W

hen 
I 
arrived 
at 

the 
University 
of 

Michigan this past 

fall, the decision to rush felt 
preconceived. I am a student 
surrounded by those of similar 
backgrounds; a Jewish boy from 
the suburbs of a big city, anxious 
to make friends with similarly 
identified people. Everyone I 
knew was doing it. It would make 
sense for me to rush, right?

At fraternity parties during 

Welcome Week, I met different 
brothers who’d ask if I was 
rushing. I would say yes in a voice 
that felt somewhat contrived, the 
octaves in my throat tumbling 
down. I strained to contain a 
part of myself that seemed close 
to spilling out.

I then realized how rushing 

was desultory with respect to 
my character. I still felt that I 
deviated from the stock “frat 
boy” image the media conjures. 
I am openly gay. I identify as 
a progressive feminist. I am 
actively seeking to dismantle 
a constricting gender binary. 
Aren’t the tenets of Greek life, 
an inherently heteronormative 
and 
androcratic 
institution, 

antithetical to those values? 
Would I be morally bankrupt 
for buying into a system where 
fraternity members are three 
times more likely to commit rape 
than non-greek students? 

With a guilty conscience, I 

nonetheless conformed. I did 
what all of my friends were 
doing.

After touring several houses 

and meeting dozens of older 
brothers, I chose a chapter 
where I felt I belonged. I could 
tell these were people I could 
be myself around, and they 
were nothing but welcoming, 
warm and inviting. I can truly 
say that I feel like a member of 
a brotherhood in which people 
care for each other. Rarely do I 
feel uncomfortable being open 
about my identity.

Yet, the implications of Greek 

life still weighed me down. As I 
became active in my pledge class 
as social chair, I was encouraged 
to invite girls to parties as part of 

the job. I thought about themed 
mixers and how they often 
objectify girls with titles such 
as “Office Hoes and CEOs.” Isn’t 
there a link? Isn’t objectification 
almost always the first step 
toward 
justifying 
violence 

against someone?

Furthermore, 
it 
wasn’t 

as 
though 
I 
resisted 
these 

objectives. I sent out messages 
to GroupMes saying how “lit” 
the night would be and that they 
should “come thru!” We would 
discuss which sororities we 
wanted to come and made group 
chats with them.

Then 
suddenly, 
the 

Interfraternity 
Council 

suspension on socials shook 
Greek life to its core, leading 

events to a standstill. In the 
wake of numerous sexual assault 
and 
hazing 
allegations, 
the 

governing body of fraternities 
shut the doors on parties. Social 
schedules 
and 
mixers 
were 

canceled and initiation term was 
halted. To some, it seemed as 
though the world was ending.

However, 
considering 
that 

this coincided with a period 
in our country where sexual 
harassment scandals roil the 
news 
with 
disheartening 

regularity, it seemed like an 
opportunity to engage with each 
other about our actions. What 
led to all of this?

Shouldn’t 
we 
have 
used 

this time to talk about what is 
inherently 
problematic 
about 

a system that devalues both 
women and men based on tiers? 
Or the ways in which hegemonic 
masculinity 
contorts 
our 

understanding of consent?

It appears as though on the 

whole, instead of harnessing this 
period as a time for introspection, 
the IFC suspension became an 
inconvenience waiting to pass. I 
heard groans about not having 
parties to attend. Even I became 
increasingly agitated waiting for 
Greek life to return to normal.

But then I recall what brought 

this on. I think about the girls 
whose lives have been disrupted 
and, in many cases, ruined by 
the sexual assaults they have 
experienced.

I even remember that I have 

been complicit in this system. My 
words become mired in socially 
unconscious terminology, talking 
about wanting to mix within 
other “tiers,” as if girls are any 
more or less worthy of respect 
based on an arbitrary rush 
process. Even coming up with 
mixer themes that place women 
in self-degrading positions was 
something I considered. Though 
girls 
should 
dress 
however 

they want, they shouldn’t feel 
compelled to do so by a sexist 
themed party.

