EOX Ticket Price: 'Can't I Just Dance?'

ANON
Volume 9, Issue 12

Penned in response to the $10 EOX entry fee

That’s a lie, I don’t want to dance, I just want to drink – I want to drink away the memories of my exams, I want to drink away the struggles and hardships of the semester just gone, I want to drink so I don’t have to think about the semester to come; but how can I when there’s an entry fee to EOX?

EOX has always been a great equaliser of law school, the academically superior are brought down a rung or two or found wasted on a sidewalk with spew trickling down their chin, and the academically challenged can enhance their reputation with some crazy dance moves or two. The beer goggles raise everyone’s attractiveness a few points – enough, possibly, to land even the hottest chicks or guys (whatever takes your fancy) for one special night.

But how can it be when the entry fee means that people like myself, entitled individuals who may or may not be able to afford the entry fee (cause you can’t make the assumption that I could just pick up an extra shift or be more scrupulous with my spending so I can save up the entry fee), won’t be able to go.

In any case, it’s not about the entry fee, it’s about the principle (because it’s always about the principle, not that I just want to whinge). The entry fee reemphasises the dichotomy that exists at law school between the haves and have nots – those that have been brought up with mattresses padded with hundred dollar bills and those that didn’t have two cents to put into the conversation (I exaggerate a bit, but I’m all for making wild accusations).

Now I’m not blaming the LSS (but really I am), they do a great job (they don’t), they do tireless and thankless work (I see them patting themselves on the back all the time) for the law students of this university, however, they have clearly dropped the ball on this one. I don’t want to name names (but I will – Dom and Henry, your elected LSS Activities Directors), should have really done better on this one. There are plenty of other things that they could have done – they could have looked for sponsors (because law firms definitely want to sponsor the drunken behaviour of students); they could have looked at discounted tickets for those that won’t be drinking wine – because why should beer drinkers have to subsidise (again) the privileged alcohol consumers? They could have also just been more creative with their finances (I don’t know what this might be, but I’m sure that they could definitely have done something).

And going back to the title of this piece (cause it ain’t a rant), what about those that just want to dance and don’t want to drink? (cause those people exist, even if I’ve never seen or heard about them) We should definitely make the whole process more cumbersome to accommodate these (non-existent) individuals, because law school should be an inclusive place where people like me get their way.

Signed: Pompous Arse

The rest of this week's *bumper* issue:

• Practitioners and Students Rally Against Further Cuts to Legal Aid Funding
• The Mask
• Stress Less: Embrace Mediocrity
• Where Can Legal Training Take You? Interview with Nicholas Reece
• Jessup: This is a Joke, Right?
• Response to ‘Jessup: This is a Joke, Right?’ 
• When You Can’t Cedar Wood for the Trees
• I’m With Crazy
• The Erasure of Authenticity
• Sushi is Just a Rice Salad Rolled in Seaweed & Other Obvious Things
• Blame Glynn Davis
• The Clerkship Diaries: I’m Not Mad, I’m Just Disappointed
• Equity Uncle on De Minimis’ Unprofessionalism

More articles like this:

• Law Ball Review & MULSS Response
• MULSS Law Ball: The Break Down
• Another Year, Another Shafting: That's Law, Folks!

Source: Bootshaus