By Katie Toth, Opinions Editor
As journalists, our very work fights for free speech. A free press is critical in the fight for accountability of our institutions and protection of our democracy. When discussion is shut down so is truth, we argue. Freedom of speech is not only a human right, but a tool for the public good.
So what happens when we see people using those freedoms to harass or intimidate others? This month, men and women will be standing outside of the Victoria General Hospital, where the majority of therapeutic abortions in Nova Scotia are performed, to mount an event called “40 Days for Life.” Their event of prayer and anti-choice mobilising is comprised mostly of protesters staring and praying silently in the direction of the hospital. The silent eyes of these protesters watch each individual as they pass by, ripping people of any sense of comfort, dignity or privacy, whether they are entering the hospital for a brain scan or a new cast for their wrist.
At the same time, a new and unratified society calling itself “Pro-Life At Dal” had its first meeting on Sept. 21. According to the society’s Tiger Society page, accessed on Sept. 2, the group seeks “to publicly oppose legislation and public policy allowing abortions to be carried out.”
The society advertised for its first meeting with posters of a five month old fetus in the Killam library. A key member of the society has reportedly stated intentions to seek assistance, mentoring and funding connections from the
National Campus Life Network. We have seen the actions of anti-choice societies which work with NCLN, either directly or indirectly, on university campuses across the country. Often, NCLN works with anti-choice societies to bring a roaming display called the Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) onto campus.
At University of British Columbia, representatives of the GAP were invited onto campus by the anti-choice student society Lifeline. The representatives threatened litigation if they were not permitted to set up their display, which featured comparisons between abortion and the Holocaust, for as long as they deemed appropriate and with no security or incidental fee paid to the University.
At Ryerson University, the GAP’s presence on campus and its comparisons between abortion and southern mob lynchings of the 1950s sparked a plethora of complaints from students through the university’s student union.
At the University of Victoria, an anti-choice society calling itself Youth Protecting Youth promised they would not bring in the Genocide Awareness Project. They later rescinded that commitment, inviting a prominent GAP speaker.
The Genocide Awareness Project also campaigns abroad, in the United States. At the University of Kentucky, one black student was so offended by the racist comparison of lynching to abortion that he drove his truck into the display and was consequently arrested.
Why do we, as student journalists, care? Aren’t we supposed to be objective on divisive issues such as abortion? To not take sides?
In some ways, yes. But our job is more than striving for an impossible model of objectivity. It’s to report what we see, to bring harassment and injustice to light, and to inform and advocate for our readership.
In Canada, women in undergraduate degrees are approaching 60 per cent of the student population. Women make up the majority of low-paid teaching assistant and sessional instructor positions, while over 60 per cent of tenure-track faculty members are men. Our own university’s employment equity practices can only reasonably aim for 24 per cent of its Canada Research Chairs to be women.
Women on campus form a polite, quiet and underpaid majority. They’re part time students, staff, mothers, and community members, and aren’t always asked for their opinion between their three jobs and their class work. Thus, for student writers, advocating for the Dalhousie community and its often
unheard voices means advocating for women. As journalists who notice anti-choice action on campus, our task within the upcoming months will be to record what happens, fairly and objectively. It will be our job to let no harassment— be it verbal, physical, or visual—go unseen or unchallenged by a fair and accurate press.
As a university community, our task will be to stop sitting quietly, allowing people to view us as some kind of malleable, “mushy middle.” Many of us who appear to walk some sort of line between pro-choice or pro-life opinion actually support legalized and accessible abortion for women who need it.
At St. Mary’s University right here in Halifax, Jose Ruba from the Genocide Awareness Project came to speak to a half-full lecture hall where the complaints of pro-choice activists were louder than his microphone. Walking by the 40 Days For Life demonstration at the Victoria General, it’s rare to even see 40 people. That’s because most Canadians support our current legal framework which gives women control over their bodies. We don’t want a fringe group’s opinion to threaten our rights. We just don’t talk about it, because talking about abortion is depressing.
As awkward as it is, this Canadian politesse must change. We do not yet know if Pro-Life at Dal has any plan to invite groups such as the Genocide Awareness Project to Halifax, or the nature of their relationship with the National Campus Life Network. This means that we can influence their decisions whether or not to have those hurtful tactics on our own campus.
We must stand together and make sure that anti-abortion groups are aware that while they are entitled to their opinions, we as a community will not tolerate a space like the ones we’ve seen at Kentucky, Ryerson, or UBC. We’ve seen the havoc that those environments wreak for students and women, and we’re not going to warmly invite such divisive and hurtful actions here.
Recent Comments