THE VOICE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO MISSISSAUGA
February 25, 2019 Volume 45, Issue 19 themedium.ca
Scarbrough’s union elections
Ford and gun vioence: discuss.
Toronto’s new lights
From acting to teaching Italiano
No TV before bedtime!
News, page 2
Opinion, page 4
Arts, page 5
Features, page 8
Sports, page 11
UTMSU holds emergency meeting The emergency meeting discussed possible options to combat the provincial governments changes MDUDZI MHLANGA
On February 14, the UTMSU held an emergency assembly for students to discuss possible options to combat the provincial government’s changes to OSAP, and the new student-choice initiative. UTMSU VP External Atif Abdullah gave a presentation on the government-lead changes, which he said would impact each and every student. He also denounced an idea put forth by U of T President Meric Gertler to bring in more international students to act as a “buffer” for the government’s 10% tuition cut. “Bringing in students without providing ample resources just to use them as a buffer to cover up revenue losses is pretty heartbreaking and a shameful thing to do for the university.” Abdullah made a note on the lack of resources the school would have if they enrolled more international students. The VP external also spoke about the importance of having an interestfree grace period after graduation to act as an aid for students. He ac-
PHOTO OF DOUG FORD FROM TVO.ORG, UTMSU LOGO FROM UTMSU.CA
The UTMSU’s emergency assembly discussed options to combat the government’s recent changes. knowledged that “OSAP itself is not a perfect program, but it went a long way to helping those that needed access to post-secondary education.” Abdullah spent a substantial amount of time explaining the student choice initiative, which would allow students to opt-out or opt-in to certain services such as The Medium,
the International Education Centre, and the Centre for Student Engagement, among others. The student-choice initiative has been seen in New Zealand, however the only way student unions can exist is as for-profit organizers, meaning they act more as a business than student unions here do. However,
Abdullah stated that the UTMSU believes “none of the services offered by [the] student union should be making more off [students]” because of the “already-high” tuition costs. Abdullah stated in the meeting: “The goal of being here today is recognizing that our student life […] will take a hit next year […] we are going
to lose a lot as students, as a community on our campus. We want to pose the question today, how are we going to work together? How is your student union going to work for you?” In terms of Action items and what can be done, the assembly brought up numerous ideas on how to protest the prospective changes. A popular idea among those at the meeting was to send mass emails and call local members of provincial parliament (MPP) to voice dissent. Going on strike, silent protests, and planning sit-ins at governmental offices were also suggested by multiple students. Temporarily shutting down some of the services which students will be able to opt-out of in order to show their importance was another proposal. Another batch of proposals centred on doing research and understanding which services students cared about. That way, the UTMSU could focus on promoting the services that students deemed essential. The UTMSU will be hosting another meeting in the coming weeks to discuss the implementation of the presented ideas.
Freedom of expression discussed at UTM Mark Mercer, president of SAFS, held the mini-symposium and discussed freedom of expression on campus MELISSA BARRIENTOS ASSOCIATE NEWS EDITOR
On Thursday 21, Professor Mark Mercer, the president of the Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship (SAFS) and professor of philosophy at Saint Mary’s University in Halifax, Nova Scotia held a minisymposium at the UTM campus to talk about issues surrounding freedom of expression on campus. The SAFS was formed in 1992 with the intention of maintaining academic freedom in research, teaching, and institutional decisions regarding students and faculty. From the restriction of academic job searches in universities and colleges around Canada, to criticisms of U of T’s psychology Professor Jordan Peterson’s comments in 2016, the SAFS has striven to protect students and faculty’s academic freedom and freedom of expression. Recently, freedom of speech has been a point of conversation for universities since the Ontario government’s mandate on August 2018, that required post-secondary institu-
PHOTO FROM YOUTUBE.COM
Professor Mark Mercer discussed popular reasons for why people might oppose free expression. tions implement a freedom of speech policy by January 1st, 2019, or risk funding cuts. During the mini-symposium, Mercer examined freedom of expression and popular reasons for why people might oppose expression on campus. “One of the reasons people are
hostile towards [forms of] expression is because talking about it publicly or openly puts the laws, practices, and institutions at risk,” said Professor Mercer, “[but] this shuts down intelligent discussions.” “People who are hostile toward freedom of expression see what people say or how they say it as promot-
ing racist or sexist attitudes, thereby making work, housing, health care, and the rest more difficult for members of marginalized or historically oppressed groups to obtain.“They also think it can make research and learning more difficult, particularly for people from marginalized or historically oppressed groups, creat-
ing a leaky pipeline or delaying their entrance into the management and professional classes.” Mercer explained that unpleasant or hostile learning environments, where people can be distracted by comments or reminded of racist and sexist attitudes, is seen as the reason post-secondary programs (especially STEM programs) have a low rate of female students. “People argue that [what someone says or how they say] can lower the campus tone,” continued Mercer, “making the university less special and impressive, harming its reputation, and detracting from its mission as an institution of significant research.” According to Mercer, hostility toward freedom of expression on campus commonly manifests in the pressure to disinvite speakers for an event or forum, in the threat of vandalism, in the refusal to join panel discussions—leading to unbalanced debates on politics and philosophy— and in defunding groups and publications that “offend.” Mercer continued on page 2