Tag: ANU Sport

The Definitive Guide to Crying on Campus
October 16, 2022 7:24 pm Comments Off on The Definitive Guide to Crying on Campus

Everyone needs a cry once in a while. And whether you’ve failed your supplementary exam, your ex has started dating someone else in your pod, you’re drunk and Kebaba is closed, or you’ve once again forgotten to check the prices at Harry Hartog’s before reaching the register, there’s plenty of reasons to cry on campus. So, we’ve teamed-up to provide you with our hard-won knowledge, rating places to cry on campus. While the first two criteria, ‘privacy’ and ‘cleanliness,’ are self-explanatory, the third – ‘vibe’ – is about the je ne sais quoi of a spot. An inexplicable warmth or cozy comfort; the feeling you could be watching yourself cry in a movie; that you’re somehow suddenly connected to a hidden beating heart of campus; or that you’ve become a character in a Donna Tartt novel about to experience an eerie, irrevocable epiphany…

ANU Sport

It’s been a bad week. Uber eats and energy drinks have done little to stave off crushing feelings of emptiness. Hot girl summer seems a million miles away. With great (and admirable) mental fortitude, you wrestle on a sports bra and source a pair of questionably clean leggings. You head to the gym in a monstrous mood, trying to sell yourself on that whole ‘happy workout endorphins’ thing. You shuffle a playlist and pray for the runner’s high to take the pain away. And then, because you couldn’t change the song in time, you find your eyes streaming, running at 13 speed to Death Cab For Cutie. On the upside, if you go hard enough, people will just think you’re like, really sweaty.

Privacy: 1/5
Cleanliness: 2.5/5
Vibe: 3/5

Marie Raey Gender Neutral Bathrooms

While (in)famous for their use for sexual activity, the Gender Neutral Bathrooms are incredibly flexible due to their privacy and equal accessibility. Indeed, you could say they are well-suited and flexible for excreting all kinds of bodily fluids.

Privacy: 5/5
Cleanliness: 2.5/5
Vibe: 0.5/5

An Undisclosed Abandoned Building at an Undisclosed Location on Campus

It’s the third day I’ve slept less than three hours. The sun is starting to peak over the horizon. It’s been another all-nighter. Two science students are hunched over desks in a shabby, musty-smelling classroom of a building constructed in the 70s—an architectural dark age. You wouldn’t even notice it even if you walked straight past. The hideous building is a haven for a tiny group of poor students working at cursed hours of the morning with alarming regularity. The blue glare of a computer screen lights up my gaunt, mascara-smeared face. My thesis remains unwritten. It is due in three hours. Another tear rolls down a well-worn path on my cheek.

Privacy: 5/5
Cleanliness: 3/5
Vibe: 5/5

Sullivan’s Creek Table

Monday Week Eleven. A shit weekend with your not-boyfriend is followed by an even shitter day full of text message arguments and watery eyes. You agree to meet up, to talk things through. Between listening to him (“I don’t like when you tell me that I hurt your feelings”) and speaking yourself (“but this is how you made me feel”), walking becomes too great a challenge. You sit down at a table, one of those generic forest green ones found in all public parks.

He finally says he’s sorry for trying to ditch you to go meet his mates at the pub immediately after you have sex. He’s sorry he made you cry after he’d been away for two weeks and he’s sorry that after meeting your father for the first time he sought to use your home and bed (and body) as a hotel room. Then he says he knows now why he did these things. He has no feelings for you: he never has and he never will.

At the table with attached wooden chairs you tuck your knees up to your chest and stare at your feet. He tells you that it’s not your fault, that you’ve been perfect to him and you are perfect, but that he just doesn’t feel anything. You cry. Then, two hours later, you attend a study session for your exam tomorrow. Then, after that, you finish writing a paper. Then you go home and cry again.

Privacy: 0.5/5
Cleanliness: 4/5
Vibe: 3.5/5

Chifley Library

No matter the floor, Chifley Library should be avoided by crying aficionados. While at first glance promising, the bookable study rooms are too fishbowl-ey for proper privacy. And the bathrooms are too dirty for comfort. Their only positive feature is the motion-sensored lights which allow you to cry to your heart’s content, perched in a dark cubicle, warning you to muffle yourself with a wad of toilet paper when the lights flicker on as another patron enters. (But you haven’t known pain until you’ve left the bathroom and run into the cleaning staff who’ve patiently been waiting for you to finish your teary sesh.)

Privacy: 1/5
Cleanliness: 0.5/5
Vibe: 0/5

Australian Centre on China in the World Gardens

The courtyard of this building is so lovely. So peaceful. So tranquil. It’s the perfect place to sob while listening to Sufjan Stevens. It’s far enough from Daley Rd that if your friends see you on snapmaps they’ll be concerned, but not concerned enough where they feel the need to start checking up on you. At night there is just the right amount of lighting, enough that you feel safe but still dim to hide how tragic you look when you inevitably cave and post a crying selfie on your private story. Refreshments are provided by the sprinklers that are running 24/7. The mindfully designed feng shui puts your mind at ease. On the walk home you’ll be so distracted by passels of possums that by the time you get to your res hall, you’ll have forgotten about why you were crying in the first place.

Privacy: 4.5/5 (sometimes couples come here to make out)
Cleanliness 5/5
Vibe: 4/5

Uni Ave

Nothing beats a full blown tanty in the middle of Kambri. Lose the inhibitions and let the people know you’re crying. Dress the part by letting your mascara run down your face! You’re in the middle of all the hustle and bustle and you get to enjoy Telstra Tower and the mountains in the background—what could be more fun!? Anyway, no one will notice anyway because they’re busy running to their next class or paying for a $6 coffee.

