Editor, the Gauntlet,
Re: "Women's centre not necessary," Oct. 9, 2003,
There needs to be clarification on the role and necessity of a women's centre on campus.
Such a centre would provide a needed service, acting as a childcare contact point for student parents. Students would provide a listing of their classes, and the centre could contact them if there was an emergency with at their child's caregivers (most student parents can't afford cell phones).
The centre could also be a clearing house for women's resources in the city, which can be difficult to find. It would also facilitate action and education on international women's issues, like female circumcision, for example.
To avoid a waste of resources, as it has been suggested it could be, the centre could be run as an extension of the women's studies program, and could be staffed by the program's volunteers. They would get work experience and limited resources would be required to run it.
It is a poor example to use the trivial changing of a word with the development of an institution that would provide needed series to a segment of the student body. I also think the changing of the word alderman was a useless idea, but would support a women's centre on campus. Perhaps those who disagree could attempt to realize that not everyone lives the same lifestyle as they do, different people have different needs. If they don't use health services, or a club that excludes their interests, should that be considered a waste of resources also?
Although I was not involved in the campaign to get a women's centre, I would support it.