The piece started with an older, somber Tatyana (Car) alone on stage, in a pristine white dress adorned with bright red sash around her waist. She is sorrowful, but seems to ask us to follow her, to see how she got this way. We are introduced to storybook scenery of the Russian countryside where young Tatyana is reading, wearing the same ensemble
as her future self. She is admonished by her sister Olga for reading romance novels. Here, she is a young girl in love with love; how did she become the woman we first saw?

Tchaikovsky’s adaptation was written on the precipice of the socio-political collapse of the system: he was creating a time capsule.

Tchaikovsky’s Eugene Onegin takes place around Saint Petersburg in the early 1820s and is based on the satirical poem of the same name by Alexander Pushkin, the poet who was known for “capturing the common people’s soul.” His eight cantos parody the Golden Age of Russia and its elites, in Russian, at a time when most of the country’s nobility and upper class spoke French or other Western European languages. The common people loathed the disconnect the upper class had from Russian culture. Tchaikovsky called opera “the opportunity to speak the people’s language.” For art which is meant to be primarily enjoyed by aristocrats, being written and performed in Russian was a bridge between worlds.

The titular character of Eugene Onegin (Dupuis), embodies everything Tchaikovsky hated about his own society; Onegin is a young, vain, and arrogant. Upon his introduction by Olga’s fiancé Lensky, Tatyana falls madly in love with Onegin. He is the perfect candidate for her to project her romantic fantasies onto.

In a striking near ten minute aria, we watch Tatyana pace about her room, painstakingly composing a love letter to Onegin. “I’m all on fire! I don’t know where to begin!” she cries. Car’s performance here is otherworldly. The audience was breathless, like she had stolen all the air in the room for Tatyana’s lament. Yet no one seems to mind.
Her voice owns the space, and there is no doubt that it belongs here. When the aria is over, the conductor bows, saluting his colleague’s stellar control and grace.

Onegin receives Tatyana’s letter with a sick delight. Onegin invites Tatyana to sit with him in the garden, flourishing his hand with the arrogance reserved for men who have never endured hardship. He admits feelings for her, but denies her plea for marriage, proclaiming that “routine would destroy this love.” He leaves her devastated and alone.

Months later, there is a ball for Tatyana’s birthday. In the middle of the ball, Onegin, bored and inconsiderate, invites Olga to dance. This enrages his friend and Olga’s fiancé Lensky. “You seducer! […] You are no longer my friend. I despise you!” Lensky cries as he challenges Onegin to a duel for his fiancée’s honour.

[Tchaikovsky] married someone he didn’t love to protect himself, to hide his sexuality. He hated that Onegin could not understand that not everyone has the ability to cave to passion.

Part of Tchaikovsky’s greatness is the mischievous musical tricks and twists he plays on the audience. Nowhere is this more evident in Eugene Onegin than the duel scene. Accented by the technical artistry of fake snow, the air of this scene is dark and playful. Their voices melt together as they sing: “Oh, should we not burst out laughing before we stain our hands with blood, and should we not part friends? No!” They must follow through. Shots fire and Lensky falls. Onegin rushes over, he’s won the duel, but he’s lost his friend. This is not a victory; this is a heartbreak. He flees the country and the curtain drops signalling the end of the second act.

The next act picks up seven years later. Onegin has returned from Paris and arrives at a ball in Saint Petersburg, where he runs into Tatyana, who is now married. Upon seeing Tatyana, Onegin realizes that he is in love with her. Now it’s Onegin’s turn to confess undying love and Tatyana’s turn to be cruel. She admits her lingering feelings but is steadfast in her vow of marriage. Onegin is enraged. He doesn’t understand Tatyana’s choice. Like a petulant child, he throws a tantrum; grabbing at her skirt, begging desperately for her to stay. Again, she refuses him. This is how Eugene Onegin ends. This is how Tatyana’s heart breaks and never heals.

The production was whimsical and tragic in the right places while maintaining its Russian character.

Eugene Onegin was musically enthralling, boasting lavish and layered melodies, with as many as four performers singing at once, but in a way that was never chaotic or disjointed. The same cannot be said of the plot. This is because the background knowledge required to fully enjoy Tchaikovsky’s work is no longer commonplace. When Eugene Onegin first premiered in 1879, it was unusual for the audience to be unfamiliar with Pushkin’s original, allowing Tchaikovsky to focus on composition and get away with only writing vignettes of a larger story. While working on Eugene Onegin, Tchaikovsky wrote to his financial sponsor “let my opera be undramatic, let it have little action – but I am in love with the image of Tatyana, I am enraptured with Pushkin’s verse, I am writing music for them because I am drawn to them.”

So why was Tchaikovsky so enthralled with these characters? His obsession with Tatyana stems from his unfulfilled desire for love. He married someone he didn’t love to protect himself, to hide his sexuality. He hated that Onegin could not understand that not everyone has the ability to cave to passion. By having Tatyana deny Onegin, Tchaikovsky was able to get revenge on the caricature of the society which had shunned him.

There is a foreboding tone to Eugene Onegin as well. While Pushkin’s original was a critique of Russian aristocracy, Tchaikovsky’s adaptation was written on the precipice of the socio-political collapse of the system: he was creating a time capsule.

With Eugene Onegin, the story is bigger than the stage.

The post A Story Bigger than the Stage appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The 2019 – 2020 SSMU executive team is as follows:

President: Bryan Buraga
Bryan Buraga, whom the Daily endorsed with reservations, won the election for president with 64.6 per cent of the vote. His opponent, Kyle Rubenok, was awarded 35.4 per cent of the votes. 21 per cent of 3,944 total voters abstained from voting for this position. The President acts as the Chief Officer of the society. In this role they are responsible for representing student interests, coordinating with, and supporting, the other executives, in addition to providing a vision for SSMU. Buraga has existing experience in student government and McGill administration, yet prioritizes student input in his work. Some highlights from his platform include the implementation of a fall reading break by 2020, support for McGill’s divestment from fossil fuels, and tougher legislation on teaching staff-student relationships.

VP Internal: Sanchi Bhalla
Sanchi Bhalla won the election for VP Internal with 72.9 per cent of the vote, while her opponent, Aandrianna Jacob, received 27.1 per cent; 31.4 per cent of voters abstained from this position. The VP Internal’s responsibilities include communication, planning campus events (like frosh), and first-year involvement. Neither candidate for VP Internal received an endorsement from the Daily because of their shared lack of experience and meaningful platforms. Bhalla’s platform included provisions for less expensive campus events, more opportunities to gain points for Faculty Olympics over the school year, and other efforts to improve school spirit.

VP Student Life: Billy Kawasaki
Billy Kawasaki, who ran unopposed, won the election for VP Student Life. Kawasaki received 83.3 per cent of the vote, 16.7 per cent voted “no”, and 27.1 per cent abstained. The Daily, taking issue with Kawasaki’s priorities and his history in student government, did not endorse him. Kawasaki briefly served as VP Internal for the Arts Undergraduate Society (AUS), resigning in response to the POLI 339 controversy. The VP Student Life is responsible for the relationships SSMU has with its clubs, services, and Independent Student Groups. They must also take a role in addressing campus issues, promoting mental health, and collaborating with student services. Kawasaki’s main platform point is an online portal for clubs, which would streamline their relationship with SSMU. While this is an ambitious proposal, it is also time consuming and could lead to the neglect of other responsibilities within the VP Student Life portfolio.

VP External: Adam Gwiazda-Amsel
Adam Gwiazda-Amsel, who ran unopposed, won the election for VP External. Gwiazda-Amsel received 88.1 per cent of the vote, while 11.9 per cent voted “no” and 28.7 per cent abstained. The VP External is responsible for coordinating with different levels of government, in addition to managing affiliations with political causes and mobilization. While Gwiazda- Amsel does not have extensive experience in student government, he does have a good grasp of the VP External’s responsibility. He wants to strengthen McGill’s presence provincially, continue advocacy in the fields of anti-sexual violence, change the R*dmen name, and overall, to prioritize Indigenous voices.

VP University Affairs: Madeline Wilson
Madeline Wilson, whom the Daily endorsed, won the election for VP University Affairs with 69.3 per cent of the vote. Her opponent, Husayn Jamal, received 30.7 per cent of the vote; 25.6 per cent abstained from this position. VP University Affairs is the liaison between student advocacy and McGill governance. They also oversee equity initiatives and policy matters. Wilson, a current Arts Senator, has experience in McGill governance and has proven herself to be a fierce advocate for student interests. Part of her platform includes increasing student involvement in McGill governance through pathways like Senate and student parity on task forces.

VP Finance: Sam Haward
Sam Haward, who the Daily endorsed, won the position of VP Finance out of three candidates. For this position, the ballot was ranked with Haward in first with 6,526 points. The other two candidates, Ashar Yahya and Ahmed Bawany, received 5,219 and 3,801 points respectively; 34.3 per cent of voters abstained from voting for this position. The VP Finance is tasked with ensuring the society’s administrative security for the short and long term. Haward has the most experience in SSMU governance, including holding a seat on the Finance Committee. Additionally, his extensive platform provided tangible ways to preserve SSMU’s finances, like improving resources for clubs, as well as ways to improve accountability and transparency under the portfolio.

SSMU membership fee

The membership fee question in the referenda asked students whether they were willing to accept a 30$ augmentation to the SSMU base fee. If passed, this would raise the fee from 44.33$ to 74.33. However, 52.5 per cent of students voted NO to the item, only 47.5 per cent voted YES and 17.9 per cent of voters abstained. One of the motivators behind the proposed increase was to put us on par with other Canadian student union fees, like Western, whose fee is just over 84$. The fee increase would have allowed for the hiring of more full time staff to provide support within the operations of SSMU, in addition to renovation for student spaces like Gerts. A report released by the 2015-2016 SSMU Academic Research Commissioner found that the fee was low considering the services provided by the society. The last fee increase was in 2007 when 1$ was added. The fee has received criticism from student groups and even some executive candidates for being too steep an increase to implement at once and for having little student input in the decision.  

The post SSMU Election Results appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Following an approval of the Fall GA meeting minutes, a last minute motion was added to the agenda. The motion called on SSMU to endorse the March 15 Student Walkout for Climate Justice. It pointed to SSMU’s history of supporting climate and social justice movements to indicate that the Society should endorse the walkout. A constituent, Noah Fisher, also noted that passing this motion would show further support for Divest McGill. The motion required SSMU to release a statement endorsing the walkout and to send a delegation to the march as well. It passed unanimously at the GA and was approved at the February 28 Legislative Council.

After discussing new business, the executives gave their reports. President Mansdoerfer began with the Board of Directors’ (BoD) report, providing updates on minor business and speaking about potential consultations to better the structure of the BoD. In his report, as President, Mansdoerfer explained some of the projects he has been working on, such as SSMU’s purchase of 3501 Peel, which will be turned into a hub of subsidized student care.   

In the Internal report, VP Matthew McLaughlin explained how he has “overhauled” the First Year Council (FYC) constitution, increasing its size. The VP Internal has also aided the FYC in event planning, setting up scholarships, and relaunching their listserv. In efforts to increase student engagement, McLaughlin pioneered the “day in the life of a SSMU executive” program and spoke of the outreach efforts being done within Francophone Affairs.  

VP Finance Jun Wang spoke of SSMU’s recent switch in banks in his report. In addition, he mentioned changes to the funding process. SSMU has switched funding forms from SUMAC, an expensive and complicated system, to WordPress Forms, which are much more user-friendly. Handbooks for funding and accounting are in the works or already completed.

In the University Affairs report, VP Jacob Shapiro recounted his research and advocacy work over the past few months. This portfolio included efforts to divest from fossil fuels, as well as advocacy for a Fall reading week, students’ academic rights, and gender neutral language. VP Shapiro also gave an update on his proposed changes to the S/U option, saying that there has been a “warm” reception from the Deputy Provost Student Life and Learning. Going forward on the matter, VP Shapiro mentioned potentially writing a letter and talking to admissions officers and recruiters about the S/U option.

The last question of the night dealt with the GA’s attendance, as Arts and Science Senator Bryan Buraga pointed out that this was the third consecutive GA which failed to meet quorum. Senator Buraga asked President Mansdoerfer what could have been done to improve attendance. In response, the President suggested that in the future, SSMU hire a public relations department to increase engagement in student politics.

The GA was adjourned after only 80 minutes.

The post SSMU Winter GA appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The first act of the opera starts with Griffith (Arthur Woodley) in his old age, suffering from dementia. He cannot remember where his shoe is, nor where it belongs. His adopted son, Luis Griffith (Asitha Tennekoon), is acting as his caretaker, and reminds Griffith that they are meeting Benny Paret Jr. The mention of Benny’s name triggers a flashback for Griffith, and the story of how the young man became a boxing legend unfolds. 

The story cuts to a young Griffith (Aubrey Allicock), as he is leaving the Virgin Islands. A chorus joins in his dancing, proudly proclaiming that “you must reach what you cannot even see.” He heads to New York, where he reunites with his mother, who finds him a job with a hatmaker. The hatmaker, Howie Albert (Brett Polegato), instead takes notice of Griffith’s strong physique and persuades him to try boxing.

Quickly, Griffith gains notoriety as a boxer. However, he is plagued by questions of identity and belonging. We see him visit a gay bar and participate in a performance with drag queens, yet he can’t help thinking of an instance in his childhood where his aunt asserted that he had the devil in him.”

The climax of the show is Griffith’s fight with Paret (Victor Ryan Robertson). At the weigh-in before the fight, Paret is teasing Griffith, using a swath of homophobic slurs, and physically harassing him. This interaction leads into a song about what it means to be a man and Griffith sings, “somewhere where love is living, there is a man, I am that man, who is this man who calls himself me?” In the 12th round, Griffith knocks Paret out. He ends up in a coma and never wakes up.

The second act shows the effect of Paret’s death on Griffith, both young and old. As Griffith’s success as a boxer continues, the press asks him questions in a montage sequence: “Emile, how does it feel to be the champion? Emile, how does it feel to kill a man?”

Griffith’s guilt and trauma follow him throughout his lifetime. Years later, after he has quit boxing, he returns to the same gay bar, trying to drink away his memories. He then sings about how the bad thoughts overtake him quickly, and how all he wants is to forget. Griffith asks another patron at the bar if he can help him forget, if he can “fuck that hard.”

Leaving the bar, Griffith is the victim of a hate crime; he is attacked by a group of men in an alley. This traumatic memory throws older Griffith in a fit of crying and screaming. As he is being comforted by Luis, he cries: “I kill a man and the world forgives me, I love a man and the world tries to kill me.”

When Griffith meets Benny Paret Jr. years later, he asks for forgiveness. Young Griffith too, asks his older self for forgiveness, and in one of the most spectacular moments of the opera, the two Griffiths join in a song. Their voices melt together wonderfully, conveying the sorrow and triumphs of their life. Griffith forgives himself, and the show ends with the same song it started with, about belonging. Griffith proudly sings, “I go where I belong.”

There were many small moments in Champion, grand in their significance, that really strengthened the show. Older Griffith is never out of sight; if he is not in the scene, he is watching from the balcony, sometimes even participating. In each fight sequence, older Griffith’s shadow boxes from above. Additionally, Champion enlisted the help of the Montreal Jubilation Gospel Choir for some of the larger numbers, connecting with the city it was visiting.        

There is this prejudiced notion that opera as an art form can only be “European.” Many famous operas display racist and misogynistic stories, especially when racialized characters are portrayed by white people. The premise, music, and cast of Champion may clash with what traditional opera-goers think opera “should” be, but that’s a good thing. Champion opens the conversation about how opera can, and should, be modernized. It asks the question: whose stories are deemed suitable for an opera, and why?

Champion did not sacrifice the grandeur of the opera by telling a contemporary story; the drama was certainly there, as was the raw emotion and talent. Some of the standout factors of the show were its stage and costume design — the quality of production was phenomenal and truly immersed the audience in the two and a half hour spectacle. The unique elements of Champion came together to create a show that is, as the Artistic Director of Opera de Montreal, Michel Beaulac said, “fascinatingly accessible.”

Champion boasts an interesting story, spectacular talent, and intimately universal themes of belonging and forgiveness.

The post OdM Champions Modern Opera appeared first on The McGill Daily.

SEDE describes their mission as “address[ing] barriers to education by celebrating and integrating diverse perspectives into campus culture, and fostering research and mentorship opportunities to support more equitable, inclusive outreach and research at McGill.” The office runs many programs like Family Care, which provides resources to students who are caregivers, and hosts events for occasions like Black History Month. The office also runs homework help initiatives and programs at high schools in Montreal. SEDE has established itself as a link between marginalized communities around Montreal and McGill.

An open letter to Associate Provost (Equity and Academic Policies) Angela Campbell posted on Facebook in December 2018, as part of an online campaign called “McGill needs SEDE,” claims that the office is effectively closing. “The McGill Administration justifies this decision by claiming this move will prioritize equity, but breaking up programs of the SEDE office contradicts the real needs and demands of the McGill community.”

In response, the Reporter published an article outlining the main changes in the office so far. The article states that McGill’s equity education advisors are “more aligned with” work concerning anti-harassment and anti discrimination, as well as the mandate of the Special Advisor to the Provost on Indigenous Initiatives. The Family Care Coordinator will be relocated to Student Services, a new position of employment equity administer will be replacing the community partnerships associate and will take on the role of “improv[ing] access to employment at McGill to diverse groups, and develop mentorship opportunities for McGill students with diverse identities who may seek career opportunities at our University following their graduation.”

These changes to SEDE were carried out with no direct student consultation. In correspondence with the Daily, Campbell explained that the SEDE revisions were inspired by other McGill initiatives which featured student input, like the task force on respect and inclusion. She asserted that “changes were motivated by the objective of enhancing the visibility and impact of the work that [my] colleagues within SEDE do in connection with equity and community engagement, and to ensure that there are strong resources in place to support this work.” This sentiment was echoed by Interim Deputy Provost (Student Life and Learning) Fabrice Labeau at a recent roundtable with student press. “What we’re trying to do through this is take the different functions of SEDE and put them in locations where they’re going to be strengthened and have more support,” he explained, “putting these things together in the same service is going to help out.”

Campbell further explained that a focus on equity was the whole purpose of restructuring SEDE. She also asserted that these changes are “positioning those roles in spaces where they will be more supported.” The community outreach efforts to be carried out by enrollment services will apparently see little change in the day-to-day operations. Campbell described the mission of community outreach as “facilitating the goal of bringing McGill into communities and to students who might not otherwise have access. […] [We want] community engagement which focuses on the ultimate goal of enrollment. Our goal is to focus on pathways to the university,” and once students are here, “making sure they are fully supported.” Equity initiatives are now more than ever focused on “bolstering celebration and recognition of diverse groups on campus,” with a special focus on Indigenous students, current and prospective, according to Campbell.

Over email, Anurag Dhir, Community Engagement Coordinator of SEDE, identified a few programs at risk following the changes at the office. He said community engagement will be “repositioned to focus on co-creating Indigenous access to education programs with diverse communities, schools and community partners,” and that this will take place through enrollment services. However, the Schools Outreach program will stop receiving funding after this semester. Additionally, Experiential Community-Engaged Learning & Research (ExCELR), a program started in 2016 which “provides McGill students with community-based experiential learning in various McGill courses, and as part of the Minor in Quebec Studies,” is “looking for a new home.” Dhir explained the importance of ExCELR, detailing how it “meets SEDE’s mandate to provide experiential equity education opportunities for students while providing mutually beneficial and impactful long-term relationships with local community organizations who work with marginalized populations.” He also added that “this program has received positive feedback from students, community partners, and faculty.”

While many involved in the McGill administration believe that the changes to SEDE reflect positively on McGill’s public commitment to equity, those working within, or served by, the office are concerned. They worry that the office’s services may be of less quality, that programs may be cut, or that SEDE will disappear. In the open letter, organizers argue that, despite McGill’s assurance that these efforts will be beneficial, these changes mean that “SEDE will cease to exist as an independent body, depriving McGill of a non bureaucratic office for equity.”

In an interview with the Daily, organizers of the Facebook page “McGill Needs SEDE” Ananya Nair and Maheen Akter expressed concerns over McGill’s handling of SEDE. They pointed out how McGill only provided information about the changes after they had started to be implemented. Akter said that it was “almost blindsiding to see that the administration was making these changes without student input,” and that “from an outsider’s perspective it seems like SEDE is closing.” The organizers also expressed the feeling that administration was being “purposefully vague” in some of their responses, pointing to a lack of clarity on what students are losing with the changes to SEDE. Further, they wonder if community engagement will be “taken seriously” at enrollment services. They identified their main concern as the lack of consultation with stakeholders. “How would the administration know what is better for the students without asking the students?” Nair asked, continuing, “they didn’t consult students involved with, or who benefitted from, these projects. [Student consultation] can’t be bypassed.”

On January 29, Nair posted on the Facebook page, thanking people for their support and reiterating their mission. “We remain unconvinced that certain community engagement initiatives in SEDE will continue to exist to their full extent, but since we are currently led to believe that these projects will continue under their respective offices, we have little ability to demand the continual existence of the physical office itself,” the post read.

The post went on: “by diverting these initiatives to spaces across campus, the collective action that the SEDE office was undertaking to ensure inclusivity and diversity on campus through equity education and community engagement may be diluted.”

Attempts to contact officials at SEDE by the Daily were redirected to other personnel in administration. McGill administration will be meeting with members from student organizations to discuss changes within SEDE and other equity programs on February 12.

The post “McGill Needs SEDE” appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The “Master Plan” is a living document that sets the course for short, medium, and long term changes to campus. McGill’s master plan asserts common goals of campus living and addresses issues of transportation, landscaping, building, and space requirements.  Charlebois explains that ìa master plan can be many different things. You lay out what needs you think youíre going to have in the future for buildings, classrooms, research labs, student communal spaces, and outdoor spacesî.

The Master Plan also puts forward strategies to address McGillís space issues. Some of McGill’s buildings are not ideal spaces for classrooms, and are often inaccessible. Charlebois explained that McGill is renting 36,000 square metres of property, mainly on Sherbrooke, to accommodate student and staff needs. He also mentioned how McGill does not receive government subsidies for rental space, citing the extreme cost as an integral reason why McGill needs creative spatial solutions.

“How do you dispose of the building assets that youíve got?” he asked, “what do you do with these [buildings] that are old and need to be refurbished? Some should be gotten rid of [so] new development can take place.”

Charlebois also touched on the Royal Victoria Hospital project, explaining that McGill purchased part of the hospital with plans to use the structure for extra classroom space. Estimations say the first classrooms will be ready around 2028. On the topic of campus expansion, Charlebois maintained that ì[McGill] won’t have more students and professors, “we will just have more space so we can move people into those buildings and move people from these rental buildings to campus. It’s going to be a lot cheaper.”

Members of the CPDO were also asked about how concerns of accessibility will factor into their renovation plans. “Any new construction has to be fully accessible,” Charlebois stated. He also elaborated on the struggle of updating existing buildings on campus. Most buildings, he says, have “severely constrained” renovation options because of their heritage status with various governments. according to Charlebois, “existing buildings, which are difficult for accessibility, are going to be worked on one at a time.” He drew attention to the efforts to improve accessibility at the Athletics Complex and at Redpath library.           

The CPDO is also making the cultivation and creation of communal space a priority, emphasizing that this is one of the main areas where McGill lacks infrastructure. “We’ve heard through other consultations that communal space is very important. It’s very important for students who don’t live near campus but have classes all day long. Where do they go if there’s five [or] six hours in between classes? […] We want to hear what the spaces are that people like, [such as] places to socialize or eating areas,” said Dicki Chhoyang.

Additionally, the CPDO is stressing their desire for, and the general importance of, student input on the Master Plan. Even though most of these projects will not be brought to fruition for almost a decade, the CPDO wants to hear from current McGill students. Chhoyang explained that “[the CPDO] realizes that when we ask students for their input and their thoughts on the spaces that they like or don’t like, many will have graduated by the time the project materializes […] We are appealing to the students’ wish to contribute towards a legacy for future generations of students based on your experience. What do you want to say so that the space is better for the next generation of students?”

Chhoyang continued, “we want to create a platform for them to let us know if they have a favourite indoor/outdoor space for studying, learning, research, socializ[ing], and relax[ing]. What do they like about that space? If they have a least favourite space what is it, why, and how can we make it better?”

The CPDO has a short survey available online, and will be tabling across campus the week of January 28, with more information about the Master Plan.

The post McGill’s “Master Plan” appeared first on The McGill Daily.

In the original petition, Buraga alleged that the October 11 and the October 18 passing of the Gender and Sexual Violence Policy (GSVP) was unconstitutional, as were the results of their referenda. Buraga, in his petition, and during the November 20 hearing, maintained that this motion was not legitimate because it lacked the requisite number of movers, and that it did not comply with Elections SSMU’s timeline. According to the Elections SSMU regulations, all questions included in the Fall 2018 referendum must have been submitted by October 15. At the time of the October 11 meeting it was believed that the motion had four movers. Buraga, originally a mover of the motion, had withdrawn his support prior to the meeting. After Buraga filed his petition on October 14, President Mansdoerfer called an extraordinary meeting of Legislative Council. The special meeting, held on October 18, saw a motion amending the October 11 policies, ensuring that the GSVP had enough movers.

The judgement examines a conflict between the Standing Rules of Legislative Council, which asserts that a motion only needs three movers, and the Internal Regulations of Government, which dictates that questions destined for referendum must have four movers. Citing section 5.1 of the Standing Rules, which gives the Standing Rules precedence in matters of conflict, the Judicial Board “conclude[d] that the October 11 Motion was constitutionally adopted as it had the requisite number of movers.” Because the October 18 motion is seen as an amendment to the October 11 motion, the Judicial Board found that the question posed in the 2018 Fall Referendum, and its results, were valid.

In his petition, Buraga also alleges that by not finding alternatives to a fee levy, VP Finance Jun Wang violated the standard of care outlined in section 16.1 of the SSMU constitution and section 5.3.5 of the GSVP. Section 16.1 of the constitution requires that SSMU executives “act in good faith” and perform their duties with the “care, diligence, and skill that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in comparable circumstances.” Section 5.3.5 of the GSVP states that the VP Finance is responsible for funding the GSVP through the SSMU budget. While the GSVP is funded by a fee levy, the Judicial Board concluded that the creation of a fee levy was not in violation of the GSVP. The Board asserted in their report that because the VP Finance “stat[ed] that the SSMU should first attempt to fund the GSVP with a fee levy, he was pursuing his obligation of ensuring that the GSVP would be funded.” The VP Finance had also suggested at the October 11 meeting that if the fee levy was unable to be implemented, cuts to the SSMU budget could be made to ensure the funding of the GSVP. This, in the eyes of the Judicial Board, again proved that the VP Finance did not violate the standard of care.

In an email to the Daily, President Mansdoerfer said he is “glad that the issue is resolved and that all processes were followed in the fee being brought to referendum.” In a statement to the Daily, Senator Buraga expressed that although the Board did not file in favour of his case, he is “glad that [his] case started a conversation about SSMU’s role in protecting survivors of sexual violence.” Elaborating, he promised to “continue to fight for permanent funding for the GSVP. [He] look[s] forward to working with the SSMU President and VP Finance to do so,” he finished.

On what’s next after the verdict, Buraga said that he is waiting to see how the SSMU executives restructure the fees before he takes further action on the matter.

Mansdoerfer also told the Daily that SSMU “recently approved the hiring of two of the coordinators for the GSVP,” and that they are “looking forward to them starting their work soon.”

The post Judicial Board Releases Verdict appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The Judicial Board, a body of SSMU tasked with hearing disputes pertaining to the Society’s constitution, met on November 20 to hear the petition of Bryan Buraga (Arts and Science Senator) V. Juan Wang (VP Finance) and Tre Mansdoerfer (President). Buraga and Mansdoerfer were present; however, Wang was not in attendance.

In his opening statements, the petitioner, Buraga, outlined his goals. He is seeking a verdict from the Judicial Board that would validate the alleged unconstitutionality of the Anti Violence Fee Levies passed on October 11 and 18 at Legislative council. Additionally, he is looking to nullify the fee levies and their referenda. Buraga stated that he wishes that VP Finance Wang and the Executive Committee both be found in violation of section 16.1 of the SSMU Constitution, which demands a standard of care for SSMU members.

The petitioner maintains that the versions of both the Anti Violence Fee Levy (AVFL) motions passed on October 11 and 18 were not constitutional. The policies did not have enough movers in the eyes of the constitution, but did adhere to the Standing Rules and the precedent set by several motions from previous years, respondent Mansdoerfer pointed out. As confirmed by case witnesses Husayn Jamal (Speaker on Call) and Samuel Howard (Parliamentarian), the Internal Regulations, which designate the Standing Rules as the default, overrules the constitution when there is a conflict. Buraga, originally a mover of the motion, removed his own name from the October 11 AVFL through a Google doc, without notifying the other movers, thus causing the conflict.

Because the AVFL, which would allow for the implementation of the Gendered and Sexual Violence Policy (GSVP), is not coming into effect until January 2019, nearly four months after it was passed in council, Buraga believes that this constitutes a breach in standard of care. In his opening statements, Buraga asserted that “if the Vice-President (Finance) and the Executive Committee had made the Gendered and Sexual Violence Policy a priority, they would have found the necessary permanent funding for it. […] This case isn’t just about the Gendered and Sexual Violence Policy today, this is to set a precedent that the Officers of the Society must act to keep students safe when they have the ability to do so.”

He continued, “the Vice President (Finance) and the Executive Committee have used the Anti-Violence Fee Levy to abdicate their responsibilities and tell survivors that we need to wait to feel safe, and that is unacceptable. The Vice-President (Finance) and the Executive Committee have failed me, and I believe the Judicial Board will find the same.”

Buraga also shared his own experiences with sexual violence in his speech. “To this day,” he said, “I still have to retraumatize myself every time I see my abuser at a SSMU function. To me, this represents a failure on the part of SSMU to protect its members through its duly-passed, and currently active, Gendered and Sexual Violence Policy.”
The respondent did not disagree that SSMU has a responsibility to respect its students. The respondent argued that the Executive Committee acted in “the best interest of the Society” when choosing to implement a fee to support the GSVP, emphasizing that SSMU does want safety for it’s students, and to ensure that measures to protect them are sufficiently funded. Throughout his arguments, Buraga insisted that not only should the GSVP be funded immediately, but that SSMU itself, not SSMU members should be the ones paying for it.

Pointing to the $10,000 spent providing transportation for students at SSMU’s Children of the Corn Halloween party, Buraga argued that there is funding available for the GSVP. He specifically referenced a quote from VP Internal Matthew McLaughlin from the October 29 General Assembly: “my priority was to make sure that everyone got home safe, and of course, cost comes after safety.” The respondent countered by highlighting the difference between an emergency situation, like students being stuck at MacDonald Campus, after transportation refused to show up, and altering the operating budget for the Society.

In an interview with the Daily, one of the respondents, President Mansdoerfer, said that there is a desire to restructure funding so that policies like the GSVP would not have to be the responsibility of the students. “I met with the head of McGill finance in September to talk about how we can restructure some of our fees. […] This discussion was going to happen regardless of [this case] or not.” He continued, explaining that “the finance committee has a new objective to relook at how Society fees are structured, and come March, they should have a proposal. The end desire would be to have not just this, [but other fees too] that we identify as part of SSMU, be in the operating budget. […] It’s ridiculous when you have a thousand fees. It’s not a fair structure.”

In an interview with the Daily, Buraga summarized his goals. “One of the intentions I had filing this case was to strike down the AVFL as a way of forcing immediate funding.” He elaborated, saying, “I don’t want the funding to disappear from this [the GSVP] […] if the AVFL ends up happening it’s not the end of the world. It’s great, because there’s a permanent source of funding but I really hope it’s integrated into the operating budget as a permanent thing.”

The Judicial Board now has two weeks to write a report outlining their recommendation. The report will then have to be ratified by the Board of Directors before any action is taken.

The post AVFL Brought to J-Board appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Iran is suffering its worst drought in decades, which has sparked nationwide protests over water shortages and other related environmental consequences. In turn, authorities have been cracking down on environmentalists. The Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), a force independent from the Iranian government, has been engaging in mass arrests of environmentalists since January. Human Rights Watch reports that 50 other activists have been detained or arrested.

Canadian – Iranian environmentalists Kavous Seyed Emami, founder of the PWHF, died in custody shortly after being arrested. Officials have released little information on the death of Seyed-Emami; they ruled his death a suicide.

The UN Environment head, Erik Solheim, expressed to The Guardian his concerns about the case saying, “the message that needs to be sent is that environmentalists, like the dedicated people who are under arrest, deserve the utmost support and fullest protection which Iran’s laws and constitution guarantee. At present, Iran’s environment is under immense pressure – with water stress, land degradation, air pollution, loss of wildlife, and sand and dust storms. All who seek to protect it must be supported.”

Bayani worked at the UN Environmental Programme as a project supervisor in the Disaster Risk Reduction portfolio. Bayani returned to her native country of Iran in 2017 to work on a conservation mission with PWHF.

A friend of Bayani’s, Adam Rickards, a 2010 McGill graduate in Music Performance, reached out to the Daily in an email to raise awareness of Bayani’s situation and connection to Canada and McGill. “In late January 2018, I received a somewhat frantic message from another friend from my McGill days informing me that [Bayani] had been arrested as part of a crackdown by the Iranian judiciary (the religious extremist wing of Iran’s government),” wrote Rickards. “As you can well imagine, I was absolutely beside myself imagining that my good friend was in prison in Iran. But I thought quite reasonably that it would be best to remain calm, and I still reasonably assumed that things would be worked out, even if it took a little while.” Rickards also “noticed that the Canadian (and indeed international) press was largely silent on [Bayani]’s relationship to Canada, but I felt that maybe the best approach was indeed to be silent. Not anymore.” He continued on, writing, “On October 24, the Judiciary announced that the charges brought against the environmentalists, including [Bayani], would include ‘Corruption on Earth,’ one of the highest criminal charges possible in Iran and a charge that opens her and her fellow environmentalists to a possible death sentence […] this was a nauseating thing to wake up to. I wish only to reach out to the McGill community to support one of our own. I also wish that Canadian media would pick up on the fact that Niloufar has a strong connection to Canada and to Montreal, and that this story deserves important consideration. In short, I simply want this to be known, and to be spread widely.”

The post McGill Alumna Arrested in Iran appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Manuel Balán (MB): Brazil has a presidential system, meaning that the executive is concentrated into one non-legislator called the president. Brazil has one of the most restrictive two-round systems in the region. Even though the difference between the candidates was substantive in the first round, we are still holding a runoff election. In Argentina, where there’s also a two-round system, if there’s a ten per cent difference between the first and the second candidate in the first round, the first candidate is elected. According to the rules elsewhere in the region, Bolsonaro would already have been elected. The other thing that is important to know is that part of the congressional elections are concurrent with the presidential election; they all happen at the same time during the first round. This leads to what we usually call coattail effects. The candidates that receive votes in a presidential election are able to bring with them a number of legislators. In the context of this particular election this means that even if a huge upset takes place this Sunday and Bolsonaro loses this election, he’s already managed to greatly empower his coalition of legislators in Congress. Not to the same degree that he got almost 47 per cent of the vote, but still significant enough gains at the congressional level that will, if elected president, allow him to more easily create coalitions in government. But also, if by any luck of the draw there is an upset [and Bolsonaro is not elected], his supporters will still control Congress quite cohesively and it would be difficult for any non Bolsonaro president to actually get anything passed. Bolsonaro has better odds in creating a coalition that will get legislation passed, but I don’t mean this in a good way.

MD: Where is Bolsonaro’s popularity coming from?

