Representatives from Laurier Students for Pro-Choice recently met with the Studentโs Union on Tuesday Nov. 30 to discuss the chalking demonstrations displayed by Laurier LifeLink.
On Oct. 24 at 9:30 a.m. a message was sent from Communications, Public Affairs & Marketing (CPAM) to Laurier waterloo campus students regarding a Laurier LifeLink demonstration taking place on the public sidewalks in front of Lazaridis Hall and in front of the main entrance to the Waterloo campus.
This demonstration created by Laurier LifeLink โ a club funded by the Wilfrid Laurier University Studentsโ Union โ consisted of written messages on sidewalks, all pertaining to the topic of abortion.
Brooke Dietrich, one of the members of Laurier Students for Pro-Choice, explained that they were shocked that this demonstration was happening on campus.
โLaurier Students for Pro-Choice is a group of students who have come together over the topic of bodily autonomy and the individualโs right to choose, we formed over the Pro-Life demonstration which took place [in] late October,โ Dietrich said.
โWe received the Facebook notification on behalf of the Studentsโ Union and were startled [that] this was happening on the Laurier campus.โ
In order to combat the demonstration from Laurier LifeLink, Laurier Students for Pro-Choice participated in a counter protest demonstration and started a Change.org petition, aiming to hold the Studentsโ Union accountable for protecting students on campus.
Members of the Laurier Students for Pro-Choice have since sat down with Kanwar Brar, president of the Studentsโ Union, and other members of the Studentsโ Union to discuss the Pro-Choice petition and the groupโs beliefs that the Laurier LifeLink chalking demonstration was harmful to studentโs emotional and mental wellbeing.
Alicia Hall, a student coordinator for Laurierโs Centre for Women and Trans People, stressed the four main points outlined in the Laurier Students for Pro-Choice groups petition.
โThere were four main points [addressed in the petition],โ Hall said.
โFirst [the petition asks that] they adopt a motion in taking a public pro-choice stance on issues of reproductive justice, and wouldnโt be supporting groups trying to take away those rights.โ
โThe second [request] is [to] suspend the funding that Laurier LifeLink receives โฆ as a group that is being against reproductive rights, they shouldnโt be receiving funding through the students,โ Hall said.
โ[The Third] is prohibiting anti-choice events that are approved by the Studentsโ Union from taking place on public areas on our campus โฆ that means that students should have a choice about whether they are engaging with this [content] or not,โ Hall said.
โThe fourth point โ which the Studentsโ Union seems very open to โ was that we asked them to implement a strike policy to ensure that there will be some kind of accountability after instances of harm.โ
Laurier Students for Pro Choice also used this meeting with the Studentsโ Union to discuss their belief that that Laurier LifeLink was not upholding the Gendered and Sexual Violence Policy and Procedures part of the non-academic code of conduct.
โIn particular we wanted to talk about them [Laurier LifeLink] violating the student code of conduct. We felt that the protest fell into that category of gendered violence because it was against an individualโs reproductive rights,โ Dietrich said.
In order for a claim to go through on the Sexual and Gendered Violence policy, there would have to be a complaint made by one person against another person. The policy does not account for a particular group which is violating this policy.
โThe referendum would have the same impact of that first ask in the petition โฆ itโs essentially asking for that policy to support reproductive rights.โ
โThe sexual and gender violence policy is the right for a Laurier individual to not be harassed or judged [or otherwise harmed] โฆ based on their gender or sexual orientation,โ Dietrich said.
โUnfortunately, [Studentsโ Union president & CEO] Kanwar [Brar] let us know that, in order to pursue that, one individual would have to make a case against another single individual of the club, even though the club has to uphold those values.โ
โ[In order to] challenge them [as a club] we would need to challenge another person [individually],โ Dietrich said.
Brar declined when asked by The Cord to comment on the story, but noted that โAny violations of the Gendered and Sexual Violence policy are adjudicated through the Dean of Students Office,โ adding that โThe Studentsโ Union, including the Clubs and Associations Department, is not an adjudicator of any university policy, including Gendered and Sexual Violence.โ
Vice President of Laurier LifeLink, Jonah Vanleeuwen explains that the chalking display was meant to raise awareness on both the club and bioethical issues.
โLaurier LifeLink, in one of there mission statements, [says] that we are against abortion and euthanasia. The two [bioethical issues] that Laurier LifeLink mainly focuses on are abortion and euthanasia. Itโs in our mission statement on our website,โ Vanleeuwen said.
โThe chalking display was mainly focused on various affirmations and slogans that were pretty much put on the sidewalk in order to help raise awareness on these different issues,โ Vanleeuwen said.
Laurier LifeLink claims they are aware of the sexual and gendered violence policy and try their best to abide by the policies in place. They claim that they have worked with the Studentsโ Union to improve their demonstrations.
โWeโve done a lot of work with the Studentsโ Union, and weโve done our best to adhere to any policies that are instate โฆ we ran the chalking event by them [Studentโs Union] and weโre doing our best in order to not come at this from a confrontational point,โ Vanleeuwen said.
โWe are not trying to harm women and weโre not trying to shame them in any way. The main goal of our club is to just raise awareness, and to get people thinking about this issue and, as we said, to educate people on the movement,โ Vanleeuween said.
Moving forward, Laurier Students for Pro-Choice is planning to create a referendum question which is meant to ask for a policy from the Studentsโ Union stating that people [and] their reproductive rights are being supported.
โThe Studentsโ union made it clear what they want and they arenโt going to make any changes unless the students themselves say that they want it. They didnโt accept the Change.org petition essentially because you canโt prove that those are Laurier students,โ Hall said.
โThe referendum would have the same impact of that first ask in the petition โฆ itโs essentially asking for that policy to support reproductive rights.โ
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.