Privacy: 0/5 or 5/5 depending on your showmanship
Cleanliness: 5/5
Vibe: 4/5

Various Authors
What We Can Do About Racism In Australia
June 8, 2020 4:52 pm Comments Off on What We Can Do About Racism In Australia
CONTENT WARNING: Racism, Police Brutality, COVID-19, The Stolen Generations
All 50 American states have taken part in nation-wide protests expressing their outrage over the murder of an unarmed black man, George Floyd, by the police. His last words as he was choked to death by a police officer, ‘I can’t breathe’, reverberated among protests across the nation and formed the basis of their movement against anti-blackness. Although many American cities are still under lockdown, the sheer scale of the demonstrations highlights the urgency of the issue. It suggests that the antiracist movement is different.
As the long-standing struggle for racial equality in the United States is laid bare for the world to witness, it also seems like the right time to look at racial inequality and discrimination here in Australia, too. While I’ve seen posts on social media expressing outrage against racism in the United States, many people are still unaware of its existence here. Racism is an endemic problem in Australia. Frustrations surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic have been expressed through attacks directed towards Asian-Australians. The end of May marks the beginning of National Reconciliation Week, which recognises the Indigenous Australians who have inhabited Australia for thousands of years. It also serves as a movement to build a fairer and more just society for a historically marginalised community where its people are underrepresented in our parliament and overrepresented in our prisons, have significantly lower levels of access to education and healthcare, and lead a substantially lower standard of living than the rest of the Australian population.
Indigenous Australians have inhabited this land for more than 40,000 years, long before Western settlers colonised the land that we live on today. Since the First Fleet arrived in Botany Bay in 1788, Indigenous Australians have been treated as second-class citizens. From 1910 to 1970, government agencies forcibly removed traditional custodians from their lands and Indigenous children from their families. This is what became known as the Stolen Generations. It is one of many examples of mistreatment Indigenous people have endured, and something that they continue to face today. Yet, many Australians are unaware of the challenges faced by Indigenous Australians who are treated as outcasts in their own land.
Despite the difficulties of being an Indigenous person in Australia, numerous individuals deserve our attention and acknowledgement for their work in their respective disciplines. Among them are Eddie Mabo, a Torres Strait Islander man who campaigned for Indigenous land rights in the landmark Mabo case, and Evonne Goolagong Cawley, a multiple Grand-Slam tennis champion. This is a small list, but it highlights their value to Australian society and necessitates the provision of greater opportunities for these communities.
What can we do here?
It’s easy to feel helpless when we face a seemingly monumental problem like this. But we can all do our part. If there is one thing that we can take comfort in, it’s that racism is not an innate quality intertwined with human nature. It is learnt. Among the numerous posts expressing the anger and outrage over the murder of George Floyd, there are posts depicting children of different races embracing each other as friends as well as white and black protestors walking together in defiance. This means racism can be unlearnt. We can stamp it out. But it requires all of us to act.
It also requires us to remember that racism will probably linger even as the protests in the United States subside, the pandemic eventually comes to an end and National Reconciliation Week passes. Because even if racism is a result of socialisation, it is still deeply ingrained in society. So, it isn’t enough to simply express outrage or share posts on social media while everyone is doing it too. If we return to how things were, these movements simply become acts of virtue signalling where no real progress is being made. To truly instigate change requires us to muster the courage to call out racism wherever we see or hear it – whether it’s overt or seemingly innocent, at home, at work, with friends or anywhere else. It requires us to actively educate ourselves about the plight that Indigenous Australians have faced in the past and continue to face every day, and provide support in any way we can, such as through donations, signing petitions and learning about Indigenous history and culture. It requires us to hold governments accountable when they are interested in advancing the economy at the expense of preserving the cultures of ethnic groups. It requires us to act, even when racism is no longer at the forefront of the national psyche.
To any people of colour who may be reading this, I encourage you not to feel compelled to change to fit in. While many people of colour face racism from other communities, internalised racism is still a significant, yet underreported, issue where ideal stereotypes that are perpetuated by people of colour lead to non-white cultural standards being viewed as inferior. But there is nothing inferior about being a person of colour. We all have unique experiences which deserve to be celebrated, not hidden from obscurity. I encourage you not to be afraid to be different. Don’t be scared to speak your native language, eat food from your cuisine or celebrate your festivals. I, for instance, shouldn’t need to accommodate other’s inability to pronounce my name just because it isn’t normal by Western standards. Embrace your unique identity and tell your story.
We all have a collective responsibility, no matter what race we belong to, to do our part in tackling injustice everywhere. Even though we have made progress through programs like the National Reconciliation Week and National Sorry Day, it won’t be enough until we achieve a society built on equity and mutual respect for all people. Life for all of us is difficult as it is and we shouldn’t need to tolerate bigotry and discrimination, no matter how innocent it may seem, on top of everything else that is going on.

Think your name would look good in print? Woroni is always open for submissions. Email write@woroni.com.au with a pitch or draft. You can find more info on submitting here.

Ruturaj Patil
Instagram and the Rise of Environmental Activism
August 7, 2019 11:38 am Comments Off on Instagram and the Rise of Environmental Activism
I first heard about plastic-free July last year on Instagram. Being a science student with a marine science major, I’d been continuously exposed to the threat that plastic has on our marine ecosystem, in particular, the wildlife. Like many others, I didn’t realise how much we rely on plastic in our current society until I tried to remove it. Everything from hygiene and beauty products, to both fresh and pre-packaged foods, to clothes, is packaged in plastic. It seems almost impossible to remove plastic from our lives.
This is why I think social-media-based movements like Plastic Free July are so effective. Not only do they create a community online where information and tips can be shared, but it also makes it very clear how to get involved. I’ve found the @plasticfreejuly community to be very inclusive, as it encourages people to reduce their plastic consumption, without the pressure of entirely eliminating plastic. Their goal is for everyone to reduce their plastic use as much as is feasible for each individual. This contrasts to many other movements that advocate an ‘all-or-nothing’ approach that ultimately pushes people away. On the Plastic Free July website there are options to pledge a variety of goals for the month, including trying to remove only coffee cups and plastic bags, becoming plastic-free for just one week or going cold turkey for the whole month. Having inclusive options like this means that more people feel like they can get involved without having to completely change their lifestyle. In environmental activism,this is extremely important. A million people trying to remove some plastic from their lives, even if the amount is small, is exponentially more effective than a handful of people being completely plastic-free, which is often what happens when people are shamed for not entirely removing plastic from their lives. Small steps across a whole community make enormous impacts.
I’ve seen a few things on social media lately laughing at those who use keep cups and think they are ‘eco-friendly.’ While using a keep cup is a first step to reducing plastic waste and your environmental footprint, so many more steps can be taken. In my opinion, making fun of those who only use keep cups is so stupid. Yes, the keep cup has become ‘trendy,’ but isn’t this something we should be celebrating? It shouldn’t matter if some people only use a keep cup to be fashionable and not for environmental reasons. I mean, it would be great if they could do it for the environment and consider their footprint in other aspects of their lives, but they’re still using a keep cup. It’s ultimately a win for the planet, so who cares? Personally, I’m stoked to see anyone using a keep cup regardless of their motivations. The reality is that becoming more environmentally conscious is becoming more and more mainstream. High profile public figures and influencers are talking about it more than ever, and the market for environmentally friendly food, clothing and retail is bigger than ever before. Back to Instagram, people with huge followings are spreading their message of sustainability such as Grace Beverly (1 million followers), DJ Tigerlily (604k followers), Zanna van Dijk (280k followers) and David Pocock (202K followers). With such a wide reach, public figures have an enormous influence on encouraging sustainability to their followers.
Social media has been crucial to Greta Thunberg’s school strike activism for climate change, which has now spread across the world. The attention garnered by her large following has pushed her into the spotlight as the face of environmental activism for our generation. And while Greta’s feed, on first glance, has very little in common with Grace Beverley’s, the message is the same. Encourage, not discourage, bring people in and don’t leave people out. Keep your keep cup, encourage discussion, but most importantly, accept everyone into the environmental activism movement. Like plastic-free July, encourage people to take any step, no matter how big or small. And be stoked that environmentalism is finally becoming fashionable.

Tash Salisbury
The Value of Protest
July 26, 2019 11:53 am Comments Off on The Value of Protest

CONTENT WARNING: War
The prospect of another three years under a Liberal government, headed by a coal-loving Christian fundamentalist who wears photoshopped sneakers, is frankly alarming. How we respond to Scott Morrison’s attacks on refugees, workers, and the environment is an open question: the ball is in our court. The situation is set to get worse for the majority of the world’s population. Whether it be the rise of far-right formations on every continent, the protracted imperial conflicts in the Middle East, or widening levels of inequality, the global poor and oppressed face a worsening situation year after year. For anyone who is serious about fundamentally challenging the system that produces all these horrors, the key question is one of strategy.
In the wake of the election, the mainstream media were quick to denounce the strategy of protesting. The Age published an article titled “I Doubt I’ll Bother Attending Another Climate Rally,” which blamed disruptive rallies for alienating bystanders. A cursory search of the Internet reveals a litany of op-eds lamenting the uselessness of mass demonstrations.
Contrary to the conjectures of cynics at Fairfax, the humble protest has been the motor force for change in society. Basic democratic rights such as the extension of the franchise to working men, and later to women, had to be fought for by the Chartist and Suffrage Movements. They achieved this through organising mass protests that drew crowds of tens of thousands.
The historic “I Have A Dream” speech, delivered by Martin Luther King Junior on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, drew its power from the 250,000 people who marched alongside King. In 1964, after many decades and many protests, the civil rights movement saw its primary goal of ending racial discrimination enshrined in legislation.
The US and Australian governments were forced to withdraw troops from Vietnam after sustained rallies across both nations. This made it untenable to continue the war. Lyndon Johnson, the US president, was dogged by lively protests at every public appearance he made until he stopped appearing in public and withdrew his candidacy for the presidency.
Some commentators bemoan the era of social media, claiming that it has made it impossible to mobilise young people. But the climate strike earlier this year, which saw 150,000 Australians take to the streets, shows that mass demonstrations have not been cast into the dustbin of history.
Mass protests have won significant gains for the oppressed around the world. But critics of the strategy point out that most of the time, the government does not concede to the demands of protestors. The Marxist art critic John Berger explains that “theoretically, demonstrations are meant to reveal the strength of popular opinion or feeling: theoretically, they are an appeal to the democratic conscience of the State. But this presupposes a conscience which is very unlikely to exist.”
Berger also points out that there is more to a protest than its demands. Even demonstrations that do not immediately achieve their stated aims can have a transformative effect on the participants. Berger observes that for participants in a mass demonstration, “the numbers cease to be numbers and become the evidence of their senses, the conclusions of their imagination. The larger the demonstration, the more powerful and immediate a metaphor it becomes for their total collective strength.” When 4,000 people crammed into Garema Place for the student climate strike, the feeling of confidence was palpable. Imagine what it was like when 250,000 rallied for civil rights.
Protests that inspire confidence are the building blocks for social movements, because they attract layers of people who want to actively – rather than passively – support a campaign. In his speech at the Anti-Inauguration, Anand Gopal observed that “a single protest has never changed anything, but the social movements that link protest, that is the lifeblood of resistance.”
If there was ever a time to build a social movement, it’s now. The threat of climate change cannot be exaggerated: it is existential. Greta Thunberg, the Swedish climate striker, told world leaders to “act as you would in a crisis. I want you to act as if our house is on fire. Because it is.” Since we cannot rely on politicians, the responsibility to address the climate crisis falls to the public.
Fortunately, we don’t have to build a response to climate change from scratch. That work has already been done by generations of committed scientists, journalists, and activists. The majority of Australians already oppose the Adani coal mine, and an even greater number support a transition to renewables.
When millions of people fight together against oppression and exploitation, they show the possibility of living in a better society than a capitalist one. Socialism seems like a distant prospect under neoliberalism, where people are encouraged to feel alienated and atomised. Mass protests cut against the feeling of isolation, and demonstrate the possibility of creating a more just and democratic society based on cooperation instead of competition.
If we want to stop irreversible environmental damage to the earth, we need to build a sustained mass movement. Even the most inspiring mass movements have humble origins, prompting a nod to Paul Kelly’s iconic lyrics, “from little things, big things grow.”
Nick Carlton is a member of Socialist Alternative.

