The McGill Daily Vol. 108 Issue 2 by McGill Daily

Published by The Daily Publications Society, a student society of McGill University. The McGill Daily is located on unceded Kanien’kehá:ka territory.

Volume 108, Issue 02 | Monday, September 10, 2018 | mcgilldaily.com Looking for a token heterosexual since 1911

How Long is Enough? The Comebacks of Abusers in the Age of #MeToo page 10

Lease for January 20 9

Opening January 2019!

call (514) 273-7626 or register to receive more information for fall 2019! All-inclusive living in downtown Montreal’s premier student residence.

Campus1MTL.ca

Close to Concordia, UQAM and located directly across the street from McGill University. This is Campus1 MTL.

DESAUTELS & CONT. ED ACCOUNTING STUDENTS: This Fall, we will be offering group and semi-group technical reviews for the following topics and core competencies:

Financial Reporting:

Taxation:

Managerial Accounting:

Assurance:

Desautels: ACCT 351,352, 453 Cont. Ed: CCFC 511, 512, 513

Desautels: ACCT 385, 486 Cont. Ed: CCTX 511, 532

Desautels: ACCT 351,352, 453 Cont. Ed: CCFC 511, 512, 513

Desautels: ACCT 476, 477

Our sessions and coaching team are like none other. We had a 100% pass rate on the 2017 Common Final Examination (CFE). We offer both biweekly and pre-midterm and final exam reviews. We also offer case-writing sessions.

For scheduling or to discuss your needs, please email info@cpacoachingmontreal.com

September 10, 2018 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

CONTENTS

3 EDITORIAL Rest in Power, Nicholas Gibbs

4 NEWS International News Blurbs Quebec is Voting. Will You?

7 Culture Dressing Up for Mental Health One Size Doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Fit All

9 Commentary

LE PETERSON IS READY TO WELCOME YOU

Accepting the Good in Change How Long is Enough?

11 Features

IN THE HEART OF THE QUARTIER DES SPECTACLES

MODEL LOFT AND PENTHOUSE AVAILABLE TO VISIT

Cultivating Our Public Oeuvre

14 ARCHIVE Activities Night in Archives

15 Poetry A Self-Care Guide for Melanated Bodies

769,000

DISCOVER EVERYTHING LE PETERSON HAS TO OFFER.

www.

mcgilldaily

.com

SQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQ

COME CHAT WITH THE MCGILL DAILY TEAM AT ACTIVITIES NIGHT SQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQ TUES. 11/09 4-8PM WED. 12/09 4-8PM IN THE FIELD HOUSE SQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQ

SQSQS

LePeterson.com

An Ode to SSMU Babies

SQSQS

SALES CENTER

405 DE LA CONCORDE, 33rd FLOOR (SUITE 3301) MONTREAL 514-904-8855

16 compendium!

SQSQS

425,000

PENTHOUSES FROM + TX $

SQSQS

LOFTS WITH 18 FOOT CEILINGS FROM + TX $

EDITORIAL

Volume 108 Issue 2

September 10, 2018 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

editorial board

2075 Robert Bourassa Bld., Rm. 500 Montreal, QC H3A 2L1 phone 514.398.6784 fax 514.398.8318 mcgilldaily.com

The McGill Daily is located on unceded Kanien’kehá:ka territory. coordinating editor

Lydia Bhattacharya

managing editor

Arno Pedram

Rest in Power, Nicholas Gibbs

coordinating news editor

Claire Grenier news editor

Vacant

commentary + compendium! editor

Nellia Halimi culture editor

Panayot Gaidov

features editor

Athina Khalid science + technology editor

Vacant

sports editor

Vacant

multimedia editor

Vacant

photos editor

Vacant

illustrations editor

Nelly Wat copy editor

Phoebe Pannier design + production editor

Vacant

social media editor

Vita Azaro le délit

Lara Benattar

rec@delitfrancais.com cover design

content warning: police brutality, anti-Black racism, death

icholas Gibbs was a 23-year-old father of four and a resident of Notre-Dame-de-Grâce. His family described him as quiet and reserved. Close friends thought of him as a loving father and partner. On August 21, Nicholas Gibbs was killed by Service de Police de la Ville de Montreal (SPVM) officers on the corner of Montclair and De Maisonneuve, in another instance of police violence against Black people. According to the Quebec Bureau of Independent Investigations (BEI), Gibbs was shot after police were called to the scene to break up a fight between two men. Allegedly, the police used a taser on the men before opening fire. The BEI is currently investigating the actions taken by the police on August 21. Meanwhile, coverage from local news journals has largely focused on Gibbs’ past criminal record and the fact that he yelled “shoot me” at the officers. The press has framed these details as justification for the violent measures taken by the police. An SVPM officer interviewed by the Gazette argued that the police had no choice but to shoot; Gibbs was allegedly holding a knife, and tasers require close range. Nevertheless, Gibbs’ family stated that the police did not consider the mental distress Gibbs was experiencing, and that they escalated violence without

intermediary non-lethal techniques, such as tackling or shooting in the leg, and handcuffing. Local coverage has failed to situate the killing of Nicholas Gibbs in the broader context of police violence against Indigenous and Black people, especially those who are neurodivergent.* According to Alex Tyrell, the leader of the Green Party of Quebec, police in Quebec have shot and killed 136 people since 1987. However, in June, the SPVM quit conducting Indigenous sensitivity trainings developed and led by the Montreal Urban Aboriginal Community Strategy Network, which had been running since 2015. These exercises were meant to address police violence against Indigenous people in Montreal by increasing awareness of the reality of colonialism and the history of anti-Indigenous violence in Canada. Nakuset, the Executive Director of the Native Women’s Shelter, said that she and others who worked on this training were not consulted when the police decided to scrap it and instate a new training program. While the results of the ongoing BEI investigation remain undisclosed, it is unclear how the SPVM will address this injustice, or if they will address it at all. It is our responsibility to be aware of the biases that cloud the understanding of this case and to offer support however we can. On our website is a link to a GoFundMe page for Gibbs’ family. Rest in Power, Nicholas Gibbs. *see the online glossary at mcgilldaily.com/glossary

Nelly Wat

contributors Claire Grenier, Athina Khalid, Nelly Wat, Arno Pedram, Lydia Bhattacharya, Nabeela Jivraj, Claudia Kitchen, Florence Ashley, Gabriela Rey, Sara Hashemi, Julia Crowly, Kathleen Charles, Jay VanPut, Phoebe Pannier

Published by the Daily Publications Society, a student society of McGill University. The views and opinions expressed in the Daily are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of McGill University. The McGill Daily is not affiliated with McGill University.

Read us online! 2075 Robert Bourassa Bld., Rm. 500 Montreal, QC H3A 2L1 phone 514.398.6790 fax 514.398.8318 advertising & general manager Boris Shedov sales representative Letty Matteo ad layout & design Mathieu Ménard dps board of directors

Julian Bonello-Stauch, Nouedyn Baspin, Leandre Barome, Tony Feng, Boris Shedov, Lara Benattar, Lydia Bhattacharya, Athina Khalid

All contents © 2018 Daily Publications Society. All rights reserved. The content of this newspaper is the responsibility of The McGill Daily and does not necessarily represent the views of McGill University. Products or companies advertised in this newspaper are not necessarily endorsed by Daily staff. Printed by Imprimerie Transcontinental Transmag. Anjou, Quebec. ISSN 1192-4608.

website Facebook Instagram twitter

www.mcgilldaily.com www.facebook.com/ themcgilldaily @mcgilldaily @mcgilldaily

coordinating@mcgilldaily.com news@mcgilldaily.com commentary@mcgilldaily.com culture@mcgilldaily.com features@mcgilldaily.com scitech@mcgilldaily.com sports@mcgilldaily.com

Managing PHOTOs ILLUSTRATIONS DESIGN + PRODUCTION COPY WEB + Social Media MULTIMEDIA

managing@mcgilldaily.com photos@mcgilldaily.com illustrations@mcgilldaily.com design@mcgilldaily.com copy@mcgilldaily.com web@mcgilldaily.com multimedia@mcgilldaily.com

news

September 10, 2018 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

Quebec is Vot

A Breakdown of the Parties Hopi

Claire Grenier and Athina Khalid The McGill Daily

One of the 22 parties, Parti 51 even proposes separating from Canada with the intent of joining the United States.

uebec will vote on its 42nd National Assembly (provincial government) on Monday October 1. The election, which has been underway since August 23, is being fought between four major parties: the Liberal Party of Québec (PLQ), the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ), the Parti Québécois (PQ), and Québec Solidaire (QS). The election comes at a polarizing time for Quebec; many of the 22 parties vying for seats have drastically different views on issues all identified as “the most important” for Quebec citizens.

the CAQ is polling at 36.6%, the PLQ at 28.7%, the PQ at 18.4%, QS at 10.9%, and all smaller parties comprise 5.4% altogether.

in the polls, and general public opinion of them, makes it seem increasingly unlikely that they will win in October. The PQ is

female and one male [...] I value their inclusion of candidates and willingness to work with various community activists in

“Québec Solidaire shares this goal of separating Quebec from Canada, but I do think that separation is not as prevalent in these elections as it has in past years. And unlike many other Quebecois parties, QS does not use themes of racism or cultural prejudice to further their goals of provincial sovereignty” With the exception of a brief PQ government from 20122014, the PLQ has governed the province since 2003. As a result, the guiding principle in this election seems to be a desire for change. The CAQ, whose policies consist of lowering taxes and creating more room for “innovation” by creating tax breaks for businesses, while hoping to improve Quebec’s public education and health services, is leading in the polls: the CAQ is polling at 36.6%, the PLQ at 28.7%, the PQ at 18.4%, QS at 10.9%, and all smaller parties comprise 5.4% altogether. The PLQ’s position

trailing behind, and QS, the only remaining economically-left party, has yet to make substantial headway beyond Montreal. A few students who spoke to the Daily about the upcoming election expressed support or appreciation for Québec Solidaire. U1 Arts Student, Rachel Schleifer, told the Daily in an interview: “I really admire the values of QS. Their platform is focused on issues such as environmentalism, social justice, and access to education. I also like that the party does not have a sole leader in the traditional sense and instead has two spokespeople, one

— Rachel Schleifer, U1 McGill Arts student the province.” Another student, Mayaluna Zama Bierlich, U2 Arts, echoed these sentiments in a separate interview, saying, “I’m voting for Québec Solidaire because I believe that their policies most closely reflect my own political beliefs, and that they’re genuinely committed to adopting those policies.” Schleifer also touched on a particularly prevalent issue in this election: separatism and independence. “Québec Solidaire shares this goal of separating Quebec from Canada, but I do

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

Quebec Liberal Party (PLQ)

Coalition Avenir Québec

Incumbent (first elected in 2014) Leader: Philippe Couillard Slogan: To make life easier for Quebecers

Leader: Francois Legault Slogan: Maintenant

Education:

Pledged a total of 2.8 billion in education spending over 5 years Promised to increase the high school graduation rate from 68 per cent to 85 per cent by 2030. Hired 1,500 new educational professionals, 600 of which were teachers. Wants to add educational assistants to kindergarten and first grade to help with teaching, technical assistance, and the care of special needs students.

The party hopes to cut education costs by eliminating school boards, and transferring their authority by and large to the schools themselves. Would replace school boards with local service centres to provide the necessary administrative supports to schools.

Immigration:

Wishes to reduce, at least temporarily, the number of immigrants Quebec intakes from 50,000 to 40,000. Supports the implication of a “values test,” a test to make sure that all incoming immigrants hold “Quebecois” values before receiving a Quebec selection certificate. Immigrants would have to prove that they are actively looking for employment, although critics have questioned the legality of this policy.

Supported a plan that would have Quebec take in 49,000 to 53,00 immigrants this year. Pledged $25 million over the next four years to programs which would provide French lessons and rural community integration to immigrants.

Secularism and Identity:

Purporters of 2017’s Bill 62, a bill which forbid the wearing of religious symbols, including the hijab, while giving or receiving public services. The original bill was suspended by the Quebec superior court on grounds of discrimination. Couillard is now stating that local police forces should decide whether women on their force can wear garments such as the hijab.

Environment:

Plans to spend $2.9 billion on sustainable transport initiatives by 2023, also in favour of the federal cap-and-trade program to reduce emissions nationally.

Sovereignty:

The Liberals, and Couilliard, are federalist, and in favour of Quebec signing the constitution. Couillard has pushed for greater legislative power for Quebec within the confederation.

Immigration:

Secularism and Identity:

Believes in creating a “Secularism Charter” which would regulate the religious accommodations provided to civil servants. Opposes wearing religious symbols, especially by those who possess civil power, like police officers and school teachers.

Environment:

Supports reducing greenhouse gasses through technological innovation.

Sovereignty:

The CAQ is a “nationalist” party; they advocate for more power for Quebec within Canada. The CAQ would like to see Quebec have more sway in immigration and fiscal matters as well as a say in Supreme Court nominees. The CAQ has pledged to never hold a referendum while in power.

news

ting, Will you?

September 10, 2018 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

ing to be Elected on October 1st

Nelly Wat | The McGill Daily

Parti Quebecois

Quebec Solidaire

Leader: Jean-Francois Lisée Slogan: Sérieusement

Leader: QS has a non-hierarchical structure. Instead of a party leader, the party has two spokespeople: Manon Masse and Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois. Slogan: Populaire

Education:

Pledged to slowly move towards both free CEGEP and free University education in the province, starting with low income students. This plan is estimated to cost $400 million. Would also reduce funding for English language CEGEPS in an attempt to offer better English language instruction at French CEGEPS.

Immigration:

Opposes the influx of 50,000 immigrants a year, and would like to receive a “more reasonable number” from the auditor general. Immigrants Quebec does admit will need to have skills in French as well as an existing knowledge of “Quebec values” before arriving in the province. 25 per cent of those selected would also be made to settle in rural communities.

Secularism and Identity:

Believes that anyone in public service, such as prison guards, judges, prosecutors, police officers, and school children, should not be allowed to wear religious symbols, including the hijab.

Environment:

Would encourage Quebec’s pension fund, the Caisse de Dépôt, to divest from fossil fuel related companies and the province to ban all new fossil fuel projects. Would explore incentives to carpool through creating an app. Passengers and drivers would be awarded $4 for their first year using the app, and $3 for any subsequent trip taken after that using the app.

Sovereignty:

The PQ are a separatist party, and will continue to advocate for an independent Quebec, yet they will not hold a referendum in their first term in power. Under the PQ, the earliest referendum would be held in 2022.

Education:

Would supply free education to everyone in the province, from pre-school to university.

Immigration:

Wants to create resource centres for immigrants which would provide French lessons, and access to employment information.

Secularism and Identity:

Opposes those wielding state power, like police officers, wearing religious symbols like the hijab. However, QS does not oppose the wearing of religious symbols by those receiving public services.

Environment:

Would ban all gasoline-powered cars from the province by 2050. Promised that all cars sold in the province will be electric or hybrid by 2030. Pledged to reduce carbon emissions by 95 per cent in the next 30 years. Would ensure more sustainable waste management by introducing policies where the polluter pays.

Sovereignty:

Advocates for a sovereign Quebec, and would like to hold a referendum, after a committee to outline the terms of an independent Quebec is formed and has run its course.

September 10, 2018 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

News

International News

U.S. Cuts Funding for Refugees

India Decriminalizes Gay Sex

Claudia Kitchen News Writer

he United States discontinued funding to a United Nations agency that aids Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria on August 31 2018. The U.S. has been a major contributor to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) for decades; in 2017, the United States donated $350 million to the agency, and was planning to make the same contribution this year. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency offers a multitude of health, educational, and social services to Palestinians. The UNRWA helps provide schooling for over 500,000 children in the area, and grants medical aid to 9 million. The Trump administration also recently cut $200 million in aid to other agencies helping Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. To explain this cut of funding, the U.S. government described the UNRWA as “irredeemably flawed,” and said their business strategy is “unsustainable.” In response to the United State’s decision, the UNRWA stated that “the international [...] community, our donors and host countries have consistently praised UNRWA for its achievements and standards.” The U.S. used to supply 30 per cent of its total budget, meaning that the elimination of funding from the U.S. could have disastrous results for millions of Palestinian refugees. In response to the actions of the U.S., Arab and European countries have promised to continue to defend the UNRWA, and Germany has pledged to increase its aid for the program. In May of this year, President Trump moved the U.S. embassy in Israel to the much disputed city of Jerusalem, a decision critics believe is in line with the funding cut, and an overall shift towards a more proIsrael stance.

Lydia Bhattacharya The McGill Daily

he Indian Supreme Court decriminalized the “carnal intercourse” clause under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code on September 6 2018, in what experts are calling a “landmark decision.” While Section 377 still exists, it can no longer be used to punish consensual gay sex. This law originated from the British colonization of India in the mid-1800s, and continued to be used for prosecution, despite Britain decriminalizing homosexuality in 1967. In a public statement, Chief Justice Dipak Misra described the law as being “irrational, indefensible and manifestly arbitrary.” In 2008, a High Court in New Delhi overturned the law and decriminalized homosexuality. However, in 2013 this order from the New Delhi High Court was brought to the Supreme Court and ruled unconstitutional, reinstating Section 377. The Supreme Court decided to revisit the legality of Section 377 through the lens of privacy; in 2017 the Supreme Court ruled that privacy was an essential human right and that “sexual orientation is an essential attribute of privacy.” Following this decision, the recent revision to Section 377 focused on protecting the privacy of consenting adults. Currently, gay marriage and the adoption of children by same-sex couples is still criminalized, but many LGBTQ+ activists have been invigorated by the recent developments and are hopeful for future change. Dhrubo Jyoti, a queer LGBTQ+ activist, told CNN in an interview that the decriminalization of Section 377 “not just affirms one’s faith in the Constitution, but it also means that the gloom and the despair in this atmosphere of abuse for many of us, hopefully, for a new generation of queer people, it won’t be there.”

Journalists Arrested in Myanmar Nabeela Jivraj News Writer

wo Reuters journalists, Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo, are being sentenced to prison for 7 years for the possession of official Myanmar documents. They were investigating the massacre of 10 Rohingya men in the Burmese village of Inn Din. The verdict is being considered a roadblock for the country’s free press and transition to democracy. Multiple governments and International Human Rights groups are calling for the reporters’ immediate release. The reporters pleaded not guilty to violating Myanmar’s colonial-era Official Secrets Act, which is an offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. They claim that they were framed by the police: the reporters told the court that two police officials handed them the papers at a restaurant in Yangon just prior to their arrest by other officers. Testimony presented by prosecution witnesses was contradictory. Another police witness testified that the restaurant meeting was a set-up to block, or punish, the journalists for their reporting on the mass killings of Rohingya Muslims in Rakhine by Burmese military officials. UN investigators have called for senior Burmese military officials to be prosecuted for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The State Counsellor of Myanmar Aung San Suu Kyi has remained silent on the issue, and has been criticized for failing to stand up for the free press after having championed the rights of journalists during her own house arrest.

Trans Sex Worker Murdered in France

Arno Pedram The McGill Daily

content warning: death, anti-sex work sentiment, transphobia

anessa Campos, a trans Peruvian migrant sex worker, was murdered by seven to eight men while trying to protect a client from being robbed at the Bois de Boulogne (West of Paris), the night of August 16. A protest in honour of Vanessa Campos is scheduled for September 22 2018. Five men are currently being detained for “organised group murder” and “group thefts with hurt.” Associations like Acceptess Transgenres (AcceptessT) and STRASS (a French sex worker union), have been protesting the government’s silence, especially that of Marlène Schiappa’s, France’s Secretary of Equality between women and men. They particularly criticize France’s laws on sex work, which penalize clients and push sex workers into precarity. Activists also decry the general treatment of trans people, sex workers, and migrants in French society. On the matter, a representative of STRASS wrote: “our [sex workers’] deaths are normalised. [...] A trans woman who dies remains a ‘tranny.’”

Culture

September 10, 2018 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

Dressing Up for Mental Health

Kayley Reed on self-care, entrepreneurship and social media

Gabriela Rey Culture Writer

content warning: eating disorder

ctivist and entrepreneur Kayley Reed dove head-first into mental health advocacy in 2014. At age 20, she began to pursue her long-term goal of helping to break the stigmas around mental health, and of fostering more honest and open discussions on self-care. In fashion, she found a relatable and tangible way to make her aspiration reality. Combining her appreciation for aesthetics and style with messages of self-acceptance and self-love, Reed invented the startup clothing brand Wear Your Own Label. She has since left her brand to focus her energy on other self-care projects, and to better tend to her own mental health.

I was mentally drained. A lot of entrepreneurs don’t talk openly about the struggles of entrepreneurship. I reached out to Reed to speak to her about the challenges that come with running a startup, why she later decided to leave her brand, and to gain insight into her recent podcast called “Self-Care Sundays.” The latter is exclusively a space for women to share their stories and to talk openly about mental health and entrepreneurship. The McGill Daily (MD): What drove you to start Wear Your Own Label at such a young age, and what was the inspiration behind it? Kayley Reed (KR): When I was 20, I was in my last year at the University of New Brunswick, and I was struggling with my own mental health. Actually, I had been in a bad place for a while. It was some-

thing I didn’t talk about with anybody in my life. I had always been a perfectionist, and I thought that struggling with mental illness was something that I couldn’t share, because I didn’t want others to look at me differently. So, I struggled in silence for two or three years. Since then, I have seen a massive shift in things, from initiatives like BELL’s “Let’s Talk.” However, at the time, my mental health still felt difficult to talk about. I didn’t even tell my parents or my closest friends. In my last year of university, I started volunteering at a mental health organization, and that was also when I started receiving more treatment and help for my eating disorder. Those two things combined was how I came to realize that this is a much more common issue than I had previously thought. At that point, I started to ask myself why more people weren’t talking about it. Why is it still so hard to talk about something that affects so many of us? So, my co-founder and I started Wear Your Own Label as a side project in school for a social enterprise class. We just wanted to create a clothing campaign with positive messages and give money back to the mental health organization we were working with, and from that idea we were accepted into a business accelerator program. This side project turned into a business organically. MD: What was the process of leaving Wear Your Own Label and starting something new? KR: I did Wear Your Own Label full-time for 3 years and grew an awesome team. Things I could only dream of, and that I never expected to happen, were all of a sudden a reality. We were selling internationally and we got to debut at New York Fashion Week. But what happened after 3 years of full-time startup grinding was that I became physically and financially exhausted. Perhaps even more importantly, I was mentally drained. I think that a lot of entrepreneurs don’t talk openly about the struggles

courtesy of kayley reed

There are a million and one podcasts out there that are hosted by men, but there weren’t many platforms for women, so I wanted to create something to fill that gap. of entrepreneurship, or about how taxing it is on your physical and mental health. You work 14 hour days, followed by restless, anxious nights. Ironically, I had built this startup to raise awareness about mental health and self-care without realizing or acknowledging my own struggles. The brand was motivating me while I was recovering from my eating disorder; however, with time, my mental health started to decline again. That was a hard realization, because I was really attached to the startup. Being a mental health advocate defined me in a lot of ways. Equally, mental health advocacy in general is hard, because it’s very personal, so sharing your story and hearing those of other people over and over in front of crowds and on social media can take a toll on you. Ultimately, burning out in my startup is what led me to leave Wear Your Own Label after three years and start a new chapter. MD: What was the motivation for your podcast “SelfCare Sundays”? KR: After leaving my startup, I needed to focus on my own self-care. A lot of the time, I find conversations with my female friends or with women mentors in my life to be immensely therapeutic. The podcast emerged as an idea from the discussions we were having. Significantly, I wanted to keep it an all-female circle. There are a million and one podcasts out there that are hosted by men, but I felt like there weren’t many platforms for women, so I wanted to create something to fill that gap. I saw “Self-Care Sundays” as my passion project, and I secured a couple of sponsors for it. It’s pretty simple: an episode every Sunday. I usually interview a woman I find inspiring and go behind the scenes of entrepreneurship to see it intersect with mental health. Otherwise, I do a solo episode where I reflect on self-

courtesy of kayley Reed care and mental health in some way. I have found the podcast to be a form of self-care for me, and I will keep doing it as long as it continues to give me that. If there ever comes a time where I feel I am forcing myself to do it, I’ll stop.

There is a constant struggle with wanting to use Instagram as a tool for good, while recognizing that it also perpetuates a lot of these negative stereotypes and stigmas. MD: As an influencer who works with other influencers, what are some barriers and stigmas within social media you feel are still difficult to break? KR: I think the biggest question and source of hardship on social media is the idea of “authenticity.” Everyone strives for it, as we all know that “being authentic” is key to connecting with followers. Of course, that in itself poses a problem, as we can’t be truly authentic if we are actively seeking authenticity. Even when authentic,

we are still choosing which authentic moments to post. For example, I could open up about my eating disorder, but I would still be choosing what parts of my story to share. I also choose the when and how, so it remains a curated story. There is a constant struggle and balance between wanting to use Instagram as a tool for good and recognizing that it also perpetuates a lot of these negative stereotypes and stigmas. Sometimes, we contribute to the problem just by virtue of being consumers. It’s a fine line, but I nonetheless love working with influencers, because there’s so many ways to tell powerful and important stories. MD: Working hand in hand with startups, what business trends do you see developing? KR: I see startups becoming a trend in themselves. With the rise of Instagram and Shopify, we are in an age where anyone with $30 can create a startup (the price of a Shopify store). But because there is a low entry barrier, the space is very competitive and over-saturated. Startup influencers have been telling us how easy it is to launch a startup, and that anybody can do it and become successful. The problem now is that it is too accessible. Instagram influencers also struggle in that way, in the sense that if everybody can be an influencer, is anybody really? This oversaturation, particularly of lifestyle brands, has been a trend, and we might see things taper off as more people try and fail. The general trend is that everyone will be an entrepreneur, and everyone will have a side-hustle, if they don’t already, but the meaning of entrepreneurship will drastically change.

September 10, 2018 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

CULTURE

One Size Doesn’t Fit All Crazy Rich Asians Gives Representation a Try

Nabeela Jivraj Culture Writer

never had a thing for Disney princess movies. Yes, I love fairytales. Sure, I appreciate the colours, and I can probably halfsing most of the songs. Maybe it’s the stereotypical characters, the passé plotlines, or the accumulated incidents of people calling me “Princess Jasmine” as an attempt at seduction (because I’m brown, get it?). I just don’t relate.

Underrepresented groups have a greater responsibility to represent themselves in a positive light, and not at the expense of anyone else. I do have a thing for romantic comedies though. They’re funny, easy to watch, sometimes ridiculous, and occasionally downright awful. The most cringeworthy aspects of

any rom-com are usually the most relatable ones. If you haven’t yet seen the hottest one of the summer, you’ve probably at least heard something about the allegedly transformative film Crazy Rich Asians. Before seeing it, I would hear something different about it every day. What my friends said: “I love this movie. I’ve seen it twice and would see it again. Go see it now!” What the critics said: “93 per cent on Rotten Tomatoes. Excellent production and beautiful design. Great acting on all parts. Good job.” What my grandma said: “So, where’s your rich Asian man? Indians are Asians, you know. Also, let’s go to Singapore.” What Asian-American social media guru Chrissy Teigen said: “You never know how much you miss being represented on screen until you actually see what it’s like to be represented. And represented by all different types of characters with all different types of personalities, just like any other great movie.” Set in Singapore, Crazy Rich Asians tells the story of Rachel Chu, an American-Chinese professor who goes to visit her boyfriend’s family, finding out along the way that he might have massively understated his family’s affluence. Funny, cute, and aesthetically pleasing, the movie is a modern twist on a classic Cinderella tale, gaining points for delivery of feel-good rom-com vibes. Released in August, the film,

In representing ourselves, based on the book of the same with dynamic, fully fleshed-out name by Kevin Kwan, has since characters is a formative element we sometimes forget that we’re grossed $137.2 million worldwide. in growing up, which people from inadvertently representing a collective. Herein lies the burden of representation: under-represented groups have a greater responsibility to represent themselves holistically, in a positive light, and not at the expense of anyone else. As marginalized groups still get very little representation in mainstream film, when you take it upon yourself to depict your experience, you are doing so on behalf of the group you belong to. You become an advocate and informer of your community. Equally, there is less space —Chrissy Teigen in one’s representation of a The film is also being widely marginalized groups have largely marginalized group to include the heralded for its all-Asian cast. More been denied by Hollywood. Maybe bad, the ugly, and the immoral. specifically, it has been received as if Disney had a “diasporic Canadian Despite the fact that these are real a much-needed antidote to a gap princess” movie, I’d actually be aspects of human nature, the need to balance the risk of reinforcing in holistic media representations, interested in Disney princesses. and to whitewashing in Hollywood. Despite the praise, we still have pre-existing stereotypes must While we often see minorities to ask whether Crazy Rich Asians is take priority. Personally, I bristled and people of colour on screen, truly a win for representation. Some seeing how the only brown people these roles are usually limited to have pointed out that though set in the film were portrayed as supporting and one-dimensional in Singapore, the film does little to “scary” security guards dressed roles, or roles reliant on stereotypes, reference the marginalized Indian in strange, exoticized outfits. that demonize minorities or and Malay ethnic groups on screen, or Moving forward, we all have to reinforce negative biases towards to address racial and class dynamics consider the extent to which new people of colour. What’s worse, surrounding a Chinese economic attempts at representation open roles written for people of colour elite. The praise for the film has doors for fresh narratives, and sometimes even go to white people also drowned out controversies how much they reconfigure the (see Scarlett Johansson in Ghost surrounding casting decisions to same ones, but with a different in the Shell). In contrast, a film choose biracial actors over actors group as the oppressor. like Crazy Rich Asians portrays a of Asian descent. Accusations spectrum of personalities on screen. of whitewashing and WesternAs Teigen describes, the feeling of washing, despite the purported on representation, being adequately represented for the emphasis are not unfounded. In response, first time is a powerful experience. This is especially true for kids and director Jon M. Chu recently said young people of colour, as identifying in an interview with Deadline that the movie isn’t intended to be the “end-all be-all Asian-American film.” In essence, this is a different story, and we can’t solve everything about representation with one film. Realistically, there are limits to the amount of racial nuance a 120-minute romantic comedy can be expected to flesh out. If the same plotline were to be applied to aristocrats in a European country (think The Prince and Me), no one would bat an eyelash. They would dismiss it as just another Cinderella story, and they would see nothing controversial about it. Representation matters. It matters In the same interview, Chu admits that “[he] doesn’t have all that people see themselves on the answers. All [he] knew was screen, in film, and that they connect [he had to] to tell the truth about with characters that look like them. what [he has] experienced as an It also matters that beauty norms Asian-American.” If the box office be challenged. Like a glass slipper, sales are any indication, clearly his new efforts for better representation truth has resonated with others, in Hollywood are fragile: they especially Asian-Americans won’t fit everyone, and they are to like Chrissy Teigen. The global be handled with care. These efforts backlash, however, shows that all require creative transparency. Chu’s side of the story is not an Though not a perfect fit, Crazy Rich universal truth, and that the Asian- Asians is a step forward and a call American experience is radically for more representative films with different from the experience of more representative roles, so that other Asians. Yet, at first glance, it people of more (and ultimately, of might be difficult for a non-Asian all!) backgrounds can feel that their (or non-Asian American) viewer experiences are being acknowledged, shared and appreciated. Jen Gahrns | Artist to see this difference.

“You never know how much you miss being represented on screen until you actually see what it’s like to be represented. And represented by all different types of characters with all different types of personalities.”

Personally, I bristled seeing how the only brown people in the film were portrayed as “scary” security guards dressed in strange, exoticized outfits.

Commentary

September 10, 2018 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

Navigating Call-Out Culture

Florence Ashley The McGill Daily

Queer Culture has Evolved, Not Lost its Edge

n the last few years, critiques of call out and outrage culture* in progressive circles have grown in numbers. Cynthia Belmont’s Salon article “Has queer culture lost its edge?” was a particularly biting instance of such a critique, and was widely shared on social media. According to Belmont, the younger queer generation found in today’s universities is “fragile” and “easily triggered,” in contrast to the defining playfulness and toughness of queer culture of the olden days. The narrative that opposes an oversensitive younger generation to a tough, stoic older generation bears an imprint of conservatism. It is strikingly reminiscent of the conservative outcry over the the feminization of men today.

Yes, queer culture is growing more sensitive, but it’s because students today aren’t the same as queer activists in the past. A response that admits of the underlying point can be sketched: yes, queer culture is growing more sensitive, but it’s because students today aren’t the same as queer activists in the past. It’s because growing acceptance of queer people means that it doesn’t take the same toughness to come out of the closet. So, maybe it’s less that today’s youth are oversensitive and more that our revered past required a degree of callousness that is no longer necessary. Or it’s because minority stress, chronic high levels of stress experienced by minorities due to prejudice, is having more and more of an impact on people’s lives in an informationsaturated capitalist world. Each of these points bears some truth and some falsehood. The demographics of queer communities are changing, and so are the voices which are loudest. But toughness isn’t callousness, sensitivity isn’t fragility, and we can’t reduce the queer world to a dichotomy of tough-old versus weak-new without betraying the diversity of queer experiences. Instead of expanding those responses, I focus my attention on call out and outrage culture, us-

Nelly Wat | The McGill Daily ing Belmont’s piece as a springboard for a conversation on this frequently-decried body of subcultural practices. I don’t believe that call out and outrage culture are a sign of fragility. Rather, they are a performative practice through which people signal their care for one another. When people call out something for being transphobic, what they are saying is: “Trans people, we are here for you. We are hearing you, and we won’t let people hurt you. You matter.” Calling out oppressive behaviour and language is about transforming moments of harm into a moment of solidarity and love. It’s not fragility: it is bonding and communal toughness. Of course, call outs and outrage pose a risk of distortion. This is especially the case with performative practices, which can easily become divorced from the values which underpinned their creation. It’s easier to cry out that something is transphobic without caring for trans folk and making space for us. I often see people reacting in hostility to older trans people for saying “transgendered,” not realising that it’s detracting from that person’s need for love and community. The risk of performativity isn’t specific to call out culture. How much of the older queer generation who shouted anti-capitalist

slogans in the past refuse to criticise power now that they’re gainfully employed? How many selflabelled feminists do not embody their opinions on consent in their own relationships? As behaviours become entrenched in communal practices and morph into cultural norms, their underlying rationale disappears from view. We lose perspective. Call outs, sadly, have too frequently become a way not of criticising power and demonstrating solidarity, but of signalling one’s cultural belonging and establishing one’s moral-political credentials. By saying something is transphobic, we show that we know how to analyse structures of oppression and position ourselves in a hierarchy of value: “I’m better than them because I know how not to be oppressive.” People who have less access to ever-shifting activist language and to a critical education are disproportionately excluded from spaces because they are problematic,

entrenching the classism of most social justice spaces. We also lose perspective of the relativity of oppressive behaviour. Caitlyn Jenner’s quip about “Dude Looks Like A Lady” is not on-par with trans elders saying “transgendered,” which is much less bad, nor with the withdrawal of federal protections for trans students, which is much worse. Yet, in call out culture, they all merge into the same blurb: “problematic.” And because saying “transgendered” is problematic, we make our elders feel unwelcome in our circles, effectively excluding them instead of kindly explaining ourselves. We reject the people we sought to show care and concern for because they did not have the same access than we did to the latest vocabulary of oppression. Clearly, there is a lot to criticise in the evolution of queer culture. Yet, to call it fragile would be to misunderstand it. I hope that critics will see the good in change, rather than only the bad.

Call outs have too frequently become a way not of criticising power and demonstrating solidarity, but of signalling one’s cultural belonging and establishing one’s moral-political credentials.

More than ever in the days of Trump and the alt-right, we need to show care for one another. We must refuse to leave oppression unchecked.

We should encourage a return to the roots of call out and outrage culture. More than ever in the days of Trump and the alt-right, we need to show solidarity and care for one another. We must refuse to leave oppression unchecked. But we must also retrieve our sense of proportion. Saying “transgendered” is bad practice, but it’s not the end of the world. Highlighting that it is bad practice should, in most cases, be sufficient. On the other hand, please spend more time criticising and protesting Trump’s policies. They’re hurting trans Americans. No, queer culture hasn’t lost its edge. We’re still playful; we’re still tough. Playful and tough just look different as society changes. But underneath the surface, we survive, we love, we live, and we persist despite everything bad that’s being thrown at us. And if that’s not toughness, I don’t know what is.

commentary

September 10, 2018 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

How Long is Enough?

Sara Hashemi Commentary Writer

The Comebacks of Abusers in the Age of #MeToo

ast week, less than a year after being accused of sexual misconduct, Louis C.K. quietly made a comeback at the Comedy Cellar in New York. He performed a fittingly unannounced 15-minute set that, according to a New York Times article on his performance, included “racism, waitresses’ tips, parades” and even, boldly, rape whistle jokes. Surprisingly, no mention of how he exposed himself to women without their consent for years. Following decades of denial, Louis C.K. finally admitted to masturbating in front of women in November of 2017. In a carefully-crafted statement, he said, “I have spent my long and lucky career talking and saying anything I want, I will now step back and take a long time to listen.” And now, he’s decided that he’s heard everything he needed to hear. He took a break, living comfortably as a millionaire in the shadows for a “long time,” and now he’s come back. Is nine months outside the public eye comparable to years of masturbating in front of women and the destruction of their careers? Apparently so.

Is nine months outside the public eye comparable to years of masturbating in front of women and the destruction of their careers? Other celebrities accused of sexual misconduct during the height of the #MeToo movement are also plotting their comebacks. After being accused of sexual harassment and groping multiple coworkers, television journalist Charlie Rose was profiled in a piece published by the Hollywood Reporter. Part of the headline read “Broken, Brilliant, and Lonely.” The article focused on Rose’s life following sexual harassment claims, as opposed to, say, his victims’ lives after sexual harassment. It raised the question of how Rose will “earn back his good name” – as though he was undeserving of its tarnishing in the first place. It also reported he is interested in hosting an “atonement” TV series in which he would interview other men accused of sexual misconduct. The New York Times reported that celebrity chef Mario Batali is looking into ways he can “step back into his career” after he was accused of sexual misconduct

Nelly Wat | The McGill Daily by several women. Aziz Ansari is quietly making his way back onto the stand-up circuit. The list goes on. With predators slowly creeping their way back into the limelight, the question of whether they deserve to be there has been risen and most people wonder: have they put their career on hold for long enough? That’s asking the wrong question. “How long is enough,” is a question that places the abusers at its centre, one that privileges their narratives over the trauma of their victims. It is asking us to empathize with them for potentially losing their careers (which has yet to happen), instead of focusing on the people whose lives were damaged by those who abused them. It removes what survivors need to heal from the conversation. Instead of running profile pieces on “disgraced” celebrities, we should be raising the voices of the people who have been hurt by them. They are the ones who deserve a platform. The conversation in the wake of #MeToo should not be on how to shield abusers from facing consequences, but on how to protect victims and prevent further abuse. We should not be talking of “comebacks,” as though perpetrators of sexual violence were underdogs unfairly being victimized. No one is owed celebrity status, especially when it is that very position of power that enabled them to commit abuse. What we should be asking instead of, “have they been away long

enough,” is, “have they done enough.” Enough to fight the culture that their actions perpetuated, enough to help their victims heal, enough to help mend the careers they’ve damaged through their actions. Have they donated money to organizations that help victims of abuse? Worked to change their behaviour and create safe spaces? Boosted the careers of women in their industry?

No one is owed celebrity status, especially when it is that very position of power that enabled them to commit abuse. During Louis C.K.’s nine months away from the spotlight, he did not do enough. Simply admitting you committed a crime is not absolution; especially when you have spent years silencing the women who accused you. By imposing his presence on an unsuspecting audience at the Comedy Cellar, with no concern for who might be affected, Louis C.K. only showed that he has learnt nothing. He made a joke about rape whistles, as if he wasn’t part of that

very conversation. All he has done is wait for the negative attention surrounding him to fade. He is a sexual predator and an abuser and deserves nothing for it. By allowing perpetrators to return to the very spaces they committed crimes in, without having made any effort to change, we are putting people at risk. We are saying that these men’s careers are more valuable than the people they harm. When we allow men accused of sexual misconduct to come back on the scene after a few short months, what we are saying is that their actions aren’t “that bad.” The standard to which we hold these men is biased. One can spend decades harassing women, but if they didn’t rape them, they are considered worthy of a second chance by the public. If you’re Charlie Rose, you can even turn your harassment of others into a form of profit. This reality is reflected in the conversation surrounding these cases. When democratic Senator Al Franken was accused of groping and forcibly kissing women, many argued that his behaviour should not end his political career. It was believed that he mustn’t be lumped together with Roy Moore, who committed sexual acts with teenage girls. “At most, Franken, who announced Thursday he is resigning, is guilty of boorish behavior,” wrote Ginger Rutland.

Groping and forcibly kissing women, she argued, is “not assault, not pedophilia, not even sexual harassment.” What we hear, over and over again, is that only certain acts deserve punishment. But we should not get to pick and choose who is worth condemning, and a timeout isn’t enough to exonerate anyone. Many of these celebrities have yet to be convicted of any crimes, and probably never will be. Thus, the “time” they serve is up to public opinion and allows for a looser sentencing. For most people , no punishment at all is punishment enough. Their victims will never receive any real legal justice. If there is a way in which redemption is possible for those who commited sexual misconduct, we have yet to see someone worthy of it. Louis C.K. could have used his performance to speak about sexual violence and take a moment to apologize for and acknowledge his actions. He could have talked about how he has been challenged to work on himself in the last year. He could have made it harder for himself. Instead, he chose to pretend that nothing happened. By doing so, he also chose to erase the damage he’s done to multiple women and to perpetuate the culture of silence that exists around abuse. And he received a standing ovation for it.

Features

September 10, 2018 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

Modi is less of an economist and more of a chauvinist, building himself from a groundwork of nationalist zeal.

C U LT I VAT I N G OUR

PUBLIC OEUVRE P R I O R I T I Z I N G O U R P U B L I C S PAC E S

BY JULIA CROWLY

Features

September 10, 2018 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

CULTIVATING OUR PUBLIC OEUVRE PRIORITIZING OUR PUBLIC SPACES

Julia Crowly Features Writer

wo friends and I recently took a stroll down to Mount Royal to take in the ganja-glazed glory of the Sunday drum circle, or ‘tams’, as it is affectionately referred to. We sipped beers, watching the swaying mass of bodies that conglomerates seemingly out of nowhere every Sunday afternoon. I couldn’t help but marvel at the beauty of the park that hosted us. There was a feeling of freedom: freedom of the crowd that collectively lost themselves in the magic of shared music, and the sense of unity that resulted. The night wore on and darkness fell. The crowd thinned and police cars began to creep out slowly from the periphery, their headlights a glaring reminder of the city that existed beyond the circle of drummers. As the cops flashed their lights ominously, my friends and I found ourselves embroiled in a debate. We didn’t actually know if they could kick us out or not – does the mountain have closing hours? At which point in the night am I legally considered a trespasser? And do I, a white McGill student,

have to worry about the police enforcing a rule like that? This discussion of the nature of our city’s public spaces is an important one. While we live in a city with an exceptionally vibrant public life that includes parks and festivals, it’s easy to forget that the concept of having public space is not a given, nor is it a constant. Montreal’s public areas are not immune to the problems that are plaguing urban centers

across the world. Increasing privatization threatens the public spaces necessary for a vibrant civic life, which harms marginalized segments of the population first. Since its creation, the concept of ‘the public’ has been complicated by the reality of divisions within urban populations.

While we live in a city with an exceptionally vibrant public life that includes parks and festivals, it’s easy to forget that the concept of having public space is not a given, nor is it a constant.

The roots of the concept of a public sphere, in opposition to the private, can be traced to the era of the Renaissance. During this time, ideas of individual freedom and democracy began to grow. Public spaces, or commons, emerged as places where individuals could meet to debate public matters, usually in places like churches or town squares. Theorist Jürgen Habermas draws a link between the concept of the public

sphere and the development of democracy. He points out that commons play an important role by providing a place for public appearance, conversation, and interaction that might otherwise be limited by governmental laws

or corporate rules if occurring on private property. In other words, commons are places where the free conversation necessary to a democracy can occur. However, despite the original liberal ideals of commons, by the 1850s, the growth of consumer capitalist culture began to exacerbate the gendered nature of the idea of public space. As male duties were increasingly categorized in terms of

commercial, capitalist action in the public sphere, a binary division was established that clearly demarcated the male public realm from the female private, or domestic, one. The gendered divisions between public and private further expanded into other forms of socioeconomic exclusion as consumer culture flourished during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Philosopher and sociologist Henri Lefebvre was an early critic of the negative effects of the commodification of public spaces and the social interactions made possible by them. Lefebvre argued that the growing inequalities in cities meant that public spaces were becoming detached from inhabitants’ realities, as public land, resources, and services were unequally distributed among urban socio-economic groups. This means that accessible and well-maintained commons are disproportionately available to those privileged along economic, racial, social, and gendered axes. Lefebvre pointed out that the interaction between capitalism and cities has turned both urban space and social interactions into commodities, and called for people to reclaim their city as a “cocreated space” separate from the effects of capitalism. He advocated for public spaces to be a “meeting point for building collective life.” He argued that cities are shaped by its inhabitants through their public life, and that everyone has the right to use spaces within the city. By arguing that the ownership of space was less important than its use, he accorded more value to public use than to economic worth.

Lefebvre coined the term “right to the city” to express his view of public spaces as a collective project in which all people should have the right to participate. This idea has only grown in importance since its conception in 1968.

The interaction between capitalism and cities has turned both urban space and social interactions into commodities, and called for people to reclaim their city as a “co-created space” separate from the effects of capitalism.

Increasingly, cities like Montreal are becoming gentrified and segregated along social, economic, and cultural lines, which curtails opportunities for public interaction. Processes of privatization and urban redevelopment that gained traction during the 1960s resulted in the conversion of many publicly-

features

owned public spaces to privatelyowned spaces. This means that much of what could today be considered the commons are in fact semi-public spaces. These semipublic spaces are places where anyone can go if they pay, like cafés or shops. Public transportation, libraries, and parts of malls or shopping centers can be semipublic, and may have stricter rules like dress codes, or the prohibition of solicitation or advertising. This privatization and increased control of once-public spaces hits certain segments of the population especially hard; semipublic places are increasingly modified to both explicitly and implicitly exclude certain people. Montrealers with disabilities and those experiencing homelessness are disproportionately affected by these changes. Some benches in Montreal parks and metro stations are designed so that they can’t be used as resting places by people experiencing homelessness, and spaces like parks have restricted opening hours so that they’re inaccessible at night. These restrictions are enforced by the police, and over-policing often disproportionately targets areas where Montrealers living on the street tend to congregate. For example, the area around Atwater metro station and Cabot Square has a much stronger police presence than comparable parks and public spaces in the surrounding neighborhood of Westmount. The people experiencing homelessness who spend time in this area, largely comprised of Indigenous people and people of colour, are therefore disproportionately affected by restrictions on where they are or are not permitted to exist. In fact, the selective enforcement of laws in public spaces is described by the National Coalition for the Homeless as “criminalization of homelessness.” The Coalition argues that as the growing lack of affordable housing in large cities pushes more and more people into increasingly privatized public spaces, this selective enforcement

September 10, 2018 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

serves to harass those living on the street. Their report Illegal to be Homeless states that laws against obstruction of sidewalks and public thoroughfares by sitting or lying down in public are largely enforced against homeless people, and serve to drive them out of the public. Additionally, public spaces often implicitly rather than explicitly exclude disabled people, since suitable access is quite often unavailable. In a city as hilly as Montreal, there is an appalling lack of ramps accompanying the stairs. Moreover, the public transportation network is sorely lacking in elevators that would make its metro system accessible to those who are unable to navigate the many staircases.

Festival that allow for expression and exploration through public art. The Government of Quebec further supports public art through its policy of integrating art into the architecture and environment of government and public buildings and sites. This policy ensures that at least 1% of the cost of constructing a new public building or site goes toward the integration of a work of public art. The government reports that this effort to “foster the democratization of public art” has resulted in the installation of over 3,500 works of public art and has “[enriched] Montreal’s public spaces.” McGill itself is another site of public value, as its libraries and lawns are used by Montrealers and tourists alongside students. McGill also hosts a farmer’s

market that brings sustainable food to “both the McGill and Montreal community.” However, it’s impossible to overlook the semi-public nature of our campus; anyone vaguely student-aged or student-passing can take advantage of McGill’s green spaces, libraries, and buildings (during certain hours), but anyone perceived to be outside that description is liable to attract much more scrutiny from campus security. Globally, many organizations have come together to work to protect access to the urban commons that are so important to civic life. One such group is the Right to the City Alliance, whose main goals include “the right to land that serves the interests of the community and not of the market, the right of Indigenous people to their

ancestral lands, the right to safe neighborhoods and police force that works for all communities, and the right of working class communities of color, women, queer, and transgender people to an economy that serves their interests.” Activism from groups like this one ensures that public life can thrive in the spirit of Henri Lefebvre, who described cities as an “oeuvre,” a piece of ever-changing collective artwork shaped by the actions of its inhabitants. He lamented the deterioration of truly democratic urban spaces as a result of the privatization of land under capitalism. The public spaces from which we benefit are at risk, and it is both our right and our responsibility to add our brushstrokes to the Montrealaise oeuvre.

Montrealers with disabilities and those experiencing homelessness are disproportionately affected by these changes.

Despite these serious issues, Montreal’s commons continue to provide spaces that fulfill needs which might not be able to be met by privatized spaces. I grew up in Fort Worth, Texas, a city characterized by its utter lack of commons and its excess of strip malls. Any gathering would have to take place at a restaurant or store, if not at someone’s house - all private locations that would probably require someone to spend money in order to spend time there, rendering them inaccessible to many. Compared to the many similar North American cities, Montreal has a miraculous wealth of public spaces, such as parks, university campuses, libraries, and public festivals. Montreal’s public spaces include well-used bike paths as well as free festivals like the Jazz Fest and the Mural

Visuals By Athina Khalid | The McGill Daily