Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A — Monday, January 27, 2020
Alanna Berger
Zack Blumberg
Brittany Bowman
Emily Considine
Cheryn Hong
Krystal Hur
Ethan Kessler
Mary Rolfes
Michael Russo
Timothy Spurlin
Miles Stephenson
Joel Weiner
Erin White
Lola Yang
ERIN WHITE
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.
ELIZABETH LAWRENCE
Editor in Chief
EMILY CONSIDINE AND
MILES STEPHENSON
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
OWEN STECCO | COLUMN
A lack of visibility perpetuated by the debates
I
n a crowded field of
Democratic hopefuls, it’s
easy for the candidates
to get lost and go unnoticed
by voters, so we turn to the
debates. Each of the debates
has brought up hot-topic issues
such as healthcare, foreign
policy and electability, but has
left LGBTQ+ issues largely
untouched. The absence of
questions
and
substantive
policy stances leaves LGBTQ+
voters underrepresented and
often unacknowledged by a
party they widely support.
With
seven
Democratic
debates
under
our
belts,
only one featured a question
pertaining to LGBTQ+ issues.
The question posed during the
December debate pertained to
the disproportionate killings
of
transgender
people
of
color. The progressives, Sen.
Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.,
and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.,
were given the opportunity
to respond before the topic
shifted
to
Afghanistan.
I
applaud the question, but the
lack of attention regarding the
health and safety of LGBTQ+
Americans
across
seven
debates highlights a bigger
issue in the Democratic Party.
The
Democratic
Party
has long benefited from its
diverse coalition, especially
in the most recent elections
with
voter
support
from
people of color and LGBTQ+
individuals. NBC’s 2018 exit
polling showed that 82 percent
of LGBTQ+ individuals voted
Democrat,
second
only
to
Black voters with 90 percent
support. So why do the debates
lack questions regarding the
marginalized
communities
that propel them into office?
Put simply, the Democrats are
targeting and attempting to
appeal to independents, and in
the process taking advantage
of the communities they rely
on. This sense of reliability
and comfort with LGBTQ+-
identifying
individuals
has manifested in the lack
of attention shown on the
national stage.
LGBTQ+ voters have not
been prioritized, let alone
recognized, by candidates in
past election cycles. But with
burgeoning
visibility
and
representation in office, it’s
past due for acknowledgement.
Though there was a rare
forum dedicated to LGBTQ+
issues back in September, it
gathered less than 60,000
views on YouTube as it lacked
the national attention and
recognition the debates hold.
The forum does not compare
to the 18 million and 15
million viewers, respectively,
that tuned into the first round
of record-breaking debates.
In addition, the town hall
format of the forum did not
provide candidates any time
to actually debate the plans
and policies they preached.
The policies and stances that
candidates hold on LGBTQ+
issues
deserve
national
attention,
not
just
niche
forums.
Most Americans do not
know the policy issues that
impact LGBTQ+ individuals,
because it does not affect
them directly. While this is
somewhat
understandable,
the
debates
serve
as
a
platform for voters to learn
about different policy points
and where they stand on these
issues. Furthermore, Public
Religion Research Institute
(PRRI) found that 80 percent
of
Americans
wrongfully
believe that there are federal
employment protections in
place for LGBTQ+ individuals.
This lack of understanding
stems
from
the
relative
invisibility that the LGBTQ+
community endures in the
media, government and often
our day-to-day lives.
While the general LGBTQ+
population
is
relatively
small, the issues that plague
the
community
were
not
solved with the legalization
of
same-sex
marriage
in
2015. In fact, the issues of
healthcare,
homelessness
and
equal
treatment
in
the
workplace
affect
the
LGBTQ+ community greater
than the general population.
Currently, nearly one-third
of the transgender population
lives in poverty, 52 percent of
LGBTQ+ individuals live in
a state without employment
protections and 40 percent of
homeless youth are LGBTQ+-
identifying. The Democratic
nominee will be tasked with
representing
the
LGBTQ+
individuals
that
make
up
their electorate.
Despite
the
challenges
facing
visibility
and
the
general
conversation
about LGBTQ+ issues, it is
important to highlight that
many of the candidates have
included
LGBTQ+
people
in some broader responses
throughout
the
debates.
In the most recent debate,
Warren closed by highlighting
what the candidates did not
have the chance to discuss,
which included the issues
plaguing
the
transgender
community. Candidates, like
Warren, should be prompted
to discuss these policy issues
in
a
structured
setting,
rather than in buried plans
on websites and via name-
dropping during responses.
The
perpetual
lack
of
visibility
and
protection
for us LGBTQ+ individuals
expresses
to
voters
that
our priorities are not being
championed
by
the
party
we largely rely on. In an
election that is crucial for the
trajectory of LGBTQ+ rights
in the face of Preident Donald
Trump’s
administration’s
anti-LGBTQ + agenda, the
Democratic
Party
must
introduce
LGBTQ+
policy
issues to the debate stage
and shine a light on one
of its most reliable voting
groups.
