Latest News

Features

Beyond semantics: The colourful stories of Milton-Parc

by Robin Nyamekye on

More in Features:

“In recent years, […] there is now a relationship between McGill and the neighbourhood, because at first, McGill would say, ‘If it’s beyond our [gates], we don’t want to hear about it.’ But now, at Frosh, there is an introduction about our neighbourhood,” said Andrée Deveault, who has been a Milton-Parc resident since the 1970s, having graduated from McGill in 1978.

Regardless of whether they live there or not, most McGill students are familiar with the ‘place beyond the gates.’ Situated directly east of McGill’s downtown campus, the Milton-Parc neighbourhood—often referred to as the “McGill Ghetto” by students—is a residential area located within the borough of Plateau-Mont-Royal, with borders defined north to south by Boulevard St-Laurent and Rue University, and east to west by Rue Sherbrooke and Avenue des Pins. With a population of around 11,150 residents, Milton-Parc is one of the most densely populated neighbourhoods in the city of Montreal. Statistics provided by Mcgill indicate that approximately 2,500 students live either in the Milton-Parc neighbourhood or close by.

(Noah Sutton/ The McGill Tribune)

Although exact statistics on the number of students living in the area are difficult to ascertain, the available data indicates that permanent residents comprise the majority of the population in Milton-Parc, numbering around 7,650, making McGill students the minority. Why is it, then, that most people refer to the area as the “McGill Ghetto”?

While the colloquial term has been used by students and outsiders to describe the area for decades, its exact origin is unknown. Non-student residents of the area are aware of this misnomer. According to Adrian King-Edwards, founder of the Word Bookstore located on Milton, who has lived in Milton-Parc since 1972 after graduating from McGill in 1971, the term has been used for a long time.

“It was always there, as far as I know, […] as far as I go back,” he said.

(Hannah Taylor / The McGill Tribune)

Deveault remembers the term being used when she was a McGill student back in the ‘70s. She explained that even today, it seems that more people are familiar with the misnomer than the actual name for the neighbourhood.

“When I was a student in the ‘70s, it was already a term” she said. “Actually, to call it Milton-Parc is fairly recent. Many people don’t know what you’re talking about, so then I give them the little blurb, ‘You know, some people call it the McGill Ghetto,’ and then they go, ‘Oh, right, I know what you mean.’ But it should be called Milton-Parc.”

The correct title “Milton-Parc” conveys a much deeper meaning than “McGill Ghetto,” a myopic moniker for a place where McGill students reside. To call the area the Milton-Parc neighbourhood also represents an understanding that its residents live in a distinct community, where they interact with many other people from all different walks of life. In essence, the correct term reflects the dynamic living experience offered by the area, which should be respected and explored.

The term “McGill Ghetto,” though seemingly harmless, is inaccurate and even objectionable for various reasons. Aside from a few student residences, such as Royal Victoria College and New Residence Hall, McGill holds no form of ownership over the neighbourhood.

(Noah Sutton/ The McGill Tribune)

Furthermore, to refer to the area as a “ghetto” connotes characterizations of poverty or socio-ethnic homogeneity—neither of which accurately apply to this geographic area. King-Edwards claims that the use of the word could be considered demeaning for this reason.

“[The term] carries a derogatory ring to it [….],” he said. “It is sort of ironic in a sense [because] the students that used to live here were not affluent, but to talk about the student ghetto now when it's full of affluent students is really not accurate.”

To Hélène Brisson, a long time permanent resident who was born on Avenue des Pins and now serves as the vice-president of the Milton Parc Citizen’s Committee (MPCC)—a membership-based organization that seeks to advocate for citizen rights on issues such as housing, neighbourhood ecology, and economic development for local enterprises—the term is more than just incorrect. She sees it as a misrepresentation of an active and dynamic neighbourhood.

“Yes, of course there is a strong McGill presence, but clearly it gives a false impression,” she said. “The area, Milton-Parc, is not just the stopping point for a transient student population or other transient populations, it’s a vibrant and thriving Montreal neighbourhood.”

The permanent residents are a diverse group: Some have been homeowners for generations, others are members of housing cooperatives, and some are long-term tenants. Most have unique stories that demonstrate their longstanding connection to the community, making one think twice about using the term “McGill Ghetto” to describe the historically rich and unique area.

King-Edwards recollected his own connection to the community. Over the years, he has moved through three different residences in the borough, while running The Word, which has become a vital part of the community, for 41 years.

“My first place was on Lorne. I had a basement, basically [a] closet, for eight dollars a week, and then I lived on Hutchison,” he said. “I’ve lived on Milton, and now I’m on Aylmer. The neighbourhood has changed a lot. It used to be much poorer because it used to be rooming houses, and the situation where I had a room for eight dollars a week was not unusual, since most places were rooms for elderly people and students.”

Similarly, Deveault was a McGill student in the ‘70s before she became a long-time co-op resident—a living arrangement that provides not-for-profit housing for their members. She describes the sense of camaraderie and stability that comes from living in the co-ops. Milton-Parc is the home of the largest cooperative housing project in Canada, La communauté milton-parc.

“Being a member of a co-op, I find, it’s like a little village,” she said. “When I go do my groceries, I always see someone that I know enough to say hello or at least nod.”

Another permanent resident of over 38 years, who asked to remain anonymous, discussed the role the cooperative housing program played in formulating the borough’s permanent resident demographic. She works on projects to preserve the old buildings in the area. Those who have wandered the neighbourhood will notice how its building’s architecture stand out compared to the neighbouring downtown area. Buildings are typically no higher than four stories, with the occasional high-rise apartment building wedged between Montreal walk-ups. According to her, one of the main objectives of the preservation project was to encourage long-term residency in the area.

“We wanted families, and people who were going to /live here/ and not just be landlords,” she said. “A lot of these homes are actually quite big and so families can live here. We formed a big housing co-op, we have 20 different groups in this area now.”

King-Edwards emphasized the fact that there are many families in the area that make up the population. He recollected his own experience of starting a family in the community.

“While a lot of [residents] are students, there’s this assumption of ownership and students need to realize that they are sharing in a community, and it doesn’t look like it because it’s downtown, but there are more people than you think, that live here as families—as I did with my kids,” he said. “I brought up my family here on Aylmer, and the people who live across the street from me are [the] second-generation from the same house. The people next door to us have been here for years and years.”

(Christopher Li/ The McGill Tribune)

Therefore, it is crucial for members of the McGill community to remember that there are some people in the neighbourhood that are seeking a relatively calm, stable lifestyle. Unfortunately, some non-student residents articulate that the term “McGill Ghetto” provides a false sense of entitlement to McGill students who live in the area. In a way, the title makes the students think they have a free pass to disregard the concerns and needs of neighbours who are not students, and, thus, follow disruptive schedules and take up unruly activities for their amusement, such as late-night partying. Deveault spoke about how some students even interpret the term “McGill Ghetto” as a justification for vandalism.

“If the students use [the term “McGill Ghetto”], some students then by a leap of imagination, think that they own the place and that can lead to behaviour that’s [disruptive….],” she said. “Sometimes they will go wild and think, ‘This is our place’ and its called a “McGill Ghetto” and we are within our right to treat it as we wish.’ No, just a minute, […] you live here but there are other residents, and we have to live decently together. I don’t mind students singing during Frosh week, but vandalism no, and peeing on my fence, no.”

Another resident of the area suggests that instead of the “McGill Ghetto,” people should refer to the area as a community.

“The name itself should not allow people to think, ‘Oh, because it’s a student ghetto, I can be as wild as I want to be,’” she said. “Rules of neighbourliness and respect of others should always be, even if you call it a ghetto, but anyway we could like it to be called a community because all of these elements of respect for neighbours, and sharing of space are implied in the term.”

King-Edwards provides an alternative narrative, suggesting that this respect for the diversity of the community runs in both directions. He believes that living among students, and the vigorous rowdiness that comes with it, is part of the experience and even a perk of living in Milton-Parc.

“There is another side of it too, in that people will often move into this area and then start complaining viciously about the students, which is also really wrong,” he said. “There are a lot of students here, and if you’re going to move into this area, you have to recognize that. If you want a quiet suburban life, you shouldn’t be living here. I’ve seen that happen quite often, where people will move in and really dislike the noise and the flurry in September [….] We find that in the summertime, before the students come back, there is a real nice quiet flow to everything and then students come back, and it's fantastic! There is all this energy, and it’s exciting, and everybody’s happy and I really enjoy that.”

In recognizing and respecting these different lifestyles within the community, there is an opportunity to build a healthy relationship between McGill students and permanent residents of the area. In recent years, primarily due to the work of Brisson and the MPCC, communication has been established between permanent residents and various representatives of the university. Further, McGill has recently developed formal relations with the community, with the establishment of the Community Action and Relations Endeavor (C.A.R.E.) in 2010. The C.A.R.E. agreement is a strategic community relations framework developed by former SSMU VP External Sebastian Ronderos-Morgan and Brisson, with the aim to promote harmonious relations among the permanent residents of Milton-Parc, McGill students living in and around the area, and the McGill administration.

(Christopher Li/ The McGill Tribune)

Even before C.A.R.E was established, on July 7, 2008, a public meeting organized by former dean of students Jane Everett, brought various representatives from McGill and long-time residents of the neighbourhood together to discuss ways to improve community relations. At this meeting, a consensus was founded: The parties agreed to use the correct term for the area, the”Milton-Parc neighbourhood” rather than “McGill Ghetto.” This decision was meant to signify not only a change in terminology, but a shift in perception to acknowledge the area as a distinct and separate neighbourhood, independent of the university.

Since then, community relations have improved considerably. For instance, Brisson talked about the increased coordination and communication between organizers and residents during large events, such as Frosh and St. Patrick’s day.

“Certainly Frosh was a big issue for everyone and over the years, it took time and a lot of discussion, and, in the end, we have managed to change it […] everybody [including students, the administration, the residents, the police, and merchants] has a stake in the neighbourhood and that’s how it should be,” she said.

