SU Council Motions, Mon 13th November 2006

Blush_01

Pretty: No, I'm most definitely not denying any individual's right to have an opinion. I believe that the issue for most people (with regard to the "sexy ladies") is the increasing attempts by certain people within UCD to make the university into some form of child-proofed playground by means of the SU with regard to what we do and do not see. It's not so much that people desperately want or need images of anything in particular - women, men, cars, monkies, lollipops etc. - sprawled all over campus, it's the basic principle that we're far too old to be told to avert our eyes when people may perhaps be clad in less than long johns and a wooly coat. As I see it, that's why this is an issue. People probably wouldn't notice if another human being was never used to promote an event again on campus. But the minute it's made a "rule" it takes away the basic freedom to do whatever seems most appropriate for the given situation. We're all apparently old enough to attend third level education or higher, and should be able to live with a few scantily clad fellow humans if it happens to occur that way, as we see things that are far more "shocking" on a daily basis on campus.

As for SASS or SASAS or SSAS or whatever they were called when I was a fresher, then the Space Invaders or whatever Tobie Marvin brought them back as when I was in second year, basically, they were censors of visual imagery that included women on the basis that it was sexist.

Finally, although the people used in publications and adverts may appear to be physically flawless, appearances can be deceiving. The issue of them being unrealistic is silly - of course they're a realistic depiction of SOME human being - they're not blow-up dolls, for heavens sake! They may not be representative of the average member of the general populus, but they're definitely realistic at some level.

Elmyra - I only wish. I've fallen in love with the most expensive perfume on the planet and I feel like it's following me around the place begging me to take out a bank loan and buy it. :rolleyes: Oh well, when I win the Euromillions. (I should really play once in a while if I expect to win. )

elmyra

Blush_01 wrote:

As for SASS or SASAS or SSAS or whatever they were called when I was a fresher, then the Space Invaders or whatever Tobie Marvin brought them back as when I was in second year, basically, they were censors of visual imagery that included women on the basis that it was sexist.

Hehe. I remember that Space Invaders thing. They put silly stickers over the L&H 150 posters. I'm sorry but '150 years and still not sagging' was a great poster...I laughed, and I'm not really driven to react by society advertising as a rule. The only other poster I can remember out of 3 years here is B&L's 'wake up feeling a little fresher' - hehehe . Gah, bloodeh feminism. Anyway I really should be getting some sleep and be up in time to make breakfast for the menfolk and have a decent lunch ready before they head out to earn a crust and support me and my homemaking ways..:rolleyes:

Sangre

All our BnL Law Day 'Barely Legal' posters were ripped down (without consultation). Congratulations nazis, you just denied a children's charity a couple of €100s.

Personally, I'm absolutely against banning anything, especially something as trivial (to me) as this.

Vainglory

gubbie wrote:

Here here



If it were an environmental campaign, then they'd be supporting not using our natural resources. Theres as much danger it being out at sea as there is going through Mayo-only difference is it would affect water life and not our land if a spillage happened out at sea, but then again who cares about that-we'll just melt some more ice caps

Did you read the links I gave?

"as much danger" is rubbish.

The_Minister

pretty*monster wrote:

I'm not terribly happy with the students union using it's resources to promoating unrealistic images. .

They weren't unrealistic. The blonde in the centre had a puss on her like a kid whose ice-cream got taken away and she isn't that attractive. She is not excessively skinny - i'd bet that her BMI is normal. Her hip to waist ration isn't out either.

panda100

elmyra wrote:

At last year's Galway IV there was a motion for round five that went something like 'This House Would Ban Models Who Appear Too Thin From The Media' or something like that. There's a lurker around who could probably correct me on it and say what I'm about to better, since it was his point but here's the thing, anyway...

There has also been research done to say that illnesses like anorexia and bulimia in fact always occur at a steady rate among the populus. The affected percentage of people never increases or decreases. The same percentage of people suffer now as did in the sixties, seventies, eighties.... yet all the while this culture of thin models and increased use of advertising and media has, well, increased! Therefore there is no correlation between media and illness, there are simply always going to be that demographic of people who will be affected because they are predisposed for whatever reason to be so.

I know debaters tend to lie to win, but I also know the guys who argued this and know it to be true...

.