This
need
for
debate
and
conversation
applies to all marginalized
communities that feel largely
underrepresented by a party
that claims to champion the
inclusion of all.
Owen Stecco can be reached at
ostecco@umich.edu.
Though
the
situation
seems to have died down,
there is still uncertainty over
the future of the conflict.
Many worry the situation in
Iran will become America’s
next Iraq or Afghanistan,
an asymmetric war with no
clear end in sight. As students
mostly born between 1998 and
2001, our country has been at
war for longer than we can
remember. The only legacy we
know has been a foreign policy
of escalating violence in the
Middle East, a policy we as
The Michigan Daily Editorial
Board do not feel represents
our generation’s values.
President Donald Trump’s
administration
has
been
unclear
as
to
why
the
assassination occurred. The
Department
of
Defense’s
justification
has
been
ambiguous, convoluted and
contradictory.
Initially,
sources from the Pentagon to
the White House said the U.S.
targeted Soleimani because
he was planning an imminent
attack on U.S. embassies in
the Middle East. Later, Trump
declared it was retribution for
the killing of a U.S. contractor
in an Iraqi airbase and the
protest at the U.S. embassy
in
Baghdad.
Conflicting
accounts
raise
questions
of how these decisions are
being made. The lack of clear
reasoning behind the strikes
calls
into
question
their
necessity and the legitimacy
of
an
administration
that
is
not
transparent
in
its
decision-making process.
Foreign policy decisions are
supposed to be tightly vetted
and
challenged
through
research
and
deliberation.
Staffers will usually present
the president with a number
of options to respond with.
In this case, Trump chose the
most extreme. This change
in precedent is due to the
startling lack of experience
in the executive branch. A
majority
of
Trump’s
war
cabinet has been in office
for less than a year, and 88
positions in the executive
branch, such as Secretary of
the Navy, remained unfilled.
The
lack
of
transparency
on this issue is worrying,
especially to our generation,
because we feel that those in
charge are out of touch with
what we want.
The
morning
after
the
attacks, people flooded social
media platforms like Twitter,
Facebook and Instagram with
memes and jokes about the
night’s events. Nervous that
this was one of the most severe
escalations of violence in our
conscious lives, young people
initially
panicked
about
everything from an attack on
American soil to being drafted
in a potential World War III,
with tweets circulating like @
jadenonfirree’s viral “When
you realize #WWIII is the
first meme of 2020 and it might
be the last.” These jokes died
down over the next couple of
days as Iran, understanding
that a war with the U.S. is not
in its best interests, stepped
back from the conflict.
Nevertheless,
our
generation’s confusion at the
prospect of war with Iran
reveals that we are unaware
of the actual impact that
a war would have on U.S.
citizens.
Discussions
and
demonstrations
on
campus
against
these
extended
military conflicts coupled with
relatively little change over the
past couple years justifies our
concern that these situations
could
reasonably
escalate
into a larger war. Moreover,
the Trump administration’s
erratic approach toward Iran
— they called off an airstrike
in the eleventh hour last year
— makes it harder for both
countries to broker a peace
deal and for our allies to count
on our commitment to them.
Given
that
most
young
Americans
are
physically
removed from the scene of the
conflict in the Middle East,
our nervous jokes and memes
reflect a detachment from the
consequences of a war with
Iran. We could at least take
comfort in knowing that most
of us would not be directly
affected by such a conflict.
However, this scare was much
more extreme for Iranians.
They would almost surely bear
the brunt of any prolonged
conflict, just as Iraq has for
theirs. An estimated 200,000
Iraqi civilians have died since
the start of the Iraq War,
and a war with Iran would
likely also yield a great many
casualties.
In
comparison,
only 4,419 American soldiers
and 13 Department of Defense
civilians were killed in the
Iraq
War,
revealing
the
disproportionate
effects
American
interventionism
has
on
foreign
nations.
While young people in the
U.S. responded to the events
through memes, the effects
were much more concrete for
Iranians, who had to confront
the terrifying proposition of
their country being bombed
and attacked. It is important
for Americans to keep things
in perspective, and understand
that
the
people
with
the
most to lose in a war are not
our compatriots, but rather
Iranians who did not ask to be
put in this situation.
While the conflict with Iran
ultimately did not escalate
after Soleimani’s killing, it is
undeniable that it could have
worsened
drastically.
The
strike was ordered by a rogue
administration acting without
the knowledge or consent of
the legislative branch, a move
that undermines the principles
at the core of the U.S.’s political
system.
As
Americans,
students and supporters of
our democracy, we demand
more
transparency
from
our executive branch. Our
government
is
elected
to
serve the people and should
act rationally with the aim of
keeping us out of unpopular,
dangerous military situations.
