and they’re disgusted.”
Public
outcry
forced
Potts
to
close
Pangea
Piercing
after
a
tweet
accused him of espousing
white supremacist ideology
while giving a customer a
piercing.
Twitter
user
@
LauraStroudd tweeted that
Potts “began to talk to me
about
white
supremacy,
and why ‘whites must stick
together.’ He repeated many
times that when it came down
to ‘us vs them’ I would have to
embrace my ‘white heritage’
to survive.” The tweet went
viral and has been retweeted
more than 6,000 times.
In a statement posted to his
YouTube channel in August,
Potts said his career was
“over” and he was “completely
done
with
the
piercing
business.” He noted he was
“nowhere
near
politically
correct,” but denied being an
advocate of white supremacy.
“I can see why I present a
perfect target in the current
climate,” Potts said. “Calling
out
anti-Blackness,
anti-
Semitism,
homophobia
or
whatever is celebrated and
accepted, but extending that
to anti-whiteness, and quite a
few people get that Pavlovian
‘Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa,
what are you doing?’ — like
that type of discrimination
is somehow OK. I’ve always
steadfastly said that no one
should ever be disenfranchised
or dispossessed because of
characteristics
they
have
no control over. I’ve always
maintained that I do not want
dominion over, nor seek to
exploit, anyone — that’s like
the exact opposite of white
supremacy.”
Potts decided to reopen
Pangea
Piercing
in
late
November, telling MLive that
he was “a little nervous, but
excited to hurry up and get
back to work.”
Potts said he intended to
install bars on the store’s
windows and that he had
taken steps to guarantee his
employees’ safety as well as
his own, installing security
cameras throughout the shop
and in the piercing bays.
Stenvig said Potts called the
police because of the picketers
on Saturday.
“He
called
the
police,
and they didn’t stop us from
doing anything because we
had the right to picket on the
sidewalk, but he felt the need
to have the police, like, escort
him and the people who work
there out at the end of the day,
which is very unsustainable,”
Stenvig said.
The
other
protesters
outside of City Hall Monday
night were members of The
Ann Arbor Non-Lethal Deer
Management, who held signs
urging passing cars to “Stop
the Shoot,” a reference to the
city’s deer culling efforts. In
2015,
following
complaints
about what residents saw as an
outsize deer population that
resulted in car accidents and
damage to landscaping, City
Council voted to establish a
deer cull to manage the local
deer population.
Former Ann Arbor resident
Maggie Sadoff said she moved
out of the city in part because
she was so opposed to the deer
cull.
“I used to live in Ann
Arbor,” Sadoff said. “I used
to live in Ward 2, but I moved
out because I was so disgusted
by the deer cull. Now I live in
Scio Township. With guns in
the park, blood in the snow,
I could not stomach it any
longer. I wanted no part of it.”
The city’s third annual deer
cull took place in January and
lasted more than three weeks.
Hunters were hired to kill up
to 250 deer, but ultimately fell
short, killing only 115.
Ann Arbor resident Sue
Nelson said she thought killing
deer was wrong, and called
the deer cull ineffective. She
disagreed with claims the
deer cull was a humane way to
kill deer that saved them from
a slow death due to starvation
or disease.
“Maybe I would argue there
are too many humans,” Nelson
said. “We need to live with
wildlife and realize that we
have come in and taken over
their territory and accept the
fact that they live here too.”
2019 will be the final year
of the approved four-year deer
management plan. The city has
not yet released specifics for
“lethal removal” plans for this
upcoming winter.
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
News
Tuesday, December 4, 2018 — 3
HISTORY OF ANTISEMITISM
MATT VAILLIENCOURT/Daily
Jeffrey Veidlinger, director of the Center for Judaic Studies, discusses the historical background of antisemitism during a panel hosted by the
International Institute at Weiser Hall Monday afternoon.
SACUA
From Page 1
“I used to live
in Ward 2, but I
moved out because
I was so disgusted
by the deer cull”
light of the court ruling may
impose even more challenge
around reporting … We need
to do everything we can in the
context of this legal limitation
to
support
students
that
come forward with claims of
misconduct to hopefully make
sure they still feel comfortable.
