Ryerson Student Union: On the path of bigotry

On March 15, Ryerson Student Union fell to deploring depths of bigotry and denied the opening of a Men’s Issues Campus Group, publicly stating that men and boys have no issues worthy of examination.
Today we find that the bigotry continues from the student union president at Ryerson.
Are any of us surprised?
Ryerson Student Union members go to the same school, study the same subjects and are graduates of over two decades of the same forced feminist philosophy. Now they are going to extraordinary lengths to keep force feeding society their special Canadian University blend of misandry, seasoned with censorship and rancid animosity.
According to theeyeopener, three students from Ryerson, Anjano Rao, Argir Argirov and Sarah Santhosh made the application, generated the necessary documents to create a men’s issues group and presented them before a seven person student union groups committee.
They were denied.
A letter of appeal was sent to the Ryerson Student Union President Rodney Diverlus.
Now before we go any further here are just three of  RSU’s groups.
[unordered_list style=”bullet”]

  • Harry Potter Association
  • RU Anime
  • Vinyl Appreciation Society

It would seem that even the issues of fictitious and inanimate objects have more of a voice at Ryerson University than men and boys, given their recent ruling and reply to appeal.
According to theeyeopener Diverlus said “[C]ommittee members raised concerns about the group’s association, and whether or not they were directly or indirectly associated with the groups A Voice For Men or Canadian Association For Equality.”
So they were denied recognition because of unsubstantiated and anomalous claims that they might be associated with other groups that also concern themselves with the issues of boys and men?
That was the objection that was sufficient to rate the students concerns as less worthy of inclusion that a club dedicated to Harry Potter?
The contemptible arrogance of that notwithstanding, the implication that this group has any ties to AVFM, which they do not,  is as credible as saying RSU has ties to Al Qaeda because they also have a  Muslim Students’ Association. Whether the three students have an association with CAFE is unknown here, as we have no association with them, either.
To our knowledge, the only thing these three groups share is compassion for men and boys, but that is apparently enough to inspire a McCarthyesque response from RSU.
We might suggest a questionnaire for future RSU use.
Question 1. Are you now or have you ever been a member of groups that have compassion for men and boys?
No need for question 2.
Diverlus goes a little further by stating that:

These are groups that are, in some jurisdictions, considered to be a hate group, become known to have profiled women on campuses who speak against them, and they are tied to individuals who not only go out of their way to negate the struggles of women but can also create some problematic discourse on language around the idea of women’s rights.

And this is where the bigotry is reinforced by lies.
What “jurisdiction” would that be, Mr. Diverlus? We know of no such jurisdiction, either in Canada or the United States. We know of some accusations, completely unsubstantiated, such as those coming from RSU, but that hardly constitutes a jurisdiction.
There is also no truth at all in the accusation that AVFM or anyone else has profiled women who have spoken against them. What Diverlus is referring to here is that AVFM did news stories on people, ideologues similar to those at RSU, who were engaged in illegal acts like vandalism, harassment and blocking doors in order to prevent students at the University of Toronto from attending a lecture on male suicide and educational problems, acts that were also condemned by the administration of the University of Toronto.

Ryerson Student Union has some interesting ideas on discourse.

We also have to wonder just what Diverlus means by “problematic discourse on language.” The syntax of that statement is muddy, but still clear enough to indicate that Diverlus and crew have anointed themselves as the final and quite draconian arbiters of what discourse is to be allowed from students at Ryerson University. Not to mention the fact that there is no record anywhere of any of the parties in question ever challenging the legitimacy of women’s human rights, and abundant evidence that all support those rights.
That last statement from Diverlus was one sentence. Once sentence with two outright lies, one implied lie and a clear indication of license to control what students would and would not be allowed to think; at a Canadian university.
The article from theeyeopener, thankfully not written by Diverlus, goes on further to state that the groups six page constitution has goals to “create a progressive and constructive voice and lend representation to any and all Ryerson students concerned with the issues of men and boys.”  There is no intention of taking away women’s rights, as is well stated by one of the group.
With Rod’s next quote we find out he actually lives with his head in his ass.

We know that oppression and the marginalization of men is something that doesn’t exist just like the oppression and marginalization of straight people or white folks in our society.

This kind of statement is coming from a university where men are steadily and rapidly decreasing in numbers, as they are from the employment scene; where suicide for men happens at four to five times the rate that it does for women, and where male victims of sexual assault and domestic violence are systematically sidelined?
The fact that the Supreme Court of Canada did not believe Nicole Ryan’s abused woman’s plea and still decided not to punish her for soliciting murder was in no way shape or form the marginalization of a male’s life at all?
The very fact that RSU is refusing to allow open discussion of these matters is proof of the need for a men’s issues group. We should not be surprised that the problem is being denied by its very source.
Asking the Ryerson Student Union if men and boys need help is like asking BP if we need electric cars.
The silver lining to this story, which desperately needs one, is that according to theeyeopener, the group says they will continue to “push hard” to accomplish their goals.
That is the lesson we have always learned from history. You can sabotage people, lie about them, demonize them and worse. You can use every bit of power and influence at your disposal to throw people off track, to derail their efforts and to cause them as much grief as possible in order to dishearten them from their just pursuits. But you cannot kill the truth. You cannot forever silence those justly demand to be heard. Over and over again, we have seen this played out on the world stage, as tyrants and bullies pushed back against truths so toxic and threatening to their agenda, and were ultimately forced to relent.
All they manage to do in the end is show their desperation and their lack of moral and intellectual validity. In the end, the unprincipled dictates of forced ideology have always failed. And this will be no exception.
The time has come to recognize that men are human beings with their own unique and undeniably real troubles, challenges, hopes, dreams and difficulties. The truth about that is here. The need for it to be heard and addressed is here. The facts are speaking and the fire is starting to burn. The only thing in the way is the bigotry of ideologues who fail to see that their days of silencing the truth are coming to an end.
But we have seen their kind come and go before, and we have laid to rest their toxic ideas in a grave dug specially as a resting place for the worst of our human failings.

Recommended Content

%d bloggers like this: