Harrison Glicklich | Pro-NSO; Pro-ANA

Good Luck | Our disservice of misrepresentation

By Harrison Glicklich 09/25/16 11:35pm

When I was in high school, eating disorders were coming into their own as a public health menace. We had a lot of fun watching videos on the subject in health class. We learned, shockingly, that eating disorders are bad. We even heard testimonies from those who had recovered and seen the errors of their ways, or maybe they were child actors reading lines to the same effect. In short, you were a fool to get involved with eating disorders.

At the end of the unit, we had a quiz where we matched the symptoms to the disease: Eating too much is binge eating disorder, eating too much and vomiting is bulimia nervosa and not eating enough is anorexia nervosa. It was an easy A, and that was good because you didn’t want to spread yourself too thin with AP credits. Yet, I somehow doubted that this was the best approach toward addressing eating disorders.

Based on the trajectory of this story, you’ll be unsurprised to know that there are online communities which portray eating disorders in a positive way. So called “pro-ana” sites provide a space for people to discuss their condition. Members report feeling persecuted or misunderstood by those outside the community, which creates a sense of belonging and acceptance within. There is a considerable mythologizing of anorexia, and many report they are better for having it.

Predictably, groupthink on these sites exacerbates the severity of users’ disorders. Frequent users tend to have longer recovery times and a greater likelihood to relapse after treatment. It’s a shame to think that the programs aimed at preventing eating disorders by haranguing high school students are likely the same ones pushing them to seek these spaces.

The problem with these programs arises from their monolithic approach. When a source presents only the “right” opinion, when it doesn’t foster inclusion in a space meant for everyone, those who don’t feel represented withdraw. Unfortunately, those with the best intentions can be guilty of so-called “after school special syndrome.”

Our approach to New Student Orientation is also guilty in this regard. In the first issue of The Daily Pennsylvanian this semester, the front-page article reports that all freshmen describe NSO as “fun” and/or “exciting.” This piece struck me as a misrepresentation of the Penn community as a whole, so I conducted my own survey — with a larger sample size than the DP’s. Here, I found that while positive views of NSO are the majority, there is a significant minority with opinions to the contrary.

I wonder what we have to gain by representing our community in this manner except to reinforce an idea that most already have. In an effort to prove that NSO is “fun” and/or “exciting,” this piece only serves to alienate students who don’t share that opinion.

Nearly a month into the school year, this article might feel like it occurred in the distant past. Of course, this piece is just the most blatant example in a worrying trend. The more we choose to reinforce the idea that everyone thinks — or ought to think — the same way, the more we push diverse students out of the public space.

In this same publication, we talk a lot about “Penn Face,” the idea that students project an outward appearance of happiness and satisfaction when their real feelings are to the contrary. Of course, we are overwhelmingly against it. Yet, how does this align with the message we are sending to incoming freshmen in articles like the one above, and is it any surprise that students are withdrawing from the public sphere when it actively works to exclude them? With all the losses our community has suffered and all the ones that have yet to occur, it’s important to let people know that they are not alone. I’d rather read an article titled “NSO sucks, here’s why.”

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.