i Yes, thisis ' International Youth Year

By Carolyn Ryan

Two weeks into International Youth Year, and counting.

Look around. Are the people you pass aware that the world is treating them with more respect and concern in 1985? Don’t they know they are the elite of the world, with the most to anticipate, the least to fear, and the best of all possible worlds to tend?

From the looks on their faces, they don’t. See that scruffy- looking yahoo in the corner of the library lounge? He’s wrapped in his own international year, aided by a dose of fantasy in the form of pills. Those three with angry faces talking with helpless gestures have just visited the Career Centre to discover that the jobs they were counting on again this summer are part of the $85 million cut from youth job creation programs last fall. Somewhere in the university, at least one student is seriously thinking about suicide, convinced things can’t improve.

Yet these are some of the people from whom the United Nations designated this year one of participation, develop— ment and peace.

What have words ever got to do with anything? We’ve seen nothing so far, and no plans for anything in the months to come, to indicate that our government is willing to care about the problems of youth.

The Liberals created the Ministry of Youth last year under Celine Hervieux-Payette, as a “harmless” piece of political pacification designed to combat a perceived danger in the growing number of youths dissatisfied with futile and fleeting job creation programs and lack of productive input into the decision-making process and society in general. The good Ministry was given no money to work with.

Then in May of 1984, the Department of the Secretary of ‘ State of Canada spawned the International Youth Year Secretariat, with a budget of a whopping $12 million, meant for “special‘projects developed by young people to mark the year” (IYY Secretariat Newsletter,.September 1984). Fine, and undoubtedlv some worthwhile projects have been assisted. But grants from the Secretariat cannot be used to pay any wages. so it an organization wants to do something for IYY, its own staff must plan it in its entirety, on top of their original work- loads. A lovely mess indeed, to commemorate a year in which the UN suggested a priority be made of “increasing employ- ment opportunities through formulation of effective pro- grammes, policies, and plans to reduce unemployment.” It seems instead that the Secretariat’s goal is to provide the biggest splash, and the most publicity possible, per youth dollar.

These tokenisms were created under Trudeau’s rule. Things are very different in Ottawa now, and International Youth Year seems to have been lost in the change of of fice. Certainly, any attempts to reach students, which must be one of the most accessible of all youth sectors, have been low-key, to use an exaggeration. What percentage of the non-student youth population knows this year is different for them than any other? They need respect, aid, and power much more than we as students do, for at least we will have an education, and thus a head start, inva few years’ time. They will have nothing to look forward to but more unemployment and less dignity.

Bashing lYY can easily become addictive —- it’s all too simple to do. We need to decide now, before another eight or ten months pass, that this year should be different for people between the ages of 15 and 24. We must take an initiative in designing our own celebration of youth. 3

You see, youth is something to celebrate. We still have the chance to make a difference in our world. Some of us still have

‘ the enthusiasm. Most of us havethe time. -

Why not?

_ (Try to discover what’s going on with the Secretariat. ‘ The address is:

Graphic] Uniter

LETTERS.

Sick of myths

Dear Editor, /

I am currently engaged in a purely platonic relationship with several gays and lesbians on campus, and we have all discussed the idea of setting up a coffee shop, or least arranging a time when we could meet and discuss the problems encountered in a daily existence in the hetero: sexually-oriented campus and community of Prince Edward Island.

If the person who wrote the letter in your column was heterosexual (or as we say “straight”) then we, in our group, have been asking our- selves what does he/she want to know. We trust he was not expectingafreak show. '

The gay men on campus are not adorned in pinks or yellows, nor do they wear fur or. frills; they do not giggle when a good-looking guy goes by — they do not exclusively hang arouhd girls.

All the myths about gay men are just that —— con- founded myths.

Likewise, all lesbians do not talk in husky voices, or wear coveralls with a wrench sticking out of their back

pockets. . The whole topic of homo- sexual lifestyles has been

over-generalized and- stereo- typed to the max (pardon the Valley Girl cliche).

Gay life lives on campus and in every facet of society; unfortunately, it must be sur— pressed and shrouded in secrecy and. fear because of ignorance and miscon— ceptions.

