FREE TAPATALK APP

TragicMonkey · 7th May 2012, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by jasonpatterson

I'd be happy to have doors on the stalls in all mens' bathrooms for goodness sake.

At my college, the women lived in dorms with security card entrances and a bathroom for every four girls. The men lived in dorms with no security of any kind at the entrances (we sometimes had to ask homeless people to please leave the dorm) and one bathroom per floor (for about sixty guys each), with said bathroom having four toilet stalls without doors, two urinals next to a permanently open window (there was no air conditioning in the mens dorm, of course. In Georgia.), and three showerheads in an open tiled area with no dividers or separation.

bookitty · 7th May 2012, 12:01 PM

My initial reaction - Just turn the damn thing into a counseling center for all students - men, women, LGBT, Christian, whatever.

However, if members of certain groups already feel marginalized, exposed, or targeted, a general counseling center (which probably already exists anyway) may not feel safe. The same people who are targeting specific groups would welcome at the center, pushing out those who need help.

For example, BYU is the most homophobic college in America. Until very recently, any student who identified as gay could face sanctions and be expelled. In 2007, BYU changed their honor code. LGBT students do not face sanctions as long as they follow the BYU honor code of chastity that is expected of all students. In 2010, they lifted the ban on advocacy and an unofficial LGBT and allies club was formed. many people have come forward as allies but there is still a culture of homophobia on campus. At BYU, it would make sense to have an LGBT counseling center (so long as they stuck to science, instead of "pray away the gay.")

At the University of Minnesota, the justice department recently stepped in as a response to complaints that the rape of female students was being ignored, under-investigated, and not prosecuted. The justice department is also reviewing the university's compliance with federal laws barring sex discrimination. On this campus, a women's center would be needed if the female students don't feel safe or don't want to risk seeing their attacker at a general counseling center.

If there is reason to believe that male students at Simon Fraser would be more likely to seek help for depression, suicidal thoughts or substance abuse with a men's center, it makes sense to have one. I believe this may be the case. Depression and substance abuse are not widely understood and still have social stigma - one which says that the patient should just "deal with it." Thanks to negative gender roles, men are more likely to think that they need to tough it out and are less likely to seek help. A men's center might give them a safer place to do so.

Foolmewunz · 7th May 2012, 06:06 PM

@Tyr-13

Back to the politics at the Student Society....

I find it rather curious that the "Rotunda" group has its own sub-set on the University website, and that they seem to have been very active in the Student Society election of 2010, but any coverage or articles seem to end there. They sent out questionnaires to all the candidates in 2010, and published the responses, but there's no mention of the elections of 2011, which would be the current "board".

Have they simply lost interest in the web pages? Or is there some internal strife? Like I said - I don't know, but I find it curious that they'd have such an organized presence in the 2010 elections and have absolutely squadoosh to show after that. (I was originally looking for some mention of the elections as that would be when the author of this "amendment" would've been elected.)

Furcifer · 7th May 2012, 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by qayak

What do you think?

Canadian society is a man's world? I'm not convinced of that, but even if it is, University isn't a man's world. Last time I checked Waterloo and RMC were the only schools in Canada with a higher male to female ratio. SFU is probably 60/40 female to male. It seems like a very bad comparison to make a point with given the numbers.
Men have issues and women have issues. Not having somewhere for both seems sexist.

tyr_13 · 7th May 2012, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by Foolmewunz

@Tyr-13

Back to the politics at the Student Society....

I find it rather curious that the "Rotunda" group has its own sub-set on the University website, and that they seem to have been very active in the Student Society election of 2010, but any coverage or articles seem to end there. They sent out questionnaires to all the candidates in 2010, and published the responses, but there's no mention of the elections of 2011, which would be the current "board".

Have they simply lost interest in the web pages? Or is there some internal strife? Like I said - I don't know, but I find it curious that they'd have such an organized presence in the 2010 elections and have absolutely squadoosh to show after that. (I was originally looking for some mention of the elections as that would be when the author of this "amendment" would've been elected.)

The more I look at it the more it seems fishy. The pages of many of those links perhaps really haven't been updated in more than a year. It could be lazy web-presence, like the person who was dedicated to doing the pages graduated or something and no one picked up the slack. But the pages themselves are well done. I was doing a little digging too once I saw the article's mistakes, and it's kind of confusing. Non-official pages might be the place to look now, but that's going to end up with a lot of student reporting.

It feels like some faculty oversight issues. However, that's just a feeling based on my experience and observations inside and outside student organizations from a college in a different country, so it's not exactly a reliable feeling.

EDIT: Oh, and I think the 'Rotunda Group' is just what they call the student union and related student governing bodies and isn't actually a separate group.

Foolmewunz · 7th May 2012, 07:12 PM

No, somewhere in there it mentioned that the Rotunda Group are given facilities in the rotunda, which is evidently at a key crossroads on the campus. Sort of smacks of the cool girls versus the not-so-cool girls versus the nerds. Very high schoolish. And as they also say, a couple of the groups - the Women's Center and the Gay-Lesbian-Whatever group are actually departments of the Student Society. The radio station, the first nations group, and the Africa/Caribbean (How Not to Say Black in One Easy Lesson) are in the Rotunda Group, but are not departments. I reckon they're only halfway there. There's some other group, but I'm damned if I can figure out what they're all about - seems to be sort of a catchall for student activities and involvement in the community.

What surprises me is that there's no select group for Asians in that upper echelon. Wouldn't Simon Fraser have one of the largest Asian and Asian-American populations of any school in North America. Serious magnitudes of Hong Kong and Taiwanese money moved into Vancouver and BC starting about 25 years ago.

I think they should remove any interest group from the Student Society's sponsorship. It smacks of exclusion rather than inclusion.

tyr_13 · 7th May 2012, 07:29 PM

The other group is for 'social and environmental justice'. I think you're right though. The thing I can't understand is that I can't find any other groups. There are sports clubs, but no other groups like those ones. You're right, being in Vancouver there probably would be an Asian group. There are Afro-Caribbean and First Nation groups there.

Are these groups being excluded unfairly through political plays? Have the advocates for the Men's Center actually been trying to get it done for a while and finally found a workaround? Obviously there was talk of it as far back as 2011.

It's problematic. Or we're reading too much into it and there's an innocent explanation that's escaping us. Still, seems shady.

EDIT: The event calender is a hoot to look at. It's blank. The only page to have been updated after spring of 2011 is the radio station.

EDIT 2: Found the club list. http://go.sfss.ca/clubs/list It includes a Chinese Student Union, a Filipino Student Union, hell even a Korean Catholic Society. I guess they don't get the cool space of the Rotunda. The way to get that would inevitably be political maneuvering. On the other hand, there is only so much space to go around there. Still seems petty to make it a special group of groups, and shady to make them departments.

Furcifer · 7th May 2012, 07:45 PM

Originally Posted by Foolmewunz

What surprises me is that there's no select group for Asians in that upper echelon. Wouldn't Simon Fraser have one of the largest Asian and Asian-American populations of any school in North America. Serious magnitudes of Hong Kong and Taiwanese money moved into Vancouver and BC starting about 25 years ago.

I don't think so. The non-resident tuition rates are more reasonable in places like Windsor. Admission is easier as well.
I'm pretty sure Toronto still has more resident Asians as well.

I'd guess it's above average, but not as high as you might be thinking. SFU does have a great Math program but I think that stereotype is a little played out.

Foolmewunz · 7th May 2012, 08:06 PM

Originally Posted by Furcifer

I don't think so. The non-resident tuition rates are more reasonable in places like Windsor. Admission is easier as well.
I'm pretty sure Toronto still has more resident Asians as well.

I'd guess it's above average, but not as high as you might be thinking. SFU does have a great Math program but I think that stereotype is a little played out.

I can't find the demographics for UofT, but Toronto, the city, has no where near the percentage of Asian population as Vancouver. Vancouver is almost 40% Asian (origin).

Simon Fraser already has foreign enrollment from Asia at about 15% of the undergraduate population (the graduate school is even higher). And that's foreign citizens - e.g. exchange students. If you add in the Canadian-Asians, I'm pretty sure the largest ethnic group is Asians.

Mercurial Artism · 7th May 2012, 08:27 PM

Originally Posted by tyr_13

Yeah, it is difficult to form well supported opinions when there is a huge gap in data. I agree that a lot of it sinks of politics. There's almost always something more. With that in mind, what I've been saying is dependent on the Men's Center and Women's Center being more or less what they claim to be.

I don't doubt that the Women's Center isn't a hardline group of ebil femnazi in brown shirts and jack boots. Hell, they might even be generally the model of reasonableness but that one answer on their FAQ page is what I'd call harmful. More than likely it's either from one person being careless in his or her writing or born from frustration in dealing with boorish 'questions' lanced at them disingenuously regarding the subject.

They're a department as of last year? If that's the case I'd agree that it's probably best to defund the Women's Center and let the Men's go through the normal process. Still, they both sound like fine ideas in theory.

EDIT: A couple of useful links. http://www.sfss.ca/womenscentre.html http://www.sfuwomenctr.ca/

EDIT 2: In fact, it seems that the article misquotes the FAQ page.

