100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

October 24, 2019 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4 — Thursday, October 24, 2019

Alanna Berger
Zack Blumberg
Emily Considine
Emma Chang
Joel Danilewitz

Emily Huhman
Krystal Hur
Ethan Kessler
Magdalena Mihaylova
Timothy Spurlin

Miles Stephenson
Finn Storer
Nicholas Tomaino
Joel Weiner
Erin White

FINNTAN STORER
Managing Editor

Stanford Lipsey Student Publications Building
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com

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

MAYA GOLDMAN
Editor in Chief
MAGDALENA MIHAYLOVA
AND JOEL DANILEWITZ
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

DIPRA DEBNATH | COLUMN
Shifting exercise focus away from body image
I

t’s early October, which
means that my summer of
waiting for professional
basketball to start again is
over, and the NBA’s activities
for the new season have begun.
In the flurry of team media
days and preseason games, I
came across a Deadspin piece
that features five pictures of
Denver Nuggets star center
Nikola Jokic from a team
photo shoot. Some of the
captions in the piece, as well
as many of the comments,
drew attention to Jokic’s body.
Jokic, despite standing at
7 feet tall, does not resemble
many
NBA
players
in
physique – namely, he seems
to have more body fat and less
muscular definition than his
peers. His weight has caused
some to doubt his fitness
and
on-court
production
capabilities. Jokic, however,
is one of the best basketball
players in the league. In the
2018-19 season, he ranked
third in the NBA in the
advanced metric of Value
Over Replacement Player and
finished fourth in a vote for
the league’s Most Valuable
Player. In a testament to his
fitness, Jokic also logged 65
highly-productive minutes in
a quadruple-overtime playoff
game in May, the most played
in a single game by any NBA
player since 1984.
Most of us will never play
professional basketball, but
many of us find other ways to
get exercise. There is often a
body image aspect to physical
activity – that is, the way
we believe others view our
physique, which is commonly
formed from the way we view
how others look. Many strive
to achieve what is considered
the
ideal
body
type
for
their gender and exercise
accordingly.
However,
as
Jokic demonstrates, one does
not have to look conventional
to be in excellent shape. In
order to benefit in the long
run, we should focus on
exercising for functionality,
longevity and fun.
Concepts
of
favorable
bodies are often perpetuated
by inescapable media-driven
ideals, which influence social
standards and make shifting
one’s focus away from ideal
physiques
challenging.
The checkout line at every
other store is decked with
magazines with slim women
on
the
covers
and
bold
headlines that promise flatter
abs and accentuated curves
in a matter of days or weeks,
insinuating that these are the
results that women should
want to achieve. Ideals are
also clearly defined for men
– Zac Efron in “Baywatch”
illustrates an exaggeration of
a “desirable” male physique:
ripped
musculature
with
impossibly low body fat. Given
the ubiquity of these images
in
American
culture,
we

often mentally impose these
ideals on others and believe
others expect them from us.
Breaking from this mindset is
understandably difficult.
The way male and female
physiques have changed and
vary around the world shows
that these ideals are socially-
constructed
rather
than
innate. The perceived optimal
body type in America, in
theory, displays good health
bred from a wholesome diet
and plenty of exercise. The
issue
with
chasing
these
prototypes in real life is that
people often achieve them in
a way that is often unhealthy
and unsustainable. Diet and
exercise regimens that offer
timelines of weeks instead of
months or years may provide
rapid results, but they lead
to relapse and do not foster
long-term habits that promote
good health. To garner truly
excellent
health,
fitness
routines should be centered
around improving the body’s
functionality and longevity,
and visible results that are
sustainable
will
inevitably
come.