Nick Carlton
國際學生需要被融合嗎？
May 17, 2019 1:48 pm Comments Off on 國際學生需要被融合嗎？
To read the English version, see ‘Do International Students Need Integration?‘

對少數族群代表度 (minority representation) 做出建設性的討論很難。這就是為什麼 Kai Clark 的文章 “There is No Such Thing as an ‘International’ Student” (發表於上一期的Woroni)讓人耳目一新。文章提供了許多有價值的見解和真誠的建議。作者倡議改善國際學生的代表度，譴責同化不同群體，也反對仇外心理。當然，我對這篇文章有很多不同意的觀點，我想首先指出這篇文章中可圈可點的地方。
即使顯而易見，我也需要再多做一些解釋。改變社會的提案 (proposals for change) 經常受到非常苛刻的審查 (scrutiny)。除了一些必要的顧慮之外，有些人之所以有時過度批判某個提案是因為他們期望維持現狀 (a desire to preserve the status quo) 。例如，那些反對平權法案 (affirmative action) 的人士，他們常常會說這樣的提案不是解決不公正 (address injustice) 最有效的方式。但是這些人大多也不會支持其他解決不公正的提案。再比如那些反對工人組成工會的人，他們說他們反對工會是因為工會傷害了工人的利益。但這些反對的人也大多不會支持其他的改善工人福利的措施，譬如大規模的資源重分配 (mass redistribution)。所以，儘管我和Clark 有很多不同的觀點，我覺得他的文章對關於少數族群代表度的討論還是做出了建設性的貢獻。
我已經做了足夠的鋪墊。 Clark 文章的主要論點是國際學生不是一個同質 (homogenous) 的群體。正如標題所說的， “我們所謂的國際學生並不存在” (“There is No Such Thing as an ‘International’ Student”)。不過，我的顧慮是Clark 將對一個群體的過度概括 (over-generalisation) 替換成了另一種形式上的過度概括。 Clark 不經意地將國際學生描繪成一個個不同的小圈子，每一個圈子內卻仍然還是同質的。
Clark 說， “國際學生的身份認同就是這樣:他們覺得自己就是自己祖國的公民。” Clark 說， “他們更傾向於同來自他們自己國家的人打交道，而不是同其他的國際學生來往。” Clark 說， “這個就是為什麼以國籍或文化為界線的學生組織(cultural and country-specific clubs) 非常流行。這是因為這些學生組織給國際學生提供了一個競選學生領袖的機會。” 我覺得這樣的描述令人擔憂。它們要不就是很不準確，或者就過分的依賴刻板印象 (stereotypes)。這樣的言論也有令人反感的規範性意味 (normative connotations)。我們被告知，我們需要的“制度變革” (“institutional change”) 只是“學生領袖”和住宿員工理解國際學生面臨的“法律，文化和社會上的經濟障礙”。我不禁在想，Clark 所謂的制度變革會帶來什麼樣的 “理解”。
平心而論，Clark是有提到“即使有些詞彙— 譬如說 ”來自中國大陸，台灣，香港和新加坡的學生“— 常常會隱藏這些地方的複雜性 (complexities) 和矛盾 (contradictions)”。但我不知道當Clark 提到， “同質化群體譬如中國的 ‘新富人’ (‘new rich’) 和崛起的中產階級”，背後隱藏的或許不僅僅是一個地方的複雜性和矛盾。
當然，從大學制度政策的層面來看，某種程度的概括 (general- isation) 是不可避免的。我們需要問的是針對某些群體的概括是不是不公平和不成比例的 (unfairly and disproportionately)。

事實上，作為一名國際學生，我覺得令人費解的是為什麼一篇發表在校報的文章，像我這樣的國際學生幾乎總是被稱作 “他們”。或許作者只是想用正確的英文語法，這我不得而知。然而，我覺得在Clark的描述中，我看不到國際學生有任何的主權 (agency) 。國際學生似乎只是“包容” (“inclusion”) 和“支持” (“support”) 的被動接受者— 似乎像我這樣的國際學生只能”被融合”，只能被“ 學生領袖” 和其他學校員工幫助。
當然，如何理解弱勢群體 (disadvantaged groups) 的主權是一個複雜的問題。這是一個歷史學家，社會學家和哲學家都有廣泛討論的議題。譬如說，我們不希望僅僅通過受害者的視角 (the lens of victimhood) 來看待原住民 (indigenous peoples)。我們也不希望僅僅著眼於原住民慷慨激昂的抗爭 (triumphant resistance)。所以我的觀點不是Clark沒有解決這個如此複雜的問題。相反，我只是非常好奇為什麼國際學生會被單獨挑選出來談論。畢竟，很多學生都有遇到適應新環境困難。也有很多學生，如Clark所說的， “希望融合但不知道要怎麼做。”
即便是文章中提到的一些看似具體的問題也不是國際學生所獨有的。Clark說， “例如，餃子製作活動可能僅僅會吸引東亞的學生。大多的南亞學生並不會太感興趣。” Clark 接著說， “這樣的情況快速的惡化當你感覺大多的活動都像是在為某些特定群體量身定做。” 我再次對這點感到疑惑。難道這不就是民主制度 (democratic institutions) 中常見的問題嗎?就是說，難道大多的民主制度不都會遇到如何顧全少數群體的權益的問題嗎? 這和，譬如說，某些學生派系 (factions) 主宰某些在校內的學生社團有什麼區別呢?
或許我有些偏見。毫無疑問，僅僅因為某些問題具有廣泛性並不意味著它不重要。同樣，上面提到的許多問題，例如某些國際學生群體沒有足夠的代表度，都是非常確切的。但關鍵的是我們應該如何處理這些問題。我不知道為什麼我們要說， “為陷入困境的國際學生提供服務和支持”，而不是， “為所有陷入困境的學生提供服務和支持”。當Clark 說， “在我們談論國際學生的時候，我們要注意我們的用語。” 我完全同意。這就是為什麼我覺得我們不應該將國際學生僅僅定位成無能為力的受害者。 Clark 還說， “國際學生應該被尊重因為他們的人性 (humanity) 和文化多樣性 (cultural diversity)”。我同意。但為什麼不僅僅著眼於人性呢?
當然，國際學生確實有自己獨特的困境。或許正如Clark所講的，國際學生遇到與英語語言技能和文化差異相關的問題。但對我來說，正如我在其他地方寫到的，我覺得對我身份的過度刻板印象和(善意的)假設比缺乏任何來自學校的支持或服務更令人煩心。譬如說，我常常被問及，“喔，所以你學哲學喔。。不是。。金融學?”
我應該承認不同學生確實有不同的需求和利益。 ANU也應該為學生提供更好的支持和服務。 (我曾經要為一個心理諮商的會面(counselling session) 等三個星期。很多其他學生也有類似的經歷。)但這也正說明了為什麼我們不應該一概而論— 特別是當我們討論那些已經被一概而論了很久的群體。
或許，我終究和Clark有著同樣的觀點。或許，正如Clark所講的， “所謂的國際學生並不存在”。但我們更應該記住的是，所謂的什麼問題都沒有的模範學生也並不存在吧。

Kida Lin
Do International Students Need Integration?
1:47 pm Comments Off on Do International Students Need Integration?
閱讀中文版請看 ‘國際學生需要被融合嗎？’

Having a constructive discourse on minority representation is hard. That’s why I find Kai Clark’s article “There is No Such Thing as an ‘International’ Student” particularly refreshing. The article offers a number of valuable insights and sincere suggestions. It calls for the increased representation of international students. It speaks against pigeonholing different groups and calls out xenophobia. As will become clear, I disagree with many things in this piece; but there are also many, many more that I wholeheartedly embrace.
At the risk of stating the obvious, I should preface my discussion with one more point. Proposals for change are often subject to remarkably harsh scrutiny. Legitimate concern aside, what underlines such (at times enthusiastic) scrutiny is often a desire to preserve the status quo. Think, for example, about the fact that those who oppose affirmative action on the grounds that it’s not the most effective way to address injustice are unlikely to be proponents of other progressive policies either. Think, also, about the fact that those who lament unionisation on the grounds that it hurts workers are probably not going to vote for mass redistribution in any event. Point being, for all that I will say later, Clark’s article makes an invaluable contribution to the ongoing discussion on minority representation.
So much for the set-up. Clark’s main argument in the piece is that “international students” are not a homogenous group, and hence “there is no such thing as an international student”. My worry, though, is that Clark runs the risk of replacing one form of over-generalisation with another. Clark presents, unwittingly I believe, a picture of international students as many groups with diverse interests that are nevertheless internally homogenous.
We are told that, “they see themselves as who they are: a citizen of their home country.” We are told that, “they are more likely to relate more with others from their country than with other overseas students.” We are told that, “[this] is why cultural and country-specific clubs are so popular… as they create a place for ambitious overseas students to cut one’s teeth in student leadership.” These descriptive claims are worrying not only because they either are widely inaccurate or rely excessively on stereotypes. They also carry off-putting normative connotations. We are told, later in the piece, that the “institutional change” we need is simply that “student leaders” and residential staff understand the “legal, cultural, and socioeconomic barriers” international students face. Informed by the above-mentioned conception of international students, one can’t help but wonder what kind of understanding such institutional change will produce.
To be fair, Clark does mention that “even… simple descriptions [like Mainland Chinese, Taiwanese, Hong Kong and Singapore] hide the complexities and contradictions of these places”. I don’t know, however, whether “ethnically homogenous China with its ‘new rich’ and rising middle class” — referenced by Clark in the same paragraph — obscures more than just the “complexities and contradictions” of a place.
Of course, at the level of university and residential policies, some degree of generalisation is unavoidable. The question rather is whether generalisation is unfairly and disproportionately directed at some particular groups.
In fact, as an international student myself, I find it slightly puzzling that, for an article published in the university newspaper, people like me are referred to almost exclusively as “they”. Perhaps it’s just a matter of the proper use of grammar; I am not sure. I do, however, struggle to find any shred of agency for people like me in this picture. We seem merely to be passive recipients of “inclusion” and “support”— if only we could be integrated; if only “student leaders” and staff could help us.
Now, how to understand the agency of disadvantaged groups is a very general problem for historians, sociologists and philosophers. For example, we do not want to theorise indigenous peoples solely through the lens of victimhood, nor should we only sing a feel-good anthem about their triumphant resistance. The point is not that Clark doesn’t resolve this intricate issue. Rather, it is simply very curious why international students are singled out. There are presumably a great many students who have difficulties adjusting themselves to the new environment. A great many, perhaps, “want to be included into the community but are struggling”.
Even some of the seemly specific problems identified by Clark are hardly unique to international students. We are told that, “a Chinese dumpling making event, for example, does not necessarily appeal to South Asian students as it would to East Asian students.” Clark then says, “this is exacerbated when you continue to see events that continue to borrow upon one cultural region over another”. I am again quite puzzled by this. Isn’t this just a general problem of how to accommodate the interests of minorities in democratic institutions? How is it different from, say, political factions dominating certain student societies on campus?
Perhaps I am being unfair here. It’s certainly true that just because something is a general problem doesn’t mean that it is not serious. It’s also true that many of the issues identified by Clark, such as the under-representation of certain groups of international students, are very real. The question, though, is how we should approach these issues. I see no reason why we ought to prioritise, say, “providing services and support to struggling international students” over “providing services and support to all those who are struggling”. I cannot agree more when Clark says, “we must be careful of how we use language to refer to overseas students”. That’s why, given the prevailing social message, we should caution against framing international students predominantly as powerless victims to be provided for. Clark also calls for international students be “respected for their cultural diversity and humanity”. I agree; better yet, why not drop the “cultural diversity”?
Of course, it might be said that some issues are in fact primarily faced by international students. Perhaps, as Clark mentions, these are issues associated with English language skills and cultural differences. As I have written elsewhere, though, I personally find over-generalisations and (well-intentioned) assumptions about my identity a bigger irritation than the lack of meaningful support or services. There are simply way more instances where I am told, “oh, so you study philosophy… not… finance?”
Now, it should be pointed out that different students do in fact have different needs and interests. It’s also the case that the ANU should provide better support and services to its students. (I once had to wait three weeks for a counselling session, which is a common experience of many.) But this makes it all the more important not to generalise — particularly when it comes to groups about whom so many generalisations have already been made.
Perhaps, Clark and I do not really disagree after all. There is indeed no such thing as an international student. What should be remembered, though, is that there is also no such thing as a non-struggling student.

Kida Lin worries that in discussions about international students, we run the risk of replacing one form of over-generalisation with others.

Kida Lin
Four Simple and achievable ways to eat more sustainably
May 4, 2019 6:51 pm Comments Off on Four Simple and achievable ways to eat more sustainably
From school climate rallies, to keep-cups and the movement against straws, young people are championing a more sustainable future. However, amidst all of our sustainable attempts what is often ignored is the enormous impact our diets have on the environment. One-third of total global greenhouse gas emissions come from agriculture alone and Australians have one of the largest per capita dietary environmental footprints in the world. But fear not! Although veganism is an ideal solution (I’m patting all the vegans on the back here, especially because you’ve made it very clear who you are), there are many more achievable ways for us mere mortals to help the environment by what we eat. It all starts by what you put in your supermarket basket.

Plan your meals

It’s simple. A well planned supermarket shopping list translates to less food wastage, less impulse spending and more money in your pocket. You won’t have sad and soggy vegetables sitting in the fridge and will also ensure that you have the right ingredients to cook with (rather than opting for another packet of two-minute noodles). Sit down at the start of each week or fortnight and plan your meals. This can be all your meals or just your nightly dinners. Basically just list the ingredients and quantities you will need to buy.
E.g.

MONDAY AND TUESDAY DINNER

Healthy roasted chicken and veggies

2 medium chicken breasts
1 capsicum
1 zucchini
1 clove of garlic
½ an onion
1 cup of broccoli
paprika

BUY
BUY
BUY
BUY
Pantry
Frozen in freezer
In cupboard

   2. Moderate your meat intake
Avoiding meat is the single biggest way to reduce your environmental impact on the planet. Try making Mondays meat-free! Red meat, lamb (if you are feeling particularly bourgie) and processed meats such as sausages, salami and ham have particularly high eco-footprints. Eating beef just 1-2 times per week, over an entire year is the equivalent of driving 2482 km in a petrol fuelled car. Attempt to substitute them for lower impact meats such as chicken or pork. In addition, alternatives such as flexitarianism (eating meat more rarely) are feasible for most people. Another great tip is to experiment a bit and learn to cook your favourite recipes a little differently. Why not make a vegetarian lasagne or pork tacos instead of beef! There are also a huge range of legumes, tofu and nuts that can act as meat-like substitutes. Similarly, junk food and most-dairy products have a reasonably large environmental footprint as they are heavily processed. Swap some of your processed snacks for fruit or home baked products (particularly if they are lovingly baked by a parent or grandparent).
        3. Eat seasonally
Eating food that is abundant and in season means that produce does not have to be transported internationally from countries such as the US and China to appear on our plates. Buying produce that is seasonal will not only reduce transport emissions but it is often fresher and less expensive. It is easy to tell what is in season based on the fruit and veggies that are the cheapest and most abundant in supply. If in doubt just check the label.
Here are some of my personal Autumn faves in season

Fruit: Most apples are in season, kiwi fruits, avocados, bananas, most oranges, pears
Veggies: beetroot, broccoli, Asian greens, cucumber, carrot, spinach, pumpkin, leek, zucchini
Some ‘treat yourself/I’ve just been paid’ fruits: strawberries, raspberries, grapes, mangos

        4. Eat locally
While lowering your environmental dietary footprint can be achieved by shopping at the big two supermarkets, it is even better to support local stores and producers. Right here at the ANU, the Food Co-op under Lena Karmel Lodge sells affordable and sustainable local produce. They also sell weekly veggie boxes filled with seasonal fresh fruit and vegetables. Their foods are sold in bulk to reduce excess packaging and plastic.
In addition to places such at the Food Co-op, Canberra is surrounded by quality farms and growers who are passionate about cultivating great produce. The Farmer’s Markets are held every weekend and are a great chance to feel like a prised millennial, walking around in your activewear (with no intention of going to the gym) while holding a bunch of kale. Choku Bai Jo in Lyneham and Curtin also aim to give local farmers another outlet (that’s open during the week) to sell their produce and foods.
Another fantastic thing about shopping at smaller, local sellers is that you are helping to reduce the food wastage associated with the big supermarkets. Shockingly, up to 60 percent of fruit and veggies never even make it to the supermarket shelves because they do not meet the narrow cosmetic standards they set. For example, Woolworths lists an 11,000-word document just describing their standards for bananas. While some stores have introduced ranges such as ‘the odd bunch’ selling ‘ugly’ produce at a discount, local producers will sell you what they grow. They may sell you a slightly bend-ier carrot, or a mysteriously large zucchini, but ultimately it’s what’s on the inside that counts.
The keep-cup revolution and the switch to reusable shopping bags shows us that if small changes are done consistently they can have a huge impact. Planning what you buy, swapping high-carbon footprint foods for lower ones and eating locally and seasonally where possible are some of the easiest ways to ensure that our planet can support future generations. A more sustainable diet is not only healthier for the planet but it is also better for your cash-strapped student wallets and your health.

Jennifer Kerr
The Case for Veganism
April 24, 2019 10:22 am Comments Off on The Case for Veganism
On 9 April 2019, traffic chaos surged in Melbourne while vegan activists blocked Flinders Street intersection as part of a nationwide protest. Police eventually acted, arresting the protestors and throwing them into paddy wagons. Placards were left on the road, their message still visible: “You have been lied to. www.watchdominion.com.”
Widespread condemnation erupted. Prime Minister Scott Morrison dubbed the activists “green-collared criminals”. Greg Sheridan, journalist for The Australian, complained that his “productivity was diminished” because of “vegan militants”.
Even The Betoota Advocate, usually favouring the underdog, took an admittedly humorous swing: “Melbourne’s Vegan Protests Lose Momentum As Activists Begin Napping Due To Iron Deficiencies”, their satirical headline read.
An important message was forgotten among the furore surrounding the protests. That veganism – the belief we should not eat or use animal-based products – has a rational basis. In fact, veganism is based on an uncontroversial moral principle that everyone reading this will accept: that we should not cause unnecessary harm.
So let me carve out the meat behind this argument – so to speak.
Consider why we should accept the principle in the first place. You approach a fork in the road while driving. Road A and Road B are your options. Both have pleasant views, require similar travel time, and lead to your destination. However, driving along Road A causes a boulder to fall from a cliff, killing someone. Nobody is harmed on Road B.
Obviously, everyone would choose Road B. Otherwise you would harm someone unnecessarily. Consuming animal products, however, is analogous to choosing Road A.
Nonhuman animals are sentient – capable of experiencing pleasure and pain – and thus capable of being harmed. We know animals suffer because they virtually all scream, cry or resist when subjected to mistreatment, behaving just as humans do. Backing up this inference, the nervous systems in vertebrates are fundamentally similar to humans.
However, invertebrates – and especially bivalves like oysters – have less similar nervous systems. Therefore, we should be less confident these animals experience pain. Nevertheless, recent research suggests that crabs, prawns and octopuses all experience pain. With the science inconclusive, we ought to give invertebrates and bivalves the benefit of the doubt if killing them is unnecessary.
There is no significant evidence to suggest that plants have the capacity to feel pain.
Killing nonhuman animals for food and clothing causes them harm. Many modes of killing animals do not inflict an immediate death. Instead, they cause animals to suffer greatly as they die. Intensive farming practices confine sentient animals in cramped, unsuitable conditions for their entire lives. Eggs regularly come from hens in small cages, and the male chicks are killed at birth because they will never produce eggs. Dairy products often come from cows who are artificially inseminated in confined barns – their calf taken to the slaughterhouse shortly after birth, leaving the milk for humans, but the mother and calf wailing.
The lives of free-range animals are undoubtedly better than those raised in factory farms. Using them for food, however, still requires killing them. Even hens and dairy cows are killed when their productivity declines, which is usually early into their life span. By killing them, we are eliminating their future pleasures – all for the mere difference in taste between a plant-based and animal-based meal.
So, using animals for food and other items causes harm to animals. We have no good reason to discount this suffering simply because they are not members of the species homo sapiens.
Animal agriculture also produces more greenhouse gas emissions than the entire transport sector worldwide. There are many more negative environmental impacts associated with non-vegan diets. In 2018, Oxford University researchers concluded that plant-based diets are the most sustainable: the “single biggest way” to reduce your environmental impact. For anyone who believes in climate change, the harms associated with non-vegan diets are clear.
Consuming animal products is completely unnecessary for most. According to the American Dietetic Association, “appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain conditions.” Granted, vegan diets can be unhealthy, but with proper planning all essential nutrition is available. A plant-based diet may even be healthier as growing evidence connects red and processed meat consumption with higher incidence of bowel cancer. It is no coincidence, after all, that many elite athletes now opt for vegan diets.
There are many delicious vegan dishes too. True, some vegan products are more expensive, but many are not. Lentils, chickpeas and tofu – great sources of protein – are much cheaper than meat-based equivalents. My favourite dish – Spinach Dhal – is cheap, easy to make, and mouth-wateringly tasty.
Therefore, consuming animal-products harms animals, the planet and ourselves. We lack good justifications to cause this harm. It is analogous to choosing Road A.
Other objections to veganism remain. “It is natural to consume animal flesh,” some say, “as nonhuman animals eat each other.” Are other things nonhuman animals do – including torture one another – therefore acceptable among humans too? Moreover, most animals who kill for food would not survive if they did not, whereas we have no need to eat animal flesh.
“We do not actually cause the harm by purchasing animal products,” people contend. “Such products already exist – irrespective of whether we consume them or not.” Nevertheless, there has to be some threshold that – if consumption levels drop beneath – will precipitate a change in ordering patterns. If demand falls for animal products in a supermarket, less will be ordered in the future; triggering a reduction of animals harmed. Vegans, therefore, are not attempting to change the past, but prevent the persistence of objectionable practices. Just as boycotts of products coming from South Africa during apartheid endeavoured to do.
Granted, some days a vegan diet will make no difference. But on other days, refraining from purchasing may cause the threshold to drop beneath the level of profitability. Thus, we ought to avoid animal products. After all, we would all avoid Road A even if there was only a small chance the boulder would fall and crush someone.
Veganism is based on strong foundations – and everyone who accepts the moral principle that we should not cause unnecessary harm thereby accepts the premise of veganism. You may indeed disagree with the Melbourne protests. But a misguided protest does not render the cause itself misguided.
I strongly encourage everyone to watch documentaries about slaughterhouses – to see, for yourselves, the abhorrent reality that underpins our consumption of animal products; hidden from us in the supermarkets, restaurants and clothing stores we frequent. And if you agreed that driving on Road B was the right thing to do, I encourage you to think about how you may be steering the wheel in your own life. On reflection, you may decide to eat like the world depends on it.

Anthony Merlino
There’s No Such Thing as an ‘International’ Student
April 18, 2019 12:56 am Comments Off on There’s No Such Thing as an ‘International’ Student
During my time on residential leadership we ran events hoping to involve international students in our hall’s community. These events, however, were run based on the presumption that all international student experiences are the same. They are not. A locally educated student from Japan, for example, is different to a western-educated student from Myanmar. Grouping ‘international students’ as if they are a unified, cohesive community misinforms our policies for inclusion. It is time we step away from this overly broad term and recognise these students as who they are: a diverse group of people with different needs and challenges.
According to the Australian government, the term ‘overseas student’ refers to students studying in a foreign institution who are not Australian or New Zealand citizens or Australian permanent residents. ANU, Australian National University Students’ Association and the International Student’s Department use the term ‘international student’ to the same effect. This is an accurate label when it is used solely to describe the legal and fee-paying status of the student. The problem arises when the term ‘international student’ moves past this narrow definition.
Few, if any, ‘international student’ identifies as such. Instead, they see themselves as who they are: a citizen of their home country. They are more likely to relate more with others from their country than with other overseas students. This is why cultural and country-specific clubs are so popular at ANU: they create a place for ambitious overseas students to cut one’s teeth in student leadership – sometimes after being rejected from college leadership.
Within the microcosm of overseas groups at ANU, we see reflections of the same stories and tensions back home. Mainland Chinese, Taiwanese, Hong Kong, and Singapore students are all generally seen as ‘Chinese’, yet the level of wealth, education, English language proficiency skills, and cultural upbringing varies. Ethnically homogenous China with its ‘new rich’ and rising middle class differs from the racially diverse Singapore, where English is the vernacular for many of its citizens. Yet, even these simple descriptions hide the complexities and contradictions of these places.
These complexities manifest more clearly when we ask a person to represent the ‘international community’. When there is only one international representative on a resident’s committee, the workload of dealing with overseas student engagement falls largely onto them. While it’s admirable for student residences to put on cultural events to engage both Australian and overseas students, a Chinese dumpling making event, for example, does not necessarily appeal to South Asian students as it would to East Asian students. This is exacerbated when you continue to see events that continue to borrow upon one cultural region over another
Even the very role of international representative limits the potential of international students to engage in their community. I have spoken to many who were hesitant to run for any other position on their residents’ committees because they felt that they didn’t ‘fit’ into the role as well as they would as an ‘international representative’. Conversely, I have heard students not vote for international students for other roles because they believed they were better suited for being an ‘international representative’.
So, what can we do to be more inclusive to international students? As student leaders in colleges, a good start is to triage. Some students are here to study and are content to be with one’s own. Others have a western background or education and the English and social skills to integrate successfully. The priority, instead, should be on the students who are in between, who want to be included into the community but are struggling.
These students are the ones who show up but need encouragement. It may be their lack of confidence in their English skills, their lack of understanding on Australian college life or it may be their unfamiliarity with the Australian social culture and norms that make conversations difficult for them. By supporting these students early on we enable them to participate in college culture. I have seen many students who, after a few weeks of constant struggle, give up from engaging all together. It is up to all of us to be more inclusive and welcoming.
But institutional change is also needed. ANU should step up in providing training to its student leaders and residential staff to effectively understand the legal, cultural, and socioeconomic barriers overseas students may face. I have seen Senior Residents and other leaders of the community pass judgements about a student’s fashion sense or behaviour which in the context of their home culture is the norm. We cannot expect the one international representative to educate a college on various cultural practices. That is everyone’s responsibility
ANU also needs to be more transparent in its policies for international student integration in residences. Many student leaders and Senior Residents I have spoken to have expressed cynicism about ANU’s uneven allocation of international students into various student accommodations. Likewise, despite international students making up a significant portion of the hall, many of them are left wondering why Senior Resident teams are largely made up of domestic students. We need more transparency around these decisions to have a fruitful and informative debate on overseas student integration into halls.
Finally, we must acknowledge the rising xenophobia around the term ‘international student’. Australian politics and discussions at ANU increasingly use ‘international student’ as a thinly veiled reference to new, rich generation of Chinese students – or as one student leader brazenly said to me, “Chinese spies”. Because of this, we must be careful of how we use language to refer to overseas students. They are people to be respected for their cultural diversity and humanity, not threats to our way of life.
The author served on the Bruce Hall Common Room Committee as Media Officer in 2018.

Kai Clark
The Human Currency of Protests
April 6, 2019 4:50 pm Comments Off on The Human Currency of Protests
I recently attended a policy and advocacy training session conducted by a well-seasoned advocate who’d overseen and helped drive numerous successful campaigns. I came away from it overwhelmed with all the lifelong assumptions I was now forced to question. She imparted many gems of advice, but chief among them was to believe in the spirit of human generosity and benevolence, and to never try to justify the importance of human rights through numbers.
It appears that most human beings do share the same values – while we don’t usually argue against those, we do often get lost in the processes and solutions to enact those values. The same advocate told us that about 75 percent of Australians responded to select extrinsic values such as benevolence and community to be more important to them than intrinsic ones such as power and security. This was met with nothing but sheer disbelief and scepticism by the people who could not help but think of the troubled nature of our current political climate.
However, it really shouldn’t be surprising – least of all to someone who must operate on a nonpartisan but not apolitical approach daily. Struggle, pain and isolation are such fundamental human experiences that no one is a stranger to – even if they can be typically exacerbated in some individuals of specific identities for many reasons, some social.
It is for this reason that we should view the Kinley rally as an effort to help a high school boy, who is beloved by his friends, his teachers and the wider community, to keep his home and lead the best quality of life possible with his family. Every parent has the right to wish for their child to attain the happiness and security that they deserve in a community that accepts them – regardless of ‘financial cost’.
Kinley Wangchuk is not a chess piece in someone’s wider political narrative, but a human being with a very real story and set of experiences and emotions. He is 18, likes playing sport with friends and is an active participant in his classes. He and his parents have lived in Australia for seven years. In these years they’ve become valued members of a community that they not only have contributed to immensely, but helped enhance and uplift. Kinley is now able to hear with the assistance of a hearing aid and has learned Australian Sign Language.
His entire life has been built from his childhood in this community and in this country, and his ability to communicate with ease offers him independence and autonomy. Deportation of Kinley and his family to Bhutan not only strips him of the support networks and friends he’s built over several years, but also the ability to speak for himself or retain autonomy.
Not only is Australian Sign Language not used in the area of Bhutan where they are from, but there are unique stigmas and forms of discrimination that Kinley will undoubtedly face. He will probably also struggle with the isolation and upheaval of his life as he knows it. It is bizarre to decentralise who he is and his story from other narratives.
People with disabilities are not burdens on society. They contribute to their community in significant and meaningful ways when simply given the opportunity and the appropriate assistance to express themselves, their personalities, their passions and their talents. You cannot ignore the specific needs of an individual as if they are negotiable (hint: they’re not!) or switch to adopting a set of blanket assumptions and stereotypes about everyone with a shared identity. All disability is simply at different points on a spectrum of lived experience. The needs or accessibly requirements of everyone is central to their lives experience, but the individuals themselves are as diverse as everything else in this world.
There are undoubtedly thousands of protests and causes that will occur in our lifetimes, and it is easy to spend time lazily debating with constructed theories on how worthwhile or deserving they are of our time and support. However, that bored discussion has real-life consequences, and here it impacts a very real person and his family.
An hour of attendance may simply be just that – an hour of effort or initiative on top of a busy week or a little less time to do other fun things. I can’t say those other things aren’t valid – you, too, are an individual with needs and your own context after all. We may not even remember or pay much attention to the outcome after tomorrow – we certainly won’t live with it for the rest of our lives. But there’s a human being who will. And he is now in a position where he must rely on the support of other people to decide how he gets to live the rest of his life. I hope that makes you feel something, at least a little.

Madhumitha Janagaraja