Upon my fraternity’s executive 

council elections, I was appointed 
to be “Sorority Relations Chair.” 
At first, this prospect excited 
me. I love talking to girls and 
scheduling parties. It felt as if 
there was nothing more fitting. 
Although I’m enthusiastic to take 
on this role and help our fraternity 
get to know new people, I’m a 
hypocrite and I submit myself to 
exploitation. I have zero sexual 
intentions with any of the girls, 
but I know that my brothers 
have their own plans. While I 
am proud that my fraternity isn’t 
among the accused and feel that 
they are genuine, good men, this 
does not change the culture we 
sometimes foster.

It’s time to scrutinize the roles 

we seem inclined to put women in. 
Disallow complacency and speak 
up in every situation. Perhaps 
then Greek life can return safer 
and more accommodating than 
its previous incarnation. 

T

he past couple months 
have 
been 
eventful 

for 
special 
counsel 

Robert Mueller. In his broad 
investigation 
into 
President 

Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign 
and its possible connections to 
the Russian interference in the 
election, Mueller and his team 
have indicted several former 
Trump aides, including former 
campaign chair Paul Manafort 
and former National Security 
Advisor Michael Flynn, but his 
investigation has been subjected 
to intense and increasingly 
partisan scrutiny.

Mueller has faced hostility 

from the White House since 
his 
appointment 
as 
special 

counsel in May, with President 
Trump repeatedly disputing the 
need for a special prosecutor, 
and 
at 
times 
denouncing 

Mueller’s probe as a “witch 
hunt.” In contrast, Republican 
lawmakers, at least for the most 
part, initially praised Mueller’s 
appointment 
and 
voiced 

support for his investigation. 
Yet in recent weeks, criticism 
of Mueller, and the FBI in 
general, has been amplified, 
with many Republican members 
of Congress and conservative 
political 
commentators 

questioning the competence and 
impartiality of not only Mueller 
but also former FBI Director 
James 
Comey 
and 
Andrew 

McCabe, the current deputy 
director of the FBI.

Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Arizona, 

called for Mueller’s resignation 
from the Russia investigation, 
while Rep. Francis Rooney, 
R-Florida, proposed a counter-
investigation into Mueller and 
his team. Rep. Louis Gohmert, 
R-Texas, 
was 
more 
brazen, 

asserting that Mueller is “out for 
a scalp” and wants to be “a hero 
of the left,” while also accusing 
McCabe of being “disrespectful” 
to 
the 
Republican 
Party. 

Conservative pundits cite the 
fact that several of Mueller’s 
hired lawyers are registered 
Democrats 
as 
evidence 
of 

Mueller being biased, and Fox 
News contributor Jesse Watters 
insinuated Mueller is acting 
like a potential Democratic 
candidate for president. 

These claims are fanciful at 

best, and downright delusional 
at worst. Mueller is a registered 
Republican (though his party 
affiliation is hardly related to 
his aptitude) and he earned 
a 
reputation 
for 
integrity 

during his long career with the 

Department of Justice and the 
FBI. There is no credible reason 
to doubt Mueller’s ability to run 
an independent and unbiased 
investigation.

But while this cadre of 

conservative critics represents 
the 
far-right 
wing 
of 
the 

Republican party, the tepid 
defense of Mueller provided by 
more moderate Republicans has 
enabled criticism of Mueller to 
spread from the fringe to the 
political mainstream, leaving 
his investigation on unstable 
ground as it enters a critical 
stage.

Naturally, Mueller, and the 

FBI in general, are not perfect. 
Some of the recent criticism of 

Mueller stems from reports that 
a member of Mueller’s team was 
dismissed for having sent anti-
Trump text messages during the 
presidential campaign. Though 
some conservatives pointed to 
this revelation as evidence of 
the probe’s supposed bias, their 
argument ignores the fact that 
Mueller had removed the agent 
in question swiftly, and months 
prior to the report, which, if 
anything, serves as a testament 
to his commitment to carry out 
an impartial investigation.

Likewise, Comey’s handling 

of the FBI investigation into 
Hillary Clinton’s private email 
server drew the ire of both 
liberals 
and 
conservatives. 

