Responsible Leadership at Trinity

The idea of a community has been celebrated, challenged, and abandoned since the start of the academic year. From gender issues to Trinity’s representation on the University of Toronto Student Union (UTSU) Board of Directors, our social fabric has been stretched. Our political experiment has been tested. This community is tired. Our debate has been divisive, our reactions insensitive, our faith in each other — and in our institutions — shaken.

Whenever we gather, we seek to fulfill a responsibility that we each took on at our respective Matriculation ceremonies: to build a community with responsibility and leadership as its pillars. It is on this foundation that we have risen to the challenges thrust upon us. From collectively defeating a skewed agenda at the UTSU Annual General Meeting (AGM) of 2012 to reshaping Rush in an effort to make it more inclusive, we have shown our dedication to these values. Responsible leadership defines each Trinity student, and in turn, the Trinity experience.

We aspire to responsible leadership, yet we have fallen short. This community, too disillusioned with the challenges of today and our responses to them, is struggling to come together.

Important issues of gender - in particular, the attempt to change identity language in our governing documents to “Members of College” and to strike segregated TCMs from the text have left many feeling disheartened. In light of these setbacks, numerous individuals have expressed the feeling of being “disappointed to be a Trinity student.” The questions raised were, “how could students look their peers in the eye and deny them fundamental recognition of their respective identities?” and “how could we fail to build a community where students of all gender identities feel comfortable?”

Similarly, Trinity’s stance on the UTSU’s proposal to restructure its Board of Directors elicited varied responses, most of which were conflicting. We clashed over whether or not our students are getting the most accurate representation of events. We clashed over whether or not Trinity’s hostile environment is one that demands political involvement. We clashed over whether or not enthusiastically encouraging students to proxy their votes at the AGM is responsible.

Students are disappointed with the College and this community, and this disappointment seems to be fostering indifference. Yet, to adopt an attitude of indifference at a moment where the College is trying to better understand its social policies would be irresponsible. Apathy cripples progress. An apathetic approach to combatting the UTSU’s anti-democratic practices would have left us without university-wide online voting in 2012. An apathetic approach to building a more vibrant and dynamic community would have left us with segregated residences at Trinity and St. Hilda’s. Finally, an apathetic approach to understanding the place of alcohol at Trinity would have left us without a survey and policy that best reflect the needs of this community.

Both in the past and today, apathy has not defined this community. Since the TCM of October 6, 2014, discourse on gender equity has increased. Similarly, in preparation for this year’s UTSU AGM at the end of October, many students took the time to become fully educated on all sides of the contentious issues at hand.

Ultimately, it was the presence of informed Trinity students at this year’s AGM that ensured college representation on the Board of Directors was not lost. Curiosity has been sparked, conversation has flourished, and commitment has been strengthened. These are the hallmarks of responsible leadership.

Responsible leadership entails a recognition of the difficulties that lie before us. It demands a resolution to grapple with the challenges we encounter, and an understanding that from our failures emerge lessons that ameliorate our social and political endeavours. Our shared history reminds us that our hopes for Trinity today, and Trinity tomorrow, are inextricably bound together. At a time where an absence of consensus has driven this community apart, we must be willing to listen, to learn, and to change for the better.

As members of the Trinity community, it is our responsibility to build communities that are safe, inclusive, and representative of all. This is not to say that there will not be disagreement and that there will be no discord. There is a reason why change to our Constitution demands these interactions. The TCM erects barriers to change in order to ensure the stability of our democratic system. Discussion and debate act as safeguards to our democracy; the fact that constitutional amendments require a two-thirds majority to pass is reflective of the criticality of consensus at the TCM. Agreement is difficult to obtain. However, once again, this challenge speaks to the need for student engagement with the issues, and our response is reflective of student’s care for each other.

Reading this, your time at Trinity may have just begun, or it may be arriving at its natural end. Despite these varied experiences, we all collectively struggle because we believe that our actions will define the Trinity experience five years, ten years, and fifty years from now. We continue to struggle over traditions and their place in the midst of an ever-changing and diverse student population. And we’ve responded by trying to make traditions - or traditions as institutional memory defines them - less anachronistic. We continue to struggle over gender and its role in College governance and leadership; and we’ve responded by encouraging education and discourse in different spheres.

Ultimately, our struggles are defined by this community coming together, recognizing errors, and considering solutions. It is our deep care for one another that inspires us to face communal challenges head on.

Our minds and hearts may be weary. Yet we must be full of hope.