Thursday, March 12th 2009

By medina abelkader

I would like to address various points from Adam Owen’s article advocating against the premise of a Women’s Centre at McMaster.

The single valid point that I think Owen made was that the proposition for the Women’s Centre is still extremely raw, and that it is not at all ready to be voted on. I think that the ambiguity of the proposal will prevent it from succeeding at the referendum because not only are students unsure of what they’re voting on exactly, but there are several clauses within it that desperately need revision (such as the lack of actual building space to run the Centre from).

Logistics aside, it is impossible to deny that women need a venue to discuss issues that relate to them as a gender which subject to the patriarchal values that dictate our society. We are not, as Owen stated, one unified group. We are a species that has exponentially more male Presidents and Prime Ministers, men who make more money and who sit at the heads of tables. And as long as Mr. Owen is a male, he won’t understand what it is to be ostracized by the very system women are forced to navigate. 

My stand-point can be better justified by viewing the student union as a microcosm of greater society, where every citizen pays taxes and contributes to the infrastructure of our cities and towns. We pool together the funds that we collect from every citizen and then appropriate them towards various causes: maintaining our sidewalks, providing education and health care, as well as a slew of other social services that exist to address disparities within the city. The student union works very much in the same way. The measly dollar per student that it would take to fund a Women’s Centre would go toward providing invaluable services that address the specific needs of women.

I understand the argument that the Women’s Centre would be partly funded by male students who would not be able to access the resources that it would provide, but the reality of it is that we all pay for services that will never apply to us in our lifetimes, and this is what it means to be part of a collective. Certain people utilize social services more than others, and although that might not seem fair, the services exist to empower minority groups that inarguably do not have the same access to opportunities than other groups. 

Taking into account that Owen was writing from a “straight man’s perspective,” he is inadvertently arguing against having services that support the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered community as well. By labeling himself as a straight male, Owen is denying the need for him to exercise G.L.B.T. services, does that mean that we shouldn’t fund a G.L.B.T. group on campus?

The statement “the issues at hand (extreme examples such as rape or abortion come to mind) would be better served discussed in the public sphere,” is a perfect testament to the ignorance of Owen’s argument. The idea that women should feel comfortable talking about such trauma in the public sphere is ludicrous, and an obvious indication that he made no effort to understand the guilt and shame associated with those cases. Furthermore, to refer to the inability to talk about these topics in an open forum as “betraying every girl who will follow the same path,” is essentially channeling blame onto women themselves.

There is room for discourse surrounding these topics, but not in the capacity that Owen is referring to. The discussion should be centered around prevention of abuse and the fostering of positive feminine ideals, not used as a means of further victimizing women. A Women’s Centre would provide a safe space to engage in this discourse as a means of empowerment, and is not at all the gender segregation that Owen implied. 

At the very minimum, Owen should appreciate a service that would be there to support the women in his life. To deny the need for this group is in fact, exactly what it is to be a chauvinist.