Notice that the question it is answering is, "What is the Male Allies Project?" The actual text of another FAQ is also useful.

The page says it was last updated 01/2011. I doubt that, but I don't think it was updated recently either. It does point to the Male Allies Project answer either being written by someone else or just poorly worded. "Masculinity and it's harmful effects," can be read two ways and I'm suspecting that they meant to limit their point to the harmful effects cause by some concepts of masculinity and not that masculinity inherently is harmful.

Yeah, reading that now it does sound like they were referencing STEREOTYPES of men/masculinity, and just worded it very poorly, making it seem like men are all about being aggressive louts without feelings. I would support a men's group as long as it didn't promote harmful stereotypes (much like I would oppose a women's group or LGBT group or whatever promoting harmful stereotypes). I haven't familiarized myself with the funding structures and political motivations of this particular case, so mine is a more general statement.

And TragicMonkey, that sucks about the dorm conditions. My college dorm was co-ed, and you had to swipe your ID and/or use a key to get in the building.

Beerina · 8th May 2012, 05:35 AM

Originally Posted by NoahFence

At some point in time, in order to have REAL equality, we need to eliminate such things as "women only" places, black history month, and the like.

Ya really. What's up with this? Are our white women not good enough for 'em?

wobs · 8th May 2012, 07:59 AM

Men's organisations in Uni's have often faced opposition. Of course it is women's groups who oppose them, but it is the SU who ultimately decide which society stays. The following is taken from the minutes of a summer meeting for Hull Uni SU re Men's officer:

Quote:

(d) Men’s Officer – Proposal to abolish the Position The President introduced the attached proposal giving details as to why she believed the above position should be abolished. Asked if members had any comments or questions? VP(Scarb) put forward his reasons for keeping the position which included his belief that men were under-represented; national statistics in education highlight that there is a greater need to support men; a referendum was held and the students voted to keep the position; UEC should not be making this decision under summer powers as feel it is a decision to be made by the student body – why can this not wait until September to do this via referendum?; should not take into account that we are a laughing stock for having this position – why should we be bothered by this? 12 other Student Unions also have this role; if the role is not there, where would men go to be counselled on issues that effect men, such as testicular cancer; and this role is constantly under attack and feel should fight to keep it. VP(W&E) stated that the national statistics in this case are being misused. Here at Hull University, the majority of courses are ones that women particularly excel at but am addressing this through the University committee structure. It has been nationally identified that the there are specific groups that suffer discrimination and men are not included in this. Our liberation committees, therefore, are set up to address these specific groups, such as disabled students and black students. The President added that women in society are stereotyped against as generally speaking it is men that rise to the top of organisations. An example of this is the HUU structure this year - the Board of Trustees and UEC this year has only 1 woman represented on it. VP(W&E) added that there is no allowance in the Welfare budget for a Men’s Officer. At the end of the above discussion, it was agreed to vote on this issue. The following was, therefore, put to the vote:
- Those in favour of deleting the role of Men’s Officer:
Votes for: 5
Votes against: 1 Carried

http://hullstudent.com/files/UEC_OPS_23Jun09.DOC

Found here:
http://therightsofman.typepad.co.uk/...-tactics-.html

Furcifer · 8th May 2012, 09:07 AM

Originally Posted by Foolmewunz

I can't find the demographics for UofT, but Toronto, the city, has no where near the percentage of Asian population as Vancouver. Vancouver is almost 40% Asian (origin).

Simon Fraser already has foreign enrollment from Asia at about 15% of the undergraduate population (the graduate school is even higher). And that's foreign citizens - e.g. exchange students. If you add in the Canadian-Asians, I'm pretty sure the largest ethnic group is Asians.

What's your source? That figure just doesn't jive with my experience, unless it's like Vancouver, Richmond and Burnaby and not the lower mainland or Fraser Valley. Either that or they're using "Asians" as in from the continent of Asia. If they're including Pakistan, India etc. under that umbrella then 40% sounds right.

The other thing possibly worth mentioning is that I know more than a few Canadian born "Asians" that don't identify with being Asian. The second and now third or even fourth generation is so far removed culturally they're just plain Canadian. I don't want to say they resent being Asian, but they resent being identified as Asian simply because of their appearance.

Foolmewunz · 9th May 2012, 04:09 AM

Originally Posted by Furcifer

What's your source? That figure just doesn't jive with my experience, unless it's like Vancouver, Richmond and Burnaby and not the lower mainland or Fraser Valley. Either that or they're using "Asians" as in from the continent of Asia. If they're including Pakistan, India etc. under that umbrella then 40% sounds right.