Sincerely, Those-in-theeknow

[yy secretariat (that is, the informed Secretary of State few) ‘ Room 13-A-5 The Gay Liberation Ottawa, Ontario Front KIA 0M5 P-S- We would appreciate (819) 994. 239 1 any other comments in future , editorial-sections. 1., it . . . . . . L... . . . -. .. . . . ..t_‘.-.s.s.~- «g.»“muxn“munnuxuau-uxmxvn‘fi

Response to Webster

Dear Editor,

I doubt that many people were misled by Professor Gary Webster on the CBC, January 9. He said that he hadn’t seen any evidence of fund-raising by any of the presidents of UPEI.

If, he is ever in the Robert- son Library, he might find that it was built as the result of fund-raising. Certainly the president at the time was not wholly responsible for the most. successful fund—raising campaign, given the circum- stances, of that time, but I think that I did something. One gift alone of $400,000 was negotiated entirely by me. I was significantly in- volved in others.

Yours sincerely, R.J. Baker President Emeritus.

Nowomen .chosen

We wish to register our dismay and concern about the short list of candidates for the UPEI Presidency. That there are no women on the list strikes us as shock- ing and deplorable‘in 1985. Our concern leads to ask some questions.

(1) What were the criteria for selection of the short list? They are not readily dis- cernible from the informa- tion provided about the candidates.

What is discernible is a remarkable correlation be— tween the composition of the committee and the com- position of the short list. The committee is all male and the candidates are all male. The committee includes pro- fessors from engineering, sociology & anthropology, classics, and religious studies while the short list includes

an engineer, a sociologist, a classicist and a'minister (as

.well as a philosopher and a

psychologist).

Sheer coincidence? Per- haps. But without further information about the cri— teria, we can’t help but wonder.

(2) What were the cha- racteristics of all of the appli— cants? Obviously names, other than the six on the short list, are confidential information but we think it is important that the general characteristics of the appli- cants be public knowledge.

Specifically we would like to know: (a) how many were female and how ‘many were male, (b) how many were internal (UPEI) candidates and how many were external,

(c) what fields did they come

from and (d) where did they come from? Without such information, it is difficult to assess the fairness of the short list. In fact, without such information, it is diffi- cult for us to avoid the con- clusion that there were biases in the selection process. Finally, we wish to remind

you that this is not the first time these issues have been raised. At several meetings held during the first semester, the necessity of having appro— priate criteria was empha- sized. As well, the possibility of bias in the absence of criteria was noted, and there was an explicit suggestion that you give serious con- sideration to female candi- dates. We are disappointed that these issues were ‘ap-_ parently ignored.

The status of women at this

‘ university is of grave concern

to us. While women make up justvover half of the full-time student population and con— siderably more than half of the part—time student popula- tion, there are only three women on Senate, one on the Board, and less than 15% of the faculty is female. With-

, out more conscious aware-

ness of the desperate need to correct . these imbalances, no change will occur. \ We look forward to your reply to our questions. We share with all members of the

(continued next page)

The N etted Gem 1.

Volume 2, Issue 14

January '17, 1985

Laying out a newspaper in a blinding blizzard (we’re inside,

of course, but still such dedication is amazing), we continue strug- gling for truth, justice, and whatever else we can wangle. Staff this week: Katy Baker, Robert Bodrog-Goodland, Glen Boswall, Kaberi Dasgupta, Carol Doiron, Lori Anne Heck'bert, Ross Hartinger, Jim Lai, Ron Lewis, Brian Linkletter, Brian MacLeod, Jonathan Orlowski, Nancy Ross. Carolyn Ryan, Bob Stanley, Phil Stanyer, Jill Warburton, David YORSTON, AND Michael Zinck.

The Netted Gem is a full member in good standing with Canadian University Press, a- collective of 57 Canadian student newspapers. The Gem is the ,student publication of the University of Prince Edward Island, publishing weekly in the fall and winter terms with a circulation of 1300. ,

Views expressed herein are not necessarily those of the Student Union, the staff, or anyone in particular. We reserve the right to edit copy,for space, style, or legal reasons. Letters to the editor must be typed, double-spaced, and submitted before noon on Mondays. All letters must be signed by their author(s), but names niay be withheld upon consultation with the editor. Phone 89234121, extension 387. Staff meetings are Mondays at 6 pm. All students are welcome to jointhestaff. 4 . , >