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.

November 08, 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
4A — Friday, November 8, 2019

Alanna Berger
Zack Blumberg
Emily Considine
Emma Chang
Joel Danilewitz

Emily Huhman
Krystal Hur
Ethan Kessler
Magdalena Mihaylova
Michael Russo

Timothy Spurlin
Miles Stephenson
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

BRITTANY BOWMAN | COLUMN

The harm in non-organic tampons

ALANNA BERGER | COLUMN

ZACK BLUMBERG | COLUMN

How pop culture sees mental illness

Has neoliberalism run its course in Chile?

A

s I settled in to catch up
on HBO’s award-winning
series “Barry,” an atypical
opening announcement took me by
surprise. In a show about a former hit
man looking to start anew, pre-show
warnings on violence are the norm.
However, this disclaimer stated that
“the following program contains
post-traumatic
stress
disorder,”
quickly followed up by “and it’s
ok.” The next announcement was
a reminder to call a mental health
hotline run by both HBO and the
National Institute of Mental Health
if the viewer or someone they know
is in crisis, with an additional website
address for further information.
These
new
mental
health-
oriented “bumpers” are a part
of HBO’s initiative to increase
awareness
for
mental
illness.
However, as opposed to issuing
viewer discretion warnings for
depictions of mental illness, as
Netflix did with the controversial
“13 Reasons Why,” HBO’s alerts
serve
another
purpose.
They
highlight the reality that living
with a mental illness is normal and
provide a reminder that there is no
shame in seeking help. Rather than
advising those who are sensitive
away from certain scenes because
of their content, these bumpers
act as invitations of discussion on
specific mental illnesses. These
“viewer conversation encouraged”
advisories will accompany some of
HBO’s most popular programs, such
as “Euphoria,” “Girls,” “Succession”
and “The Sopranos.” In addition to
the use of mental health-oriented
bumpers,
HBO’s
partnership
with NIMH includes a series of
educational videos with expert
commentary on myths surrounding
mental health issues as well as
discussion on their portrayal in the
episode.
This initiative by HBO represents
the beginning of a larger societal
change regarding mental illness.
The media has a profound influence
on the reinforcement of public
perception of a certain population
based
upon
their
common
portrayal. The American aversion
to conversations on mental illness
is often augmented by inaccurate
portrayals
in
popular
culture.
However,
current
depictions
in TV programs and movies
demonstrate drastic progress in the
understanding of mental health over
the past century.
In the 1950s, for example, the
majority of the U.S. populace
equated all mental illness with

psychosis. During this era, issues
pertaining to mental health were
often avoided, contributing to such
inaccurate perceptions. The danger
and violence often associated with
mental illness is highlighted by
Alfred Hitchcock’s 1960 horror
film “Psycho.” In the film, serial
killer
Norman
Bates
develops
what is now known as dissociative
identity disorder and engages in
a series of violent murders. The
horror genre’s emphasis on violence
and mental illness continues with
John
Carpenter’s
famed
1978
classic, “Halloween.” The storyline
of this film involves an escaped
mental asylum patient, Michael
Myers, and his deranged killing
spree of teenagers in his suburban
hometown.
Breaking away from horror films,
mental illness was again in the
spotlight in the Academy Award-
winning 1975 film “One Flew Over
the Cuckoo’s Nest.” Based on the
popular 1962 novel of the same name,
the film stars Jack Nicholson as
Randle Patrick McMurphy, a convict
who feigns mental illness to avoid
a prison sentence. In many senses,
“One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”
was a radical, innovative portrayal
of mental illness. The oftentimes
patronizing and inadequate care
experienced by institutionalized
patients is at the forefront of the plot.
The characters involved are treated
as children by their caregivers
and have little hope for life after
release. As opposed to portraying
them as violent killers, the mental
health patients here are humans
condemned to life in a health care
system that cannot properly care for
them.
However,
the
movie’s
most
memorable scenes involve terrifying
moments as McMurphy’s character
undergoes violent electroconvulsive
shock therapy as a punishment
for unruly behavior. Eventually,
the
once-lively
McMurphy
is
lobotomized and left in a zombie-
like state before being euthanized by
his roommate. “One Flew Over the
Cuckoo’s Nest” certainly challenged
the status quo in terms of typical
representations of mental illness.
However, the popularity of the film
influenced common ideas of mental
illness for years to come. A 1983 study
finds that college students viewed
those with mental illness more
negatively after viewing the film.
Understandings of mental illness
began to change at the end of the 20th
century. In contrast to perceptions in
the 1950s, Americans in 1996 showed

