Advertisement

Dalhousie University's choice of punishment for Facebook misogyny met with outrage

Dalhousie dental scandal protests draw range of protesters

A rally was held today at Dalhousie University’s Halifax campus to express their outrage at the school’s decision to address complaints of misogyny with “restorative justice.”

CBC reports about 200 students gathered in opposition to the disciplinary measures chosen by the university in response to comments made on a Facebook group called the Dalhousie “Gentlemen’s Club,” the members of which are part of Dal’s school of dentistry. Those comments included plans for sexual assault on female classmates, and the proposition of using nitrous oxide and chloroform to carry out those plans.

The outrage on campus and across Canada in response to the comments themselves was exacerbated when Dalhousie President Richard Florizone announced the students would not be expelled, or even suspended, and instead be punished through something called “restorative justice.”

"The restorative justice process is collaborative and inclusive of the parties involved, with a view to developing outcomes that ensure accountability," Florizone wrote in an official statement.

"The process is confidential so that a safe space can be created for the parties to explore the impacts, to address accountability and to forge constructive, meaningful outcomes."

In short, the restorative justice method puts offenders and those they harmed together to work out a way to resolve the conflict. It sets aside harsh punishment – such as suspension and expulsion – and instead seeks to foster a dialogue and establish a plan of action that benefits the harmed parties, and teaches a lesson to those who harmed.

Restorative justice is used in many regions in Canada. It has been the official policy of Dalhousie since 2011, as well as other university campuses. It is also the preferred method of punishment in many of Canada’s First Nations communities.

Florizone notes that the students who complained about the offensive comments were the ones who recommended restorative justice. And if it fails, formal complaint procedures are still available.

That hasn’t stopped some from being outraged at the “slap on the wrist.”

Jennifer Nowoselski, vice-president of the Dalhousie Student Union, told CTV News that, “Dalhousie’s reaction to this issue is not action. Our students are not safer today, than they were yesterday.”

She added that restorative justice methods used by the university in the past have failed to settle previous issues.

Avalon, a sexual assault assistance centre in downtown Halifax, a short distance from the Dalhousie campus, has also expressed their dissatisfaction with the result.

"Although restorative justice practices can be effective methods of healing, we have concerns with this being the only approach the university has taken so far," the agency wrote in a statement to Florizone.

"Within the Criminal Justice Process, there is a moratorium on the use of Restorative Justice in cases involving violence against women. This is done to protect the victims.

"In situations of abuse, when the abuser is in a position of power, trust and authority, or when they are known to the victim, women may be pressured to engage in a restorative justice process. This could lead to the re-traumatization for the victim."

Avalon makes a very important point. It may have been unfair for the school to expect the victims to select the punishment. Further, women were hurt by the actions of these young men. Just because they didn’t go through with the attacks they joked about doesn’t change that.

To a lesser level of importance, their actions also injured the reputation of the school and the dentistry profession. So you can’t say their behaviour was victimless stupidity.

The question does remain to what extent society would benefit from a harsher punishment. Is this mistake something that should derail their lives, as would surely be the result of expulsion?

Is this something from which they can learn and grow? Can their young lives be improved by receiving a level-handed punishment and, through that, can we pull a dozen young men back from the brink of obnoxious, chauvinistic behaviour and return to them a level of decency?

In short, is this one of those situations where something legitimately repulsive has been done by someone unforgivably repugnant, or is this a case of someone saying something thoughtlessly offensive on social media?

Either way, society is going to rightfully respond with furious outrage. The question is, how far do we want to burn down their house?

Do we take it all the way down to the ashes, or do we leave the foundation standing, where someday perhaps a better one can be built in its place?