M

y 
childhood 
in 
Romania was pretty 
basic. I was raised in 
a conservative society and was 
fed American entertainment 24 
hours a day. Everything, from the 
movies I watched to the books 
I read, came mostly from the 
U.S. When I was 10, I was in a 
bookstore with my father when I 
spotted a notebook that I wanted 
to buy. I asked my father for it, but 
his answer was a clear “no.” My 
response came just as clearly: I sat 
down on the floor, arms crossed.
“Free speech,” I said, as I 
looked him in the eyes.
“Child, you are not in America, 
you are under my dictatorship,” 
my father said, clearly amused by 
my misdemeanor. He pulled me 
up and walked me out of the store.
As a European, hearing an 
American say “free speech” was 
fascinating. I couldn’t put my 
finger on the difference between 
Europe’s and America’s differing 
concepts of free speech, but I knew 
that Europeans never talked about 
it while Americans seemed to 
instinctively mention it whenever 
they could. Ten years later, as I 
hear tech companies defend their 
inability to regulate hate speech, 
the term “free speech” makes me 
shiver.
In recent years, we have seen 
countries in the European Union 
clash with American social media 
giants, as with the General Data 
Protection 
Regulation 
laws, 
which gave users more control 
over their data; the “right to be 
forgotten” enforced in the EU, 
which bans Google from sharing 
people’s 
personal 
information 
online if they have asked to 
erase it; and the German Media 
Authority’s regulation requiring 
accurate contact information to 
better regulate the ads posted on 
social media. At the same time, 
we have seen Facebook allow 
its 
advertisers 
to 
specifically 
reach “Jew haters,” or create a 
censorship guideline to delete 
posts targeted against a “protected 
category,” but not against a subset 

of that protected category. In 
one of the documents offering 
guidelines for Facebook’s censors, 
the question, “Which group is 
protected from hate speech?” 
was followed by three possible 
answers: “female drivers,” “black 
children” and “white men.” The 
correct answer? “White men.”
Had they been created in 
Europe, social media platforms 
would look different. Their fight 
to avoid any kind of governmental 
regulation 
probably 
wouldn’t 
have flourished. Strictly enforced 
regulations from the European 
Union would have taken the 
place of their own censorship 
guidelines. Facebook CEO Mark 
Zuckerberg’s motto, “Move fast 

and 
break 
things,” 
would’ve 
probably raised more eyebrows — 
especially when “breaking things” 
creates a space where hate speech 
can flourish.
Europeans 
reject 
and 
criminalize any kind of hate 
speech. Following World War II, 
the Council of Europe established 
the European Court of Human 
Rights, 
which 
protects 
free 
speech up to a certain limit: That 
limit is where it starts interfering 
with human dignity.
Dignity is a word which seems 
missing from most of the debates 
we are having on the limits of free 
speech on social media platforms. 
We talk about the need to have our 
ideas heard, to be able to freely 
debate, to go against the status-
quo. But as much as Americans 
value their “free speech,” this 
free speech does not happen in 

a vacuum. It happens within a 
historical background from which 
we are supposed to learn and 
strengthen our belief in giving 
each human being the right to 
“dignity.”
While 
many 
have 
already 
discussed the merits of regulating 
“hate speech” online in a similar 
fashion to European guidelines, 
others have complained that hate 
speech laws in Europe “suppress 
and punish left-wing viewpoints.” 
That is the point, though hate 
speech regulations were never 
meant to punish one side of the 
debate, but to punish those who 
bring the debate into the realms of 
violence and hatred. An example 
of Europe’s harsh laws was Azhar 
Ahmed’s case, when he as a 
British teenager wrote a post on 
his Facebook talking about the 
innocent Afghans killed by British 
soldiers after some British soldiers 
were killed in the war. In his post, 
he included the comment, “All 
soldiers should DIE & go to HELL! 
THE LOWLIFE F*****N SCUM!” 
which led to him being arrested 
for a “racially aggravated public 
order offense.” For many, this case 
might raise some question marks. 
For me, it only emphasizes the fact 
that both right-wing speech and 
left-wing arguments can be made 
without attacking the humanity 
and dignity of the “other,” whether 
the “other” is a group of innocent 
Afghans or British soldiers.
Europe’s hate speech laws are 
not perfect, but compared to the 
“free speech” argument, it strives 
to allow for discussions to happen 
in a safe space, helping maintain 
human empathy when arguing for 
one’s side of an argument. Whether 
a tweet or a Facebook post comes 
from someone from the political 
left or right, once violence is 
inserted, humane understanding 
is forgotten. In a political climate 
of increasing hatred, we should 
look for creating empathy on our 
social media platforms.