MB: I think Bolsonaro’s popularity comes from a couple of different sources. The main characteristic of Bolsonaro that brings him popularity isn’t what gets all this media attention. It’s not his racism or misogyny that’s getting him votes, it’s his “anti system” attitude. All the well-established parties in Brazil that have received most of the presidential votes in past elections did very poorly in this election. The PT lost a lot of votes, but if you look at the former opposition party they also did super horribly this election. If you look at the person who was the third place candidate in the last election, Marina Silva, she went from 20 per cent of the vote to one per cent. Everything sort of in the middle of the spectrum, centre left or centre right, basically anything that wasn’t extreme [Balán notes that he doesn’t find the PT extreme] lost its votes, and they lost most of those votes to Bolsonaro. So this can be seen as an anti-system type of attitude by voters that are frustrated with a number of different things but two big ones. One is an economy that is in recession and has been struggling for years now, and the second is related, to some extent, to all the corruption scandals that we’ve seen. And these corruption scandals have taken place during a PT government (but do not address only the PT). If you look at the prior composition of Congress almost all Congress members are being prosecuted or indicted for corruption charges. They are all involved in this. So a rejection towards politics as usual, plus an economy on the downturn, means people start looking for strongman figures. We’ve seen this elsewhere, where this larger-thanlife, maybe quasi-authoritarian figure, who is not “politics as usual” rises in popularity. This in a way explains one chunk of the vote. I think another part that cannot be forgotten is that the PT have been in government for 12 years. Their government, even with a lot of mistakes, empowered a lot of minorities, they helped a lot of lower classes, they brought a bunch of people out of poverty. Again with lots of mistakes, but they did do this. So there is an anti-PT sentiment in Brazil that is very strong. Just as we saw the #EleNão movement, we also saw the PTnão (anyone but the PT) movement. So people felt if Bolsonaro was the guy that is going to beat the PT, then so be it. This was a very antisystem and a very anti-PT vote.

MD: Was this election, then, more about sending a message than about electing a government people like?

MB: To some extent, yes. To another extent, it is about electing a powerful figure, someone who seems to be a strongman. Bolsonaro certainly fits that bill. This can be debated, but I don’t think that because this guy is a racist, misogynist, militaristic guy, that those sentiments are necessarily on the increase in Brazil. I think these sentiments have always been in Brazil. There’s a big part of society that resonates with these types of claims, not 47 per cent, but a big part. These sentiments are alive and well, but I don’t think that’s what people are choosing him for. But I think it’s not a minor factor, either. This guy has been in politics for a long time, and he was someone who was not taken seriously by the PT or by anybody. What explains why he is starting to be taken seriously is that he is receiving support and being taken seriously by the strong economic powers in the country. So this gives him credibility. Also, for years now we have seen the rise of evangelism as a very powerful societal force, and as a very powerful political force. There’s an evangelical part of Congress and Bolsonaro is very much associated with them, and a part of the evangelical movement in this election. This also helps explain the rise of Bolsonaro.

MD: Is the comparison of Trump and Bolsonaro, like we’ve seen in the media, valid?

MB: I think there are some similarities. These are very different countries and Bolsonaro and Trump are very different themselves. But I think there are some points of connection. Trump is a businessman; Bolsonaro is military. This is a significant difference in terms of their background. I do think that Brazil, and the forces at play in Brazil and in the U.S., are significantly different in many ways. But, yeah he is generally is compared to Trump. I think he is, in my personal view, much scarier than Trump – and I’m scared by Trump. He is much scarier than Trump in many ways. We can also draw comparisons with other current figures like Orban, or in terms of the processes that are behind his rise to power, there are some parallels as what happened in Italy in the 90s, and how the prosecuting of corruption generates a void in the political sphere and how out of this void another sort of “larger than life figure” [Silvio Berlusconi] emerges, that was terrible for corruption in Italy actually. So in drawing that parallel, I think Bolsonaro will be elected, and he will be terrible for corruption in Brazil. This is not the fix for corruption, its making things worse. So yeah I think Trump is a valid comparison. I think Orban is a valid comparison. I think Berlusconi is a valid comparison.

MD: What policies do you see coming from Bolsonaro’s election?

MB: There are a couple of different things here. For all his racism, misogyny, classism, etc. I think those are things that he may not explicitly change policy about. I don’t think that he will be a classic authoritarian military guy that will take over power and close Congress. I don’t think this is the type of scenario we should envision going forward. That doesn’t mean [that his election] isn’t a grim picture. I think the grim picture encompases two things. One is that any sort of environmental protection is gone out the window, along with any sort of protection of Indigenous rights. Because environmental protection is out the window, this means complete and utter free range for exploitation of the Amazon. It wasn’t that the PT was great about environmental policy, but this is going to be a free for all. Here [the environment] is where he is going to move quite quickly. This is in part what explains the level of support that he gets from business. These are mining companies these, are natural resource companies; this is why The Wall Street Journal published an editorial in favour of Bolsonaro, saying that he is the right choice for Brazil. I think what lies behind this is business interests and lack of regulation to exploit natural resources. This is very scary to me. And this is where I think we will see policy changing. Now the other part: the racism, the misogyny, etc. I don’t think there will be changes in policy, but I do think electing a guy who says these things, as we saw in the U.S., brings certain free range for people in their daily lives to exert these kinds of discourses. And we already are seeing this. So I think actual conditions on the ground in Brazil when it comes to minorities, women, other disempowered people, are going to get significantly worse. There’s a difference between policy and what happens, but I think what happens is its going to get significantly worse. If this guy says this then why aren’t we doing what he says. [The support of Bolsonaro] validates a very misogynistic, a very racist, a very classist type of attitude towards people. One place where we may see some changes, one of the groups that is the most disadvantaged in Brazil are domestic workers, and they were completely unregulated up until recently. They worked terrible hours for terrible wages. This was changed, and now they’re regulated. The conditions still aren’t great, but there is some improvement. Everybody [in Congress] voted in favour of this except for one person. And he has made it a point of his campaign to advertise that he was the one guy that opposed domestic worker protections. Guess who that is? Bolsonaro.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length

The post Not “Politics as Usual” appeared first on The McGill Daily.

LGBTQ2I+ History Month began in 1994 in Missouri, at the initiative of a high school teacher hoping to raise awareness of queer histories and struggles. Many educational institutions across both the US and the UK celebrate the month, yet McGill is the first educational institution in Canada to host an LGBTQ2I+ History Month. Meryem Benslimane, the Equity Education Advisor for the Office of the Provost and Vice Principal (Academic) and a chief organizer for the month told The Daily, “we’re really proud of doing that, but also kind of sad that we are the first to do so.” Eve Finley, one of the speakers and the Equity Facilitator at the Office of the Dean of Students had the same concerns, “it’s cool to be the first, but it’s also like, what? We’re the first? In 2018? That’s pretty wild!”

Every speaker stressed the importance of having an LGBTQ2I+ history month at McGill and recognizing these histories in general. Angela Campbell, Associate Provost (Equity and Academic Policies), said in her speech, “[At McGill] our symbols and iconography, the luminaries and literary canons of our respective disciplines: none fully reflect the campus community in a way that accounts for all of our identities’ experiences.” Regarding representation and acceptance on campus, she said “we’re not where we need to be, and the road before us remains a long one […] I don’t think any institution, McGill included will ever be in any position to be able to say that this work is fully done; it is necessarily ongoing.”

Iain Blair, Vice President of the Archives Gaies du Québec (AGQ), a McGill alum and former coordinator of Gays and Lesbians McGill (GALM) spoke of the different attitudes towards queer people in the late 1980s. “I think it’s positive to note that the institutional environment has changed a great deal for LGBTQ people here,” he said. He recounted a story of a GALM film showing which was interrupted by engineering students wielding plastic guns filled with urine that they sprayed on the filmgoers, and physically assaulting a few participants. At that time, he said, there was no institutional support or action. “An event like this shows just how far we’ve come since those decades.”

The Director of IGSF, and a speaker for the night, Alanna Thain, spoke to the Daily about the lasting queer history and culture at McGill. “[McGill’s queer community is] not new,” she said, “a great part of this project [has been] to go back and kind of find where those historical figures are at McGill […] Sometimes we just need to find different ways to perceive something already there. That’s one thing that LGBTQ2I+ history does really effectively; it opens our eyes to differences [within queer experiences].”

Thain also emphasized the different ways McGill can add more queer content into its syllabi, calling for an increased hiring of tenure track staff at IGSF. Further, she believes that “[McGill has] the coolest IGSF faculty out there! […] I actually really think that! If you look at the [kind of ] stuff that people are doing here […] I know that people are doing amazing work – really innovative work that’s making real differences in people’s lives.”

“I think it’s really important to look at history because it’s about creating better futures. We also think about this in terms of our students, [our faculty and our staff ] the people who are very much keeping this tradition alive,” she elaborated.

Meryem Benslimane echoed these sentiments asking “if, in the curriculum, there is a mention of an LGBTQ2I+ historical figure, to not erase the sexual orientation or gender identity of the person, [and] also to highlight these pioneers of LGBTQ2I+ history. […]Here at McGill, there are a few classes where you can talk about queer history, but in general, in the education system here in Montreal, and in Quebec, queer history is often erased.” Benslimane went on, “LGBTQ2I+ students, staff, and faculty still have to navigate through discrimination, through sexual violence, they experience more harassment in environments, more depression; so it is still very important to talk and to highlight the history, and also the [current needs] of LGBTQ2I+ students, staff, and faculty.”

Eve Finley, who also runs the Rez Project series, in-residence workshops that educate first year students on gender and sexuality issues, takes very concrete measures in her work to teach queer history. She explained, “in our workshop we start off with a queer history quiz now. [This] is a fun, interesting way to get people to challenge what people know about queer history,” Finley also mentioned the “other initiatives on campus that are trying to do that work,” and how “we just need to make sure that there is support [for their expansion] like [with] queer history month, Rez Project, IGSF, and other things.”

The difficulty of actually discovering LGBTQ2I+ histories was also a topical theme of the night. Iain Blair mentioned the constant erasure of queerness in history, and how the recovery of identities came from grassroots movements. “In the earlier days of the movement, community organizations began gathering magazines, brochures, documents, and many other materials which were purposefully ignored, if not destroyed by a lot of the official institutions of memory.”

Thain told a particular anecdote about erasure in her remarks to the audience. Thain teaches a film called Forbidden Love: the True Unashamed Stories of Lesbian Lives, which details the real and fictional lives of queer women during the 1950s and 1960s and is available for free through the National Film Board of Canada. The film’s directors found most of their material not from organizations like AGQ, but from police archives. “It’s not just about knowing our histories, it’s about knowing how we get our hands on those histories as well,” she said.

Thain further called attention to erasure both past and present, asking the audience to consider “the histories lost to the pressure of silence or conformity,” and “what stories are going untold right now.” Most were also hopeful about the future of this event and recognition of the LGBTQ2I+ community. Finley expressed her enthusiasm saying, “I hope it becomes a regular celebration. The number of people who showed up tonight, and the fact that this is a room full of 17-18 year olds, and 50 year olds, is really fucking cool because we have so few spaces that are intergenerational. [It’s so important] for people in these communities to actually be in the same space and be able to talk to each other […] I hope it continues to be [an intergenerational community gathering], and not just about history.”

Thain too expressed desire for the festivities and sentiments to extend beyond the one month currently allocated to LGBTQ2I+ history. “When you have a history month I always think the goal of it is not to end [on the last day of the month], but to make it a more present part of everyday life all year round. […] No one stops being gay on November 1st.”

LGBTQ2I+ History Month continues all through October, with more than 20 events planned. For a full schedule you can visit SEDE’s website.

The interviews were edited for clarity

The post McGill LGBTQ2I+ History Month appeared first on The McGill Daily.

I am fat. Sitting down to write this article, my first instinct is to start by saying “I’m not that fat.” I am shrouded in shame about my body, making excuses for my size before I’ve even made my first point. Fuck that. I am fat. My doctor certainly thinks so and has told me repeatedly throughout the years. Since I was thirteen. Since I weighed 50 pounds less than I do now. Fuck that too. I try to embrace my body: I get told I’m beautiful, not fat. These things do not have to exist separately, and yet that’s all we know. If anything I am told to focus on my health, and weight will follow suit. Fuck that in particular.

Last week the Huffington Post published a report by Michael Hobbes called “Everything you Know about Obesity is Wrong.” The article is astounding, detailing the horrifying and potentially life-threatening treatment many fat people have gone through. “I have never written a story where so many of my sources cried during interviews, where they shook with anger describing their interactions with doctors and strangers and their own families,” he says. The article details crash diets, offensive doctors, unsolicited advice, and, of course, shame.

I try to embrace my body: I get told I’m beautiful, not fat. These things do not have to exist separately, and yet that’s all we know.

Physicians, Hobbes points out, are usually in good shape and this influences how they view and treat fat patients. Some also “sincerely believe that shaming fat people is the best way to motivate them to lose weight.” Emily, one of the interviewees, talked about going for an MRI scan before getting an ovarian cyst removed, only to be shamed by her doctor. “Look at that skinny woman in there just trying to get out,” he said. Another woman, Corissa Enneking, was equally mistreated by her doctor when at her lightest weight. He congratulated her on her eating disorder because it had caused her to lose weight.

“Ask almost any fat person about [their] interactions with the healthcare system and you will hear a story, sometimes three, the same as Enneking’s,” Hobbes comments.

I remember getting my yearly checkup from my family doctor when I was 15, with my dad in the room, because I was a minor. My doctor read aloud my weight and height, pointed out that I was in the 90th percentile for both. How this meant I was obese. He told me to lose weight, maybe watch what I eat. That was all the advice he had to give me. I also remember trying to hide how devastated I was for the rest of the appointment. My doctor did not ask me what activities I was doing — at the time I was on my school’s rugby team, practicing every day and playing twice a week — or comment on my perfectly fine cholesterol: he saw my body as unhealthy, so I was unhealthy.

I am embarrassed of how I look most of the time. In public, I enjoy myself until I can’t anymore, until I’m eating and get worried someone will think it’s too much, and maybe it is too much, maybe I should eat less. Maybe tomorrow I won’t eat at all.

I’m worried about the space I take up. I’ve always been the biggest of my friends, and one of the most boisterous. Is it too much? Am I too much? When I have to awkwardly squeeze into every desk and constantly shift because I am never comfortable, but then spend the entire class with my hand raised, do I make people uncomfortable? When I was on the rugby team, or when I was boxing, or when I was doing dance numbers in theatre, did people laugh at me? Think that I was either the poor fat girl trying to lose weight, or that I was just brave for living my life?

I’m worried about the space I take up. I’ve always been the biggest of my friends, and one of the most boisterous. Is it too much? Am I too much?

I’ve never owned a bikini, only a one-piece swimsuit, that I rarely wear because going swimming means exposing my body. I saw a picture of myself in a bathing suit two summers ago and didn’t dare go swimming for another year. I never wear sweatpants because I don’t want to be labeled as the stereotypical lazy fat person. Instead, sometimes I wear control top tights underneath my jeans; I have had a corset in my Amazon shopping cart for six months. I do not live a day where I don’t wish I could change my body.

I’ve only really been called fat by other people in elementary school. When I was 12, a boy told me I could win a fight by sitting on someone and suffocating them with my weight. I wonder if people notice my discomfort, how I move back if my stomach roll touches a table. Or how I lift my chin to avoid any fat gathering there if I think someone is watching me.

“This is how fat-shaming works,” Hobbes says, “It is visible and invisible, public and private, hidden and everywhere at the same time.” And it has absolutely horrendous effects. Hobbes mentions a 2015 study on weight discrimination and mortality which found that fat people who face discrimination based on weight have shorter life expectancies than fat people who don’t. In its conclusion, the study stated the possibility that, “the stigma associated with being overweight is more harmful than actually being overweight.”

“This is how fat-shaming works,” Hobbes says, “It is visible and invisible, public and private, hidden and everywhere at the same time.”

I have biases against my own body, even against others who have the same body type. I have consoled myself by looking at another fat person and thinking “well at least I’m not that big!” Or I become scared that I could get that big. It’s vicious. I don’t want to think this way but I can’t help myself; this is a trend in other fat people too. Erin Harrop, an eating disorder researcher, says this is because “fat people grow up in the same fat-hating culture that non- fat people do.” Unlike other marginalized groups, fat people don’t meet up. Fat people “never get a moment of declaring their identity, of marking themselves as part of a distinct group,” Hobbes notices. “They still live in a society that believes weight is temporary, that losing it is urgent and achievable, that being comfortable in their bodies is merely ‘glorifying obesity.’” Another interviewee, community outreach director for the National Fat Acceptance organization, Tigress Osborn, summarizes that “you can’t claim an identity if everyone around you is saying it doesn’t or shouldn’t exist.”

I doubt that Hobbes’ article, while a breath of fresh air, will actually change anything. However, he still did something more pow- erful than just reporting the story. He asked his subjects how they would like to be portrayed and photographed them in that way. Some were empowering like Erin Harrop’s, who was photographed playing a superhero game with her son. “I like that I’m sweaty, dirty and messy, […] that I’m not hiding my stomach, thighs or arms. Not because I’m comfortable being photographed like that, but because I want to be – and I want others to feel free to be like that, too,” she said of her portrait. And Joy Cox, another interviewee, said, “being depicted as a female CEO — one who is also black and fat—means so much to me. It is a representation of the reclamation of power in the boardroom, classroom, and living room of my body. I own all of this.”

For my pictures I wanted to show myself relaxed, just living. Not posing for anyone, or trying to hide my body. I’m tired of being made to believe that I have to be smaller to be happy.

The post Am I Too Much? appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Guest Speakers
In their presentation, representatives from Elections SSMU outlined their new elections timeline and goals for this year. They pointed out that during the 2018 Winter referendum, more people voted in just the questions portion than for SSMU executive positions. 1,500 people voted in the referendum, and 1,200 of those voted only on the question proposing a fall reading week. Longer nomination periods for elections are now in place, with hopes to open the internal regulations to also lengthen the extended nomination period. Elections SSMU also expressed desire to encourage more students to run for executive positions as most were uncontested. A motion to accept the proposed timeline was put forward later in the meeting and subsequently passed. Last February, SSMU passed a motion to de-gender their language; the Gender Language researcher position was set up and awarded a contract of 35 hours. At this meeting, the SSMU Gender Language Researcher presented some of their findings and recommendations, a few of which had already been implemented. First, the researcher spoke about their plans to address misgendering at council. They worked with Husayn Jamal, SSMU’s stand-in parliamentarian, to redraft Robert’s Rules, a manual used for parliamentary procedures, to accommodate instances of misgendering. “Councillors must address each other formally, usually in the form of councillor last name, and avoid referring to one another using third person pronouns to promote a cordial environment. Should the speaker notice the misgendering of another councillor, they should call this to the attention of the council in the form ‘before we continue with debate I would like to call attention to the pronouns specified on councillor last name’s placard.’ Should any councillor notice the misgendering of another councillor they should call this to the attention of the speaker on a point of personal privilege,” the researcher explained. While councillor placards already had gender pronouns on them, there were concerns of legibility. In order to address this concern, the Researcher implemented a colour-coded system for placards: green for councillors identifying as she/her, burgundy for those identifying as he/him, and black for those who go by them/them pronouns. While the researcher pointed out that these are not an exhaustive list of pronouns, they are the most common, and more pronouns and colours may be added as needed. This practice is now standard, unless a councillor requests otherwise, and a councillor may change their pronouns at anytime.

Motions
Council also passed the motion regarding the nomination of VP University Affairs, Jacob Shapiro to the SSMU Board of Directors. Shapiro was nominated to serve as the 4th member of the Board of Directors effective immediately as he is also the only executive eligible to be nominated to the Board. One of the more contested issues brought to the meeting was a concern raised by Law Faculty representative councillor Marie Pilote over point three of section 2.7, which outlines what “may be ruled as out of order by the Speaker at their discretion, subject to a successful Point of Order by Councillors.” Section 2.7.3 originally stated that any statements made which contravenes the the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or the Quebec Charter of Human rights and freedoms will not be tolerated. Pilote objected to the inclusion of reference to both the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. “As a law student I find it odd that there is the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms there because normally it’s for government and things, not for ruling relations between individuals […] It’s not that it is a bad document its just that the purpose of what I think is going on is more about respect between councillors, so it’s not the perfect tool to do this,” Pilote stated during debate. “The Quebec charter is more appropriate you could say because it can apply to relationships between individuals,” Pilote continued. “The Canadian charter […] is not the best fit.” Pilote continued fighting for the Charter of Canadian Rights and Freedoms to be taken out of the standing rules, and only the Quebec Charter to be mentioned. There were protests from council members including Shapiro who said, “I definitely see councillor Pilote’s point, [but] I don’t [think] anyone’s trying to use this in a legal context. Both of these are documents that were […] supposed to set values. I think having them in our organizational structure is important for our values.” Arts Representative, councillor Rebecca Scarra expressed her thought on the matter: “As individuals who live in Canada and as a corporation that operates within Canada we should be held to the standard of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” Arts and Science Representative Bryan Buraga was also in disagreeance with Councilor Pilote. “I understand what councillor Pilote’s arguments are […] but where I have problems with [removing reference to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms] is the appearance of it—the symbolism [of] taking such a fundamental document, a document that’s supposed to encapsulate what it means to be Canadian out [of the section] I understand that it shouldn’t really apply to the situation, only the Quebec Charter should, but […] if there is no harm done by just keeping it in there, personally I’ll vote against it.” Councillor Sanchez put forward an amendment to the section which later passed. Section 2.7.3 now reads “statements that contravene the Charte des droits et libertés de la personne (Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms), and/or the spirit of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms [may be ruled as out of order by the Speaker at their discretion].”

VIP Culture at SSMU Events
VP Internal Affairs, Matthew McLaughlin, proposed a policy to deal with the history of power abuses by the VP Internal regarding alcohol consumption. McLaughlin pointed to the commonality of having bottle service for both the VP Internal and the Student Society Programming Network (SSPN), a move which often resulted in members from both organizations being severely intoxicated and unable to perform their duties. The policy stated that no SSMU funds should be used for alcoholic purchases for the executive, and that the executive shall not become intoxicated at events, in order to maintain an optimal mental and physical state. The sentiment of the policy was applauded, but it’s wording was criticized as vague and there were concerns over an absence of any punitive measures if the VP Internal or SSPN members were to become intoxicated at their events. An amendment put forward by councillor Sanchez to change the title to Policy on VP Internal Intoxication and VIP Culture at SSMU event passed, but the motion itself was set aside in order to discuss further motions. Arts Councillor Andrew Figueiredo, Senator Buraga, and VP McLaughlin left to attempted to implement the recommended changes. After councillors were assigned to their committees for the year, the policy was again put forward. However the solution reached by the caucusing parties, that “any accusation that the VP Internal became intoxicated to the point of that they were incapable of performing their duties […] be brought to the legislative council for a discussion and vote on possible disciplinary measures,” was still deemed insufficient. Councillor Sanchez motioned for the policy to be debated at the next council on September 27; the motion carried.

The meeting closed with reports from SSMU executives detailing their accomplishments over the summer. All reports have since been made publicly available on SSMU’s website.

The post Amendment to the Amendment appeared first on The McGill Daily.

With the exception of a brief PQ government from 2012-2014, the PLQ has governed the province since 2003. As a result, the guiding principle in this election seems to be a desire for change. The CAQ, whose policies consist of lowering taxes and creating more room for “innovation” by creating tax breaks for businesses, while hoping to improve Quebec’s public education and health services, is leading in the polls: the CAQ is polling at 36.6%, the PLQ at 28.7%, the PQ at 18.4%, QS at 10.9%, and all smaller parties comprise 5.4% altogether. The PLQ’s position in the polls, and general public opinion of them, makes it seem increasingly unlikely that they will win in October. The PQ is trailing behind, and QS, the only remaining economically-left party, has yet to make substantial headway beyond Montreal.

A few students who spoke to the Daily about the upcoming election expressed support or appreciation for Québec Solidaire. U1 Arts Student, Rachel Schleifer, told the Daily in an interview: “I really admire the values of QS. Their platform is focused on issues such as environmentalism, social justice, and access to education. I also like that the party does not have a sole leader in the traditional sense and instead has two spokespeople, one female and one male […] I value their inclusion of candidates and willingness to work with various community activists in the province.” Another student, Mayaluna Zama Bierlich, U2 Arts, echoed these sentiments in a separate interview, saying, “I’m voting for Québec Solidaire because I believe that their policies most closely reflect my own political beliefs, and that they’re genuinely committed to adopting those policies.”

Schleifer also touched on a particularly prevalent issue in this election: separatism and independence. “Québec Solidaire shares this goal of separating Quebec from Canada, but I do think that separation is not as prevalent in these elections as it has in past years. And unlike many other Quebecois parties, QS does not use themes of racism or cultural prejudice to further their goals of provincial sovereignty”. Only one of the four parties evaluated here, the PLQ, is a federalist party, meaning that they support Canadian confederacy and Quebec’s role within it.
Chloe Wong-Mersereau, an U2 Arts student, has committed to voting, although she has yet to decide who she will vote for. “I will be voting on October 1st and it will be my first time voting in a provincial election,” she said, “I’m still doing my research on the different parties, their platforms, and the party members to make my decision.” Wong-Mersereau also spoke to the importance of youth voting: “I think it is very important for young people to take that initiative and properly compare the parties before making any major decisions. There are a lot of important questions on the table and it is best to have a holistic view of the situation.”

Below is a breakdown of the four prominent parties competing in this election with highlights from each of their platforms.

Quebec Liberal Party (PLQ)
Incumbent (first elected in 2014)
Leader: Philippe Couillard
Slogan: To make life easier for Quebecers
Education
Pledged a total of 2.8 billion in education spending over 5 years
Promised to increase the high school graduation rate from 68 per cent to 85 per cent by 2030.
Hired 1,500 new educational professionals, 600 of which were teachers.
Wants to add educational assistants to kindergarten and first grade to help with teaching, technical assistance, and the care of special needs students.
Immigration
Supported a plan that would have Quebec take in 49,000 to 53,00 immigrants this year.
Pledged $25 million over the next four years to programs which would provide French lessons and rural community integration to immigrants.
Secularism and Identity
Purporters of 2017’s Bill 62, a bill which forbid the wearing of religious symbols, including the hijab, while giving or receiving public services. The original bill was suspended by the Quebec superior court on grounds of discrimination. Couillard is now stating that local police forces should decide whether women on their force can wear garments such as the hijab.
Environment
Plans to spend $2.9 billion on sustainable transport initiatives by 2023, also in favour of the federal cap-and-trade program to reduce emissions nationally.
Sovereignty
The Liberals, and Couilliard, are federalist, and in favour of Quebec signing the constitution. Couillard has pushed for greater legislative power for Quebec within the confederation.

Coalition Avenir Québec
Leader: Francois Legault
Slogan: Maintenant
Education
The party hopes to cut education costs by eliminating school boards, and transferring their authority by and large to the schools themselves.
Would replace school boards with local service centres to provide the necessary administrative supports to schools.
Immigration
Wishes to reduce, at least temporarily, the number of immigrants Quebec intakes from 50,000 to 40,000.
Supports the implication of a “values test,” a test to make sure that all incoming immigrants hold “Quebecois” values before receiving a Quebec selection certificate.
Immigrants would have to prove that they are actively looking for employment, although critics have questioned the legality of this policy.
Secularism and Identity
Believes in creating a “Secularism Charter” which would regulate the religious accommodations provided to civil servants.
Opposes wearing religious symbols, especially by those who possess civil power, like police officers and school teachers.
Environment
Supports reducing greenhouse gasses through technological innovation.
Sovereignty
The CAQ is a “nationalist” party; they advocate for more power for Quebec within Canada. The CAQ would like to see Quebec have more sway in immigration and fiscal matters as well as a say in Supreme Court nominees. The CAQ has pledged to never hold a referendum while in power.

Parti Quebecois
Leader: Jean-Francois Lisee
Slogan: Sérieusement
Education
Pledged to slowly move towards both free CEGEP and free University education in the province, starting with low income students. This plan is estimated to cost $400 million.
Would also reduce funding for English language CEGEPS in an attempt to offer better English language instruction at French CEGEPS.
Immigration
Opposes the influx of 50,000 immigrants a year, and would like to receive a “more reasonable number” from the auditor general.
Immigrants Quebec does admit will need to have skills in French as well as an existing knowledge of “Quebec values” before arriving in the province. 25 per cent of those selected would also be made to settle in rural communities.
Secularism and Identity
Believes that anyone in public service, such as prison guards, judges, prosecutors, police officers, and school children, should not be allowed to wear religious symbols, including the hijab.
Environment
Would encourage Quebec’s pension fund, the Caisse de Dépôt, to divest from fossil fuel related companies and the province to ban all new fossil fuel projects.
Would explore incentives to carpool through creating an app. Passengers and drivers would be awarded $4 for their first year using the app, and $3 for any subsequent trip taken after that using the app.
Sovereignty
The PQ are a separatist party, and will continue to advocate for an independent Quebec, yet they will not hold a referendum in their first term in power. Under the PQ, the earliest referendum would be held in 2022.

Quebec Solidaire
Leader: QS has a non-hierarchical structure. Instead of a party leader, the party has two spokespeople: Manon Masse and Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois.
Slogan: Populaire
Education
Would supply free education to everyone in the province, from pre-school to university.
Immigration
Wants to create resource centres for immigrants which would provide French lessons, and access to employment information.
Secularism and Identity
Opposes those wielding state power, like police officers, wearing religious symbols like the hijab. However, QS does not oppose the wearing of religious symbols by those receiving public services.
Environment
Would ban all gasoline-powered cars from the province by 2050.
Promised that all cars sold in the province will be electric or hybrid by 2030.
Pledged to reduce carbon emissions by 95 per cent in the next 30 years.
Would ensure more sustainable waste management by introducing policies where the polluter pays.
Sovereignty
Advocates for a sovereign Quebec, and would like to hold a referendum, after a committee to outline the terms of an independent Quebec is formed and has run its course.

The post Quebec is voting, will you? appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Floods in Kerala
Kerala, a state located in south-western India, is practically underwater, new NASA satellite images show. Since August 8, the Indian state of Kerala has experienced a particularly horrendous spell of monsoon rain, wherein the state receivied one third more than usual precipitation, and subsequent flooding. Over 400 people have lost their lives in the flooding epidemic, with close to a million others displaced. Rescue operations have since ended but significant funds are needed to start rebuilding and rehabilitating the land. In line with Kerala and India’s past actions during natural disasters, the government is denying any and all offers of foreign aid, a move which local officials are condemning, considering the level of damage in the area. Instead, the government of Kerala has set up The Chief Minister’s Distress Relief Fund for civilian donations.
It is expected that Kerala will continue to suffer damages both physically and financially. Farming, construction, and tourism were all put on hold during the height of flooding, and the state’s largest airport in Kochi was shut down for a number of weeks, only recently resuming service. In comments made to Reuters, the State Financial Minister of Kerala T.M. Thomas Isaac said he expected GDP for the area to drop by 2%. It is estimated that the tourism industry, responsible for roughly 10% of the state’s economy and 25% of the state’s jobs, will suffer a $357 million loss as a result of the flood. The Chief Minister of Kerala now believes that the original estimate of $2.8 billion (USD) for damages and repairs across the province will not be enough to rectify the trauma.

Student protests in Bangladesh
Two students died in a violent bus crash in Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh, on July 29. The tragedy has since caused outrage, prompting other students to organize protests over the condition of the country’s roads. The accident in question occurred when a speeding bus from a privately owned company ran into a group of students, killing two, and injuring many others. Accidents like this are not uncommon in Bangladesh; the World Health Organization estimates that around 300,000 people die in road accidents in the nation each year. In protest of the bus crash and the general unsafety of the roads, students in Dhaka protested these conditions by taking over the streets, only letting emergency vehicles through and making sure that all drivers are in possession of a license. Despite the success of these students, reports say that during their takeover congestion in the city dramatically decreased, the Bangladeshi Government is outraged at their conduct, using violent measures to “control the problem”.
In early August, authorities resorted to beating protesters with batons, even using water cannons and tear gas on student demonstrators outside Dhaka University. A prominent journalist, Shahidul Alam, has also been arrested for his comments made in support of the protests and against the government. Alam is now coming forward with allegations that he was tortured by authorities while in custody. Activists are concerned that if authorities continue abusing students on the street, this abuse will continue while protesters are held in custody.
While the government of Bangladesh is not in support of the students and their actions, they recently tabled a new piece of legislation including some of the demands put forward by the student protesters called The Road Transport Act 2018, which is now awaiting legislative approval.
The protests ended August 6, and while during the height of the action roads were deemed safer, since the dispersion of demonstrators, some say that the roads have reverted back to their original, dangerous condition. Bangladesh’s National Committee to Protect Shipping, Roads, and Railways reports that between July 29 and August 27, 282 road accidents were recorded resulting in 315 deaths and 819 injuries.

Canada-Saudi Arabia human rights dispute
On August 2, Chrystia Freeland, Canada’s Minister of foreign affairs tweeted her shock over Saudi Arabia’s arrest of women’s rights activist Samar Badawi. Badawi’s brother, Raif Badawi, also an activist, has been detained since 2012. In her tweet she expressed her anger over the situation and called for the release of both the siblings. “Very alarmed to learn that Samar Badawi, Raif Badawi’s sister, has been imprisoned in Saudi Arabia. Canada stands together with the Badawi family in this difficult time, and we continue to strongly call for the release of both Raif and Samar Badawi,” wrote Freeland. The following day both The Canadian Foreign Ministry and the Canadian Embassy in Saudi Arabia also shared tweets with similar sentiments to Freeland’s. On August 5 the Kingdom’s Foreign Ministry responded, also via Twitter, saying Canada had a “negative” attitude and was “interfering with the internal affairs of the Kingdom”. The ministry further declared that no new trade or investments will be made with Canada and tweeting the exile of Canada’s ambassador to the country, demanding that he leave within the next 24 hours. The Saudi government has also suspended all flights to Toronto, withdrawn support for over 15,000 students studying in Canada with the exception of medical students who are allowed temporary stay in the country , and is moving all Saudi patients receiving treatment in Canada to other countries.
Canada has stood behind its claims and has recently gained international support through a letter signed by numerous international dignitaries. As Saudi Arabia plans to behead a female activist for the first time in the Kingdom’s history, Canada is standing by Freeland’s original comments, with Prime Minister Trudeau saying in a press conference: “Canadians have always expected our government to speak strongly, firmly and politely about the need to respect human rights around the world. We will continue to stand up for Canadian values and human rights.”
There is no word yet on if Canada will make an attempt to withdraw from its existing arms deal with Saudi Arabia.

Ontario elections
Doug Ford, leader of the Ontario Progressive Conservatives, became the new premier of Ontario following the party’s majority election win on June 7 of this year. The election of Ford disrupted the consecutive 15 years of Liberal government in Ontario, ousting Kathleen Wynne as Premier. The Liberal party, for the first time in 161 years, did not win enough seats to maintain party status, winning only seven seats across the province. The NDP, led by Andrea Horvath is now the official opposition party.
Ford, during the campaign did not provide a fiscal platform like the other candidates, instead offered a list of promises with a focus on restoring “respect for the taxpayers”.
Since his election, Doug Ford and the Progressive Conservatives have followed through on a few of their promises. Highlights of the Ford Government’s actions include: the cancelling of municipal elections for the Regional Chair position across the province, the termination of Ontario’s Basic Income Project, withdrawing from Ontario’s cap and trade program and related energy programs, and reverting back to the province’s 1998 sex-ed curriculum instead of using the controversial 2015 version. Most recently, Ford introduced the Buck-A-Beer program, one of the main policies of Ford’s campaign, which would mandate the lowest price for a can of beer to be $1, with incentives for breweries to offer beer at this price.

The post International News Blurbs appeared first on The McGill Daily.