Beyond using the correct terminology to refer to their neighbourhood, students should realize that wherever they go, they must respect the area that they’re in. It's important for them to learn to live with others: Once they move out of this neighbourhood and go on to become permanent residents of another area, such skills in neighbourly etiquette will be essential. Moreover, the opportunity to build a deep connection and understanding with their community is a valuable experience, and one that benefits all residents of the area, not exclusively students or permanent residents.

Deveault expressed her pleasure towards being able to interact with students in her neighbourhood.

“These days with the snowstorms, I go on the sidewalk with my shovel and a dollar sign and I find students to come and shovel for me,” Deveault said. “It’s really really nice, because it's hard for me to shovel [….] I like to have the students here, it's nice to have young people around and have a relationship.”

Commentary, Opinion

Clarifying the McGill context at Carnival and future events

by Christopher Buddle on

More in Commentary:

What is the “McGill context?” When do student activities count as a McGill event? Are events hosted off-campus still considered a McGill context? What about Frosh, or a house party in Milton-Parc?

These are difficult, but nonetheless important, questions because some of McGill’s policies only apply to a McGill context. For example, a student may allege that another student assaulted them, but if this didn’t happen on campus or at an official McGill event, follow-through with our formal disciplinary process might not be possible. Recent events at Queen’s and elsewhere show that we aren’t alone in wrestling with this issue. As Dean of Students, I want to clarify some of these definitions and make certain that we can use our disciplinary processes should a student violate the Code of Conduct, with the broader goal of ensuring the safety and wellbeing of all students.

Faculty student societies at McGill are separate legal entities from the university, and any events they plan off-campus—including most Frosh activities—are not legally defined as a McGill context. If things go wrong during these events, it’s the respective student society’s responsibility to deal with it. Most students don’t know that events planned by student societies aren’t under the umbrella of McGill, and don’t realize that McGill’s Code of Conduct—one way to ensure the safety and wellbeing of students—may not apply. Yet student societies and McGill have the shared goal of ensuring all events are not only fun, but also safe for every student. We need to work together to achieve this.

A pilot project that the McGill administration did in collaboration with Winter Carnival this year—a week-long event held in January of each year, organized by the Management Undergraduate Society (MUS) of McGill— allowed us to make important progress toward clarifying the McGill context. Historically, Winter Carnival has had a mixed reputation. However, this year’s MUS Vice President Events Ramzi Cotran wanted to change the culture to make student safety a priority, alongside Carnival’s other goals of raising money for cancer research, and being a fun event. He worked with Associate Dean Liette Lapointe from the Desautels Faculty of Management, and together with the MUS executive team, they approached me to discuss how we could work together to revisit the question of the McGill context with Carnival.

 

 

Student societies and McGill have the shared goal of ensuring all events are not only fun, but also safe for every student.

In December of 2016, I, as a representative of McGill, signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the MUS executives. The MoU, approved by the Dean of the Desautels Faculty Management Isabelle Bajeux and the upper leadership at McGill, included several agreements, but fundamentally meant that the Code of Student Conduct would apply to Carnival events. Per the MoU, myself and the MUS admin and executives would work together on preparing communication and educational materials around consent education. We would discuss in detail all Carnival events with security services so that all of us were satisfied with safety measures and security. If incidents occurred, there would be a clear reporting structure, involvement of Disciplinary Officers and follow-through with disciplinary procedures. Finally, there would be a full debrief after Carnival to assess the success of the project.

Our efforts paid off—The 2017 Carnival was a success, and there was a very positive culture shift. Other than a few minor injuries and some logistical challenges, there were no major reported incidents. I offer my congratulations to Ramzi Cotran, MUS President Rachel Burk and the rest of the executive team, Associate Dean Lapointe, Dean Bajeux, Deputy Provost (Student Life and Learning) Ollivier Dyens, and others for taking this step.

This is important progress towards a renewed and ongoing productive relationship with all Faculty student societies, especially as we look ahead to the 2017 Frosh. McGill and student societies can work together on educational materials and training, discuss venue security with our security services team, and put in place appropriate safeguards—using the Code of Conduct. This collaborative approach benefits the entire McGill community, and will provide all students with safe, respectful and engaging events that are even better than they are today.

 

 

 

 

 

Christopher Buddle is the McGill Dean of Students.

 

@McGillTribOp | [email protected]

 

 

 
McGill, News

Kevin O’Leary speaks at McGill

by Calvin Trottier-Chi on

More in McGill:

Candidate for leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada Kevin O’Leary came to McGill University on Feb. 13. He elaborated on his platform for jobs and social inclusivity in an exclusive interview with The McGill Tribune, as well as in a speech at the Shatner Building.  

Of foremost importance to O’Leary is the economy. He was particularly critical of Canada’s gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate, which has fallen below three per cent, and felt that Canada has the capacity to improve.

