OPINION

CECIEL ZHONG | SOPHOMORE DUAL-DEGREE

Beyond empty promises: The pursuit of systemic change to the University’s toxic environment of gender-based violence

Content Warning: This article discusses gender-based violence, which includes but is not limited to sexual violence.

Engaging in student activism was not part of my plan in 2019, but like many others, to stay calm was to ignore the horror and anger caused by the new interim sexual assault and misconduct policy. This policy, among other things, allowed direct cross-examination for survivors who came forward. Despite the outcry, the University of Michigan did not change its procedure, insisting to wait for former Secretary of Education Betsy Devos’s new regulations to come out. The University’s position drifted with the unstable political climate and in turn, allowed survivors of sexual violence to be re-traumatized through this interim policy.

Administrators claim that they “take allegations of sexual misconduct very seriously.” The words seem clear: “Sexual misconduct will not be tolerated in the University of Michigan community.” However, in the past two years, it is hard to count the times when high-profile cases on campus arose with one hand. The University administration has made its stance well known through words and statements, but how has institutional change truly been implemented so far? To look at that we need to understand that sexual assault is about power and control. The University, as an institution, exerts institutional power that ostracises survivors through inadequate report addressments, resulting in institutional betrayal. This pattern has been exemplified through highprofile cases at the University such as Robert Anderson, Martin Philbert, and David Daniels, to name a few. Institutional betrayal created a mass of known perpetrators spreading across schools and departments, including SMTD, EECS, Michigan Athletics, Michigan Medicine, and OIE itself, a place that everyone was told to go to if an incident occurs. Meanwhile, campus organizers witnessed an apparent disconnect between the administrators and the people whom the policy directly impacted. What was consistent among the headlines is that the University knows of perpetrators at the institution, but continues failing to act promptly and comprehensively, both in retrospect and in foresight.

To “act” would be a series of steps toward justice, which includes both individually and systemically addressing where the failure occurred, rethinking and transforming the institutional structures and power relations that enabled harm. In the class-action lawsuit against former University of Michigan athletic doctor Robert Anderson, that abuse occurred years ago is not an excuse for fractional justice and no change.

Appropriate actions extend beyond providing verbal support to adopting institutional courage, which means cherishing the whistleblower, creating a culture of transparency, and using institutional power to protect community members, not assaulters. Despite the long-standing myths of false reports ruining one’s life, “the alleged” seldom face expulsion from the University, as reflected by OIE’s Annual Report in 2016, 2017, and 2018. In the workplace, three out of four sexual misconduct cases go unreported, and over 60% of people who committed sexual assault are repeated offenders. This reality is played out in Philbert’s rise in ranks despite years of rumors and Anderson’s decades of abuse, which harmed hundreds of students.

Statistics and numbers numb me, as do all of the released “official statements.” Actions, not words, are the true criterion of our community values. When protecting survivors is solely treated as a checkbox to maintain federal funding and reputation, the campus climate will not improve. When the Sixth Circuit Court discouraged personal confrontation — recommending agents, not students themselves to conduct cross-examination — but the University’s interim policy still maintained to not provide representatives for students who need them, we ask, how could we count on the procedure to be trauma-informed? When a professor with pending sexual misconduct lawsuits was appointed to teach a large course in the upcoming semester without considering the community, we ask what the University has learned from the WilmerHale report that was released not long ago?

Read more at michigandaily.com

Ceciel Zhong is a sophomore dual-degree student in the School of Information and the College of Literature, Science, and the Arts. She can be reached at xizhong@umich.edu.

JOSIE GRAHAM | JUNIOR

Beyond empty promises: Why I signed onto the class action lawsuit against U-M for students affected

Content Warning: This article discusses gender-based violence. Genderbased violence “ … refers to harmful acts directed at an individual based on their gender. It is rooted in gender inequality, the abuse of power and harmful norms.”

Iwrite this article in honor of the survivors of gender-based violence filing the class-action lawsuit against the University of Michigan for allowing Robert E. Anderson former U of M athletic doctor’s decades of abuse to continue unabated and for all other survivors of gender-based violence. This story belongs to them and to all of the survivors who go unheard and continue to be failed by oppressive systems, which perpetuate violence and inequity against marginalized groups, on this campus, in this country and across the globe.

I am no expert; I do not hold all the answers to solve this complex, nuanced issue. I write this, first and foremost, to call for justice for survivors, a form of justice defined solely by them and what they need to heal, varying on a case-to-case basis. They deserve better.

To all survivors, thank you for protecting all of us in filing this suit. The University knew of its abuse and failed all of you and the rest of our community by enabling it. If the University cares about its students, it would take responsibility for this unimaginable injury and validate these survivors.

Second, I write this as a call to myself and all of us to continue to reckon with the reality of gender-based violence, a reality we construct and maintain and to start to think of and pursue solutions to deconstruct it. I hope this op-ed encourages further debate, reflection and action when it comes to addressing and dismantling the oppressive systems that create gender-based violence. * * *

Zoom In.

Case I: Former U-M provost Martin Philbert sexually harassed multiple people over two decades throughout his entire career at the University, rising in ranks from professor to Dean to Provost, the head of the office that oversees cases of gender-based violence. University officials, including President Mark Schlissel, knew of the rumors, now proven true, circulating about Philbert’s misconduct and failed to launch investigations until the 20182019 school year.

Case II: More than 150 survivors have come forward in filing individual lawsuits and a class-action lawsuit against the University in response to the University’s handling of sexual abuse of students by former athletic doctor Robert E. Anderson dating back to the 1960s. The University received over 460 complaints against Anderson, starting this February. Worst of all, former football coach Bo Schembechler and former athletic director Don Canham knew about Anderson’s actions and failed to do anything in response at the time. Anderson worked until his retirement in 2003, despite being demoted for his behavior in 1979.

Case III: The Michigan Daily uncovered 40 years of harassment and sexual misconduct allegations against SMTD faculty Stephen Shipps.

Case IV: Employees at Clinc, an AI start-up, made allegations of sexual misconduct against Clinc’s CEO and EECS professor Jason Mars; some faculty wrote a statement calling for Mars to take a leave of absence. He taught an undergraduate course during the Winter 2021 semester.

Case V: In 2019, the University conducted a survey on sexual misconduct. Critical results include: 12.4% of women and 1.7% of men experience rape on campus; 20.4% of women and

AMBIKA TRIPATHI | OPINION CARTOONIST CAN BE REACHED AT AMBIKAT@UMICH.EDU.

4.2% of men experience nonconsensual sexual touching on campus; 34.3% of undergraduate women remain most at risk for experiencing nonconsensual touching and penetration on campus; 17% of undergraduates, 26.4% of women, experience unwanted kissing and sexual touching prior to coming to the University; 6.7% of undergraduates, 10.6% of women, experience unwanted penetration or oral sex prior to coming to the University.

Read more at michigandaily.com

Performative Diversity in Netflix’s Shadow and Bone

SAFURA SYED MiC Columnist

When I arrived in Ann Arbor in January, I embarked on a quest to survive my second semester of college. Along my epic journey, I faced powerful foes such as Calculus 2 and second year-level Japanese. Night after night, I crossed swords with Taylor polynomials and kanji characters. Despite several defeats over the course of the semester, I vanquished my last final exams and claimed the ultimate treasure, an ancient relic I had long since forgotten: free time. Immediately after my Calc 2 final, I swiftly exited Gradescope and navigated over to Steam; it was time I enjoyed myself with a good video game after months of nonstop work. Combing through my backlog of games, I stumbled across “Omori,” a psychological horror game set in a deceptively bright and colorful, nostalgic, 8-bit fantasy world brimming with amusing characters and heartfelt moments.

I bought Omori just a few days after its release after seeing a video showing the game’s cute art style on Tiktok. I had anticipated the game’s horror elements from its description on Steam; nevertheless I was still a little shocked when my player character began in a sparse, eerie white room called Whitespace. After poking around the area and obtaining a knife as a weapon, a door became accessible and let me venture through the world with other friendly characters I met. The pastel world design and charming characters were so adorable that I pretty much forgot that this was a horror game. And because I was familiar with the fairly simple combat system found in other turn-based role-playing games like “Pokémon,” I was immediately comfortable with Omori. As a result, I never wondered why there was an inaccessible menu option labelled “???” on the top-left corner of my screen (Since I was still in the tutorial, I figured this would be a normal tool that would open up to me later). And when my character learned a combat skill bluntly labelled “stab,” I never viewed it as anything more than a basic element typical to the genre.

This comforting familiarity combined with Omori’s exaggeratedly adorable world design lulled me into a false sense of security and quietly set me up for calamity.

After I spent about 30 minutes learning the in-game combat mechanics, becoming acquainted with the main cast and marveling at the charming world and character design, one of the supporting characters suddenly became enveloped by a mysterious darkness. Completely unexplained, the player character is teleported back to Whitespace, except now the door I once passed through is gone. The sudden ejection from my pastoral fantasyland back into the sinister Whitespace left me trembling as I yearned for the sense of comfort I felt just minutes prior. With no clear way out in an infinite and empty room, I wandered around aimlessly, desperately searching for the exit but to no avail. Out of options, I opened up the in-game menu in order to search for an item or something to use.

“STAB,” written in a bold red font, replaced the “???” option I had previously ignored. Once I apprehensively selected the “STAB” option, the game prompted me to confirm that I wanted to stab my player character.

