2-News
Editor’s Note: This statement was previously
provided by Phoenix to the News section last
week and was partially quoted in this news story.
The Michigan Daily is now reprinting Phoenix’s
statement regarding the discontinuation of their
organization in full so that it is on the public record.
I
n 1979, Adara, later renamed Phoenix,
was founded as a senior-only female secret
honor society at the University of Michigan.
According to the organization’s documents, Adara
was founded after a Title IX complaint was filed
against the University’s male-only secret society,
Michigamua, who later changed its name to Order
of Angell. Founded on principles of “character,
achievement, leadership, loyalty and service,”
and to give women leaders across campus space
for support and empowerment, Adara occupied
the upper floors of the Michigan Union’s tower
alongside Michigamua in what was later known as
the Tower Society.
This past year, the history and practices of secret
societies have been top of mind for many students
on campus. They have been top of mind for us,
too, the Phoenix class of 2021. We were “tapped”
for this organization the week that the University
switched to virtual classes. We were initiated over
the spring and summer through numerous Zoom
meetings. Though our class never met in person,
Phoenix’s traditions dictate that we “tap” around
25 juniors in “leadership” positions around campus
this month to become our organization’s class of
2022.
However, for the first time in our organization’s
history, we will not be tapping another Phoenix
class. Instead, we are discontinuing our
organization’s presence on campus.
When we were first tapped for Phoenix almost
a year ago, we were told that “P” was what we
made of it. The only purpose of our organization
was to anonymously improve campus through our
roles as campus leaders. We could launch our own
projects and initiatives for the improvement of the
University as a whole. We would build friendships
throughout the process, taking advantage of
relationships that would otherwise not have been
formed.
We’ve spent recent months studying our history
and debating our future. On Feb. 21, our class voted
by an overwhelming majority not to tap another
class. We view our vote not as a judgment of the
past but as a declaration about the future: Phoenix
and other secret honor societies do not belong on
our present campus.
This decision was not taken lightly by our class,
nor was it made out of convenience. It was not
made in connection with — nor was it influenced
by — Order’s recently publicized outreach to its
alumni regarding its future.
There are many reasons why we have made
this decision. We believe that our organization’s
mandate of “campus leaders” as a prerequisite for
membership is inherently elitist. Leadership roles
within this organization are obtained through
and sustained by privilege. The meaning of this
phrase has never been defined. In reality, each
class of Phoenix is tapped mostly by friends in
previous classes, compounding issues of elitism
and homogeneity that have long plagued our
organization.
Twenty-five seniors could never be truly
representative of the wealth of cultures, beliefs
and experiences that make up a senior class of
the University. We also recognized the cognitive
dissonance Black members, Indigenous members
and members of color face in secret societies. Our
members should never have had to contemplate
their relationship to secret societies’ racist history
and elitist nature.
Over this past year, we’ve watched members
face backlash for their role in these organizations.
A number of student groups for students of racial,
religious and ethnic minorities have specifically
denounced secret societies and forbade their
members from participating in these organizations.
We believe this is a cycle that will continue if left
unchecked. Recruiting a diverse class does nothing
to alleviate this structural flaw.
“It is weird and discouraging to have to
think, ‘Am I joining a racist club?’ It is even more
unnerving to be actively told while being recruited
that Phoenix is not racist,” one BIPOC member of
our class said. (This member has asked to remain
anonymous for fear of professional retribution.) “I
did and still do believe that Phoenix is not a racist
society. However, it is modeled after one and I
think that it is time to realize that distinction.”
This member recalled speaking to another
prospective BIPOC member about this dissonance.
Ultimately, this member decided not to join after
citing similar concerns.
Given these facts, we cannot in good conscience
move forward with Phoenix knowing the harm that
secret societies have caused and will continue to
inflict if still in existence. No amount of rebranding
can plaster over the inherently problematic nature
of these organizations.
If there was one redeeming quality we found
in Phoenix, it was the random friendships that it
fostered between our members. Despite our class
meeting mostly over Zoom, we recognize and
appreciate the value in bringing together people
who would likely never otherwise cross paths.
We hope that interest in forming new senior-year
cross-campus friendships rises from the ashes
of our decision, though we believe it needs to be
completely separate from the existing constructs of
senior secret societies on campus.
Rather than contemplating a year-long
“pause,” we urge the current members of Order,
and all other secret societies, to discontinue their
organizations indefinitely. Beyond discontinuing
our own organization, we believe the dissolution
of all secret societies to be in the best interest of the
U-M community.