“We have to start thinking about making this country competitive with the rest of the world because Canada is the richest country on earth in terms of resources, and water, and minerals, and timber, and energy,” O’Leary said. “In order to maintain the contract that we have as Canadians with each other, including funding the arts and all the social programs [which] support the poor and immigrants that need to get started here, we either grow at three per cent or you are going to be living in a deficit for 38 years.”

O’Leary argued that Canada must open itself to international investment to enjoy economic benefits. Given Donald Trump’s intentions to cut carbon taxes, O’Leary was dismayed that Prime Minister Trudeau has not followed suit to keep Canada competitive.

“If you compare capital flowing around the world, where does it want to rest itself to invest? If your taxes are too high, if your regulatory environment is too punitive, if you have carbon tax when none of your competitors do, capital tends to follow the path of least resistance and goes to other countries, which is what’s happening now. That’s the problem, and we need to get ourselves in synch,” O’Leary said.

Specifically, O’Leary hopes to attract industries from Asia to Canada and to create jobs by developing fracking in Nova Scotia.

O’Leary also emphasized engaging with youth voters, hoping to provide them with prosperous financial futures.      

“My job as Prime Minister is to provide you an environment where you can choose your path and have a high probability of success,” O’Leary said. “[Youth] unemployment rate’s more like 15 per cent, it’s really failed because there’s no growth. These people need jobs.”

After O’Leary’s speech, in which he reiterated the importance of the economy and millennial voters, McGill students in attendance asked for his opinion on a series of topics, including health care, housing, O’Leary’s personal investments, the environment, inclusivity, and comparisons to Trump. O’Leary also spoke about his childhood living around the world while his mother worked for the International Labor Organization.

“There’re two elements of our educational system that are missing: Tolerance for cultures and religion, and also financial literacy,” O’Leary said. “What someone wears, how they want to live their lives, we should accommodate all of that in this country, and I learned that as a child in Cambodia. What headdress was worn in the street did not define who a person was, it was their style, their culture. We have to accommodate that. That ends up being a competitive weapon for this country.”

Another clarification that students sought was distinguishment of O’Leary from Trump. O’Leary referenced the fact that his family immigrated to Canada before he was born.

“If we built a wall around Canada, I wouldn’t exist,” O’Leary said. “I wouldn’t be here. So, I do not agree on many of [Trump’s] policies, he’s dealing with other problems in the U.S. that we don’t have here in Canada. We’re going to have a very inclusive economy, a very inclusive country, I don’t care what your race or religion is, you can come here as I did.”

The event was organized by the Conservative Association of McGill, with the President Adam Wilson, U3 Arts, pleased with the turnout of approximately 300 people. Wilson spoke of O’Leary’s inclusive social direction  being an appealing draw for young voters.

“I think the fact that he cuts through all the social things that people don’t like the conservatives for [will] attract young people,” Wilson said. “I think that some people don’t like conservative fiscal policy, but a lot of people [who do] won’t vote for the conservatives because there are people in the conservative party who are anti-LGBT or anti-choice.”

Arts & Entertainment, Theatre

Kitsch, tongue-twisters, and true love: McGill’s Savoy Society presents ‘The Pirates of Penzance’

by Niklas Kaemmerer on

More in Arts & Entertainment:

It shames me to admit that before The McGill Savoy Society’s presentation of The Pirates of Penzance, I had never seen a Gilbert & Sullivan operetta. Although I was familiar with the general tone and the plot of the operetta, I entered Moyse Hall with an open mind. Upon reading that the Savoy Society director, Roger Andrews, had directed this specific operetta four times—yes, four separate times—I knew I’d be in good hands.

The two-act operetta follows Frederic (Sebastian Comtois), a pirate’s apprentice finally free of his servitude after 21 years of loyal labour. Mistakenly conscripted to the Pirate King’s (Aaron Meredith) boisterous gang at the fragile age of eight, Frederic struggles with choosing between his intense sense of duty towards his adopted family and his love for the Major-General’s (Scott Cope) beautiful daughter, Mabel (Sevan Kochkarian). The resulting conflict between both groups involves exactly the campy sort of tomfoolery one would expect from a Gilbert & Sullivan classic: A chorus of cowardly policemen, a surprisingly haunting interpretive ballet performance from a grown man in a nightgown, and an unfortunate technicality involving leap years.

The operetta truly shone when it embraces its joyful camp and exuberant silliness. From the first act’s introduction of the daughters to the Major-General’s ballet performance, almost every scene was delivered with a wink and a chuckle, reminding the audience that they were in on the joke. 

Perhaps because of the immensely difficult vocal work necessary for the operetta, the Pirates cast shone across the board. In the lead role, Comtois embraced his character’s naïveté and masterfully guided the audience through the plot, providing a stable anchor in a sea of ridiculous characters. It’s clear, however, that Kochkarian’s Mabel was set to be the star of the show; her vocal prowess was repeatedly on display, and she drew the largest applause from the audience over the course of the night. Kochkarian expertly wove her way around the vocal acrobatics integral to the role of Mabel and effortlessly imbued nerve and confidence into the take-charge character. 

