VUWSA not learning
December 5th, 2011 at 10:56 am by David FarrarVUWSA is voluntary from next year. The idea is that they focus less on being a branch of the Labour Party, and more on actually doing good stuff for students.
However they have struck a dirty deal with the university, where VUW will fund them using taxpayer and student money so they can function even if no students wish to join them. This is obviously a sign that VUW is awash in surplus funds and doesn’t need any further taxpayer contributions.
For let’s have a look at how the 2012 VUWSA President plans to use VUWSA assets funded by taxpayers and students:
Now you can’t blame the VUWSA flunkies entirely for this. They have had years of a culture of entitlement where they see VUWSA assets as being available for their personal political activites.
Whom I blame is the Council and Vice-Chancellor of Victoria University. The whole idea behind VSM is to give bodies like VUWSA an incentive to provide better representation and services to students. Handing over a large cheque every year with next to no accountability, means they are unlikely to change.
If I was the new Minister of Tertiary Education, I’d be thanking the Council and VC of VUW for making their job much much easier. If at anytime in the next four years before the Govt gets the books back into surplus VUW asks for more money, then it is an easy “No” as they obviously have lots to spare. Of course some of the academic staff may get upset that they’ll go four years without a payrise, just so VUWSA gets to keep its van for trips to Young Labour conferences.
UPDATE: VUWSA President-Elect Bridie Hood has e-mailed to clarify:
I just wanted to clarify a few of the issues mentioned in your blog post this morning entitled ‘VUWSA Not Learning’.
As has been mentioned in the comments section, all VUWSA Affiliated Clubs are able to access the VUWSA Van for use. Most of the youth political groups are affiliated VUWSA clubs (including VicLabour, VicNats, Greens@Vic, Act on Campus etc), and those which are not have the opportunity to become so. The process is transparent and fair. VUWSA does not privilege any particular groups simply by dint of their political affiliation.
As stated on the VUWSA website (http://www.vuwsa.org.nz/other-services/van-and-trailer-hire/) there is a $90 per day fee to use the Van and clubs must also pay for petrol.This is not a service fully funded by the University and/or VUWSA. It is, however, offered at a cheaper rate than other companies such as Hertz and Rent-a-Dent to allow clubs to participate in events.
Regarding my comment on the Young Labour Summer School event page, I was suggesting that VicLabour could hire out the VUWSA van (if it was available) so they could travel to the event at a lower cost than flying.
I’m disappointed to see that a personal facebook post has been interpreted in such a way.Anyone who knows me and knows my work at VUWSA knows that I would never use a VUWSA resource, such as the van, for my own personal gain.
Please let me know if you have any questions on this issue and I am happy to discuss VUWSA policy with you if the need arises. I hope you find the time next year to come and visit us, I think you will be pleasantly surprised with the changes that have been made over the last few years.
A fair response by Bridie, and I accept there was no intention of private gain. I do think there is a wider issue about using income gained through compulsory means to benefit the small minority who are involved in clubs and socs. I’d have no problem with that, if there was a voluntary membership fee and that was one of the “perks” of joining. But the whole idea with VSM is that compulsory sources of income should be used only for essential student services such as a class rep system, a union building.
But full marks to Bridie for the tone of her response.
Tags: Victoria University, VSM, VUWSA
December 5th, 2011 at 11:07 am
“However they have struck a dirty deal with the university, where VUW will fund them using taxpayer and student money so they can function even if no students wish to join them.”
Um it was fairly widely anticipated prior to VSM passing that universities could sub-contract the associations to continue to provide the services for the university’s. It’s not exactly a surprise
[DPF: Any sub-contracting should be for a small number of defined services. VUWSA will never improve unless it has to actually develop services that students value]
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 11:07 am
What! That’s outrageous if true (the deal with VUW). I’m glad I’m out of that scene now.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 11:11 am
Smells fraudulent to me.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 11:22 am
So my tax dollars are being used to fund some snotty, pimple faced twerp to a Labour Party summer camp? No way is that an activity that should be funded by the taxpayer. The Government does NOT have any money. They only have monies that they take from taxpayers. Wonder how many similar $s were paid by Canterbury U and were included in their recent funding request to Goivernment.
Vote:It is a time to say NO!
December 5th, 2011 at 11:25 am
And aren’t student associations supposed to be there to fight for student rights (bahaha) and be critiques of university decisions that affect their members (bahaha)?
Vote:How can they be credibly independent when the university now holds the purse strings.
