Note: This piece is based on the opinion of one writer and does not reflect the views and opinions of Her Campus.
Note II: The Whomst’d’ve UofT Facebook page is still up with no intention of being taken down if you would like to read through some of the key events that happened during their campaign.
It was a particularly regular Tuesday evening in March, a couple of friends, acquaintances, and I camped out in our weekly spot for the weekly special of cheap appetizers and drinks. I came in greeted with a sheet of paper, half-full with student names, numbers, and signatures and a pen to sign said paper.“What’s this?” I asked.
“I’m running to be the President of the UTSU.” John Sweeney stated, without a break or falter in his voice as he kept the paper and pen out waiting for me and Saarthak to sign. After a few jokes, inquiries on whether he was actually serious about running in the election, what sounded to me like the planning of a joke campaign, I went home to sleep and prepare for my classes and errands the next day. After I gathered some of the materials and papers I needed for my courses the afternoon after, I got a message from Saarthak saying that he’s printing out signature forms to get people to sign so I could be eligible as a candidate for Vice-President Professional Faculties on the UTSU. “I can’t believe you’ve done this, ” I said and kept repeating from the moment I received the papers up until a few hours before online voting ended.
In the beginning of it all, I had been fairly dismissive of messing with the UTSU elections and intentionally dropping out before voting started a protest, which had originally been Saarthak and mine’s plan for this “campaign”. Prior to this election, I had run several other campaigns, mostly within my Architecture faculty. I ran as an Architecture, Landscape, and Design Director candidate on the UTSU slate, Hello UofT. To continue the work Brighter UofT had done within the UTSU, Hello UofT had incumbents from the current Board of Directors along with individuals who expressed interest in being a part of changing the negative portrayal of the student union. I was taken on as a director candidate via the recommendation from Saarthak, who ran as one of three Engineering directors with Brighter last year.
Though I didn’t win my election, I got to meet a large group of individuals passionate about bringing change to the student body and were willing to fight to no end for the issues that mattered. I learned so much about issues that affected students, from fee hikes to accessibility, and I couldn’t have imagined a better group of individuals to get the job done. The bitter flavour of student politics came not from being involved and engaged with those on the board itself, but more so from hearing the perspectives of individuals who were seen as “other” in these groups. Adriana Menghi, Architecture Director on the UTSU board in 2015-2016, had mentioned to me how disconnected she had felt during her term, which may have stemmed from the fact that she had run on the “Not Brighter” Slate, despite running uncontested for her election.
With English as their second language, Adriana mentioned to me that one of her main struggles being on the Board of Directors was understanding the complicated language and topics the UTSU engages in during meetings and conversation, with little to no help in understanding them. This, in conjunction with a specific image of being on Change UofT, meant that Adriana had felt a disconnection with the Board of Directors. It’s not to say that no one had made efforts to connect with her, but during several conversations with Adriana, it was more than clear that there was certainly some pre-determined negativity towards her. During this year’s director’s term, Marienka Bishop-Kovac won the seat as an independent, affiliated with neither Hello UofT nor 1UofT.
Fast-forward to March 2017, the week of nominations had me, John, and Saarthak collecting signatures being fairly blunt about our intentions, “we’re running as a joke”. We faced widely different reactions, from laughter, to confused acceptances to sign our forms, to slight disapproval. From hearsay and rumours, people had found out there were not only the two usual slates colloquially nicknamed the “CFS” and “Anti-CFS” slates running, there was also talks of a slate which had intentions of making a complete tabula-rasa of the UTSU, along with our slate.
We had all the criteria of being a legitimate slate: we had our personality and group shots taken by The Varsity along with blurbs on what we wanted to do if elected, we had a facebook page like the other candidates and slates, we had campaign materials, a scheduled AMA on Reddit, even plans in the works from individuals on how to get us to drop out towards the very end of the election. When the announcement of the slates was released by The Varsity, no doubt there was a stir on all social media platforms about the fact that there had been four slates running for UTSU seats this year, half the slates which looked highly out of the ordinary compared to previous UTSU elections.
When running on a slate, it becomes extremely easy to group many individuals under one slogan, one ideology, one opinion. With a slate whose one of many purposes was to make fun of the ever present slate games at UofT, the other slates seemed to enjoy our intention to make things light hearted. I enjoyed the ease of being able to talk to and get to know individuals of the other slates and not see them as a group or idea.
It wasn’t until people had begun to gain demerit points and the stress of staying in the game had intensified as online voting was nearing an end that I felt how toxic student politics can be. A day or so before voting closed, photos of private messages between individuals who inherently should have no involvement within the election surfaced on Reddit and quickly deleted by moderators. I had been lurking the r/uoft forum every now and then in case there were unanswered questions on our AMA or any posts specific to our shenanigans that I was able to see the post before it got immediately deleted. In sum, the conversation showed our slate had generated a lot of conversation and student involvement within UofT, and that was essentially a threat to a slate that wanted badly to win the election.
My chest tightened when I read the messages, and it certainly didn’t help me focus in my evening class. It baffled me that an individual, whom I have spoken to once or twice last year when they helped with Hello’s campaign and in general wanted me to win my seat, could easily turn their opinion of me simply because my slate decided not to join the “good slate”. Being perceived as a non-threatening slate and opting out of physical campaigning meant that Whomst’d’ve UofT avoided being in the crossfire of “slate games”: the infamous recording of people’s every word, the constant shuffling and tearing down of posters hoping to claim the most cover on campus, the need to watch everything everyone says and does to see who can get the most offences for breaking the election rules. The last ones not to be disqualified will be crowned winners of the UTSU elections. This immediate target you receive as soon as one becomes an eligible candidate can be no doubt why people are both deterred away from becoming involved or just not caring at all. Even if one does manage to get elected, there’s been a history of a slate winning the majority of the UTSU seats making it difficult for one to get things done without being scrutinized for being an “other”. The issues and conversations that the UTSU deals with are complex and one’s knowledge and stances on such topics are put under a microscope the moment one gain representation. Toxicity of cliques and group think are dangerous features that have become synonymous with the UTSU, and there’s no telling whether it’ll become better for students eager to get involved but are simply too afraid to after what they’ve seen and heard.
Since the announcement of the new board of directors for the UTSU, my only wish is that they really do make an effort to reach out to students in more than just explaining who they are and what they do. The abolishment of slates in next year’s elections, one of the main points of Demand Better’s platform, will significantly curb groups ganging up on each other, yet there’s no telling that it will completely rid the problem of the same kinds of people getting into politics, with the help of those who don’t wish to seek conversation with “the other”. As for me, I feel that I’ve finished my run at UTSU elections and I’m more than excited to continue my work at Her Campus next year. In a campaign based solely on memes that was silly enough to give a laugh to those equally tired of student politics, yet seriously enough to show exactly what’s wrong with student politics, there’s certainly no better way to discontinue my involvement.