A
s thousands of new pet-owners have
discovered during the pandemic,
dogs are simply the best. I have
two myself and being without them has
made returning to Ann Arbor each semester
incredibly difficult. During a pandemic that
has burdened millions with increased anxiety
and stress, it should be no surprise that a
significant number of people have recently
chosen to add some furry members to their
families. After all, dogs are proven to provide
legitimate health benefits, both physically
and mentally. The University of Michigan
realized this fact long ago, offering times for
students to hang out with dogs at least a few
times a year.
Nearly 40% of all American households own
dogs, including (except for former President
Donald Trump) every U.S. president since
William McKinley, which is over 100 years
of presidential dogs. President Joe Biden
revived that presidential trend, welcoming his
two beautiful German shepherds, Champ and
Major, into the White House.
This past week, Greg Kelly — host of
the conservative news outlet Newsmax —
took a dig at Champ, Biden’s 12-year-old
dog. Kelly and presidential historian Craig
Shirley labeled Champ as unpresidential,
saying he looks like he is “from the
junkyard.”
In response to both Kelly and Shirley:
Find something better to do with your time
than ridiculing the president’s elderly dog.
Although I suppose they should not be
surprising in the context of an increasingly
petty and partisan political sphere in the
U.S., these comments were ridiculous.
Criticizing a president’s dogs is crude and
criticizing Champ as ‘unpresidential’ is
simply incorrect. If not an American icon,
dogs are most certainly a presidential
staple.
German shepherds have long been
considered a favorite amongst Americans
in several categories, for both their loyalty
and intelligence. Most police canine units
country-wide, including the Michigan State
Police, rely on German shepherds for their
high work rate and intelligent problem-
solving abilities — two ideal presidential
qualities. So, if Champ’s smarts were at all
in question, they shouldn’t be. This is also
not the first time a German shepherd has
been a resident of the White House. Former
presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and John
F. Kennedy also had German shepherds —
they were certainly considered adequate
presidential pets at the time.
If it was his physical appearance, give
Champ a break. He is 12 years old — that
is well into his 80s in human years. Would
you go up to your grandpa and say he
was junkyard-like or looking as if he was
uncared for simply because he looked old?
No. It should be normal for an old dog to
look, well, old. One of my dogs is starting to
become a bit feeble, but I am certainly not
going to ridicule her for it.
Personal attacks have sadly become
the new norm in politics, it seems. We
saw it consistently throughout the past
two presidential elections; Vice President
Kamala Harris was regularly mocked for
her tone of voice, her name and her race —
as were many politicians before her.
It is frustrating that these attacks
have become standard in the U.S. They
reflect poorly on the character of both
American politics and the intelligence of
the American people as a whole. Our time
is spent on narrow-minded, irrelevant
jabs and Twitter comments, including
Greg Kelly’s response to the backlash he
received following his segment.
But, if personal attacks are going to be
a norm, so be it — it seems there is not
much that can be done to buck that trend
in a post-Trump America. With that being
said, dogs need to be left out of those digs.
A politician’s dogs are irrelevant to their
politics and should only be discussed
as a potential judge of character for any
candidate. Using them simply as a way to
belittle a president or politician is immoral.
Instead, find a way to criticize Biden’s
agenda or policies. That is the basis of
what politics should be: informed debate
regarding what legislation our elected
officials should be passing.
Rather, this is a wake-up call for the state
of our political discourse in this country. It
is time to bring back some intelligence to our
discussions. Leave Biden’s dogs alone. Dogs
have only served to be a positive American
icon within the White House — Major and
Champ are no different.
A
fter
deciding
to
check
Facebook following weeks of
being offline, I immediately
saw an opinion article one of my
former classmates shared with the title:
“Transgender athletes don’t belong in
girls’ sports. Let my daughter compete
fairly.” Immediately, the author claimed
that allowing “biological boys’’ to
participate in girls’ sports is the exact
opposite of gender equality and destroys
years of progress for girls in athletics.
The article then framed the landmark
Supreme Court decision that banned
employment
discrimination
based
on gender identity, which preceded
this development, as unfortunate.
Then, it pronounced sex as defined by
our bodies’ DNA. That, however, is a
classic example of pseudoscience used
to justify continuous transphobia by
claiming sex can be boiled down to a
binary definition.
Opponents of trans rights often miss
three key indicators when it comes to
determining a person’s sex according
to science: genetics, endocrinology
and neurobiology. Basic biology taught
us that those with XX chromosomes
are females, while those with XY
chromosomes are males. But what
about other combinations of Xs and
Ys? What about the various strengths
of male-differentiating genes? What
about studies proving transgender
people’s brains more closely resemble
the gender they identify as?
However,
challengers
of
transgender rights will point to
psychology with the claim that being
trans is a coping mechanism for gender
dysphoria
and
body
dysmorphia.
However, many of these studies have
already been dismissed for ethical
reasons and numerous public health
organizations are steadily working
toward
declassifying
transgender
identity as a psychological disorder. On
the other hand, reevaluation of former
psychological studies has revealed
that gender-based discrimination and
violence is most often the root cause of
mental illness within the transgender
community.
In the contentious debate over
whether
self-proclaimed
gender
identity should be respected, the idea of
feminism has been called into question.
Political
activist
and
American
journalist Gloria Steinem defines a
feminist as “anyone who recognizes
the equality and full humanity of
women and men.” Unfortunately, that
sentiment is not universal across all self-
identifying feminist groups.
One of the most infamous includes
TERFs, an acronym that stands for
Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist, a
group that has repeatedly euphemized
themselves
as
“gender
critical
feminists.” TERFs have increasingly
divided the feminist movement, leading
to controversy over who falls under the
protection of feminism.
Harry Potter fans may have noticed a
very prominent display of TERF ideology
when “cancel culture” swarmed J.K.
Rowling in June after she posted a tweet
implying that true women menstruate.
However, instead of providing the
typical mediocre apology and claiming
innocent ignorance, Rowling doubled-
down on her stance, claiming “It isn’t
hate to speak the truth.” This ignited a
torrent of fuming subtweets between
defenders of Rowling and supporters
of trans rights, with both sides calling
themselves feminists. However, the
dueling perspectives concerning J.K.
Rowling and her tweets invoke the
uncomfortable, yet inescapable, roots of
feminism.
Simply put, the feminist movement
was rooted in a philosophy founded on
the principles of white supremacy and
bigotry. The second wave of feminism
in the 1960s and 70s was dominated
by white women, who utilized the
inferiority of their sex in a progressive
age as an aegis to perpetuate their own
prejudices. This feminism aimed at
promoting the voices of its constituents
who were usually limited to the
demographics of middle class, white
and heterosexual. In its beginning, the
movement never incorporated minority
women, and certainly would not have
considered transwomen among its
ranks.
Despite public resistance to the
TERFs’ approach toward transgender
people,
the
consequences
of
its
internalized ideology have led to
de facto inequality including the
trans military ban, removal from the
workplace, discrimination in health
care and “bathroom bills.” Here at the
University of Michigan, it is apparent
when professors use the wrong
pronouns despite the correct ones
placed beside names on attendance
sheets and then excuse themselves for
being “old-fashioned.” Or, for example,
when trans people are asked their
“preferred” name and pronouns instead
of simply name and pronouns.
On Jan. 20, President Joe Biden made
a national effort to combat transphobia
through an executive order combatting
“discrimination on the basis of gender
identity or sexual orientation.” Soon
after, “#BidenErasedWomen” began
to trend on Twitter with intolerance
disguising itself under the shroud of
feminism to attack the advancement of
equal rights.
With the passage of the Equality
Act on Feb. 25 by the House of
Representatives, the battle between
supporters and opponents of trans rights
was reinvigorated. These so-called
feminists that oppose the president’s
executive order and the Equality Act
were outraged at lawmakers for putting
cis girls and women at risk by allowing
trans women to play sports and use
bathrooms according to the gender
with which they identify. Instead,
opponents prefer to keep trans people
as the marginalized and severely
oppressed community that they have
always been.
No, Biden has not erased women.
Comparatively,
the
president
has
given validation to the existence of
trans people across the United States
who have been constantly ridiculed,
questioned mercilessly and abused for
decades. In the words of renowned
anti-racist activist Franklin Leonard,
“When you are accustomed to privilege,
equality feels like oppression.”
The “feminists” that feel as though
they are facing discrimination remain
trapped in the delusions of second-wave
feminism. They pursue a narrative that
is substantiated by neither biology
nor psychology to maintain hostility
toward transgender people, all while
pretending to advocate for the rights of
women.
Therefore, to truly be a feminist
in the 21st century, people must first
acknowledge the history of hate and
discrimination feminism has fostered.
From there, it is possible to build upon
the faults of the past to construct a more
inclusive and forceful wave of gender
reckoning.
But let one thing be clear: You are
neither an ally nor a feminist if you
pick and choose the circumstances in
which it is acceptable for trans women
to have equality. Feminism advocates
for all women regardless of surgeries,
hormonal treatments, menstruation
or appearance. Transgender women
are women and deserve the same
recognition from society as cis women.
10 — Wednesday, March 10, 2021
Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
KATHERINE KIESSLING | COLUMNIST
LIZZY PEPPERCORN | COLUMNIST
PHOENIX CLASS OF 2021 | OP-ED CONTRIBUTORS
JOHN TUMPOWSKY
| COLUMNMIST
Katherine Kiessling can be reached
at katkiess@umich.edu
The Phoenix Class of 2021 can be reached
at aurigaclass@umich.edu.
Jack Tumpowsky can be reached at
jgtump@umich.edu.
Lizzy Peppercorn can be reached at
epepperc@umich.edu.
T
hrough speaking with my peers
and friends, I know I am not
alone in thinking for a long time
that things would be relatively “normal”
by this summer. Especially with the
beginning of the vaccine rollout in
December, I was confident that by June
I would be vaccinated and the pandemic
would be much more under control.
While the daily number of new
COVID-19 cases in the United States
has decreased, the vaccine rollout
has problems. With the University of
Michigan still in Phase 1b of vaccinations
and the continuous weekly emails
about how the University is behind
on its original vaccination goals, I am
now skeptical that I will be able to get
the vaccine by the end of the winter
semester.
One summer in a pandemic was
difficult enough for college students.
Internships were canceled, travelling
and immersive experiences were put
on hold, and any programming that did
happen was mostly remote. When I
began my search for what I wanted to do
this summer, most programs mentioned
that they would likely be virtual and that
there was still a chance of them being
canceled last minute given the level of
uncertainty surrounding the future state
of the pandemic.
Summer programs are usually a time
for college students to try out fields of
interest and explore what they want to
do after college. Whether an internship
is a good or bad experience, it allows the
student to gain clarity on what they want
to study and pursue. Two summers in a
pandemic could prevent college students
from gaining hands-on experience to
enhance their studies and confirm that
they are on the right track. Because many
undergraduate students were unable
to participate in summer internships
or programming last summer, there is
a lot of pressure to find something this
summer. Whether or not a program gets
canceled is mostly based on luck, but the
students who are able to gain experience
to add to their résumé will be ahead of
those who aren’t as lucky.
In my experience, reliable, engaging
and in-person internships are extremely
hard to find. Furthermore, the few I
did find were extremely competitive
because options are so limited. The
summer application process has been
a point of stress and anxiety for many
students this school year.
Even if a majority of internships
are not canceled this summer, the
likelihood of them being in-person and
offering the programming they would
in “normal” times seems unlikely. When
adapting to a pandemic world, in-person
internships will have to sacrifice parts
of their programming such as large
meetings, collaborative projects and
team building that would normally
enrich the internship experience. And
internships that are fully remote and
involve staring at a screen all day make
it challenging for students to evaluate if
this is a field they want to pursue further.
There are multiple consequences of
these pandemic summers that could
have serious implications for the futures
of current undergraduate students.
One potential impact is that students
will not be able to determine if they
dislike an industry or career path during
college. Internships help students decide
whether a career is appealing to them, so
not having that opportunity could lead
many to make mistakes in their first job
out of college.
Another potential consequence of
not being able to engage in hands-on
immersive summer experiences is that
students may need to try out different
fields and industries after graduation,
since they did not have the opportunity
during their college summers. Getting
a job out of college is already stressful,
and now it will be many students’ first
time working in the field outside of an
academic setting. Many might have to
test multiple jobs post-graduation to truly
figure out what they want to pursue.
While virtual internships still offer
experience and useful skills, to me,
the possibility of an entire summer on
Zoom did not seem worth the benefits. I
began looking at outdoor non-academic
experiences that have, so far, seemed
less likely to be canceled and can take
place in-person. Summer jobs such as
working at a camp or in a national park
and programs such as Outward Bounds,
Northern Outdoor Leadership School
and Overland offer a break from Zoom
and an environment that is much easier
modified to follow pandemic guidelines.
A worry for many college students
when considering outdoor programs
compared to a job or internship in
their field is that they will not develop
applicable skills to their studies and
that their résumé will not be as strong.
However, students have the remainder
of their lives to work in an office
environment and develop technical
skills. Working as a camp counselor or
leading an outdoor expedition provides
participants with experience regarding
leadership, responsibility, delegation
and independence that are applicable to
most work environments.
Undergraduate
students
must
understand that if they are unable to
find the perfect internship or academic
program this summer, it is not a
reflection of their application but rather
the challenges employers are facing in
offering internships. Even internships
themselves may not offer the experience
and growth they would in normal times
and alternative summer plans should be
embraced as a great and unique option.
Stop acting like trans women are a threat to feminism
Disbanding Phoenix — secret societies don’t belong on our campus
Why White House dogs don’t deserve
your criticism
Another summer with the pandemic
Design by Man Lam Cheng
Design by Man Lam Cheng