Opinion

SHOHAM GEVA
EDITOR IN CHIEF

CLAIRE BRYAN

AND REGAN DETWILER
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS

LAURA SCHINAGLE
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
4 — Tuesday, April 5, 2016

“S

top Islam”

“Trump 2016”
“Build the Wall”

These
were

the
words

chalked
onto

the
middle
of

the
Diag
last

Thursday, March
31.
Muslim

students
then

spent
hours

cleaning
the

mess
because

of the lack of
response
from

the University of
Michigan’s Division of Public Safety
and Security and the University’s
administration.

I am sorry to say I am not

surprised.

The fact that DPSS and the

University failed to take immediate
action to clean the words from
the Diag, forcing Muslim students
to clean up the words of hatred
directed at them, is despicable. But
it’s a good example of how things
always go for Muslims and minority
students on this campus. Though
President Schlissel and spokesman
Rick Fitzgerald released statements,
the University does not put forth
real effort to mend its relationships
with different minority groups on
campus, and it is the members of
the groups themselves that have
to create their own safe spaces.
Islamophobia has been prevalent on
campus throughout the years and
statements without regular action is
not enough.

This is not an isolated situation

in terms of how the University
treats Islamophobia or even how
Islamophobia is treated in general.
Last year when UMix — a University
program that provides students with
a space to enjoy alcohol-free Friday
nights — planned a screening of
“American Sniper,” several minority
student
groups
and
individuals

petitioned to not have the movie
screened. The UMix organizers

accepted this change at first, but
after pressure from the media and
others who called the incident an
infringement of freedom of speech,
they decided to play the movie
anyway. During that week, Muslim
students
were
blamed
for
the

incident from all sides, and instead
of the University administration
standing up for Muslim students,
Fitzgerald stood by the decision to
keep the movie running in UMix.

Muslim and Middle Eastern and

North African students had to create
their own safe spaces during this
time and had no public support from
the University. They were their own
spokespersons, their own safety net,
their own validation.

I bring this up because since

that time, not much has changed.
Fitzgerald’s statement on Thursday
felt as if the University was enforcing
the rhetoric of Muslims being against
freedom yet again:

“Attacks directed toward any

member
or
group
within
the

University of Michigan community,
based on a belief or characteristic,
are inconsistent with our values of
respect, civility and equality,” the
statement read. “We all understand
that where speech is free it will
sometimes wound. But our message
is this: We are fully committed to
fostering an environment that is
welcoming and inclusive of everyone.
Tonight we are reminded there is
much work yet to be done.”

I fail to see any substantial work on

the part of the University to combat
Islamophobia or listen to minority
students on campus. The very nature
of Fitzgerald’s statement implies
that Muslim students are simply
wounded by freedom of speech and
to imply that hateful speech should
be expected, is a remark that stems
from the same ideas that Muslims
face because of Islamophobia.

The students who washed the

Diag kept the chalk with the words
“Trump 2016” in respect of freedom
of speech demonstrating how the
students’ intentions were not to

censor speech, but to work against
hate speech. To say that there is
work to be done without making
substantial effort is hollow. Muslim
and minority students are not
treated as students deserving of the
University’s concern.

Everything
adds
up.
Jim

Harbaugh was revered for a tweet
about watching “American Sniper,”
while Muslim students were seen
as attackers of freedom of speech.
A
member
of
Central
Student

Government yelled in my face when
the only indication of my identity was
my headscarf. No one called it a bias
incident. A University medical school
professor posted an Islamophobic
comment on one of my articles. I
am expected to be used to this and
to accept it because otherwise I am
just another Muslim that cried hate
speech being discarded as being
anti-freedom of speech. Despite the
fact that freedom of speech exists in
America does not mean that hateful
speech should be tolerated in such
a way that the victim of hatred
gets treated like the perpetrator.
Hateful speech is never as painful as
watching people react as if there is
nothing wrong with it.

The path to progress is not

through tolerating hateful speech, it
is in recognizing it, just as it was in
the past with anti-Semitic speech or
blackface or any other forms of hate
written by few but accepted by the
masses.

Every day, I get closer and closer

to believing I will never truly be
seen as belonging to this University,
or in America for that matter — my
University of Michigan acceptance
e-mail and the fact that I was born
and raised in the state of Michigan
still does not feel like enough.

I should not expect hateful speech.
I should not accept hateful speech.
I should not be expected to accept

hateful speech.

