The Tribune’s editorial, “Deregulation at McGill should not necessitate an increase in international student tuition,” is inaccurate and unrealistic in depicting what tuition deregulation would entail for students.
First, it fails to clearly differentiate between equalization and deregulation policies; it is possible to eliminate the equalization model in Quebec without deregulating tuition fees. It also does not recognize the historical context of this system, which has been central in establishing francophone post-secondary education across the province. If Quebec international tuition fees primarily benefit McGill, mobilization against future increases might also be isolated to our campus.
In an earlier Tribune article, the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) Vice-President (VP) University Affairs, Chloe Rourke, is clearly quoted as stating, “Every time tuition has been deregulated we have seen an immediate increase in tuition for international students.” While the university emphasizes the benefits of ending equalization, they are reticent to acknowledge the substantial increases made to fees in all deregulated programs, or the inevitable decrease in financial accessibility that follows. According to the Scholarships and Student Aid Office, despite increases to our financial aid program, in the 2013-2014 school yearthis covered only 25 per cent of tuition fees for international students in deregulated programs, compared to 54 per cent in regulated programs.
There is a particular risk of McGill using “market rates” to match international tuition to other Canadian or even American institutions. This follows the trend of deregulation here and at other schools, such as the University of British Columbia. If current trends continue, within a decade McGill programs deregulated in 2008 will have nearly tripled in cost. This is a reactionary process that shifts the burden of government cuts to students, rather than a real contribution towards improving the quality of education.
Thus, while it may be tempting to suggest that “McGill stands to benefit from deregulation,” it is unlikely that this scenario includes the diverse cohort of less privileged international students alluded to in the editorial. While the piece claims that international students have been more open to tuition increases, it is likely that those least opposed to hikes are also those who can already afford them.
We must be particularly wary of such assertions in our current climate, where the future plans of the administration are opaque at best. As student representatives, we are extremely concerned with both the quality and accessibility of our educational experience for a diverse student body. Significant budget cuts have severely threatened both of these values, and we are calling on the University to oppose provincial austerity measures instead of further offloading their impact on to students. Tuition increases, much like austerity, are not an economic necessity but a political choice.
Alex Kpeglo-Hennessy (U3 Honours Political Science) and Erin Sobat (U3 History) are the Arts undergraduate senators this year. They can be reached at[email protected] and [email protected]. This letter is co-signed by other members of the SSMU Senate Caucus: Benjamin Brunot (Law), Parvesh Chainani (Education), and David Benrimoh (medicine)
Macklemore’s latest hit, “White Privilege II” gives the outspoken rapper a chance to delve into the serious issues of white privilege and appropriation in Hip Hop, but do his lyrics drive home a powerful point, or are they just an ironic display of the very privilege he’s lambasting against?
“White Privilege II” helps Macklemore properly address the real issues
– Jasmine Lee
“White Privilege II” by Macklemore, featuring poet and singer Jamila Woods, is a song that has been a long time coming. On his solo album, /he Language of My World (2005), Macklemore debuted “White Privilege,” a song where he considers his role as a white performer in a traditionally black musical culture. He compares the appropriation of Hip Hop to other genres such as rock; calling out Elvis Presley for taking on the title “King of Rock” based on a musical style that originates from black artists. He also questions his place in the genre as a rapper, which “started off in a block that [he’s] never been to / to counteract a struggle that [he’s] never been through.” From listening to this song, one can tell that Macklemore left the issue open-ended, as he himself doesn’t quite know the answer to the problem of white privilege.
Macklemore has also less prominently addressed white privilege in his Grammy-winning album The Heist (2012). In the last verse of the song “A Wake,” Macklemore questions what he can do (or if he can do anything at all) as a white man who sees new cases of police brutality against black people every week. His subconscious tells him, “Don’t get involved if the cause isn’t mine / so we just party like it’s 1999 / celebrate the ignorance while these kids keep dying.” A common theme of these songs is that Macklemore knows better than to choose ignorance; there has to be a way to accept the responsibility of white privilege while respecting black voices, who need to be heard the most.
The amount of time, thought, and effort that has gone into the production of ”White Privilege II” is evident when you listen to the song all the way through. On the song’s website, a brief description says, “This song is the outcome of an ongoing dialogue with musicians, activists, and teachers within our community in Seattle and beyond. Their work and engagement was essential to the creative process.” This short paragraph is followed with profiles of the many people involved in the making of the tack, plus a corporate statement regarding Macklemore & Ryan Lewis LLC’s involvement in supporting black-led organizations. As for the song itself, Macklemore confronts the same issues that he does in “A Wake,” questioning where he stands and how he should speak (if at all) in the black activist movement. Like in the original “White Privilege,” he calls out white artists, now including Iggy Azalea and Miley Cyrus, for appropriating black culture but contributing nothing to the anti-oppression movement. He also bluntly states that his success is built on the very foundation of white supremacy, the same system that simultaneously supports police brutality and praises the appropriation of black culture. He also criticizes the people who praise his rap as “true poetry” and say that his rap is “the only hip-hop that I let my kids listen to,” as many of these people are the same people who condone systematic violence against black people saying, “If a cop pulls you over, it’s your fault if you run.”
There are numerous layers to Macklemore’s piece, and perhaps the most important message is that Macklemore is no hero or saviour. He is simply relaying the same message that has been said by numerous black activists for so many years, and so many of these activists have gone unheard. It is a nine minute polemic that was not made to be a mainstream radio hit, but for his fans to listen to and learn from. Whether or not you are a fan of Macklemore, take some time to not only listen to “White Privilege II,” but to also consider how to respectfully contribute to anti-oppression movements in America.
Macklemore flexing his white, celebrity privilege does nothing to address the real issues
– Christopher Lutes
Macklemore is at it again. The grammy-winning self-appointed poet laureate of /how we live now/ has released an 8:43 minute long opus about how he relates to the Black Lives Matter movement. In typical Macklemore fashion, it manages to be simultaneously condescending and ignorant, spending four lengthy verses rapping in a questionable cadence (he’s a white guy from Seattle, not Method Man) about his take on race relations in America; as if anybody while watching the protests across the US thought to themselves, “Hmmm, I wonder what the guy who wrote ‘Thrift Shop’ has to say about all of this.”
The track examines different facets of the movement, starting with his first person perspective at a Black Lives Matter rally. He expresses his trepidations about being there, torn between the idea that he would feel out of place at a predominately black protest versus not wanting to feel like a bystander. Beneath the bombastic, gaudy layers of production, courtesy of Ryan Lewis, and the embarrassingly lazy slant rhymes delivered by Macklemore, there’s a germ of a good idea here. Feeling unsure of whether or not to speak up on black issues as a white man is a legitimate line of questioning, but the matter is pretty much settled by his subsequent writing, recording, mastering, and releasing the song. Also, it somehow never comes up that the problem might not just be that he’s white—he’s also a celebrity. Like Sean Penn going to post-HurricaneKatrina New Orleans or John Travolta personally airlifting groceries to Haiti, Macklemore’s intentions may be good, but he must have known that his celebrity status would invariably take some of the focus away from the evening’s protest, especially when he takes the time to pose for photos.
The second verse shifts to the perspective of a hip-hop fan who chastises Macklemore for being a hypocrite by appearing to care about civil rights while basing his career on an appropriation of black culture. It’s interesting that the sole criticism Macklemore perceives hip-hop fans have of him is that he’s white, and not the fact that he’s a mediocre songwriter. The fact that he doesn’t include any nuanced self-criticism in this verse—instead, he opts to make the exact point Eminem did 14 years ago in “Without Me”—is understandable given his seeming yearn to be treated as a serious artist who raps about ‘the issues.’ But it’s frustrating that he fails to address any real gripes beyond the surface level. For instance, he never brings up that feeling the need to weigh in on every issue is also acting as part of the white power structure that he wants to rail against.
Wading deeper into the semiotic minefield, his third verse switches perspectives yet again to that of an unhip soccer mom archetype who happens to be a fan of Macklemore and a casual racist. The verse perfectly crystallizes the insidious middle-distance empathy that exists in his music, purporting to be open-minded and honest in one moment, then delivering a lazy stereotype in the next. There’s a lot of potential in talking about the complex unconscious racism that exists in some white hip-hop fans, but Macklemore instead goes after the easiest target imaginable.
The final verse comes full circle, going back to Macklemore who seems to be trying really hard to tie a nice ribbon on a complicated issue with lines that amount to “Boy, the world sure seems to have a lot of opinions, eh?” The verse is a culmination of everything wrong with the song, serving up a mountain of recycled platitudes and interpolated civil rights chants. It is delivered with Macklemore’s trademark faux-profound affectation, as if he were taking dictation from god. He’s so clearly looking for an ‘attaboy’ from the black community by continuing to lob softball criticisms at himself and repenting for being a white rapper.
Ultimately, the only thing admirable about “White Privilege II” are Macklemore’s intentions, and even those are dubious. His yearning to be taken seriously trumps any political message he’s trying to get across, and the result is a gigantic mess that almost anyone could take offense with. There are many important conversations around the modern civil rights movement that other rappers have already been having with much more first-hand knowledge and nuance. In this context, Macklemore comes off as just another white voice in a sea of white voices, making reductive, redundant arguments because he feels like he has to.
[audiotrack title=”The Sport Authority Ep. 4: Recapping the NBA trade deadline” songwriter=”Zikomo Smith and Arman Bery” date=”February 27, 2016″ width=”700″ height=”200″ src=”https://24f2041bb5b609d25f1a97039f71682cc9154421.googledrive.com/host/0B9rQxTeDv2duM0FmSjBSYkZFS1k/NBA%20trade%20deadline%20podcast%20%28final%29.mp3″ autoplay=”on”]
The NBA trade deadline last week saw little activity; teams were more conservative given next year’s salary cap increase, and most moves aimed to consolidate picks for future drafts, or to take on players that complemented teams systems.
Who were the winners and losers of the trade deadline? Was Tobias Harris a good pickup for the Detroit Pistons? Why have the Memphis Grizzlies accrued so many second round draft picks? Also on the lineup is the mystifing decision behind why Sting was chosen to play at NBA All Star Weekend. Contributor Arman Bery and Sports Editor Ziko Smith discuss these issues and more in episode four of The Sport Authority Podcast.
The Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) Council approved a motion for the upcoming Winter referendum on a process to prevent motions deemed as ‘divisive’ or ‘external’ to SSMU’s mandate from being discussed at the General Assembly (GA). Under the proposed amendment, the GA Steering Committee—an unelected body composed of the SSMU president, vice-president (VP) (University Affairs), speaker of Council, four councillors and a thirdeExecutive member to be chosen by a vote of Council—would decide if the content of a potential GA motion should be debated and voted on by students, unless those present at the GA vote to overturn the decision with a two-thirds majority.
Science Representative Sean Taylor felt that adding this system would be a step towards easing tensions that emerged in light of the GA on Monday, February 21 which saw the approval of a motion in support of Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions against Israel.
“We’ve been told by the results of a survey that we put out last year […] that SSMU is being too political,” Taylor said. “I hear from my constituents that there’s just a lot of people tired of divisive things like this coming forward because they don’t think that, as a student society, we’re there to provide support for them.”
SSMU VP External Emily Boytinck raised the concern that a screening process could limit the democratic nature of the GA.
“It is absolutely unacceptable that as a representative body—or even a potential non-representative body such as the steering committee—has the choice to determine what is divisive and what isn’t,” Boytinck said. “This is extremely problematic, not only for the culture of what we consider to be divisive, but also for who gets to have their voice heard on campus.”
Mental Health Fee
Council has approved for referendum a motion to create a new restricted fee to cover certain mental health services. Citing the need for urgent action in combatting mental illness on campus and the success of previously-established student efforts in this domain, the motion proposes a $0.40 opt-outable fee for all SSMU members, and would be used for general projects and hiring mental health staff.
While Clubs and Services Representative Francois-Paul Truc agreed with the necessity of these services, he expressed concern that it was a rehash of the recently-proposed SSMU fee increase that failed in special referendum.
“I’m very disturbed that this is a direct overlap with the referendum motion that failed previously, especially considering that this mental [health] fee will go towards paying staff, and one of the primary concerns that was echoed during the referendum was that people did not want more money going to staff,” Truc said.
Engineering Representative Malcolm McClintock spoke in support of the motion, citing the individuality of the fee as an asset.
“Seeing as the students didn’t directly oppose every individual motion that was packaged together into the referendum […] putting something forward that is smaller such as this is more beneficial in that students can actually pick and choose what they do and do not want rather than saying no to the large number that they saw during the referendum,” McClintock said.
This runs concurrent to the passing of a question for referendum to raise the opt-outable SSMU Health Plan fee by $25 to cover the addition of psychology services to the plan.
Leap Manifesto
Council voted to add SSMU to the list of signatories to the Leap Manifesto, a broad set of demands decided on by a cohort of “indigenous rights, social and food justice, environmental, faith-based, and labour movements,” according to the motion.
Boytinck, a co-mover of the motion, compared this motion to the recently passed SSMU Climate Change Policy.
“[I]t’s a little toned-down because it’s made by a lot of groups,” she said. “[Demands] are related to climate justice, indigenous rights, the just transition for workers against austerity cuts that severely damage the environment.”
Boytinck noted that the motion was largely symbolic, stating that signing the manifesto would be in solidarity with other McGill groups that have signed it, including Divest McGill and the McGill Office for Religious and Spiritual Life.
McClintock expressed concerns with the neutrality of the motion.
“Unfortunately, [the Engineering Undergraduate Society is] inclined to abstain with regards to the fact that this is more of a political statement that doesn’t represent the beliefs of the [enginering students],” McClintock said.
The motion passed with 16 in favour, one opposing, and six abstaining.
This article was corrected on March 2, the Tribune regrets any errors.
Over the past five years, the McGill Mental Health Services (MMHS) has seen a 35 per cent increase in students seeking help. According to McGill’s Mental Health Education Coordinator Emily Yung, one in 11 McGill students in the past academic year are reported to have used MMHS services.
The Wellness Recovery Action Plan (WRAP) was initiated for students at McGill in Fall 2015 to help tackle the rapidly rising demand at MMHS. Founded in Vermont 18 years ago, WRAP is a psycho-education program developed for individuals living with mental health issues. At McGill, students meet once a week for six sessions, each lasting two hours in length. Every session is facilitated by a mental health professional and a highly trained student.
According to Yung, students participating in the program learn a set of key concepts to help build a foundation for recovery, as well as developing a “wellness toolbox” to combat symptoms. The program also helps students identify triggers and develop an action plan when facing a mental breakdown.
“We talk about what are some strategies we can implement, what are things that have worked in the past for you, […] you talked to a friend, you sought medication from a psychiatrist, all of those things to build a support system in difficult times,” Yung explained.
Yung stressed that the success of the program is due to what students feel they can bring to the discussion.
“[Students] are able to share some of their darkest moments in life and they can learn from each other about what’s worked,” she said.
WRAP is designed to help students cope with day-to-day challenges, but not for students who are actively in a mental health crisis.
“We allow students who have mild to moderate mental illness into this group,” Yung said. “We do not put in crisis cases because those students will need much more resources, perhaps more one-on-one [counselling].”
However, students who have been using MMHS services can also join the WRAP Program. What differentiates WRAP from other services offered at MMHS is its transdiagnostic approach—WRAP does not tailor to a specific mental illness, but tackles a spectrum of mental health problems in a group setting.
“We want to change the mentality of having one-on-one [therapy session] as the best [treatment strategy….] I understand that it can be appropropriate for many students, but research has shown that group [therapy] is equally as effective,” Yung said.
According to Clinical Director of MMHS Dr. Nancy Low, WRAP was given two years worth of funding from the Student Services Innovation Fund.
“We’re going to evaluate [WRAP] after two years and see if it is something we should incorporate [into MMHS],” Low said.
The cost of WRAP mainly comes from preparing the student facilitators, who are paid $1,000 to undergo a seven-day training session. Students who are currently interested in joining WRAP must first make an appointment with MMHS.
“We eventually want to make it where students deliver [WRAP sessions],” Low said.
Julia Tischer, a PhD student in the school of Architecture who has participated in WRAP, pointed to the time-sensitive nature of her needs as a factor that changes the effectiveness of the program for her. Tischer explained that she did not immediately get the help she needed when she approached MMHS, but that the WRAP program still benefitted her.
“When I went to the workshop, my difficult moment had already passed,” Tischer said.
However, she is still thankful to have joined WRAP as it helped her stay positive and prepare for a crisis situation.
“[WRAP] was still very helpful in many ways,” Tischer said. “I had this wonderful bonding experience with other people who have been going through difficult situations, many related to stress in school. So I didn’t feel alone.”
In 2014, a short clip of Deadpool test footage was leaked on YouTube, after the character was considered too crass for movie screens. The video—which has since been deleted by 20th Century Fox—sparked a movement among fans who had been altogether disappointed by the character’s 2009 appearance in X-Men Origins: Wolverine. On Feb. 12, the “merc with a mouth” finally made his way into theatres, burdened by an R-rating that was expected to ruin his chances at commercial success. Instead, Deadpool set the record for the highest grossing opening weekend for an R-rated film—and with good reason. Recognizing itself as an adult superhero movie, Deadpool finally gives audiences a comic-based action flick that refuses to take itself too seriously, but in the process, risks constricting itself to a narrow audience.
Deadpool follows Wade Wilson, an ex-special forces operative turned mercenary assassin with a penchant for alcohol and foul language, as he falls in love with a prostitute he meets at his favourite bar. In a twist of fate typical of comic book stories, Wilson is diagnosed with late-stage terminal cancer. In an attempt to save his own life, he subjects himself to experiments by a sadistic mutant doctor, Francis, that leave him with an accelerated healing ability and looking like “an avocado had sex with an older avocado." Taking on the persona of Deadpool, Wilson launches a campaign for revenge against Francis, tracking him down and leaving a trail of bodies in his wake in the hope of reversing his disfigurement and reuniting with his girlfriend.
Deadpool is truly what every comic book fan wants to see when their favorite character gets a movie deal. Deadpool is notorious for his vulgarity, sense of humour, and breaking the fourth wall on the page—characteristics that in the '90s made his edgy comics a hit among readers, creating devoted fans. He was a popular costume choice at comic cons long before there was any talk of his appearance on the big screen. The best part of reading Deadpool is that it doesn’t strive to be anything more than a comedic romp through violence with a beloved—but ultimately not truly lovable—main character. There is debate over whether Deadpool really deserves the designation of superhero; he doesn’t act on moral grounds or in the good of humanity and his services usually go to the highest bidder, or follow his fleeting desires. The film doesn’t try to change his character. Aside from a love story that plays a large role in the plot, Deadpool doesn’t try to find depth in the character like most superhero films do, a refreshing change for fans.
The best part about Deadpool is that it’s not about anything deeper than Deadpool. Even the love story serves to set up a plot in which he ultimately seeks revenge for his disfigured appearance, all the while killing anyone he can get his hands on in pursuit of his nemesis. And he manages to be funny the entire way through, interacting with audiences and winning over fans’ hearts much the same as the print character has for decades. The comedy begins before the movie is even really rolling, with credits that deem the writers “the good guys” and the producers “the asshats.” The film takes advantage of a number of inside jokes for comic fans, such as poking fun at the confusing X-Men cinematic timeline, and develops the self-awareness that make his comics so refreshing. It also situates itself nicely in the X-Men universe, pulling in characters from the comics and helping audiences anchor themselves in an already familiar world. Even the music creates comedy, pairing The Cordette’s Mr. Sandman with a gruesome torture montage.
However, Deadpool presents a challenge to parts of the audience. Nearly every line out of the main character’s mouth is a joke—a breakneck comedic speed that can grow tiring for viewers who fail to develop a connection with the character. This connection is challenged by the violence of the film that serves no greater purpose. Normally when we see a superhuman character disfiguring regular people, it’s justified by the greater good, or it’s used to illustrate the amoral nature of a villain. Deadpool is neither of these things and asks audiences to justify his violence with his search for reunion with his girlfriend, a stretch for audiences accustomed to Captain America and the humanity-saving X-Men.
Deadpool is finally what comic fans have been asking for: A movie made for them. But, in pleasing them, filmmakers run the risk of alienating the general audience in future installments. It’s the nature of comic book movies that there won’t be just one, and Fox and Marvel will have a challenge ahead of them to keep the general audience interested without losing the fans who pushed them into the franchise in the first place.
This is the title card that opens Louis Malle’s Pretty Baby. The film tackles the scandalous topic of child prostitution in a strikingly elegant and elegiac fashion through chronicling an upscale brothel in one of New Orlean’s most notorious red-light districts. Madame Nell (Frances Faye) is an old and cynical matriarch who runs the brothel that the film centres on. With an acute attention to detail, most likely due to his love for period pieces, Malle brings Nell’s bordello to life in such a way that even the viewer finds the place endowed with homeliness and comfort.
The first shot of the film is a close-up on the face of a beautiful little girl. This girl is Violet, played controversially by a 12-year old Brooke Shields. Shields’ talent as an actress remains questionable, but Malle demonstrates a deft ability in capturing her expressive face and youthful spirit. As the camera tightens on her awestruck expression in this opening shot, the viewer realizes that Violet is witnessing her mother Hattie (Susan Sarandon) give birth to a baby boy in bed. Like her new half-brother, Violet is herself a “trick-baby,” or a child of a prostitute and an unknown father.
Through Violet’s curious perspective, the viewer perceives the dynamics of Nell’s whorehouse. Aside from the working girls, “Professor” (Antonio Fargas), a black pianist, amuses the guests with his music in the drawing room, and later an eccentric photographer named Bellocq (Keith Carradine) arrives with an interest in photographing the prostitutes. Bellocq is loosely based on actual Storyville photographer Ernest Bellocq. He is eccentric and enigmatic, spending bountiful time at the house while never asking for any services. In a sense, Bellocq is a true artist, deriving the most pleasure out of freezing the world around him through capturing moments in time.
Violet’s dichotomous character is defined by precociousness and innocence. In one of the most disturbing scenes of the film, Violet’s virginity is auctioned off. Malle cuts between shots of Violet, her hair curled and face done up with makeup, to close-ups of the sun-spotted, gray-haired men wishing to deflower her. Standing on the pedestal, Violet waves to Bellocq, whose stolid expression emanates a quiet outrage.
When Violet arrives at Bellocq’s house one day, she asks him if she can stay with him. When he replies yes, she tells him: “I love you once, I love you twice, I love you more than beans and rice!” This childish declaration of love seems to epitomize their relationship, which mimics that of a parent and child despite its sexual intimacy. Bellocq even purchases Violet a doll, declaring, “Every child needs a doll.” Despite the visceral queasiness that an erotic relationship between a child and adult arouses, there seems to be some element of puppy love between Violet and Bellocq.
While Pretty Baby encountered controversy and scandal surrounding its production, Malle’s cool approach to the daring subject matter prevents the film from appearing exploitative. The film is mesmerizingly beautiful in its cinematography and smart in its study of physiognomy. Like Bellocq who finds beauty in a still image, Malle is fascinated by close-ups of the expressions of his characters. Therefore, much like the renowned ending to Francois Truffaut’s 400 Blows, Pretty Baby concludes with a freeze-frame of young Violet’s strikingly beautiful visage. As the credits begin to roll over the image of her face, the viewer realizes that Violet’s story is in fact an accurate documentation of a chapter in American history.
The Motion to Support the Boycott, Divest, and Sanctions Movement mandates SSMU to support campaigns associated with the worldwide BDS movement, and to lobby McGill University at its Board of Governors to withdraw investments in companies such as Re/Max, L-3 Communications, and the Mizrahi-Tefahot Bank.
“This call for BDS states that such campaigns are to remain in place until Israel meets its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination, and fully complies with the precepts of international law,” the motion reads.
Students debated for nearly two hours in the SSMU Ballroom, with overflow rooms elsewhere in the Shatner University Centre hosting a livestream of the event and allowing students to vote. Those who spoke in favour of a “No” vote cited the potential divisiveness of this motion, and worry that passing BDS would cause a climate of fear among students who feel the decision does not represent them.
"The McGill student body prides itself on our diversity, yet why is when it pertains to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, [is there] an attempt is made to make our campus homogeneous?” asked Maya Rosenkrantz, U3 Science. “This motion contradicts SSMU’s safer space policy, as BDS proposes a cultural boycott of Israel, alienating students who belong to that culture [….] Students’ mental health is on the line. Students who identify as Israeli or Zionist are genuinely afraid that if that motion passes, they will not be able to truly express their identity on campus. No student should ever be afraid [of that]."
Supporters of the motion attempted to clarify its purpose—divesting McGill from holdings associated with certain Israeli settlements military effort—while at times, relating the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to apartheid in South Africa.
"As a Palestinian, you do not speak for us," Laura Khoury, U2 Engineering, said. "Please do not speak on behalf of my lived experience [….] It’s your moral obligation as people of social conscience to answer this call. It is not your obligation to tell us what is being done to us. Would any of you here have been in support of South African Apartheid? [….] No, you would have not."
Students were reminded by Speaker Benjamin Dionne to maintain silent decorum through the debate by refraining from applause, and by their peers to treat the sensitive topic with respect for both sides.
"I would just like to say, as somebody who prides themselves on being both pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian, as somebody who is very personally affected by this conflict, I ask […] please engage in moderation,” said one first-year student in the Faculty of Law. “Engage in a dialogue that would endorse both people's rights to self-determination.”
Motion in support of Kahtihon’tia:kwenio (women title holders of the land)
Cadence O’Neal, U3 Arts, moved a motion in support of indigenous women title holders from the floor, which was tabled until the next GA in Fall 2016 in order to undergo consultation from the indigenous student community at McGill. This motion was developed alongside Kahnawake women, frustrated with McGill's lack of response to their notice of seizure of the unceded territory the university occupies.
"The students who are moving this motion hope to both remind students who are here […] that this is an ongoing issue, that McGill has ongoing political context, and that our university […] is very much involved in a [settler-colonial] situation here," O’Neal said.
Ashley Dawn Louise Bach, coordinator of the Indigenous Student Alliance, expressed concern that the motion was neither publicized prior to the event, nor included any feedback from her organization.
"I would just like to point out that there was no consultation with the Indigenous Student Alliance […] in the making of this motion,” Bach said . I actually hadn't heard of it until earlier today […] and I feel that this lack of consultation is just a perpetuation of the colonial problems we have at this university."
Movers of the motion agreed to seek further input from the indigenous community at McGill before reintroducing it at the next GA.
One of the quickest ways that professors can get students to drop their course after the first lecture is to announce that laptops are not permitted. The feeling in the lecture hall is almost palpable as everyone pictures lectures with nothing but a pen, some paper, and a professor attempting to keep the attention of 100 or more students. Laptops do have their uses in an academic setting, including those that are not exactly academic—the temptation of the internet is always there during a lull in a lecture. The age-old practice of writing notes by hand, however, has several advantages over typing on laptops.
As much as it might pain students who have full course loads, are involved in extracurriculars, or are trying to maintain some shred of a social life to realize, humans are bad at multitasking. Multitasking leads to impulsive decision making, as well as problems with processing information. Unfortunately, the modern laptop is a multitasking machine: Students can take notes, write emails, update social media, read the news, and check the weather, all while sitting in class. This seems like a godsend being able to get so much done at once, but you are absorbing very little information.
There is no multitasking with a pen and paper—you are locked in. There are no new tabs, updates, or notifications—nothing but what the professor is talking about. There are those who say they can refrain from the endless multitasking capabilities of a laptop in lecture, and maybe they actually can, but all it takes is one boring tangent and suddenly you are deep into scheduling your next two weeks, or chatting on Facebook.
Having sat in classrooms permeated with laptops as well as those in which everyone took handwritten notes, it is clear that students are more engaged, ask more questions, and become more collaborative when laptops are absent.
Every professor who has ever advocated or enforced handwriting has brought up the studies that indicate that students learn better when taking notes by hand. However many times students have heard the speech and rolled their eyes, it doesn’t make the science any less true. Students who take notes by hand remember lectures better than those typing, even when those typing are warned ahead of time. After all, there must be a reason these professors resort to the same tirade time and time again.
The perks of handwriting for individual students are numerous, but should this grant professors the right to ban laptops from their lectures? Earlier this year a commentary in the McGill Daily argued that this was a paternalistic and dictatorial decision that overruled paying students’ rights to decide how best they learn for themselves. While there is some truth there, there is something that the piece failed to recognize. Yes, professors are providing a service for which students pay a good deal of money. But professors are also lecturing to make, in some cases, very dry material seem a little interesting, which becomes even harder to do if the audience is a sea of laptops. Having sat in classrooms permeated with laptops as well as those in which everyone took handwritten notes, it is clear that students are more engaged, ask more questions, and become more collaborative when laptops are absent. There is a real difference in the quality of a lecture when the professor feels appreciated, or at least feels heard.
There is no one right way to learn. Some people might learn better with a laptop. But it has become the norm that the newer, more efficient way is seen as the best way, and this is not always the case. Though it might take a little more thought and require eye contact, the value of hand writing should not be dismissed.
Zachary Carson is a fourth year joint honours political science and international development student. He enjoys listening to Canadaland podcasts, watching Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, and dogs.
Boundless: McGill Tribune Special Issue
November 30, 2016
The Sport Authority EP. 7: Looking back at Sam Hinkie and The Process
April 12, 2016
Rare books: The hard spine of the modern library
April 5, 2016
