A rebuttal to last week’s opinions piece, straight from the man himself
By Moe Kopahi
Mr. Joseph Leivdal, thank you for taking your time to express your opinion (“The SFSS needs Moe accountability”, April 2,
2013) in regards to the SFSS, SFU senate and me. I will address your concerns one by one.
You stated that, “The cover of a recent issue of The Peak shows newly elected SFSS President Khan revelling in his victory.” I find it hard to understand how this line is linked to the rest of your article. However, just for your information, the person behind the president is me, celebrating the results of the election and all the hard work we had put in campaigning and as board members over the last year.
You asked “where is the voice against increasing tuition coming from? Student fees? Budget cuts? Things are looking bad when all we see from the SFSS on these issues is an article and an email.” I agree that increases in tuition fees hurt students. But advocacy committee falls under the portfolio of the external relations officer, which is not me. I am the applied sciences representative.
“I bet you didn’t even know that Senate is debating the top-down integration of learning outcomes in curriculum, restructuring the very core of student experience at SFU. You would if the SFSS were doing their job,” you said in the article. I bet you didn’t know that the SFSS does not interfere with academics of SFU, which is the responsibility of senate. Check out their mandate.
You also quoted me on Facebook as saying, “If it was about equality, it wouldn’t be called feminism.” This sentence is just a tiny fragment of the conversation you are referring to and has been highlighted out of context. All it means is that in some cases, the definition of feminism has been modified to achieve a certain goal. I said this through my personal experience, and not as the incoming MSO.
You take issue with the fact that I was voted in with 1,962 votes on a 23 per cent voter turnout. I agree on the issue of lack of student engagement at SFU, however, we have been doing our best to get students involved. As far as the issue of votes cast for me is concerned, I was elected by 1,962 people voting in my favor.
If you claim that just bec a u s e n o t e n o u g h p e o p l e voted, the election process is somehow flawed, or that the
legitimization of the incoming directors should be questioned, then you are directly negating and undermining democracy and the time and effort of those active members of our community that actually voted in the last election.
Finally, you stated that “the Women’s Centre not only offers alternative resources to individuals of all genders, but also organizes a variety of events on a regular basis that serve the interests of our diverse student body.” While I completely agree with the quote and the importance of the Women’s Centre, I still stand by the fact that there needs to be more communication between the Women’s Centre and the SFSS and vice versa. Both parties should make an effort to resolve this issue.
As a general note to yourself and all SFU students: thank you all for participating in the SFSS elections in March. I highly recommend you to be involved with the SFSS, as it is a wonderful and productive experience at SFU. After five years of university experience and involvement, I have found that the best results come from working together for a common goal. Solving student issues and voicing their concerns is one of the SFSS mandates.
If you have any concerns, you should feel comfortable to contact us directly and work as a team to improve the student experience at SFU. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns: appscirep@sfss.ca.
The opinions in this article are my own, and not necessarily the opinions of the SFSS.