No one should.

— Rabab Jafri can be reached

at rfjafri@umich.edu.

Expected to accept hate

RABAB
JAFRI

T

his
Sexual
Assault

Awareness Month, I stand
with survivors who are

too often silenced by a culture that
refuses to believe them.

I advocate for survivors who

never told anyone, not even their best
friend, their mom, their partner.

I believe survivors who stay silent

because they feel what happened to
them “doesn’t count.”

I
support
survivors
who

experienced
coercion
or

manipulation and don’t think what
happened to them “counts” as sexual
assault.

I am here for the survivors who

don’t tell anyone because they don’t
want to hurt the perpetrator of their
sexual assault, who may be a friend.

I fight for every single survivor

because I refuse to accept that sexual
assault impacts thousands of students
on this campus — many of whom face
the effects of their experience alone
— yet only a handful ever see justice.

Silence is a tool of oppression. Our

call to action is not to blame those
who are silent; it is to identify and to
change the culture and the systems
that silence people. Survivors stay
silent for many reasons, and these
reasons often relate to their identities.
Lesbian, gay, transgender, queer or
gender non-conforming folks may
stay silent for fear of being outed. Men
may fear being asked, “Why didn’t
you fight back?” Many people believe
that sex workers cannot be sexually
assaulted because their services are
being paid for. Trans women of color
face overwhelming violence and the
confluence of risk factors that make
it incredibly difficult to speak up and
find help. Religiously conservative
groups may feel silenced due to the
stigmatization of sexuality. Women
are treated as if they are responsible
— questioned about what they were
wearing, what they were drinking
or what they’ve done in the past.
Undocumented
immigrants
may

experience human trafficking or
fear sharing their story due to fear of
deportation.

When the odds are stacked against

anyone so unfairly, it is no wonder
they stay silent.

According to the 2015 Campus

Climate
Survey
on
Sexual

Misconduct, 11.4 percent of all
students,
undergraduate
and

graduate,
experienced
sexual

assault in the year preceding the
survey.
More
than
22
percent

of
undergraduate
females
were

assaulted in a year.

Shockingly, more than half of

those survivors reported telling no
one about what happened to them.
That means in the year preceding
the survey, about 2,600 survivors
never talked to anyone at the Sexual
Assault Prevention and Awareness
Center, at the University of Michigan
or in law enforcement. They never
even told their story to their best
friend.

While I recognize that these

numbers are not necessarily accurate
due to survey limitations, and raw
numbers are always inadequate
to measure the full costs of sexual
assault, that number is simply too
high to accept. Any number of
students who are violated so deeply
is completely unacceptable. Further,
those rates only measure sexual
assault and not the other forms of
sexualized violence that impact
college students like intimate partner
violence and stalking.

On campus, there are many places

for survivors to go — SAPAC is an
excellent confidential resource for
all survivors. The primary place
to seek non-confidential help from
the administration is the Office for
Institutional Equity, which is meant
to address Title IX violations. Title IX
prevents sex-based discrimination
in education, and since sexual
harassment
and
sexual
assault

inhibit a student’s ability to learn in
an equitable environment, it is the
University’s legal responsibility to
address sexual violence on campus.

In
January,
the
University

released its Fiscal Year 2015 report
on Office for Institutional Equity
investigations under the Student
Sexual Misconduct Policy. Despite
the fact that nearly 5,000 students
experience sexual assault in a year
alone, just 97 incidents were reported
to the University.

The subsequent 25 investigations

found
seven
perpetrators

“responsible.” You read that right —
last year, the University only found
seven
perpetrators
responsible

for
sexual
assault.
With
the

preponderance of sexual assault
on campus, it is unbelievable to me

that only seven perpetrators will see
some form of academic discipline
for creating an intolerable campus
environment. It speaks to both a
campus culture that discourages
survivors from coming forward
and to the failure of the sexual
misconduct policy to adequately
address the incidents that are
reported. Our University’s system
fails survivors, and our culture fails
survivors when it silences them.

Action is whatever you want

it to be — there is no right way to
feel, no right way to act, no right
way to share. But in the spirit of
transforming silence to action,
here are a few ideas. Request an
educational workshop from our
Peer
Educators
or
Bystander

Intervention
and
Community

Engagement
programs.
Engage

with survivors in your community
by hosting a confidential survivor
speakout. Attend a SAPAC event
or collaborate to host one in your
community. Contact your elected
representatives in the Michigan
legislature and in Congress to
ask about what they are doing to
end sexual assault on campuses.
Contact the University’s Board
of Regents to tell them that you
demand action from our campus
administration on sexual assault in
our community. Read the Student
Sexual Misconduct Policy and
educate yourself on the changes
that will go into effect on July 1. Go
through ally training or volunteer
training
with
SAPAC.
Most

important of all, start conversations
in your community. Bring up the
subject with your friends. Support
survivors by saying, “I believe you,”
“It’s not your fault” and “There’s
no right way to heal.” Be kind and
empathetic. Take care of yourself
while talking about these important
but heavy issues.

The campus climate survey found

that 37 percent of survivors who did
not report did not do so because
they didn’t think anything would
be done about it. Let’s prove to
them that we will believe them
and that something will be done.
#WeBelieveYou.

Laura Meyer is a networking

publicity activism SAPAC student

volunteer co-coordinator.

From silence to action

LAURA MEYER | OP-ED

Claire Bryan, Regan Detwiler, Caitlin Heenan,

Jeremy Kaplan, Ben Keller, Minsoo Kim, Payton Luokkala,

Kit Maher, Madeline Nowicki, Anna Polumbo-Levy,
Jason Rowland, Lauren Schandevel, Melissa Scholke,

Kevin Sweitzer, Rebecca Tarnopol, Ashley Tjhung,

Stephanie Trierweiler, Hunter Zhao

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

W

atching
our
current
political

circus is no longer amusing. The
corrupting forces pulling us toward

accepting the xenophobic
tendencies that have long
disrupted human progress
— see our treatment of
Native Americans, Chinese
Americans
or
Irish

Americans, among others —
are becoming terrifyingly
omnipresent.
It
seemed

that after many twists and
turns, we finally learned
to be better than our fears,
that
we
had
accepted,

however grudgingly (for
some), the importance of
bringing outsiders into our classrooms, our
lives and our country.

Though some discomfort around new people

and ideas is expected and normal, there are
ways to combat this that do not devolve into
exclusionary, and now oftentimes blatantly
racist, language. We must condemn such
language for what it is: Bigotry that alienates
citizens at home and whole groups of people
around the world.

In recent months, the flagrant disregard

for our country’s founding ideals from the
leading Republican candidates has created a
toxic environment that not only ostracizes our
friends and neighbors, but also endangers our
values more so than any threat coming from
abroad. Without a strong rebuke from those of
us yet to be targeted, we risk endangering the
very pluralism that many Americans have long
taken for granted.

The unfortunate fact remains that this

bigotry radiates from both of the leading
Republican presidential candidates. It is not
unreasonable to surmise that these derogatory
statements, whether they be directed at women,
Mexicans, Muslims or more recently anyone
who protests at a Trump rally — especially if
they are not white — signify a deep-seated fear
among many Americans that they are in danger
of losing out on their American Dream.

The idealist in me wants to think that many

Americans are being manipulated by a well-
staged campaign playing on their deepest
fear: Fear itself. I want to believe that upon
reasoning their way through these illogical

and often unapologetically racist arguments,
Americans will find them both logically flawed
and morally reprehensible.

This is exactly what I thought upon hearing

that, apparently, most Mexicans in this country
are rapists and murders (with some good
people among them, of course). But instead
of falling to the wayside after the initial
shock that these statements sent through our
collective discourse, proponents (a group that
is unfortunately growing) have only further
hardened their resolve to alienate groups
who do not share their nationality, religion
or ignorance. These statements have yet to
dissuade potential voters and many in the
Republican political establishment who have
yet to disqualify offenders for their remarks
outright.

My inner cynic is now leaning toward

another explanation for our current political
environment. Instead of living in a nation
that welcomes diversity and attracts the best
and brightest from all over the world, instead
of living in a nation devoted to the pluralism
inherent to our founding ideals, instead of
living in a nation that provides a source of
hope and opportunity to people living all
around the world, we are living in a nation
of parasitic opportunists who — while happy
to extend a welcoming hand to further their
goals — are now trying to desperately grasp
at a malformed ideal of days gone by to save
a way of life built on the back of inequity and
discrimination.

