The latest flashpoint of tension at Queer McGill (QM) revolves around the dismissal of Brian Keast, the former treasurer of the club, after an equity complaint filed by Libby Bouchard, the club’s Political Action Co-ordinator. The complaint alleged that Keast, an executive of the group, had violated QM’s anti-transphobia mandate. Some of the detailed aspects of the complaint included not being attentive enough to the complaints of transgendered members and not attending a “Trans Allyship” workshop for QM executives because, Keast claimed, he had to study. The SSMU equity commission, in their binding ruling, sided with Bouchard. Keast declined to speak on the record for this piece.  

I visited Queer McGill’s offices to get a closer view of the situation. I spoke to three of the remaining executives; the social co-ordinators, Lindsey Clark and Sasha Choupique, and publicity director Mona Luxion. They all characterized the reality of the situation as being quite different from the Facebook wall. According to Clark, the contentious atmosphere surrounding the dismissal stemmed from incomplete information provided to club members at the time. In addition, she characterized the debate as a “few loud voices” magnifying the issue. 

All three current executives I spoke to agreed that this episode was reflective of broader debates that often occur in the queer community about how to approach transgender issues. Luxion went as far as to note that the types of oppression that exist in the wider world also exist in the queer community as well. In addition, the three of them expressed confidence in both the equity commission and its decision. In response to my inquiry about the (seeming) lack of transphobic intent in Keast’s comments, Luxion argued that while there is room in a “safe space” for misunderstandings, a refusal to acknowledge the hurtfulness of one’s actions is almost as bad as actually trying to be hurtful.

The three executives also spoke with one voice when I inquired whether QM will move past the situation. Luxion noted that worse disputes have occurred since the club was founded in the 1970s, but the current situation was far more transparent thanks to the Internet. 

The other, longer-term debate surrounding QM has been about the scope of its mission. Is it to be a “support service [for] queer students and their allies,” or is it to take a broader role in on campus politics? Several weeks earlier, another rancorous debate was triggered on the QM page by Bouchard’s posting of a pride flag draped over the sign of the James Administrative Building, in support the sixth floor occupation earlier this year. To get an external perspective on this aspect of the story, I talked to Aliénor Lemieux-Cumberlege, who formerly served as QM’s First Year Representative and Volunteer and Discussion Groups co-ordinator. She resigned from the latter position at the end of last term, citing stresses associated with being on the club’s executive body. On the subject of politics at Queer McGill, she noted that both “are strongly linked at the moment, perhaps to the detriment of the service mandate.” While, in her view, politics are not “irreconcilable” with the service mandate, she expressed worry that queer students would feel that they are not political enough to get involved with QM. 

Luxion, meanwhile, struck a somewhat different tone, arguing that those who become executives on QM tend to be politically and socially involved on campus. The tension between what executives do in their official role and what they do individually, Luxion said, was healthy because it opened discussion on what sorts of things the organization wants to be involved with on campus.  

Queer McGill will almost certainly survive Keast’s dismissal. Lemieux-Cumberlege, Luxion, Clark, and Choupique all agreed to as much when asked. As to whether the club can minimize the impact of such incidents in the future is an open question. 

A previously published version of this article mistakenly claims that a complaint filed against Brian Keast, former Treasurer of Queer McGill, alleged that he had scheduled a club event on the same day as a vigil commemorating transgendered people. The complaint actually alleged that Keast opposed rescheduling a planned event to make way for the vigil. The Tribune regrets this error.