> 2. Remove gender specifics from the paragraph in question. Or better still,
> give it a homosexual flavour, then nobody in the university will dare
> challenge it. Changing it is two seconds work that would instantly solve
> the problem. Refusing to change it would involve meetings with the union,
> ombudsman, and above all BAD PRESS.
At this point, I disagree. If the university is to preserve freedom of
expression, that freedom needs to be for everyone, not just homosexuals.
If the university itself attempted to co-erce (sp?) us to change these
clauses, *I'd* go to the media.
Whoever is making this complaint is clearly only interested in making us
her first victim, and being a victim is contrary to my religion :-)
> Remember the importance of good PR in this situation. Let her have her win,
> it's no skin of our backs
I'm afraid it is. I do NOT think that is in our interests to announce to the
world that we are willing to be walked all over by over-sensitive poltical
clowns. We are the (2nd) largest student body within UTS, I believe that
we should be in a position to protect the interests of our members, at the
expense of one mindless whinger.
> and it will shut her up.
Wrong again. We become her first whipping boy. Not a chance!
> If we dig our heels in the bad publicity will hurt nobody but ourselves.
If it were unmanaged, certainly. I think it's worth some rapid action
(a letter to and statements from each of the bodies that she's complained
> If divisions in the
> university are considering paying us to produce web pages, then this sort
> of situation could affect that situation if handled wrongly.
Correct. Lying down and playing dead would indeed be the wrong way to handle
this. Those who might pay us to store content (if we go that path) are
going to be less willing if they know that any whinger can force us to
censor our "customer's" content.
> Sorry about the lecture.