Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A — Wednesday, November 20, 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
MAX STEINBAUM | COLUMN
Populism’s popularity
ISABELLE SCHINDLER | COLUMN
Information leads to tolerance
W
hat started as a custody
battle in Texas over
seven-year-old
twins
has transformed into a cultural
debate
that
underscores
the
damaging effects of intolerance and
misinformation about health care for
transgender people.
The custody battle between
Jeffrey
Younger
and
Anne
Georgulas made national headlines
in late October due to the couple’s
disagreement
over
the
gender
identity of their child. One of their
twins, who chooses to go by Luna,
was assigned male at birth but
identifies as female. Luna first began
expressing a desire to be a girl at
around age three. Since then, her
mother has taken Luna to doctors
who have recommended certain
gender-affirming actions, such as
allowing Luna to dress as a girl and
identify as a girl in public. These
so-called gender-affirming actions
follow the American Academy of
Pediatrics’ guidelines on how best to
support children like Luna.
Luna’s father, however, refused to
follow these recommended steps and
would not recognize his daughter
as a girl. He continued to use male
pronouns for the child, called Luna
by her birth name and refused to
allow her to dress in female clothes.
As he and his wife entered into a
custody case, Younger also began
publicizing the court battles, using a
website created to raise donations for
himself. He claimed that Georgulas
was forcing Luna to identify as a girl
and was going to push a medical sex
change on Luna. Younger also used
his website and subsequent media
coverage for personal monetary
gain. He is said to have made over
$139,000 as a result of his actions.
It did not take long for right-
wing media to pick up on this story
and add further false information,
including claiming that Georgulas
was going to “chemically castrate”
Luna. Soon, the case became fodder
for conservative politicians. Sen. Ted
Cruz, R-Texas, claimed Luna was
being used as a “pawn in a left-wing
political agenda,” and Gov. Greg
Abbott, R-Texas, said he had referred
the case to the Texas Department of
Family Services.
These comments by politicians
only serve to misinform people
about transgender health care.
For young children such as Luna,
it is recommended to use gender-
affirming actions such as allowing
them to choose a new name, choose
their pronouns and wear what they
want. If children continue to identify
with the gender they choose, they
can begin undergoing treatment
to block the onset of puberty in
early adolescence. These hormonal
treatments are reversible. Only
later are the decisions made about
undergoing surgeries.
On Oct. 24, Judge Kim Cooks
decided to award the couple joint
custody
without
compelling
Younger to recognize Luna as a
female. This unfortunate ruling
will undoubtedly have a negative
effect on Luna.
Upon reading about this court
case, I brought it up in conversation
and was shocked to find many
people whom I interact with in
my daily life incorrectly believed
that young children would receive
irreversible medical treatments
to change their gender. Most of
these individuals are very tolerant
of the LGBTQ community but are
unfamiliar with the process of
how gender affirmation works in
regards to young children.
For these people, it was simply a
lack of information or even worse,
the spread of misinformation. One
of the most shocking things about
this whole story is the role of fake
news and hyperbole. Not only
were websites pushing Younger’s
claims, but so were elected officials
such as governors and members of
Congress. These are people who
at face value we believe we can
trust, but in reality, we cannot.
Though it may be tedious, it is more
important than ever for us to be
cautious and to question the media
we consume. We will all be better
off if we read critically and ensure
that what we are reading is actually
rooted in fact.
If people ensured they read
credible articles on this case,
they would likely be able to find
out about the benefits of gender-
affirming actions and would,
therefore, be more accepting of
parents and children who are
using these actions. If we want
to build a more tolerant and
accepting world for children like
Luna, it is up to all of us to embrace
information that is based in truth.
Isabelle Schindler can be reached
at ischind@umich.edu.
O
ne hundred and ninety-
five
years
ago,
the
Democratic-Republican
Party
tapped
a
hot-tempered
Tennessean
nicknamed
“Old
Hickory” to headline
its
presidential
ticket.
Andrew
Johnson, the hero
of
the
Battle
of
New Orleans — an
entirely
self-made
man who grew up
impoverished
and
orphaned in the Waxhaws
region
of
South
Carolina
region of the Carolinas —
received more than 45,000
more popular votes and 15
more
electoral
votes
than
his
nearest
competitor,
National
Republican
John
Quincy Adams, but fell short
of the electoral vote majority
necessary to secure the Oval
Office. In accordance with
the
Twelfth
Amendment,
the election was therefore
to be decided by the House
of Representatives. Through
congressional maneuvering —
nefarious or adroit, depending
on perspective — Adams, the
son of Founding Father John
Adams, won the House vote in
February 1825.
Supporters felt that Jackson,
who had received a clear
plurality, had been snubbed by
Adams and his congressional
allies. Four years later, the
1828 election featured a second
showdown between Jackson
and the incumbent Adams,
offering an opportunity to
rectify the outcome of 1824.
Much of Jackson’s base, rooted
in the rural South and western
frontier,
disdained
Adams
as a pampered New England
aristocrat. In Jackson, a man
of the humblest origins, they
had found a champion and
protector
of
the
common
man against the blue-blooded
Washington
establishment.
The
populist’s
resounding
victory, therefore, was the
first electoral triumph of the
everyday American against the
elite class to which the first six
occupants of the White House
belonged.
The
electoral
outcome,
Jackson
beamed,
was
a
“triumph
of
the
great
principle of self-government
over
the
intrigues
of
aristocracy.” The forgotten
man, engaged in a perpetual
struggle
for
recognition
in a world dominated by
elite interests, now had a
champion at the highest seat
in American government.
Like an ocean tide that
advances and recedes, the
resurgence
of
a
populist
animus
against “the elites”
to the forefront of
American politics is
inevitable. The 2016
election
witnessed
a rebirth of this
perennial struggle.
With the clinching
of
Wisconsin’s
10
electoral
votes,
Donald
Trump
became
president-elect
at
2:30 a.m. November 9, 2016.
An hour later, the brash New
Yorker took to Twitter and
acknowledged
the
populist
wave that carried him to
victory. “The forgotten man
and woman,” Trump promised,
“will never be forgotten again.”
The national populism that
came to define Trump’s brand
resonated
with
Americans
who, like Jackson’s supporters,
felt
disaffected
and
disconnected with the world
around them. Hillary Clinton,
cast by her opponent as a self-
serving elitist, was an iteration
of
John
Quincy
Adams;
Trump, an energetic disrupter,
promised due consideration
of the common man. In what
was
evidently
perceived
as a bold stand against the
establishment
machine,
Trump framed himself as the
brusque Jacksonian champion
of blue-jeans America.
Feelings of alienation —
legitimacy aside — is what
makes populist rhetoric so
attractive.
The
fact
that
right-wing
dimensions
of
populism have surged in the
United States in recent years
is no accident, because it was
conservative populations who
felt alienated in the lead up to
the 2016 election.
Take
immigration,
a
spotlight issue in the last
election
cycle.
Trump’s
antipathies
toward
illegal
immigrants were a rhetorical
centerpiece of his presidential
campaign;
he
has
even
since
characterized
illegal
immigration as an “invasion”
that has “violently overrun”
America’s
southern
border.
In promising a border wall,
Trump seemed to reassure
Americans
that
under
his
administration,
unwelcome
outsiders would not overtake
Americans
in
their
own
country.
The
populist,
anti-
establishment
character
of
Trump’s
campaign
rhetoric
is evident in these statements
too. “The fundamental problem
with the immigration system
in our country,” Trump said
at an August 2016 campaign
rally in Arizona, “is that it
serves the needs of wealthy
donors,
political
activists
and powerful politicians. Let
me tell you who it doesn’t
serve: it doesn’t serve you, the
American people.”
Conservatives,
however,
by no means have a corner on
populism. A political narrative
that juxtaposes the “common
man” with the “elite,” the
cornerstone of all populist
ideologies, has found refuge
in left-leaning rhetoric, too.
While conservative populism
has devoted much of its energy
to immigration, Sen. Bernie
Sanders, I-Vt. — the left’s most
prominent
populist
—
has
railed against big business,
corporate interests and the top
one percent.
The progressive emphasis
on tackling inequality has
found increasing support: 29
percent of Democrats were
self-described “progressives”
in 2016, a figure that rocketed
to 44 percent by last year’s
midterms. While none of the
presidential candidates are as
left-wing as Sanders, several of
the presidential hopefuls have
championed populist policies,
such as sweeping health care
reform and antitrust measures.
What has become clear from
all this is that populism is in
fashion because the theme
of the common man against
the elites is resonating with
Americans
of
all
political
stripes. Four years ago, a
New York developer observed
this reality, built a campaign
around it and took the White
House
through
a
populist
wave.
Three of the most important
states in the 2020 election
are
Michigan,
Wisconsin
and
Ohio,
which
together
command
a
potentially
decisive 44 electoral votes.
With their Midwestern, old-
school idealism, voters in these
states could very well buy into
a liberal brand of populism.
While
most
Democratic
candidates fare well in head-
to-head
polling
against
Trump, they would still do
well to consider why Trump
was able to turn these states
red in 2016 — a question whose
answer is rooted, of course, in
populism’s popularity.
Max Steinbaum can be reached at
maxst@umich.edu.
SUBMIT TO SURVIVORS SPEAK
The Opinion section has created a space in The Michigan
Daily for first-person accounts of sexual assault and
its corresponding personal, academic and legal
implications. Submission information can be found at
https://tinyurl.com/survivespeak.
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.
