All about Arbor
Re: Letters, Feb. 13th
Rachel Barton notes in a letter to The Varsity that the Board of Stewards of Hart House have a “disregard for students.”
Although she doesn¹t seem to wonder why this is so, there is a simple answer: Stewards disregards students because they can.
Each year Hart House holds elections for its standing committees. In the last six years, only one committee election has been contested. All of the remaining students, approximately six hundred of them, have been acclaimed to office. The Board of Stewards is, for better or worse, composed of the un-elected representatives from the standing committees.
Only by running for, and voting in, these elections will student democracy ever be returned to Hart House. Until that time, the Board of Stewards will continue to be filled by students who have never needed to defend any of their decisions to anyone but their own self-selected coterie of the interested.
Students who are ignorant of the structure of their university get the government- and decisions- they deserve.
Charles M. Levi
Re: “Time to fell the Arbor,” Feb 16th
The editorial about the Arbor Room on February 16th brings to attention that “ten unionized employees were never at risk of losing their jobs, but many observers mistakenly thought they were.” Although this is a correct statement, it neglects to mention eight other employees who are also under CUPE as part-time casual staff. Six of these eight employees are also all international students, of which most depend on this job as a source of their only income.
Being a part-time employee, you do not get the perk of being transferred to a different location. You are simply let go. And that is what is going to happen to all of these students. So, even though 10 jobs will be replaced, 8 other jobs won’t be.
But let’s say we get lucky, and the new food provider creates 20 news jobs for students, the chances are that they will pay only 7-8 bucks an hour. So, in an ideal situation if all these students get hired back they will still be only making 50% of what they used to.
Students need to fight for quality jobs on campus. If Robarts paid $7/hour no one would be so eager to work there, trust me.
Standards for living and tuition are high, especially for international students. By removing these well paid jobs, we are not only eliminating good jobs for international and non-international students, but we are encouraging businesses to pay low wages and get high returns at the cost being transferred to us.
What good are the “great minds” of University of Toronto if they won’t have “great futures” because they’ll be in debt from student loans and working a $7/hour job struggling to pay bills? Maybe the students on the Hart House Board of Stewards should have considered how many of their fellow students they put out of jobs.
We all know that international students are not able to work off campus, and that campus alone does not offer that many jobs. The least we owe to these students who come here and pay huge international fees, through which Canadian students benefit, is to create jobs on campus that pay a good wage.
Just because someone is an international student, it doesn’t mean they have dollar signs stamped to their forehead. They also need jobs to pay rent and a very high tuition.
University of Toronto and Hart House should not be promoting low-wage part-time jobs on campus. Anyone who works and goes to school at the same time out of necessity would know how much of a break it is to have a well-paid job that will also allow time for school.
Thank you.
Tamara Adizes
International Student/Arbor Room Part-time worker
Refuting the fests
Re: The U of T film Festival uses a trailer that features a joke with a punch line that a trans person is a “freak.” This was shown at the beginning of the second part of the Hart House Film Board Gala screening on Feb 18th at Innis Town Hall. This trailer was most likely also shown during other nights of the festival. The trailer is also featured online at the film festival website (http://www.UofTfilmfest.ca) under the section “Screening room”, titled “Outback Jack.”
This event is sponsored by SAC, Hart House, and various other groups on campus, and is under the U of T banner.
I cannot believe that the people responsible for this actually think that this is acceptable, especially when one of the nights of the festival was devoted to films that promote equity.
Chris Jodoin
Re: “One act to stage them all,” Feb. 13th
I am writing in response to Jordan Bimm’s “review” of “Beyond Characteristic” at the U of T Drama Festival.
I want to start by saying that I believe that it is well within the rights of a critic to give a bad review. As someone who has reviewed theatre, music, television, and film I have done this myself. That being said, I feel that Bimm’s review represents a perfect example of irresponsible journalism filled with childish insults.
I’m not going to argue with Bimm’s opinion as he is entitled to like or dislike whatever he wants. But his juvenile remarks do not constitute a review. It just seems to be an exercise in insult comedy.
He cannot identify the genre so he insults the plot. He even admits he is not able to identify why some characters work and some don’t. A review is analytical in nature and this is just… not.
Your other critics, whether they liked the shows or not, were able to use well thought out, articulate language to express themselves.
I’m not even sure why this would pass through the editing process without someone realizing that it would be better for The Varsity’s reputation if they didn’t publish something that looks like it was written for a high school paper. He may as well have just written “THIS SUCKS” over and over again. I feel that by publishing this article your misrepresent the UTSC Drama Society as a whole. Had you printed a full list of the awards given at the festival then your readers could see that “Beyond Characteristic” was presented with the Viewer’s Choice Award for the Wednesday evening as voted by the audience. Then they could have seen that this was just one person’s opinion and not just the worst-rated show of the festival.
The audience, like Bimm is entitled to their opinion and they spoke louder than a few childish remarks. This seems more like the sort of thing that The Toronto Sun would run.
Andrew Epstein
Director, The F-Word Uncut
UTSC
Spinning round and round
Re: “Dialogue, animosity at IAW,” Feb. 16th
I still strongly disagree with the way you covered IAW [Israeli Apartheid Week]. It was biased coverage. There was still no coverage of any of the real controversial aspects of this event. The fact that one speaker downplayed the Nazi Holocaust, the group’s acceptance of the use of terrorism and the mention of extreme rhetoric was generally left out of your official coverage.
What about the flyers that called for a global intefadah? Again, not even a mention in terms of how this was controversial. The only issue discussed was the extremism of the “apartheid” claim, and no other issues were brought up. Dissenting views were shoved into the op-eds section, where facts are always considered opinion. And, ironically, there was an editor’s correction!
Where are the corrections for your own articles? Or the omitting of why the conference is problematic? It sheaths the fact that this group calls for violence by suggesting that the only controversial fact is that it compared Israel to an apartheid state.
Curiously, the same person who did the terrible job of writing the first article [“Israeli Apartheid Week begins,” Feb. 13th] wrote the second one: Ben Spurr.
Look, the reality is that this writer has a biased view (or is a very poor journalist). Let him write his views in the opinions section. If he wants to write an article covering such an event, then be personable and suggest he write an opinion on his experience instead.
Simon Lightstone
I attended Israel Apartheid Week Friday night at the U of T organized by the Arab Student Collective.
Let me tell you, this was not a discussion about borders nor was it a discussion about Israel’s “Apartheid” policies. The object of the exercise was to destroy Israel.
Ted Belman
Editor of Israpundit.com
They’ve got the blues
Re: “Union Blues,” Feb. 16th
Kudos to Cam Vidler for using an important and contentious campus issue, like the closing of the Arbor Room, as a springboard for wider commentary on the state of unions at the University and in Canada in “Union Blues.”
Vidler makes relevant and provocative points that, regardless of their merits, reflect the prized journalistic traits of proximity and timeliness. Hopefully Vidler’s comments will incite The Varsity and other student outlets to explore and debate the role of unions at the university.
On a related note, The Varsity staff deserves praise for its continued improvements in coverage. It seems you’ve honed your scope and truly explored the issues at the university on which you can provide the most informed and authoritative coverage.
Keith Dell’Aquila
• I hope that Mr. Vidler writes better for his courses — his op-ed is the most fallaciously argued and inconsistent drivel I’ve had the misfortune of reading. That’s saying something: as a TA, I’ve read lots of fallacious and inconsistent drivel.
I’d give him a D, and that’s because I’m not being paid enough to justify the zero he deserves.
Patrick Reed
• I could point out any number of errors in Mr. Vidler’s childish piece, but I will focus on just one that exposes the hallmark signs of ill-informed editorial writing.
Mr. Vidler writes, “Maybe I’ve realized that we’re not living during the Industrial Revolution. Karl Marx might have had a point in his day, but he has fortunately lost relevance.”
Fair enough, sir, the industrial revolution ended over a century ago- certainly the writings of our bearded 19th Century German Philosopher have departed from our discourse on modern labour issues.
Mr. Vidler continues, “Maybe, if the jobs were open to perfect competition- they aren’t- then people would have access to a competitive wage based on individual effort and human capital (sic.)”
I wonder from what century and from which bearded 19th Century German philosopher Mr. Vilder owes the above terminology?
Michael Lehan
Call in the troops
Re: “President Naylor gets pranked,” Feb. 16th
Just wanted to make some clarifications. There is not just a lack of Ethical guidelines at U of T. There are NO Ethical guidelines at U of T concerning “types and lines of research and research partnerships,” (University of Toronto’s Policy on Ethical Conduct, March 28, 1991).
President Naylor indicates in the article that he is “baffled” by militarization and military partnerships at U of T. However, Vivek Goel, U of T’s provost, states, “Because of the range of research funded by military sources, it would be imprudent and inappropriate for the university to constrain military research,” (Governing Council Report #388, p. 2).
Also, both U of T’s provost Vivek Goel and associate provost of research John Challis sit on the board of directors of U of T’s Innovations Foundation, which works to privatize and commercialize research, and which has physically moved its offices into the MaRS complex www.marsdd.com.
One last thing: U of T and MaRS are partnering with U.S. based Battelle Memorial Institute, which is a top bio-chem-nuke Pentagon contractor (www.cbiac.apgea.army.mil/). It was even part of the team that worked on the Manhattan project. Its role would be to manage research.
All students should know that U of T is in the process of reviewing all research policies, with terms of reference being set by top U of T administration. This excludes faculty, students and community. People can view PAML’s full report on U of T-military partnerships at http://publish.indymedia.org/en/2006/02/834073.shtmlhttp://publish.indymedia.org/en/2006/02/834073.shtml
Ivona Vujica
We are little pawns
In the modern world, Islam has effectively made servants of the very people that should serve to alert the population to what could potentially harm us.
You may not like what I am saying, but you, along with everyone else in the media, will become the new servants of Islam.
The followers of this religion have succeeded on a global scale to instil fear in all of us. They will continue to succeed in thwarting all opponents to Islam by using you, the media people.
I had a chance to view the kissing cartoon published on the website of The Strand. This cartoon struck me as totally harmless. So what is all the fuss? The fuss is the opposition to Islam. Those people, not of the Islamic religion who say they were offended, I believe, have had the sort of brainwashing that will become increasingly common as the era closes in on the greatest conflict man has ever known: the battle between Christianity and Islam.
This is the beginning and you are its little pawns. See how you are manipulated if you have eyes to see. Think of the possible outcome of this conflict, if you can still think freely. Your Islamization has just begun and you may not even be aware of it.
Jean-Francois La France
Know Radical Islam reminder
I find it interesting that, while the ASC is (to my understanding) the primary representation for Arab students at U of T, Beth Tagar [sic.] is anything but the equivalent for Jewish students. Beth Tagar is a minority Zionist group, not THE Jewish group, as it appears to be seen as by many at the university, including this paper.
It would be more relevant if someone bothered to ask a representative of the Jewish Student’s Union what their opinion of this issue/event is. It’s unfair to view this clash as a debate between two major sides of a debate, when one group in fact represents a minority. Especially if we are to consider the argument that IAW is anti-Semitic, it would only be fair to ask the JSU what their view is.
Until then, I find most coverage of the so-called Jewish position unfairly biased. Beth Tagar does not speak for me, nor many others.
Jeremy Greenberg
