The panelists – Michelle Hartman, associate professor of Arabic literature; Jon Soske, assistant professor in the Department of History and Classical Studies; and Samia Botmeh, a professor at Birzeit University in the West Bank – drew links between the apartheid regime in South Africa and Israeli apartheid practices in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. They connected campaigns against the South African apartheid regime from the late 1950s until the 1990s to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement initiated by Palestinian civil society in 2005 to pressure the Israeli government into ending its occupation of the West Bank and its ongoing blockade of the Gaza Strip.

Soske, who specializes in modern African history, opened the panel by asserting that the apartheid analogy between Israel and South Africa is uncontroversial in South Africa, and drew similarities between the conditions that Israel enforces on Palestinians and the conditions enforced by white South Africans on the black community under the apartheid regime.

Soske noted that sanctions came in the form of economic pressure on the apartheid South African government, which greatly affected the livelihoods of white South Africans, and emphasized the integral role of universities in kickstarting the movement through boycotts and divestment.

“For universities as institutions to take an early stance and say, ‘We will no longer be complicit with apartheid,’ was key to starting to push broader sections of society in [Canada and the U.S.] against apartheid,” said Soske.

“One of the most important things said here is that there’s no neutrality on an issue like this.”

Botmeh, a member of the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel, stated that the BDS movement was a response to the asymmetric nature of the peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization in the 1980s and 1990s, notably in negotiating the 1995 Oslo Accords.

“You cannot make peace […] assuming symmetry of power, because there is no symmetry of power between the oppressor and the oppressed,” said Botmeh.

Botmeh also took issue with the international community’s response to the situation in Palestine, claiming that it is treated like a humanitarian issue rather than a political one. “Dealing with Palestinians as if the creation of the state of Israel led to a natural catastrophe has meant that the intervention was very charity-like,” said Botmeh. “So [they] feed the Palestinians, [they] provide them with all forms of charity, and that neutralized the political factor. What the BDS movement tries to do is hold the international community responsible.”

Hartman maintained that it is the duty of professionals, academics, and students alike to respond to the call for BDS, which comes from their colleagues who live under occupation in Palestine. She called on the audience to reflect on why, for example, some might choose to boycott Israeli academic institutions in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

“[The] Hebrew University [of Jerusalem] is built on confiscated land, it is built over a Palestinian village,” said Hartman. “As Canadians, and people studying at Canadian educational institutions [built in Indigenous land], I think we need to take that very seriously, and take that into account, and look [at] where the calls [for solidarity] are coming from. When we have a call like [BDS], it is our duty to respond to it.”

“It is very empowering to know that people stand in solidarity with us, and that enables us to resist and move forward on the path of liberation,” Botmeh declared.

‘Neutrality’ and representation

The fact that the panel was organized by SSMU drew opposition from some students. An online petition expressing concern with the event began circulating a few days before the panel, and gathered 220 signatures.

“SSMU should ensure that there is open and balanced dialogue on such contentious topics,” the petition reads. “We are upset that SSMU, which we expect to represent the entire student body of McGill, has chosen to host an event that offers only one perspective on such a divisive issue.”

Moustaqim-Barrette explained to The Daily that the panel was a result of students’ calls for forums for such debates, made during the discussion of a Palestine solidarity motion at the Fall SSMU General Assembly (GA). SSMU was also mandated to “support campaigns that mobilize in solidarity with the people affected by the use of military technology” at the GA.

An anonymous U2 Science student, who attended the event, found the petition expressing concern about the event “hypocritical.”

“Facilitating those debates is what they were asking for at the GA to begin with, so in that sense I think it does fall under SSMU’s mandate and it is SSMU’s responsibility to facilitate,” they told The Daily.

U0 Arts student Jonah Winer told The Daily that the panel had brought about personal reflection. “In general I’m not a huge fan of the BDS movement, but I also realize that I’ve only heard really negative portrayals of it,” he said. “I think to hear people who [participate] in forming [the movement], and also people who are really [in] favour of it, gives it a lot of nuance and gives me a lot to think about.”

U3 Arts student Ameya Pendse expressed concern about the selection of panelists. “I was, to be honest, disgusted that SSMU was hosting an event on such a divisive issue on campus,” he said. “I think that it was very sad that there wasn’t a single person or academic to counter what these three panelists were saying. […] I think SSMU should focus on issues that are actually affecting students. […] They should not be taking foreign affairs decisions, that is not why we elected them.”

Asked whether SSMU should remain neutral on the issue of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Moustaqim-Barrette said that this was impossible. “There is no way to be neutral in these kinds of affairs, I think that’s just a way of silencing dissent and just another form of censorship,” she said. “I think it’s important that SSMU talks about these things and has events like these where people can come talk about these things.”

“I think one of the most important things said here is that there’s no neutrality on an issue like this,” noted Winer. “You’re either for or against, and to try to remain neutral is disingenuous.”

The post Boycotting apartheid states appeared first on The McGill Daily.

When Aaron Lakoff and Sarah Woolf were banned from appearing at Le Mood –“the festival of unexpected Jewish learning, arts, and culture” – they were pretty sure they knew why. Both had been up-front about being anti-Zionist Jews and Palestine solidarity activists, and thought that the festival had pulled their panel because of their beliefs, although an organizer at Le Mood cited “internal tensions” as the cause.

Their fears were unfortunately confirmed when Federation CJA, the organization behind Le Mood, drafted a press release stating that “as broad and inclusive as the tent is at Le Mood, Federation CJA has exercised our right, as any organization would be expected to do, to draw the line at funding and providing a platform […] to those who deny the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish State […] This is not censorship […] no organization is under the obligation to provide an outlet for the expression of views that are entirely antithetical to its mission.” (Woolf and Lakoff drafted their own press release in response.)

Its mission? To “build and sustain the [Montreal Jewish community] by providing principled leadership, by raising and distributing funds, and by facilitating, incubating and overseeing the delivery of services and programs [for every Jew] […] irrespective of ideology.”

“I was pretty skeptical about the conference, because even though [Le Mood] was trying to portray itself as kind of an alternative, hip conference that speaks to Jewish youth who might be alienated by the mainstream Jewish community, it’s still clear that it was the mainstream Jewish community that’s very institutional and conservative that was pulling the strings,” said Lakoff.

Woolf admitted that “The issue is less about any particular instance of censorship, and more about the general, institutionalized, and utterly pervasive climate of political Zionism has become the status quo within Jewish communities.”

They ended up holding the panel outside the building where Le Mood was happening, where, according to Lakoff, they got double the attendance because of the “stink” their controversy created around censorship.

“The discussion was very rich. Different generations of Jewish activists were sharing their own experiences about censorship within the community,” he said. “In a way it was just a clear example of censorship backfiring, which it always does right?”

* * *

The mainstream media generally looks kindly on Zionism, and unkindly on almost all alternate points of view. For proof, look no further than the coverage of the death of former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon last week. Canadian mainstream news outlets across the board reported on all his achievements for his country, how he was honoured at his burial, and how he fought for his life for eight years. Prime Minister Stephen Harper even went so far as to eulogize Sharon in saying that he was one of Israel’s “staunchest defenders.”

“The furthest people will go in criticizing him is saying that he was controversial,” said Lakoff. “Massacres are not controversial, displacing thousands upon thousands of people is not controversial, nor is destroying people’s homes.” Criticism has been scattered, an article by Robert Fisk here, Noam Chomsky speaking out there, but nothing substantial.

Scott Weinstein is a member of the Montreal Steering Committee at Independent Jewish Voices (IJV), a growing progressive pan-Canadian Jewish organization that deals mostly with Palestinian and Israeli issues. “We understand that money doesn’t talk, it swears,” he told The Daily in an e-mail.

“Ideological Zionists control a lot of wealth and hold sway in the mainstream media. […] When the Zionist Asper family owned CanWest media, which owned most of Canada’s daily newspapers, a [Montreal] Gazette journalist told me, ‘We can write critically about anything, except Israel and Palestine.’ Since the Aspers sold CanWest, the media is a little more open to the issue, but we have a long way to go.”

There seems to be a pattern of hegemony which rules mainstream Jewish thought with regards to Zionism, especially within Canada. It’s a hegemony that we can see playing out in Federation CJA’s mandate (an example of an “unelected Jewish elite,” as Lakoff calls them. One simply has to read between the lines of their About Us page). In that vein, is this hegemony responsible for censoring countless Jews who are anti-Zionist, anti-Israeli, pro-Palestinian, or sometimes a combination of the three?

In Lakoff and Woolf’s case, there’s no question. But was theirs a one-off?

Weinstein would say that it was not. IJV is one of many Jewish anti-Zionist pro-Palestine grassroots movements that is dedicated to fighting censorship within the Jewish community. “We are in a conflict with the ideological Zionist movement that hijacked our Jewish culture for their political ends. […] We recognize and even highlight the growing division among Jews (which is based solely on our position on Israel).”

IJV’s work centres around exposing what they call the “racially discriminatory” Jewish National Fund (JNF) charity that uses Canadian money to take over Palestinian land for Jewish-only possession. They work to support free speech in public spaces and on campuses, and against the Israel lobby’s censorship of, and threats to, those who stand for Palestinian human rights and the right to criticize Israel.

Their work is not without its consequences. Weinstein said that IJV has been a victim of censorship and discrimination before. “The principal tactic of the Israel lobby to oppose Palestinian rights activists and Jews like us is to censor, ban and slander the activists and our message. […] It is ironic that we Jews used to be known as ‘the people of the book’ – Jews used to be the comics, dissidents, radicals, and scientists fighting censorship – but now the Jewish establishment is trying to suppress dissent.”

Weinstein also claims that Jonathan Kay of the National Post insulted IJV in columns (such as in the article “Jonathan Kay on Jennifer Peto and the new breed of self-hating Jews”), while neatly sidestepping any discussion of the issues that IJV deals with. To top it off, “The federal [government] and some provincial governments have spared IJV directly, while going after our Palestinian allies and coalitions we are part of.”

One instance of censorship in Montreal is when Federation CJA banned IJV from hosting Israeli political activist Jeff Halper at the Gelber Centre, Montreal’s “unofficial Jewish community centre,” according to Weinstein. Halper is the co-founder of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, an anti-settlement peace group based in Israel.

* * *

“It’s bullshit, it’s a cop-out. You know, unintellectual. It’s fearmongering, it’s childish,” Lakoff fired off when asked how he responds to those who call anti-Zionists anti-Semitic. And Weinstein claimed that today’s Zionists are the principal agents fueling anti-Semitism.

“People everywhere can see the Jewish state’s cluster bombs spill the blood of Palestinian babies, Jewish settlers humiliate Palestinian families, Jewish soldiers destroy Palestinian homes, the Jewish National Fund supports Jewish settlements in Palestine, and the Jewish government enacts dozens of discriminatory laws favoring Jews over Palestinians,” all of which could, according to Weinstein, could be responsible for another wave of anti-Semitic attacks if nothing changes.

“I think that whenever ideas start to gain traction, of course they cause fear within the establishment, which has a lot to benefit from those oppressive ideas. And they’ll just come out with whatever kind of fearmongering they can,” Lakoff adds.

Interestingly, some anti-Zionist, anti-Israeli, and pro-Palestinian supporters are actually members of the Ultra-Orthodox Jewish community. I interviewed Rabbi Yisroel Dovid Weiss, spokesperson for Jews United Against Zionism (some people might know them by another name, Neturei Karta), who wants to make the distinction between Judaism and Zionism clear.

Neturei Karta is one of the most outspoken anti-Zionist grassroots organizations in the world, but not a terribly well-known one due to a lack of coverage in the mainstream media (see Sarah Marusek’s article “Not every Jew is a Zionist but their voices are being silenced,” in which she describes an Ultra-Orthodox anti-Zionist protest of around 30,000 that few heard about because of the glaring lack of mainstream media coverage, and see a video of the protest here). Weiss explained to me that, from a religious point of view, “The mere existence of the State of Israel is contradictory to our Torah.” He goes on to explain that after the destruction of the Temple of Solomon 2,000 years ago “We were forbidden, expressively put under oath by God not to form any type of Jewish sovereignty.”

“While I believe that having difficult conversations about Israel and Palestine with my Jewish family, friends, and colleagues is essential, I also believe that Jewish voices (such as my own) have been given far too much space in the movement for justice and freedom in Palestine”

Neturei Karta’s opposition does not stop there. As Weiss explained, it’s also “the fact that they are displacing [Palestinians], oppressing [Palestinians], stealing and killing. [The Jewish religion states] that we’re not allowed to steal, we’re not allowed to kill, we’re not allowed to oppress people. More than that, our Arab neighbours, our Muslim neighbours, were always a home, a safe haven for Jews throughout history when they suffered in Europe, and the Torah requires of us to always show our gratitude and repay with good, to never forget the good that has been done to us.”

The organization has gone much further in its activism than organizing grassroots protests with similar-minded groups. Spokespeople for Neturei Karta have spoken at the United Nations, and at universities (where they have not been banned or censored). One of the most striking things that they have accomplished is to visit prominent politicians in Iran (meeting directly with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s infamous former president) as well as to visit Hamas in Gaza and offer humanitarian aid to the people there. They’ve even met with high-ranking representatives of Hezbollah “to let the whole world know that they should not consider the Jews their enemies.”

Weiss confesses that they barely get any media attention, and that when they do their organization is ridiculed and trivialized. They can’t call them anti-Semitic, so they are labelled as self-hating Jews instead, he says. “We make demonstrations, thousands show up, we really hardly ever get published if at all. The world doesn’t get it. If the media do cover it, it’s usually with ridicule, slander.”

Eric Caplan, Chair of the Department of Jewish Studies at McGill, told me that Neturei Karta is a relatively small faction of the Ultra-Orthodox community. According to him, the Montreal community considers their anti-Zionism irrelevant. “I think the reason why they get sidelined is because their anti-Zionism is coupled with a very pro-Palestinian perspective. If it was just an ideological sense that the Jews shouldn’t have a state, I don’t think people would care one way or the other.”

“If you’ve been to one of these Israel day rallies, most people ignore the Neturei Karta when they show up – there’s only like three or four people – often not from Montreal. They often come in from New York, so there isn’t much of a major Montreal-based group in the first place.”

* * *

Charlie*, a Jewish McGill student, approached me for this piece. After telling me they consider themselves very active in Jewish life, they continued, “I support the idea and the necessity of having a Jewish state (perhaps not necessarily in the geographical location where Israel currently lies), and support the notion of a Palestinian state.”

Charlie actively goes to McGill’s Hillel (a Jewish student organization) gatherings. What troubles Charlie the most is Hillel’s stance toward Israel, described by them in these terms: “Israel is at the heart of Hillel’s work. Our goal is to inspire every Jewish college student to develop a meaningful and enduring relationship to Israel and to Israelis. We know that engaged and educated students can become committed Jewish adults who are passionate supporters of Israel.”

For Charlie, there are many other ways of expressing a Jewish identity, especially as a university student, that do not have anything to do with Israel. Like many of their peers, Charlie is afraid to speak their mind at Jewish student gatherings, for fear of “people looking at me like I’m crazy, because Israel is so much a part of what their Judaism is.”

“I also feel deeply conflicted because I feel like I have no idea what’s true and what’s not true, in terms of the propaganda […] I feel that in the world of Jewish education, I’m really not being given any tools to engage in this discourse without spouting the information that was taught to me, which I don’t entirely trust to be unbiased.”

Charlie claimed that the idea of anyone speaking out against Zionism or Israel, or in support of Palestine, at these types of Jewish student gatherings is absurd, and so there is no way of knowing whether someone shares the same beliefs that you do simply because everyone is too afraid to speak up. There may be others like them, but unless others confide in another person in secret, there is no way of knowing. In Charlie’s words, “The Jewish community isn’t really a safe space, at least, not the one I’m a part of.”

“The McGill administration actively collaborates with Israel and won’t support the academic boycott to pressure Israel to respect Palestinian students’ rights to live without occupation,” continued Weinstein. “The Israel lobby has a campaign to stop Palestinian advocacy on campus and has resorted to censorship, banning organizations like Students Against Israeli Apartheid, supporting student government parties that oppose Palestinian-rights candidates, threatening and firing teachers and their academic freedom if they criticize Israel, et cetera.”

* * *

Caplan asserts that discourses around Zionism are not censored in any way within the Jewish community. “I think the reason why you don’t hear that many Jewish anti-Zionists in the community is because starting with the rise of Hitler, and of course culminating with the Holocaust, the vast majority of Jews who were on the fence concerning Zionism reached the conclusion that Jews needed a state,” explains Caplan, “I don’t think that there’s very many [Jewish anti-Zionists].”

Caplan wants to differentiate between anti-Zionism and anti-Israel as two disparate concepts. To him, critiques of Israel are so widespread, and are so heard, that Jewish community leaders feel that they don’t have to serve as a channel for anti-Israel criticism when it’s already happening elsewhere. “It’s not like Jews are having the wool pulled over them if the synagogue doesn’t invite an anti-Israel speaker, because everybody knows the anti-Israel positions – they’re everywhere. I think Jewish communal institutions are interested in giving space to views that only they can foster.”

There’s also an important difference between people who critique an aspect of Israeli policy – who might themselves be hardcore Zionists – and people who deny Israel’s right to exist as a whole. “I know tons of people who are supporters of Israel, and who would consider themselves Zionist, who voice criticisms of Israel, but who voice their opinions within synagogues and who are not excommunicated or sidelined because of that,” said Caplan. “But the community has a different response to somebody whose critique of the State of Israel is this massive blanket critique, that everything is bad such that the state shouldn’t exist.”

Caplan maintains that the McGill Department of Jewish Studies does offer both points of view as well as a wide array of ideologies – when dealing with issues such as Zionism in the late 1800s, and social justice, among others – through the readings and books professors assign to their students.

Caplan affirms that the professors in the department “dont seek to use the information that we have to forward a political point of view. The people who teach these courses will read the books and offer the different points of view and they will say who is making the most convincing case, and students will see from both sides.”

“I feel that in the world of Jewish education, I’m really not being given any tools to engage in this discourse without spouting the information that was taught to me, which I don’t entirely trust to be unbiased”

He is an advocate of nurturing vibrant and productive discourse around Israel, stating that there is nothing wrong in believing a country can make mistakes, “We can criticize Canadian policy, like I can say that Canadian policy to the Aboriginals [sic] is historically a tremendous problem and requires a response. That doesn’t mean I’m anti-Canadian. That also applies to Israel.” Caplan wants people to see the whole picture. According to him, it is problematic when people only focus and criticize the negative aspects of Israeli policy without considering all the positive parts. “If you see the whole picture, I think it’s a healthy thing.”

“[People] fail to understand the real challenges that Israel faces when it comes to the Arab world. If Canada had on its borders a variety of countries in which there were strong radical elements that seek its destruction, it would respond to these countries in a way that is probably not all that different – you know in basic thrust – as what Israel does,” is one of Caplan’s responses when asked what critiques of Israel he doesn’t particularly enjoy.

He later admits that people have “an unusual fascination” with Israel and everything that it does, adding that “There are so many places in the world [where] the actions of governments are so much more reprehensible than what Israel is doing, and we don’t talk about it […] so yes I would like to see some balance. If not, I think its a distortion of reality.”

* * *

Being a native Lebanese citizen myself, I thought that Caplan’s argument bordered on apologist, and that censorship within the community is a concrete issue that has yet to be dealt with. Lakoff has some advice for journalists who, like me, want to try to combat some of this censorship.

“[Journalists should be] giving voice to the voiceless […] trying to shed light on what Ariel Sharon actually did, or what the Israeli administration continues to do on a daily basis.” Lakoff later added that “The biggest thing is not buying into the myth of objectivity; there is no unbiased media, and I think that what we really need is media that is going to challenge the status quo, and actually be a counterbalance to power.”

“While I believe that having difficult conversations about Israel and Palestine with my Jewish family, friends, and colleagues is essential, I also believe that Jewish voices (such as my own) have been given far too much space in the movement for justice and freedom in Palestine,” Woolf said.

“Censorship of anti-Zionist Jewish voices is undoubtedly a major problem within this community, and I am more than willing to call it out; however, I firmly believe that the struggles anti-Zionist Jews face within our community are a related but ultimately secondary issue compared to the very central issue of the pursuit of justice and freedom for Palestinians.”

“The only polite response to injustice is to resist and to speak the truth,” Weinstein wrote to me. “The civil rights, feminist, and gay movements taught us that silence is a form of violence, and that resistance needs to be creative, flexible, playful, and beautiful.”

*name has been changed

In an earlier version of the article, The Daily referred to former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon as President Sharon. The Daily regrets the error.

The post An eye toward Zion appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Trying out Tinder after Grindr (a similar app that caters to a wider variety of sexual orientations) felt like going to watch Frozen after just having sat through The Wolf of Wall Street. After hours of obsessively scrolling through hundreds of profiles on both apps, you’ll realize that this is the perfect tool for our generation. It is fast, quick, superficial, and easy. And it’s all fun and games until you realize what you’re doing, which is passively judging people from behind the comfort of a smartphone screen.

These seem like pretty useful apps, to find “new friends or [meet] someone special,” as CEO of Tinder, Sean Rad, states. Of course they can only be useful if you fit into the relatively narrow group the apps are directed at, as Tinder and Grindr reinforce the normative social construct of beauty.

Unlike Tinder, Grindr allows you to message anyone in your area, without the indication of mutual interest. As you can’t just swipe people you’re not interested in to the left, many biographies include the statement of “no *insert any race but white*.” Even though users might argue that their personal attraction is inherent, the biographies display an obvious pattern of white people as desirable, while people of colour exist as fetishes. This is based on the system of oppression that we can encounter every day in media, advertisements, our school system, and our workplaces, that establish whiteness as superior; however, racism is not the only issue. Fatphobia and fat shaming are still deemed acceptable in many parts of our society, and these new quick fix apps are no exception. Grindr bios are often littered with “no fatties, seeking athletic men, built,” et cetera.

Most newspaper articles a person would come across in a simple Google search for the keyword “Grindr” are assertions that the app helps spread STIs and HIV faster than if the app never existed. [For example, Grindr has been blamed for a syphilis outbreak in New Zealand and New York City, and spreading HIV]. Grindr’s website has a health page about how and when to get tested, and how to stay safe when partaking in consensual sex. In reality, STIs and HIV could be transmitted in a number of ways, and placing the blame of these apps is somewhat scapegoating and misinformed.

A joint study conducted by professors at University of Southern California and UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs concluded that, out of all respondents, 23.2 per cent of Grindr users had engaged in anal sex without a condom, and 74.4 per cent had engaged in oral sex without a condom. But the same study concluded that most participants had gone to the internet in order to seek safe-sex information. Moreover, a study conducted by Hunter College’s Center for HIV Educational Studies and Training found that at least 10 per cent of people on Grindr had never gotten tested for HIV.

While a seemingly insignificant number, this is actually a staggering number of sexually active respondents. The same respondents claimed that, even though they had never been tested, their HIV status was negative. This, according to Jon Rendina, one of the conductors of the study, “may mean that men are sharing potentially inaccurate HIV status information with their partners on Grindr.”
The fact is some people don’t need Grindr or Tinder (et cetera) to hook up with someone, and if you’re sexually active (regardless of where you met your sexual partner) you are at risk for contracting an STI. But is more transparency about sexual history the only answer? Hula, another dating app, allows people to share their STI results up front for everyone to see. That may be a good solution, but the only way to be completely transparent is to be honest and forthcoming enough with your sexual partner in order to disclose any information that may be compromising to the other person’s health before engaging in anything.

Nevertheless, Tinder and Grindr offer an easy solution that does not require hours of dressing up and standing around waiting for the right person and the right moment. Tinder especially empowers individuals who identify as female, as it opens up the possibility of a casual one night stand, without the presence of an environment prone to unwanted approaches and potential groping. You can just comfortably sit on your couch or in the library, swipe the picture of your object of desire to the right, and hope for them to do the same. Then you get a match and can start a conversation. As neither interest nor dismissal will be known, unless the sympathy is mutual, Tinder offers a medium for people who might have a strong fear of rejection, or experience the latter regularly due to a lack of social skills.

What matters is exercising vigilance. Be careful who you talk to, be suspicious of odd behaviour, and always practice safe, consensual, sex. Then maybe you’ll make the most of what these apps have to offer and prove all our parents wrong: maybe taking candy from strangers isn’t that bad after all.

The post Don’t take candy from strangers appeared first on The McGill Daily.

My father had prostate cancer – caught fairly early and treated – but for a long time he couldn’t admit it to himself, or come to terms with the outcome. I realize that Movember helps men acknowledge that they are not immortal, not pillars of immaculate health and glory. It forces them to face their illnesses head on – and overall, prostate cancer awareness is great. But there are so many holes that can be poked through this campaign that it’s hard not to notice.

Despite Movember claiming to be a global movement, it assumes privilege and a certain relation to class on behalf of the participant, which is only found in certain parts of the world. It is also wrong that Movember aims to link masculinity and being a man to secondary male characteristics, including having a prostate and being able to grow a moustache. To be completely clear, you don’t have to be a man to have a prostate, and you don’t have to have a prostate to be a man. Being a man, according to Movember, implies an archaic view of gender that implies that only a male/female gender binary exists, and that you aren’t really a man if you don’t necessarily identify with that binary. The idea of suggesting that men show solidarity with each other by growing moustaches is completely absurd.

The facts concerning prostate cancer are clear. According to the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER), the survival rate for prostate cancer is 99.2 per cent. Black males are also twice as likely to develop, and die with or from, prostate cancer than white males. This begs the question: who are all these white cisgender men fundraising and growing moustaches for? This is not to say that SEER statistics are without fault, as they fail to show any facts outside of the established and outdated gender binary. No wonder Movember is exclusionary to trans* people: how are people who do not identify with that binary and have a prostate supposed to partake in this cause? This is also because there are no facts concerning their demographic, and the campaign in question specifically targets cisgender men.

Movember is also sexist. Cisgender women, called “Mo Sistas,” are encouraged to help their “Mo Bros” raise money during November, but god forbid these women try to let their own body or facial hair grow in support of this campaign. Quiteirregular.com, a blog run by blogger Jem Bloomfield, compiled a few polite tweets written during/about Movember, aimed at their female counterparts. The tweets range from, “Just a heads up, No Shave November is not for women. Don’t be disgusting, ladies,” to, “I know it’s no shave November but please ladies know this month is not made for you to take part of. #Gross,” and, “Ladies, if you’re participating in No-Shave November, we cannot be friends. I’m gonna ask nicely that you continue your routine maintenance.” (It is important to note that people often mix up Movember and No-Shave November, although they both support prostate cancer awareness.)

Bloomfield then remarks that, “This campaign, intended as a project by men for men, has immediately been turned into a pretext for demanding that women submit themselves and their bodies to male approval,” going on to add that, “I don’t want to be told that a moustache makes me a man, or that my identity depends upon shaming women into being presentable to the male gaze.” No- Shave November’s website asserts, “guys and girls alike unite in the height of laziness agreeing to not shave their beards or legs (respectively) for the entire month of November.” But Bloomfield is right in saying that the campaign has been twisted into a misogynistic tool by its own users.

Movember is also a huge advocate of regular Prostate Specific-Antigen (PSA), testing for men (PSA is a specific type of protein found on the prostate gland, and this test examines the level of PSA in a man’s blood.) An article published on ecancer.org, entitled “U.S. task force decides against PSA screening,” concludes that PSA-based screening results in detection of more prostate cancers but “small to no reduction in prostate cancer-specific mortality after 10 years; [as well as harms] related to false positive [PSA] test results, subsequent evaluation, and therapy, including over-diagnosis and overtreatment.” The same task force warned against PSA screening for asymptomatic men. Margaret McCartney, a General Practitioner based in Glasgow who also runs her own health blog, wrote that PSA testing “doesn’t work well as a screening test, and is not part of an [National Health Service] Screening programme.” She adds that, “Movember presents PSA testing as something a good citizen would do, not something which performs very poorly. Nor do they link to information such as decision aids [which help decide whether or not to have a PSA test] for PSA screening (which, incidentally, tend to lead to more men not wanting the test)”. Movember does not take into account the risks identified with PSA testing, and this, in turn, spreads misinformation and thoroughly narrows a person’s choices with regards to testing if the Movember website is their only source for information on prostate cancer.

Blogger Ashley Ashbee, who calls Movember a type of “slacktivism,” puts it perfectly when asking participants, “Does your moustache share information about the importance of screening, or where to get screened? Does it tell you how you can prevent prostate cancer (if you even can)? Does it tell you the symptoms? Does it tell you who’s affected?” Yes, Movember might raise awareness, and a good deal of money ($146.6 million just last November, according to their website) for a good cause, but that isn’t an excuse to ignore its major flaws. The point of articles like this is also to raise awareness to inherent micro-aggressions (interactions between people of different races, genders, sexualities, and cultures that represent small acts of non-physical violence) and discrimination that campaigns like Movember help perpetuate, whether directly or indirectly. This awareness is raised in order to take something, like Movember, help fix it up and make it more accessible and less misogynistic, and turn it into something better. Do some basic research, educate yourself on the issue, and think twice before growing a moustache this, or any other, November.

The post Movember as microaggression appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Series like Culture Shock, said Kira Page, External Coordinator at QPIRG, are important in a “broader context of neoliberalism that is telling people that racism is not an issue – that colonialism is not an issue.”

“At McGill specifically, I think there’s a comforting discourse [about] multiculturalism – that this is a diverse school, it’s all good, there’s a lot of diversity,” Page said. “Representation is certainly a barometer we can use […] but just the fact that it isn’t just white people who go to this school doesn’t mean that people don’t experience institutionalized racism in a McGill context.”

Another motivation for Culture Shock is McGill’s position on unceded Mohawk territory, Page said. “The fact that McGill is on stolen land is not just a historical issue. It’s a current issue.”

See The Daily’s Culture section for more coverage of Culture Shock events, or head over to Multimedia to listen to an interview with and performance by Lady Sin.

“Canada Behind Bars: On the Incarceration of Indigenous Communities”

Written by Hannah Reardon.

Statistics Canada findings show that 30 per cent of female offenders in federal prisons are Indigenous, and this figure is steadily climbing, according to Patricia Eshkibok, one of the speakers at the Canada Behind Bars panel on October 10.

Panelists Eshkibok, Jessica Danforth, and Kawate Tawe, focused mainly on the incarceration of Indigenous women in Canada, while also highlighting the crisis facing Indigenous youth. The “pipeline from school to prison,” as Danforth referred to it, is an intergenerational effect of the residential school system. Many of its effects, such as alcohol and drug abuse, identity loss, and high suicide rates, are all serious and pervasive problems, the panelists stressed, which push Indigenous youth disproportionately out of the education system and into the prison system.

Dismal health conditions, extreme homophobia, racism, and violence are all issues that face Indigenous people within the prison system. However, some efforts are being made to improve the rights of Indigenous people in the prison system. Danforth is the founder and executive director of the Native Youth Sexual Health Network, an organization that works to protect the health rights of incarcerated individuals. “You don’t lose your right to health as soon as you enter prison. Just because you’re incarcerated doesn’t mean you lose your rights as a human being,” she said.

“Colonization is happening,” said Danforth, adding that racism and loss of identity are day-to-day realities for Indigenous people. There is a pressing need, according to the panelists, to spread the truth [about] the present-day effects of colonization. Raising awareness and fighting for justice for marginalized Indigenous people is the only way to move forward, the panelists stressed. “We are here to speak truth to power,” said Danforth.

For more on the incarceration of Indigenous communities, visit the Life after Life Collective.

“Roundtable Discussion on Solidarity City”

Written by Olivia Larson.

QPIRG McGill and SSMU co-hosted a roundtable discussion on Montreal’s Solidarity City declaration, presented by migrant justice network Solidarity Across Borders. Dozens of public service organizations across Montreal have signed the declaration in an effort to make basic resources such as education, food, and housing accessible to non-status migrants. At the roundtable discussion, representatives from various public service organizations were present to share their successes and to discuss the challenges they have faced in implementing the declaration.

Quebec’s residency clause bars thousands of undocumented children from free schooling every year, pointed out Anne, a CEGEP teacher. She works with the committee on education, which has successfully “made this problem exist” for the government through persistent lobbying in the hopes that the word ‘resident’ will be omitted from the law.

The Food For All committee, a part of the Solidarity campaign, reaches out to food aid organizations and banks, asking them to adopt the declaration and implement a ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy in regards to immigration status. So far, the committee has had relative success in signing organizations on, and thereby increasing “food justice,” as one representative put it, for non-status migrants.

Several organizations are working with Solidarity City to increase the number of subsidized housing projects across Montreal, and to make shelters for those who identify as trans* or as women safe spaces for those who are undocumented.

The shortage of available social housing for Quebec residents has made the government reluctant to expand the list of people who qualify for public housing, leaving many who are non-status homeless. Shelters have had issues with the Canadian Border Services Agency raiding and subsequently deporting paperless immigrants. The declaration, for both social housing agencies and shelters, has been extraordinarily difficult to implement, as the struggle for increased accessible living is being waged at all levels of government.

Despite myriad obstacles, Solidarity City’s powerful declaration to “fight back with solidarity, mutual aid, and direct action” is making headway in achieving equal status for all those living in Montreal.

For more information on Solidarity City, visit Solidarity Across Borders’s website.

“Race at McGill”

Written by Dana Wray.

Racial microaggressions, systemic and institutional racism, and the specific experiences of racialized people at McGill were all topics of discussion at a workshop co-facilitated by Shaina Agbayani and Annie Chen on October 16. The first half of the workshop, presented by Chen, focused on the basics of racial microaggressions, in addition to systemic and individual racism.

Microaggressions are small, everyday actions – whether verbal, behavioural, or environmental – that are hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights. Although not always done intentionally, the slow accumulation of these microaggressions over a lifetime adds up to a marginalized experience.

Agbayani gave an example of the McGill-centric website McGill Microaggressions, where people at McGill send in their experiences with racism on an interpersonal, often casual and everyday level.

Chen’s part of the workshop also debunked the myth of reverse racism. A term thrown around to describe discrimination against white people, reverse racism is often used in arguments against programs such as affirmative action.

Agbayani focused more specifically on race at McGill, and how racism manifests itself on an institutional, day-to-day, and curricular level. She highlighted that there is an underrepresentation of people of colour within McGill’s faculty, as well as a lack of financial support for initiatives addressing racism, such as the Social Equity and Diversity Education Office.

Agbayani attributed the underrepresentation of faculty and staff of colour at McGill to a “feedback loop” between a lack of diversity in the student body and in staff. “Some [people of colour] who were offered jobs at Counselling Services rejected the offers because they noted that they wanted to serve student populations that [was] more diverse, and they wanted to be a mirror of identity in a position of authority for students of colour, which they didn’t see a lot of at McGill.”

In interviews with a former McGill dean and his daughter, a current staff member, Agbayani said the lack of diversity appeared to be a systemic problem that wasn’t getting any better. “[The former dean and his daughter] haven’t seen much progress [over the past few decades]. They’ve seen a decrease in diversity visibly – not of students, they noted more students of diverse backgrounds – but in terms of faculty and staff.”

According to Agbayani, diversity is used as a superficial buzzword for McGill. “Diversity for McGill [as stated online] would reflect a pursuit of diversity as a pursuit of cosmopolitanism, as opposed to diversity as a pursuit of social justice and [a process of] redressing historical injustices.”

Want to read more on issues of racism at McGill? Read Amina Batyreva’s feature “Colouring the conversation” or read our editorial on racism at McGill. 

“Ongoing colonization: Addressing systemic violence against Indigenous women”

Written by Dana Wray and Anqi Zhang.

At the trial of two men for the brutal murder of an Indigenous woman named Pamela George, the judge presiding over the case lamented that it would be “dangerous” to convict the “bright, promising young men” that were her murderers, and that George was “just a prostitute.”

According to Candice Cascanette, a member of Missing Justice, a Montreal-based organization and the leader of the workshop, this racist and sexist language is common in the media and the broader Canadian society when talking about Indigenous women. In Canada, there are 600 missing or murdered Indigenous women, although some activists argue that the number is closer to 3000. In addition, Indigenous women are five times as likely to face violence, a fact Cascanette called proof of “ongoing colonization.”

“Talking about the colonial present requires us to go to the colonial past,” asserted Cascanette, before giving a brief historical account of the theft of Turtle Island and subsequent colonization. As Indigenous women had power connected directly to this land within their communities, Cascanette explained, they were a threat to the patriarchal European forces, and therefore a target.

More recent practices like the residential school system continued the process of colonization by separating families, forcing Christianity upon Indigenous children, and attempting to destroy Indigenous culture. According to Cascanette, the “cultural genocide” extended past the schools, into the forces – such as the Indian Act – that imposed patriarchy, capitalism, and other oppressive European structures on Indigenous communities.

However, Cascanette also dispelled the notion that Indigenous people were victims without any agency. “There have been over 500 years of colonization and over 500 years of resistance – I just want to make that clear.”

Be sure to read The Daily’s annual coverage of the March for Murdered and Missing Indigenous women. As well, read The Daily’s editorials on the subject: one from October 2013, another from February 2013, and one from October 2012.

“Teach-In Against the Charter of Values”

Written by Cem Ertekin.

In preparation for the October 20 demonstration organized by the Ensemble Contre la Charte Xénophobe Coalition, Aishah Nofal, Bochra Manaï, and Vincent Tao facilitated a teach-in on resisting the proposed Quebec Charter of Values. The event focused on what the Charter is presently, and what social ramifications it could have.

Tao, one of the lead organizers of the upcoming demonstration on October 20, outlined the Parti Québecois’s proposed content of the Charter. The Charter aims to ban the wearing of religious symbols, a goal which Tao critiques as discriminatory. “This is state sanctioned social exclusion of women of faith who need government services,” said Tao.

Manaï, a PhD candidate in Urban Studies at Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique, said that the Charter has a clear electoral agenda. After conducting research looking at inter-ethnic relationships in middle class neighbourhoods, Manaï has concluded that people see diversity mostly when there is political discussion surrounding it.

Nofal, a second-year Law student at McGill, called the Charter blatantly discriminatory. “The PQ claims that the ban of religious symbols will neutralize [the] public sector. It deprives minorities of choice. They can’t simply discard their beliefs. What this Charter is saying is that some beliefs are suitable while others are not. […] This is really frightening. As a person wearing the hijab, I feel I’m subject to public scrutiny.”

Read The Daily’s coverage of the first anti-Charter of Values protest. 

“Political Prisoners’ Struggles in Palestine”

Written by Ralph Haddad.

Tadamon!’s workshop on October 16 discussed the harsh reality that Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip face when arrested by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). Tadamon! – an Arabic word for solidarity – is a Montreal-based collective that works in solidarity with struggles for self-determination, equality, and justice in the Middle East as well as diaspora communities in Montreal and beyond.

As of 2013, there are an estimated 5,000 Palestinian prisoners in Israel. These prisoners are illegally held in poorly-maintained facilities, tortured in interrogations, and are subject to immediate maltreatment upon arrest. Israel was condemned by the UN earlier this year for its “abusive” treatment of prisoners, who are also denied family visits, Palestinian-based education, and basic healthcare.

What is important to note is that Jewish settlers and Palestinians in the West Bank are subject to separate legal systems – Jewish settlers are seen by an Israeli civilian judge, while Palestinians are seen by an Israeli military judge. Furthermore, rates of incarceration for Palestinian children are almost ninefold compared to those for Jewish children in the occupied territories, according to the workshop. Some Palestinians are arrested using administrative detention, supposedly used in times of emergency for strict security reasons (though Israel has an almost perpetual state of emergency). This form of detention allows for prisoners to be prosecuted without trial and charge, and are kept in prison for a period for up to six months, subject to renewal.

Today, there are around 178 Palestinians under administrative detention. The number has decreased “due to international grassroots pressure,” claimed Paul Di Stefano, a member of Tadamon!, “but the number is still extraordinarily high.” He continued that this form of detention allows the state to “circumvent” people’s rights.

According to Tadamon!, Israel also outsources its human rights violations by employing a private security company, G4S, to run its prisons. This privately-owned British security company also provides the IDF with equipment for checkpoints. Pressure in the form of hunger strikes on behalf of prisoners, or from movements such as Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) are still used today in order to pressure Israel to stop its maltreatment of prisoners and give them better care and humane services.

“Palestinians can be tried as adults as young as 16, and are interrogated by Israeli soldiers,” said Amy Darwish, an organizer for Tadamon!

For more resources, visit Tadamon!’s website.

“Unsettling and Decolonizing: An Introductory Workshop”

Written by Joelle Dahm.

Heidi Pridy and Philippe – who preferred not to give his last name – of the Anti-Colonial Solidarity Collective led an introductory workshop on unsettling and decolonizing, urging settlers to be respectful and effective allies to Indigenous populations on Turtle Island – also known as North America.

After an introduction to the vocabulary of decolonization and the history of colonialism in Canada, and specifically in the Montreal area, participants engaged in an interactive discussion on works by Cree artist Kent Monkman and documentaries dealing with decolonization.

Later in the workshop, Pridy explained that people often react to negative stereotypes, but feel comfortable about positive stereotypes that might glorify the group in question and give it a preconceived identity. “It does not matter if a stereotype is negative or positive. The problem is that it’s is a fixed representation and an abstraction of a complex dynamic.”

“When one group is marginalized, another one is benefitting. We need to understand ourselves as complicit in and beneficiaries of the illegal settlement of Indigenous people’s land,” said Pridy. “This appropriation often leads people to experience feelings of guilt. Guilt is a state of self-absorption that upholds privilege in a lot of ways and can really immobilize people from doing anything. We would encourage people to embrace that discomfort as a sign of a much-needed shift in self-consciousness.”

In special regard of upcoming Halloween festivities, Pridy urged people to be conscious about their self-representation, especially considering “sexy Native women costumes” sold in stores.

“Given the grade of sexual violence against Native women, that is really problematic,” Pridy stated. “Using someone else’s cultural symbols to exercise a personal need in self-expression is an exercise in privilege. That does not mean that cultural exchange never does happen and that we never partake in someone else’s culture, but there needs to be some element of mutual understanding for it to be a true exchange.”

Additional resources for decolonization can be found through Missing Justice, or read Mona Luxion’s column on decolonization and Idle No More in The Daily. 

“Indigenous feminisms and historical and contemporary two-spirit identities in North America”

Written by Hannah Besseau.

On October 10, Molly Swain and Lindsay Nixon facilitated a workshop on contemporary Indigenous feminisms, anti-capitalism, and two-spirit identities. The workshop tackled what Swain described as ‘the sexist and racist colonial values” of Canada’s ongoing violence against Indigenous people.

“We hear a lot about the victimization of Indigenous women, but not a lot about the resistance,” Swain told The Daily. “I wanted to introduce people to the topic of Indigenous feminisms and get them thinking of it not just in terms of within [academic settings], but in their daily lives.”

Swain emphasized environmental degradation and the role of capitalism in the oppression of Indigenous peoples. “Canada was […] founded very much on the principles of resource extraction, pushing further and further inland. […] John A Macdonald, the first prime minister of Canada, and his project of the Canadian Pacific Railway, was very much an extension of that need to keep pushing and [to] quell Native dissent and any Natives’ resistance to bring these dissenters under the fold.”

According to Swain, “colonialism, misogyny, and capitalism are deeply intertwined.” Decolonization – a continuous process whereby settlers, or non-Indigenous people, attempt to help heal the consequences of colonialism – is a crucial step in the struggle.

“It’s one thing to talk about decolonization and to acknowledge the land that we’re on, but it’s another thing to go out there and actually get involved in the struggles that are taking place, and to learn from those communities to figure out how to engage in a real responsible relationship with these folks. I think that’s a really important aspect of decolonization.”

Swain and Nixon are both co-founders of QPIRG McGill’s new working group, the Indigenous Women and Two-Spirit Harm Reduction Coalition. The group aims to provide resources and materials to Indigenous women and two-spirit people.

“We’re hoping to provide people with free materials such as needles, condoms, as well as resource guides to things like consent, safe sex, good drug-use practice, navigating the prison system, and guides to Montreal services,” said Swain. “Our group is open to Indigenous-identified folks only because we wanted this to be very much work we’re doing for our community.”

Culture Shock also featured a workshop on decolonization for settlers – scroll up to read Joelle Dahm’s article on it. For more information on the Indigenous Women and Two-Spirit Harm Reduction Coalition, contact ndn.harmredux@gmail.com.

The post Culture Shock appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Mashrou’ Leila grew out of an open invitation, in February 2008, by former band members Omaya Malaeb (keyboardist) and Andre Chedid (guitarist), as well as on-going member Haig Papazian (violinist). They were looking for musicians who wanted to jam and vent due to the ongoing unstable political situation in Lebanon. The band’s still going strong, starting 2013 with a dose of well-deserved international critical recognition.

When asked about what had changed since the initial inception of the band, Sinno and guitarist Firas Abou Fakhr unanimously exclaimed, “Everything.” Obviously the line-up has changed; they went through three bassists before they found Ibrahim Badr, whom Sinno proclaims “is a gift.” But neither of the two can really put their experiences into words. “It’s like asking you how much of your self has changed over the past five years […] Our job is going into a room and talking about what goes on in our heads, and in five years your head isn’t in the same place.” One thing that has stayed the same, however, is their wholehearted commitment to keep on creating art through music. Inevitably, says Sinno, letting out a wistful sigh, “The way you look at politics changes, the way you kiss someone changes, the way you dress, the way you carry yourself on stage, the way you carry an instrument, the kind of writing you do, everything changes.”

“The good thing is when the lyrics are so powerful that they become conveyors of a message […] it means that the album demands attention, whether it’s [one way or another],” Firas confessed, when asked what their stance was on the new album being called political. For Hamed, it depends on a person’s definition of politics, “[…] It’s not like we’re working with a particular track of socialism we’re trying to get people behind.” They both agree that everything is inherently political, and Raasük can be interpreted in that way. The album is dense with layers of themes and issues ranging from existentialism, finality, nostalgia, government critique, the Arab Spring, Lebanese singers with closeted sexuality, love, loss, and lust, among others. It took Mashrou’ Leila roughly three years to finish recording and producing Raasük, all without the help of a record label. Instead, they launched a massive social media project entitled #occupyarabpop, a crowdfunding project aimed at keeping the album contract-free, an independent work of art. They managed to raise approximately $66,000, which went into advertising, producing, and designing the album; their “biggest endeavour yet,” Abou Fakhr said.

Everything seems to have a hashtag nowadays, and the band wanted to draw on the ones coming from their region as inspiration for #occupyarabpop. “Whenever you saw #occupyGezi or #occupyTahrir, it became clear that was there was a discourse and people were trying to to occupy it,” Sinno explained, “Without trying to belittle the political aspect of that, we were trying to show people that there was a dominant discourse of clear economic restrictions of what we could and couldn’t do [as a band in the Middle East].” The fact remains that there isn’t a space for alternative or independent Arab bands to get recognized on a large scale, and Mashrou’ Leila wants to be part of the movement to change that, “[allowing] non-commercial or independent bands to be able to exist in the Arab world, and to be able to sustain themselves across countries,” as Sinno says. They want to occupy Arab pop. They want to try to turn the industry on its head, satirize it, critique it, shame it, and hopefully change the way things work in Lebanon, and across the Middle East. Whether this can actually be done remains to be seen.

Right now, if an artist wants to make it big there, they need to be signed to a huge local label. One of the most notable of these, Rotana Records, can be likened to an Arabic pop music factory. Roughly the same songs, with the same beat, are sung by different artists who all roughly look alike (blame plastic surgery). No variety, no individuality, just the usual Middle Eastern percussion, and the same charming bearded man the song is about in the music video. The industry wants to commodify artists, and put them on the market, wholesale, for consumers to purchase. Mashrou’ Leila is looking to find a loophole.

“This album was the first album we wanted to release on an international level with international standards; we wanted it to sound like a record that could potentially be played anywhere,” Abou Fakhr told The Daily. That is why they chose to record the album, in its entirety, in Montreal, to the band’s immense satisfaction. “It just sounds better. When you [play it on] on a [larger] system, you feel a big difference.”

Montreal, they both claim with beaming faces, has been amazing. “It’s very inspiring being here, and there’s a lot of good music in this city,” Abou Fakhr asserted. This definitely comes through when the third album is compared to the first two. There is a grounding of music, an all enveloping experience of sound that just feels right. It feels like they’ve hit home. To Sinno, it was interesting gauging people’s sensibilities here because of the entirely different political climate, “…It helps to understand why things are the way they are back home.” Things take on a more serious air when they are asked about the Charter of Values, in light of Sinno’s personal advocacy for a Lebanese secular state. He blatantly proclaimed that, “There’s a difference between secularism and fascism. There’s a difference between saying secularism is how the law is going to operate, and saying that being a secular believer is how every individual needs to function.” He went on to say that, “It seems as absurd to try and impose something like that as it would be to flip it around, where you’re operating in a country with an Islamic majority and they say you’re not allowed to walk out without a Hijab.”

Sinno’s sexuality and the band’s politics used  in Western media to put Mashrouè Leila in the “controversial” category. Sinno thinks that the band can never be portrayed objectively by any form of mass media. “You need a line that grabs the reader to read the rest of the article, and unfortunately talking about [the] recording process isn’t going to do that for most people,” Abou Fakhr added.  Mass culture is formulaic, “but it’s not without merit,” said Hamed. By their reasoning, these newspaper articles aren’t lying, they’re just choosing to say some things and leave other things out. “One of the things we’re proud of is being portrayed quite straightforwardly…” Any publicity is, essentially, good publicity.

One thing the band won’t assume responsibility for, Sinno affirmed, is being considered role models. “I don’t think that would be very fair, and I don’t think it would be possible to wake up in the morning and get up with that kind of pressure. [But] I think these things happen to all of us, we all have arbitrary role models growing up. I wanted to be Kurt Cobain for two years in high school.” For Abou Fakhr, the impact they’ve had is clear to them and is still important, but it does not factor into whether the band should limit their behaviour. Sinno maintains that if self-censorship ever happens because of this, then the power the band has would to start to fade; they just wouldn’t be them anymore. “We are who we are, and we’re proud of [that], and people like who we are. But apart from that, the only thing that’s good about [being role models] is that it motivates people to try to be musicians, which we think is a great thing.”

The first single off Raasük, “Lil Watan” (“For the nation”), tells the story of propaganda, smooth-talking politicians, indoctrination, and mass distraction. The beat is synthy, more pop than most of their songs, but a welcome addition to the growing diversification of their music. Moreover, it is further proof that Mashrou’ Leila cannot be boxed into a specific genre. The video for the song revolves around a belly dancer, representing the top-down distraction. It also parodies 1980s and 1990s Lebanese music videos. “You see a bunch of people on stage with a very low budget backdrop and there’s a belly dancer…” explained Sinno. Effectively, Mashrou’ Leila is satirizing the entire Lebanese music industry, while also critiquing local politics. For Abou Fakhr, making the video was a highly enjoyable experience, “[…] I like that the band isn’t very foregrounded in the video. I like this idea of slowly disappearing as opposed to [our] other videos, which were very much focused on […] who the band was and it’s identity. [Now] we’re starting to move away from that, even in the music.”

When it comes to their new-found international recognition, Sinno confessed that it all seems surreal, “Suddenly when we talk about our fans and our families, it’s not just in the Middle East anymore.” They claimed this has only happened out of the good grace and fortune of somehow making the right consensus-based decisions between the five of them. “A lot of the reason we’re here is that [we just happened to make] the right decisions at the right time.”

The post Mashrou’ Leila makes it big appeared first on The McGill Daily.

“Quebec is home to 600 different religions,” Sarna continued, a fact barely a handful of citizens currently residing within the province – one that supposedly celebrates pluralism – probably know. Freedom of Religion makes up Article Three of the Quebec Charter of Human Rights. In light of that fact, Sarna highlighted that forcing someone to make their religion private holds no legal ground – a simple but resounding statement that could mean the proposed Charter of Values could get the axe if presented in a court of law. Going further, Section 43 of the Quebec Charter of Human Rights states, “People belonging to ethnic minorities have the right to develop and promote their culture…” Obviously, the PQ needs a better legal consultant. Their proposed charter would, according to Sarna, be impossible to implement in light of the Charter of Human Rights, which takes precedence over all other laws in Quebec. The way things are phrased in government and the media counts as well; as Sarna put it, calling an ethnic entity a “cultural community” instead of a “minority” devoids it of any rights it may lay claim to.

For the Rights Commission, discrimination is an all-too-familiar foe that has yet to be defeated. The Commission has collaborated with the Service de police de la Ville de Montréal on cases of racial profiling (they have admitted this, and proposed a five year plan of action to eradicate this discriminatory practice on behalf of its officials). The Commission also released a report stating that foreign doctors trained in Quebec are being turned away on the basis of ethnicity, even though Quebec severely lacks healthcare professionals. It also denounces the three month waiting period immigrants have to sit through in order to obtain proper healthcare coverage. The Commission has also uncovered findings that suggest visible and ethnic minorities are not being hired by Quebec corporations and businesses; the employment equity program (which monitors the employment of “visible and ethnic minorities, women, first nations, and people with disabilities”) in Quebec is nothing short of a disaster in need of serious reform. Sarna also could not help but highlight how inaccessible Montreal is when it comes to non-able bodied citizens.

But there are clearly limits to how much the Quebec Human Rights and Youth Rights Commission can accomplish. When asked by The Daily about what the Commission’s stance is on Bill 35 and the general infringement on trans* rights, Sarna could only conclude that trans* rights are the next platform of discussion. She ended on an advisory note, in a tone that would suggest not following her advice would only lead to further discriminations, “The best way to ensure human rights is by creating an informed citizenry […] this is not the society we are hoping to create…and not the future that I hope to promote.”

Ihsaan Gardee, the Executive Director of the National Council of Canadian Muslims (formerly CAIR-CAN), opened his piece with a joke, a refreshing icebreaker to a scarce audience that welcomed him with dispersed laughs. His segment touched upon how the Quebec Charter of Values will impact minorities in the province; he likened the possible aftermath of the Charter to a ripple effect. “The effects of this Charter will occur at the micro level,” Gradee stated; that of the individual sphere, the lives of the people involved, and their interpersonal relationships. It will also occur on the “macro level,” that of the Quebec socio-economic sector. Jobs will probably turn away possible applicants, fire current employees, and migration and immigration to Quebec will go from rivers of potential immigrants, to streams of them, with the ever looming possibility of an immigration drought. “Quebec has witnessed net losses in migration,” Gardee claimed.

His spiel centered around putting the debate on the Charter within a historical context. He mentioned the Quiet Revolution in Quebec as inciting the ongoing stigma of any form of religion spilling into government practice, policy, and institution. “This debate parallels [that] of the hijab in France,” he declared; albeit that debate is one laden with scapegoat excuses like secularism, French supremacy, and nationalism. In Gardee’s words, “The state should not be in the business of deciding what is a bona fide religion, provided this religion does not infringe on other people’s rights.”

The Daily asked Gardee the tough question of whether this Charter is fueled by internalized anti-semitism and Islamophobia, to which Gardee replied that the government has specifically said that it is not. His argument, though, is that the Charter’s wording makes it sound anti-semitic and Islamophobic, about which we can only speculate.

In more surprising news, according to a recent Léger-Le Devoir poll, as reported by CTV Montreal news, the PQ gained five points in popularity since June, up 32 per cent, a close contender with Parti Libéral Québécois popularity at 36 per cent. It is also even more popular among francophones after the reported leak of the news on the Charter of Values.

The impact of the Charter? The potential to foster fear and exclusion, green-light further physical and emotional discrimination of religious minorities, and, in Sarna’s opinion, incite people with religious prejudices to freely act on their prejudices. The basics of what is happening, Gardee asserted, is a “forced homogenization from the top-down” of a province inherently afraid of losing its heritage and core identity when so many new cultures and identities are being poured into the melange every day. The fact is, the PQ are in denial, and, as Gardee reiterated, “Quebec is in desperate need of immigrants.”

The post Know your rights appeared first on The McGill Daily.

—Zoë Knowles

Asbestos
October 2012
One of the most heated health issues at McGill this year revolved around the controversial asbestos study conducted by retired McGill professor John Corbett McDonald. On October 18, 2012, McGill cleared McDonald of any misconduct – which included allegedly working with the asbestos industry and consequently fabricating his study’s research about asbestos’ health concerns. But his innocence is still questioned. The controversy around this study affected the way that McGill viewed its education and research process. We, as students, should always be critical of what we learn and not assume that professors are infallible. This controversy has sparked debates over reliability, accountability, and the way that studies should be conducted at McGill. McDonald deemed certain types of asbestos “innocuous,” although asbestos is linked to cancer. As a result, asbestos industries have cited McDonald’s flawed study to promote asbestos usage. However, McGill investigators found “no evidence of scientific misconduct,” on MacDonald’s part, according to the CBC.

—Zoë Knowles

HPV Study
January 2013
In January 2013, McGill launched a study called Carrageenan-gel Against Transmission of Cervical human papillomavirus (HPV) infection (CATCH) to evaluate a new method of HPV prevention. A seaweed extract, carrageenan, has been identified as an inhibitor of HPV infections by the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda, Maryland. The CATCH study involves the application of a Carrageenan in gel-form as a personal lubricant before sexual intercourse, in order to prevent the spread of the virus. The plan is to recruit 465 women, who are sexually active and university-aged, to apply the gel before sex. Half of these women will be given the Carrageenan gel, and the other half will be given a placebo. This study will show both the effectiveness of the Carrageenan gel in preventing HPV and in treating existing infections. While a vaccine preventing HPV was released in the market a few years ago, it does not prevent all strains of HPV, which in turn can cause cancers in the throat, tongue, penis, vagina, vulva, anus, and cervix. If successful, the study will revolutionize the treatment of HPV, which is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI), making this a very important study. However, the problem with the study is that is seems to be geared only towards cisgendered women, presumably those who are heterosexual. However, HPV can be contracted by any sexually active individual, including men, and the testing of this drug should be open to individuals of all genders and sexual orientations.

—Sarah Fortin

Promising multiple sclerosis treatment
March 2013
Successful clinical trials using bone marrow transplantation (BMT) were carried out in a small group of patient with Multiple Sclerosis (MS). Though a highly risky from of treatment, BMT has been found to be effective in preventing relapse in patients with MS. This study was based on immunological research at the Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) and the Université de Montréal. The principle investigator of the study was Amit Bar-Or, a neurologist and researcher at the MNI and director of the Experimental Therapeutics program – which, according to Bar-Or, is “a program that grew from [their] interest in trying to study the biology of a human condition by studying people with the human condition.” In particular, with a disease like MS where no real animal model exists, researchers are finding it more effective to study the biology of what is actually changing in the human with the illness, by assessing early phase clinical trials such as this BMT study in humans.

—Diana Kwon

Nanoparticles for brain disorders
March 2013
Today, the number of Canadians affected by brain tumours and disorders, such as Alzheimer’s, are on the rise. One of the main issues in terms of treatment for these diseases is that less than half of the administered dose of medicine contained in current drugs actually reaches the brain. Sebastien Boridy, a Pharmacology graduate student at McGill, is currently looking into developing the technology to administer nanoparticles into the brain. Nanoparticles provide a uniquely effective way of delivering drugs to the brain because of their specificity and improved penetration into target areas in the organ. These drugs hold huge potential for the future treatment of brain disorders.

—Diana Kwon

Understanding the cultural impacts of HIV/AIDS in the Middle East
March 2013
HIV/AIDS is a global crisis – over 34 million people are estimated to have contracted with HIV in 2011. This is a particularly large issue in the Middle East, due to the fact that HIV-related topics are a cultural taboo in this region, which leads to very few efforts in research, and a lessened chance of affected individuals reaching out for help. Saoussan Askar, a graduate student in Sociology at McGill, is studying how HIV and AIDS is conceptualized and discussed in the Middle East by conducting a discourse analysis of media outlets in these areas. Thus far, Askar has found little or no mention of safe sex or treatment of HIV, and an exclusion of the questions of why and how transmission occurs. The results have pointed to the need to address certain cultural taboos related to HIV in the Middle East in order to be able to provide better prevention and treatment measures.

—Diana Kwon

The neurochemistry of music
March 2013
Daniel J. Levitin, a professor of Psychology at McGill, aided by his post-graduate research fellow, Dr. Mona Lisa Chanda, has discovered multiple benefits of playing and listening to music. The effects of the latter on the reduction of pre-surgery anxiety were found to be greater than the usual prescribed pre-operation medication. Music was found to strengthen the immune system by increasing the number of important mucosal antibodies and natural killer cells. The research also showed that music plays a role in mood management and in human social bonding. On the topic of further research, the authors will examine probable differences between playing and listening to music, and found a correlation between oxytocin – the ‘love drug’ – group affiliation, and music, as well as the possible similarities in chemical pathways between musical pleasure and other forms of pleasure, such as sex and food.

—Julie Prud’homme

University’s attempt at energy reduction
March 2013
McGill has completed an array of projects aimed at decreasing its energy consumption and improving sustainability. McGill partnered with the Energy Management Group to make the University’s energy “more visible and easier to track.” The company has installed 400 real-time energy metres in seventy buildings on campus. The results from these metres can be accessed by anybody online at mcgill.pulseenergy.com. Projected energy savings from recent projects that involve “heat recovery from a data centre, a ventilation upgrade in a chemistry building, or upgrades to one of the library buildings, range from $100,000 to $300,000 for each project,” accoding to the group. McGill has succeeded in lowering its greenhouse gas emissions by 20 per cent since 2002. While it may seem productive for McGill to partner with an outside organization to help with energy needs, it would be worth looking at its own resources – staff, graduate, and post-graduate students – for help on these issues. One of the means through which McGill is doing so is by undertaking an applied student research project dubbed the “McGill Energy Project.” This project has allowed undergraduate students to build an energy systems map for McGill. It has also given them the opportunity to develop methods to forecast the university’s energy demand and optimize steam and chilled water origination. Involving undergrads is a good step on the university’s behalf, but careful consideration of background and experience should be taken before assigning these students to bigger projects.

—Ralph Haddad

The post This year in research at McGill appeared first on The McGill Daily.

As a Middle Eastern man, I am blessed (or cursed) with bushy eyebrows, a thick beard, and basically the whole hairy package (which I will not be addressing in this article). The fact that I am a bearded person with a Lebanese passport, apparently, has a whole different meaning to North American customs officials. It’s always the same conversation with my parents before I travel anywhere in the industrialized West: “shave your beard off, they might detain you!” It’s a simple joke with deep cultural resonance. There is no justifiable reason why I should have to shave in order to pass as more “white-looking” to please customs officials every time I travel to Canada or the United States. This is racial profiling. That I am being singled out because I am ‘Muslim-looking,’ (Muslim, of course, a prerequisite for being a terrorist according to the West) is completely unethical, and speaks volumes about the terror-driven, Islamophobic society the West has become. My initial reaction to a recent bus bombing in Bulgaria, which killed seven people, was “please don’t let the bomber be an Arab.” We can’t get a break.

A 2010 CBS poll showed that 51 per cent of Americans agree with racial profiling as a way of assessing whether someone is or isn’t a national security threat (as opposed to 59 per cent of Canadians who disagree with racial profiling as a tactic, and 79 per cent of Canadians who agree that racial profiling goes against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, according to a recent poll conducted by the Canadian Department of Justice). Racial profiling has graced the pages of The Daily more than once, and why not? As long as this issue stands as a major social problem, someone has to write about it. The reality is that, while I am not Muslim, if I even look ‘Muslim’ to customs officials or border officers, there is always the possibility and the fear that I will be detained, I will be searched, I will be interrogated – a possibility that will exist for as long as I hold a Middle Eastern passport. And while I understand that this problem does not only plague one ethnic or racial group, Middle Eastern travelers are often most visibly plagued. Recently, on a train to New York, I was taken aside (along with all other non-American, non-Canadian passport holders) to fill out an entry document to the United States. While I was waiting, I was listening in on a conversation between a U.S. customs agent and a Korean man – not much older than me, which was happening nearby. He had been selected for a “randomized search.” The officer consoled him with sentences like “this happens all the time” or “it’s standard procedure, don’t worry” while going through his personal belongings and delicates with gloved hands. I don’t know about you, but I have never seen anyone other than a person who is a visible minority person be taken aside for questioning.

When my mother first told me to shave before going to New York City for Reading Week, I bristled, telling her I wasn’t going to just because I would put off the customs officers, but I eventually relented. “Is my beard short enough?” I asked. She nodded, and that was that. I was now set for travel. For me, it’s not just that simple fact of having to consider this every time I travel. There are cultural implications surrounding this simple act of cutting something off my face. It doesn’t only symbolize hormones or puberty or “masculinity.” I also see it as a signifier of Arab identity. To shave my beard is to let go of part of my identity, my culture, where I’m from. It is my way of continuity with my past, continuity I genuinely do not want to lose.

And it’s not just the facial features, looking “too Arab,” or “too Muslim.” It’s also a dress code. According to the United States’ Transportation Security Administration (TSA), “the new standard procedures subject all persons wearing head coverings to the possibility of additional security screening, which may include a pat-down search of the head covering.” They also say that although you are permitted to wear “loose fitting or religious garments” while going through security, it could lead to an extra screening, which is apparently done to ensure the safety of the travelling public. Doesn’t the ‘travelling public’ include people in headscarves and “loose fitting religious” clothing? How do airport and customs officials get away with these searches, and brush them off as being “random” and for ‘the good of the community?’ Is it okay to justify strip searches, intense cavity searches (to which my best friend was subjected at John F. Kennedy Airport in New York), three-hour interrogations (my father suffered one of these, at one of the several Vermont U.S. border security stations) on the ludicrous basis that the traveller has a Middle Eastern passport or that they look Middle Eastern or ‘Muslim’?

Has America, operating through institutions like the TSA, completely disregarded that terrorism and violence might not just come from foreign lands? What happens when the threat of violence comes from within? A recent shooting at a Sikh temple (it’s worth noting, for those who don’t know, that Sikhism is a religion entirely separate from Islam) in Wisconsin that left seven dead – and was labelled by Attorney General Eric Holder as “an act of terrorism, an act of hatred, a hate crime,” – left question marks about whether the American government is doing enough to combat domestic terrorism in a post-9/11 era. The shooter was an Army veteran, who killed himself shortly after the incident. The shooter was not wearing “loose fitting religious garments,” and the shooter was indeed not a foreigner. According to an article published on edition.cnn.com, “Sikhs in America have been targeted by revenge-seekers who apparently have mistaken them for Muslims, perhaps due to the traditional turbans they wear and their dark skin.” I sense a pattern.

The post Islamophobia & Co. appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Benelux, 245 Sherbrooke West

A five-minute walk away from campus, Benelux was the first stop of the night. The atmosphere was very relaxed and intimate, complete with the usual dim lighting. Their décor was modern and warm: stainless steel bar tops, exposed ductwork, and kegs lining the walls. Our waitress, Gabrielle, was very patient as we mulled over a selection that ranged from traditional Belgian-style beers to IPAs, and helpfully gave us detailed descriptions and recommendations. We ordered the Pollen, which was described as a classic cream ale, though it was a tangier than expected, with undertones of buckwheat. The Hutchison was an amber ale, not too bitter, with mild hops, and a slightly roasted flavour. This would be an ideal place to go after class to catch up with a friend.

L’Amère à Boire,  2049 St. Denis

Our second stop of the night, L’Amère à Boire, felt more casual, with brighter lighting and a crowded atmosphere different from the more intimate feel one usually gets at brewpubs. It seemed like the crowd consisted of Quebecois patrons who were looking to kick back after a hard day at work. Though it was only 7:30 p.m. and the three floors slightly more than half full, it took a while for our waitress to arrive. Once she greeted us, the service was quite prompt. Their beer list came in French only, and featured a lot of German- and Czech-style beers. I tried the Drak, a clear amber with a strong malt taste and a faint tangy aftertaste, as well as their imperial stout. The stout’s colour was as black as coffee, and matched the earthy, bitter taste, as well as the undertones of dark chocolate. It was less bitter than the other stouts we tried, and became thinner and sweeter with subsequent sips. As we were preparing to leave, we caught a whiff of a plate of fries being delivered to the table behind us, and immediately our salivary glands kicked into production. The smell was intoxicating and we will definitely be trying the food next time.

Le Saint Bock, 1749 St. Denis 

Down the street from L’Amère à Boire was our next stop, Le Saint Bock. Though the outside is easy to miss, the interior is very sleek, with heavy white drapes and red moody lighting. Think of a clash between a semi-formal lounge and a sports bar. The waiter arrived quickly, but rushed through his recommendations from the extensive beer list, and was generally impatient. We had developed a taste for stouts by this point, and ordered Le Stout Cerise. It tasted strongly of coffee, laced hints of whiskey and plenty of sugar. When I asked for a red beer, the gloriously named Dunkelweisen was recommended, a malty brew with a hint of spices and fruits. The beer itself was pretty light; it felt highly carbonated, and the flavour seemed to evaporate on the tongue.

Dieu du Ciel, 29 Laurier West

Alas, we saved the last stop for perhaps the best (and certainly one of the most popular) of Montreal’s microbreweries. The pub is almost always busy and full. Luckily, a table emptied just as we arrived and we were quickly seated. The servers were efficient and friendly. Their selection spans the gamut from standard to eccentric, including a beer infused with wormwood, the herbal base of absinthe, and another one with hibiscus. We had a tasting cup of the Aphrodisiac, a stout with cocoa and vanilla undertones. Even though we enjoyed it, a full pint would probably be too sweet to finish off. It was reminiscent of a very sweet chocolate shake – in beer form, something you would buy at Starbucks, if it had a liquor license. They lacked a full kitchen, but offered appetizers and simple bar food, so we also ordered a plate of nachos that we devoured rabidly, after our four beer runs. Considering that, it was hard to judge the food fairly. However, the size was good for three people for a fair price, and the nachos were crunchy and utterly satisfying.

The post A microbrewery journey appeared first on The McGill Daily.