I 

think I look too hard for love.
Maybe I’m just a hopeless 
romantic. Maybe I just long 
to have something — or someone 
— who could pick up the trail of 
pieces I have left and rearrange 
them in a way I am unable to do 
so myself.
Upon moving to New York 
City, my hopes of finding this 
fix began to feel more palpable. 
Surely, I surmised, these pieces 
would effortlessly find a place 
to fall into. And after weeks of 
looking, they did. Yet it was not 
where I expected.
The warm days of July began 
to fade, and a growing desire to 
mend this enduring discontent 
came along with it. An occupation 
of the mind with something 
different, I concluded, would be 
the best remedy.
Hoping to get involved with 
the thriving gay community of 
New York, I decided to visit the 
local Callen-Lorde Community 
Health Center in an effort to find 
ways to volunteer within the 
community. Never before had I 
been to a major city health center 
specifically for LGBTQ people. 
And never before had I truly 
understood the significance these 
centers have.
After being greeted by the 
building’s security guard, his 
weathered face marked with an 
enduring smile, I was pointed 
toward the entrance of the 
center’s youth program. I took a 
seat on one of the inviting green 
sofas that filled the room, waiting 
for the hall’s two receptionists 
to call me to speak. Both of them 
must have been near the same 
age as me, yet their poise and 
steadiness with each coming 
patient before them affirmed 
their experience.
Despite the uncertainty that 
painted the faces of those in the 
room, a sense of belonging and 
safety filled the air. People from 
different corners of the country, 
some escaping tattered homes — 
some, the brutal grip of poverty 
— came to one, unified refuge. 
The woman next to me, gently 
unwrinkling a thin stack of 
dollar bills in her rugged hands, 
explained that she had to wait 
three extra days to return for 
her next round of injections for 
hormone therapy. The boy who 
walked in before me joked with 

the young woman behind the 
desk, with a soft gaze affirming 
each word that left his mouth.
The tightness in my chest 
loosened as I began to understand 
that no internal guard was needed 
here. I did not have to regulate 
my words or the way in which 
those words left my mouth. I had 
found a place that required no 
additional explanation of myself, 
or my experiences, because we 
all were sewn from the very same 
thread.
I took a deep breath and 
peered around the room full of 
people who bore no physical or 
familial appearance, but shared 
something so palpable that it 

filled the air.
This is what love looked like 
in its purest form. It wasn’t love 
by any traditional means — or at 
least the love I had imagined. But 
it was a love that I was missing 
in my life. Now, the pieces I had 
left behind were not picked back 
up but replaced with something 
stronger.
Recently, there have been many 
days filled with hopelessness 
from what I see in the news, on 
my campus or even in my own 
home. While there is a crucial 
duty to maintain dialogue among 
all of us to bridge these seemingly 
irreconcilable differences, there 
remains a need for spaces where 
people from all walks of life can 
come together to heal and grow. 
Centers like Callen-Lorde remain 
crucial for such a reality. These 
centers do not just provide a 
space for people who have been 
kicked out of their homes or cast 
aside by society. They provide 
vital medical care to individuals 
who would otherwise often not 
have access to such resources. 
Some people are without such 
proper care due to discrimination 