A focus on body image also
has the potential to harm
the self-esteem of those who
exercise. A 2005 study of
college students showed that a
large number of both men and
women who exercise place
emphasis on body image, and
that this focus is associated
with
reduced
self-esteem,
particularly
in
younger
and
female-identifying
participants in the study. One
consequence of this emphasis
on body image is that many
people who exercise focus
on performing activities that
focus on physique rather than
those who contribute to better
overall health.
There
is,
however,
significant
importance
in
exercising
for
functional
benefits, such as increased
strength,
flexibility
and
stamina.
The
long-term
benefits may be even more
essential. As young adults,
we
have
the
ability
to
establish not only habits but
also
physiological
changes
that can benefit us in the
future. A 2014 study on
adult men showed that men
who
regularly
participate
in
high-impact
exercise
in adolescence and young
adulthood
had
increased
bone density when compared

to those who did not, even
when neither of these groups
participated
in
significant
exercise in later adulthood.

Establishing significant bone
density in early adulthood
helps
prevent
structural
issues in later adulthood,
especially the negative effects
of osteoporosis. Additionally,
maintenance of a healthy
body mass index throughout
life reduces the likelihood of
developing
cardiovascular
disease.
We can motivate ourselves
to exercise for these purposes
by
keeping
activities
enjoyable and setting goals.
Those who participate in
exercises they enjoy tend to
have more positive feelings
following
these
activities
and are more likely to repeat
them in the near future. As
such, we should seek physical
activities that make us happy.
These activities don’t have
to be restricted to using gym
equipment:
Team
sports,
hiking and dancing are all
excellent ways of establishing
and
maintaining
overall
fitness.
Conversely,
when
one’s primary motivator is
body image, lack of progress
toward an ideal may lead to
the development of negative
self-concept and discourage
continued activity.
Setting
goals
for
improvements in fitness and
body
composition
can
be
great motivators for exercise,
but it is best to focus on
making progress and setting
realistic
expectations.
If
our aim is to lose weight, we
should celebrate incremental
successes in reaching our
goals. It is common to see
plateaus in progress in any
exercise plan, so it is essential
to
remember
that
fitness
improvements are made even
during plateaus and that we
are still benefiting our bodies
in the short and long term.
The important thing is to
maintain
happiness.
Self-
worth and fitness go far
beyond one’s physique. By
being
comfortable
in
our
own bodies, we can focus on
exercising for health benefits,
keeping activities enjoyable
and not getting bogged down
by minute issues. This can be
challenging when businesses
seem to do all they can to
push certain ideals to drive
consumer
behaviors
that
reinforce these ideals. If we
can continue to remember
that, ultimately, the shapes
of others’ bodies should not
matter to us, then we can
convince ourselves that what
we look like should not matter
to the people who care about
us most. Once we do this, we
can accept that appearance
is not the same as fitness and
strive to focus on the latter.

CHLOE PLESCHER | COLUMN
On support (or lack thereof) for Brooke Nevils

NOAH HARRISON | COLUMN
The looming threat of unrepresentative democracy
T

he
Constitution
was
ratified 231 years ago,
making
the
United
States
one
of
the
oldest
modern democracies in the
world. Along the way, we
have
tweaked
and
refined
our
system
by
expanding
voting rights, delegating more
responsibility to the electorate
and
eliminating
unforeseen
quirks. The gradual evolution
of our institutions has enabled
our
democracy
to
endure
and
thrive
for
centuries,
with
our
constitutional
safeguards
affording
an
enviable degree of stability.
But today, our core tenet of
fair democratic representation
is quietly eroding, and further
institutional
adaptation
is
necessary
to
preserve
the
vitality of American democracy.
The Electoral College is the
most obvious area for reform,
and the prospect of such reform
has been widely debated since
former
Secretary
of
State
Hillary Clinton was defeated in
the 2016 presidential election
despite winning the popular
vote by nearly three million
votes. The popular vote winner
has lost the Electoral College
five times, but two of these
were atypical circumstances:
the four-way election of 1824,
which was decided by Congress,
and the corrupt election of 1876.
The Electoral College had never
awarded victory to the popular
vote loser in a clean, two-way
race – until recently. Now, two
of the past five elections have
been won by the popular vote
loser, and statisticians predict
the trend could continue in
future elections.
This trend is alarming, but
after 2016, many on the right
have rushed to the defense of the
current system. Conservative
commentators have peddled
myths
that
the
Electoral
College
was
deliberately
created as a anti-majoritarian
institution,
purposefully
designed to ensure small-state
voters a voice in the presidential
elections.
This historical retelling is
novel, but grossly inaccurate.
The
Electoral
College
was
created
as
a
compromise
between the direct election
of the president and letting
Congress choose the president.

The
founders
were
wary
of the populace’s ability to
rationally choose a president
and designed the Electoral
College as a mechanism to
keep the presidency a safe
distance from the passions and
whims of the general public –
Alexander Hamilton explained
the
rationale
in
Federalist
68. The general public would
choose
electors,
and
these
electors
would
choose
the
president. The Founders failed
to foresee that electors would
preemptively pledge to vote
for a certain candidate, and
as a result, we are left with an
oddly indirect way of electing
presidents.
Historical
inaccuracies
aside, the Electoral College is
not needed to give small states
a voice.
On
the
contrary,
the
Electoral
College
currently
dilutes the voices of voters
who live in larger states and
essentially ignores the voices of
voters in uncompetitive states.
The reality is that the Electoral
College is a relic from an era
when presidents were intended
to be selected, rather than
elected, and its continued usage
defies the ideal of one person,
one vote. If the nation’s leader
is to represent the will of the
nation, a transition to a popular
vote is imperative.
Moreover, faithless electors
pose a oft-overlooked threat
to the integrity of presidential
elections. Due to the Electoral
College,
Election
Day
technically
only
determines
electors, and the election is not
officially determined until the
electors vote. In 2016, several
of these electors went rogue
and refused to vote for the
candidate they had promised
to vote for. A federal court
ruled these “faithless electors”
cannot be prevented from going
rogue or punished for breaking
a pledge, meaning in a close
election, the will of the nation
can be overturned by a handful
of unscrupulous electors.
Beyond
the
Electoral
College,
a
lesser
discussed
concern is the growing power
disparity in the Senate. Each
state is represented equally in
the Senate, as opposed to the
House where representation is
proportional to population. At

the time of the Constitution’s
ratification, the population of
the smallest state, Delaware,
was roughly 10 percent of that of
the largest state, Virginia using
the
official
representation
metric.
Today,
the
gap
between
the biggest states and the
smallest states has widened
considerably.
The
smallest
state, Wyoming, is a paltry 1.5
percent of the population of
the largest state, California.
Combined, Texas and California
have the same population as the
smallest 28 states put together.
This is staggering: two equal-
sized groups of people, one
represented by four senators,
and the other represented by 56.
This disparity will only grow
wider, since the three most
populous states – California,
Texas
and
Florida

also
accounted for half of population
growth nationwide at the time
of the last presidential election.
If
small
states
were
a
roughly even mix of partisan-
leanings,
then
maybe
this
trend would be another curious
quirk with little impact on
legislative outcomes, but the
fact is that smaller states tend
to
be
disproportionately
conservative,
granting
the
Republican Party a significant
institutional
advantage.
Gridlock
in
Washington
could also be exacerbated if
the Senate’s ideological bent
becomes permanently out of
sync with the House, which
will more closely represent the
nation’s ideological breakdown
due
to
its
proportional
representation.
Our democratic institutions
have adapted before (see the
12th, 15th, 17th, 19th and 22nd
Amendments as examples), but
further evolution is necessary to
ensure our elected government
truly represents the will of
the people. Any substantive
reform would probably require
a constitutional amendment
and
is
therefore
unlikely.
Nonetheless, as a country we
are quickly approaching a point
where
institutional
reform
is needed, or we run the risk
of our republic becoming an
unrepresentative democracy.

Dipra Debnath can be reached at

dipra@umich.edu.

Noah Harrison can be reached at

noahharr@umich.edu.

