By Katie Stobbart (The Cascade) – Email
Print Edition: April 1, 2015
Whether it’s part of some celebration or corporate give-away, music on the Green always signals news. So, hearing it on March 18, I rerouted to walk toward the sound, only to veer off the main pathway and avoid eye contact when I saw the source. It was knee-jerk; believe it or not, I dislike confrontation.
The tent set up outside the Learning Commons (library building) advocated a particular point of view on a topic which, for many, is sensitive: abortion.
The premises of arguments for and against abortion are well-known and easily found, so I won’t repeat them. My main concern is less the cogency of either argument, and more with the nature of its delivery at the event held by Life Link, a student group.
Yes: university campuses can be fertile ground for intelligent debate on especially sensitive issues. However, with a tent on the Abbotsford campus Green representing one point of view, Life Link either (a) preaches to the choir, to those students who already think the same way, or (b) causes discomfort, shame, and / or trauma to students who don’t.
Furthermore, the approach is not conducive to stimulating healthy discussion; rather, the imagery and slogans used — albeit not as graphic as can be found elsewhere — are biased and aggressive.
“You’ll never regret loving this much,” in this context is targeted at a particular audience: a woman deciding — I doubt lightly — to end pregnancy in its early stages. The images used are employed to appeal to the emotions: a little plastic fetus shows a somewhat human shape in development.
The real problem in this case, however, is location. If the event was in a classroom and advertised around campus, people who want to contribute to or hear discussion can choose to do so. The placement of the tent in a common thoroughfare makes it difficult for students to choose whether to participate.
While I believe we should participate in and contribute to such conversations in productive ways, I fully support the rights of students who do not want to experience extreme discomfort, shame, or trauma on their way to grab a coffee or study for an exam.
Roundtable discussions, panels, screenings, guest lectures, info sessions or meetings in classrooms, and formal debates are all great ways to encourage productive discussion. However, when it comes to a “hot-button” issue, we tend to generalize, polarize, sensationalize, and start sharpening our life-and-death stakes so fast there’s no sitting down to have a respectful, open-minded discussion in a non-judgmental space.
Much of the time, our engagements with this “debate” are just as shallow and black-and-white as they would be anywhere else; we don’t seem to go any deeper or bring anything new to the discussion just by virtue of being at a university.
I would love to see a well-conceived event with a proper, informed, and unique dialogue in a contained campus space, breaking down some of the black-and-white elements of the argument around abortion and contributing something to the topic beyond attempts to sway the audience one way or another.
What kind of space should the university provide? That, too, is up for debate. But it should come down to respect — and just because the imagery used was not explicit does not make this event or its intent respectful of its audience. This wasn’t a conversation; it was a confrontation, and the Green is no place for it.
