The Ryerson Men's Issues Awareness Society (MIAS) applied last fall for official student group status, but was rejected on the grounds it's anti-feminist and violates the union's 'core equity values'

A “men’s issues” group is taking the Ryerson Students Union to court over its failed bid to attain club status.

Distroscale

The Ryerson Men’s Issues Awareness Society (MIAS) applied last fall for official student group status, which would have entitled it to funding, access to free room and facility rentals and other benefits. But the student union rejected the group on the grounds its focus on men’s issues and purported links to anti-feminist groups ran contrary to the student government’s “core equity values.”

In January, an internal appeal was rejected and now the group has filed an application for a judicial review of the decision — a sort of last-resort appeal for any and all quasi-judicial decisions. It’s being funded by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms , a libertarian organization that grades campus freedom of speech each year and has previously helped pro-life organizations fight for a presence on campus.

Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

“The Men’s Issues Awareness Society is saying their freedom of expression and freedom of association rights are being violated by the student union,” John Carpay, president of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms. “The student union has repeatedly accused the Men’s Interest Awareness society of being linked with or associated with… a group called a Voice for Men, and it’s quite radical and vociferous”

“In fact the Men’s Issues Awareness Society does not have any links with this group.”

The leaders of MIAS say they are focused on discussing issues specifics to men and masculinity, whether it’s higher rates of suicide and homelessness or the declining performance of young boys in academic settings.

President Kevin Arriola says those groups, and the student union, have misrepresented his club’s goals. He said their membership is diverse and discussion topics and events include LGBT issues, among other “intersectional” causes.

“We’re a group that pretty much accepts everybody of all different backgrounds, but we also accept different ideologies as well,” he said. “We don’t allow hate speech or anything like that, but we do allow people to come and talk about (issues) even if they’re controversial.”

“There’s a whole slew of issues that arise because of society’s expectations of men and we’re here to talk about them.”

Feminist groups on campus have said the “men issues” club has ties to anti-feminist groups and its language about misandry — the notion of discrimination against men, the flipside of misogyny — means it has no place on a modern campus, even if there are many women in the group.

Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

“It’s the kind of culture and climate that exists around these group… even if it’s not the group itself,” said Alyson Rogers, one of the founders of the Ryerson Feminist Collective. “It’s a gathering area for people who are anti-women, anti-feminist and rape apologists.”

“Even if half their membership is women… We’re more concerned about the ideology as opposed to the makeup of the membership,” she said.

MIAS says it falls somewhere in the middle.

“We have explicitly said we are not a feminist group, but we are not an anti-feminist group as well,” Arriola said.

Yet, the group’s Facebook page does use the word misogyny and points to events from groups that many characterize as anti-feminist. Ryerson Student Union president Andrea Bartlett said the organization was given a fair shake in the process, which they will defend in court.

“Our decision to reject them as an official RSU group doesn’t impeded on their ability to operate on campus,” Bartlett said. “Fundamentally, groups can’t force the RSU to give them students’ money if the mandate of the group runs contrary to our core equity values of the organization.”

“The acknowledgement of patriarchy… is one of our core values.”

The debate at Ryerson isn’t unique. The University of Toronto’s men’s issues club has been a source of controversy, even alleged to be the source of threats made against women on its campus. Simon Fraser University student government’s decision to equally fund a men’s issues hub, as it has for decades a women’s centre, raised similar concerns. It’s not even the first time the issue of a men’s group has been debated at Ryerson, which in 2013 rejected a similar group. Despite those dividing lines, ardent feminists and men’s rights advocates agree on one thing: that current gender norms can be harmful to all genders.

Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

“A lot of the issues that men face comes form the privilege of being men. Patriarchy is oppressive to women but it also deals men a bad hand,” Rogers said.

And in a similar line of thought, Arriola said, “We’re just kind of coming at it from the other side of the discussion, where we as a society recognize that women have been disadvantaged based on the fact that they’re women and there’s issues around femininity… we think that’s true for men as well and men are held up to this expectation and there are consequences for that as well.”

Legally, the case is somewhat unique.

“There has not been a court decision in Ontario in a case like this” “This is new ground. There’s no precedent of a court decision rendered in a case where a student club has sued a student union for not being allowed to be an officially recognized,” Carpay said.

However, MIAS’s claims this is about freedom of expression and assembly may not hold up. Jed Blackburn, a lawyer with Cassels Brock, couldn’t comment on the specifics of this case, but said that, in general, whether it’s a pro-life group or another controversial topic, denying official accreditation isn’t the same thing as undermining people’s right to assembly

“I think it’s fair to say that these types of cases are often really about access to funding. By getting accredited, a group may be able to receive direct funding from a student union or may have free access to certain facilities. But of course if a student union were to deny accreditation to a particular group, that doesn’t prevent it from meeting or expressing itself altogether,” he said.