Though 
Comey 
severely 

mismanaged the investigation 
through his unorthodox public 
disclosure 
of 
the 
agency’s 

prosecutorial recommendations 
and 
his 
consequential 

decision to briefly reopen the 
investigation in the days leading 
up to the 2016 election, his 
missteps do not constitute clear 
biases, and it is implausible that 
Comey’s actions were politically 
motivated.

Attempts 
to 
denigrate 

Comey’s 
reputation, 
which 

have 
reemerged 
since 
his 

controversial firing by Trump, 
and the efforts to discredit 

Mueller’s 
investigation, 
are 

politically motivated, largely 
unmerited and deeply troubling. 
The 
current 
campaign 

against 
Mueller 
represents 

an encroachment of extreme 
partisanship into the spheres of 
law and justice.

The 
congressional 

investigations 
into 
Russian 

election 
interference 
show 

signs 
of 
devolving 
into 

counterproductive 
partisan 

jostling 
and 
grandstanding. 

House Republicans reportedly 
are preparing to conclude their 
investigation to the objection of 
House Democrats. The Senate 
Intelligence 
Committee’s 

investigation has been clouded 
by reports that President Trump 
pressured Senate Republican 
leaders to end their inquiries 
as quickly as possible. The 
uncertainty surrounding the 
congressional 
investigations 

underscores 
the 
importance 

and 
relevance 
of 
Mueller’s 

independent investigation.

Mueller has proven himself 

to be a fair and honest man 
fully qualified to lead the main 
investigation 
into 
Russian 

interference in the election and 
related matters. If President 
Trump 
and 
his 
campaign 

were uninvolved with Russia’s 
election meddling, his aides 
and 
allies 
should 
proceed 

with the utmost confidence 
that Mueller will vindicate 
him. However, Mueller must 
be 
allowed 
to 
thoroughly 

investigate and pursue charges 
as approporiate. 

It 
would 
be 
grossly 

improper to impede Mueller’s 
investigation 
on 
partisan 

grounds, and the possibility 
of Trump firing Mueller has 
received considerable media 
attention. 
However, 
given 

Trump’s repeated pledges to 
not fire Mueller, Mueller’s 
investigation 
is 
perhaps 

more greatly endangered by 
partisanship. Recent partisan 
attacks on Mueller’s probe 
are unwarranted, yet they 
threaten 
to 
unduly 
shake 

public 
confidence 
in 
the 

investigation. 
Partisanship 

must be blocked from the 
domains of law and justice if 
the law is to retain its sanctity 
and 
independence. 
Failure 

to do so could have profound 
consequences, for the Russia 
investigation and beyond.

Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A — Wednesday, January 3, 2018

DAYTON HARE

Managing Editor

420 Maynard St. 

Ann Arbor, MI 48109

 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.

ALEXA ST. JOHN

Editor in Chief
 ANU ROY-CHAUDHURY AND 

ASHLEY ZHANG
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.

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

 NOAH HARRISON | COLUMN

Carolyn Ayaub
Megan Burns

Samantha Goldstein

Emily Huhman
Jeremy Kaplan

Sarah Khan

Max Lubell

Lucas Maiman

Madeline Nowicki
Anna Polumbo-Levy 

Jason Rowland

Anu Roy-Chaudhury

Ali Safawi

Sarah Salman
Kevin Sweitzer

Rebecca Tarnopol

Stephanie Trierweiler

Ashley Zhang

IFC suspension is a time for introspection

Joel Danilewitz can be reached at 

joeldan@umich.edu.

JOEL DANILEWITZ | COLUMN

Don’t let partisanship threaten Mueller

2

017 was an exasperating 
year for many of us. 
Challenges 
in 
our 

personal lives, coupled with 
the anxiety induced by our 
world’s headlines, made for 
a uniquely intense feeling of 
exhaustion by the semester’s 
end. When I finally landed 
in Los Angeles, my smog-
blanketed home, I couldn’t 
tell whether I was happy to 
be home and at rest, or out of 
breath now that I could finally 
be still.

My friend likes to remind 

me that the road to hell is 
paved with good intentions. 
It’s not quite the first thing I 
want to hear after I mess up, 
but it provides balance to the 
idea that “it’s the thought that 
counts.”

If I had a dollar for every 

time I thought about going to 
church, I could probably build 
one in my backyard. It’s not 
that I hate the idea of religion, 
but it doesn’t dictate my life. 
In other words, I’m in the 
same place as a lot of people 
regarding my faith.

As I rolled my luggage to the 

front door, I was surprised to 
see a wreath— I’d forgotten it 
was almost Christmas. There 
were 
more 
responsibilities 

to worry about than ever this 
year, and fewer Christmas 
movies, advertisements and 
music meant I never thought 
less about this formerly Earth-
stopping time of the year.

As Christmas snuck up on 

me, I remembered those good 
intentions of mine to practice 
my faith, and how consistently 
I failed to do so this semester. 
Would I succeed on December 

25th? Did I even want to?

I made plans with my dad 

on Christmas and Christmas 
Eve. I set my alarms on 
December 
23rd 
and 
went 

about my Saturday. My friends 
and I celebrated being back 
together, almost done with 
one of the hardest years of our 
short lives.

As usual, I slept through the 

three alarms I set for Mass, 
laying another brick in the 
road to hell.

After he came back from 

church, my dad and I went to 
visit a family friend, his best 
friend as a matter of fact. They 
immigrated 
to 
the 
United 

States together from Egypt and 
had plans to become priests 
until they met their wives.

As I listened to him recount 

his year, two things stuck out 
to me. One, he had a year filled 
with many personal hardships 
and two, unbelievably, he still 
seemed happy — at peace, even.

This was a man who lost 

his teenage son to cancer. 
Undoubtedly, he had endured 
more than most could bear. It’s 
not because he wasn’t furious 
at God, and it’s not that he 
moved on or forgot or didn’t 
feel pain.

Suffering is a blessing, he 

told me, because it helps you 
comfort others when they 
suffer. I sat in amazement as 
my whole year transformed. 
What I formerly considered the 
hardest year of my life became 
a year of intense empathy.

Renewal washed over me as 

we left his house. This must be 
how religious people felt when 
they connected with God. I 
used to envy those people for 

their steadfastness. How could 
they still have faith in the face 
of natural disasters, diseases 
and such great suffering?

No, I still can’t explain 

those things, nor do I ever 
expect to. I still cannot bring 
myself to accept evil as an 
irremovable element of our 
world, because I don’t want to 
become jaded. I don’t want to 
stop fighting against it.

But perhaps this is part of 

the balance that makes life 
what it is. It’s okay to feel 
exasperated, to delight in the 
ability to even feel negative 
emotions. The real tragedy is 
to feel nothing.

Later that night, as I was 

recounting this epiphany to 
a friend, they asked me about 
my plans to go to church. My 
new intention was to go to 
Mass at midnight. Knowing 
I might flake, he insisted 
that he would go with me for 
support, even though he’s 
Jewish. 

We stood in the back, 

overlooking the pews in full 
capacity. My resolve was not 
strong enough to get there 
soon enough to earn a seat. 
That was okay with me. I was 
just happy to be there.

In a time when it’s easy 

to lose hope, Mass lit up my 
spirits, a refuge of warmth 
during a cold winter. My 
friend and I broke bread at 
a Jewish deli afterward, for 
balance. It may be true that 
the road to hell is paved with 
good intentions, but maybe 
the road to heaven is, too.

ANDREW MEKHAIL | COLUMN

Breaking bread with 2017

 Andrew Mekhail can be reached at 

mekhail@umich.edu.

JOE IOVINO | CONTACT JOE AT JIOVINO@UMICH.EDU

It would be 

grossly improper 

to impede 
Mueller’s 

investigation on 
partisan grounds

My words become 
mired in socially 

unconscious 
terminology

Noah Harrison can be reached at 

noahharr@umich.edu.

