Tag: opinions

Categories
Opinions

Mental illness is as serious as physical illness

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin.

The stigma around mental illness needs to end, and the conversations need to start

Full disclosure: I suffer from obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). If I’m not medicated, it will take me 20 minutes or more just to get out of my apartment in the morning. I will check to make sure the back door is locked several times over. I will check repeatedly that the stove and oven are off, despite having eaten cold cereal for breakfast.

Then I need to verify that nothing near the heaters could start a fire, even in the summer when I know the heaters are off. Finally, and most importantly, if I cannot see the cat when I close the front door to leave, I assume that he has escaped and is lost somewhere outside. All the while, I keep my right hand on the pocket where my keys go to make sure I haven’t left them inside (and won’t be subsequently locked out).

I know a lot of people have morning routines, and they may even have similar rituals themselves. However, in my daily life, I must do these things. It’s not just a habit—it’s something that releases a pressure inside me and satisfies a seemingly physical need. Now, keep in mind, this is just my attempt to leave home. None of this says anything of the day-long struggle to keep everything and everyone doing what I need them to do in a way that appeases these compulsions. That is the most exhausting part.

This is my everyday experience if I am not medicated. It is a pain in the ass, but my symptoms are mild compared to many others who suffer from OCD. I take medication for these symptoms, and I am not ashamed of that because they tell my brain that many of these silly rituals are unnecessary. Therefore, medication gives me the option to focus on what’s really important, like going to school and doing reasonably well. So, am I crazy? Am I a lunatic not worthy of anything more than a life of seclusion and shame?

I’m not embarrassed about having OCD, nor should I be. Just as someone with a physical disability shouldn’t be embarrassed either. This is how we need to start thinking about mental illness. The stigma of “weakness” or “lunacy” are old and outdated, just as the terms “invalid” or “cripple” are. The time has come to talk about mental illness in a constructive manner. And so, I am putting myself out there to say that I am not crazy—my brain just works in a different capacity than others, and I will not apologize for that. I am not responsible for the position I have been put in, yet, I’m responsible for managing it.

So, why are some people scared to talk about mental illness? Perhaps it’s because they cannot see it. Or perhaps they simply fear the unknown. Well, I’ve got news for you: it is visible and we can see it all around us. Unfortunately, though, it will remain unknown until we talk about it.

You know some of those folks living on our city streets, right near Concordia’s downtown campus, talking to garbage bins and yelling at shadows? That’s mental illness. And until we educate ourselves, they will continue to be marginalized by society. According to the Mental Health Commission of Canada, nearly 40 per cent of the homeless population in Montreal suffer from various forms of severe mental illness. They are not evil, they are not crazy, nor are they possessed (by anything other than the socially-constructed prejudices of others). They are examples of what happens when people fear you or don’t understand you.

Perhaps I could be one of them. Luckily, I have a network of understanding people around me and access to healthcare that keeps me in school and possibly off the streets. This is not afforded to everyone, but it needs to be. You can help just by talking about it. I want to talk about this, and I want to talk about it now. My hope is that this will get things started.

If you or someone you know is suffering from a mental illness, please seek help. It is worth the effort. You can contact the Canadian Mental Health Association, Action on Mental Illness (AMI) Quebec or Mouvement Santé Mentale Québec for help or to get more information.

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin

Categories
Opinions

Why kneeling speaks louder than words

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth.

Colin Kaepernick’s protest has emphasized the debate on freedom of expression

Colin Kaepernick, an American football quarterback, took the country by storm after kneeling during the anthem at a National Football League (NFL) game in September 2016. His reasons for doing so weren’t out of spite or insult, but rather to protest against the continued violence and injustice towards people of colour in the United States.

Kaepernick’s form of protest spread as other athletes followed his example, even branching off into other sports, such as basketball. Unfortunately, not everyone approved of this type of protest. U.S. President Donald Trump, for one, reacted harshly, calling a player who kneels during the anthem a “son of a bitch,” according to The Guardian. Furthermore, Trump said athletes who kneel or show any “disrespect” to the national anthem should be fired, according to CNN. His words sparked protest and shock throughout the sports world. Across the different leagues in America, athletes voiced their contempt towards President Trump. Notable examples include the Cleveland Cavaliers basketball player Lebron James, who spoke out against Trump, calling him a “bum” on Twitter.

In light of Trump’s comments, the Golden State Warriors basketball team refused an invitation from the president to visit the White House. Even football player Tom Brady, a close friend of Trump’s, sided against him, calling his words “divisive,” according to CNN.

President Trump has twisted a protest against racism into a matter of disrespecting the very essence of American pride. This isn’t the first time Trump has been insensitive towards issues of race, as demonstrated by his poor handling of the events during the Charlottesville riot. Yet with all his claims of others disrespecting the flag, according to the Washington Post, on Oct. 12, Trump made a joke during a bugle call, which is a military tradition that consists of raising the flag to show respect.