That is interesting.Unfortunatly though all my research on body image disoders comes directly through the eating disorders association of Ireland and the HSE.Im afraid I have to take their facts and figures before those of your friend in a debating competition .

elmyra wrote:

get to understand eating disorders.

I have never had an eating disorder so I would never claim to be an expert on the matter. This motion is based on people whom I have known with body image disorders and profesional view who work with bullemic and anorexic patients. To them one of the factors that stimulates and stimulated these diseases was being bombarded with an 'ideal' man and women constantly. Of course there are many other issues that cause a person to have a negative body image but these are more difficult to control. The union cant control psychiatric issues that a student may have instilled from a young age etc. This is one way in which we can help those with body image disorders. I know it wont solve the problem but it will help and to me isnt this is what the union is all about...helping students?
What else can the union do to help these people?Hold talks and meetings on anorexia and bullimia?They already do and they would be poorly attended. This is one way in which we can make a small but crucial difference (also I am currently planning a positive body image week for next year.If anyone has any ideas please pm me)

Blush_01 wrote:

many of whom who have too much going on in their own heads to give a toss who's in an SU publication, or on a poster

I wouldnt be so fickle here. I cant imagine someone who looks in the mirror everyday and hates what is staring back at them will get a boost of confidence when they walk around campus and see posters up of men and women with 'perfect' bodys. The union is all about making a positive environment for students in Belfield. By this one simple motion we could be making someone walk through campus that little bit easier then having the body they crave for staring down at them from every pillar.

elmyra wrote:

It honestly seems like eating disorders are being used as a new vehicle to achieve the same result of regulating SU posters and the like in the same way the last motion tried to, and that, quite frankly, isn't cool

I wasnt involved with the last motion at all and so Im sorry that it seems this way. I would never use a serious illness to further my own 'agenda'. For the recors I thought that space invaders against sexism was ridiculous.I was thinking about doing something to help those with body image disorders last year when a friend told me that her flatmate who was in final year medicine at the time wasnt eating anything and looked like a walking skeleton. I didnt have a clue what to do as Ive never had experience with something like that before. The girl in question left the house one weekend,never sat her finals and never graduated from her course after five years studying for it . Her life ruined by being so ashamed of her body. It made me think what I could do to help. UCD must be such a daunting place if you have an eaing disorder.People on campus are so uncompassionate about the situation and mock it which is reinforced by some of the comment here.

elmyra wrote:

But jeez, next time I run off to puke up my lunch cos the girl in the fresher's guide is thinner than me, I'll let you know

cast_iron wrote:

Draw up a motion encouraging UCD students to boycott going to a swimming pool or beach. They will see the same thing there

Really who would you turn to with this problem in UCD?Hardly your peers in college with these sort of comments. The union hasnt done much to help these people in recent years and so this motion is a start,a slow and perhaps ineffective start but a movement in the right direction nonetheless.

The passing of this motion will cause problems for no one. It can only benefit those and will harm nobody.There is no malice,bad intentions or harm to anyone on this campus in this motion and it only serevs to do good to people. Those who are agains it are just being mean and that is the fact of the matter. I know I am not solving the problem of negative body image that is so prevalent on this camus but this coupled with other initatives could make a real differnce and we,the union, have to reach out t these people who are so unreachable at the moment.

singingstranger

For everyone's info, the motion about Bebo has, on the request of the proposer and seconder, been deferred to the next meeting, Monday 27th November.

Blush_01

panda100 wrote:

I wouldnt be so fickle here. I cant imagine someone who looks in the mirror everyday and hates what is staring back at them will get a boost of confidence when they walk around campus and see posters up of men and women with 'perfect' bodys. The union is all about making a positive environment for students in Belfield. By this one simple motion we could be making someone walk through campus that little bit easier then having the body they crave for staring down at them from every pillar.

People on campus are so uncompassionate about the situation and mock it which is reinforced by some of the comment here.

elmyra wrote:

But jeez, next time I run off to puke up my lunch cos the girl in the fresher's guide is thinner than me, I'll let you know [/ QUOTE]

Really who would you turn to with this problem in UCD?Hardly your peers in college with these sort of comments. The union hasnt done much to help these people in recent years and so this motion is a start,a slow and perhaps ineffective start but a movement in the right direction nonetheless.

Those who are agains it are just being mean and that is the fact of the matter. I know I am not solving the problem of negative body image that is so prevalent on this camus but this coupled with other initatives could make a real differnce and we,the union, have to reach out t these people who are so unreachable at the moment.

Oh boo, we're being mean. Panda, read what I've highlighted in bold. You can't imagine? I'm not being fickle. I can quite honestly guarantee you that the attractive students people with negative body images see walking around campus are more of a problem than posters that most people never look at anyway. When you've been the person who looks in the mirror and hates what they see every day, do come back to us and let us know what impact a few rain-soaked pieces of paper flapping off pillars have, by comparison to a student population of over 20,000, many of whom are more than passingly attractive, and all of whom you consider to be more attractive than yourself.

You can only get help when you're willing to take it - for anything. Mandating the removal of people from posters and publications will only bring forward other problems. I'd prefer to see a human being than, for example, a manga character with a tiny waist and impossibly long legs - at least you can find fault with a fellow human being if you want to.

Stepherunie

Sangre wrote:

All our BnL Law Day 'Barely Legal' posters were ripped down (without consultation). Congratulations nazis, you just denied a children's charity a couple of €100s.

Personally, I'm absolutely against banning anything, especially something as trivial (to me) as this.

If I remember correctly the SU photocopied replacement posters for you after that little stunt at their expense so that you could still publicise your event in order to benefit said children's charity.

elmyra

panda100 wrote:

elmyra wrote:

But jeez, next time I run off to puke up my lunch cos the girl in the fresher's guide is thinner than me, I'll let you know

.

That was flippant, I apologise. The point I was trying to make was that advertising just doesn't come into it. It just..doesn't.

This motion is going to get passed anyway, by a sense of people doing something that they presume to be good from the vantage point of standing a good country mile from any understanding of the issue. I don't take issue with that, and if you have genuine reasons Panda then I support the work you're putting into the motion in the same way that I support the work put into every motion, whether I agree with it or not. You are right about one thing, it wont do any harm. The issue I was taking with it is that it wont do any good either. I genuinely believe that it wont...but I guess I'll just take the apathetic ground and say that since it doesn't really do anything to me personally, fire away. It's what's going to happen anyway.

Incidentally, if you are doing this positive body image week, you might contact Dove to support it, their Campaign For Real Beauty is something quite effective because it deals with what genuinely are aesthetic problems rather than psychological ones and explains why they show certain images rather than just showing them.

humbert

I think you should have to show some proof that the girls portrayed in those posters are in fact unhealthy, I think you'd fail. Trying to boost girls self esteem by removing posters of attractive girls (in ucd where modelish girls that spend more time each day on their make up than they do in class are a dime a dozen) is so silly that if it's passed I think I'll die a little inside.

Chakar

I think its highly unlikely that the motion referring to men and women in posters will be passed.

elmyra

Gah, I know I said I was leaving this alone but it's physically bugging me.

*Elmo attempts to put forward reasonable argument*

Ok, I have accepted that this motion has been put forward with good intentions and I think that it has been conceded that advertising, posters and media do not cause eating disorders.

What does cause eating disorders are psychological factors are there are always good to be people who are predisposed to suffer.

While one might argue that in removing the sort of body images that people are taking pains to aspire to from our student publications we are helping them out so that they don't have to see these paragons of beauty, I would argue that this is neither removing a cause nor implementing a cure. The fact is, that when people are treated for eating disorders they are not systematically shown pictures of gods and goddesses and driven to built up some sort of resistance to the glare of beauty. The treatment of eating disorders doesn't involve showing people the wrongs of others being thin, it's about teaching them to accept their own body. Nowhere will you see a sufferer being told 'that girl on the poster is actually completely unrealistic anyway', it's about changing a mindset whereby the suffer sees something wrong with themselves, not something right with someone else.

What happens when we remove these images from posters is that we take away the very thing that people need to be getting used to. It's all very well to suggest that it would be nice for someone who's a size 16 not to have to look at anyone smaller and compare themselves, but for as long as posters are a reflection of reality, little good it'll do. We don't remove the things that highlight symptoms, we treat causes.

Still more from this, many eating disorders aren't even about people seeing themselves in a poor light compared to some model, they're about having control over one thing (what you eat), when you dont have control over other parts of your life.

I just think it's a shame that when people are so willing to put in time and make an effort on something that with however good an intention they have, the effort is misguided. Ask people what they want before you give it to them.

Blush_01

I couldn't agree more.

panda100

elmyra wrote:

Ok, I have accepted that this motion has been put forward with good intentions and I think that it has been conceded that advertising, posters and media do not cause eating disorders.

What does cause eating disorders are psychological factors are there are always good to be people who are predisposed to suffer.

While one might argue that in removing the sort of body images that people are taking pains to aspire to from our student publications we are helping them out so that they don't have to see these paragons of beauty, I would argue that this is neither removing a cause nor implementing a cure. The fact is, that when people are treated for eating disorders they are not systematically shown pictures of gods and goddesses and driven to built up some sort of resistance to the glare of beauty. The treatment of eating disorders doesn't involve showing people the wrongs of others being thin, it's about teaching them to accept their own body. Nowhere will you see a sufferer being told 'that girl on the poster is actually completely unrealistic anyway', it's about changing a mindset whereby the suffer sees something wrong with themselves, not something right with someone else.

What happens when we remove these images from posters is that we take away the very thing that people need to be getting used to. It's all very well to suggest that it would be nice for someone who's a size 16 not to have to look at anyone smaller and compare themselves, but for as long as posters are a reflection of reality, little good it'll do. We don't remove the things that highlight symptoms, we treat causes.

Still more from this, many eating disorders aren't even about people seeing themselves in a poor light compared to some model, they're about having control over one thing (what you eat), when you dont have control over other parts of your life.

I just think it's a shame that when people are so willing to put in time and make an effort on something that with however good an intention they have, the effort is misguided. Ask people what they want before you give it to them.

I have to admit that I really see some good points coming from elmyra and blush which Im really taking on board.I should clarify though more that while I mention eating disorders in my motion its more to really promote a positive body image around campus.So it more targeted at the general student population then those with eating disorders,its targeted at those with body image distortions which would probably be a large percentage of male and females on this campus. Hopefully with this motion people may see that they dont have to look a ceratin way to be beautiful.My motion is aimed to be a bit like the dove campaign.That there isnt a certain type of ideal and just like we see on the beach not everyone looks a certain way in a bikini.

Also on humberts point why do you think so many people spend so long each day on their makeup?Do you think its cos there really confident of how they look??
I dont .Most people on campus have a mask of makeup and most of them are really beautiful girls.This shows a real underlinig negative body image as girls shouldnt be masking themslves in makeup.Maybe with this motion we can help people to feel more positve about themselves so they dont have to mask themselves everyday in college.

panda100

Sangre wrote:

Good thing I've left UCD. Think it would be overload with me *and* the posters.

Being beautiful is a cruel mistress sometimes. I'm sorry for all those whose self-esteem I've shattered with a flick of my locks and a dash of my smile.

Did you not see the motion we passed last week.....

Council notes that sangre has left UCD
Council notes with concern the serious health risk Sangre posed to the female poulation of UCD with heart palpitations in some and severe nausea in others
Coucil therfore mandates that Sangre due to his toxic health risk may not step within a 5 mile radius of UCD

Proposed by panda
Seconded by Hullabaloo
Thirded by Mr Nice guy

Edited to say:wahoo my 2000 post!

humbert

panda100 wrote:

Also on humberts point why do you think so many people spend so long each day on their makeup?Do you think its cos there really confident of how they look??
I dont .Most people on campus have a mask of makeup and most of them are really beautiful girls.This shows a real underlinig negative body image as girls shouldnt be masking themslves in makeup.Maybe with this motion we can help people to feel more positve about themselves so they dont have to mask themselves everyday in college.

body image? where do you wear make up?? It's because they look better with make up and this allows them, in spite of the complete absence of both intellect and personality, to be popular. I really hope you're not going to try and associate this with posters of attractive girls.

Being bothered by images of attractive girls is nearly as shallow as aspiring to be one of them. If people would grow up and realise there's more to life and more to people than looking pretty then the posters would cease to bother them.

Instead of trying to remove pictures of these type of girls from posters advertising events which involve some shit niteclub, lots of tarted up girls and enough alcohol to make the experience tolerable, perhaps you(the SU) should organise events which are centred more around personality than looks. The posters, lets face it, are entirely apt for the events they advertise.

panda100

humbert wrote:

body image? where do you wear make up?? It's because they look better with make up and this allows them, in spite of the complete absence of both intellect and personality, to be popular. I really hope you're not going to try and associate this with posters of attractive girls.

Being bothered by images of attractive girls is nearly as shallow as aspiring to be one of them. If people would grow up and realise there's more to life and more to people than looking pretty then the posters would cease to bother them.

The last time I checked my head was apart of my body so when I am talking about negative body issues I am talking about the whole package. So if people are slapping on lots of war paint then in most,not all cases, they have a negative body image. Also can you not see somethying wrong in the fact that they try and make themseves prettier to be popular?My motion along with other initatives is trying to change this.
I agree with you that it is shallow and there is more to life then being pretty.That is exactly what this motion is about. To promote this positive body image and realise that there is more to life then looking good in a bikini. Posters up of women in bikinis and muscly men dont help this situation and it is a SERIOUS situation.Poor self esteem is rampant in Ireland and I for one am trying to help this situation.

humbert wrote:

The posters, lets face it, are entirely apt for the events they advertise.

The last time I was out no one was wearing a bikini and swimming trunks and none of the guys were tall,dark and handsome so there not apt for the events there advertising.

The_Minister

panda100 wrote:

and none of the guys were tall,dark and handsome so there not apt for the events there advertising.

FFS stop talking about the Med Ball.





EDIT: If this is passed then I swear the next ELS event will be advertised with this:

humbert

panda100 wrote:

The last time I checked my head was apart of my body so when I am talking about negative body issues I am talking about the whole package. So if people are slapping on lots of war paint then in most,not all cases, they have a negative body image. Also can you not see somethying wrong in the fact that they try and make themseves prettier to be popular?My motion along with other initatives is trying to change this.
I agree with you that it is shallow and there is more to life then being pretty.That is exactly what this motion is about. To promote this positive body image and realise that there is more to life then looking good in a bikini. Posters up of women in bikinis and muscly men dont help this situation and it is a SERIOUS situation.Poor self esteem is rampant in Ireland and I for one am trying to help this situation.



The last time I was out no one was wearing a bikini and swimming trunks and none of the guys were tall,dark and handsome so there not apt for the events there advertising.

*pats panda on the head.

Stabshauptmann

humbert wrote:

If people would grow up and realise there's more to life and more to people than looking pretty then the posters would cease to bother them.

And if people who were depressed would just get over it and people who are stressed would just relax:rolleyes:

Mental health issues are not something one can just "get over". That is a terribly misinformed opinion humbert.

I can definitly support an initiative to combat eating disorders and I can accept in principal the need to be careful what we choose to put on our posters in this regard. I will however vote against this motion as I dont think its the best way to achieve this aim.

humbert

Kaptain Redeye wrote:

And if people who were depressed would just get over it and people who are stressed would just relax:rolleyes:

Mental health issues are not something one can just "get over". That is a terribly misinformed opinion humbert.

I can definitly support an initiative to combat eating disorders and I can accept in principal the need to be careful what we choose to put on our posters in this regard. I will however vote against this motion as I dont think its the best way to achieve this aim.

meh, taken out of context.

Stabshauptmann

Sorry if I did.

Can you clarify your position

humbert

Kaptain Redeye wrote:

Sorry if I did.

Can you clarify your position

No problem. I was talking about the SU trying to ban the use of attractive girls in posters, the only people who seem to be bothered by the posters, when I said it. Not about people suffering from eating disorders who I suspect are infinitely more concerned about the multitude of thin modelish girls walking around UCD.

ed6hellsfresh

if this motion was to pass, doesnt it leave some ambiguity as to who CAN be used for the posters. is there going to be a minumum body fat percentage requirement?
i think its rediculous to impose such an open ended restriction, and to say that havind a lean muscular body is unhealthy. granted some people choose to achieve this by a poor diet, but then again many dont.
their body types are not unhealthy to aim for.

Stabshauptmann

exactly what Ive been saying on newsire ed and what I will say at council tonight

humbert

Yea I've said that a couple of times too.

singingstranger

Remember, all, Council in two hours (that's 6:15pm) in Theatre O. Come if you can.

humbert

drat I've actual college work to be doing:eek: no time for fun and games.

Blush_01

How did the whole thing go?