a deeper understanding of the non-
psychotic symptoms of mental
illness. However, these same results
also found that U.S. society by the
late 1990s still maintained negative
attitudes toward those with mental
illness. Representation of mental
health in pop culture seemed to turn
a corner with 2001’s “A Beautiful
Mind.” The biographical film about
the life of famed mathematician
John Nash and his schizophrenia
diagnosis
demonstrated
those
with mental illnesses as capable
of achieving remarkable goals.
“A Beautiful Mind” depicted the
vivid, haunting hallucinations that
followed Nash throughout his life
while also showing his triumphs,
including
a
Nobel
Prize
for
economics and his ability to have a
family.
The relationship between public
perception and pop culture portrayal
of mental illness cannot be ignored.
All too often, movies and TV shows
fail to accurately demonstrate the
reality of mental health problems,
further stigmatizing an already
marginalized population. However,
the
HBO-NIMH
initiative
represents
changing
ideals
on
popular
culture’s
handling
of
mental illness. While films such
as
“Psycho”
and
“Halloween”
demonized
those
with
mental
illnesses,
more
contemporary
depictions represent a different path.
NIMH has praised movies such as
“Silver Linings Playbook” (2012),
“The Skeleton Twins” (2014) and
“The Perks of Being a Wallflower”
(2012) as examples of humanizing,
accurate portrayals of mental illness.
However, negative and harmful
portrayals of mental illness still
persist. “13 Reasons Why” received
criticism for targeting a vulnerable
teenage audience while highlighting
a suicide revenge fantasy and
failing to mention mental health
or mental illness at all in the first
season. M. Night Shyamalan’s 2015
thriller “Split” once again features
a violent villain with dissociative
identity disorder, reviving a trope
seen since “Psycho.” Despite these
instances, Hollywood seems to be
reversing the trend of demonizing
mental illness. More and more films
released recently have received
praise for accurate displays of
mental illness. The HBO-NIMH
partnership represents a societal
trend on opening honest dialogue
surrounding
mental
illness,
as

Alanna Berger can be reached at

balanna@umich.edu.

F

or the past several weeks,
Chile has been rocked by
massive protests, mainly
in the capital city of Santiago.
Traditionally, protests of this scale
are the result of major political,
social or economic decisions made
by a government that citizens feel
would dramatically impact their
lives. However, in Chile’s case, the
uprising was caused by a seemingly
innocuous change: the city of
Santiago’s decision to raise the price
of metro tickets by 30 pesos, or about
four cents. While this may seem like
a strange catalyst for nationwide
protests, the increased metro fare
cannot be viewed in isolation. For
many Chileans, this is representative
of systemic problems with their
nation’s society and government
which have gone on for far too long.
Since the mid-1970s, Chile’s
socioeconomic identity has centered
on neoliberalism, and this free-
market ideology helped spur a
period of growth which economist
Milton
Friedman
once
called
the “Chilean Miracle.” However,
while some raw data may point to
Chile’s neoliberal period as a time
of success, this is misleading. In
reality, Chile’s economic growth
has almost exclusively benefited
the social and political elites, and
the country’s neoliberal policies
have left most citizens struggling
mightily. Ultimately, what Chile and
Chilean citizens need is not a return
to lower metro fares or a reshuffled
government, but rather a systematic
shift away from the neoliberal
economic policies that have propped
up economic growth for decades,
but have simultaneously failed to
provide for the vast majority of the
Chilean people.
To begin, it is important to
critically evaluate the Chilean
economy’s
impressive
statistical
growth of the past 40 years, since
on a purely numeric level, some
of the numbers are undeniably
strong. In 1980, Chile’s GDP per
capita sat at $2,577.32 per person,
essentially level with the world
average of $2,530. However, by
2013 Chile’s GDP per capita had
risen to $15,941.40 per person,

substantially higher than the global
average of $10,764 per person. In
South America specifically, Chile’s
economic trajectory has followed
a similar path. Around 1980, the
nation’s wealth was in line with
the regional average, but by 2013, it
was one of the wealthiest nations in
South America.
However, these statistics don’t tell
the whole story of Chile’s economic
development under neoliberalism.
First, overall economic growth
has been stagnating in Chile in
recent years. Since the nation first
introduced its neoliberal economic
policies in the 1970s, annual GDP
increases of over 5 percent have been
common. However, in recent years
this growth has tailed off, and since
2014, Chile’s GDP annual growth
rate has never surpassed 2.5 percent
(the five year period from 2014 to
today is the only period in which this
has happened). More importantly
than the country’s overall economic
standing, Chile’s neoliberal policies
have created massive inequality
within the country, which is at
the heart of many protesters’
discontent. Today, Chile is the most
economically
unequal
member
of the 36-country Organisation
for Economic Co-operation and
Development, with a greater wealth
disparity than countries such as
Mexico, Turkey and Hungary.
Additionally, while the country’s
overall poverty rate has declined,
much of the urban population is still
impoverished.
Unsurprisingly,
Chile’s
focus
on privatization and market-based
policies has created a societal
structure
which
worsens
the
difficulties
already
inherently
associated with working-class life.
The most prominent inequality
in Chile’s current political system
is the nation’s tax plan, which has
two major problems: It both fails to
raise sufficient revenue for federal
projects and is highly inequitable,
frequently foisting a great deal of the
nation’s costs onto the lower class.
First, Chile has by far the lowest
tax revenue of any OECD nation,
which prevents the government
from effectively providing public

services to the people, a problem
which is particularly pertinent for
lower and middle-class Chileans.
Intertwined with this is Chile’s
second problem, which is the
nation’s extremely unprogressive
tax system. Today, Chile only has
three income brackets taxed at
above 20 percent (for comparison,
under President Trump’s tax cut,
the United States has five). The
nature of Chile’s neoliberal tax
system means the nation misses out
on a chance to actually raise revenue
from society’s wealthiest members,
leading to limited government
spending
or
disproportionate
taxation of the working class, either
through increased income taxes or
an excessive reliance on regressive
policies such as sales tax.
Taking all this into account, it’s
easy to see why protesters across
Chile have taken to the street.
Their nation’s economic model has
promoted growth overall, but has
left the vast majority of the citizenry
behind. This is not a protest over
a particular leader or corrupt
government official, but rather over
an entrenched economic system that
requires substantial overhauling.
So far, Chilean leadership seems
unwilling to acquiesce to the
protesters demands, with President
Sebastían Piñera removing some
hardline government officials, but
not making any drastic changes.
Furthermore, the government has
cracked down on protests with
violence, something that has a very
ugly history in Chile. Unfortunately
for Piñera and the government,
the endemic problems behind the
citizens discontent are omnipresent
and are unlikely to simply fade
away. In order to truly counter
these problems, Chile must finally
drop its focus on neoliberalism and
make a systematic shift toward
raising taxes, nationalizing certain
goods and services, and focusing
on providing for its working-class
citizens — then, and only then, will
the problems behind this movement
be abated.

Zack Blumberg can be reached at

zblumber@umich.edu.

W

ith so many new
companies
offering
organic
cotton
menstrual products, my housemates
and I got to talking one night and
wondered why so many people were
making the switch. There are the
obvious reasons: There’s less waste
with silicone cups, and the smaller
companies are run by knowledgeable
women versus huge corporations.
There’s also the glaring concept that,
compared to non-organic items,
organic products are simply better
for you due to the lack of chemicals.
My friends and I began to look up
the ingredients of commercial and
conventional tampons and realized
we actually knew nothing of what
goes into them.
Like many things, the Food
and Drug Administration doesn’t
thoroughly require toxicity testing
for menstrual products or that all
ingredients and the manufacturing
process be made transparent to
consumers. They do recommend that
tampons should be free of pesticide
residue, but many still contain trace
amounts due to the manufacturing
procedure.
Furthermore,
the
cotton that constitutes non-organic
tampons is commercially produced,
meaning it goes through rigorous
bleaching and chemical cleaning
that exposes the cotton fibers to
toxins. More insecticides are used to
grow conventional cotton than any
other commercial crop.
First, let’s consider the area of the
body that tampons regularly come
into contact with. As many of us
know, tampons are inserted directly
into the body to absorb blood and stop
external leakage. The tampon then
resides in the upper two-thirds of the
vaginal canal, an area rich in blood
vessels and mucous membranes.
Additionally, the vaginal epithelium
is covered in multiple layers of dead
and dying cells, and the vaginal
mucous membrane helps to protect
against harmful microorganisms
and bacteria. However, this tissue
is nowhere near as thick as our
external skin, and this tissue is
efficient
at
carrying
chemical
messengers and other materials
throughout the body.
A report from Women’s Voice for
the Earth, a nonprofit organization,
states
that
within
menstrual
products, there are ingredients used
that are known or suspected to be
endocrine-disrupting
chemicals,

or EDCs. The endocrine system is
a complex physiological network
of glands and organs that work to
produce and secrete hormones.
When
the
endocrine
system
functions
normally,
it
works
brilliantly
to
regulate
healthy
development and body function.
However, when exposed to EDCs
— which can be substances in the
environment, food, personal care
and/or
manufactured
products
— this system is disrupted. Some
EDCs can act as “mimic hormones”
and trick our bodies while others
can stop natural hormones from
doing their job. They can increase
or decrease natural hormone levels,
change how sensitive our bodies
are to hormones and have the
ability to ultimately cause various
injurious health outcomes. These
deviations of healthy processes can
include abnormalities in sex organs,
endometriosis,
early
puberty,
changed nervous system or immune
function,
including
respiratory,
metabolic, cardiovascular issues and
more.
The breakthrough concerning
EDCs came following a time when
female researchers realized there
was really no scientific research
into the development or effects of
conventional tampon usage. Vaginal
research desperately needed more
attention, and women such as Penny
Hitchcock and Nancy Alexander
took this opportunity to begin
research
programs
on
vaginal
physiology,
microbicides
and
immunology. These new programs
founded by women led to the
knowledge that certain chemicals,
many of which were conventionally
used in or around reproductive
organs, could irritate or even damage
vaginal epithelial cells. While nearly
everyone who menstruates uses
some type of tampon or sanitary
pad, the chemicals in those create
a perfect environment for altering
normal vaginal physiology. In a
study conducted in 2000 to provide
numbers for how many people use
which menstrual hygiene product,
a range of 50 to 86 percent use
tampons, 75 percent use panty
liners, 62 to 73 percent use pads
and so on. With a rough majority
of users opting for the tampon
route,
many
people
choosing
conventional tampons are directly
and unknowingly subjecting their
body to microdoses of chemicals and

parabens.
Groundbreaking
menstrual
health research, which has only
started in the past few decades,
creates
greater
awareness
surrounding chemicals in hygiene
products, but there’s still a large data
and funding gap. This means people
who menstruate really don’t know
what is going into their bodies and
how those products are affecting
their health.
This brings us to the upside of
organic cotton tampons. To be
labeled organic, any product must go
through considerably stricter FDA
guidelines than their nonorganic
counterparts. For this reason, we
know exactly what we are getting,
and that is often pesticide-free,
rayon-free,
synthetic
fiber-free,
all-organic, cotton tampons. The
wonderful women who started the
organic tampon movement industry,
pioneering companies like LOLA
and Cora, ensure their consumers
that their companies do not contain
synthetic fibers, chemical additives,
fragrances, dyes, chlorine bleach,
GMOs, pesticides, toxins, latex
or formaldehyde. We can assume
that if a company specifically states
those ingredients are not involved in
their products, it would be logical to
believe those bad ingredients go into
the widely purchased, conventional
tampons — But we don’t really know,
do we?
Of course, the FDA does regulate
tampons
as
medical
devices
and provides many guidelines
companies should follow. However,
this doesn’t mean the micro-
amounts of chemicals still allowed
in
non-organic,
conventional
menstrual products are necessarily
safe for you or ideal to put in your
body. For the same reason many
people made the switch to organic
foods to avoid consuming trace
amounts of pesticides, fertilizers or
carcinogens, many are now making
the switch to organic tampons
to avoid those same things. For
some, including myself and my
housemates, organic tampons have
anecdotally reduced menstruation
time or lessened period cramps.
These results could be due to a
variety of reasons, but it gives us
peace of mind to know what we are
putting in our bodies.

Brittany Bowman can be reached

at babowm@umich.edu.

SOFIA ZERTUCHE | CONTACT CARTOONIST AT SOFZER@UMICH.EDU

Back to Top

© 2024 Regents of the University of Michigan