— others due to homelessness, 
a lack of financial means or 
limited English proficiency. In 
fact, in the case of community 
health centers in general, over 
70 percent of patients seen 
have incomes below the federal 
poverty level. These centers have 
medical professionals trained to 
specifically handle LGBT-related 
health issues. There are many 
types of treatments and services, 
such as hormone therapy and pre-
exposure 
prophylaxis 
(PrEP), 
that many physicians may not be 
familiar with.
Almost one in 10 LGBTQ 
people have said that a health 
care provider has refused to see 
them because of their actual or 
perceived 
sexual 
orientation, 
and three in 10 transgender 
individuals experienced the same 
treatment due to their actual or 
perceived gender identity. Such 
instances have taken place in our 
own state of Michigan, and are 
often even protected under the 
law. For example, in Roseville, a 
pediatrician refused care to an 
infant because she had same-
sex parents. Beyond our own 
state, a transgender 14-year-old, 
admitted to a San Diego hospital 
for attempting to commit suicide, 
was continuously misgendered 
and discharged early from the 
hospital staff. Upon release, he 
killed himself. These community 
centers are not just helpful, they 
are crucial to closing some of the 
many disparities afflicting our 
health care system.
My time in New York allowed 
me to see these integral spaces 
in our country firsthand. Callen-
Lorde is an oasis for people who 
have been set aside because of 
who they love or the way they 
were born to exist in a place — no 
matter how temporary — without 
judgment.
Through expansion and greater 
awareness of these centers, it is 
that very love and support that I 
hope to further on campus, and 
beyond, in the future.
Consider donating to these 
LGBTQ+ health centers:
http://callen-lorde.org/
donation/
https://www.jimtoycenter.
org/donate

Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A — Tuesday, November 6, 2018

Emma Chang
Ben Charlson
Joel Danilewitz
Samantha Goldstein
Emily Huhman

Tara Jayaram
Jeremy Kaplan
Lucas Maiman
Magdalena Mihaylova
Ellery Rosenzweig
Jason Rowland

Anu Roy-Chaudhury
Alex Satola
Ali Safawi
Ashley Zhang
Sam Weinberger

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

ANAMARIA CUZA | COLUMN

What if Facebook was created in Europe?

A breathing place

ALEX KUBIE | COLUMN

Anamaria Cuza can be reached at 

anacuza@umich.edu.

Alex Kubie can be reached at 

akubie@umich.edu.

W

e 
are 
writing 
as 
concerned 
members 
of 
the 
UM community in response to 
Dean Elizabeth Cole’s letter 
to 
Professor 
John 
Cheney-
Lippold outlining disciplinary 
measures. We are also disturbed 
by the covert politicization of 
teaching and service evidenced 
in President Mark Schlissel’s 
and Provost Martin Philbert’s 
letter to the campus. Under the 
guise of separating political 
commitments from our role 
as educators, the university 
administration 
has 
taken 
a 
clear political stance against 
the 
Boycott, 
Divestment, 
and 
Sanctions 
movement. 
Irrespective of faculty positions 
regarding BDS, the President, 
Provost and Dean’s disciplinary 
actions 
threaten 
academic 
freedom and have had a chilling 
effect on workplace morale. 
Rather than debating the merits 
of an important political issue 
of our time, the university has 
taken a side, and disparaged 
pro-BDS students, staff and 
faculty.
We 
stand 
in 
solidarity 
with others who have already 
expressed their disagreement 
with the administration. We 
agree 
with 
UM 
Professor 
Juan Cole who wrote that it is 
not “the place of a university 
administration 
to 
coerce 
faculty or other instructors’ 
conscience on these issues, 
which are much more complex 
than they seem to realize.” We 
agree with Stanford University 
Professor 
David 
Palumbo-
Liu who wrote, “disciplining 
faculty who refuse to write 
letters opens up the possibility 
that universities will be turned 
into pawns of ideologically-
driven organizations who target 
professors 
critical 
of 
their 
views.”
We 
stand 
with 
graduate 
students who have stated that 
such 
disciplinary 
measures 
set “an alarming, worrying, 
and dangerous precedent for 
impinging on the protected 
political speech and action of 
employees of the university.”
We stand with signers of the 
Change.org petition who assert 
that such disciplinary actions 
promote the corporatization of 
education and thus trivialize 
our 
work 
as 
educators 
by 
“bypassing 
the 
educational 
mission of the university (...) 
and turning professors into 
simply service providers.”
The University of Michigan 
has always stood firm on the 
issues of academic freedom 
enshrined 
in 
the 
faculty 
handbook. 
We 
remain 
committed to this tradition and 
to educating thoughtful critical 
thinkers and citizens. We call 
on the administration to refrain 
from any disciplinary actions 
against 
graduate 
student 
Lucy Peterson and to drop 
the actions against Professor 
John Cheney-Lippold. We call 
on the university to include 
diverse 
voices 
in 
the 
new 
panel the provost has created 
to examine the intersection 
between 
political 
thought/
ideology and faculty members’ 
responsibilities 
to 
students. 
We call on the university to 
affirm our shared institutional 
commitment 
to 
academic 
freedom.