Particularly on these stories of
sexual misconduct, when you
think or get information from
people that don’t think the
University is paying adequate
attention or if someone accuses
the University of trying to
brush under the rug or hide
these episodes, I can tell you
that couldn’t be more wrong
… The darn problem with
these cases, even this one in
Music, Theatre and Dance that
has become a bit notorious,
the initial complaints were
anonymous complaints, and it’s
extremely difficult to follow-
up on anonymous complaints
but we do … When you don’t
hear of an investigation it
doesn’t mean the University is
ignoring it. It’s just unfair and
untrue and this notion that it’s
in the University’s best interest
somehow to hide misconduct is
exactly the opposite.
TMD:
Given
the
recent
midterm
regents
elections,
the new partisan makeup of
the board is seven Democrats
and one Republican. Although
the members of the Board are
supposed to be nonpartisan,
how do you believe this shift
towards
a
large
majority
Democrats will influence the
decisions made on behalf of the
University and the issues the
Board decides to undertake?
MS: Rarely do partisan issues
show up in discussions by the
board.
They’re
responsible
for supervising me and then
general
oversight
of
the
University, and there are way
more similarities than there
are differences between the
members of different parties
… With two new people, that’s
a quarter of the group that’s
different so there’s a whole new
dynamic and people come in
with their own background and
the issues they care about … but
I wouldn’t parse those things
into Democrat or Republican.
TMD: Why do you think we
are one of the only three public
universities in Michigan that
hold statewide elections for the
regents?
MS: It’s historic. It was
done here in a moment in time
as part of the bylaws of the
University of Michigan. The
other universities in the state
that do this are Wayne State
and Michigan State University.
The other publics all have
appointed boards.
TMD: Do you foresee that
changing in the future?
MS: I don’t see the politics
that would lead to a change.
TMD: In terms of political
platforms,
candidates
like Jordan Acker and Paul
Brown
were
running
on
affordability, which, as you
said, is very nonpartisan, but
what about issues like Richard
Spencer last year and free
speech, which are very partisan
issues?
MS: I don’t think Democrats
or Republicans were thrilled
with the content of what Richard
Spencer would speak about. I
don’t think either party would
be excited about the specter of
potential violence and spouting
racist, misogynistic discourse
… I think that members of
both parties recognize that
free speech is essential for
a
university
…
We’ve
had
discussions
on
the
board
about whether the campus is
sufficiently welcoming to more
conservative political points
of view or whether they get
suppressed … The commitment
to free speech is bipartisan.
People look at different groups
and worry differently but the
commitment is that same.
TMD: At our last meeting,
you discussed the formation
of a committee to address
the
University’s
goals
for
carbon
neutrality.
Students
have expressed a hope that
the “proper individuals” will
be placed on the committee to
ensure success. How are you
taking into account the voices
of
student
environmental
advocates or supporting faculty
when
selecting
committee
members?
MS: The goal of making us
carbon neutral is very hard …
Experts say the same thing,
they’re not sure how we’re
going to get there. There are
lots of ideas and it’s going to
take a window of time … It’s
going to be complicated. It’s an
area that’s so important that
there’s so much activism not
just by students, but by faculty
and staff, citizens of Ann
Arbor and the state. Everybody
would want to be a part of this
commission because everybody
wants to help. What I have
found is that for a group to be
effective it can’t be too large.
I’m going to try to keep it to
a reasonable size that allows
it to be high functioning and
schedule
frequent
meetings
… To make up for the fact that
we can’t possibly have every
constituency represented on the
committee or all the expertise
we need, we’ll encourage the
committee and help it set up
other advisory groups who will
be turned to for thoughts and
advice.
TMD: How is the University
also looking into other facets of
anthropogenic climate change
(wildfires,
food
shortages,
coral reef depletion, etc.)?
MS:
There
are
faculty
interested in a large number
of aspects of global climate
change and sustainability. For
instance, one of the initiatives
funded through the Biosciences
Initiative
is
global
change
biology … fascinating research
but not directly related to our
carbon neutrality process. This
commission will be focused on
advising the campuses on how
to become carbon neutral in as
rapid a time frame as we can
handle economically and in a
way that others can replicate so
we make more of a contribution
than just the campus.
TMD:
On
the
topic
of
committees, a separate panel
created to examine “obligations
to students as instructors with
regard to letter-writing and
all other modes of academic
support” was announced in
October, reportedly containing
mostly
senior
members
of
the
University
community
and
no
representation
from the humanities fields.
Some faculty members have
expressed concern regarding
this
lack
of
diversity
in
the
panel.
How
does
the
administration
intend
to
address these concerns?
MS: The idea is to appoint a
committee that’s thoughtful,
high-integrity,
(with)
high
expertise on it, but empower
them to reach out broadly
across
the
campus
where
lots of people are concerned
about
the
question
that’s
been called … The panel’s in
charge of collecting thoughts
from
a
diverse
array
of
people as possible and then
gathering
those
thoughts
and presenting to the provost
some recommendations and
an analysis. The panel won’t
make
decisions.
They’ll
capture
opinions,
analyze
them
and
present
some
recommendations, but then it’s
really up to the provost and the
deans and, to an extent, myself
to decide how to move forward
with these recommendations.
TMD: Some faculty members
we’ve talked to said they think
it would be helpful if lecturers
and
younger
faculty
are
included on the panel because
they’re often asked for letters
of recommendation.
MS: Although (the esteemed
professors) are very senior now,
they weren’t senior for their
whole lives and they’ve taught
over decades in many different
capacities so they do bring a lot
of different types of expertise.
But the criticisms are fair.
TMD: Earlier this month,
Mohamed Soumah, a University
custodian, took refuge in an
Ann Arbor church to avoid
being deported by Immigration
and
Customs
Enforcement.
Due
to
a
genetic
kidney
disease and a lack of adequate
treatment in his home country
of Guinea, Soumah has said: “If
I get deported, I will die.” Is
Soumah still an employee at the
University?
MS:
We
don’t
discuss
information about employees
with the media, with anybody
in general and particularly
if there are issues around
status, oh my goodness, we just
wouldn’t do that.
TMD:
How
does
the
University
work
to
assist
employees like Soumah who are
at the risk of being deported?
MS:
It’s
similar
to
the
situation with undocumented
students. We obey the law,
we don’t do law enforcement
work on behalf of outside
agencies, but when making
legal requests for information
that we’re obligated to provide,
we provide it, but it has to be
something that we’re legally
obligated
to
provide.
We
want to be supportive of our
employees, and we have to be in
compliance with the law.
SCHLISSEL
From Page 1
COUNCIL
From Page 1
outlined in CSG’s resolution.
Senate
Assembly
Chair
Neil Marsh wrote a response
to CSG’s request on behalf of
SACUA, noting the need for the
University as a whole to address
issues of climate change and
to work toward amending the
problems at hand as soon as
possible.
“SACUA
joins
with
the
broader University community
in recognizing the existential
threat posed by climate change
and global warming,” Marsh
wrote.
“SACUA,
therefore,
supports
the
goals
of
the
resolution recently passed by
Central Student Government.”
The
meeting
continued
as
the
assembly
welcomed
Schlissel and asked him about
the most pressing issues facing
University administration is
facing as the Board of Regents
will be meeting this Thursday.
According to Schlissel, the
most important issue that will
be discussed at the meeting
is sexual misconduct and the
efforts to improve the handling
of such reports on campus.
“We’re discussing our work
around
sexual
misconduct
and finding ways to improve
reporting and make it easier to
increase support for people who
report,” Schlissel said. “The
provost has set up a committee
to look at various types of
faculty-student
relationships,
and we’ll discuss the emerging
advice and direction to go on
that.”
Schlissel
also
noted
the
recent changes in the Board
of Regents which two new
members, Jordan Acker and
Paul
Brown,
who
will
be
joining in January. Though
they are qualified, Schlissel
told the assembly, there is an
onboarding process that they
will participate in as their
terms begin.
“I
think
I’ve
spoken
to
both (Acker and Brown) and
they both recognize their full
enthusiasm and ideas, but they
recognize they have to learn a
lot more before they can really
feel comfortable contributing
as actively,” Schlissel said.
Schlissel
closed
by
mentioning
the
upcoming
retirement of Jerry May, vice
president of Development, and
noting his efforts over nearly
eight years to raise $5 billion
for the University through the
Victors for Michigan campaign.
Read more online at
michigandaily.com