100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

November 14, 2017 - Image 1

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

On Tuesday, University of

Michigan
Central
Student

Government will vote on its
divestment resolution. Tensions
have been ramping up, as it has
in mid-Novembers over the
past decade. The resolution
aims to gain support from CSG
on divestment from companies
operating
in
Israel
due
to

possible human rights violations
of Palestinians.


This
year’s
iteration
of

the resolution has not been
without conflict. Last week,
an
investigative
committee

within CSG was convened to
review “improper use of CSG
materials” by a member of the
executive team stating CSG did
not support the #UMDivest
movement.

According to the ethics

committee’s
reports,
the

undisclosed member of CSG’s
executive committee sent an
email to a recipient outlining
CSG’s
supposed
opposal
to

the movement. According to
allegations, the member then
had a conversation with another
student stating CSG’s opposition
to divestment. A Facebook post
also discussed anti-divestment
sentiment in the body, this time
in relation to the assembly’s
diversity.
The
post
claimed

the
individual
stated
there

are “not enough white men”

and “Jewish people” on the
assembly; however, a self-survey
distributed within CSG last year
found a member of the body
was most likely to be a wealthy,
white heterosexual male.

History of the resolution
Students Allied for Freedom

and Equality — a group of
“student activists organized to
promote social justice, human
rights,
liberation,
equality,

and self-determination for the
Palestinian people” — brought
the resolution in its current form

in 2014, in what remains the
high-water mark for the campus
movement. After first reads
in mid-March, the assembly
voted to indefinitely postpone
a decision on the resolution.
AFE members and allies held a
weeklong sit-in in CSG’s Union
chambers to force a vote — but
the resolution ended up failing
in a secret ballot vote 25-9.

SAFE’s arguments center

around alleged human rights
violations
by
companies

supporting
Israeli
military

activities and operations. This
year’s resolution names Boeing,
Hewlett Packard and United
Technologies as “companies that
supply weapons and equipment
to Israel’s illegal occupation
of Palestinian territories in
violation of international human
rights law” through actions
such as checkpoints and civilian
casualties.

Divestment is rare. Since

1817, the University has divested
just twice — first in 1978 from
apartheid
in
South
Africa

and later in 2000 from the
tobacco industry. Yet before
any resolution even reached the
floor of any student government
on
any
of
the
University’s

campuses,
former
University

president Mary Sue Coleman
expressed in 2002 the University
would not be divesting from
Israel. In a 2005 statement
describing
the
University’s

investment
portfolio,
then-

Chief
Financial
Officer

Timothy
Slottow
remarked

the
University’s
endowment

is profit-driven, veering away
from
political
persuasions.

SAFE draws upon the precedent
of South Africa, tobacco in its
resolutions,
arguing
human

rights violations are antithetical
to the University’s commitment
to “invest in socially responsible
companies.”

Institutions like Columbia

and
Harvard
had
already

established endowment ethical
advisory review committees. In
the last decade, Northwestern

University, the University of
Wisconsin
at
Madison,
the

University of Minnesota and
the University of California-
Berkeley have passed resolutions
calling for divestment. Student
governing bodies at the Ohio
State
University,
meanwhile,

spoke out against divestment
where the resolutions failed to
pass.


On
this
campus,
the

resolution’s
proponents
and

critics seem to reach an annual
impasse on core issues such as
identity, inclusion and the role
of dialogue. Students on both
sides wonder if this year will be
any different.

The divide between sides
Historically, the divestment

movement
has
been

characterized as divisive; critics
argue SAFE seeks to break
apart the student body rather
than bring it together. In an
interview with The Daily, two
SAFE members — who wish
to remain anonymous due to
targeting
of
pro-Palestinian

activists online — decried the
“divisive” argument as one used
to quell Palestinians’ concerns.


“This
argument
has

historically
been
used

silence
marginalized
voices,

historically in the country and
not just on campuses,” one of
the
students
said.
“Voicing

someone’s concerns about literal
human rights violations should
not be a divisive point.”

During last year’s resolution,

one SAFE member asked, “How
is
helping
Palestinians
on

your campus hurting Jewish
students?”


Earlier
this
month,

SAFE released a “Statement
of
Solidarity
to
Support

Divestment”
in
2017.
More

than 30 student organizations
— many of which are social
justice-oriented — signed the
statement, including the Black
Student Union, Jewish Voice
for Peace, the executive board
of
United
Asian
American

The
Senate
Advisory

Committee on University Affairs
convened
Monday
afternoon

to
discuss
amending
the

Statement of Student Rights and
Responsibilities — a University
of Michigan document written
by and for students that outlines
University standards and norms
of behavior — making tuition
more affordable for students and
increasing the faculty’s role in
diversity, equity and inclusion.

LSA senior Anushka Sarkar,

Central
Student
Government

president, served as a guest
speaker and discussed amending
the statement to include biased
motivated
misconduct
as
a

violation of University behavior.
The section regarding bullying
and harassment violations does
not explicitly state that biased
and prejudice motivation against
another
student
results
in

heightened sanctions, according
to Sarkar.

“Under the statement, there’s

no codification that says that if
a student stalks another person
or hazes another person and it’s
bias-motivated — you hazed a
person because they were Black,
you hazed a person because they
were gay — that you would receive
heightened sanctions for that,”
Sarkar said. “Myself and a lot of
students find that to be wrong and
that is something that should be
codified in documents.”

Sarkar proposed amending the

document to add “Violation V,”
which clarifies bias-motivated
misconduct language.

“Bias-motivated
misconduct

is a violation of community
behaviors,
including
but
not

limited to characteristics such as
race, gender, sexual orientation,
gender expression,” Sarkar said.

Sarkar
also
announced
a

second amendment that will
outline the measures that will be
taken if a student is in violation of

bias-motivated misconduct.

“Should a student be found

of having committed an act
against another person with
bias or prejudice motivation that
their sanctions be heightened
automatically,” she said.

The
purpose
of
these

amendments is to deter students
from committing bias-motivated
acts, as they will know there
will be heightened sanctions as a
consequence. The level to which

sanctions will be heightened will
be treated on a case-by-case basis
up to the discretion of the Office of
Student Conflict Resolution, and
each of these cases will result in
two separate charges, according
to Sarkar.

“The goal here is to set the

precedence in our governing
documents that action that is
taken against another person in
a malevolent way with biased or

Z Nicolazzo addressed a crowd

of approximately 100 Monday
night at the School of Social Work
as part of Transgender Awareness
Week. Nicolazzo, who uses the
gender-neutral pronouns ze and
hir, is an assistant professor in
the Adult and Higher Education
program, and a faculty associate
in the Center for the Study of
Women, Gender and Sexuality at
Northern Illinois University.

Nicolazzo’s
dissertation

consisted of an ethnographic
study
in
which
ze
worked

with
transgender
students

to
understand
their
college

experience;
hir
work
was

published as a book — “Trans* in
College: Transgender Students’
Strategies for Navigating Campus
Life and the Institutional Politics
of Inclusion” — which served as
the primary focus of the talk.

Speaking
of
hir
own

experience, Nicolazzo explained
hir coming out narrative is
different from what is often
considered as the normative
narrative for transpeople.

“Oftentimes,
we
think

michigandaily.com
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Tuesday, November 14, 2017

ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-SEVEN YEARS OF EDITORIAL FREEDOM

GOT A NEWS TIP?
Call 734-418-4115 or e-mail
news@michigandaily.com and let us know.

INDEX
Vol. CXXVII, No. 30
©2017 The Michigan Daily

N E WS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

O PI N I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

A R T S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

S U D O K U . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

CL A S S I F I E DS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

S P O R T S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

See AWARENESS, Page 3

Professor
discusses
being trans
in college

CAMPUS LIFE

Transgender Awareness
Week to explore identity,
gender norms, narratives

JENNIFER MEER

Daily Staff Writer

ALICE LIU/Daily

The Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs discusses campus issues in the Fleming Administration Build-
ing Monday afternoon.

SACUA talks changes to Statement of
Student Rights and Responsibilities

Faculty members discuss graduate student tuition, DEI bias reporting

ALEX COTT

Daily Staff Writer

michigandaily.com

For more stories and coverage, visit

In an email sent to all students

Monday
afternoon,
Central

Student Government announced
it will continue a program from
the previous administration to
encourage students to participate
in Bystander Intervention training.

This initiative, a program CSG

piloted under past-President David
Schafer last year, will require any
student
organization
wishing

to claim more than $1,000 a
semester in funding from the CSG
Student
Organization
Funding

Commission to have at least two of
their authorized signers complete
a Bystander Intervention course.
The trainings, facilitated by Sexual
Assault Prevention and Awareness
Center’s Bystander Intervention
and
Community
Engagement

program and Wolverine Wellness,
aim to bring issues of sexual abuse,
as well as drug and alcohol abuse,
into the open. They are focused
on empowering people who might
witness incidences of misconduct
to intervene and change campus
culture surrounding these issues.

CSG body,
SAPAC to
incentivize


trainings

STUDENT GOVERNMENT

Efforts encourage student
participation in Bystander
Intervention initiative

MAYA GOLDMAN

Daily Staff Writer

The question of divestment:

recounting a tense history at U-M

MAZIE HYAMS/Daily

University students protest during CSG on the Diag in favor of divestment November 8.

CSG votes today on resolution concerning alleged rights violations against Palestinians

JORDYN BAKER &
DYLAN LACROIX
Daily Staff Reporters

See DIVEST, Page 3

Read more online at

michigandaily.com

See STATEMENT, Page 3

Back to Top

© 2024 Regents of the University of Michigan