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.