So I just read this entire document. I almost forgot what a complete joke student politics are. If you’re a student, remember that you pay mandatory fees to these jackasses. Consider demanding a better use of your money.
At least half of the motions put forth were deciding to write letters to people. If you are a Canadian student, you are paying these representatives to travel, in some cases across the country, to collectively decide who to write letters to. Think about that one for a second.
Whereas the current name of the Women’s Constituency Group is exclusive, transphobic, and non-inclusive of the diversity of the community; and
Whereas the current language could be updated to reflect the diversity of the community; and
Whereas the Queer Constituency Group addresses issues of sexuality and the Women’s Constituency Group addresses issues of gender; therefore
Be it resolved that the Women’s Constituency Group be renamed the Women and Trans People Constituency Group.
Here they draw a distinction between “exclusive” and “transphobic”, meaning they recognize that the two are different things. So being “exclusive” is in itself a bad, wrong thing to the CFS. Yet they’re only moving to include transpeople, and continuing to exclude men. This violates their own logic and shows where their ideology actually lies.
Page 7 — this one’s really fucking bizarre
Be it further resolved that Standing Resolution 3, article 4 be amended to read:
- Anti-Oppression Procedures, Mood-Watchers and information-Helpers
In order to ensure that conversations remain productive and safe, a minimum of one mood-watcher who has undergone training in anti-oppression politics and facilitation frameworks will be appointed by the voting members at the beginning of plenaries.
Professional student thought police! Woo hoo.
Page 17 — this is the MRA one
Whereas there has been an increase in the presence of ‘Men’s Rights Awareness Groups’ on campuses across the country; and
Whereas these groups provide environments for sexism, patriarchy and misogyny to manifest and be perpetuated on campus, which should be safe(r) spaces for students; and
Whereas these groups promote misogynist, hateful views towards women and ideologies that promote gender equity, challenges women’s bodily autonomy, justifies sexual assault, and decries feminism as violent; and
Whereas messages from these groups claim to be of equality, but are in fact messages that are misogynist, sexist, cissexist, heterosexist and homophobic responses to the challenge of cis-male privilege in society; and
Whereas ‘Men’s Rights Awareness Groups’ are attempting to establish chapters and service centers across Canadian colleges and universities; and
Whereas a ‘Men’s Rights Awareness Group’ at the University of Toronto recently held a meeting, which was protested by women and allies, prompting a barrage of threats and attacks on several women on campus and the students union for taking part in protesting this group and its meetings; therefore
Be it resolved that the issues policy ‘Sexual Assault and Violence Against Women on Campus’ be amended to include the following under ‘The Federation opposes’:
- campaigns, forums, groups, meetings or events whose purpose is to frighten, intimidate and/or target women students on campus; and
- the administration’s lack of response to calls for public support and protection of students being threatened, stalked and/or attacked on campus.
This is such a ridiculous clusterfuck that I don’t even know where to begin commenting. But let’s start with the fact that this is nothing but vague platitudes and indefensible generalizations. “Men’s rights awareness groups” all exist to promote misogyny and hateful views towards women? You’re going to have to prove that one if you want the statement to be legitimate. It’s going to be hard to prove that both a) MRA ideology actually does promote hate, and b) ALL MRA groups promote identical ideologies.
Note the phrasing in the actual amendment. The motion isn’t concerned with groups that frighten, intimidate, or target trans or male people on campus — it is only concerned with women students. So the CFS is implicitly violating its own (ridiculous) ideology by encoding female privilege over trans people (and arguably men, butcertainly trans people).
Whereas the Supreme Court of Canada on October 5, 2012 upheld a law where HIV positive individuals can be charged with aggravated sexual assault for engaging in a sexual act with another person without disclosing their status; and
…Whereas men have used criminal allegations against women living with HIV as a weapon of abuse and this ruling gives abusive men a more powerful tool to coerce, control and to trap in abusive relationships women living with HIV; therefore
Be it resolved that a letter be written to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Minister of Justice Rob Nicholson and Opposition Justice Critics condemning criminalisation of those who fail to disclose their HIV status and the Supreme Court of Canada’s definition;
Be it resolved that letters be written to the Provincial Attorney Generals calling for an exercise in restraint in prosecutions related to criminalising [sic] those who fail to disclose their HIV status under the Supreme Court of Canada’s definition; [and blah blah blah blah…]
Again, your CFS not giving a fuck about any group of people other than women. How about gay men who are victimized by other HIV-positive men? How about men who are victimized by HIV-positive women? How about trans people who are victimized by men? How about trans people who are victimized by women?
Doesn’t matter, because if you are not a woman, no one cares.