SOCIAL DISASTER

Andrew Carroll

 

n April 4, the Les-
bian, Gay and
Bisexual Collective
(LGBC) held a social
at the David Lam Campus in
Coquitlam. The collective had
been planning it since February.
Posters had béen put up on all
campuses, a DJ was hired (DJ
Mick Shea) and decorations
purchased. It was expected to be
well-attended since LGBC socials
at Douglas had always been the
best attended of all the student
society socials. In addition, the
last social at David Lam was well-
attended as well (in some opin-
ions a little too well-attended).
There was no reason to believe
that the social would be a failure.
But it was. The total turnout for the
dance was twelve students and no
guests. What went wrong? This is a
question the Douglas College Student
Society, as well as the members of the
LGBC, have been asking. How could a
well planned event be so disastrous?
There are many possible explanations.
One explanation is that, generally,
the students of Douglas do not turn out
to socials in high numbers. Apathy, of
course, is the first thing to be blamed
and the Other Press has done its fair
share of discussing student apathy.
The sort of apathy that applies here is
really the saddest going. The student
society socials are completely free and
open to all students of Douglas
College. The music is always good
and the drinks are inexpensive com-
pared to prices in bars. Many straight
students may have been scared off

 

because most of the posters specifi-
cally mentioned the social was a
“Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Collective”
event. The role of the collective is
inclusive rather than exclusive: the
LGBC wants to include straight
students in the collective.

Another problem with the Post Cards
from Paris social was that the Douglas
College social rules were changed
after the last social at David Lam.
They now stipulate that students may
only have one guest rather than three.
This stricter guideline meant that the
LGBC could not invite any other
university/college lesbian, gay and
bisexual groups to attend.

Other members of the LGBC blamed
ineffective advertising of this social to
the college community. Even some
members of the LGBC did not hear
about the social until the day of the
dance.

The Post
Cards: from
Paris
Social
qualifies
as . a
Miserable
Patiluarme.. :; puck
whose fault
es. ae

The problem of timing was also
blamed. The date of the dance
was Close to the end of the
semester, when most students
were either finishing term papers
or preparing for exams. Others
blamed not having an attraction,
such as drag queens. Some said
it came down to location.
Coquitlam is a difficult place to get
to by public transportation, while
New Westminster is better
because it is on the SkyTrain
route.

Besides the attendance problem
there was also a problem with
administration, who insisted on the
cafeteria lights being on because of
safety concerns. Many people at the
dance thought this was because the
administration is homophobic, since at
prior socials having the cafeteria lights
off (for the dance lights) posed no
concern at all.

Fifteen hundred dollars were spent
on the dance (some of the cost of the
alcohol was recovered though).
Student society president, Jaimie
McEvoy, mused that it may have been
better to send those who showed up to
Mexico for a vacation. | agree. As a
member of the LGBC and an active
student on campus, | think we have to
find a way to wake up DC students and
effectively plan our socials so that all
members of the LGBC can attend,
bring guests and encourage other
students to come as well. @

Opinion 5h