O

n Oct. 8, 2019, rape
allegations
against
Matt Lauer, a former
host for NBC News, were made
public. Lauer was fired in 2017
for sexual misconduct, but
the details were not publicly
shared. Now, the details have
come to light. Variety reported
that in Ronan Farrow’s new
book “Catch and Kill,” former
NBC employee Brooke Nevils
shares she was raped by Lauer
at the 2014 Sochi Olympics.
Since the report, many news
outlets have covered the story.
However,
prominent
social
movements
have
remained
silent about the allegations.
The #MeToo and the Women’s
March movements have not
voiced
support
for
Brooke
Nevils.
As
a
result,
the
allegations are not receiving
the widespread attention that
they deserve.
Sexual assault has been
a
major
news
topic
with
the inauguration of Donald
Trump, the Harvey Weinstein
conviction
and
the
Brett
Kavanaugh hearings. With the
birth of the #MeToo movement,
survivors have come forward
with their allegations, both
anonymously and publicly. As
more survivors came forward,
social movements worked to
support the survivors as the
news cycled through their
stories, providing resources
and
publicly
supporting
the
survivors’
statements.
It is surprising these social
movements have not voiced
support for Brooke Nevils.
Their
actions
contradict
the purpose of the #MeToo
movement and the idea of
solidarity
in
the
Women’s
March movement. Even after
Farrow’s book was released
on Oct. 15, #MeToo and the
Women’s March have been
silent on the allegations. There
is no excuse for their behavior.

The #MeToo and Women’s
March movements create safe
spaces for people to share
their stories and traumas. On a
national level, the movements
help survivors who stand up to
the celebrities who assaulted
them, such as comedian Bill
Cosby and producer Harvey
Weinstein. Both were powerful
men who used their status to
scare their subordinates and
get away with rape. Lauer is
no different.
The story can be construed
as complicated and fabricated:
Nevils was drunk during the
assault and had consensual sex
with Lauer after the assault.
Many online commenters are
using these behaviors against
Nevils. The comments on this
Facebook video blame Nevils
for being drunk, and they
discredit her because she had
consensual sex with him after
the assault.
However, the case is not as
complicated as some people
claim. In fact, it is harrowingly
simple: Nevils was drunk, and
Lauer took advantage of her.
She later had “consensual” sex
with him, which she shares in
a statement to Variety: “This
is the Matt Lauer … who I
feared when I continued to
engage with him, as many
victims
of
acquaintance
rape do, particularly in the
workplace.”
Nevils’
actions
following the assault are not
out of the ordinary, and they
do not discredit her story. As
many sexual assault survivors
are, she was afraid of the
workplace
consequences,
especially since Lauer was the
host of the Today Show and
she was only a staffer. Nevils
acknowledges this, remarking
that Lauer was the “most
powerful asset at NBC News.”
Lauer had power over Nevils,
especially after he brutally
raped her.

When Nevils reported to
NBC in 2017, she asked her
report be investigated and for
Lauer to have the chance to
defend himself. She did the
same when she shared her
story
with
Farrow.
Nevils
provided
“dates,
times,
evidence of communications,
and corroborating accounts,”
and both NBC and Farrow
found her allegations to be
credible. Yet the public is
quick to attack Nevils, and
the social movements famed
for supporting women and
survivors have remained silent.
When someone decides to
come forward with a sexual
assault, they are not doing so
for more money or five minutes
of fame. Many come forward
to relieve the burden of the
assault and to continue their
personal
healing
process.
Not every survivor feels the
need to come forward, but for
those who do, it is extremely
important.
Strong
social
support is key, especially if
the allegations are against a
popular or beloved celebrity
such as Lauer. News outlets
and social media users will
victim-blame
and
discredit
the accuser, but support from
#MeToo movements can help
survivors
process
through
being scrutinized in the public
eye. But by remaining silent
when Nevils came forward, the
#MeToo and Women’s March
have failed Nevils and fellow
survivors. With no prominent
social support, Nevils’ story
is diminished to another rape
story, a statistic. Her story is
kept from being more than a
day’s breaking news, allowing
criticism of Nevils to build
and allowing Lauer’s popular
legacy to remain as a former
television host.

Chloe Plescher can be reached at

chloebp@umich.edu.

CONTRIBUTE TO THE CONVERSATION

Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor and op-eds.
Letters should be fewer than 300 words while op-eds should be 550
to 850 words. Send the writer’s full name and University affiliation to
tothedaily@michigandaily.com.

One does not
have to look
conventional to be
in excellent shape

Back to Top

© 2025 Regents of the University of Michigan