Letters to the Editors

AMS needs policy on offensive displays

Dear Editors,

Re: “Artwork sparks censorship accusations” (Journal, March 17, 2006).

I was interested and entertained by the fiasco over a briefly misunderstood piece of art at CARED’s “Art in Colour” exhibition. To be sure, the Deputy Human Rights Commissioner should be a local expert in what constitutes offence, but we can forgive his wanting to wait for his boss when his knowledge fails him. And all’s well that ends well, etc.

What truly amazes me is VP (University Affairs) Shiva Mayer’s response that “we don’t have the right to censor … we don’t have a policy on censorship, as censorship is illegal.” Frankly, I don’t know why Mayer thinks censorship is illegal, but I think it’s insane that we don’t have a policy on the issue. Almost everything put on display at this school has to be approved by someone … but the AMS doesn’t have a stance on censorship? What, exactly, would have happened if the Social Issues Commissioner had decided the drawing was offensive?

Alex Davis

MSc ’06

Sports headline needlessly sexist

Dear Editors,

Re: “Always a bridesmaid” (Journal, March 17, 2006).

Check the date. It is 2006. Our society has come a long way from using references to “bridesmaids” as a method of patriarchal put-down. Shame on the editors for perpetuating a sexist and belittling title, [and applying it to] a group of women who are exceptional athletes. Isn’t it about time that you leap into this century and erase terms that were designed to keep women in their place?

The use of “always a bridesmaid, never a bride” was designed to remind women that they would only have status or protection as a wife of some man, and to perpetuate the stigma of “spinster.” Let us not forget that many women chose not to marry, not to become the chattel of men, and to explore other possibilities that a fulfilled life might offer.

Kim Dolan

Peterborough resident

Tuition increases not inevitable

Dear Editors,

Re: “Grants, dialogue must accompany fee hike” (Journal, March 17, 2006).

The editorial staff at the Queen’s Journal are either conservative or cowards. Nothing else explains their ridiculous editorial of March 16 (sic.) in which they advocate a further increase in tuition fees. Either your editorial staff supports the increased privatized financing of post-secondary education (a conservative position) or it lacks the courage to take a principled and clear stand against increased tuition fees (a cowardly position).

There is nothing inevitable about tuition fee increases. As evidence, I cite the province of Manitoba. In the same week that Premier McGuinty increased Ontario tuition by 20 per cent over four years, the government of poor, old, cash-strapped, have-not Manitoba extended its tuition freeze for the seventh straight year. Neither is there anything reasonable about Premier McGuinty’s policy. It calls for an increase of 20 per cent in tuition fees over four years. That is nothing less than draconian.

I remind you: good journalism is not safe journalism. Good journalism is bold. Good journalism challenges authority, it does not support it. Your newspaper is playing precisely the same role that the New York Times played in the lead-up to the Iraq War: that paper gave succor to authority, lent it credibility and marginalized dissent. You will note that the New York Times has apologized for its coverage and admitted it should have been more critical. The Queen’s Journal would do well to remember that.

Simon Kiss

SGPS VP (External)

Tuition hike editorial unrealistic

Dear Editors,

Re: “Grants, dialogue must accompany fee hike” (Journal, March 17, 2006).

The editorial about tuition fees lacks any concrete evidence to support your position. It is therefore entirely ideological. The attempt to draw a connection between quality and tuition fees ignores the fact that throughout the 1990s tuition increased 300 per cent while the quality of education continued to deteriorate.

There is overwhelming evidence that class sizes have risen, infrastructure has been crumbling, tenured faculty to student ratios have decreased and the breadth of courses offered has narrowed. The reason for this is that governments used rising tuition as a justification for further cuts to education. Thus tuition went up and quality continued to deteriorate. This same pattern has occurred in every country that has implemented this policy.

The editorial also fails to give any concrete evidence that appeals to the “respect and attention of politicians and administrators” actually work as a strategy for social change. Thus you can describe demonstrations as ineffective while ignoring the fact that Quebec students managed to make some extraordinary gains last year through their province-wide strikes.

OUSA, on the other hand, attempts to use more “respectful” means of lobbying the government. When the government made its announcement lifting the tuition freeze, OUSA was left out in the cold feeling as though they had been betrayed by their pals in government.

What is most offensive, however, is that you can describe the drumming of demonstrators as “resorting to aggressive tactics and rhetoric” while avoiding any discussion of the systemic violence of a policy that will effectively amount to another transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich. That is exactly what student loans do.

If you think there is no alternative then you should consider the fact that we used to have something called a social contract. This meant that the working population would pay for the education of the young and the retirement of the old. This was worthwhile for people because they knew they too would be taken care of when they were old. Now, however, instead of paying taxes to the public the poor majority will be paying debt to the banks (i.e. the rich).

Please take your ideas out of the clouds and ground them in an objective reality.

Toby Moorsom

SGPS VP (Internal) and PhD candidate

Hesitation to hang art an honest mistake

Dear Editors,

Re: “Artwork sparks censorship accusations” (Journal, March 17, 2006).