Samer Ali, Center for Middle 
Eastern & North African Studies, 

UM-Ann Arbor Evelyn Alsultany, 
American Culture, Ann Arbor 
Sascha Crasnow, Residential 
College, Ann Arbor 
Su’ad Abdul Khabeer, American 
Culture 
Deirdre de la Cruz, Department 
of History, University of Michigan 
Ann Arbor 
Victor 
Mendoza, 
Women’s 
Studies and English, UM Ann 
Arbor 
Kate 
Jenckes, 
Romance 
Languages and Literatures, Ann 
Arbor 
Anton Shammas, MES, UM 
Ann Arbor 
Dr. Savithry Namboodiripad 
Linguistics/LS&A 
UMich 
Ann 
Arbor 
Manan 
Desai, 
American 
Culture 
and 
Asian/Pacific 
Islander American Studies, UM 
Ann Arbor 
Alan M. Wald, English and 
American Culture, U-M Collegiate 
Professor Emeritus (Ann Arbor 
Campus) 
Karla Mallette, Global Islamic 
Studies Center, U-M Ann Arbor 
Zoya Zalatimo, Middle Eastern 
Studies, Ann Arbor Campus 
J Carlos de Los Santos/RLL, 
Ann Arbor
Evyn Kropf, University Library, 
Ann Arbor 
Farah 
Kader, 
International 
Studies, UM Ann Arbor 
Melissa Phruksachart, Dept. of 
Film, Television, and Media, Ann 
Arbor 
Sergio Villalobos, RLL 
Ian 
Watts, 
Mechanical 
Engineering Department, College 
of Engineering 
Silan Fadlallah, Student LS&A, 
Ann Arbor 
Bushra Habbas-Nimer 
Mar Freire Hermida, Romance 
Languages and Literatures, Ann 
Arbor 
Howard Brick, Department of 
History, UM, Ann Arbor 
Sally Howell, Center for Arab 
American Studies, UM-Dearborn
Joshua Akers, Social Science, 
UM-Dearborn 
Angie Achkar, Undergraduate 
Student
Hani 
Bawardi, 
SSCI/
HIST&AAST, UM-D 
Kevin Kobelsky, College of 
Business, Dearborn 
Dennis D. Pollard, Romance 
Languages, Ann Arbor
Antoine Traisnel, Departments 
of 
English 
and 
Comparative 
Literature, UM Ann Arbor 
Michael Lempert, Department 
of Anthropology, University of 
Michigan (Ann Arbor) 
Lawrence La Fountain-Stokes, 
American 
Culture/Romance 
Languages, LSA, Ann Arbor 
Pam 
Pennock, 
College 
of 
Arts, 
Sciences, 
and 
Letters, 
UM-Dearborn 
Clare Croft, Dance, School of 
Music, Theatre & Dance 
Kristin Poling, Social Science 
Department, UM-Dearborn 
Jalal, LSA, Ann Arbor 
Andrew 
Shryock, 
Anthropology/LSA, Ann Arbor 
Daniel 
Andrew 
Birchok, 
Department 
of 
Sociology, 
Anthropology, 
and 
Criminal 
Justice, University of Michigan-
Flint 
Elizabeth 
F.S. 
Roberts, 
Anthropology, LSA
Daniel 
Nemser, 
Romance 
Languages 
and 
Literatures, 
UM-Ann Arbor 
Bruce 
Pietrykowski, 
Social 
Sciences/CASL, UM-Dearborn 
Sara 
McClelland, 
Women’s 
Studies & Psychology, Central 
Campus 
Nayli Ma, Asian Studies and 
Biology, Ann Arbor 

Katherine L. French-History-
UM Ann Arbor 
Elif Izberk-Bilgin, Management 
Studies, UMD 
Janice Molloy, Management 
Studies, Dearborn 
Reem Khatib, LSA, UM Campus 
David Skrbina, LPA/Philosophy, 
Dearborn 
Maria Ulayyet, LSA, UM Ann 
Arbor 
Mary Kelley, Departments of 
History and American Culture, 
UM, Ann Arbor
Faith 
Sparr/Communication 
Studies 
Lisa Martin, College Wide 
Programs, UM-Dearborn 
Fatma Müge Göçek, Sociology/
LS&A, UM Ann Arbor 
Suzanne Bergeron, University 
of Michigan Dearborn 
Juan Cole, History, University 
of Michigan Ann Arbor
Anna Watkins Fisher, American 
Culture, UM Ann Arbor 
H. Erdem Cipa, History & 
Middle East Studies, Ann Arbor 
Paolo Squatriti/History, Ann 
Arbor 
Osman Khan, Stamps School of 
Art & Design, Ann Arbor 
Roi Livne, Sociology, Ann Arbor 
Nancy A. Khalil, American 
Culture/AMAS, Ann Arbor 
Saquib 
Ali 
Usman, 
Anthropology, Ann Arbor
Will Glover, History, Ann Arbor
Rima Hassouneh/Center for 
Middle Eastern and North African 
Studies & the Center for Southeast 
Asian Studies/UM-Ann Arbor 
Muniba 
Saleem/
Communication Studies 
Holly 
Hughes, 
Professor, 
Stamps School of Art and Design, 
Theater and Drama and Women’s 
Studies
Rebekah 
Modrak, 
Stamps 
School of Art & Design, Ann Arbor 
Andrew 
Herscher, 
Taubman 
College of Architecture and Urban 
Planning, UM Ann Arbor 
Javier 
Sanjines, 
Romance 
Languages and Literatures, UM 
Ann Arbor 
Rifaat 
Dika, 
Department 
of 
Language, 
Culture, 
and 
Communication-Dearborn 
Margaret 
K 
Willard-Traub, 
LCC, UM-Dearborn 
Rashmi 
Luthra, 
Department 
of 
Language, 
Culture 
and 
Communication, College of Arts, 
Sciences and Letter, University of 
Michigan-Dearborn campus 
Lara Rusch, Dept. of Social 
Sciences, UM-Dearborn 
Rose Wellman, Department of 
Behavioral Sciences, University 
of 
Michigan-Dearborn 
Patrick 
Beauchesne, Behavioral Sciences/
Anthropology, Dearborn 
Brian 
McKenna, 
Behavioral 
Sciences, Anthropology 
Dr. Maya Barak, Criminology 
and 
Criminal 
Justice, 
UM-Dearborn 
Peggy McCracken, Romance 
Languages, 
Women’s 
Studies, 
and Comparative Literature, Ann 
Arbor 
Stavroula Kyriazis, Ford School 
of Public Policy 
Giorgio 
Bertellini, 
Film, 
Television, and Media 
Holly Hughes, Professor, School 
of Art and Design 
Ian Shin, History & American 
Culture, Ann Arbor 
Maria 
Cotera, 
American 
Culture and Women’s Studies 
Khaled Mattawa, English, Ann 
Arbor
Peggy Lee, American Culture, 
Ann Arbor 
Charlotte 
Karem 
Albrecht, 
American 
Culture, 
Women’s 
Studies, Ann Arbor

Statement from UM faculty to administration

UNDERSIGNED UM FACULTY AND COMMUNITY | OP-ED

These community 
centers are 
crucial to closing 
some of the 
many disparities 
affecting our 
health system. 

Once violence is 
inserted, humane 
understanding is 
forgotten. 