What a joke.
December 5th, 2011 at 11:37 am
As Brad already said, this was an entirely predictable outcome of the VSM legislation. In fact, the University of Canterbury has been doing exactly this for some years now in anticipation of VSM coming into effect (contracting the UCSA as its service arm and then imposing a compulsory student services levy, which unlike the old levy imposed by the students association you cannot opt out from). It really is the worst of all possible worlds – the students’ association at UC is now the puppet of the VC and the Council who control the purse-strings, while students have no control at all over how their student services levy is spent (this is now decided by the University, not the democratically-elected student association).
Not to deny the very real problems (particularly relating the calibre of people getting elected to student associations in recent years and their increasing bureaucratisation), but this is so much worse!
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 11:44 am
Is the taxpayer still providing direct funding to unions, as implemented by the last Labour government? I this was called “Employment Relations Education” of something similar. Judging by the union vehicles I saw out delivering Labour party material during the election campaign, the unions don’t require any further taxpayer subsidies.
An obvious place to cut spending.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 11:47 am
However they have struck a dirty deal with the university, where VUW will fund them using taxpayer and student money so they can function even if no students wish to join them.
Gosh, how could anyone have foreseen that some universities would look on the govt trying to micromanage them as intolerable interference and would find a way to give the govt the finger? Nobody predicted this would happen… er, except all the people who predicted exactly this would happen.
…using taxpayer and student money…
Actually, using Victoria University of Wellington’s money. If Google offers a medical plan to its staff, it’s doing it with Google’s money, not customers’ money. It stopped being customers’ money when they paid it to Google.
If at anytime in the next four years before the Govt gets the books back into surplus VUW asks for more money…
The govt’s going to get the books back into surplus? Do they have some kind of plan for how to do that? Because there’s been no sign of one the last few years. Anyway – you might want to look up how universities are funded. How much money VUW gets from the taxpayer is a factor of things like how many students the govt’s willing to pay it for, and how well it scores in PBRF. The VC turning up in the Minister’s office and saying “Please sir, can I have some more?” isn’t a recognised funding method.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 11:50 am
Typical left wing flunkies still wanting to suck on the public tit for its handouts.
When will it cease.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 11:52 am
Allowing students to choose is fucking micromangment now? Sounds more like not managing them to those of basing our ecvlautuon in english rather that socialist agenda speak milt.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 12:02 pm
Why on earth is anyone surprised by this? The Universities have long been dependent on student associations to perform various services which they outsource, and which can then be funded through the student association levy, rather than tuition fees. Gets around the fee maxima policy nicely. It has nothing to do with VSM, it is just a matter of structuring fees in accordance with regulatory incentives. VSM didn’t change those incentives, so the Universities will continue to contract out services to student associations.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 12:05 pm
Allowing students to choose is fucking micromangment now?
Sigh. It’s been explained often enough: if the student associations didn’t exist, universities would have to provide the relevant services themselves; they aren’t really interested in doing so; and the govt that decides to stick its nose in is going to get a smack on that nose. Blather about choice is irrelevant.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 12:08 pm
Why are we surprised,this coming from a gaggle of academics.Take the wizened little gnome who seems to appear from time to time on TVNZ,calls himself Johannsen.Always thought NZ was full of educated idiots.Seems people of his ilk live in a fools paradise, or a paradise funded by sucker taxpayers.Seems there are a lot of clones like him in VUW.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 12:11 pm
You utter knob, DPF. As others have said this was exacty the predicted outcome of VSM. The university will fund those functions of the student association that the university wants present, and will of course increase student fees to do so. Massey and Canterbury have done the same.
Student Associations are no longer accountable to the students. They are now directly accountable to the universities.
[DPF:20 demerits for name calling. The universities are not just funding a few discrete functions (such as class reps) but absolutely everything, as VUWSA is charging a zero fee.
I knew the SAs would try to get around the legislation as they are too scared to actually try convincing students they provide any value. But you had to give them the chance to do the decent thing, and there will be consequences down the road for the backdoor deals to stay de facto compulsory]
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 12:16 pm
Student Associations are no longer accountable to the students. They are now directly accountable to the universities.
+1
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 12:26 pm
“VUW asks for more money, then it is an easy “No” as they obviously have lots to spare.”
Yes because a weekend van trip for a bunch of student politicians is going to break the bank – what do you think the cost to the taxpayer will be for a weekend of wear and tear on a university vehicle plus possibly cost of petrol. I mean we could be talking a couple of hundred dollars here!