I am writing in support of AMS Deputy Human Rights Commissioner, Bavidra Mohan. I feel compelled to respond to this particular situation because I believe that the importance of Eracism week is being overshadowed by this misunderstanding.

Knowing how passionate Bavidra feels about human rights, I know that his request to have the [art] approved was not of malicious intent, [but based on] his lack of knowledge on the history of the Black Panther Movement. We all make mistakes, and as ironic as it seems, his was an honest mistake. He has since apologized profusely for this, and has also educated himself on the Black Panther Movement.

I hope that these two parties that stand for the rights of people from all walks of life can use this as a learning experience and continue with their much needed work.

Amma Bonsu

Social Issues Commissioner 2000-01

Students can handle new recycling system

Dear Editors,

Re: “City proposes recycling changes” (Journal, March 17, 2006).

The AMS argues that the proposed changes to recycling in Kingston will needlessly complicate the system. I would like to point out that it ain’t easy being green. The simplest system would be to throw it all in a landfill. But we like to think that we care about the environment more than that. The city certainly cares about the revenue it gains from selling our recyclables more than that.

In order for recyclables to be processed, they need to be sorted even more than what we do to prepare them for pickup. I know this, having worked in a recycling plant where I removed plastic bags that were used to bundle paper. Following initial sorting, cardboard and cartons need to be separated from newsprint and lighter weight papers. This is all done by hand, and the system isn’t perfect. (Some cities have adopted costly, but effective single stream recycling programs, which are primarily machine sorted.) Not having to remove the plastic bags and strings that were used to separate paper from other recyclables would allow workers to focus on more specific sorting. This specific sorting is crucial to the process, because the default location for improperly sorted recyclables at this stage is the garbage heap.

If the new system were put in place, students would make a reasonable attempt to sort; this would be far more successful than the attempts of a frantic worker with a conveyor belt speeding past her. I assure you that the help of many hands in sorting recycling would not be needless, nor do I think it would be overwhelmingly complicated. Some of my fellow students have attended labs or tutorials on a biweekly alternating system for years now without too much chaos or confusion. I have faith that we can function with a similar pickup system.

I strongly urge the AMS to reconsider their stance and support the proposed changes to the recycling system.

Janet Gordon

ArtSci ’06

More funding doesn’t mean increased quality

Dear Editors,

Re: “Tuition increase will help maintain quality” (Journal, March 17, 2006).

Considering the latest damage done to public education by the Ontario government, I was flabbergasted to see Sergio Gomes’ outrageous letter. Mr. Gomes states that he supports tuition increases and deregulation, tuition means little to the brightest students, and implies that Queen’s should be an elitist school so people do not have to leave Ontario to get a world-class degree.

Firstly, being “bright” does not make high tuition less of a problem. Yes, scholarships are available, but since high school marks are incredibly inflated these days, the criteria for these scholarships are skeptical. Marks inflation aside, assuming that high school performance is actually a fair measure of intelligence, if tuition is set really high, rich kids who meet the minimum requirements will be able to get in, but poor kids who greatly exceed the minimum requirements but narrowly miss the scholarships will not be able to attend. The end result? A tiny pool of smart students and a whole lot of rich, short-sighted fools like Mr. Gomes.

Secondly, do not be fooled by the false choice of quality and accessibility. The only reason why tuition fees went up over the last decade was because of government cutbacks. However, now that the government is increasing funding, there is less of a need to raise tuition. Furthermore, while money is obviously essential to providing a quality education, more funding will not necessitate higher quality if it is spent on questionable projects, such as allocating $20,000 of university funds to hiring a high-profile lawyer to run Principal Hitchcock’s whitewashing campaign, spending $7-million on the architectural facelift for Goodes Hall (involving the removal of the top floor to make it look prettier) and spending $230-million on the forthcoming Queen’s Centre. Perhaps this money could be better spent somewhere else, such as lowering tuition and class sizes?

Lastly, if tuition and money mean little to bourgeoisie students like Mr. Gomes, then surely they will have no problems leaving Ontario for an education that is defined by its price tag.

Aaron Lemkow,

ArtSci ’07

AMS hiring ad based on stereotypes

Dear Editors,

When I first saw the “underwear ad” advertising the AMS hiring I thought nothing of it, except, maybe, that it was stupid to advertise an AMS job using underwear. Then after thinking about it for a while I was disgusted. How could an advertisement be approved that clearly links men’s underwear to head manager positions and women’s underwear to service staff? How could the AMS (and the editors of the Journal by publishing it) possibly propagate this stereotype? It’s absurd and should not be tolerated. I would expect more from this institution.

Michelle Williamson

Sci ’06

AMS’s opposition to recycling changes unnecessary

Dear Editors,

Re: “City proposes recycling changes” (Journal, March 17, 2006).

I am a bit confused. Why is the AMS “working hard” to ensure that the city does not pass a motion to save $1-million? Don’t get me wrong, I have the utmost respect for the work that the Municipal Affairs Commission does for Queen’s students and people pretty much classify me as a tree hugger, but this just doesn’t make sense. Sure the proposed changes will mean that we will have to remember whether it’s fiber or container week, but heck, we are at one of the most respected universities in this country. To say that after these proposed changes the Ghetto will look like Michigan after a visit from the Toronto waste terminal doesn’t really say much about the intelligence of Queen’s students. John Giles and his team over at Kingston Area Recycling Centre are right in saying that we can handle it. When the first blue box program was introduced in Kitchener in 1981 it was unheard of, but it has survived to this day, with over 90 per cent of Ontario municipalities undertaking in some form of a blue box program. Sure, maybe the AMS is worried that the city will use the extra cash to fund new Tasers and attack dogs, but in retrospect, if the city saves money, we all save money, so buck up and pay attention to the changes come next fall.

Tim Philpott

ArtSci ’08

Large tuition hike unnecessary

Dear Editors,

Re: “Tuition increase will help maintain quality” (Journal, March 17, 2006).

Firstly, I also agree that tuition cannot freeze indefinitely without an eventual degradation in quality of university. The laws of inflation can explain that alone. That aside, [Sergio Gomes’] idea that “tuition means little to the brightest students” simply does not make sense. Such rhetoric is built on a false belief that the most expensive schools are necessarily the best schools. This is false. Two universities that immediately come to mind, and which are also among the top in the nation, include McGill University and McMaster University. McGill has the lowest tuition price of any Canadian university and is quite good at attracting the brightest minds in the nation. The only conceivable group of people that would be least affected by a tuition hike are the wealthiest students. And yet, unfortunately, coming from a wealthy family does not guarantee intelligence. In short, raising the price of tuition will do little more than increase the number of wealthy students, rather than “brilliant students,” at Queen’s.

Mike Fralick

ArtSci ’08

AMS’s underwear ad sexist

Dear Editors,

I was shocked and appalled by the AMS’s clearly sexist hiring ads that appeared on page 20 of the March 17 edition of the Journal. Touting that there’s “something for everyone,” head manager positions were advertised with a picture of men’s boxer briefs and service staff positions were advertised with a picture of panties designed for women.

Why do these ads even need to feature undergarments in them anyways? This is merely another weak attempt at being risqué, which much like the window displays of the Greenroom, serve no artistic or comedic purpose. The only purpose this type of advertisement serves is to perpetuate the stereotypes that women are unsuitable for management positions.

In a university that boasts one of the best reputations in the country, can’t we come up with a better marketing campaign than that?

Dara Geffen

Sci ’06

Moorsom and others shameful in treatment of RBC employees

Dear Editors,

Re: “Students drum to protest ‘debt sentence’” (Journal, March 17, 2006).

If Toby Moorsom, SGPS VP (Internal), thinks that by having student loans at an institution gives him the right to break into it, he is sadly mistaken. I work at one of Canada’s big banks (not the Royal) and I am ashamed of the conduct of the Queen’s students who barged into the Royal Bank branch to terrorize low-level line employees. Moorsom also has it very wrong if he thinks that “CEOs and shareholders are accumulating profits off our student loans.” Student loans are generally a loss-leader for the banks and if I were a decision-maker at the Royal, I would seriously consider calling Moorsom’s $40,000 loan. Why should the big banks support students like Moorsom if this is the thanks that they receive?

Shame indeed.

Dan Scarrow

Comm ’05

An AMS conspiracy has been revealed

Dear Editors,

Re: “CAC commissioner hired according to trend” (Journal, March 17, 2006).

We recently read with interest Tim Kraumanis’ letter regarding a rather suspicious trend in AMS hiring decisions. As Mr. Kraumanis points out, every successful candidate for campus activities commissioner since 2004—David Homuth, Louis Plamondon and Hillary Smith—have all been vice-presidents of MCRC at some point in their past. While others may look at this situation and see mere coincidence, we, like Mr. Kraumanis, see that a conspiracy is clearly afoot.

When one digs a little deeper, it becomes apparent that this plot goes far beyond the MCRC connection. Consider this: each of the last three campus activities commissioners have the letter “A” in their first name. Each also has the letter “M” in their last name. What could this mean? Is the AMS trying to spell out some sort of secret code? 

Answer:  yes.

As former members of council and other hiring committees throughout the AMS, we feel it’s time to let you, as members of the Queen’s community, in on a secret. In reality, the AMS has very strict standards with regards to letters that must be present in a student’s name in order to be selected for council. Most notably, any students with the letters Z, Q, or K shouldn’t even bother applying—it’s not going to happen.

Some might find this strange, others a violation of the traditional AMS hiring policy. But hey, this is the way it is, and the way it always has been. All we can say to you Tim, and to you the student body, is this: deal with it (or change your name).

Gord McGuire and Tyler Turnbull

ArtSci ’06

All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s)-in-Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to journal_editors@ams.queensu.ca.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Skip to content