Latest News

Science & Technology

Communicating climate change in Canada

by Daria Kiseleva on

More in Science & Technology:

On Feb. 2, Media@McGill hosted a panel discussion on the role of journalism in effectively communicating climate change. NASA recently revealed that 2016 was the hottest year in history and the third record year in a row—the first time such a pattern has occurred since climate data collection began. Despite this, according to a 2015 study from the Université de Montréal, only about half of Canadians subscribe to the scientific consensus that rising temperatures are primarily caused by human activity and only 27 per cent say that they are well-informed on the issue of global warming. In an attempt to address the gap between scientific knowledge and public engagement, the panel featured six experts across multiple sectors.

The participants acknowledged the media’s limited success in bringing climate change to the forefront of public awareness.

“The media has covered climate change in Canada extensively, but it has failed in a lot of cases, particularly in the last election,” Mike de Souza, managing editor of the National Observer, said. “It would have been up to the media […] to provoke more discussion during debates.”  

Kai Nagata, communications director of the Dogwood Initiative, believes that the Canadian government has made decisions on the assumption that there will be a market for non-renewable energy in the future because climate action will fail.

“[The media] fails to hold these people to account,” Nagata said.

The discussion also touched on the challenges journalism faces as a medium in tackling the complex issue of climate change. A proposition was put forth that the scope of the environmental phenomenon cannot be contained by the reactionary, event-driven format of popular media.

“[To communicate about climate change] we need to dig down deep into stories over a long period of time,” Linda Solomon Wood, CEO of the Observer Media Group, said. “And that’s not sexy, it’s the total opposite of clickbait.”

Repeatedly, the conversation returned to the subject of promoting engagement with the issue of climate change in diverse populations.

Martin Lukacs, environmental journalist for The Guardian, argued that a rift along ideological and political lines is central to the divergent perceptions of climate change.

“Polarization is really necessary [to motivate action against climate change],” Lukacs said. “What we are confronting is an ideological foe.”

Nagata agreed with Lukacs that perceptions of climate change vary strongly across the political spectrum.

“Discussion [on climate change] is not happening to the same extent on the political right [as on the left],” Nagata said. “Our responsibility, as advocates, is to understand the values that motivate people’s choices and to find a way to talk about this crisis that motivates action from people who are our political opposites.”

On the other hand, Candis Callison, associate professor at the Graduate School of Journalism at UBC, shared insight from her research on different forms of environmental activism, including that of American Evangelicals.

“There’s a way of talking about climate change which imbues it with ethics and morality […] and in various contexts it sounds different,” Callison said. “That kind of plurality associated with climate change isn’t something we generally think of.”

Laure Waridel, executive director of Interdisciplinary Research Centre on Sustainable Development Operationalization, agreed with Callison.

“The same message will not reach everybody,” said Waridel. “To get the business sector involved, […] we might not even use the language of climate change, but […] the language of optimization, for example.”

Lukacs remarked that environmental issues may resonate more with the public when they are framed in a new light by social movements.

“Pipelines six or seven years ago were a technical issue that got mentioned in the business section of newspapers, […] but they are now a defining political issue in this country, discussed in terms of their impact on indigenous rights,” Lukacs said.  

The panel seemed to agree that an impactful communication of climate change goes beyond an accurate reporting of statistics.

“[Climate change communication] needs to stay true to the scientific fact […] and at the same time it needs to become more than that in order for a diverse public to become engaged,” Callison said.

Science & Technology

McGill bioethicists argue for stricter limits on first-in-human clinical trials

by Palma Gubert on

More in Science & Technology:

The standards for drugs entering first-in-human (FIH) clinical trials are too low, argues Associate Professor Dr. Jonathan Kimmelman and PhD candidate Carole Federico in McGill’s Biomedical Ethics Unit. In a commentary published online in Nature on Jan. 30, Kimmelman and Federico maintain that evidence for drug efficacy is not emphasized enough before FIH trials and call for more thorough evaluation of the clinical promise of a drug before it is tested in humans.  

Today, regulatory bodies in Europe and North America look for evidence of safety before drugs are tested in humans, but do not require evidence of drug effectiveness.

“We believe that many FIH studies are launched on the basis of flimsy, under-scrutinized evidence,” Federico and Kimmelman wrote.

The ALS Therapy Development Institute, which studies the motor-neuron disease made famous by the ice bucket challenge in 2014, has similarly determined via its own animal studies that many failed drugs enter human trials due to inadequately designed or conducted preclinical studies.

Most drugs that make it to phase II and phase III in human clinical trial stages fail due to lack of demonstrated effectiveness. Kimmelman and Federico posit that raising the bar for assessments of efficacy before going into human trials would lower failure rates and the high costs of drug development—money that could be better spent developing drugs with real clinical promise.

Likewise, failed drug trials—even if the drug in question is harmless for the participants—divert manpower away from more promising trials. Researchers and volunteers, in devoting time and effort to a fruitless drug, are not available for other, more favourable endeavours.

“Scientists are a very scarce resource,” Kimmelman told CNN. “It takes years and years of training to be able to run a trial and we want to allocate that resource as judiciously as possible to lead to major advances and cures.”

Moving forward, Kimmelman and Federico suggest a number of changes to the existing process of clinical trial approval. They propose that researchers should be obligated to disclose all of the results, even the unfavourable ones, from their preclinical studies when looking for trial approval. Furthermore, a central review board of experts should be created, combining ethical and scientific vetting of the preclinical evidence before approval for a human trial. In order to determine a drug’s clinical promise, such a board should pose questions asking, for example, how other drugs addressing the same disease process have fared, or whether the conditions of preclinical experiments match clinical scenarios.

Critics of Kimmelman and Federico’s proposal may counter that increased regulation could hinder potentially favourable drug candidates from ever reaching human trials. Kimmelman and Federico, however, argue that preclinical evidence does not necessarily need to be strong—but it should be critically scrutinized. In some instances, where animal models of a condition are inadequate, such as in some neurodegenerative disorders, a “limited suggestion of clinical promise” may be enough to warrant human trials.

“We call for infrastructure, resources, and better methods to rigorously evaluate the clinical promise of new interventions before testing them on humans for the first time,” Federico and Kimmelman wrote. “We must abandon the fiction that current oversight systems are adequate […] to steward scientific efforts.”

Kimmelman expressed his worries to CNN regarding the potential effects of the Trump presidency in prioritizing speed over efficacy. While campaigning, President Trump said that he wanted to speed up the drug approval process and eliminate red tape at the FDA.

“If President Trump follows through on some of the plans he has articulated on the campaign trail about drug approval, he plans to weaken the critical evidence needed to approve new drugs," Kimmelman said.

Science & Technology

MNI researchers link lack of pleasure from music with decreased connectivity in the brain

by Izze Siemann on

More in Science & Technology:

Ever have friends that didn’t tap their foot, bob their head, or drum their hands to the beat of a good song? Researchers at the Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) and the University of Barcelona have discovered that the lack of joy from music can arise biologically, rather than just by choice or taste.

While on sabbatical in Spain, MNI neuroscientist Dr. Robert Zatorre connected with colleagues at the University of Barcelona. Pooling together Zatorre’s knowledge of the brain’s response to pleasure and music and his colleagues’ expertise on anhedonia—the inability to experience pleasure—the team set out to explore the way in which the human brain derives happiness or displeasure from music.

In their resulting study, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in September 2016, 45 participants filled out a questionnaire regarding the satisfaction they receive from music. The team divided these participants into three categories: Those who “can’t live without music,” those who experience regular joy from music, and those who exhibited no joy from music.

Participants in all three categories listened to music during the scans, voicing whether they liked the music or not. Brain scans using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the subject pool brought an intriguing conclusion to light: The scans projected three different patterns for the three subject pools.

The cortical regions of the brain that control audio processing and the reward system are connected. “Hyper-hedonic” people—those who receive vast amounts of happiness from music—have tightly connected audio and reward systems. On the other hand, individuals who don't experience joy from listening to music have lower connections between these regions than usual. This phenomenon, found in three to five per cent of the population, was dubbed “specific music anhedonia” by the research team.

“There is a whole group of structures called […] the reward circuit,” Zatorre explained. “If there’s activity in that part of the brain, you experience pleasure. If there is no activity in that part of the brain, you experience no pleasure.”

But there are crucial differences between specific music anhedonia and anhedonia in general.

Subjects with specific music anhedonia took a control test. They played an addictive gambling video game so the researchers could focus on their “reward system” response. This test, coupled with verbal questions, revealed normal results—affirming that because the subjects could activate their “reward system” in other ways, the anhedonia they experience must be specific to music.

“[Anhedonia is] a symptom that often occurs in depression and other disorders, like Parkinson’s disease,” Zatorre said. “It refers to the lack of pleasure. The people that we were studying were perfectly fine in terms of their pleasure responses for anything [besides music]. […They] like to be with their friends. They like to be among their families, and have normal, loving relationships like other humans [.…] They like everything, except for music.”

According to Zatorre, subsequent studies seek to explore whether and how these psychiatric conditions may receive more effective treatment—such as a collaborative team at the University of Tel Aviv in Israel, working on the development of a targeted music therapy. Currently, these developments are still experimental.

“The human brain can do a lot of really cool stuff,” Zatorre said.

Commentary, Opinion

Trudeau must be held accountable in the era of “alternative facts”

by Grey Gunning on

More in Commentary:

On Jan. 31, Donald Trump signed an Executive Order limiting immigration from seven majority Muslim countries. The order also suspended the United States’ acceptance of refugees for 120 days, and barred Syrian refugees completely. Trump’s order ignores the 1951 Geneva Convention, which recommends that participating governments provide asylum to refugees without considering “race, religion, or country of origin.” The ban has since been blocked as unconstitutional by a U.S. federal court ruling; nonetheless, the reverberations of such a sweeping and exclusionary move persist. Amid the outrage that followed the order, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took to Twitter, declaring that Canada welcomes all refugees, regardless of faith. Trudeau’s feel-good tweet, however, is undermined by his government, which has placed its own cap on refugee admission. Even more troublesome is the fact the Canada-United States border continues to operate under the Safe Third Party Agreement. The Agreement requires that refugees request protection in the first safe country that they arrive in—meaning Canada cannot legally accept asylum seekers turned away from the United States. Should Trump follow through on his promise to overturn the court’s decision and reinstate the ban, it seems that those denied entry to the U.S. can find only false hopes in Canada.

It the responsibility of Canadian citizens have a responsibility to hold their government accountable for its lack of concessions to refugees. In a political climate where “alternative facts” have taken precedence over honesty, it is crucial that the Trudeau administration maintain a standard of integrity and compassion. If the people of Canada do not see this integrity and compassion, they must demand it.

Given the global political climate, political participation is more vital than ever. The power inherent in political speech is apparent in the events of the last week. After Trudeau’s tweet, Canadians took action. An online petition calling for the repeal of the Safe Third Country Agreement currently has 38,583 signatures, and a movement has emerged encouraging constituents to contact their MPs to demand change. Locally, McGill Law students are providing legal services to those affected by the ban at Trudeau airport, and organizing a letter writing campaign to protest the Executive Order. This coincides with a nationwide effort among law students to make legal resources accessible to anyone who needs them in the wake of the Executive Order. Protesting, volunteering, contacting local representatives are all examples of political action that has the potential to minimize the ban’s negative consequences. By refusing to stand idly by, Canadians can keep their own government transparent and, by extension, demand equivalent accountability from the Trump administration.

It is a representative’s job to listen—but it is also the citizen’s job to speak.

The rhetoric of “alternative facts” allows for the perpetration of harmful lies, such as the idea that a significant amount of Syrian refugees are terrorists, or, in Trump’s words, “the very threats our soldiers are fighting overseas.” Canada must do its part in emphasizing that a government that lies is not normal or acceptable. It should not permit a political landscape that facilitates the formation of national myths that are disconnected from reality. Leading by example is essential to setting this standard. To combat the political culture of falsehood that the Trump administration propagates, and to impress upon the U.S government that their decisions do not exist in a vacuum, the people of Canada must demand transparency from their own government. If the Trudeau administration strives to be humanitarian, it needs to be transparent with its constituents first and foremost. When it is not honest, Canadians have the power to put pressure on their government, and they should use that power.

The nature of a representative system ensures that politicians have a responsibility towards those they represent. They are supposed to empower their constituents, to amplify these citizens’ voices and implement policy that caters to their needs. It is a representative’s job to listen—but it is also the citizen’s job to speak. Now more than ever, Canadians need to ensure that their government represents their ideals in both actions and words. If those ideals are compassion and honesty, then the responsibility falls on Canadian citizens to ensure that Canada supports the people that the United States does not.

 

Grey Gunning is a U2 History major and occasional artist. She enjoys climbing, gardening, and cheesy 80's sci fi.

 

@mcgilltribop |

 

 
Commentary, Opinion

Quebec pharmacists should not act as gate-keepers for emergency contraception

by Emily Heer on

More in Commentary:

The condom broke, you skipped a pill, or your memories are foggy from the night before. Accidents happen: Thankfully, emergency contraceptive pills are available. Since 2005, pharmacies have provided levonorgestrel pills (Plan B) without a prescription in Canada. In 11 provinces and territories, you can now find Plan B beside the condoms on drugstore shelves, while Quebec and Saskatchewan both keep it behind the counter. But in Quebec, it is only administered after a mandatory consultation with the pharmacist. This barrier impedes the autonomy of women seeking emergency contraception. It is unreasonable and unethical for Quebec to continue to uphold this standard when most of Canada has removed it.

When I went to get Plan B in Montreal, my consultation was with a pharmacist who seemed to be close to my age. He asked whether I had taken emergency contraception before, the date of my last menstrual cycle, the length of my typical cycle, why I thought I needed emergency contraception, when the "event" had occurred, and whether I used other methods of birth control. At the end of our consultation, he agreed that he would dispense the pill.

My bill came to $44.50. The consultation and the pill both cost $22, which is on the low-end of pricing in Montreal. If you have a valid Quebec health card, the consultation is free of charge. The pill can be partially or completely covered by insurance, depending on your plan. And, if you're under 18, it's always free. But, because I'm a student and it's not a prescription medication, I have no coverage.

 

Given the right information, women should be able to decide on their own if they need emergency contraception.

At the end of my consultation, I asked whether he would ever refuse to dispense it. He confirmed that he would if there was little chance of the woman being pregnant, or if she were outside the window of effectiveness.

While the latter condition may be reasonable, the period of efficacy is not widely agreed upon and depends on the pill. There is some evidence that the pill is still effective within five days, but other studies suggest that it decreases significantly after 3 days.

Refusal to prescribe the pill based on the likelihood of pregnancy, however, is unreasonable and unethical. While the chance of pregnancy immediately after or before a period is extremely low, the women who seek out emergency contraception are typically in their early 20s, and in the reproductive prime of their life. Furthermore, regardless of the likelihood of a pregnancy, emergency contraception empowers women with autonomy over their bodies. Even if a woman forgot to take her pill, or the condom broke, or there was a sexual assault, she can still be in control of her reproductive system. Barring situations where use of Plan B would be unsafe, it is unethical for a pharmacist to send a woman who was attempting to exercise this autonomy home.

The Canadian Women's Health Network and the World Health Organization have declared that there is no medical argument to justify a consultation or examination to obtain the pill. While they should certainly ensure that patrons are educated on the proper use of any drug, pharmacists are not medical practitioners. They are not a sexual health consultants or necessarily experts in women's health, either. The paternalistic idea that a pharmacist knows best what every woman needs is therefore rattling. Given the right information, women should be able to decide on their own if they need emergency contraception.

I work in sexual health, so my level of comfort with this consultation may not reflect the comfort of all women. These conversations can cause shame and embarrassment, especially in the case of assault. This consultation also makes it impossible for women to buy emergency contraception in advance—just in case.

When taken safely, Plan B is a fast and non-invasive way for women to take control of their sexuality. Mandating a consultation detracts from this, and there is no excuse for the fact that Quebec has yet to abolish this standard.

 

 

Emily Heer is a M.Sc Public Health Candidate at McGill.

 

@mcgilltribop |

 

 
Out on the Town, Private, Student Life

The art of brewing better coffee: An education in third wave coffee culture at Dispatch Cafe

by Flaminia Cooper on

More in Out on the Town:

According to the Coffee Association of Canada, in 2016, over 58 per cent of Canadians aged 18-24 drank coffee on a daily basis, a number that grows every year. It is clear that coffee has become a staple of Montreal life; from the famous Tim Hortons to the lesser-known independent coffee shops in the Plateau, there seems to be a never-ending choice of places to get that daily caffeine boost. However, this makes it difficult for third-wave coffee companies to stand out among the crowd.

‘Third-wave coffee’ is a movement based on the idea that coffee is more than just a commodity. For those who follow its tenants, all stages of production, from the growing to the brewing of coffee beans, are done meticulously. There is often a focus on the experience of coffee drinking itself, and as such, many baristas put effort into other drink elements, such as latte art and alternative brewing methods.

To support this love of coffee, the beloved Montreal-based Dispatch Coffee has begun offering free workshops at its new location in the Plateau on Rue St-Laurent and Avenue Duluth. These workshops give customers the opportunity to discover where their coffee comes from and to learn new brewing methods.

FlaminiaCooper_Dispatch_online2

Every Thursday from 4-7 p.m., the Director of Coffee at Dispatch, Chris Durning, introduces attendees to a different brewing method. The most recent demonstration on Feb. 2 focused on the V60 pour-over method. A funnel-shaped device filled with freshly ground coffee is placed over a cup, then water is poured over the top in concentric circles so that it filters evenly into the cup below.

There is a significant amount of chemistry involved in the brewing process. The balance of acidity, sweetness, and bitterness of a cup can be significantly altered depending on how it is brewed, and finding the ideal ratio is a detailed process. Specific aspects of coffee making—such as the temperature of the water, how fine the coffee has been ground, and the ratio of coffee to water in the brew—can be the difference between a good cup of coffee and a bad one.

“I always like to say making coffee is like making a cocktail, you’re trying to balance all of these flavours,” Durning said.

Dispatch works exclusively with high quality ethically-sourced coffee from all over the world, and each kind is chosen for its unique blend of scents. The Rwandan Kanzu coffee sold by Dispatch is described as ‘sweet and comforting,’ while the Peruvian Amaybamba coffee beans are also fairly sweet, but have hints of deeper chocolate and nutty aromas. Durning invites workshop observers to taste the freshly brewed coffee, helping them to identify these subtle, distinct smells during his demonstrations.

These beans, roasted in Montreal, are light-roasted to retain as many nutrients as possible and preserve their high quality and complex flavours. The effort of roasting the coffee locally clearly shows the care and expertise that Dispatch puts into their products. This is also reflected in the free workshops, which go above and beyond to improve the customer experience. 

At the end of the workshop, Durning also hands out recipe cards with specific instructions on how to replicate the brewing methods at home.

“By giving you recipes that we’re actually roasting for, it’s making sure you’re in the ballpark already,” Durning said. “Then, by teaching you how to manipulate the flavour, you can adjust it so that it tastes perfect and you’re wasting less coffee. That’s the biggest thing for us.”

Though there are many secrets to brewing the perfect cup of coffee, Dispatch provides an easy and enjoyable avenue to understand the fundamentals. Durning’s workshops make the complex world of coffee brewing more accessible—plus, the free coffee makes the educational experience all the more gratifying.

A previous version of this article incorrectly stated that Chris Durning is Head Roaster at Dispatch, and that Dispatch exclusively sells fair trade coffee. In fact, Chris Durning is Director of Coffee at Dispatch, and Dispatch sells exclusively ethically-sourced coffee, though not all of this is fair trade. The Tribune regrets these errors. 

Off the Board, Opinion, Private

Why you should clap at the movies

by Noah Sutton on

More in Off the Board:

Have you ever walked out of a movie in which the audience clapped raucously as the credits rolled, only to have your friend turn to you and ask, “What’s the point of clapping? It’s not like the cast or crew can hear the applause anyway.” If you’re anything like me, you’d respond to this comment by muttering “what a fucking twat.” To be honest, I can’t remember the last time I’ve heard clapping after a movie. A quick Google search confirms that this idea is commonplace, but not that it happens all that often. “Do people in the U.S. really clap after movies?” asks a confused Redditor, while angry internet bloggers echo the same sentiment my make-believe friend said above: Why clap at a movie when the people supposedly receiving the symbol of appreciation are unable to hear it? The answer is simple: Clapping is far more than showing appreciation, it’s an expression of emotion shared by everybody in the theatre–a recognition of the shared experience of the film.

At the theatre, applause and standing ovations show appreciation to the cast and crew who stand on stage and bow accordingly. If the only use of applause is to convey appreciation, then clapping after a movie is pointless. But applause is not a solely outward gesture, like the obligatory head nod to a vague acquaintance you pass on campus. Standing ovations spread through a theatre, one person stands, then another, and another. The gesture of appreciative applause is more emanating than transmissive—the audience, cast, and crew walks away feeling like they are part of something larger than themselves, and clapping in unison as a group confirms it. While theatres and cinemas are typically quiet affairs, sports events offer a magnified example of cheering to show group identity. When someone yells out, “Are you blind, ref?” it would be remarkable if the referee turned around and actually responded, “Why yes, I forgot to put my contacts on this morning and I’ve just been bullshitting this entire game!” Comments like these aren’t meant as literal advice for the referee, but as a gesture of solidarity with fellow fans upset by the call. Applause and questions like that are entirely rhetorical in nature, they affirm the obvious: “That was a great film,” or “that was a bad call.”

 

Clapping is far more than showing appreciation, it’s an expression of emotion shared by everybody in the theatre–a recognition of the shared experience of the film.

It isn’t surprising, then, that most of the films people report clapping at are films with strong cult fan bases. The Lord of the Rings movies, Star Wars and The Dark Knight series are all hotbeds for post-movie applause. While the “group” isn’t as identifiable without the colour-coded apparel of a sports game, the message is clear: “Pretty good movie, eh?”

Movie theatres are odd social spaces. One sits in a room with several dozen strangers, entirely in silence. Additionally, film as a genre is moving toward greater viewer immersion. The expansion of 3D and VR draws viewers into the film itself and away from the theatre environment. Increasing viewer participation has been tried and discarded with the failed idea of smell-o-vision (Rugrats Go Wild 2003). But stalwarts of extreme audience participation have continued with screenings of The Rocky Horror Picture Show, in which audience members go so far as to bring props and dress up as characters in the movie. This would be excessive to do for every movie, but watching a film is a shared emotional experience—people resonate with the emotions of others. Laughter with a group is always louder than laughing alone—this is the lasting power of the cinema. Of course, there’s a line—one should not jeer constantly, standard rules of etiquette still apply. But if by the end of the film one feels like letting off some applause, give it a go and see how many people feel the same.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Noah Sutton is a multimedia editor at the McGill Tribune

 

@mcgilltribop |

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Editorial, Opinion

Disrupting mourning students is no way to protest Trump

by McGill Tribune Editorial Board on

More in Editorial:

On Feb. 1, the McGill International Student Network (MISN) held a rally entitled “United We Stand #NoHate” in order to “reflect [MISN’s] support for the Muslim community” in light of the troubling “recent events” around the world. The event was widely understood as a reaction to the Trump administration’s travel ban against Muslim countries and to the recent terrorist attack against a mosque in Quebec City, in which a gunman killed six Muslim men—Azzeddine Soufiane, Abdelkrim Hassane, Mamadou Tanou Barry, Ibrahima Barry, Khaled Belkacemi, and Boubaker Thabti—while they were praying.

Some students criticized the rally for taking an apolitical stance, as it pitched itself as an inclusive event and explicitly stated that Trump supporters were able to participate. McGill Against Austerity organized a counter-protest, called “Make Racists Afraid Again,” which took place simultaneously and claimed the initial demonstration was “cowardly” because of its apolitical stance and refusal to explicitly condemn Trump. The afternoon of the event, the “Make Racists Afraid Again” protesters proceeded down to the “United We Stand” rally unfolding at the Y-intersection, interrupted the speech of a McGill student and Syrian refugee, and verbally confronted participants.

While taking an overt or directed political stance is an essential aspect of protest, the decision of “Make Racists Afraid Again” to interrupt the “United We Stand” rally was disrespectful, ineffective, and morally reprehensible. Taking a stance against Islamaphobia, xenophobia, and other forms of bigotry is crucial; however, it must be done with consideration of those who are most vulnerable. 

 

Protestors can always keep in mind their anger and their political convictions, but when someone is grieving, they must be afforded that opportunity without interruption.

The events of the past week have been deeply disturbing, and McGill students may be experiencing a range of emotional responses to news from the United States and Quebec City. Some may be angered or frustrated, while others may wish to express solidarity and compassion for those affected. All of these sentiments are valid. However, condemning the desire of some students to show love and support to the Muslim community, instead of hate for those who have harmed it, is unacceptable. 

Some Muslim students from countries targeted by Trump’s ban were present at the “United We Stand” event, and voiced their appreciation for the show of solidarity. In condemning the solidarity demonstration, “Make Racists Afraid Again” showed disregard for the needs of individuals most affected by recent events. Those who have the privilege to speak out without fear of harm are needed in the fight against those who target marginalized groups. In doing so, students must be diligent that their voices do not speak over those they wish to support. 

The affected individuals in this case sought not only to express solidarity in the face of adversity, but to mourn the tragedy in Quebec City. Lost in the debate over opposing Trump was the need to remember the victims of the recent shooting. Protesters can hold onto their anger and their political convictions, but those grieving must be afforded the opportunity to do so in their own way. It is inexcusable that neither the organizers of the counter-protest, such as McGill Against Austerity, nor its participants, including Students’ Society of McGill University Vice-President External David Aird, demonstrated this sensitivity.

Not only was this counter-protest insensitive, it undermined the message behind both demonstrations. The counter-protest purported to “make racists afraid,” yet the only people it succeeded in frightening were those at the “United We Stand” rally. In effect, the “Make Racists Afraid Again” protesters mistook “United We Stand’s” alternate priority for cowardice.  Furthermore, the haphazard way the counter-protest was organized and carried out made its message unclear and misdirected. This needless conflict between the protests overshadowed the central message of both rallies: That McGillians simultaneously stand with the Muslim community, and against those who would do it harm.

 

 

 

 

@mcgilltribop |

 

 
Out on the Town, Private, Student Life

Prioritizing safety: ‘Guardian angel’ policies being implemented in Montreal bars

by Ella Benedetti on

More in Out on the Town:

In cafe-bar Casa del Popolo, one might notice signs, printed in both French and English, that read, “If you feel unsafe in any way, don’t hesitate to talk to your bartender.”  In the bathrooms, these signs are hard to miss; one is placed above the mirror, and another over the toilet. A more detailed explanation of its non-violence policy is posted below the mirror. 

Xarah Dion, staff member for seven years, still vividly remembers the night two years ago when a customer was being choked by her date right inside Casa del Popolo. This attack was a game-changer for the staff at the Mile End establishment. 

“[The staff] decided enough was enough,” Dion said. Since the incident, Casa del Popolo has instituted an attitude of zero tolerance toward violence, and is taking measures to ensure that its staff are able to appropriately handle unsafe situations when they arise. In the coming months, Casa del Popolo intends to engage its staff in a mandatory workshop with local Montreal non-profit organization Head & Hands to help the servers and bartenders learn more about violence and its prevention.

“It is crucial to learn how to help, it’s not enough to offer help,” Dion said. 

In the age of online dating and the explosive popularity of match-making websites and apps like Tinder and Bumble, this generation’s version of blind-dating has reshaped traditional dating culture. For many people, the first date entails meeting someone for the first time, with very little background information. Although blind dating can greatly expand one’s dating pool, it can come with safety risks. Moreover, the alcohol-fuelled environment of a bar can make customers more vulnerable to unsafe interactions. Though there are a plethora of unknowns with each bar visit, having bar staff as a source of protection is a comfort to customers.

Initiatives like the one at Casa del Popolo are popping up in bars across Canada and around the world. Most are inspired by a campaign called ‘Ask for Angela,’ which allows patrons to walk up to the bar and ask for ‘Angela’ as a signal that they’re in trouble. By discreetly alerting the bartender using these code words, individuals who find themselves in a difficult situation are assisted promptly. Knowing this policy is in place can also increase the sense of security that customers feel upon entering the bar. 

The initiative was started in 2016 in England by a woman named Hayley Child. According to BBC News, the name ‘Angela,’ which Child created, is a play on the word ‘Guardian Angel.’ Last November, the campaign went viral after a poster explaining its procedure that was hung in a bar in Lincolnshire, England was retweeted over 28,000 times. Internet users across the world are voicing their approval of the idea, requesting that this initiative be implemented worldwide. 

As the campaign spreads, bars have taken on different variations of the code language to suit their needs. For example, The ‘Angel Shot’ takes this concept to the next level, by providing customers with a discreet way to request the bartender’s specialized help depending on the specific version of the shot one orders. If the customer orders the shot “neat,” the bartender knows to escort the customer to his or her vehicle; when ordering “with ice,” bartenders will call the customer an Uber or taxi ride home; and ordering “with a lime on the side” lets bartenders know to call the police.

Beyond directly improving the security of patrons, advertising these non-violence policies at bars can spark discussion among customers that creates a more safe and aware bar environment. 

“If some people find it shocking, that’s good,” Dion said. “It’s something that people should always have in mind, and some people don’t. And maybe [for] the people that feel shocked by these signs, [they have] a positive impact.”

On McGill’s campus, the ‘Ask for Angela’ concept is gaining traction, though it has yet to be implemented in any of the university’s bars or restaurants.

Tim Mapley, U3 Arts and manager of Gerts, hopes that the campus bar won’t need an ‘Ask for Angela’ policy. 

“If the McGill community felt like there was [a] need, we would likely have no problem implementing something like that,” Mapley said. “Safety of patrons is our top priority. We pride ourselves on being a safe space.” 

According to Mapley, Gerts works hard to create a safe and responsible environment with vigilant security, reliable male and female staff, and its close connections with WalkSafe and MSERT—two student-run groups that prioritize students’ safety on nights out.

Beyond the existing risks present at any bar environments, exposure to a wide array of strangers through dating apps has heightened these risks. Implementing campaigns, such as ‘Ask For Angela,’ is an effective way for bars and clubs to create safer spaces for those exploring the possibilities of the dating scene. 

For more information on the original campaign and tips to implement the “Ask for Angelia” policy visit www.lincolnshire.gov.uk/nomore

Montreal, News

McGill community responds to shooting at a Quebec City mosque

by Julia Metraux on

More in Montreal:

On Jan. 29, during evening prayer at the Centre Culturel Islamique de Québec, a shooter killed six and injured nineteen others. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau labelled this tragedy an “act of terrorism.” The Montreal and McGill communities responded by denouncing the shooting and participating in events focusing on solidarity.

Vigils were held across Canada to remember the lives of the six victims: Azzedine Soufiane, Khaled Belkacemi, Aboubaker Thabti, Abdelkrim Hassane, Ibrahima Barry, and Mamadou Tanou Barry, according to CBC News. On Jan. 30, the “Vigil de solidarité avec les musulman-es de Québec” was held in Montreal at the Parc metro station in response to the mosque shooting.

 

Vigile de solidarité avec les musulman-es de Québec

The vigil, which translates to “vigil of solidarity with the Muslims of Quebec,” aimed to stand up to hatred and support those who feel affected by anti-Muslim actions over the past week, according to Anglo-spokesperson of the Vigil Sameer Zuberi. The event was organized by local activists Eddy Pérez, Emilie Nicolas, Dalila Awada, Benjamin Prud’homme, Rim Mohsen, and Cathy Wong.

According to Zuberi, the event was organized the night of the shooting and arranged to take place the next day to provide an immediate response and to support those who lost their loved ones.

“We hope that people get an increased sense of awareness,” Zuberi said. “People often talk about Muslims in terms of terrorism. We hope to change that.”

Starting at 6 p.m., mourners gathered on Rue Jean-Talon to pay their respects to the victims of the shooting. Eight speakers voiced their reflections, with many sharing the sentiment that people of every nationality, sexuality, and race are part of Canada and Quebec.

Maia Salameh, U0 Arts, explained that she decided to attend this event to show solidarity and mourn with Muslims not only in Canada but around the word.

“The most memorable moment for me was when we joined in saying the al-Fatihah prayer,” Salameh said. “It was striking for me because it is the beacon of my faith and the faith of my fellow brothers and sisters of Islam. To say it proudly, despite the tragedy that took place, meant to me that we are not afraid of white supremacy and racism and xenophobia and we will stand firm in our faith.”

 

McGill University’s response

On the morning of Jan. 30, Principal and Vice-Chancellor Suzanne Fortier sent an email to the McGill Community officially condemning the actions of the shooter and the Arts Building flag would be lowered to half-mast. She encouraged students and faculty who require support to reach out to various campus resources, including McGill Counselling and Mental Health Services (MCMHS) for students and the Employee Assistance Program for faculty and staff.

In an email to The McGill Tribune, Sara Parks, the director of the McGill Office of Religious and Spiritual Life (MORSL), said that although the aftermath of the shooting has been difficult for members of the McGill community, the support has a silver-lining.

“I have been heartened by how many groups and students on campus have contacted us today, wanting to show their solidarity,” Parks wrote. “Students from the United Theological Seminary and the Student Christian Movement approached me to offer peer support to ‘Muslim sisters and brothers.’ The Newman Catholic Centre and other individual McGill chaplains have either issued statements condemning the violence or have reached out in other ways to coordinate strong displays of solidarity with Muslim communities and with any communities [shaken] by recent anti-religious acts.”

Parks encourages students to speak with chaplains at MORSL, as she said that they are available to offer support regardless of one’s faith.

1 … 680 681 682 683 684 … 1,363

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue