W

ith Halloween fast 
approaching, 
so 

comes the narrative 

of 
costumes 
stained 
with 

cultural 
appropriation 
and 

racism. Yes, there are posters 
hung across the University 
of 
Michigan 
to 

say 
costumes 
like 

these 
are 
wrong, 

but there still are 
ignorant 
people 

who will choose to 
sport 
blackface 
or 

insensitive garb that 
incorrectly represents 
a culture of people. 
We’ll see it on the 
streets on our way to 
parties and we’ll see 
it all over the news in the days 
surrounding the holiday.

Sadly, 
some 
people 
who 

wear culturally inappropriate 
costumes don’t think about 
how it could be wrong. They 
don’t think about how others 
react, believing it’s a joke and just 
all in good fun. They wouldn’t 
know what it would feel like to 
be made fun of in a horrific way. 
Cultural appropriation has been 
happening for hundreds of years, 
from Nazis persecuting the Jews 
to the days when intellectuals 
argued that African Americans 
had smaller brains than white 
Americans 
descended 
from 

Europeans. 
It 
still 
happens 

today 
through 
unfortunate 

dressing up, cartoons and racist 
comments, among other things.

I’ve been lucky to grow 

up in a very diverse town of 
Black, white and Arab folks, 
where we learned about one 
another’s cultures and had 
great discussions about being 
respectful to each other when 
discussing 
topics 
like 
race 

and religion. I’ve been lucky to 
be born to a Black father and 
a white mother, seeing both of 
my races and what comes along 
when they collide and mix head 

on. Other people haven’t had the 
same experiences as me, being 
closed off into communities 
of one race, possibly unable to 
learn about what it’s like to walk 
in another person’s shoes.

The time to eradicate this 

problem completely 
is now. Hatred from 
Donald 
Trump 

and some of his 
followers 
and 

hatred from your 
neighbor who may 
have said a racist 
comment 
cannot 

be tolerated. Some 
people think that 
making 
general 

assumptions 
is 

harmless, and they don’t see 
the fault in their ways or how 
it can make an entire culture 
look less sophisticated and 
misrepresented. We need to be 
more vocal in our discussion, 
for all involved to ask and 
answer 
questions. 
Without 

this, 
division, 
silence 
and 

racism perpetuate and progress 
toward inclusion and empathy 
is stagnant.

When 
these 
situations 

occur, it’s very difficult for the 
offended party to speak up. 
Whether the person who feels 
compelled to say something 
has been personally attacked 
or just feels that the costume is 
flat-out wrong, confronting the 
insensitive person is difficult 
to do. First of all, being 
confrontational is a challenge 
and can even be affected by 
factors such as the surrounding 
environment 
and 
the 

relationship you have with the 
person in question. As the only 
Black man surrounded by a vast 
majority of white colleagues in 
almost all of my classes, every 
day I wonder what people are 
thinking about when I speak 
up. The situation only escalates 
when conversation becomes 

confrontational. The person 
defending themselves may be 
wondering where their support 
is and is likely more apt to 
remain silent because they feel 
alienated in their frustration.

If you see this problem this 

Halloween weekend or ever, 
please say something. Don’t be 
silent and allow the ignorance 
to persist. You owe it to yourself, 
those who could be hurt and the 
person wearing the inappropriate 
costume to use your voice to 
point out the injustice. It may be 
awkward, but the awkwardness 
is worth doing the right thing.

Just like it’s tough to be 

confrontational, 
asking 
and 

answering 
questions 
makes 

us extremely vulnerable. Both 
sides wonder if the person 
they’re discussing with will 
listen or understand where 
they’re 
coming 
from. 
For 

change to happen, we must 
be willing to take a risk in 
this way, moving past our fear 
in hopes of progress. People 
can be afraid of coming off as 
racist or insensitive if they ask 
questions about things they 
don’t understand. But a genuine 
inquisition will come through 
if they ask from a perspective 
of empathy, improving the 
conversation of representation 
for all.

Halloween is dubbed as the 

scary holiday, but the real fright 
is racism and misappropriation. 
This fear digs right into the 
heart of many and is still a root 
problem in our nation. Hopefully 
someday we will no longer need 
posters explaining that cultural 
appropriation 
can 
happen 

through costume, but without 
conversation, we all face an 
uphill battle. Let our words be as 
strong as our actions.

M

y grandmother recently 
had the opportunity 
to upgrade her phone. 

She’s had the same flip phone for 
years, and during a recent trip to 
the Verizon store with my father 
and me, a salesman recommended 
that she upgrade to an 
iPhone. She turned to 
me and asked, “Why 
would I need this?” My 
dad chimed in that she 
could have access to her 
email account, and the 
salesman 
mentioned 

she’d have far superior 
texting functionality.

This is a woman who 

just about always knows 
what she wants, and a 
new phone was not on her list. She 
explained that she didn’t need to 
text; she prefers calling. She didn’t 
need mobile access to her emails. If 
she’s out, she can just check when 
she gets home. She didn’t need to 
download the plethora of mobile 
applications so often associated 
with people of our generation — 
Snapchat, Tinder, Facebook and 
Spotify come to mind — because 
she just wouldn’t use them.

For my grandmother, an iPhone 

(or an Android for that matter) 
would be more bling than tool. The 
implications of this interaction set 
up camp in the back of my mind, 
and I’ve since come to a somewhat 
stunning conclusion: I hate what 
my phone has done to me.

Studies show that 89 percent 

of smartphone users aged 18 to 
24 reach for their devices within 

15 minutes of waking up in the 
morning. People in the same 
demographic exchange an average 
of nearly 110 text messages every 
day and are prone to texting more 
than calling one another.

There 
is 
an 
argument 
in 

there 
somewhere 

for 
heightened 

connectedness or for 
encouraging 
people 

to communicate more 
appropriately. 
After 

all, you can’t get away 
with a phone call in 
a movie theater, but 
provided 
that 
you 

reduce your screen’s 
brightness, 
texting 

in that environment 

isn’t all that taboo. But research 
importantly reveals that texting 
is making us conversation-phobic, 
less sincere and in some cases, 
more isolated and sleep-deprived.

So what are we clinging to?
Our parents used to have to 

look up people’s phone numbers 
and call them if they wanted to 
talk; hell, so did we! There was 
ceremony involved in sitting 
down to catch up with someone 
or making plans with them. But 
hey, why hop on a quick phone 
call to deliberate plans for going 
out when we can take longer to 
sort through scattered group text 
conversations where everyone 
receives the messages at slightly 
varied time intervals?

People 
used 
to 
read 

newspapers. 
Our 
Facebook-

oriented generation scrolls down 

newsfeeds. We wade through 
trending videos of people dancing 
to “Juju On That Beat,” 35-second 
BuzzFeed Tasty food porn and 
recycled articles from April about 
Trump’s children forgetting to 
register to vote in the primaries 
before we happen upon our 
current events and politics for the 
day. At least I know how to make 
cheeseburger onion rings!

Look, it’s not that I don’t like 

the slow crumbling of my posture 
brought on by texting, accidentally 
bumping into people (or inanimate 
objects) on my way to class or 
feeling like I can’t enjoy a moment 
unless I’ve chronicled it on my 
Snap Story. These are tenets of 
modern greatness! But the grass is 
always greener on the other side.

On the days I’ve left my phone 

at home before taking a walk in 
the Arb, completely turned it 
off in class or had a face-to-face 
interaction without having a 
device to divide my attention, the 
experiences I’ve had have been 
more meaningful and memorable.

Our use of technology isn’t 

inherently bad or unnecessary, 
but anything in excess can be 
detrimental, and I think we have a 
tendency toward excess. I’m all for 
“connectedness,” but maybe the 
irony is we can only achieve that 
if we know how to periodically 
unplug. In the meantime, I’ll be 
researching flip phones.

Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4 — Friday, October 28, 2016

Going unplugged

As it currently stands, the 

proposed legislation would prohibit 
local governments from enacting 
their own taxes or additional 
licenses, require companies to 
pay an annual fee and register 
with the state, mandate state and 
federal background checks and 
annual safety inspections, and 
compel drivers to take the most 
direct route unless the passenger 
specifies otherwise. Essentially, 
the bills create a space for ride-
hailing services in the state’s laws, 
but they don’t address some of the 
more tenuous problems that come 
along with these services.

First and foremost, there is a lack 

of substance when it comes to the 
enforcement of these regulations. 
The bill notes the suspension or 
revoking of licenses from drivers, 
but no other punishments for the 
company. Too often, customers 
are taken advantage of by taxis 
and ride-hailing options like Ubers 
and Lyft. Though accountability 
of some form exists due to the 
GPS system, there are many 
other methods by which a driver 
can scam a customer, especially 
tourists and out-of-state students 
who may not know the area they 
are traveling in very well. 

That said, a potential positive 

of the pending legislation is that it 
avoids the mistakes that other local 
governments have made, such as 
that of Austin, Texas. Earlier this 
year, Uber and Lyft pulled out of 

the 11th-largest city in the United 
States after the city proposed 
strict regulations, including the 
mandatory 
fingerprinting 
of 

all drivers. In their attempt to 
maintain the delicate balance 
between safety and innovation, 
local officials in Austin failed.

However, 
the 
motivation 

behind the Austin policy — to 
provide 
maximum 
safety 
to 

citizens — is understandable and 
needs to be made a priority in 
any new legislation that regulate 
ride-hailing services. Among the 
popularity of apps such as Uber 
and Lyft, research suggests that 
there has been an increase in 
assaults against passengers in 
ride-hailing taxi settings. Three 
drivers in Chicago were charged 
with sexually assaulting their 
passengers over the course of 
the past two years; in more 
than one case, the victim was 
highly intoxicated. A similar 
assault occurred just last month 
around San Diego, when an Uber 
and Lyft driver was accused 
of 
assaulting 
three 
teenage 

passengers. Perhaps the most 
tragic and relevant example to 
pinpoint the necessity of new 
legislation occurred in February 
in Kalamazoo, when Jason Dalton 
killed six people and wounded two 
others (while driving for Uber). 
Hours 
after 
the 
shootings, 

he blamed his iPhone for the 
attacks, saying that it directed 

him both where to go and when 
to shoot.

The evidence is clear that the 

current state of the company’s 
background 
checks 
is 
simply 

not doing enough to protect its 
passengers. It is a reasonable 
expectation of a customer that 
when they download this app, they 
will be transported safely from 
one place to another by someone 
who does not have a criminal 
background and is mentally stable.

A recent bill in California makes 

important strides in this respect. 
This new bill prohibits companies 
such as Uber and Lyft from hiring 
registered sex offenders, as well 
as those who have been convicted 
of felonies or have driven under 
the influence in the last seven 
years and mandates a fine of 
between $1,000 and $5,000 when 
companies 
violate 
background 

check rules. This bill supplements 
the ride-hailing checks and provide 
for the safety of millions of citizens 
who use these services. Michigan 
should take note.

Now that the Michigan state 

legislature is seeking to bring more 
regulation and specific legal status to 
these ride-hailing companies, it is a 
reasonable expectation that some of 
these more substantial regulations, 
like those that California has 
implemented, 
will 
follow 
and 

provide more accountability and 
safety to Uber and Lyft users across 
the state of Michigan.

CHRIS 

CROWDER

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.

SHOHAM GEVA

Editor in Chief

CLAIRE BRYAN 

and REGAN DETWILER 

Editorial Page Editors

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.

Carolyn Ayaub
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

Kevin Sweitzer

Rebecca Tarnopol

Ashley Tjhung

Stephanie Trierweiler

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

O

ne of the most likely 
ways your friend, peer, 
student or child will 

die in college is by suicide. 
Though researchers at the 
University of Virginia have 
found that college students are 
less likely to commit suicide 
than those of the same age (18 
to 24) in the general population, 
suicide is responsible for more 
student deaths than alcohol 
use. According to the American 
Psychological 
Association, 

the 2010 National Survey of 
Counseling Center Directors 
reported that the incidence of 
serious mental health issues 
on campus has risen 16 percent 
since 2000. The APA also admits 
that though significant measures 
have been put in place to address 
students’ mental health concerns, 
campus 
counseling 
centers 

struggle to maintain expanding 
student need. Something more 
needs to be done.

The 
American 
College 

Health Association National 
College 
Health 
Assessment 

for spring 2014 shows that 
between spring 2013 and spring 
2014, 13.5 percent of students 
reported depression as a factor 
that negatively affected their 
studies. The percentage of 
students who report depression 
as a prominent factor affecting 
their studies was much greater 
than student reports of drug 
and alcohol use, which stand 
at 1.8 percent and 4.1 percent, 
respectively. 
Furthermore, 

2.5 percent of college students 
report 
having 
seriously 

considered suicide.

Based on the ACHA data, 

alcohol use may increase the 
prevalence of suicidal ideation 
among college students. As 
alcohol use remains a salient 
issue on campus, it could 
be placed under the student 
mental health umbrella, under 
which all major student mental 
health 
concerns 
could 
be 

prioritized based on student 
need. The reported incidences 
of 
depression 
and 
suicidal 

ideation should not be ignored, 

nor should the link between 
student behavior and mental 
health. Let’s take a break from 
facts and figures, and bring 
this a little closer to home.

Self disclosure: As a current 

graduate student in the School 
of Social Work, I have been 
diagnosed with anxiety and 
depression, still struggle to 
overcome it and have seriously 
considered suicide at various 
junctures in my life, roughly 
beginning 
when 
I 
was 
a 

teenager. There have been 
numerous times when I was 
afraid to talk about it with 
others, and my fear often kept 
me from acting authentically.

As an undergraduate transfer 

student at the University of 
Michigan, I was required to 
participate in AlcoholEdu for 
College, an online program 
that has demonstrated success 
in reducing high-risk behaviors 
related to alcohol use among 
students. Student drinking is 
a public health concern, and 
programs designed to address 
the 
issue 
are 
important 

and can be effective, but I 
wonder if ableism contributes 
to the stigma attached to 
conversations 
about 
suicide 

and depression. A program 
similar 
to 
AlcoholEdu 
but 

geared 
to 
positively 
affect 

students’ more pressing mental 
health needs would confront 
institutionalized 
ableism 

and address what appears to 
be a greater student need. If 
programs like AlcoholEdu have 
been effective to limit risky 
student 
drinking 
behaviors, 

why have incoming students 
(as freshmen or otherwise) not 
been required to participate 
in a similar online program 
to address the more pressing 
issue of student suicide and the 
prevalence of depression?

On April 26, 2015, University 

students gathered in the Diag 
to show support for a student 
who had posted a suicide 
note on the social media app 
Yik Yak. The note sparked a 
larger discussion about the 
reality of student suicide and 
depression and the importance 
of acknowledging the reality of 
mental health issues on campus. 

One student interviewed by 
MLive discussed that though 
Wolverines 
compete 
with 

one another in the academic 
setting, it is still important 
to reach out in support and 
demonstrate 
concern 
for 

other 
students’ 
well-being. 

Some “yaks” posted to the site 
after the incident stressed 
the 
importance 
a 
friend’s 

intervention played in keeping 
them safe.

Recent social work literature 

would support what students 
said in their “yaks.” In Barry 
Duncan’s 
edited 
anthology, 

“The 
Heart 
and 
Soul 
of 

Change,” John Norcross, a 
professor at the University of 
Scranton, demonstrated that 
the effective use of empathy 
is among the most predictive 
components 
of 
positive 

psychotherapy 
outcomes 
— 

even more so than deploying a 
specific intervention model.

This leads me to believe that 

students’ 
everyday 
practice 

of empathy can significantly 
transform student experience. 
An 
educational 
program 

providing some basic empathic 
techniques might be helpful 
in reducing the incidence of 
depression and suicidal ideation 
among students, as well as 
creating a more nurturing and 
respectful student body. In 
regard to the racism that exists 
on campus as evidenced by the 
recent flyer and hate speech 
incidents, a more empathic 
student body might not only 
reduce 
depression 
among 

students and begin to redress 
ableism on campus, but also 
might reduce the likelihood 
of 
racist 
and 
heterosexist 

attacks on vulnerable groups 
or individuals.

I echo the sentiment that 

support from peers, often just 
feeling listened to, has greatly 
influenced my decision to keep 
going. It’s time we speak up for 
ourselves and one another and 
consistently challenge each other 
to learn to listen and confront 
privilege and oppression.

Confronting ableism

NATHAN SCHMALL | OP-ED

Michael Sugerman can be reached 

at mrsugs@umich.edu. 

MICHAEL SUGERMAN | COLUMN

Chris Crowder can be reached at 

ccrowd@umich.edu.

MICHAEL 

SUGERMAN

FROM THE DAILY

Bill should address Uber safety
O

ver a year ago, the Michigan House of Representatives began debating 
the lack of regulations on ride-hailing companies like Uber and Lyft, 
attempting to clear up the legal gray area in which these companies 

have been operating. Now, the Michigan House Legislature is in the process 
of considering a similar package of bills that would seek to address this issue, 
as well as provide regulation for all transportation companies across the state. 
Though this proposed legislation seeks to provide a necessary answer to 
questions surrounding these companies place in the state of Michigan, it fails 
to address certain aspects of safety and accountability that surround this issue.

Culture is not a costume

CHRIS CROWDER | COLUMN

NATHAN SCHMALL

Nathan Schmall is a School of Social 

Work graduate student.