Don’t get me wrong – I think it’s a stupid call, I think they should make their own way there in their personal time if they want to and I think it’s a great thing you are highlighting this issue and I hope they get punished for this by the student voters and appropiately reprimanded by the university. But students, especially student politicians, doing dumb stuff or wasting money is nothing new.
What concerns me is that what you say could very well occur. Critical research or teaching money for the university could get cut and the people making the decisions will quote examples like this, that make great headlines, as justification. I absolutely think that the universities need to spend their money wisely. I also believe that if we want to develop a better economy, improve our exports, pay down our debt etc that universities are a huge part of the solution not the problem.
I’ve heard some quotes in the last few years from Stephen Joyce about the fact that NZ spends as much as similar countries on tertiary education but a disproportionate amount goes on student support. I think that’s a great anomaly to be highlighting. Yes students need support but it shouldn’t come at the cost of education quality – the best economies in the world have the best research driven universities in the world, quality should be the paramount priority and if you want quality you need to pay for it. If our universities face funding freezes every time the economy is in a downturn or going slow then you’ll just exacerbate the problem, by and large universities act as drivers for the economy not a drag on the economy, so it could easily become a vicious circle, backward economy begets backward education begets backward economy. There are a lot of other areas of government spending that should go before the universities face freezes or cuts, I would argue that education should be the last place you look for savings.
If this debacle helps to provide the minister with ammunition to drive a strong focus on value for money for student services and a realignment of spending weighting from student welfare to education quality then it’ll be a good thing. As a taxpayer I would be very happy to see strings attached to the tertiary education dollar to ensure that it is actually spent on education!. If this example is used, as your comment seems to imply, as a pretext to just freeze or cut funding to universities then that would be horribly short sighted act which would do nothing for the long term improvement of the country.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 12:28 pm
Clearly universities don’t need as much taxpayer funding as they get if they can afford to sponsor student union road trips to Labour Party events. I’m looking forward to some of their budget being redistributed to more worthwhile endeavours.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 12:32 pm
At university some years ago the SU services included a radio station, a vegetable food bank that required student volunteers, counselling and so forth.
What services is Vic contracting the former SU to supply? Similarly for other universities.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 12:34 pm
@Nick R.
It is nothing about contracting out services.
The relevant services, from the university perspective, that the student associations provide, is representation and advocacy for students *against* university process. This is needed to provide some semblance of natural justice to university processes. Of course, sometimes the university managers would probably rather that Student Association advocacy/representation was less effective on some issues. But student representation and advocacy needs to be present in some form, so that the university can present its decisions as legitimate to the students. This is why the universities will continue to fund student associations. However, the previous independently-funded, all-inclusive, student associations were much more valuable to the university than the new system.
The new situation is actually quite fraught for the universities. If a university funded Student Association is perceived to be a creature of the university management, then suddenly it has no value as an agent for representing students. On the other hand, if the Student Association is poorly funded and/or seen to only represent a small proportion of student-members, it likewise has no value for representing the student body.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 12:35 pm
when were associations accountable to students in anything but name? they have been running their own agenda for years and have enough mates who want a turn at the trough to never be held accountable.
as to services, psycho, should universities be holding sausage sizzles and funding orientation pissups? is a subsidised bar a relevant service?
is a womens room relevant or just pandering to nutcases?
hell if the university gets rid of all the pointless crap that the unions just used to make themselves feel relevant, maybe this is the better way to go.
on the other hand now that the unions are funded by the university it will mean less pointless sit ins and complaining as they need to sing for their supper. i am not sad at all to see the student unions who promised little and delivered less completely cut off at the knees.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 12:44 pm
My understanding is that any VUWSA affiliated club can book the VUWSA Van (a service funded by the University). VicLabour is a club at Victoira so would be entitled to use the van if it was free. Bridie is therefore not out of line in suggesting they would make use of that service.
The Young Nats LNI have recieved more support from VUWSA than VicLabour has over the last few years.
Most universities around the world provide support for clubs like this – as part of supporting thier mission to encourage the free exchange of ideas and promote political, philosphical and cultural expression.
[DPF: It is a very bad look for the VUWSA President to be suggesting the use of VUWSA resources for personal political activities - even if other clubs in theory can book it.
Is there any reason VUWSA needs a van, and Young Labour can't use Hertz or even rent-a-dent to arrange transport like everyone else?]
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 12:48 pm
Richard29 – “Yes students need support”
Psycho Milt – “if the student associations didn’t exist, universities would have to provide the relevant services themselves”
Why do students need “support”? Can they not look after themselves? What support do they need?
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 12:59 pm
Well the arts & humanities students are a subset of tomorrow’s vulnerable unskilled workers, so they need to learn how to claim entitlements early.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 1:01 pm
Govt should tag any future cheques to VUW (my alma mater) with “$000 less $xyz for VUW contribution to VUWSA” already paid by taxpayer.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 1:02 pm
Yes, I should have mentioned that one as it has seemingly been around forever. The thing is that I can remember only one such case” in my 5+ years at university – and I heard of none at all where there was a meaningful result that actually changed things for students in any measurable way. Perhaps it was precedent situation and students of the 1960′s and 70′s had done all the hard yards in changing university “process”? Perhaps I don’t understand what process means in this context and some examples would help?
Almost every student I knew assumed that the varsity would get their own way on any given issue. I don’t recall any student burned about an issue, leaping to their feet with the cry of the student union will help me.
Any recent examples? Because, again, I can’t recall any. It was assumed that a negotiating talkfest would occur, followed by a diplomatic resolution that allowed everybody to feel like a winner.
Hmmm. Refer back to my earlier point about the campus I knew being quietly cynical about who would win in the varsity vs. student union arguments. There were a few students who were loudly outspoken about the “university elites”, demanding of students that they “fight back” against these grey oppressors, and so forth – but aside from becoming key members of the student union I don’t recall anything else they actually did in these areas.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 1:10 pm
@Weihana “What support do they need?”
The support students need is “independent” representation and advocacy against and within university process.
@DPF “The universities are not just funding a few discrete functions (such as class reps) but absolutely everything, as VUWSA is charging a zero fee.”
Sure, but clubs, radio-stations, newspapers, and the like are:
a) an independent source of information for the student body (so are a part of effective representation),
b) help to create a vibrant student culture — which is great for university marketing — and,
c) are nice to have because a student culture is good for the students too.
So, the university does want these functions to be present to and they need to be properly funded if they are to happen — hence why the university will fund them (by increasing student fees).
Again, the university would *much* prefer these were still funded in the old manner. The new situation is a bit like relying on your Dad to fund your drinking parties. Much drinking may still happen, but it is just a bit uncool.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
Weihana
They don’t. How many former students here have ever availed themselves of SA services?
If you aren’t sufficiently mature to go to varsity without mummy holding your hand, then you shouldn’t be there.
You roll up. Get a map. Register. Go to classes. Study (more likely go to the pub). Go home.
It isn’t hard if you managed to make it through school without getting lost on the way there or on the way home.
They don’t need counsellors, clubs, doctors, or every other service that is otherwise available in the community. If anyone wants to form a club, let them use the notice boards. Those services don’t automatically cease as soon as you go to varsity. If they need careers counselling from some plonker who can’t get a real job then they aren’t doing anything useful or have no idea what they went there for. In either case, they shouldn’t be there.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 1:23 pm
Hate to rain on the parade but VicLabour is a club at Vic so I would think that they can rent the VUWSA van out and take it wherever – just like any other club. I would say they probably pay the set price just like any other group on campus. I am all up for exposing corruption but a VUWSA President encouraging groups to use and pay for their services doesn’t really seem like a scandal.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 1:27 pm
The problem I have as a member of the VUWSA is their arrogance in their representation of their members. They have campaigned for MMP and are basically a thinly veiled front for the left. While I have no problem with officers being affiliated to these groups I start to object when they start speaking in favour of their groups representing me. Thinking back to earlier this year I should have run for office to try and end the politicisation of the student union.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 1:29 pm
DPF, check your facts first. VUWSA affiliated clubs must request AND pay for use of the van, and there are certainly no exceptions made for any clubs. I am the President of VicLabour and a 2012 VUWSA exec member. There were no exceptions made for me when it came to the charges for hiring the van nor the process that I had to go through.
If you think students’ associations are still functioning to support left-wing clubs on campus then you are dreaming.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 1:30 pm
@tom hunter
The representation I am mostly thinking of is small-scale. It is when students complain about grades, lecturer/tutor performance, conditions/equipment in labs, time-table problems, conduct of other students, conduct of staff, resolution of course cancellations, library fines, inability to enrol due to course caps., accusations of plagiarism, etc.
There will be dozens, if not hundreds, of these issues every year at every university. But individual issues may only involve one or two students. I can’t give you specific cases because they are private to the students concerned.
Of course, some students may be able to resolve these issues for themselves. Other students need help. And, of course, many times the university will decide against the students. But that’s not the point, the point is to ensure that the students get a fair hearing, and are seen to get a fair hearing. Which is why this function is critical from the university point of view.
The reason you apparently don’t know about it is that the Students Associations do successfully advocate for their students. Which is also good from the university perspective. Problems resolved through advocacy do not cause riots.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 1:39 pm
I never did and neither did any of the 300 or so students that I knew by name, including several with some fairly shitty personal history problems (including sexual abuse). The latter certainly got counselling but it was either on the parent’s coin or free and organised by psych lecturers that they knew or who were friends of friends. The SA never even came up in conversations.
Twas ever thus. I can’t recall a time when there was a “right-wing” student union, even those that had a few right-wingers on board. Well, what can you expect from a group that is both a “union” and “compulsory”. Hell, they’d have to be left-wing.
Of course, these are really the two key points that all the VUWSA defenders have been dancing around for some time. If their “services” were really so valued and they were so representative of the student body, then the student protests to keep them would have been huge – or at least larger than the sad, little groups I saw around the country.
The simple fact is that not enough students knew or cared what the student union did – so the union died.
Perhaps the Labour Party can assign some ex-VUWSA people to the Jordan Carter-inspired review committee (horrible thought – perhaps they already did)?
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 1:43 pm
RJL (73) Says:
December 5th, 2011 at 1:30 pm
“The representation I am mostly thinking of is small-scale…. some students may be able to resolve these issues for themselves. Other students need help.”
Who wants to employ someone who cannot manage life’s small-scale problems? Perhaps such people shouldn’t be at university in the first place.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 1:50 pm
@ Weihanna: “Who wants to employ someone who cannot manage life’s small-scale problems?”
Irrelevant.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 1:51 pm
Hey milt repeating bullshit lines doesn’t suddenly make them true.
No one has ended the existance of student unions. I’m a fucking memember of one you tool.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 1:52 pm
My god, you’re right. I had no idea. Well, there’s one problem for a start: promotion based on a nullity. It’s all a bit late now but here’s some advertising suggestions.
We sleep soundly in our beds because rough
menstudents stand ready in the night to visitviolencepaperwork on those who would do us harmor my personal favourite:
Vote:“I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it.”
December 5th, 2011 at 1:58 pm
Here’s VUWSA’s policy on the van:
Outrageous. The nerve of these student politicians.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 2:13 pm
And if Jesus owned a boogie board his beard would be full of seagulls.
Perhaps if Google got most of their money through donations your point would make sense. People purchase services from Google. The Government funds the university.
If you dont like the Government having an interest in what the universities do with the Governments (our) money, then advocate privatisation of tertiary education.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 2:19 pm
@Grendel
“is a womens room relevant or just pandering to nutcases?”
Hehehhehe. I had totally forgotten about the womens room. To begin with I didn’t really understand it. But over time I think I came to enjoy the spectacle of it just because it upset so many people. I can remember the endless lobbying, complaining, letters to editor of the student magazine, haranguing of student politicians etc.
Vote:There’s a certain element within the anti-PC brigade who just get massively frothing at the mouth offended at the idea of a dedicated space for women.
The same crowd never really took up the issue of all the various faculty only offices, post grad or staff only cafes and offices, the existence of various clubs based around race or national identity etc. There are heaps of offices, storage rooms and lounges around campus that get precious little usage and this was not perceived as a problem. Yet the prospect of a lounge that people are denied access to purely on the basis of having a Y chromosome – mayhem!
December 5th, 2011 at 2:30 pm
Tom H, DID YOU ORDER THE CODE RED?
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 2:30 pm
actually i have no issue with clubs based around gender or race, they are voluntary and have the same rights as any other group.
the legitimate complaint against teh womens room was that men who were a minority at Vic, and paid the same rate to go were told that in the interests of ‘equality’ there needed to be a space where women could go to feel safe.
oh and to be safe it needed free tea and coffee and a free phone.
the good thing was that it kept the super nutters away from teh rest of campus and let us get on with life, but it was a perfect example of how a) university has nothing to do with real life, b) how some people choose to interpret their own fucked up version of ‘equality’ and c) what a crazy little socialist paradise vuwsa was and is.
even to fix a lightbulb the poor janitor had to ask permission, be supervised and then any women who were in there or could not go in while he was there were offered counselling. i would have given them the lightbulb and told them women can do anything and to change it their fucking selves.
if the university badly handled its use of offices that its issue, but they were not denying access to a room purely on the basis of gender (barring toilets for obvious reasons).
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 2:48 pm
@ Richard29 “The same crowd never really took up the issue of all the various faculty only offices, post grad or staff only cafes and offices, the existence of various clubs based around race or national identity etc. …Yet the prospect of a lounge that people are denied access to purely on the basis of having a Y chromosome – mayhem!”
I once thought that a women’s room was an archaic aberration. Nice to have, perhaps, but I didn’t really understand the need for it.
Then, I reflected on who was arguing against it and why. That convinced me that a women’s room was a good idea.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 3:10 pm
# RJL (75) Says:
December 5th, 2011 at 1:50 pm
@ Weihanna: “Who wants to employ someone who cannot manage life’s small-scale problems?”
Irrelevant.
Irrelevant? Employment is irrelevant to tertiary education? Perhaps this attitude is the problem.
Given that the taxpayer is largely footing the bill for tertiary education then perhaps employment prospects should be considered relevant otherwise the taxpayer may as well take away all such funding to people who have either no real interest in future employment or who are simply unemployable due to inherited genetic deficiencies which sees them incapable of dealing with minor personal problems that they face.
I suggest that the person who needs their hand held as they go to university is a waste of time, space and money and that the taxpayer’s investment in their education is a waste. Am I being unfair?
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 3:11 pm
Grendel/RJL
Do you not think that there is considerable merit in having a ‘wimen’s room’ to accomodate all the hairy wimen that nobody really wants to have anything to do with? It keeps them away from everyone else, while all the normal chicks will go to the common room with the blokes.
After all, the only real function of the common room is to act as a convenient rallying point before heading off on the piss.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 3:28 pm
@RJL
“Then, I reflected on who was arguing against it and why. That convinced me that a women’s room was a good idea.”
Enlighten the plebs..
I have read the waffle here:
http://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/bitstream/10092/596/1/Women's%20rights%20officers.pdf
but it doesn’t realy answer the question.
So who is arguing against it and why are you convinced it is a good idea?
And please don’t quote drivel like this:
Vote:http://www.redstockings.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=76&Itemid=59
December 5th, 2011 at 4:13 pm
@Other_Andy
The people arguing against a women’s room are generally pricks. This is why a women’s room is a good idea.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 4:22 pm
@Weihana “I suggest that the person who needs their hand held as they go to university is a waste of time, space and money and that the taxpayer’s investment in their education is a waste. Am I being unfair?”
If you take this narrow view of education then it is the qualities that the person leaves the university with that are at issue. So what if they need hand-holding at some point? It is merely whether they are competent at graduation that you are apparently worried about.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 4:27 pm
@RJL
“The people arguing against a women’s room are generally pricks. This is why a women’s room is a good idea.”
Penguin Logic.
Vote:Your answer tells me more about you than about the people arguing against a women’s room.
Four material fallacies in one sentence.
Well done.
December 5th, 2011 at 4:43 pm
@Other_Andy
The argument for a women’s room is simply that the wonderful tapestry of society includes misogynistic pricks who want to control what women can and cannot do.
The fact that there are a bunch of misogynistic pricks busy trying to argue that there shouldn’t be a women’s room on spurious “equality” grounds (or some other trite) is therefore precisely why there should be a women’s room.
This is not to say that everyone arguing against a women’s room is a misogynistic prick — some are just misguided.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 4:48 pm
My view on women’s rooms was always that we (being men) shouldn’t argue against them, simply argue that a men’s room was also appropriate. Said room would of course require free beer. Problem is that (at least until they get married) men don’t generally seek a space with no women in it.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 4:54 pm
My woman has a room.
It’s called the kitchen!
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 5:00 pm
Johnboy Tzu
It was that attitude that caused you so much aggravation and cost you so much money.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 5:03 pm
But as Confucius say oh learned Leonardo fellow. “Man who keep woman in kitchen save shitload on takeaways”.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 5:10 pm
Takeaway food or takeaway women?
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 5:17 pm
Confucius also say:
“Man who reach 62 best to keep eating same old pork and rice rather than try new pussy and rice as rice may not be quite as well done!
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 5:18 pm
@RJL
Just to summarise your points…
People who are against a women’s room at a university are either misogynistic pricks or misguided.
And…
Equality is an overused concept and consequently of little importance.
I suppose your argument wouldn’t work the other way around?
As in….
“The fact that there are a bunch of misandrynistic cu#t@ busy trying to argue that there shouldn’t be a men’s room on spurious “equality” grounds (or some other trite) is therefore precisely why there should be a men’s room.”
I guess not…
Are you a member of the ‘Margaret Mutu’ school of thought?
Vote:Women can’t be sexist as women are not in a position of power just like Maori cannot be racist as Maori are not in a position of power?
December 5th, 2011 at 5:29 pm
RJL,
“society includes misogynistic pricks who want to control what women can and cannot do”
Who and where? And how does a room stop this? I say if you’ve got an overbearing boyfriend or husband or just a friend then you need to sort him out and tell him to either piss off or stop being so oppressive. I don’t see how a room solves whatever personal issues some women have with their male associates.
Further it is false to imagine women as endangered in normal society such that they need constant protection. Any boy who tried to control what a woman did with herself would be severely chastised by the vast majority of social circles the obvious exceptions being Muslims and people from other patriarchal cultures. But again, how does a room fix this?
I’m not saying I’m against a room for women, just that I don’t understand the reasons given. Have a room for all I care. Just don’t complain when the white supremacists want their own room lest you be considered a hypocrite.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 5:51 pm
No one has ended the existance of student unions. I’m a fucking memember of one you tool.
Not studying English, I take it?
From VUW’s point of view, the services provided by VUWSA will cease to exist under this legislation as students won’t pay for them voluntarily, just as they wouldn’t pay for a staff common room or the VC’s car voluntarily. VUW is therefore faced with either paying for these services itself, or taking a hit to its “student experience” – which you can sneer at all you like, but university administrators take it seriously and its their opinions that count.
VUW’s obviously decided to fund the services itself, and as DPF points out, that takes money the university could have otherwise spent on administration, equipment etc – which must be very annoying. Accordingly, it looks like VUW’s decided to fund the services in a way that conspicuously extends a big middle finger to the govt.
Kimble: you seem to have confused universities with a branch of the public service. They aren’t.
Weihana and Grendel: you should set up a business consultancy in which you advise businesses they need to stop pandering to these customer assholes and instead tell them to harden the fuck up. No doubt you’ll make a mint.
And in general: this thread is full of people telling us what they don’t like about the student association they’re familiar with, which is about as relevant as telling us how their last bowel motion went. The scary thing is that these people have presumably attended a university and therefore ought to have at least some rudimentary understanding of what an argument consists of and what is relevant or irrelevant to a point of dispute.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 5:53 pm
You’ll probably find that like all political party youth branches, the Labour one is an affiliated club at VUWSA and can therefore rent vans etc. The Young Nats could probably do the same.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 5:56 pm
Psycho Milt: interesting perspective. Ultimately, VUW was already know as a bastion of lefty thought – not quite Waikato, but no news here. No doubt they’re offering a service in the market, and those who like that service will go to VUW. This means that either:
– there will be a services charge, those who want to pay that services charge will go to VUW, those who don’t might go elsewhere, OR
– their education spend will be cut, you’ll get a lower quality education but more “services”. Again, people can make their choices
I guess ultimately this whole thing is yet more argument why govt shouldn’t be funding universities at all. Then none of these arguments would arise. People could pay for their own education.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 5:56 pm
Pissing into the wind again Psycho?
You just haven’t realised yet than none of us really give a fuck about your opinions.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 6:13 pm
David – Facebook stalking of young women as the basis for political commentary? I expected better. You know as well as I do that any affiliated club can book the van, and that was the context in which your featured comment was made. Smearing young people is not a good look.
[DPF: Someone e-mailed me the Facebook comment of the VUWSA President-Elect made on a Labour Party page. This is not stalking and I have no idea what Bridie's gender or age has to do with it, except that you are of course trying to suggest I stalk young woman. You are a wonderful example of why Labour got 27%. Keep it up]
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 6:14 pm
Psycho Milt,
Weihana and Grendel: you should set up a business consultancy in which you advise businesses they need to stop pandering to these customer assholes and instead tell them to harden the fuck up. No doubt you’ll make a mint
So this is about providing what the customer wants. Okay… but but but…
the services provided by VUWSA will cease to exist under this legislation as students won’t pay for them voluntarily, just as they wouldn’t pay for a staff common room or the VC’s car voluntarily. VUW is therefore faced with either paying for these services itself, or taking a hit to its “student experience” – which you can sneer at all you like, but university administrators take it seriously and its their opinions that count.