Additionally,
being
largely
removed
from
the
direct
conflict,
University
of
Michigan
students
must
work to contextualize their
response to the threat of
war and have more empathy
for those who would have
been most gravely affected
by this conflict. Lastly, if we
want change in our foreign
policy, we must take action to
enact it. We urge students to
strive for increased political
engagement,
especially
in
light of the upcoming 2020
elections. Oppose unnecessary
military action against Iran,
call for transparency from
the
executive
branch
and
encourage awareness on U.S.
military actions in the Middle
East.
RYAN BEGININ | COLUMN
Music and maturing
W
hat do we do to pass
time while studying
alone? The answer
is almost always music. Music
is more accessible and portable
now than ever before, a fact
made clear by the widespread
use of headphones and speakers
in restaurants. I can’t help but
notice others walking around
flaunting their AirPods or other
earpieces. We have access to
free music platforms through
apps such as Spotify, Apple
Music or Google Play Music.
We have millions of choices
of what we listen to regarding
musicians, genre or playlists.
The artists we listen to have
a huge impact on our fashion,
slang and decisions.
As a teen immersed in pop
culture, I can admit that I
am
heavily
influenced
by
the artists I follow daily. Not
long ago you could find me
spending hundreds on GOLF le
FLEUR* by Tyler, the Creator.
I tune in to this artist’s music
so frequently, it’s hard not to
support him and try to replicate
his style. Yet, he didn’t solely
influence my fashion sense. I
discovered over time that Tyler
is the reason I’m not settling
for anything less than what I
deserve concerning my future.
He preaches individuality and
loving what you do regardless
of what others think. Even if
I’m interested in things others
deem “lame,” I still do it with
pride because I find comfort in
it, such as writing as a form of
therapy.
Tyler’s line in the track
“FIND YOUR WINGS”, one of
his most concise yet melodic
songs, “Supposed to fly and
take control cause you’re the
pilot / You can’t swim, you’re
gonna drown, the sharks are
comin’” helped make me realize
that I shouldn’t put myself in
a place I don’t belong. This is
especially relevant to my social
life and academics, as I choose
friends
wisely
and
haven’t
rushed myself in choosing a
major. Since I discovered Tyler
in high school, I promised to
be who I really am, even if it
strays from the status quo. For
example, I don’t act “cool” to fit
in – contradicting my former
self. Instead, I found a group
that makes me feel at home
and comfortable with being my
eccentric self. Tyler preaches
this through not only his music,
but his lifestyle. His art had an
impact on my life greater than
just material goods. This is not
the case for all people impacted
by artists, however.
Specific
types
of
music,
mainly due to the lyrics, can
expose impressionable youth to
toxic cultures. Lyrics like those
of rap artists XXXTENTACION
or
recently
deceased
Juice
WRLD can popularize the
abuse of drugs and alcohol.
These artists can have an
influence on listeners’ lives to
the same, or greater, degree as
parents. Song lyrics can lead
an
impressionable
audience
to believe it’s “cool” to live
the way the artists live. Youth
are still developing and still
capable of being manipulated
and molded into what they say
“inspires” them.
It’s no surprise to hear lyrics
containing drug references in
the rap scene. For example,
artists Juice WRLD and Lil
Peep
regularly
reference
drugs like Xanax, Percocet
and marijuana. As consumers
listen and become obsessed
with these lyrics, they are
more likely to experiment with
drugs. Rap music is not only
rising in popularity, but it is
also extremely prevalent in
teen culture. This means drug
culture is also present and
popular among the youth. The
last thing we need is the youth
asking themselves “If I want to
be cool, then I have to smoke
weed and drink liquor, right?”
As rap continues to grow
and the newest hits promote
toxicity like substance abuse,
teens will face the decision to
succumb or abstain.
Nowadays, the influence of
musicians such as X and Juice
WRLD play a pivotal role in
shaping the moral character of
the youth, whether it is through
the power of lyrics or the
overall message encapsulated
in their art. Each has their
own culture. Today’s teens and
future generations, therefore,
need to find respectable role
models who can help them
become who they’d like to be.
Ryan Beginin can be reached at
rbeginin@umich.edu.
FROM THE DAILY
Iran conflict reveals underlying foreign
policy frustrations
Y
ears-long tensions between the United States and Iran peaked three
weeks ago when the U.S. assassinated the leader of Iran’s military, Major
General Qassem Soleimani, in the wake of increased conflicts, including
violent protests outside the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. The Iranian general’s death
disturbed the Middle Eastern and Western world as allies scrambled to prepare for
a likely counterattack. Iran responded four days later, sending a barrage of missiles
at two U.S. military bases. The attack was rather minor as there were no deaths
— though some soldiers were injured. The next day, Iran’s military — allegedly
mistakenly — shot down a Ukrainian airliner, killing all 176 people on board.
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.
LGBTQ+ voters
have not been
prioritized, let
alone recognized.
JOIN EDITBOARD
Interested in sharing your opinion on current events and
University affairs? Come to our Editorial Board meetings from
7:15 p.m. to 8:45 p.m. each Monday and Wednesday in the
newsroom (420 Maynard St.).
It is important
for Americans
to keep things in
perspective.