in women appears substantially
greater than in men,” but also, “any
individual should be capable of experiencing
desires that run counter to his or her overall
sexual orientation.”
So guys out there, feel free to join the
club, too.
I only read Diamond’s words for the first
time earlier this week. I’ve had barely any
time to process it, but to me it doesn’t matter,
because as soon as I read these words I knew,
without looking back, I had found my “Aha!
This is what I’ve been missing!” moment. Now,
instead of beating myself up about not knowing
how to label my sexuality, I’m reveling in the
label of non-labels: fluid.
I am fluid as fuck. And god, that feels right
to say.
— Rachael Lacey can be reached
at rachaelk@umich.edu.
ALEXIS
FARMER
RACHAEL
LACEY
Less loaded language
“N
o more baby parts.”
This comment, attributed by
a senior law enforcement official
to Robert L. Dear Jr. — the
rage-filled man suspected
to have killed three people
and injured nine others
while opening fire on a
Planned Parenthood clinic
in Colorado Springs last
Friday — doesn’t sound all
that foreign to me. In fact,
the line could very well be
narration from the surrep-
titious Planned Parenthood
“sting” videos released this
past July by the inaptly
named Center for Medical
Progress, an anti-abortion
group that claimed the footage contained evi-
dence proving Planned Parenthood’s selling of
“baby parts” for profit.
I’ve
also
heard
the
phrase “baby parts” on the
presidential campaign trail
by some of the nation’s most
prominent
politicians
(and
political
wannabes).
Last
July, Ted Cruz appealed to
Christian
conservatives
by
demanding
that
Congress
launch an investigation into
Planned Parenthood’s “sale
and transfer of aborted baby
parts.” And just a few months ago, at the end of
September, Carly Fiorina condemned Planned
Parenthood because she believes they “harvest
(fetuses’) brains and other body parts.”
Even after Planned Parenthood conclusively
discredited these claims, she asserted that
“Planned Parenthood will not and cannot deny
this because it is happening. It is happening in
this nation.”
For me, the fact that the words of a mad-
man on a shooting rampage eerily echo lan-
guage used by anti-abortion politicians on
a national stage is too worrisome to ignore,
even if authorities have yet to determine the
gunman’s exact motives.
I’ll admit that abortion is a highly sensitive
topic. However, opponents often discuss it
in extreme rhetoric that advances beyond
blind emotion, evoking false imagery that
depicts the procedure as utterly horrific
and murderous. Terms like “baby parts”
and “harvesting” inextricably tie the worst
kind of violence imaginable to the medical
procedure, making abortion dangerously
taboo. Much of the dialogue surrounding the
topic is not only inaccurate,
but also unfair to the women
who will eventually have
an abortion in her lifetime,
and
infuses
the
issue
with an unnecessary level
of depravity.
To be clear, as provocative
and disturbing as some of the
language used by anti-abor-
tion advocates is, none of it has
called for bloodshed. However,
the historical prevalence of violent, anti-abor-
tion actions is undeniable. Attacks on abortion
providers are far from a new phenomenon. The
Opponents often
discuss abortion in
extreme rhetoric that
advances beyond
blind emotion.
I am fluid as
fuck. And god,
that feels right
to say.
It’s important that
the administration
is inclusive of the
various communities
that exist on campus.
ANNE
KATZ
Claire Bryan, Regan Detwiler, Jeremy Kaplan, Ben Keller, Payton Luokkala, Aarica
Marsh, Anna Polumbo-Levy, Jason Rowland, Lauren Schandevel, Melissa Scholke,
Rebecca Tarnopol, Ashley Tjhung, Stephanie Trierweiler, Mary Kate Winn, Derek Wolfe
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
fatal shooting at Planned Parenthood
this past Friday was merely the lat-
est event in a long history of bloody
attacks on doctors and clinics that
offer abortion services.
According to The New York Times,
“At least 11 people have been killed
in attacks on abortion clinics in the
United States since 1993, including
the Colorado shootings.” Across the
nation, opponents of abortion have
vandalized, burned and bombed the
clinics and offices where abortion
doctors work; the doctors them-
selves, their staff members, patients
and guests have been threatened,
intimidated and murdered.
Last
Friday’s
shootings
were
clearly an act of domestic terrorism
— even Mike Huckabee agrees with
me on that. However, we must rec-
ognize that the violent ideology that
was likely at the root of the attack is
not distant, but wholly homegrown.
In order to help prevent future acts
of violence against abortion pro-
viders and their patients, the abor-
tion paradigm must shift away from
misrepresentations of violence and
murder. We’ve got to work together
to normalize the dialogue surround-
ing abortion and discuss the topic
with far less loaded, provocative and
frankly inaccurate terms than “har-
vesting” and “baby parts.”
The reality is that a large number
of women will have an abortion in
their lifetimes, and the procedure
itself is not only common, but also
safe and legitimate. Though Friday’s
shooting (and all the violent attacks
before it) certainly reflects our
society’s
unsatisfactory
state
of
mental health and paltry gun laws,
it’s also an undeniable reverberation
of the violent and overheated terms
in which some opponents discuss
the procedure. Widening the debate
around abortion to make room for
language that’s less loaded (and more
accurate) will begin to neutralize
the
topic
and
hopefully
help
prevent more murders of innocent
people. Preventing more events
like last Friday’s is something we
can all agree upon, whether you’re
pro-choice or not.
— Anne Katz can be reached
at amkatz@umich.edu.
“I don’t want
to be outcast as
a second-class
student.”