Shit just got real at Queen’s University.
Police are investigating after a man allegedly beat up a Queen’s University student who says she received threats for her support of feminist activities on campus.
Police say they haven’t dismissed the possibility the attack was a hate crime.
Danielle d’Entremont said the attack occurred late Wednesday night as she was leaving her home. In a Facebook post, she said the suspect punched her in the face repeatedly, breaking one of her teeth.
Ok but there could be some other explanation. Maybe the guy was just in a bad mood and she was the first person he saw. That can happen.
Police haven’t said whether the fourth-year student’s campus politics are linked to the attack, but she wrote that her attacker was a man and knew her name.
Well if he knew her name, that takes care of the first person he saw theory. But hey, she could totally be lying. Maybe she punched her own self in the face.
The Queen’s Journal reported d’Entremont was “actively involved in opposition” to an event hosted by the Men’s Issues Awareness Society (MIAS) Thursday night.
The student-run club organized a talk by Janice Fiamengo, an English professor at the University of Ottawa and a former-feminist-turned-men’s-rights activist.
There was opposition; there was a motion to de-ratify the Men’s Issues Awareness Society; the motion was dismissed.
On Thursday, MIAS president Mohammed Albaghdadi wrote on the event page: “We would like to state that the MIAS condemns the recent attack on a Queen’s student, and violence in general. There have been various comments associating MIAS with this attack. Please know that these claims are unfounded and untrue. Our sincerest thoughts go out to the student who was attacked.”
How does he know that? How can he know that? I don’t know that the claims are true; how can he know that they are untrue?
Should we be glad her attacker didn’t throw acid in her face?
Futrelle is on it, or rather on the MRAs’ denials.
MRAs would never do such a thing of course not!
If only her attacker had eaten a Snickers this all could have been avoided.
And being an article hosted by Sun “News” (Canada’s version of FOX) the comments below are predictably vile…
And not to draw a causal relationship, but recently another Canadian university was embroiled in a human rights controversy when York university administration ordered a professor to allow a student to refuse to do group work with women for religious reasons.
I know, it was via Futrelle that I found the link. I wanted to use the comparatively dry version in the report.
Just on the epistemological question, doesn’t it depend on how you interpret “associating MIAS with this attack”?
The president of a society *should* be expected to know the policies and positions taken by the society as such without being able to know all of the opinions and actions of all its members. As president of a society I might well claim that my society was not “associated” with an action by one of its members (which might, for example, even be explicitly contrary to the society’s expressed policies).
Steve oberski
No no no Steve, if only he hadn’t eaten snickers. Remember, Snickers stops men from being feminists.
Oh dear, my alma mater has distinguished itself again.
That’s all I got.