The scene-stealers of the show, however, were not the leading couple, but the trio of larger-than-life supporting characters. Cope’s portrayal of the Major-General proved that he was born for the role, perfectly encompassing the man’s influential yet fundamentally silly persona. Cope embraced Gilbert’s tongue-twisting wordplay and delivers every syllable of the infamous “Modern Major General” song with the confidence and skill of a top-tier performer. 

Meredith’s Pirate King bridged the gap between the unnamed pirate gang and the audience, demonstrating that physical comedy is an exceptional talent when done right. Olivia Barnes’ Ruth was also a sight to behold: From the first scene to the last, the audience’s biggest chuckles erupted directly because of Barnes’ knack for lively characterization and outrageous comedy. Even as the scene shifted from her character, my eyes followed her for her outrageous reactions alone. 

Despite the overall strengths of the show, it was not without its weaknesses: The show dragged on occasionally, especially during the slower songs; the choreography shones during group numbers, but was uninspired in duets. The chorus, although wonderful during the first act, clearly felt the fatigue set in as the choreography became unsynchronized, namely during the police line. 

Overall, the show was a thoroughly enjoyable experience as long as one embraced the inherent campiness. From the oddly good-hearted pirates, to the exuberant chorus of sisters, and the cowardly band of policemen, the show was filled to the brim with charisma and quirk. The Savoy Society put on a madly entertaining show definitely worth the trip to Moyse Hall.

Science & Technology

McGill graduate spearheads PornHub’s new sex ed initiative

by Andy Wang on

More in Science & Technology:

Pornhub, the largest online provider of pornography, launched a new initiative website on Feb. 1. Called the Sexual Wellness Center, it is the first sexual education website undertaken by a pornographic website.

“At the Pornhub Sexual Wellness Center, we are fully dedicated to your health and education, and to create a place where information pertaining to the physical, psychological, and even the most intimate aspects of sex is available to all,” Dr. Laurie Betito, 1988 McGill University graduate in psychology and Montreal-based clinical psychologist, explained.

Betito is the creator of Pornhub’s new initiative and the author of the majority of its content. The Sexual Wellness Center also brings in experts to contribute articles about reproductive health, anatomy, and sexually-transmitted infections, including Dr. Zhana Vranglova, an associate professor of psychology at New York University.

Pornhub had an estimated 21.2 billion visits in 2015, which, according to Betito, is an enormous population who the Sexual Wellness Center would be able to reach.

“Pornography, is […] all just fantasy,” Betito said. “But, unfortunately, it is sometimes the only sort of sexual education people receive and if it’s possible that this website could potentially reach millions of people, it would be a step in the right direction.”

The Sexual Wellness Center also encourages visitors to send in questions regarding any aspect of sex. Betito’s latest responses answer questions regarding the female orgasm and male virginity.

“In just a few weeks, we have received hundreds of questions, telling us that the site has already gained some traction,” Betito said.

According to statistics published by the Guttmacher Institute, a U.S. sexual and reproductive health think tank, 76 per cent of public and private U.S. schools taught abstinence as the best method of avoiding pregnancy. Furthermore, 88 per cent of all U.S. schools allowed parents to remove their children from sexual education classes. Instead, the extensive accessibility of pornography influences children’s and young adults’ views on sex, in particular with respect to its physical aspects.

Not everyone agrees that Pornhub’s sex education initiative is decidedly beneficial. Quartz had a more skeptical outlook on the website.

“The ironies of Pornhub’s endeavor, of course, are clear,” Leah Fessler wrote in Quartz. “If any industry has negatively impacted young people’s understanding of healthy sexual behavior, it’s mainstream porn. And if any company epitomizes mainstream porn, it’s Pornhub. [Pornhub’s Sexual Wellness Center’s] site collectively feels like a wash of disconnected, elementary, and at times, even inaccurate information which, without proper context, serves limited educative power.”

It is too early to determine the efficacy of the Sexual Wellness Center as the site only launched a few weeks ago. However, according to Betito, Pornhub releases an annual report on the viewership of its content and this new initiative is very likely to also be included in the statistics.

There are still some technical issues to address as the Sexual Wellness Center is set in motion. From Pornhub’s main site, it is currently impossible to navigate to the Sexual Wellness Center. Betito responded that she is working on resolving the issue and increasing the visibility of the site.

“Pornhub has told me they are working on it,” Betito explained. “We just got started a couple of weeks ago. They will also post some banners to advertise in between the videos.”

Betito also responded to accusations that Pornhub is pursuing sex ed just to get more clicks.

“I want to make it clear that this is not some sort of publicity stunt by Pornhub to attract more people to their site,” Betito said. “They already have enough traffic as it is.”

Aesthetically, the Sexual Wellness Center has distinguished itself from its mainstream partner. The website’s pale blue background is in stark contrast to the black and orange theme featuring Pornhub’s more explicit materials.

With Pornhub’s bold new initiative, other pornographic websites may follow suit. Just this month, the adult website xHamster protested Utah’s refusal to adopt a comprehensive sexual education program by redirecting traffic from the state to websites hosting sexual education videos. Utah currently provides abstinence education only.

Creative, Podcasts

The McGill Tribune Podcast: Weighing in on women’s birth control

by Jeannie Richardson on

More in Creative:

The McGill Tribune Podcast is the Trib’s home for long-form narrative podcasts. In this episode, student living contributor, Jeannie Richardson, questions the benefits of hormonal birth control and the difficulties women face in choosing the “right one.”

[soundcloud url=”https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/308574730″ params=”color=ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false” width=”100%” height=”166″ iframe=”true” /]

 

This episode was produced by Jeannie Richardson, Noah Sutton, Audrey Carleton and April Barrett. 
Sound recording and editing by Noah Sutton.

Special thanks to Dr. Steben, Teresa Norris and our panel guests, Romane, Holly, Selin, Mia, and Kinga.


Music provided by Richie Dagger’s Crime and Joy Scouts.
Cover illustration by Cordelia Cho.

If you’re interested in producing your own podcast, learning more about podcasting or providing your own music for future episodes drop us a line at [email protected].

Arts & Entertainment, Music

From the viewpoint: Arkells, Morning Report Tour

by Natalia Malinowski on

More in Arts & Entertainment:

After scoring Metropolis, one of the most renowned musical venues in Montreal, Arkells definitely put on a show. Their Saturday Feb. 18 set was perplexing: A stark contrast between raw Canadian-born talent adored for their lyrics and zest, and choreographed dance moves that were the epitome of cringe-worthy. Witnessing this duality in the performance was like riding an emotional rollercoaster through the hour and a half set list. 

Originally from Hamilton Ontario, the five members of Arkells caught their big break in 2011 with the release of their most acclaimed album, Michigan Left. They’ve made their way to the top of Canadian alternative rock music, winning four Junos and a gold record. Their music is known for pop hooks with rock n’ roll roots—making their songs almost immediate classics. 

On Saturday night, Arkells certainly performed—in every sense of the word. Starting with “A Little Rain (A Song for Pete),” Max Kerman’s impeccable vocals set the bar high for the crowd. Then came the choreographed dance moves—the five band members moved up and down the stage in horrific unison, giving me flashbacks to my sixth grade talent show. It appeared as though the band was afraid that their music wouldn’t be enough, and were making an obvious effort to keep the crowd entertained. 

Soon after, they switched their attention back to the music. Their well-known song, “Passenger’s Seat,” sent vibrations that reset their momentum and had the audience swaying left to right, completely lost in the song. Smashing “11:11” out of the park, the great acoustics provided by the venue allowed the music to resonate throughout the crowd.  However, they fell back on clearly rehearsed jokes, a proposal on stage, and even a small karaoke stint by the opener Frank Turner. Arkells undoubtedly have chemistry, yet their delivery felt somewhat forced.

As the end of the concert neared, my faith in the concert was restored. The entire crowd was grinning and dancing, reciting the well-known words to tunes like “Whistleblower” and “Leather Jacket.” Everyone was feeding off each other’s energy and excitement, reflecting the liveliness of the band. 

Leaving the concert left me confused as to where the band is headed. Perhaps they are looking to become the kind of big act that sells out the Bell Centre, putting on shows with back-up dancers and confetti falling from the ceiling. Or, maybe, they are they still in an awkward, intermediate stage between being “big” enough to play at the Metropolis in Montreal and fearing that the large crowd will not enjoy themselves. 

Arkells needs to realize that their musical talent is strong enough to entertain crowds. They have such a active Canadian community of music lovers supporting them; Metropolis was filled with people there to listen and connect with the music, not to see high leg kicks and tacky dance moves. Here’s to hoping that Arkells drop the act and focus on their music.   

Science & Technology

Systemic racial discrimination of indigenous children in Canadian public policy

by Kate Lord on

More in Science & Technology:

“What if 165,000 children were told by a government that they were going to get less education, less health, less child welfare, and less [access to] clean water […] because of their race?” Dr. Cindy Blackstock, of the Gitksan First Nation, asked in her keynote address at the third annual McGill Nurses for Global Health Conference on Indigenous Health on Feb. 10. “How many of you would be out marching in the streets against […] racial discrimination against children? It’s happening right now by the Canadian government. It has been going on since confederation, and […] we have been trained our entire lives to look away.”

Blackstock, a social worker with 25 years of experience in child protection and indigenous children’s rights, has spent her career fighting for culturally-based equity for the indigenous peoples of Canada and holding the government accountable for racial discrimination. She joined McGill as a professor in the School of Social Work in August 2016. She advocated for a call to action among academics and the general public in the audience.

“I believed if we documented the inequalities, if we documented the harms to kids, that we could work with the government to create evidence-based and economically-tested solutions, and the government of Canada would do the right thing,” Blackstock said. “We did that in 2000 [when] we found the shortfall in social welfare to be 78 cents on the dollar. So if you’re a First Nations child, even if you have higher needs because of the residential schools, you’re getting less funding to stay safely in your families [….] We provided 17 recommendations for reform and Canada acted on none of them.”

With little apparent action from the federal government despite numerous reports since the early 2000s, the Assembly of First Nations and the Family Caring Society, for which Blackstock serves as the Executive Director, filed a human rights case against the Canadian government in 2007.

“We alleged that Canada’s refusal to provide equitable child welfare care and its refusal to ensure that First Nations children can access public services on the same grounds that other children can, amounts to racial discrimination,” Blackstock said.

Over the next eight years, the Canadian government tried to get the case dismissed on legal technicalities, Blackstock explained. Finally, the case went to trial in front of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal in 2013.

“The tribunal [issued] a decision in January of last year, finding Canada is racially discriminating against 165,000 children and ordered it to stop immediately [.…] And what did the Canadian government do? Not very much,” Blackstock said. “It has been since subject to two failure to comply orders by the tribunal and there is another set of hearings on failing to comply in March.”

In just one example of the inequities faced by indigenous peoples in the health care system, Blackstock described that Ontario pays for mental health services for at-risk children. However, this funding is not provided to indigenous children, meaning the children most at-risk are denied this service.

“So when the tribunal’s ruling came down in January, [the Canadian government officials] were to immediately provide that service if they complied with the order,” Blackstock said. “But, they didn’t.”

Despite her evident frustration with the Canadian government’s continual lack of meaningful action towards such a devastating issue, Blackstock expressed her optimism for the future.

“My biggest hope is with the country’s children,” Blackstock said. “In the tribunal, […] the first group to come was actually a group of high school students [.…] They stayed the whole two days, and then they come back to the next set of hearings with other friends [.…] By 2012, there are so many kids coming to the case that we had to book them in shifts. So, please join me in giving this country the best 150th birthday present we can give it: A generation of First Nations, Métis, and Inuit children who never have to recover from their childhoods. And a generation of non-Aboriginal kids who never have to say they’re sorry.”

Private, Student Life

The finstagram phenomenon: A peek into the private

by Grace Bahler on

More in Private:

Commonly referred to as ‘finstagram,’ or ‘finsta,’ the ‘Fake Instagram’ phenomenon is on the rise. A rather curious oxymoron, the trend is taking over the popular and ever-evolving Instagram app.   

Over the past decade, the world has witnessed a digital boom, revolutionizing how—and what—people share. Within seconds, social media users can broadcast their new job promotion or upcoming travel plans to  hundreds of followers and ‘friends.’ Social media has given individuals control over how others perceive their lives. 

Users tend to post about their high moments and none of their lows, effusing an image of perfection. This tendency to share only the happiest moments of one’s life manifests itself more so on Instagram—currently the top photo-sharing application—than on other platforms, such as Facebook or Twitter. Of the millions of user accounts, most contain photos of friends, family, smiling people, and happy memories—a testament to the constant projection of perfection. 

According to Urban Dictionary, finstagram stands for “a mixture of fake & Instagram.” In practice, the way some McGill students use their extra—and extra-goofy—accounts conveys a sense of realness and humanness that their official profiles do not. 

Hana Geadah, U1 Arts & Science, is among the many students who have a finstagram—except unlike most others, she has two. Her “mainstream” finsta, as she calls it, is the classic personal account filled with photos she deems to be as too intimate or too ugly for her official Instagram page. But her second account takes an altered, offbeat approach—it is dedicated to her hookups. 

Geadah made her hookup finsta in May 2016, inspired by a friend of a friend. Only close friends who she approves can follow this private account. She has her own protocol for posting on this account, too. A photo and short bio accompany every hookup, briefly describing the individual and the encounter. And if she happens to come into contact with that person again, Geadah turns to Instagram’s story feature to keep her followers informed with a photo of the person, as well as a status-update. 

“I like it because I can just be really sassy about the people who I hook up with,” Geadah said, with a laugh. “And, it’s also good because basically my best friends who follow the account can just see, and if they want to talk to me about it they can.”  

On a platform as vast and revealing as Instagram, the posting of one’s private life seems counter-intuitive. But through her second finsta, Geadah is breaking many stigmas surrounding sex, being a woman, and being queer. 

“I feel like there’s a stigma or a shame about ‘look at all these people I hookup with,’ [more so] as a girl, especially as a queer girl,” Geadah said. “I remember when I had a girlfriend, I felt super self-conscious about posting on my real Instagram, pictures with her.” 

Geadah’s use of her finsta as a platform of real and unrestrained expression defies the ways in which individuals control their image on social media. The finstagram trend isn’t restricted to the typical self-management of one’s account; the possibilities for creativity and expression are endless. 

Jamie Woods* and Emma Buscher*, both U1 Arts, also employ this creative use of finstagram. Best friends and avid finsta users, their take on the trend is unique: They run each other’s accounts. Woods created Buscher’s account originally as a birthday joke, but it’s still active months later. For the pair, running each other’s finstas means letting go of the constant need to micro-manage one’s image. It’s also a telling sign of trust in one another. 

“I really like finstas because I feel there’s just this kind of togetherness and community about the way we run them,” Buscher said. “[…] Even though it’s run by someone else, you can trust them, and I think that’s really important.” 

The two friends often post embarrassing selfies of each other, and fun selfie submissions from their followers. They also strive to promote self-care amid academic stress. Woods and Buscher know each others’ midterm and exam schedules, and aim to post kind words for each other to see. 

“Every single time one or the other [have] a test coming up, [we] always post an encouraging post, like, ‘Look at them go,’” Buscher said. 

Having control of each other’s finsta accounts is an essential counter to the social pressure to have everything seem perfect on their official Instagram accounts. 

“It’s definitely a paradox,” Woods said. “[…] Your finsta is supposed to be your fake-self, but it’s really your actual self versus the rinsta, which is more how you want people to perceive you on a social level [….] We derive so much of our self-worth in how people perceive us on social media.”

The rise of finstas is a large collective statement on social media; it is a rebuke of the constant management of image, a challenged to the need to portray perfection. Rarely will one find posts about a failed exam or a panic attack, but these accounts are moving in the direction of normalizing the imperfections that everyone has, but rarely shows.

*Names have been changed at the request of the source.

Editorial, Opinion, Private

McGill administration must support the independence of student societies

by The McGill Tribune Editorial Board on

More in Editorial:

On Feb. 17, the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) Executive Committee released a statement requesting the resignation of Igor Sadikov from his positions as a director and as an Arts representative to the SSMU Legislative Council. The request comes after Sadikov tweeted “punch a zionist [sic] today,” which the SSMU executives deemed “an incitement of violence” in violation of the Standard of Care outlined in the SSMU Constitution. The Feb. 17 statement came two days after a meeting between the SSMU executives and McGill Principal and Vice-Chancellor Suzanne Fortier, during which Fortier claims she shared her “strong belief” that SSMU should call on Sadikov to resign.

This meeting between Fortier and SSMU executives calls the relationship between student governance bodies and the university administration into question. The administration is justified in wanting to respond to the current situation; however, the administration must take care that the manner in which it exercises its authority does not undermine the independence of SSMU. Recent events demonstrate how susceptible student societies may be to pressure from the administration.

Under Quebec law, SSMU is a corporation independent from McGill, run by its 10-member Board of Directors (BoD). The relationship between SSMU and McGill is determined by a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) that guarantees SSMU’s independence from McGill. However, McGill can declare SSMU to have defaulted on the MoA if it judges that the society violated its own constitution.

Maintaining SSMU’s operational independence from the university is crucial—while McGill must balance the interests of many groups, SSMU is the only body on campus that exists solely to represent the interests of students. The society remains the most accessible governing body to students; if its independence is violated, students lose their most direct means to affect change at the upper levels of the university’s administration.

The McGill administration’s desire to intervene in the Sadikov affair is understandable: It must ensure the safety of its students after an incitement to violence, while maintaining its image in the face of a media storm in response to the tweet.

The society remains the most accessible governing body to students; if its independence is violated, students lose their most direct means to affect change at the upper levels of the university’s administration.

In order to avoid even the appearance of compromising SSMU’s autonomy, McGill must ensure that it engages with SSMU transparently. McGill can express its concern over SSMU and the decisions of its BoD, but it must ultimately respect that it does not decide who sits on SSMU Council—students do. Secret meetings with SSMU executives give the appearance that the administration is meddling in student governance. Even if the meeting is not coercive, the opacity of the process damages the image of both parties. Fortier’s justification that the Sadikov case is an “exceptional” circumstance is also worrisome, as this condition seems to have been unilaterally defined by the administration, and could be used to justify interventions in the future.

The administration must also ensure its actions do not preempt the student governance process. When a Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) motion was passed at the Winter 2016 General Assembly, Fortier waited until the motion had been defeated in online ratification to express the administration’s stance on BDS. In her statement, which condemned BDS, Fortier noted, “The University as an institution has not commented publicly until now out of respect for the student governance process.” This standard of respect should apply equally to the current case—the student governance process is still ongoing, as the Arts Undergraduate Society (AUS) will vote on Sadikov’s impeachment on Feb 22.

The administration’s actions reflect a failure on SSMU’s part as well. To the administration, and to many students, the SSMU BoD failed its constituents by choosing not to impeach Sadikov, revealing the need for means of additional recourse within SSMU.The Judicial Board has been able to fill this role in past cases, but it does not have the authority to overturn BoD decisions. If a minority of students ever feel that they have been wronged—and especially they have been made to feel less safe—by a SSMU decision, channels for recourse must be fair and accessible.

In the meantime, the administration must make it clear that its role in this matter was not coercive. Further, it must clarify what it defines as “exceptional” so that it may be held accountable to this standard in future instances. SSMU’s representative autonomy is meaningless unless it is clear that it is able to make decisions with which the administration does not agree.

 

 

Lauren Benson-Armer, Aaron Rose, Clare Lyle, Joe Khammar, David Watson, and Natalie Vineberg believe that the McGill administration is justified in intervening with student governance if the student governance process fails to rectify extreme circumstances, such as cases of incited violence.

 

@McGillTribOp | [email protected]

 

 

 

 
1 … 675 676 677 678 679 … 1,364

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue