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.