A men’s issues group that recently had its proposal for club status rejected by the Ryerson Students’ Union (RSU) has reignited discussion over whether such groups belong on university campuses.
The proposal from fourth-year Ryerson politics student Kevin Arriola would have allowed for the Men’s Issues Awareness Society (MIAS) to become a registered club on campus. Arriola appealed the RSU decision, which will be voted on at a board of governors meeting on Jan. 4.
“Regardless of the decision, we will continue operating,” Arriola said. “We have already had our first meeting and we will be having another one in December.”
RSU cited concerns over the group becoming a haven for misogyny and anti-feminism.
This isn’t the first time a men’s issues group has run into strong opposition in attempting to gain club recognition on a Canadian university campus.
At Queen’s University, a MIAS group received club certification in 2014 but had it taken back before it was able to host any events.
In 2012, a $30,000 men’s centre at Simon Fraser University received backlash over whether it would actually be committed to “challenging the traditional notions of gendered ideologies,” as stated in its mandate.
In 2013, RSU rejected a proposal for a MIAS to be granted club status.
The RSU also cited MIAS’ connection to the controversial men’s issues group Canadian Association for Equality (CAFE).
CAFE founder Justin Trottier insisted his organization is not a “men’s rights association.” He called it a men’s health centre focusing on the “status, health, and well-being of boys and men.”
Despite its intended focus, the organization has hosted events with speakers critical of the modern feminist movement such as writer Cathy Young, National Post columnists Robyn Urback and Barbara Kay, and men’s movement activist Warren Farrell. Some of these events have been countered with disruptive protest.
CAFE, headquartered in Toronto, has seen branches of its group pop up in Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Montreal, and Ottawa. The organization is affiliated with 15 men’s issues groups at Canadian universities including Carleton, according to its website.
Trottier said CAFE has done most of its work outside of university campuses, which he considers hostile to his organization’s views.
“The university setting is not necessarily representative of the wider world,” Trottier said. “When you come off the campus and look at the work we’re actually doing, the only reason we’ve been able to do what we do is that we are actually able to create collaborations with other organizations.”
Jackie Mlotek, a member of the Ryerson Feminist Collective, said she thinks CAFE and MIAS’ framework for understanding men’s issues is problematic.
“Our concern is with their CAFE affiliation and having access to resources means bringing events like the victimhood one to our campus, and generally contributing to a university climate where a group can be open about being misogynistic in thinly veiled discourse with feminist language,” Mlotek said.
Mlotek said men’s issues groups argue for male victimhood, which means they say “women over-victimize themselves when it comes to various forms of gendered violence and harassment women and trans folks experience every day.”
Trottier said his group acts as a shelter for men who are in troubled situations. He said incidents of domestic violence against men are actually higher than believed to be, and men are more likely to commit suicide than women.
He said CAFE is different from men’s issues groups because of that fact.
“It is disappointing that there’s no real appetite to have a real conversation about the legitimacy of those issues,” he said.
Deborah Conners, a PhD student in sociology at Carleton, said CAFE’s work is bound to an ideological lens.
“CAFE says it is not ideologically based. Rather they say that they are dealing with ‘facts.’ However I think it is pretty commonly known at this point that data is always seen through an ideological lens,” Conners said. “Whenever we put forth a point of view we are arguing against another point of view.”
Trottier said he thinks the debate over men’s issues groups isn’t as nuanced as it should be.
“I understand when people . . . are familiar with the gender war between feminism and men’s rights activism, [they try] to put new organizations into one of those two categories,” he said.
