SU Council Motions, Wed 1st November 2006

Blush_01

Can I just ask one question Vain? Have you ever been to UCD during warm weather? Ever? You see more on a walk up the concourse than in those posters. You can actually tell whether some people have recently had a brazilian in what they're wearing. Do you propose we ban people who others might find offensive from the concourse too?

How much should I make your reality cheque out for?

Vainglory

Now now, no need to be like that.

Like I said..it's sometimes necessary for people to wear less clothes because it's hot. And I don't have any control over what other people wear.

But it's NOT necessary to put pictures like that on posters. And I do have a degree of control over that.

Unless you're arguing that it is necessary?

hullaballoo

Vainglory wrote:

Like I said..it's sometimes necessary for people to wear less clothes because it's hot.

...And sometimes it's necessary for people to wear less clothes because they're hot.

Het-Field

Personally I think we must break from the ideas of these poster being sexist. Since the University has got rid of certain people (extreme feminists) the situation has died down somewhat.

I remembe rposters being put up by one of the sports clubs (i cant remember which) and it had a picture of a girl, and a statement pertaining to the vast amount of women in the club relative to the amount of men. Now I remember a certain feminst attacking my friend as he was putting up the poster, and his response was something like At least the women in the club are doing something to disprove a steryotype that women are inferior to men at sports" I have far more respect for women who play sports at a high level or women who do something out of the ordinary than those who go runnig around ripping down posters and shouting that all men are pigs. They just get under peoples skin.

I wish those extreme feminists would realsie something. Women have never had it so good.

They can all Vote
They are payed the same as men for the same work
Getting married and having a baby does not mean one has to give up their career.

Furthermore women are in the advantaged position when it comes to child custody cases. Now you dont see loads of men taking to the streets protesting that

Society has moved on from the 1930s. Women are highly respected in society. One of the strongest leaders in the world was Maggie Thatcher. In Ireland our President is a woman, and until recently our Tanaiste was a woman.

If women want to make more of an impact on politics they should be willing to get involved

The_Minister

hullaballoo wrote:

...And sometimes it's necessary for people to wear less clothes because they're hot.

Say what you want, but Hulla would have made a great troll.

valor

Excellent motion Butler

Make sure it passes

cast_iron

Vainglory wrote:

Like I said..it's sometimes necessary for people to wear less clothes because it's hot.

Unless you're arguing that it is necessary?

That's ridiculous, and I think you will find that nobody here is saying it is necessary.

And to suggest otherwise is just stupid, and shows a complete lack of comprehention of the counter-arguement.

Girls don't go about on a Fri/Sat night wearing nothing more than a belt(!) because it's hot (on the celcius scale anyway - as Hulla said!) Maybe you don't get out much these days, but it could be the coldest nite during the winter and that doesn't stop the short skirt brigade (nor should it:) )

Vainglory wrote:

And I don't have any control over what other people wear.

Thank God for that.

Vainglory wrote:

But it's NOT necessary to put pictures like that on posters.

The word "necessay" is largely irrelevant. If a club intends to have a succesful nite/event, then numbers are a must. As long as no student code/rule is broke then where's the problem?
Bar yourself, i don't see many others whinging about this.

It's really a topic for another thread, but clubs/scoieties are finding it increasingly difficult to host events with the onset of modularisation. And the fact is - that alcohol/sex sells events.

Very few people seem bothered by this, so perhaps you would be better served by serving the majority of students (male and female) wishes, rather than the biased few.

You might find your opinions are more apreciated when you don't have a ridiculous self-centred point of view.

Vainglory wrote:

And I do have a degree of control over that.

That's the saddest part of all.

hullaballoo

Het-field, is Mary Harney not Táiniste currently? Sorry for the off-topicness, but I can't find out anywhere and I should be in bed.

Paul Tergat

hullaballoo wrote:

Het-field, is Mary Harney not Táiniste currently? Sorry for the off-topicness, but I can't find out anywhere and I should be in bed.

Michael Mcdowell now holds it, as well as Min For Justice

John_C

I agree with Vainglory on this. Using these pictures shows a lack of imagination in whoever made the posters.

There's no need for them, we're not weighing up pros and cons. There's no pro and a small con.

tintinr35

council notes and council affirms but at the end of the day council does F*uck all

Sangre

As a Muslim I find the depictation of events selling alcohol as deeply offensive.

Allah Akbar.

gubbie

Vainglory wrote:

Plus, in the past couple of years, my experience is that societies have generally stopped using images like that to advertise their events. The last one I remember was B&L's "Barely Legal" thing with the Olsen twins in aid of Temple Street Children's Hospital. So why do we have to be the only ones still doing it?

Sorry but there has been more. The Bunny Ball ones, school discos, christmas parties all used scantly clad women last year in their posters

Stabshauptmann

There was a really suggestive poster recently that seemed not to come up on anyones radar. Better not mention it before wednesday...

dajaffa

gubbie wrote:

Sorry but there has been more. The Bunny Ball ones, school discos, christmas parties all used scantly clad women last year in their posters

Ya + all you have to do i look at the sexual health part of the student survival guide for a seriously suggestive image that nobody kicked up a fuss about.

AngelofFire

Theres a distinction there dajaffa, one has a choice to as to whether one wants to read that section of the freshers guide or not. I have no problem with people buying the Sun, weekly sport or playboy-each publication contains pictures of partially or fully naked people. Those who take offence to those images dont have to buy the magazine. Posters with partially naked people are displayed on the concourse are exposed to everyone, including those who may take offence to it, unlike buying a magazine where people have a choice in the matter, its very hard to avoid such images when they're all over campus.

abelard

AngelofFire wrote:

Theres a distinction there dajaffa, one has a choice to as to whether one wants to read that section of the freshers guide or not.

I don't quite agree just with that particular point. I mean reading through the Student Survival Guide, you wouldn't have any idea if there was going to be a "suggestive image" on the next page or not, so you can't make a conscious choice to avoid the images.

gubbie

AngelofFire wrote:

Theres a distinction there dajaffa, one has a choice to as to whether one wants to read that section of the freshers guide or not

Ya one also has the option to walk blindly up campus with their eyes shut

As Abelard pointed out, no one knew it was coming in the freshers guide. I don't remember seeing any "Warning this publication may contain images that some people may find offensive". You at least know whats gonna come in Playboy and the Sun even if you've never looked at it in your life

dajaffa

AngelofFire wrote:

Theres a distinction there dajaffa, one has a choice to as to whether one wants to read that section of the freshers guide or not. I have no problem with people buying the Sun, weekly sport or playboy-each publication contains pictures of partially or fully naked people. Those who take offence to those images dont have to buy the magazine. Posters with partially naked people are displayed on the concourse are exposed to everyone, including those who may take offence to it, unlike buying a magazine where people have a choice in the matter, its very hard to avoid such images when they're all over campus.

Well other peeps have made other points but also, this motion says "sexually suggestive images of semi-naked people not be used in the promotion of any Union event or in any Union material" which that instance would come in under.

panda100

Het-Field wrote:

Women have never had it so good.

But just not as good as men yet

Het-Field wrote:

They can all Vote

only for the last 100years so we have a lot of catching up to do

Het-Field wrote:

Getting married and having a baby does not mean one has to give up their career.

It does in some careers ecspecially in the course I represent.


Also that picture in the freshers guide of a girl straddling a guy you couldnt really see, really wasnt necessary to promote safe sex.

The_Minister

Just to remind everyone, Council is on tonight. Come for the bloodbath, and see hacks get overexcited over-worthless things. It will probably be a good council, with all the really controversial motions.

6:15 Theatre R

Blush_01

Sorry, have to wash my dog and take the hair for a walk.

Red Alert

don't walk down Grafton street or Henry street because a lot of the shops have more suggestive windows than the posters!

humbert

Red Alert wrote:

don't walk down Grafton street or Henry street because a lot of the shops have more suggestive windows than the posters!

I hope you're not making light of their childish concerns!!

cast_iron

Red Alert wrote:

don't walk down Grafton street or Henry street because a lot of the shops have more suggestive windows than the posters!

Oh and don't ever go to a swimming pool or a beach. There are semi-naked people there too. Yes, really!!:eek:

The_Minister

cans: passed
shell to sea: defeated
food co-op: passed
blood policy: passed
early Irish: passed
stickers: defeated
sex images: defeated
cigarettes: defeated
suggestion boxes: withdrawn
continuous assessment: passed
cheap butter: passed
previous mandates: withdrawn.

GusherING

The_Minister wrote:

cans: passed
shell to sea: defeated
food co-op: passed
blood policy: passed
early Irish: passed
stickers: defeated
sex images: defeated
cigarettes: defeated
suggestion boxes: withdrawn
continuous assessment: passed
cheap butter: passed
previous mandates: withdrawn.

Yay for Early Irish!

valor

Why the hell was the previous mandates motion withdrawn?

The_Minister

valor wrote:

Why the hell was the previous mandates motion withdrawn?

It was getting stomped, because it became about the deportation thing rather than the purpose of the motion. It will be back in a different form. I'd imagine that a motion limiting UCD objection to deportation to UCD students will being deported, will appear in the future.

pigeonbutler

It will be back. But without any reference to deportations. I'm not going to bring a motion saying that we should campaign against only UCD students being deported. That would be wrong. We can't oppose blindly all deportations. If we are to have any immigration policy some people will be deported. It is individually tragic and should be minimised but it has to happen. And I'm not going to propose that the Union place a UCD students case at a higher priority than someone else's in case of a deportation order. One would have to ask why the UCD student is being deported? Are they here illegally? We ought to be examining and proposing a fair immigration policy rather than having blanket opposition to any government action on immigration.