Now that Justin Trudeau has stepped down from the position, current Prime Minister Mark Carney will be in control of this nation- building project. The HSR was mentioned in Carney’s Canada Strong plan and is ostensibly a goal for Carney’s time in office. Trudeau’s administration brought up several large-scale infrastructure and resource projects, such as the Northern Gateway and Energy East pipelines, without taking any action so far. Now, Carney’s administration has inherited this burdened reputation of unfinished projects. However, American President Donald Trump’s tariffs and his bold stance on Canada’s sovereignty should provide additional motivation for Carney to complete this project. The United States has been Canada’s biggest trading partner for years, but this change in relationship means there is a need for the nation to strengthen pre-existing markets to be able to sustain itself.

Alto, the company behind the HSR, believes the project will be able to offer accommodation for Canada’s rapidly growing population. In addition to faster travel, over 50,000 jobs are expected to be created via the construction of the HSR. The company estimates that Canadians could save up to $570 million in travel efficiency, besides reducing carbon emissions by transitioning to an electric rail system. Furthermore, they claim that the project will contribute an annual $35 billion to the country’s economy.

However, before even beginning construction, the HSR’s design phase alone could last up to four or five years. Accounting for planning and design, the rail line is not projected to be fully operational for another eighteen years. The heavy time investment required by the project is just one of the concerns that Canadians have been voicing around the HSR.

Many farmers question the company’s level of consideration for the long-term impacts of the project on the lands and communities that will be affected by its construction. Similarly, a group known as Alt-NO has formed in opposition to the proposed HSR line. They’ve created a GoFundMe for donations used to spread awareness on Alto’s project. They write, “The Alt-NO committee, composed of citizens, residents and businesspeople, landowners and farmers, has formed to oppose the proposed high-speed rail corridor project being developed by Alto, a federal Crown corporation. We are non-partisan and our opposition is founded in our concern for the serious and irreversible impacts this project would have on farms, natural habitats, and communities in Ontario and Quebec along the proposed routes. This is a 90 billion dollar folly at taxpayer expense.” Members of the group have been expressing concerns with the ramifications of Bill C-15 and its effects, including the expropriation of land, the lowering of property values, and the potential to block residents from their property for the period of construction. Alt- NO are in favour of abandoning the project entirely and focusing instead on pre-existing infrastructure.

Additionally, several online groups have also voiced disquiet over the project’s environmental impacts. A group of ecologists from Carleton University recently signed off on a Facebook post warning against the loss of natural habitat they believe the HSR would cause and questioning whether Alto had a plan to mitigate environmental harm.

Despite public opposition, the planning phase of the HSR project is currently underway. During this pre- construction period, representatives from Alto have been visiting cities and towns for “public consultations” to answer citizen and media questions about the new rail line. Additionally, the company says they plan on conducting field studies and have begun technical design work on the infrastructure.

Alto states that they have “signed several collaboration agreements with Indigenous communities” to mark their progress in “building strong partnerships.” In October 2023, when Alto was working on a High Frequency Rail (HFR) project, the company published a “What We Heard & What We’re Doing” report, which demonstrates an effort to bring Indigenous voices into their project. In this report, Alto acknowledges the involvement of Indigenous people as “essential to its success.” Through the report, Alto gained a concern for Indigenous peoples’ engagement in the project, awareness of economic considerations, and respect for Aboriginal and treaty rights while the HFR project was in motion. Now that the company has transitioned to an HSR project, its ideals have not changed, but there hasn’t been a report released yet. Iori:wase, the publication for the Kanien’kehá:ka or Mohawk Nation, writes that the “Mohawk Council of Kanesatake (MCK) Acting Vice Chief Brant Etienne said the council has not signed up for any of the consultation sessions as of yet.” Nothing is planned, but that’s not to say consultations between Alto and Indigenous groups will not happen.

While Alto has successfully gained federal approval, citizens in the region where it plans to build remain uneasy about the HSL project. 

The post Alto’s High-Speed Rail Project for Canada appeared first on The McGill Daily.

I always knew in the back of my head how important my friends were. I’ve obviously had ups and downs with many of them. Yet my friends have seen me through all my phases and stuck with me as I’ve evolved into the person I am today. And as friendship is a two-way street, I’ve done the same for them. While I reside in a happy romantic relationship, my friendships are one of the most important things in my life. I gain so much love and knowledge from the people I build friendships with, and what I’ve gathered up to this point, I will always hold close to my heart.

I resonate with the notion that our personalities are made up of the ones from people we’ve met throughout our lives; SZA has been one of my top artists ever since a close friend recommended “Good Days” to me in 2021. Every time before I peel an orange, I roll it the same way as a friend of a friend of mine.

With Valentine’s Day having just passed, there’s been a noticeable societal shift away from spending time with significant others to prioritizing our friendships. The moment I personally realized the importance of investing time and care into my friendships rather than romantic relationships was when one of my best friends got a boyfriend. Gradually, she stopped devoting time to us and our friends, as she spent more and more time with her boyfriend. If we wanted to hang out with her, he would be automatically invited. He was her priority, and she made this explicitly clear to us. Most of us noticed this shift, and in some ways, I started to resent her for it. I felt guilty, though. I wanted my best friend to be happy, but not at the cost of our friendship. I never wanted any of my friends to feel this way about me, so I calculated how I was going to act in my future relationships. I would approach my relationship with open arms, but still have set times dedicated to my friends.

I got into my first serious relationship shortly after experiencing this. I started to understand that some of my friend’s actions were valid: you’ll obviously devote time to the person you are with. But at the end of the day, it’s natural to still invest time in your friendships as well. I always find myself wanting to call my friends or have a laugh with them, which is a different experience than hanging out with my boyfriend.

Incidentally, being in a healthy relationship has amplified my commitment to my friendships. While my boyfriend and I are in a strong relationship, it’s only one extension of our lives, as we are much more than simply our romantic ties. By avoiding devoting my whole life to this one relationship, I’ve been able to still reach out and hang out with my friends.

Growing up in a patriarchal society, there are some things that only my girlfriends will ever understand, making their friendships that much more valuable to me. My friendships give me more than what a romantic relationship can sometimes offer. As I love to spend time with others, I’ve always been one to cultivate my existing friendships and seek new ones. My favorite memories are the ones I’ve shared with my friends, laughing about something ridiculous in the car or their rooms.

Asma Siddiqui mentions in an article for Vogue India how throughout a woman’s lifetime, friendships are neglected when more “important” relationships develop, such as the ones we have with “husbands, children, in-laws, and parents.” Depending on the phase of our lives, the strength of certain friendships can change. My friends talk about how their moms don’t have close friends, and it makes sense to lose these strong connections at an age when you have an entire family to take care of. The world has established that the role for most women is to become mothers and raise their children; that role is more often than not something that is forced upon women. So, when she is placed in that role, she isn’t given the free time to sustain her friendships and make new ones. Yet isn’t there a sting that comes with accepting that idea? How can the girls I’ve grown up with suddenly not be the centre of my life? The ‘inevitability’ of my lifelong friends someday having their own, more ‘important’ relationships to tend to is a terrifying thought.

Nevertheless, this fear has not altered the importance I’ve placed on developing close connections with my peers. At university, the single most important thing to me outside of academics is making lifelong friends. We can learn so much from anyone we cross paths with. While my friends’ mothers have a different experience with friendship in their maternal years, with dating becoming less of a worry to young women, I have greater hope that I will stay close to my best friends in my future. There’s been less of a concern on maintaining a family, and more of a focus on maintaining your friendships with the downfall of dating culture. There’s a newfound importance in keeping our friendships throughout those years that will stick with us even if we all decide to settle down and become mothers.

In high school, I was always looking for a boy to latch on to. It made the time go by quicker, and it was an easy distraction from schoolwork. Over time, the boys changed, but my friends never did. I will always be so grateful for the friends whom I’ve met and the ones to come. To have thoughtful conversations with, laugh with, and confide in a friend is the strongest connection one will have at the end of the day.

The post Falling in Love with Friendship appeared first on The McGill Daily.

*Spoilers ahead!*

My 2026 New Year’s resolution is to read more books. While I love purchasing new ones, I decided that while home during winter break, I would gather the collection I had already bought but had never read and bring them back to McGill with me. One of those books was Emily Henry’s People We Meet on Vacation, and I rang in 2026 while reading the story. 

When I started the book, the movie had just been released on Netflix, which further compelled me to read it quickly. People We Meet on Vacation was a well-anticipated film by Henry’s fans, and reached 17.2 million viewers in its release weekend. News of the book’s movie adaptation was announced in 2022, a year after its publication, and audiences were given a trailer in July 2025 to much buzz. However, after reading the book and, directly after, watching the film adaptation, it’s clear to me that the mixed reviews of fans and critics met by the latter were warranted.

A quick summary of the plot for those who are unfamiliar: Poppy Wright and Alex Nilsen, polar opposites, meet at the University of Chicago and grow to become best friends. Each summer, they go on a trip together, travelling to places like Squamish and New Orleans, and grow even closer. Two years before the story’s main events, on a trip to Croatia, something happened that caused them to separate for 2 years only to reunite for one more trip, which the story’s events center around. Would this summer allow them to work things out? A classic storyline. It was an entertaining read that gave me a break from the theory I’d been reading for my classes. 

To begin with my positive impressions of the film version of People We Meet on Vacation, I think that it is visually pleasing. The various gorgeous vacation spots, the bright colors, and the casting all contributed to a visually easy watch. The storyline on its own was interesting, but its utter differences from the book are the basis of my criticism for the film as an adaptation.

As a reader, I have a few strong opinions about the book itself. I personally believed the tension and yearning between the best friends was frustrating because it was so obvious to me they were in love with each other throughout the entire book. It’s annoying to think about the romantic partners they didn’t ever feel “right” with. How their failed relationships weren’t the wake-up calls needed to realize they  wanted each other the whole time. While I know that’s the whole point of the romance novel, I found it hard to fully grasp the idea they had been holding out on each other  for so long despite all of their history, physical, and emotional affection.

There are multiple inconsistencies between the book and the film. From specificities like the university the main duo attend, and the location of their wedding; to larger things like how it was a work trip in the film rather than a non-sponsored trip in the book that brought Poppy and Alex back together, as well as the fact that Croatia was not mentioned in the film, these differences impact one’s perception of the storyline. To go more in depth, readers of Henry’s book would know that Croatia was where Poppy and Alex first kissed, which caused their relationship to fall apart, hence the reason why the story even exists. It’s the event they avoid discussing during the entire summer. To take that away and reduce the plot to the events that take place in Tuscany is to remove crucial contexts and serious plot points from the original narrative.

Another detail being criticised by fans is the fact that Alex’s tumultuous background was neglected in the film. If a viewer hadn’t read the book, they would never know that his mother passed away during childbirth, and that he had to raise his brothers by himself while his father mourned the loss. They would also never know that he got a vasectomy because of Poppy’s pregnancy scare. These are all important to understand Alex’s character and the depth of his and Poppy’s emotional connection.

Henry was inspired by When Harry Met Sally (1989). While I do see the connections between both narratives, I didn’t feel the same while watching People We Meet on Vacation as I do when watching When Harry Met Sally. With the latter, I was satisfied with the couple’s long-awaited happy ending; with the former, I simply felt irritated and a little disappointed. The endings of both films are predictable, but even knowing what is going to happen, the development in People We Meet on Vacation wasn’t strong enough to make me feel relieved about their reconciliation. Viewers of the movie can understand that Poppy and Alex’s relationship is strong, but they are not as privy to its complex development as those who read the book. To cushion the blow, some critics believe that the story is better suited as a miniseries, which would give ample space for the development of the storyline and all characters. Meanwhile, the two-hour-long movie feels rushed, especially in comparison to the book.

People We Meet on Vacation can be considered a classic in the contemporary novel universe, and I enjoyed reading it for the most part. But after watching an attempted film adaptation, my feelings about the entire storyline are more mixed than ever. This review is not to take away from people’s enjoyment of the film; a viewer with a penchant for rom-coms who had never read the book would love the movie’s classic friends-to-lovers storyline. However, if you choose to immerse yourself in the People We Meet on Vacation universe, I recommend either reading the book or watching the movie, but not both. While the endings are the same, there are so many inconsistencies that either strengthen or diminish the plot, so it’s best to choose one version of the story and enjoy it.

The post From Paper to Screen: People We Meet on Vacation appeared first on The McGill Daily.

While she suggests that boyfriends are widely seen as embarrassing, the true focus of Joseph’s article is that heteronormativity is being challenged in the modern day – causing the concept of the boyfriend to now be fragile. This is because women don’t need to center men to succeed anymore.

Historically, being tied to a man was considered desirable for women. Others looked at you with great accomplishment for having a husband or a boyfriend. On the other hand, if you were a single woman, people pitied you. Take a look at Sex and the City; the entire show is about single women who are constantly being looked down upon by other couples and always in search of a new relationship. The goal of a long-term relationship rules the main characters’ lives.

Romantic relationships have long been deemed necessary to live a fulfilling life; craved because of the comfort of mutual dependence. On the one hand, Joseph mentions that being single, though, should be treasured because it allows for more independence than being a woman in a relationship. On the other hand, it’s not that a woman cannot be independent while she’s in a relationship. She should have the autonomy to do what she wants, including being in that relationship. Yet, it’s also important that we recognize that many women now have the privilege to achieve what they want without the imposed necessity of a romantic relationship.

During most of the 20th century, a woman would have needed to be married to have access to fundamental rights in the United States. For example, it was only with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974 that an unmarried woman in the United States could open a credit card in her own name. In addition, unmarried women did not have access to birth control until the 1972 Supreme Court case Eisenstadt v. Baird. In other words, rights we now take for granted were not accessible for single American women before the 1970s.

Across the world, countless women still lack access to these basic rights. Millions of women do not have the right to participate in society without being bound to a man. In Afghanistan, women’s access to healthcare is dwindling. Hologic’s Global Women’s Health Index determined that “relatively few Afghan women reported getting tested for high blood pressure, diabetes, cancer or sexually transmitted diseases or infections (STDs/STIs) in the 12 months prior. In fact, no Afghan women — zero respondents — said they had been tested for any type of cancer in the past year.” Additionally, in 2021, Taliban authorities made it mandatory for women who are travelling more than 48 kilometres be accompanied by a male guardian. These women suffer from a lack of care and autonomy in controlling their own health in comparison to the Western women. Instead, their health is at the responsibility of the men who surround them. This is also true regarding their economic independence, as less than 7 per cent of Afghan women have a bank account. The United Nations estimates that, worldwide, 43.7 per cent of women “lack decision-making power over their sexual and reproductive health and rights.” In many countries, not just Afghanistan, women are being denied their rights and have to depend on a man to survive. Joseph’s original article questions women’s reliance on men, and allows us to address the cultural differences and privileges that come with being single and being able to denounce having a male partner. However, the power to decentralize men is not something that every woman has had or will have the privilege of doing.

In a world where we are continuously fighting for our rights purely because of our gender, at the very least, it’s comforting to know that women, more so in privileged areas of the world, don’t have to be associated with a man to succeed. If you have or want a boyfriend, there’s nothing wrong with that. As Joseph made clear, having a boyfriend is only embarrassing if you center your life around him. Moreover, being a single woman is something that is now treasured rather than looked down upon. According to Joseph, being single isn’t an achievement, nor does it “affirm your womanhood” anymore. The status of being single is being reclaimed, and is now associated with freedom and choice.

To continue on Joseph’s point about centering one’s life around a man, whether single or in a relationship, a woman can be male-centered, which is the primary condition being criticized in her article. Being male-centered may consist of solely posting your boyfriend on your social media, making decisions based on the needs of men, or consistently seeking male validation and attention. It can become a problem because, as one Medium blogger put it, needing a male’s approval for your decisions “puts your self-esteem in someone else’s hands.” In relationships specifically, being male-centered is when a woman “constantly puts her partner’s needs and desires ahead of her own.” It’s harmful to her autonomy, outlook and participation in relationships.

But instead of blaming women for this mindset, we should blame how patriarchal society has
conditioned women to believe that they need a man to live happily. While being male-centered is a condition that can be avoided, it’s not easy when society is pushing you to get and keep a man romantically in your life.

It shouldn’t be inherently embarrassing to have a boyfriend, so long as he does not become the center of your world. Thus, the current shift away from boyfriends stems from an active attempt to decentralize men. Unfortunately, this debate still centers men, because while we are talking about the decreasing value of the boyfriend, we are simultaneously faulting women for being with men. If we want to truly decentralize men, we need to move away from the concept that a man is needed to make your life better whilst also not making them the center of our conversations.

Having said that, we can still recognize that many single women are now much more capable of claiming their independence compared to our past counterparts. While this doesn’t cover all women in the world, as many are still stuck depending on men, it is still a reflection of our changing society and the questioning of heteronormativity and the patriarchy.

The post A Look into Women’s Independence in Media Discourse appeared first on The McGill Daily.

We are all university students now, and I look back at that memory thinking of how young we were, too young to be worrying about our body hair. Entering McGill as a freshman, my new friends and I discussed body hair removal, from arms, legs, to upper lip — all but the hair on our heads. There is a certain expectation from Western culture for our bodies to be smooth and ridden of hair, but for the hair most prominent on our heads to be long, luscious, and “well-kept.”

As we now understand, most women experience the “importance” of body hair removal from quite a young age, but when did the idea really begin to appear in society? Hair removal ads became very prominent in the mid-1900s as hemlines and sleeves decreased in length, since there was no guarantee that someone’s clothes would cover their leg or underarm hair. For example, in 1915, the popular shaving brand Gillette released its first razor for women, advertising the importance of a smooth and hairless body. All of these ads encouraged women to buy hair removal products, establishing the start of the anti-body-hair culture and market that is still present today. Popular culture, including the rise of popular media like Playboy, increased the need for women to be free of body hair to appear sexier in the eyes of patriarchal society. Of course, no discourse needs to be had over men’s body hair as it is natural, and presents them as manly.

Biologically, body hair represents a mature woman, a woman that a man should reproduce with. A study done by Lígia Azevedo from Brandeis University examined male perceptions of female body hair. What Azevedo concluded from her study was the relationship between body hair and femininity,
with the presence of the former compromising the latter. Patriarchal society expects a hairless body from women. That same hairless body demonstrates a woman’s youth, recalling the stage before puberty. Azevedo’s research observed that men found it more attractive when a woman didn’t have body hair. Hence, she makes the connection that hairlessness perpetuates the sexualization of youth and young appearances in women by the patriarchy.

Patriarchal society has always played a big role in influencing the expected appearance of women. Women themselves have become accustomed to the idea that visible body hair is unfeminine, and thus unattractive. They are left uncomfortable, feeling the need to get rid of all their body hair. Many women resort to painful hair removal methods, such as lasering or waxing, to feed this image of femininity established by the dominant patriarchy. Society views hairless pre-pubescent bodies and desirable femininity as two inextricable ideas.

Going beyond the general female demographic and their relationship with hair removal, there are additional associations of the culture of hair removal with women of colour. In 1871, Charles Darwin published The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. Specifically in relation to body hair,
Darwin made it clear that hairiness was associated with, as Nicki Butler from Mustang News words it, “deviance and uncleanliness.” In Western society, the majority of white women did not want to be associated with the image of impurity and lack of hygiene, so shaving became a way to escape that image.

Darwin’s ideas put women of colour, who typically have naturally thicker hair, in a targeted position. It wasn’t only the South Asian women I grew up with who reaped the consequences of Darwin’s ideology. Most women of colour in Western society did and still do.

The normalization of body hair removal, originally established by men but continued in practice by women, established another racial divide between white women and women of colour. Many women of colour, especially more impressionable younger girls, are left in the position of believing that to fit into the white- dominated patriarchal society we are confined to, we must obey the norms that are presented to us. Hair removal, although a tedious and sometimes painful task, is one of the easier ways to conform to white-dominated patriarchal norms. One can simply buy the materials, remove their hair, and they will be perceived in higher regard. It’s supposedly that easy, but is it really?

This entire subject continues to reduce women to only their bodies, as patriarchy has been doing for over a century. Society’s inability to embrace body hair as the natural occurrence that it is not only pits women against each other, but also continually places women beneath men in our modern social hierarchy.

The post The Roots Of Hair… Removal appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Scented candle collection 

First, let’s set the mood. A nice soy candle, with countless scents to choose from. Mahogany Apple, Pumpkin Pecan Waffle, Fall Farmhouse, the list goes on. With a bounty of options to choose from, and all so different, one must stock up. We are told that the only way to experience the season is to indulge all the senses. Can it really only be fall with an everpresent aroma of spice? Yes. These candles hold the scents of fall, which is why they can’t be used throughout the year. And so, long-lasting items such as candles become disposable before they are even exhausted. The candle itself serves as the perfect representation of all the money that gets burned through on fall items. 

Gourds, gourds and more gourds

  Someone once said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and so it goes to show some love for fall’s hues in home decor! New burnt orange pillow covers, a flannel blanket and an array of heirloom pumpkins and gourds. These are the things that make a house a home. Big-box retailers such as Homesense and Target, stock their shelves as early as July with collaborations for variations on fall home decor. This pre-emptive marketing is what builds the desire for the “aesthetic of autumn” on the hottest days of summer. Decor that brings the outside indoors suggests that one must fully immerse themself in the season to participate in it. Display it while you can, because this decor won’t match nature for long! 

Sweaters, scarves, socks

With the changing weather, of course we are going to need a change in wardrobe. Colder weather calls for bigger sweaters (like the Rory Gilmore one!), another scarf for the year, more fuzzy socks, earthy-toned clothes, and a new pair of UGGs. When you buy your new fall uniform, you’ll wash and wear them but how long will you keep them for? The cost of your new clothes comes with a price greater than the price tag itself. Fast fashion is polluting our earth by overusing water and generating waste that goes into landfills. Additionally, fast fashion contains many unethical practices such as the mistreatment of workers and the usage of child labor. Still, the microtrends on our FYPs keep changing each time we scroll, flowing with the speed of fast fashion. We invest in something shown in one TikTok, and then a week later, we forget about that cute sweater we just bought and want the fluffy quarter-zip this other influencer has. 

Pumpkin Spice

Don’t forget the iconic fall flavor: pumpkin spice. On August 26, the Pumpkin Spice Latte (PSL) returned to Starbucks. Run, don’t walk to your nearest coffee shop, because you surely need pumpkin spice to spice up your day, whether it be a latte or chai. While you’re drinking your yummy drink, you can think about how much PSLs have driven consumerism in the last decade. With everyone drinking the iconic fall drink, Starbucks sells over 20 million PSLs a year. That is about 20 million coffee cups used and thrown into a landfill each year. Depending on the material of the cup, it will take months to years for a singular coffee cup to be reabsorbed into the earth again. The 20 million coffee cups only address Starbucks’ sales. Pumpkin spice is a popular flavor in most popular coffee shops like Second Cup and Tim Hortons. The waste is neverending when it comes to pumpkin spice.

Bottom Line

What do we really love about the fall? Is it the cold and unreliable weather, the school work that starts to pile up, the shorter days, and less natural light? Does the temporal change really set the tone for the new season, or the marketing campaigns that accompany it? We’ve fallen in love with a curated seasonal aesthetic,  one that has made us extreme consumers. 

Companies and social media influencers alike use a tactic called “FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out) Marketing” that preys on anxieties of missing out to drive purchases. Creating a fall wishlist of “must haves”, predicting fall beauty trends, and using the well-renowned “Lalalala” sound from Gilmore Girls to rope you into buying pumpkin-scented products; these are all examples of how social media tricks us into overconsumption.

We can use McGill students as a demographic to view how the marketing techniques play into our vulnerabilities. With Montreal’s vibrant social scene and going out culture, it can be easy to feel like one is missing out. This general “FOMO” is exploited and extrapolated into a fear of missing out on a whole season if we don’t participate in its consumerist trends. Furthermore, most of us are far away from home. Hence, it is possible that we long for coziness and comfort as we prepare for midterms in the Montreal cold. In line with this, the media promotes buying more seasonal items as the way to achieve these feelings of safety and solace. 

Additionally, seasonal marketing exploits human anxieties about the passing of time. Through pre-emptive seasonal marketing campaigns, we’re led to long for something in the future. This longing only shortens the amount of time we feel engaged in each season. In the fall, companies exploit the nostalgia for simpler times, and organize their aesthetic around the 80s, 90s and early 2000s to appeal to a large millennial audience. This is implied as a way to alleviate uncertainty for the future that accompanies the season as the year comes to a close. Hence, media from the past becomes “fall coded” and Bon Iver and Nora Ephron films make their resurgence. Either way we are deterred from enjoying the current moment and primed to prepare anxiously for the next season through our consumption choices. 

Whether or not we wear UGGs or indulge in PSLs everyday, we will still be participating in the season just by living through it. A brand new apple cinnamon candle can smell just as sweet as last year’s. In Montreal, there are so many ways to enjoy the season, like taking a hike up Mont Royal right behind campus! This fall, let’s take advantage of the season without letting it take advantage of us. 

The post The Daily’s Consumer-Girl Autumn Starter Pack appeared first on The McGill Daily.