So student unions provide services, and therefore a “student experience”, so important to students that they won’t voluntarily contribute any money towards it. Interesting logic there.
See the difference with a staff common room and the VC’s car is that those aren’t for the students. They are for the staff who provide the service so obviously a student wouldn’t voluntarily pay for something that is not directly for them, rather they pay indirectly for it by paying for their tuition because they want to be educated and the staff amenities and perks are a necessary part of getting that service provided. However, student services, provided for by student associations, are intended for students directly so if the students valued them then one would expect them to pay for it voluntarily. If they don’t then its value to students is questionable.
The university administrators may believe it is important for their schools reputation and preference among students. That doesn’t make it so. Indeed the University of Auckland has had voluntary membership since before the law change and yet it is still the number one ranked university in the country.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 6:17 pm
Psycho Milt,
Also, tertiary education is not simply a business. Most of it is funded by taxpayers as an investment in our collective future. It is quite legitimate to question whether that investment is worthwhile and whether or not the type of people who need their hand held are probably not going to be the people who we depend upon for our future wellbeing.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 7:30 pm
I guess ultimately this whole thing is yet more argument why govt shouldn’t be funding universities at all.
Or it’s yet more argument why everyone should get a free unicorn. One or the other
…none of us really give a fuck about your opinions.
Indeed, so little do you care that you take the trouble to reply to them. There really isn’t any level of giving-a-fuck lower than that.
So student unions provide services, and therefore a “student experience”, so important to students that they won’t voluntarily contribute any money towards it. Interesting logic there.
I get the feeling you don’t encounter a lot of students. In any case, it’s what the people running the universities think that counts, and they think this stuff is necessary.
Also, tertiary education is not simply a business. Most of it is funded by taxpayers as an investment in our collective future.
Less than half of it, in some cases. But yes, it’s an investment in our collective future, which is why some retards persuading the govt to fuck with them to no purpose annoys the fuck out of the people running them. Hence VUW’s big finger to the govt.
Vote:December 5th, 2011 at 9:21 pm
Comments deleted for using a commenter’s assumed real name. Please do not, or demerits will occur.
Vote:December 6th, 2011 at 12:47 am
@ Jordan King. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. You smug little prick. Your little battle against VSM was an utter failure.
You ran the SOS campaign and you and your mates spent thousands of student’s dollars running up and down NZ telling students you knew better than they did.
You censored peoples rational comments on the Facebook page and mocked those who you didn’t agree with. You exemplify everything that is sad and pathetic about the Labour Party. I guess now you may have to go get a real job and stop leaching off of students. That isn’t an open invitation to join a union or lobby to be an MP.
Regarding VUWSA, it will take them a few years to get with the programme. They are a bit slow over there. The comment from the president was not really good enough, she was covering her ass for being caught out supporting Labour Youth. Why should taxpayers subsidise a mini-van for any political party youth wing? What’s the bet that VUWSA would have given it out for less or even free if they weren’t caught out?
Vote:December 6th, 2011 at 1:08 am
Psycho Milt,
“…it’s what the people running the universities think that counts, and they think this stuff is necessary.”
No it’s not. If you’re going to make the business analogy then that would be the equivalent of saying “It’s the manager’s opinion that counts”. This is silly of course. What counts is reality. The manager’s opinion could be rubbish and he may run the business into the ground. What I’m doing is simply connecting the dots. If students won’t voluntarily fund services intended for them it says to me that they do not value the services very much. It’s common sense. They value alcohol so they voluntarily fund bars as we all know. They don’t value student services which is why they often have to be forced to contribute. The universities may think they value them but that doesn’t make it true.
Vote:December 6th, 2011 at 6:14 am
“What counts is reality.” Exactly, which is why the university administrators are basing their response to this on reality rather than school-level economic theories.
Vote:December 6th, 2011 at 12:47 pm
Too right.
So, can we have an admission that your ill-informed smear was just that?
Or was that it?
Vote:December 6th, 2011 at 1:50 pm
Psycho Milt,
“Exactly, which is why the university administrators are basing their response to this on reality rather than school-level economic theories.”
What reality? That other universities do not consider it necessary yet are more highly regarded than VUW?
Vote:December 6th, 2011 at 11:09 pm
If you’re interested in seeing what can happen when a student association goes truly feral, here is a case in Canada.
http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3453103
Please be aware that the something awful forums are *nsfw* in most workplaces.
Vote: