6

Finally, an apology


 

The president of the Carleton University Student Association, after days of public outrage and with a petition for her impeachment on its way, finally apologies for the blatant sexism and racism of the motion.

The letter is online here: http://www.cusaonline.com/Downloads/shinerama_letter.pdf


 

Finally, an apology

  1. This is an apology?

    She issued a by-the-way ‘apology’ to ‘anyone who was offended’ and expressed regret for any pain to CF sufferers caused by the motion.

    Nowhere does it say: “we were wrong”, “we were sexist”, “we were racist”, “we didn’t research this properly”, “we have damaged the reputation of our school and of the students whom we represent.”

    Most of all, “we did not consult with the students whom we represent, nor did we give adequate prior notice.”

    Nowhere is there any indication that she, or any of the rest of her council, has learned from this fiasco.

    It will take Carleton a long time to recover from this well-deserved black eye and damage to their student credibility.

    Hopefully, next time Carleton students will choose their representatives more carefully…

  2. Agreed with Bruce…it’s not an apology for being reverse-racist and reverse-sexist…it’s an apology for offending people.

    Not a real apology. Hopefully she’ll be impeached, along with her cronies.

  3. These calls for impeachment, resignation, etc., must be politically motivated.

    The student association decided to explore other charities to support. Many objected. The student association apologized and changed course. What’s the big deal?

    Yes, the original preamble to (rationale for) the motion was enormously problematic, incorrect, insensitive, and divisive. But it was a rationale crafted by one person, and the leadership of the student association repudiated it — despite sloppy procedure.

    The student association discovered that its members want to continue supporting the CF charity. The response was loud and clear. In response, the student association will change course.

    That’s responsive representation.

    Something tells me that, for some people, no apology will be good enough. The Joey-Carson’s of the world are looking for any opportunity to smear-blog progressive and hard-working student leaders. “Off with their heads!”

  4. Why is that, when poor (or in this case, appallingly bad) judgment is shown by some people and confronted accordingly, that the whine goes up, “this must be politically motivated”?

    The impeachment issue has less to do with polital motivation than with the reputation and credibility of Carleton University and, in particular, that of CUSA.

    The minimum standard in the workplace (even the ‘progressive’ ones) is far above what demonstrated both by the original author(s) of this resolution and by the council itself.

    The research was non-existent and no consultation was made. In the real world, an ‘error’ of this magnitude would be a career-limiting, if not career-ending one – as racism or sexism as practised here could result in a multi-million-dollar legal liability. The term ‘due diligence’ means something out here…

    Even though ‘crafted’ by one person, once the preamble was ratified by the council, it became theirs no matter who originally wrote it – thus the entire council is guilty of both sexism and racism.

    In the eyes of the public (including potential employers) CUSA represents not only the student body, but the institution itself. If the sloppy and morally indefensible behavior shown by this council is representative of the typical Carleton graduate, then the value of a Carleton degree is greatly reduced, if not negated in the eyes of those employers who expect and demand a professional standard of behavior in their employees.

    For the good of Carleton University’s reputation and credibility, both the president and Mr. Northrup need to resign – as soon as possible.

  5. well, us “not idiotic” students have the required 1, 250 signatures required to impeach Brittany. In the meanwhile we will be gathering additional signatures as “buffer” to mitigate against fake and or double signings. Through this we hope to show the world that CUSA us not representative of carleton and by promptly removing those responsible show that Carleton students understand due diligence and professionalism even if it’s student union does not.

  6. Impeachment:

    Even if 1/20th of students sign the petition to recall B.S. the CEO doesn’t have to bring forward the writ of Recall. There is no timeframe wherein the CEO has to bring forward the writ. I doubt it’ll ever happen. Once the ‘reverse’ the ill-fated motion they will be able to weather until the end of their terms by refusing to listen to the democratic uprising against them because students have no power within CUSA.

Sign in to comment.