The other thing possibly worth mentioning is that I know more than a few Canadian born "Asians" that don't identify with being Asian. The second and now third or even fourth generation is so far removed culturally they're just plain Canadian. I don't want to say they resent being Asian, but they resent being identified as Asian simply because of their appearance.

The source was the 2006 Census, via the lazyman's standard, Wikipedia. And they're shown as being for "the Greater Vancouver Regional District", whatever that encompasses.

"They" didn't include South Asians. But I did. Persons who self-identified as being from the Indian Sub-Continent amounted to just under 10%, the remainder were broken down as East Asian (which includes China and Korea, notably) and Southeast Asians. Filippinos get a separate category, and there's a wee amount of West Asians, by which I assume they mean "west of the Indian Sub-Continent", notably Iran. But whether you exclude the nearly ten per cent of the population from South Asia, you still have a very high percentile of the 2.0 million people who are Asian.

One or the other, you'd think with a very high (16%) foreign Asian student base, and a very visible, nay prominent Asian population in the area, that one of the key student groups would be the Asians. Maybe they're more concerned, as they are traditionally, with getting an education?

ETA: Wanna see those acquaintances who resent being identified as Asian or Chinese by mere appearance quickly reverse field? A friend of mine from Toronto (who's HK Chinese and now in HK) said that whenever someone refused to acknowledge that looking Asian could simply be "looking Asian" and have no deeper meaning, she'd pretend to be astonished and say, "You're Asian? I always thought you looked Inuit!" Damn, did they become flag-waving Asians in a heartbeat. It's mostly a posturing thing, I feel.

Furcifer · 9th May 2012, 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by Foolmewunz

The source was the 2006 Census, via the lazyman's standard, Wikipedia. And they're shown as being for "the Greater Vancouver Regional District", whatever that encompasses.

"They" didn't include South Asians. But I did. Persons who self-identified as being from the Indian Sub-Continent amounted to just under 10%, the remainder were broken down as East Asian (which includes China and Korea, notably) and Southeast Asians. Filippinos get a separate category, and there's a wee amount of West Asians, by which I assume they mean "west of the Indian Sub-Continent", notably Iran. But whether you exclude the nearly ten per cent of the population from South Asia, you still have a very high percentile of the 2.0 million people who are Asian.

One or the other, you'd think with a very high (16%) foreign Asian student base, and a very visible, nay prominent Asian population in the area, that one of the key student groups would be the Asians. Maybe they're more concerned, as they are traditionally, with getting an education?

ETA: Wanna see those acquaintances who resent being identified as Asian or Chinese by mere appearance quickly reverse field? A friend of mine from Toronto (who's HK Chinese and now in HK) said that whenever someone refused to acknowledge that looking Asian could simply be "looking Asian" and have no deeper meaning, she'd pretend to be astonished and say, "You're Asian? I always thought you looked Inuit!" Damn, did they become flag-waving Asians in a heartbeat. It's mostly a posturing thing, I feel.

Yah the GVRD would be the entire area easily assessible to kids wanting to go to SFU.

The wiki page says the census refers to people "identifying" with being of visible minority origins, the largest of which being Chinese. For purposes of the point you were making I guess it's a good enough indicator, but I honestly question what that means in an ethnically diverse city like Vancouver, with multiple generations now well established. 25 or 30 years ago that 41.7% (or whatever it was) was pretty much immigrants, today they're mostly just Canuks.

You're anecdote reminds of the Irish I know who are adamantly Canadian, unless you call them Scottish. Then all of a sudden they're Fightin' Irish.

Yes, the Men's Centre should be allowed along with the Women's.	23	57.50%
No, the Men's Centre shouldn't be allowed but the Women's Centre should.	1	2.50%
Neither Men's nor Women's Centres should be allowed.	6	15.00%
Planet X should only allow gender neutral centres for men and women.	10	25.00%
Voters: 40. You may not vote on this poll

7th May 2012, 11:41 AM	#41
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 30,285	Originally Posted by jasonpatterson I'd be happy to have doors on the stalls in all mens' bathrooms for goodness sake. At my college, the women lived in dorms with security card entrances and a bathroom for every four girls. The men lived in dorms with no security of any kind at the entrances (we sometimes had to ask homeless people to please leave the dorm) and one bathroom per floor (for about sixty guys each), with said bathroom having four toilet stalls without doors, two urinals next to a permanently open window (there was no air conditioning in the mens dorm, of course. In Georgia.), and three showerheads in an open tiled area with no dividers or separation.
	__________________ One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.

7th May 2012, 12:01 PM	#42
bookitty Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 5,532	My initial reaction - Just turn the damn thing into a counseling center for all students - men, women, LGBT, Christian, whatever. However, if members of certain groups already feel marginalized, exposed, or targeted, a general counseling center (which probably already exists anyway) may not feel safe. The same people who are targeting specific groups would welcome at the center, pushing out those who need help. For example, BYU is the most homophobic college in America. Until very recently, any student who identified as gay could face sanctions and be expelled. In 2007, BYU changed their honor code. LGBT students do not face sanctions as long as they follow the BYU honor code of chastity that is expected of all students. In 2010, they lifted the ban on advocacy and an unofficial LGBT and allies club was formed. many people have come forward as allies but there is still a culture of homophobia on campus. At BYU, it would make sense to have an LGBT counseling center (so long as they stuck to science, instead of "pray away the gay.") At the University of Minnesota, the justice department recently stepped in as a response to complaints that the rape of female students was being ignored, under-investigated, and not prosecuted. The justice department is also reviewing the university's compliance with federal laws barring sex discrimination. On this campus, a women's center would be needed if the female students don't feel safe or don't want to risk seeing their attacker at a general counseling center. If there is reason to believe that male students at Simon Fraser would be more likely to seek help for depression, suicidal thoughts or substance abuse with a men's center, it makes sense to have one. I believe this may be the case. Depression and substance abuse are not widely understood and still have social stigma - one which says that the patient should just "deal with it." Thanks to negative gender roles, men are more likely to think that they need to tough it out and are less likely to seek help. A men's center might give them a safer place to do so.
	__________________ No more cupcakes for me, thanks. Last edited by bookitty; 7th May 2012 at 01:23 PM.

7th May 2012, 06:06 PM	#43
Foolmewunz Grammar Resistance Leader Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Pattaya, Thailand Posts: 20,873	@Tyr-13 Back to the politics at the Student Society.... I find it rather curious that the "Rotunda" group has its own sub-set on the University website, and that they seem to have been very active in the Student Society election of 2010, but any coverage or articles seem to end there. They sent out questionnaires to all the candidates in 2010, and published the responses, but there's no mention of the elections of 2011, which would be the current "board". Have they simply lost interest in the web pages? Or is there some internal strife? Like I said - I don't know, but I find it curious that they'd have such an organized presence in the 2010 elections and have absolutely squadoosh to show after that. (I was originally looking for some mention of the elections as that would be when the author of this "amendment" would've been elected.)
	__________________ Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele Don't you wish someone had slapped baby Hitler really really hard? [i] Dr. Buzzo 02/13 [i] Last edited by Foolmewunz; 7th May 2012 at 06:11 PM.

7th May 2012, 06:47 PM	#45
tyr_13 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Falconer, NY Posts: 9,779	Originally Posted by Foolmewunz @Tyr-13 Back to the politics at the Student Society.... I find it rather curious that the "Rotunda" group has its own sub-set on the University website, and that they seem to have been very active in the Student Society election of 2010, but any coverage or articles seem to end there. They sent out questionnaires to all the candidates in 2010, and published the responses, but there's no mention of the elections of 2011, which would be the current "board". Have they simply lost interest in the web pages? Or is there some internal strife? Like I said - I don't know, but I find it curious that they'd have such an organized presence in the 2010 elections and have absolutely squadoosh to show after that. (I was originally looking for some mention of the elections as that would be when the author of this "amendment" would've been elected.) The more I look at it the more it seems fishy. The pages of many of those links perhaps really haven't been updated in more than a year. It could be lazy web-presence, like the person who was dedicated to doing the pages graduated or something and no one picked up the slack. But the pages themselves are well done. I was doing a little digging too once I saw the article's mistakes, and it's kind of confusing. Non-official pages might be the place to look now, but that's going to end up with a lot of student reporting. It feels like some faculty oversight issues. However, that's just a feeling based on my experience and observations inside and outside student organizations from a college in a different country, so it's not exactly a reliable feeling. EDIT: Oh, and I think the 'Rotunda Group' is just what they call the student union and related student governing bodies and isn't actually a separate group.
	__________________ Circled nothing is still nothing. "Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong Last edited by tyr_13; 7th May 2012 at 06:49 PM. Reason: too add

7th May 2012, 06:37 PM	#44
Furcifer miscreant Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: hohm Posts: 13,379	Originally Posted by qayak What do you think? Canadian society is a man's world? I'm not convinced of that, but even if it is, University isn't a man's world. Last time I checked Waterloo and RMC were the only schools in Canada with a higher male to female ratio. SFU is probably 60/40 female to male. It seems like a very bad comparison to make a point with given the numbers. Men have issues and women have issues. Not having somewhere for both seems sexist.