FROM THE DAILY
Building on CAPS
A
s the winter months quickly approach, many University
students may begin to feel their moods darken as the weather
gets drearier and schoolwork becomes more intense. During
such times, mental health support services are in high demand.
For
many
students,
the first line of defense
against
mental
health
struggles is the University
of
Michigan’s
Counseling
and Psychological Services.
However, as wait times for
appointments reach upward
of two weeks, it is clear
CAPS may not be accessible
to
all
students
seeking
assistance.
Many University students
frequently criticize CAPS
as
ineffective,
largely
because of the long wait
times.
Services
such
as
CAPS are deeply important
to the University, and we
encourage all students to
seriously seek help if they
need it. However, as students
at the University, we feel
there are fundamental and
structural
changes
that
CAPS must make in order to
ensure that students are able
to obtain the proper care.
For many students, the
actual
purpose
of
CAPS
is unclear. They do not
prescribe medications for
mental illness, but rather
serve
as
a
resource
for
short-term talk therapy and
can act as a pipeline to other
services on campus. They
mainly act as a treatment
center
for
acute
issues
and
not
for
long-term,
specialized care. However,
the often prohibitively-long
wait times do not reflect
this
aspect
of
providing
care for short-term issues.
Additionally,
for
many
students on campus who
may not have diagnosable
mental
disorders
but
regardless
struggle
with
the
demands
of
college
life, talk therapy should
certainly be prioritized over
other
treatment
options
such
as
medication.
For
this reason, they are an
excellent resource for many
University students. Yet the
inability of CAPS to meet
with students over a longer
period of time is a hindrance
to such individuals. The
fact that they are unable to
provide for such services
with its current budget is
understandable.
However,
CAPS should serve as a
pipeline to other options
for students in need of
longer-term care. This can
include services such as
local
therapists
holding
“office
hours”
to
speak
with students in need a
few times a week, referrals
to therapists in Michigan
Medicine
and
access
to
professional
therapists
covered
by
insurance
or
with need-based aid.
With that in mind, it would
be helpful to students if
CAPS took action to amplify
their outreach and expand
their
resources.
Certain
steps
have
been
taken,
including
North
Campus
recently opening their own
Wellness Zone, but there
needs to be more available
to students living on North
beyond the sun lamps in
this space. CAPS has also
taken steps to create school-
specific
therapists
for
students on North Campus
and beyond. This includes
the
implementation
of
“embedded”
psychologists
and social workers: At least
one specialized and full-
time
counselor
in
each
University school, including
those on North Campus.
CAPS now even has two
counselors
conveniently
available for all students in
the College of Engineering.
While these school-specific
counselors
do
help
to
increase
the
therapist-
student ratio, there are more
areas that need funding and
resources.
While we acknowledge the
work of CAPS with school-
specific
therapists
and
counselors for non-binary
and trans individuals, CAPS
should continue to expand
resources so more students
are
more
comfortable
readily
accessing
them.
Implementation
of
the
CAPS Trans Care Team,
a group of mental health
care providers specifically
trained
in
providing
affirming
care
to
trans
and
non-binary
students,
is a great step in the right
direction.
Unfortunately,
long wait times and limited
professional resources can
still compel students feel as
if they cannot or should not
seek adequate help. After
all, knowing that there is
scarce availability can make
students hesitant to take
those resources away from
a fellow student who might
“need it more.”
We
acknowledge
that
CAPS on their own cannot
simply
revolutionize
the
current plan and implement
new, radical programs. For
that reason, the University
should consider allocating
more
funding
to
CAPS
so new ideas can be seen
through and more staff can
be hired. U-M’s budget for
Counseling
Services
this
year is nearly $3 million,
a
nearly
$800,000-dollar
decrease from that of the
previous year. The University
does not seem to have a
lack of disposable income
—
the
Michigan
Union
renovation, just one of many
major campus construction
projects, had a budget of
$85.2 million. A new medical
building is purported to cost
U-M more than $900 million.
It
seems
deeply
illogical
to cut funding to CAPS.
There is an outstanding and
chronic issue with mental
health among students on
campus, and U-M should
recognize
and
respond
to this demand for more
mental health resources. It
is arguably more important
to have healthy, happy and
treated students than a new,
shiny building.
CAPS does a lot for our
campus,
but
they
could
do a lot more and reach
a
much
broader
range
of
students
if
increased
funding was poured into
the program. While we do
not want to negate the help
they currently provide for
thousands of students, we
do challenge that this help
is
often
temporary,
and
resources
for
long-term
care often fall short. With
the winter season steadily
approaching, and as daylight
continues
to
decline,
we
encourage better and more
expansive
mental
health
options and programming
for students on campus.
MAX
STEINBAUM
It is more
important than
ever for us to be
cautious and to
question the media
If you or someone you know is in
need of counseling and psychological
services, CAPS can be reached at
(734)-764-8312.