Read more at michigandaily.com

The PI in AAPI is silenced

ANDREW NAKAMURA MiC Columnist

The month of May brings warmer weather and millions of posts under the Asian American Pacific Islander hashtag across all social media platforms. It is AAPI Heritage Month, a time for every Asian American and Pacific Islander to celebrate their respective cultures. AAPI commemoration was first officially recognized in 1978 as just one week in May, and the celebration didn’t expand into a month and didn’t become annual until 1990. At the same time, the U.S. Census Bureau was using the Asian Pacific Islander label they had used starting in the 1980s. However, while the Census Bureau separated the two groups in the year 2000, the label has continued to persist in colloquial use and in names such as AAPI Heritage Month. From celebrities to “woke” corporations and Instagram activist accounts, everyone has started using the AAPI label, yet the term never felt right to me.

As the word AAPI has risen in popularity in recent months, I began to wonder if people really had Pacific Islanders’ interests in mind when they used the AAPI label. I grew up in Hawaii, and as I met more people from mainland America, I realized just how little people know about the Pacific Islands. Most of my mainland American friends didn’t even know the three regions composing the Pacific Islands, yet all of a sudden, it seemed like everyone was discussing violence against Asian Americans AND Pacific Islanders. As I read article after article with AAPI in the headline, I noticed that I found nearly no quotes from Pacific Islanders. I waded through a flood of Asian-focused writing until I found articles specifically centering Pacific Islanders’ opinions on the AAPI label.

The AAPI label continues to spread online without people understanding its flaws. Despite comprising half the acronym, Pacific Islanders, composed of Polynesian, Melanesian and Micronesian ethnic groups, are often left out of the discussion surrounding AAPI issues. In reality, AAPI in most contexts just means Asian, more specifically East Asian, yet tacks on Pacific Islanders like an afterthought. While AAPI and Asian American seem like innocuous and interchangeable terms to us non-Pacific Islanders, our carelessness with the label harms the Pacific Islander community we claim to want to uplift.

In an attempt to be inclusive, the use of the AAPI can end up causing more harm than good. Pacific Islanders are often drowned out by the comparatively large influx of Asian American voices. As a result, the issues and needs of Asian Americans are projected onto Pacific Islander Americans, misrepresenting the actual struggles Pacific Islanders face. For example, according to research compiled by APM Research Lab, Pacific Islander Americans are facing COVID-19 infection rates nearly two times higher than Asian Americans.

Michigan in Color Collective Statement on Palestine

Design by Marina Sun

MICHIGAN IN COLOR STAFF

Disclaimer: This collective statement is written under the crucial understanding that Israel is an occupation and apartheid. It is an occupation in that it controls who goes in and out of Palestine and continuously and illegally occupies Palestinian land through Israeli police aggression and Israeli “Defense” Forces, which we will more accurately refer to as the Israeli Occupation Forces throughout this statement since “defense” falsely implies an equivalent power to defend against. Israel is an apartheid in that the Palestinian citizens of Israel are treated as less than by the Israeli government on issues from a lack of civil rights compared to Jewish citizens of Israel, to medical discrimination, to a lack of clean water, and property expulsions. Israel exists at the expense of Palestinians, and for that, this piece is centered on the importance of a liberated Palestine.

Introduction

Saturday, May 15 marked the annual commemoration of the Nakba (Nakba is the Arabic word for “catastrophe”). Since 1948, the ongoing Nakba has resulted in the displacement of over 7.2 million Palestinians, the brutal genocide of over 1,240,000 Palestinians and the destruction of over 927 Palestinian villages. This day signifies yet another year of oppression and forced immobility for the Palestinian people as they continuously suffer from the structurally violent state of Israel that works to oppress, dispossess and displace Palestinians. The oppression of Palestinian people is commonly mislabeled as a “conflict” between two sides. This false characterization serves as an erasure of Palestinian oppression and suggests Palestine’s defense is equally oppressive. Israel has one of the most extensive armies in the world, while Palestine does not have a unified military and has restricted access to weaponry; it’s clear that “bothsidesism” and the notion of an equal conflict are not only inapplicable, but dangerous. The magnitude of Israeli settlercolonialism, the development of the apartheid-state and the ongoing ethnic cleansing committed against Palestinians indicates that this oppression should more accurately be termed a humanitarian crisis. The oppression of Palestinians is rooted in Zionism: a racist, ultra-nationalistic ideology that, while based on the desire for Jewish self-determination, strips Palestinians of their rights on their own ancestral land and justifies the continuous perpetration of inhumane war crimes towards Palestinians. The bigotry and violence birthed from Zionism is the direct reason that Israel violently targeted Palestinians in the Al-Aqsa Mosque on May 7, killed over 197 Palestinians in Gaza with airstrikes in the last week, murdered at least seven people in the occupied West Bank and violently attempted to dispossess Palestinian families in Sheikh Jarrah.

May 15 of 2021, Nakba Day, commemorates 73 years of pain for Palestinians, characterized by years of air strikes, innumerable violations of humanitarian laws — including the denial of basic rights for Palestinians such as the right to own property or vote — and relentless weaponization of international aid in support of Israel. Much of academia, from students to scholars, dismisses the oppression endured by Palestinians as complex, but in reality it is quite simple to understand — Israel is the oppressor and Palestinians are the oppressed.