7th May 2012, 07:12 PM	#46
Foolmewunz Grammar Resistance Leader Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Pattaya, Thailand Posts: 20,873	No, somewhere in there it mentioned that the Rotunda Group are given facilities in the rotunda, which is evidently at a key crossroads on the campus. Sort of smacks of the cool girls versus the not-so-cool girls versus the nerds. Very high schoolish. And as they also say, a couple of the groups - the Women's Center and the Gay-Lesbian-Whatever group are actually departments of the Student Society. The radio station, the first nations group, and the Africa/Caribbean (How Not to Say Black in One Easy Lesson) are in the Rotunda Group, but are not departments. I reckon they're only halfway there. There's some other group, but I'm damned if I can figure out what they're all about - seems to be sort of a catchall for student activities and involvement in the community. What surprises me is that there's no select group for Asians in that upper echelon. Wouldn't Simon Fraser have one of the largest Asian and Asian-American populations of any school in North America. Serious magnitudes of Hong Kong and Taiwanese money moved into Vancouver and BC starting about 25 years ago. I think they should remove any interest group from the Student Society's sponsorship. It smacks of exclusion rather than inclusion.
	__________________ Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele Don't you wish someone had slapped baby Hitler really really hard? [i] Dr. Buzzo 02/13 [i]

7th May 2012, 07:29 PM	#47
tyr_13 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Falconer, NY Posts: 9,779	The other group is for 'social and environmental justice'. I think you're right though. The thing I can't understand is that I can't find any other groups. There are sports clubs, but no other groups like those ones. You're right, being in Vancouver there probably would be an Asian group. There are Afro-Caribbean and First Nation groups there. Are these groups being excluded unfairly through political plays? Have the advocates for the Men's Center actually been trying to get it done for a while and finally found a workaround? Obviously there was talk of it as far back as 2011. It's problematic. Or we're reading too much into it and there's an innocent explanation that's escaping us. Still, seems shady. EDIT: The event calender is a hoot to look at. It's blank. The only page to have been updated after spring of 2011 is the radio station. EDIT 2: Found the club list. http://go.sfss.ca/clubs/list It includes a Chinese Student Union, a Filipino Student Union, hell even a Korean Catholic Society. I guess they don't get the cool space of the Rotunda. The way to get that would inevitably be political maneuvering. On the other hand, there is only so much space to go around there. Still seems petty to make it a special group of groups, and shady to make them departments.
	__________________ Circled nothing is still nothing. "Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong Last edited by tyr_13; 7th May 2012 at 07:37 PM.

7th May 2012, 07:45 PM	#48
Furcifer miscreant Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: hohm Posts: 13,379	Originally Posted by Foolmewunz What surprises me is that there's no select group for Asians in that upper echelon. Wouldn't Simon Fraser have one of the largest Asian and Asian-American populations of any school in North America. Serious magnitudes of Hong Kong and Taiwanese money moved into Vancouver and BC starting about 25 years ago. I don't think so. The non-resident tuition rates are more reasonable in places like Windsor. Admission is easier as well. I'm pretty sure Toronto still has more resident Asians as well. I'd guess it's above average, but not as high as you might be thinking. SFU does have a great Math program but I think that stereotype is a little played out.

7th May 2012, 08:06 PM	#49
Foolmewunz Grammar Resistance Leader Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Pattaya, Thailand Posts: 20,873	Originally Posted by Furcifer I don't think so. The non-resident tuition rates are more reasonable in places like Windsor. Admission is easier as well. I'm pretty sure Toronto still has more resident Asians as well. I'd guess it's above average, but not as high as you might be thinking. SFU does have a great Math program but I think that stereotype is a little played out. I can't find the demographics for UofT, but Toronto, the city, has no where near the percentage of Asian population as Vancouver. Vancouver is almost 40% Asian (origin). Simon Fraser already has foreign enrollment from Asia at about 15% of the undergraduate population (the graduate school is even higher). And that's foreign citizens - e.g. exchange students. If you add in the Canadian-Asians, I'm pretty sure the largest ethnic group is Asians.
	__________________ Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele Don't you wish someone had slapped baby Hitler really really hard? [i] Dr. Buzzo 02/13 [i]

7th May 2012, 08:27 PM	#50
Mercurial Artism Scholar Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 108	Originally Posted by tyr_13 Yeah, it is difficult to form well supported opinions when there is a huge gap in data. I agree that a lot of it sinks of politics. There's almost always something more. With that in mind, what I've been saying is dependent on the Men's Center and Women's Center being more or less what they claim to be. I don't doubt that the Women's Center isn't a hardline group of ebil femnazi in brown shirts and jack boots. Hell, they might even be generally the model of reasonableness but that one answer on their FAQ page is what I'd call harmful. More than likely it's either from one person being careless in his or her writing or born from frustration in dealing with boorish 'questions' lanced at them disingenuously regarding the subject. They're a department as of last year? If that's the case I'd agree that it's probably best to defund the Women's Center and let the Men's go through the normal process. Still, they both sound like fine ideas in theory. EDIT: A couple of useful links. http://www.sfss.ca/womenscentre.html http://www.sfuwomenctr.ca/ EDIT 2: In fact, it seems that the article misquotes the FAQ page. Notice that the question it is answering is, "What is the Male Allies Project?" The actual text of another FAQ is also useful. The page says it was last updated 01/2011. I doubt that, but I don't think it was updated recently either. It does point to the Male Allies Project answer either being written by someone else or just poorly worded. "Masculinity and it's harmful effects," can be read two ways and I'm suspecting that they meant to limit their point to the harmful effects cause by some concepts of masculinity and not that masculinity inherently is harmful. Yeah, reading that now it does sound like they were referencing STEREOTYPES of men/masculinity, and just worded it very poorly, making it seem like men are all about being aggressive louts without feelings. I would support a men's group as long as it didn't promote harmful stereotypes (much like I would oppose a women's group or LGBT group or whatever promoting harmful stereotypes). I haven't familiarized myself with the funding structures and political motivations of this particular case, so mine is a more general statement. And TragicMonkey, that sucks about the dorm conditions. My college dorm was co-ed, and you had to swipe your ID and/or use a key to get in the building.
Mercurial Artism Scholar Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 108

8th May 2012, 05:35 AM	#51
Beerina Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: A floating island above the clouds Posts: 23,835	Originally Posted by NoahFence At some point in time, in order to have REAL equality, we need to eliminate such things as "women only" places, black history month, and the like. Ya really. What's up with this? Are our white women not good enough for 'em?
	__________________ "Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales *now!* More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?

8th May 2012, 07:59 AM	#52
wobs Thinker Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 246	Men's organisations in Uni's have often faced opposition. Of course it is women's groups who oppose them, but it is the SU who ultimately decide which society stays. The following is taken from the minutes of a summer meeting for Hull Uni SU re Men's officer: Quote: (d) Men’s Officer – Proposal to abolish the Position The President introduced the attached proposal giving details as to why she believed the above position should be abolished. Asked if members had any comments or questions? VP(Scarb) put forward his reasons for keeping the position which included his belief that men were under-represented; national statistics in education highlight that there is a greater need to support men; a referendum was held and the students voted to keep the position; UEC should not be making this decision under summer powers as feel it is a decision to be made by the student body – why can this not wait until September to do this via referendum?; should not take into account that we are a laughing stock for having this position – why should we be bothered by this? 12 other Student Unions also have this role; if the role is not there, where would men go to be counselled on issues that effect men, such as testicular cancer; and this role is constantly under attack and feel should fight to keep it. VP(W&E) stated that the national statistics in this case are being misused. Here at Hull University, the majority of courses are ones that women particularly excel at but am addressing this through the University committee structure. It has been nationally identified that the there are specific groups that suffer discrimination and men are not included in this. Our liberation committees, therefore, are set up to address these specific groups, such as disabled students and black students. The President added that women in society are stereotyped against as generally speaking it is men that rise to the top of organisations. An example of this is the HUU structure this year - the Board of Trustees and UEC this year has only 1 woman represented on it. VP(W&E) added that there is no allowance in the Welfare budget for a Men’s Officer. At the end of the above discussion, it was agreed to vote on this issue. The following was, therefore, put to the vote: - Those in favour of deleting the role of Men’s Officer: Votes for: 5 Votes against: 1 Carried http://hullstudent.com/files/UEC_OPS_23Jun09.DOC Found here: http://therightsofman.typepad.co.uk/...-tactics-.html
wobs Thinker Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 246

8th May 2012, 09:07 AM	#53
Furcifer miscreant Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: hohm Posts: 13,379	Originally Posted by Foolmewunz I can't find the demographics for UofT, but Toronto, the city, has no where near the percentage of Asian population as Vancouver. Vancouver is almost 40% Asian (origin). Simon Fraser already has foreign enrollment from Asia at about 15% of the undergraduate population (the graduate school is even higher). And that's foreign citizens - e.g. exchange students. If you add in the Canadian-Asians, I'm pretty sure the largest ethnic group is Asians. What's your source? That figure just doesn't jive with my experience, unless it's like Vancouver, Richmond and Burnaby and not the lower mainland or Fraser Valley. Either that or they're using "Asians" as in from the continent of Asia. If they're including Pakistan, India etc. under that umbrella then 40% sounds right. The other thing possibly worth mentioning is that I know more than a few Canadian born "Asians" that don't identify with being Asian. The second and now third or even fourth generation is so far removed culturally they're just plain Canadian. I don't want to say they resent being Asian, but they resent being identified as Asian simply because of their appearance.

9th May 2012, 04:09 AM	#54
Foolmewunz Grammar Resistance Leader Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Pattaya, Thailand Posts: 20,873	Originally Posted by Furcifer What's your source? That figure just doesn't jive with my experience, unless it's like Vancouver, Richmond and Burnaby and not the lower mainland or Fraser Valley. Either that or they're using "Asians" as in from the continent of Asia. If they're including Pakistan, India etc. under that umbrella then 40% sounds right. The other thing possibly worth mentioning is that I know more than a few Canadian born "Asians" that don't identify with being Asian. The second and now third or even fourth generation is so far removed culturally they're just plain Canadian. I don't want to say they resent being Asian, but they resent being identified as Asian simply because of their appearance. The source was the 2006 Census, via the lazyman's standard, Wikipedia. And they're shown as being for "the Greater Vancouver Regional District", whatever that encompasses. "They" didn't include South Asians. But I did. Persons who self-identified as being from the Indian Sub-Continent amounted to just under 10%, the remainder were broken down as East Asian (which includes China and Korea, notably) and Southeast Asians. Filippinos get a separate category, and there's a wee amount of West Asians, by which I assume they mean "west of the Indian Sub-Continent", notably Iran. But whether you exclude the nearly ten per cent of the population from South Asia, you still have a very high percentile of the 2.0 million people who are Asian. One or the other, you'd think with a very high (16%) foreign Asian student base, and a very visible, nay prominent Asian population in the area, that one of the key student groups would be the Asians. Maybe they're more concerned, as they are traditionally, with getting an education? ETA: Wanna see those acquaintances who resent being identified as Asian or Chinese by mere appearance quickly reverse field? A friend of mine from Toronto (who's HK Chinese and now in HK) said that whenever someone refused to acknowledge that looking Asian could simply be "looking Asian" and have no deeper meaning, she'd pretend to be astonished and say, "You're Asian? I always thought you looked Inuit!" Damn, did they become flag-waving Asians in a heartbeat. It's mostly a posturing thing, I feel.
	__________________ Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele Don't you wish someone had slapped baby Hitler really really hard? [i] Dr. Buzzo 02/13 [i] Last edited by Foolmewunz; 9th May 2012 at 04:15 AM.

9th May 2012, 10:37 AM	#55
Furcifer miscreant Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: hohm Posts: 13,379	Originally Posted by Foolmewunz The source was the 2006 Census, via the lazyman's standard, Wikipedia. And they're shown as being for "the Greater Vancouver Regional District", whatever that encompasses. "They" didn't include South Asians. But I did. Persons who self-identified as being from the Indian Sub-Continent amounted to just under 10%, the remainder were broken down as East Asian (which includes China and Korea, notably) and Southeast Asians. Filippinos get a separate category, and there's a wee amount of West Asians, by which I assume they mean "west of the Indian Sub-Continent", notably Iran. But whether you exclude the nearly ten per cent of the population from South Asia, you still have a very high percentile of the 2.0 million people who are Asian. One or the other, you'd think with a very high (16%) foreign Asian student base, and a very visible, nay prominent Asian population in the area, that one of the key student groups would be the Asians. Maybe they're more concerned, as they are traditionally, with getting an education? ETA: Wanna see those acquaintances who resent being identified as Asian or Chinese by mere appearance quickly reverse field? A friend of mine from Toronto (who's HK Chinese and now in HK) said that whenever someone refused to acknowledge that looking Asian could simply be "looking Asian" and have no deeper meaning, she'd pretend to be astonished and say, "You're Asian? I always thought you looked Inuit!" Damn, did they become flag-waving Asians in a heartbeat. It's mostly a posturing thing, I feel. Yah the GVRD would be the entire area easily assessible to kids wanting to go to SFU. The wiki page says the census refers to people "identifying" with being of visible minority origins, the largest of which being Chinese. For purposes of the point you were making I guess it's a good enough indicator, but I honestly question what that means in an ethnically diverse city like Vancouver, with multiple generations now well established. 25 or 30 years ago that 41.7% (or whatever it was) was pretty much immigrants, today they're mostly just Canuks. You're anecdote reminds of the Irish I know who are adamantly Canadian, unless you call them Scottish. Then all of a sudden they're Fightin' Irish.