I desperately hope that my inner cynic is

wrong and that we use this impasse as an
opportunity to move forward: to take another
small step toward overcoming the xenophobic
tendencies of our past by rejecting bigotry at
the ballot box. To stand together in a “purple
coalition” that overwhelms what separates
red from blue, Republican from Democrat. As
a silent majority of Americans on both sides
of the aisle that has for too long watched with
bemused detachment, we must now raise our
voices and let the world know that we will not
rationalize racism. We will not resign ourselves
to the persistent bigoted contortions that aim
to divide us. We will instead come together to
prove, once and for all, that love trumps hate.

— Danny Sack can be reached

at sackd@umich.edu.

Love trumps hate

DANNY
SACK

On the evening of Tuesday, March 29:

“#StopIslam” and “Stop the Rape of Europe”

were chalked in the Diag, targeting Muslim
identities at the University of Michigan. This
incident was not singular, but joined a suc-
cession of other Islamophobic instances that
continue to marginalize and create a hostile
environment for Muslim students on campus. In
the last three years, Muslim students have faced
multiple attacks on their identity and safety:

When Students Allied for Freedom and

Equality launched the #UMDivest movement
and proposed a resolution to create a committee
to investigate investments that allegedly facili-
tate the violation of Palestinian human rights,
members of SAFE as well as their allies faced
verbal attacks on social media and in person,
and were unable to attend class without Depart-
ment of Public Safety and Security escorts.

After a widely supported letter was written

to the Center for Campus Involvement request-
ing the cancellation of an “American Sniper”
screening, the University of Michigan tempo-
rarily canceled the screening of the film. Though
many organizations representing non-Arab and
non-Muslim students endorsed the letter, this
proposition led to a disproportionate number of
verbal, physical and social media attacks on stu-
dents with Muslim and Arab backgrounds.
When is enough?

Time and time again, Muslim students have

found the administration absent when its sup-
port was needed most. Muslim students feel
unsafe, unwelcome and unheard in a space
that is meant to be inclusive of all identities.
In response to the Diag incident, University
President Mark Schlissel released a statement
emphasizing the importance of education and
community-building, but has yet to provide
actionable steps or key resources to address
these issues.

We recognize the importance of free speech,

but it is crucial to examine how our actions
impact the ability of our fellow community mem-
bers to have equal access to education. With the
glacial pace of the administration to ensure the
safety of its students, it is our responsibility to
create an inclusive and welcoming atmosphere
for our peers. It is unquestionable that differing
perspectives create mutual understanding and a
more holistic view of the world. However, abus-
ing this right to free speech to espouse hatred is
not an ideal anyone should aspire to.

As student leaders on this campus, we believe

it is imperative to not only voice our solidarity
with the Muslim community, but also to firmly
oppose any attacks on one’s religion, race or eth-
nicity. To those who believe in spreading hate:
We do not support you. This campus does not
support you.

We will not sit passively as students face bla-

tant discrimination in a community we are all
meant to call home. And we are calling on the
administration to do the same. Our adminis-
tration needs to publicly announce visible and
proactive measures to ensure the Muslim com-
munity feels supported and valued on this cam-
pus.
To our fellow Wolverines:

We cannot distance ourselves from this issue.

When any marginalized group on our campus
feels unsafe, we all suffer. We lose the value of
our institution when our university’s reputation
is tarnished with such blatant discrimination.
We lose the incredible curiosity, brilliance and
light that these students bring to our campus.
We lose the spirit of Michigan, as the commu-
nity we love and cherish becomes biased and
selective.

We, as student leaders of the University of

Michigan, call upon our peers to defend our
campus against acts that propagate discrimina-
tion. As a student body, we must let the world
know that we will not tolerate hate and hostility
shrouded in the rhetoric of free speech. As the
leaders and the best, we must unite.
To the Muslim community on campus:

We support you. And we thank you for con-

tinuing to show your strength as others expose
their weaknesses. In this country, we enjoy the
liberty to believe and practice whatever creed
we wish. This freedom extends to people of all
faith traditions. We repudiate the discrimina-
tive messages that have been cast, and it is your
right to freely be as you are. And those who
oppose your free exercise of belief oppose us as
well. We are one. This University is hoMe to all
of us.

— Demario Longmire, current Michigan in

Color managing editor, and Gaby Vasquez, former

Michigan in Color managing editor, along with

other student leaders on campus, helped to author

this letter in support of solidarity with the Muslim

community. For a list of student organizations who

signed on, please visit michigandaily.com. Please

e-mail Demario Longmire (dmolong@umich.

edu) to be added to this letter of solidarity.

OPEN LETTER | OP-ED

Uniting our Campus