Although Trump claims Kaepernick’s protest is an instance of disrespect towards the American flag, it is bringing up the topic of the right to freedom of expression. When Kaepernick knelt in protest, he didn’t intend to ridicule the sport or the NFL, nor did he want to insult the symbolic or literal importance of the American flag. He wanted to bring awareness to a critical issue dividing Americans. He was protesting against issues of racial violence and police brutality—acts that are happening in America.

Mike Evans, a wide receiver for the NFL’s Tampa Bay Buccaneers, responded to Trump’s actions, saying in an interview with CTV News: “You know people say it’s unpatriotic, but it’s unpatriotic of the president to disrespect our rights.”

White House officials claimed they stood by Trump’s statement, and that it is always appropriate for the head of the nation to defend the flag. I was shocked when I heard the president justify his words by claiming he was protecting the American flag. I was surprised considering the flag was not the focus of the national anthem protests. What is under fire here are people’s constitutional rights.

As Kyries Hebert, a linebacker for the Montreal Alouettes, explained during an interview with CTV, whether it’s fighting for their country or fighting for a cause, people do not fight just to protect a flag. Although it’s an important symbol for any country or cause, people fight to defend and respect the constitution as well as the people it protects.
American athletes are not alone in protesting during the anthem. They’re being joined by their fellow athletes in the Canadian Football League, including players for the Calgary Stampeders and the Saskatchewan Roughriders.

Kaepernick’s and other athletes’ acts of protest have brought attention to a critical issue in America. Despite Trump’s comments, athletes in the United States, and even Canada, haven’t backed down. If anything, the actions to date have served only to reinforce the players’ resolve and unite them on issues of racial injustice and constitutional rights.

Regardless of race or nationality, we are all human. So long as we do not inflict harm on others, we each have the right to say our own piece. However, in today’s society, our words may no longer be enough. If anything, our actions have more power than ever before. As Kaepernick and many others have shown, we must use our actions responsibly—there is no telling how much of an impact they can have in a world where words may no longer be enough.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth 

Categories
Opinions

The complicated ‘F’ word

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth.

The definitions of feminism and why it still needs to be applied in Canada today

I’m bringing up the “F” word again, and some of you may not like it. Some find it uncomfortable and are unable to situate where they stand on the matter. Some are passionate about it, while others are annoyed over how repetitive the topic is. However, seeing as we’re in the midst of Women’s History Month in Canada, I think it is fitting to once again open up the conversation about feminism.

Feminism is a difficult word to define. Google it and you get an endless amount of web pages trying to define it, outline the different types and argue whether or not we need to define it. After searching through more than 100 pages to find a worthy article, it seems Wikipedia provides the longest list of the different types of feminism, including mainstream feminism, intersectional feminism, ecofeminism and even Marxist feminism. It’s daunting to even try to define this complex term and it raises the question: can feminism really be defined?

Since I personally identify as a feminist, I believe feminism can be defined with a very simple explanation: feminism is the movement of equality for men and women—regardless of your ethnicity, religion, culture, age, profession, etc. I believe the need for feminism is due to society’s gender norms that continue to be applied today. Feminism is necessary because it breaks down these norms. However, this is my own interpretation and understanding. As mentioned before, there are several ways of interpreting feminism today, but it seems this multitude of ways leads some people to think there’s no way to simply define it.

Is it a movement that cannot be justified due to society’s indefinite perceptions, sexism and patriarchy? Throughout history, Canada has made great strides in applying laws to instill women’s rights, such as the 1883 Married Women’s Property Act that allowed women to have legal control over their earnings. Also, women’s right to vote was fully established nationally once Quebec jumped on the bandwagon in 1940. The Civil Rights Act later prohibited discrimination in the workplace. Equal pay was established in 1977, and abortion was made legal in 1969.
Back in 2015, when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was elected, he made the bold move to form Canada’s first gender-balanced cabinet. Many applauded his act and saw it as something obvious that should have happened years ago. But little action has been done to improve the state of feminism in Canada since then, or at least that’s how some see it.

However, women are still not treated the same as men. One in four North American women will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime, according to Sexual Assault Canada. And despite the equal pay law, women are still only making 72 cents to a man’s dollar, according to the Canadian Women’s Foundation. Furthermore, women of colour, women with disabilities, older women and women of specific religions and minorities face even more extensive oppression.

I personally believe the relation between what is considered “feminine” versus “masculine” has disrupted the freedom of choice to living independently. Why are women still struggling to find their voices in corporate, technological or political settings? Why are they worried about getting a job and starting a family?

This traditional understanding of gender norms must be rehashed since it’s one of the prime reasons feminism is still being fought for today. The application of human rights and respect is not being understood as rights for a “human,” regardless of gender. They are being applied as a division of rights: men’s rights and women’s rights. In order to combine this division into one issue, both women and men have to be more vocal about changing the way we view gender.

Parents must begin educating their children about the fact that the polarization between genders is wrong, and that it places unfair expectations on people. Society, as a whole, has to realize we are all entitled to make personal decisions, receive quality education and be respected. Until this is universally applied, the need for feminism will still exist.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth 

Categories
Opinions

Reducing homelessness in Montreal

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin.

We often see them on the metros, street corners and in alleyways. We usually ignore them to avoid guilt and perhaps uncomfortable conversations. According to a 2015 study commissioned by Mayor Denis Coderre’s administration, there are 3,016 homeless people in Montreal. Those are the same homeless people we see every day and, unfortunately, often ignore.

In 2014, city workers installed “anti-loitering” spikes that were meant to deter people from sitting in certain areas. They were removed after receiving backlash from Coderre, as he called the spikes “anti-homeless,” since many homeless people often sleep near those areas. The same mayor is now heavily focusing on homelessness in Montreal for his municipal election campaign. According to the Montreal Gazette, Coderre promised to sleep on the city’s streets to show he has the homeless in mind. And, more importantly, he is now considering implementing wet shelters in Montreal. Wet shelters allow homeless alcoholics to consume alcohol under supervision, with the goal of gradually lowering their dependence on the substance.

The Toronto Star reported such shelters already exist in Toronto and Ottawa, and work well in those cities. The wet shelters would be similar to safe injecting sites, where addicts can reduce harm when using substances. Along with the wet shelters, Coderre also has new initiatives to reduce homelessness in Montreal, according to CTV News. These include a second census of Montreal’s homeless population, 400 more spaces in rooming houses, and services aimed at youth, the LGBTQ+ community, women and Indigenous communities.

We at The Concordian think it’s great that Coderre wants to address homelessness in Montreal, and we hope his initiatives are carried out. It’s promising to see that he’s interested in improving the conditions for homeless people, but we hope he doesn’t get distracted by theatrics.

It’s also important to realize that, although Montreal’s mayor is now focusing on homelessness in the city, other community members have been doing so for a while—and have affected real change. Toe2Toe, for example, is a non-profit organization run by Chris Costello, a Montrealer. The initiative focuses on giving homeless people proper footwear, namely socks—a piece of clothing that’s often overlooked. According to their website, since 2014, the organization “has raised thousands of dollars and collected more than 15,000 pairs of socks for the homeless.” The organization also speaks to various community groups in order to raise awareness about homelessness and the importance of proper footwear.

Another community member, Gilles Chiasson, started a knitting group that aims to let homeless people know they aren’t ignored by the Montreal community. Chiasson has experienced homelessness, according to the Montreal Gazette, and he said he hopes to protect homeless people from cold weather with sweaters, leg warmers and hats. However, the knitting group’s main goal is to form a sense of connection between homeless people and the rest of the community. In the same article, Chiasson explained that homeless people often don’t feel connected to their families or community. He said he believes that if a homeless person receives something that was hand-knitted for them, it will make them feel like someone is attempting to connect with them, and that someone cares.

There was also the recent launch of the online tool 2000Solutions that illustrates data and information about homeless people in Montreal. The organization also aims to house 2,000 homeless people by the year 2020, and they want to prove it is possible to change a homeless person’s life.

Ultimately, it’s important to note that there have been efforts by community members in past years to eradicate homelessness, or at least raise awareness. Groups like Toe2Toe, Chiasson’s knitting group and 2000Solutions are just some of the ways Montrealers have tried to help fellow Montrealers. We at The Concordian strongly hope Coderre, if re-elected, follows through with his initiatives to improve the conditions of homelessness in our city.

We hope he sticks to his promises. A determined mayor can play a big role in helping us come together and help our fellow community members. And more importantly, we hope this editorial has made you wonder what more you can do to help the homeless.

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin 

Categories
Opinions

Whether or not violence can affect positive change

Understanding the place of violence and its usefulness in North American politics

Is violence an effective way of achieving systemic change in our society? This question has been one of particular interest to anyone involved in current North American politics.

The discourse of far-right and even mainstream media outlets have demonized the radical left for some of its recent approaches to political protests. Take for example Donald Trump’s response to the Charlottesville protest, in which he condemned the violence of Nazis and those who protested against them in the same breath.

For the record, violent leftist protestors are a much smaller group than the media would have us believe. According to The Atlantic, “of the 372 politically-motivated murders recorded in the United States between 2007 and 2016, left-wing extremists committed less than two per cent […] right-wing extremists committed 74 per cent.”

However, there is a valuable conversation to be had about the effectiveness of violence—ranging from the destruction of property to the physical harm of individuals—as a response to hateful groups on the extreme right. This article will mostly leave out the question of morality because I believe that pacifism under a state that supports systemic violence is at least as immoral as taking up arms against it. I will instead consider whether violence is an effective means of dismantling the oppressive systems and groups in society.

One positive effect of violence from the left is that it sends a message to hateful ideologies that they are unwelcome in society. This was seen on the UC Berkeley campus where student protesters prevented Milo Yiannopoulos, a British political commentator for the extreme-right, from speaking in February, and again only a month ago, led to the cancellation of a right-wing event.

The cancellation of extreme-right gatherings for fear of counter-protesters has become a trend in American politics lately, which, in my opinion, is likely sending an unwelcome message to both supporters and anyone susceptible to these ideologies.

In a foreword to political activist Ward Churchill’s essay, Pacifism as Pathology, Dylan Rodriguez, an author and political activist himself, pointed out that violence against “a toxic social order has life-affirming possibilities for disempowered people.” It has the power to show these people that the social order can indeed be challenged and that they have the power to do so.

Consider what is being asked of the dominant class in society, when we say that we want to “change the system,” or “overthrow the social order.” It’s calling for an end to systemic oppression and inequality, which would require those powerful groups to give up their dominance over disenfranchised groups. Rodríguez has claimed the goal of these powerful groups is to preserve their own power. In the contradiction between their goal to maintain all of their power, and activists’ goal of redistributing the power in society lies the need for violence. Pacifism only represents tolerance of the current social order.

There are, however, convincing arguments against the left’s tactical use of violence. First, it could cause others to associate the left with violence, resulting in a loss of support among the more mainstream, less radical public who are turned off by such behavior. Right-wing news sources love when the left acts violently, because they can use it to discredit the morals—and thus the politics—of the entire group.

Violence is a chaotic force, and it can be difficult to control and use productively. It is my opinion that violence, when it is excessive and not properly thought out, does more harm than good. It should be reserved for times when it will positively benefit political goals—as an exclamation point to political rhetoric that won’t be heard or properly addressed through other tactics.

Violence may also prove tactically effective when openly hateful groups are preaching their ideologies. In these instances, violence will positively associate the left with an ideology that will not tolerate racism. I think that if no one is listening to a particular political group, then violence can be the only way to be heard, thus it would be unwise to completely rule it out as a method.

The challenge lies in using violence infrequently enough that it continues to be taken seriously, doesn’t spiral out of control and doesn’t soil the reputation of the left. For me, the question of violence is not whether we should use it or not, but rather when.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

Categories
Opinions

Curriculums and classes: Where diversity falls short at Concordia

Concordia University’s Campus Service website claims they support diversity on campus, and that Concordia is “a large, urban university with a multicultural population.”

Yet, a CBC News investigation in March found that many Canadian universities don’t actually keep track of how students identify racially and most promote diversity without having actual numbers to support their claims. One of these universities is Concordia.

CBC asked 76 universities across Canada to breakdown their student populations by race and found that most couldn’t provide data about their student bodies’ racial backgrounds.

Concordia told CBC News that they don’t keep such data because, “in Quebec, this is not an option and it is considered illegal to ask.” CBC countered that argument saying that it is legal to gather “race-based” data in Quebec.

This brings up a larger problem at Concordia—diversity is promoted and celebrated, but is rarely seen within the university’s curriculums.

Collecting race-based data and truly understanding who is in your student body can help a university be more aware of student needs. Not knowing how many black, Indigenous and people of colour (BIPOC) students Concordia has is problematic, and this is made obvious by the lack of representation in course curriculums and departments.

In January, the Concordia Student Union (CSU) announced the creation of the BIPOC Committee, led by Sophia Sahrane, the CSU’s academic affairs and advocacy coordinator. The Committee was created to serve black, Indigenous and people of colour and their interests at the university.

Among its projects, this committee is attempting to highlight the institutionalized racism within Concordia and its curriculum. This doesn’t mean teachers are outright calling their BIPOC students racial slurs. This means course curriculums are often Eurocentric—they focus on white stories, by white people, for white people.

Take Concordia’s English department, for example. There are less than 10 courses that cater to people of colour, among them African-American Literature to 1900, South Asian Literature, First Nations/North American Literature and Literature of Ethnic America. It’s disconcerting to realize that almost every other class in the English department focuses on literature that is catered to white people.

These courses focus on subjects that only pertain to white culture/white history. Even worse, some of these “diverse” courses are taught by white professors instead of people from the communities they discuss. This isn’t okay—BIPOC should be teaching their own histories and cultures so students have a more concrete understanding of the subject, and more importantly, so BIPOC students feel represented.

It’s startling to realize most teachers at Concordia are white, especially given the university’s preachings about diversity. Universities shouldn’t simply aim to have a diverse student body—faculty and staff should be included as well.

We at The Concordian believe Concordia should make more of an effort to implement courses that cater to BIPOC students and that are taught by BIPOC professors. Indigenous history classes should be taught by those who identify as such; African American literature lectures should be led by black professors, not white. Students need to feel represented in a school that claims to support diversity. They need to read about their own histories and cultures by people from their communities.
This is also beneficial for white students, who can learn more about other cultures and histories. They can become more educated about topics that don’t directly concern them.

We believe that all students deserve to learn more than what they are familiar with, and to have their ideas and backgrounds represented fully in school. It is only then that we can hope to strive for a future filled with tolerance, acceptance and understanding.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

Categories
Opinions

Cycling safely down busy city streets

Highlighting the ways cyclists can feel more comfortable riding in Montreal

It terrifies me to read about a cyclist getting killed in Montreal. I ride my bike everyday. Actively dodging car doors and avoiding vehicles turning right without signaling make it crystal clear how easily a daily ride could be my last.

Unfortunately, it all went wrong for a 61-year-old cyclist on Sept.14 when she was hit and killed by a school bus, according to CTV News. This tragedy reignited calls to increase the number of bike paths in Montreal, many of which were established after a series of fatal cycling accidents in the summer of 2016. News outlets like CBC ran stories highlighting the dangers of cycling in Montreal, citing studies showing rising cyclist fatality rates and running interviews bemoaning the current state of the city’s bike lanes.

Here’s what most outlets didn’t mention.

Over the past eight years, the number of cyclists in Montreal has increased by 50 per cent, according to Vélo Quebec, a non-profit organization that collects cycling information. One million Montrealers ride their bikes at least once a week, according to the same source. This spike in cyclists inevitably leads to more deaths and injuries, a correlation explained by an SPVM official in a CBC article covering the incidents during summer of 2016.

Blaming recent cyclist deaths on a lack of infrastructure is not fair or accurate. Since 2009, Montreal’s total kilometres of bike lanes has grown from 90 km to 750 km, according to City Lab, a digital news organization. Montreal has the most bike lanes separated by a median of any Canadian city, as well as the longest on and off road bike paths in the country, according to a report by the non-profit think tank, the Pembina Institute. As cycling infrastructure expands, so does the interest in cycling… and the frequency of cyclist accidents.

Instead of the cycling community focusing on what they don’t have, Montreal cyclists should make the most of current bike lanes to ensure they stay safe. The best person to ensure your safety is you. Riding a bike is a method of transportation, a way to socialize and a whole lot of fun. By choosing to cycle, you choose to better your health, see the world around you and usually get to your destination faster than you would using public transportation.

However, this choice involves accepting and addressing the risks of cycling in a metropolitan area. Not that these risks are particularly high: for every 100,000 cycling trips in Montreal, two result in an accident, according to the Pembina Institute report.

I’m not a perfect cyclist, but I’ve been cycling daily for seven years in both Toronto and Montreal and have yet to be involved in an accident. Below are some techniques I feel have kept me safe and happy on the roads.

Being able to ride with one hand allows me to signal turns and stops. Observing car wheels is important, as they most clearly show the vehicle’s speed and direction. Looking at a car’s sideview and rear-view windows helps me avoid getting doored—if you see a head moving inside a car or a face reflected in side-view mirror, slow down and give the car plenty of space. Passing right-turning cars on the left hand side keeps you out of their blind spot. The car can turn sooner and you won’t have to stop and wait. After passing the turning car safely, move back across the lane to the curb side.

Another important technique is to make the most of your space. According to Quebec’s Highway Safety Code, motorists are obliged to give cyclists 1.5 metres of space on roads where the speed limit is more than 50 km/h, or one metre if the speed limit is less—so make them do it. It’s better to be a bit in front of a car and get honked at than to get pinned between parked and moving vehicles. And last but not least, ride a lot. Practice makes perfect. Take different routes home, turn off your GPS and get lost on your bike for a while.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth 

Categories
Opinions

Addressing reconciliation with empathy

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth.

Recognizing and celebrating our nation’s progress, but understanding there’s still more to do

It has been 10 years since the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was adopted on Sept. 13, 2007. As such, Montreal’s city council chose Sept. 13 to mark the addition of an Iroquois symbol to its city flag.

The city also committed to renaming Amherst Street—named after British general Jeffrey Amherst, who advocated for the use of biological warfare against Indigenous peoples in 1763. These were important and complex decisions, however, they are only part of a larger, ongoing conversation about Indigenous rights and reconciliation.

The debate surrounding the honouring of controversial historical figures in the public and governmental spheres has been an ongoing conversation in Canada for some time. However, it seems to have peaked in the wake of the Confederate monument discourse happening in the United States. While I certainly agree with the renaming of Amherst Street, the issue of consistency comes into question.

For instance, the Langevin block, which houses the prime minister’s office, was named after Hector-Louis Langevin, a father of Confederation and proponent of residential schools. Back in June, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced the building would be renamed because “keeping that name on the prime minister’s office is inconsistent with the values of our government.”

However, when confronted by the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario’s initiative to remove the name of John A. MacDonald—Canada’s first prime minister and a supporter of residential schools—from the province’s schools in August, Trudeau sang a different tune. According to CBC News, he said he believes this discourse is important, but “reconciliation is not just about the relationship between government and Indigenous people.” He said there are no plans for the federal government to remove MacDonald’s name from schools, and therein lies a sort of contradiction.

Some of the public’s reaction has been to label Trudeau’s Langevin block announcement and the Montreal city council decision as acts of virtue signalling. I don’t necessarily agree with that, yet when Mayor Denis Coderre proudly claimed: “If we want reconciliation, I don’t think we should celebrate someone who wanted to exterminate Indigenous peoples,” it was hard not to see his point. You can’t have it both ways.

It is important to recognize the work that led to Confederation. However, it is equally important to recognize that our nation was built at the expense of Indigenous people’s territory, culture and lives. Assembly of First Nations national chief Perry Bellegarde told the CBC that the actions of Trudeau and Ontario’s teachers signal an awakening in the minds of Canadians. “What’s hopeful for me is that Canadians are starting to get it,” Bellegarde told the CBC.

To be clear, I am not a member of the Indigenous community, nor do I mean to speak on their behalf. I believe in inclusion, empathy and reconciliation. I think Bellegarde’s words are quite poignant. This is indeed part of a slow awakening. Canada has come a long way. Two years ago, our leadership was hard pressed to even acknowledge a divide between Canada and Indigenous peoples. Now, as a nation, we are at least recognizing that our historical legacy is not perfect, and we are having a discourse to reconcile that past with the present.

I think the way forward is to recognize and celebrate the progress we have made, but not to believe—even for a second—that the past is in the past. The actions of our past have tangible, contemporary consequences. Progress is the sum total of acts of empathy, large and small. We cannot poison acts of goodwill just because they don’t address all violations at once. A single act cannot be comprehensive. But we can certainly be critical and hold our leaders accountable.

It is important to realize that total reconciliation of the past may never be fully realized, but we can work towards a more empathetic and active engagement with our nation’s past. The act of striving for a better relationship with your neighbour is certainly a noble pursuit.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

Categories
Opinions

Why Concordia’s journalism program needs updating—again

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth.

Change can definitely be a good thing. While it’s great to stick to a certain niche, it’s really important to evolve your ideas and abilities so that you can keep up with this fast-paced world.

Take Concordia’s journalism program, for example. It’s no secret that journalism has shifted from a traditional print platform to a digital one. Now, reporters are expected to know not only how to write, but also how to take photos, edit sound clips and record video. It’s a great shift, since it encompasses where our society is going in terms of technological advances. But we at The Concordian feel that, although the journalism program has changed for the better since its upgrade in 2016, there is still room for improvement.

It’s understandable that change had to come to a program like journalism—a field that’s always transforming and adapting. To be honest, though, the changes seem better in theory than in practice.

For example, under the old program, students had the option of choosing between a major in textual or audiovisual (AV) journalism. Regardless of which path students chose, though, all were required to spend a semester learning the basics of radio journalism, and another semester focusing on an introduction to video. Later on in their degree, students were offered a semester-long course on photojournalism.

Under the new program, however, students are expected to learn the basics of radio, video and photojournalism in just 15 weeks. That’s about four or five weeks per subject—simply not enough time to familiarize yourself with the basics let alone prepare you for more advanced radio and video courses.

While we at The Concordian agree with the department’s attempt to better prepare students for a work environment that requires journalists to be jacks-of-all-trades, the changes seem to go too far in the other direction. In trying to teach students so much material in so little time, many j-schoolers risk finishing courses with less knowledge than they would have under the old curriculum.

But the changes aren’t all negative. It’s extremely important to highlight the program’s necessary shift from traditional to digital media and its implications on young journalists. Writing, of course, is always going to be a critical tool for journalists. But video, radio and photography have also become necessary skills for a career in this field.

While the new program does offer in-depth audiovisual courses at the 300 and 400-level, we hope the department acknowledges that the overly condensed format of the program’s first year hinders rather than helps prepare students for the rest of their degree.

Another change that has been made to the program is that the course “Radio Newsroom” is no longer required for second-year AV students. Especially given the limited time spent acquiring radio skills in year one, we at The Concordian believe the department should create more of an opportunity for students to develop their broadcasting skills in a hands-on environment.

Ultimately, we believe the changes made to the journalism program show potential, even though they remain far from ideal. The fact that the department was willing to adapt to a shifting work environment gives us confidence that we haven’t seen the end of the department’s attempts to make adjustments for the sake of its students’ education.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

Categories
Opinions

The millennial pursuit of monetizing passion

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth.

One student’s realization that passions are valuable whether they bring you success or not

An interest in yoga has transformed into the pursuit of becoming a fitness model. A knack for style has evolved into the goal of owning your own fashion label. A passion for music has morphed into a dream of becoming a world-renowned rapper.

Among other defining characteristics, millennials’ willingness to pursue their dreams sets them apart from generations past. Unlike our parents, who weren’t necessarily encouraged to envision futures beyond desk jobs, millennials live in a world constantly inspiring us to nurture our passions and interests.

To be in our 20s today is to live in a time of endless possibility—a time when social media can become your ticket to superstardom, like it did for Justin Bieber; a time when your own voice can propel you past homelessness and poverty, as was the case for The Weeknd.

Despite a generation of baby boomers who tend to label us as lazy and entitled, our reverence for creativity makes us one of the most ambitious generations this world has ever seen. We believe there is nothing hard work and perseverance can’t achieve, and we are unapologetic and fearless in the pursuit of our dreams.

As a millennial myself, I am an avid believer in unearthing individual talents and interests. Art, dance, cuisine, writing—whatever it is, I encourage you to discover the joy and fulfillment that comes with asserting yourself as a unique individual.

I am, however, troubled by the sense that a materialistic mentality has pervaded my generation. What started as a goal in the name of passion has been overtaken by a thirst for money and fame. Our passions matter as much as the attention they receive. This is particularly evident through our changed relationship with social media, where our posts and popularity are as valuable as the likes and followers they generate. The song you post to YouTube isn’t impressive because you made the beat yourself—it’s impressive because of its view count. It doesn’t matter that I took the time to write this article—what matters is that you took the time to share it on Facebook.

In the pursuit of careers that will satisfy our intrinsic interests, millennials disregard passion for passion’s sake—doing something simply because you love it, with no ulterior motive like making money or getting noticed. Our sense of purpose becomes tethered to popularity, and we wait for the day when we will finally be recognized as the superstars we really are. In the meantime, we disregard things that make “everyday” jobs appealing, and overlook those who work nine-to-five jobs instead of pursuing a career they’re passionate about. Stable hours, benefits and a reliable salary aren’t good enough for the go-getting millennial, who scoffs at the idea of working in a cubicle.

But just because someone else hasn’t made a career out of their passion doesn’t mean they’re living a mediocre existence. They have worked just as hard to get to where they are. And they too are individuals with talents, interests and passions. Conversely, just because someone hustles in a field that they love, doesn’t mean they’re ever going to find success.

For those of you who think I’m saying these things because I don’t have any dreams, you are wrong. I hold a desire in my heart which many have called a pipe dream. I no longer measure the value of my passion based on whether or not I am able to turn it into a career because I made the disheartening discovery that, sometimes, hard work doesn’t actually pay off.

Indeed, contrary to what we’ve been told our whole lives, working towards your passion is often not enough. The difference between being good at something and getting paid to do it depends on a variety of factors beyond your control, like connections, timing and luck.

In a world that constantly measures you in likes, followers and cash, I urge you to remember that the value of your passion goes far beyond a dollar sign. You do not need recognition from others in order to enjoy or be good at something. Whether you are able to turn your passion into a career is irrelevant. The beauty of your passion is that it is yours, and that is valuable beyond measure.

Graphic by Alexa Hawksworth

Categories
Opinions

Know your rights as a tenant

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin.

As we enter the third week of the fall semester here at Concordia, many students are beginning to settle into their routines, their workloads and their living spaces. The experiences students have with their living situations vary widely: some are finding themselves in the apartment of their dreams with a landlord who is attentive and sympathetic, while others, unfortunately, are not.

It is not uncommon for landlords to take advantage of the inexperience of their student-tenants. This is why we at The Concordian hope to help educate students about their tenant rights and how to defend them. We’ve heard many horror stories of students being taken advantage of by their landlords. It’s for this reason that we’ve decided to address some of the injustices that are commonly inflicted on student-renters, and encourage students to stand up against them.

Believe it or not, landlords are not allowed to ask for any kind of deposit—for keys, damage or otherwise—when you first move in. This will come as a shock to some students, as we have heard countless stories of landlords asking for these payments. But it’s an important fact to be aware of.

Even some of our own editors at The Concordian have experienced situations where their landlord asked for a deposit of one month’s rent. Not knowing otherwise, they complied. Yet when they moved out, the landlord kept the $200, claiming it was for cleaning fees, even though the tenant cleaned the space before leaving without existing laws requiring them to do so.

One of our editors, Matthew Coyte shared his experience with renting apartments. He had found an apartment that seemed ideal on Kijiji, for $1,600 a month. But when he and his friends got to the apartment, it was the complete opposite of ideal.

“The place was run down, unfurnished,” he said. “The worst part was the landlord, who had demanded that if we were interested in renting the apartment for the coming school year, we would need to put down a security deposit, which would cost us the first two months’ rent.” When Coyte and his friends explained that Quebec renting laws make it illegal for landlords to ask for payment before the beginning of the lease, the landlord cited reasons of “making sure [they] would honour the agreement.”

These are just a few of the many situations students face when trying to find an apartment. As a renter, you sometimes have to use your own discretion when deciding whether what a landlord is asking for is fair. You should be aware of the risk you are taking if you decide to go through with renting an apartment.

Students should also be aware that landlords are, by law, required to clean an apartment before the move-in date, perform necessary repairs in a timely fashion and give 24 hours notice before entering the apartment. Concordia Student Union’s Housing and Job Resource Centre (HOJO) has a website listing all of the things landlords are and aren’t allowed to do, as well as a list of precautions to take prior to signing a lease.

François Saillant noted in the Montreal Gazette in 2016 that the average rent in Quebec was $712 per month ($744 in Montreal). “To pay such a sum without spending more than the standard of 30 per cent of your revenues,” he wrote, “you must have an annual income of more than $28,500, which is obviously not the case for many tenants.” With rent this steep, students need to make sure they get what they’re paying for. It’s your duty as a tenant to stick up for your rights, not only for your sake, but for the sake of other tenants. It’s much harder to fight injustices when they become the norm.

Landlords have been taking advantage of young people for a long time because, well, first-time renters are often naive. If you’re renting an apartment this year, take the time to learn your rights so that you know when they’re being violated. If you think something about your rental agreement or living situation seems unfair or unclear, the university offers a variety of services, including HOJO, where you can speak to someone about the issue. The important thing though, is to make sure you speak up about it.

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin

Categories
Opinions

This is not a conflict, this is a genocide

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin.

Western media has the power to highlight the injustices in Myanmar—if they pay attention

My sister was the first to inform me about the ongoing genocide happening in Myanmar. She only found out about it through an Instagram post. This revelation left me in complete shock. The fact that this unforgivable violence has been going on for more than three years is astonishing. But most shocking is that it has barely received any coverage in Western media, until now.

According to Al Jazeera, the Rohingya people are a Muslim minority living in a state originally known as Burma. There are currently 1.1 million Rohingya people living in Myanmar, and they are considered one of the most persecuted groups in the world. The Rohingya make up five per cent of Myanmar’s 53 million citizens, and mostly live in the state of Rakhine, which is described as one of the poorest states in Myanmar, “with ghetto-like camps and a lack of basic services and opportunities,” according to the same source. In addition, the Rohingya have been denied citizenship since 1982, making them illegal residents and stateless.

The majority of the population in Myanmar is Buddhist. This is a religion that honours life and is dedicated to living humbly, while doing as little harm as possible. Yet according to The Guardian, Ashin Wirathu, a nationalist Burmese Buddhist monk and leader of the country’s anti-Muslim movement, is allegedly parading across Myanmar spewing hate messages and inspiring violence against Rohingya Muslims. Labeled the “Face of Buddhist Terror” by Time magazine, Wirathu claims he is only “warning” his people about Muslims, when he is truthfully inciting hatred against them, according to The Guardian.

The civilian leader of Myanmar is Aung San Suu Kyi. She actually has a Noble Peace Prize, and according to the Washington Post, she’s a “democracy icon.” Yet, Suu Kyi has been criticized for refusing to acknowledge the violence taking place in her country as an actual genocide. When asked in interviews about the violence, she often claims the media is “exaggerating” and refuses to criticize the country’s military, according to the Washington Post.

In my opinion, labeling violence as a genocide makes it more urgent, and it takes us back to the horrors of colonialism, the Indian Act, the Rwandan genocide and, of course, the Holocaust. Discussing any kind of ethnic cleansing as genocide makes it more real because it reminds us of history, and of how many people have been murdered for being different.

For a long time, the violence in Myanmar has been considered a conflict of ideologies, a religious dispute between Buddhist Nationalists and Rohingya Muslims, without being labeled a genocide. It also wasn’t being investigated by Western media for a long time—I suppose Western media overlooked the issue because we’re so concerned with social justice, healthcare, President Trump and climate change in our own nations.

I don’t really blame us—we’ve got our own problems to deal with. But it’s sad to realize that it wasn’t until the conversation shifted and some outlets, like Al Jazeera, started using the word genocide that we suddenly became all ears.

Human Rights Watch has released a report criticizing Suu Kyi for doing nothing about the excessive violence against Rohingya Muslims. According to the Telegraph, a recent military crackdown caused almost 90,000 Rohingya Muslims to flee to Bangladesh, where they are in desperate need of basic necessities. Not only are the Rohingya people unwanted in Myanmar, they are also unwanted in Bangladesh, according to TRT World.

In my opinion, this marginalized group needs a safe zone and international intervention. But this will not happen without global acknowledgement. On Sept. 16, Concordia alumnus Majed Jam, organised a demonstration protesting the treatment of the Rohingya Muslims. This was not only a way to protest the genocide, but a way to capture the attention of the world, or at least Montreal’s attention.

The Western world’s attention is an extremely powerful tool that can shed light on this ongoing violence, and it is our responsibility to make sure people pay attention.

Graphic by Zeze Le Lin

Exit mobile version