Latest News

Montreal, News

Hillary Clinton tells Montrealers “What Happened” in 2016

by Alexandra Harvey on

More in Montreal:

A cheering crowd welcomed an injured Hillary Clinton to the stage at the Palais des congrès de Montréal on Oct. 23. She opened by jokingly describing her doctor’s orders to heal her recently fractured foot.

“The doctor said rest, ice, compress, and elevate,” Clinton said. “So I said, ‘Yes, and Montreal.’”

Clinton was in Montreal to promote her memoir, What Happened, which describes the 2016 U.S. presidential election from her perspective. She expressed her appreciation for the welcoming Canadian audience, remarking on the uniquely close relationship between Canada and the United States.

“I so admire [Canada’s] commitment to a diverse and open society,” Clinton said. “It must be very reassuring to have a charismatic, compassionate leader who cares about people and policy. I remember what that was like.”

Clinton spoke about her election loss and how she motivated herself to get back into the public sphere. She reflected on what it was like to deliver the concession speech she never expected to give, and compared Donald Trump’s presidential inauguration to getting a root canal but on steroids.

She blamed the outcome of the election largely on former FBI director James Comey’s investigation, the exaggeration of her email controversy, and Russian intelligence hacking. Clinton found Russia’s federal election interference particularly worrying from a global perspective. She equated the Putin administration’s aggressive efforts to undermine liberal democracies to a modern Cold War, propagated through hacking and the spread of false information. Clinton emphasized the importance of holding political leaders accountable.

Clinton also reminded the audience that today’s American political system is still rife with ingrained misogyny.

“The only way we will get sexism out of politics is to get more women into politics,” Clinton said. “Young women have come to me telling me they want to run [for office], and I’ve been encouraging them to do it, but I’ve also been very clear that they have to recognize the double standard is alive and well.”

Clinton commended the activists that participated in the Jan. 21 Women’s Marches, at which over four million individuals worldwide came together to stand up for women’s rights and other social justice causes, although she herself chose not to attend

“I wanted badly to join the crowds and chant my heart out,” Clinton writes in What Happened. “But I believed it was important for new voices to take the stage, especially on this day. There are so many exciting young women leaders ready to play bigger roles in our politics.”

Clinton applauded the new activism that has surfaced following the 2016 election—namely, athletes kneeling during the national anthem—with people standing up for human rights and democratic values filling her with hope.

“We’re on the right side of history,” Clinton said.

Clinton’s critical take on sexism and female involvement in politics resonated with audience members.

“[Clinton] reminded [me] that the glass ceiling is far from broken,” Alexander Bloomfield, U2 Arts, said after the talk.

Other McGill students at the event expressed optimism—after the event, they commended Clinton for her  accomplishments and her role as a trailblazer for women’s rights.

“[As the only female presidential nominee for a major American political party, Clinton] holds a perspective that no other woman in the world has,” Alexa Coleman, U2 Arts, said. “She is fiercely progressive and embodies the archetype of a strong, kick-ass, status quo-defying modern woman.”

Clinton encouraged Americans—and Canadians—to continue the momentum she started by standing up for what they believe in, a fitting end to her speech that mirrors the way she signed off on the final page of her book.

“‘What do we do now?’ I said. There was only one answer: ‘Keep going,’” Clinton wrote.

 

Private, Science & Technology

Sordid tales of quantum physics

by Kimberly Johnston on

More in Private:

More haunting than any ghoul is the occurrence of entanglement, or nonlocality. Entanglement occurs when particles, also known as various small ‘fields,’ are linked. These fields include electrons, photons, atoms, and even molecules, which share a common history that intertwines their futures. Measuring or changing the state of an entangled particle will modify the state of its linked particle.

To explain this phenomenon with a Halloween twist, McGill physics professors broke down the theory of entanglement, using the metaphor of trick-or-treating. The ‘quantum candy’ represents the particles, or fields, and the ‘colour’ of the candies are entangled.

In this case, because of the way candy is entangled by colour, both trick-or-treaters had to end up with the same colour of candies.

Assistant Professor Bill Coish of the Department of Physics at McGill illustrated this example in an email to The McGill Tribune. 

“Minerva and Ada get special quantum candy from a […] candy bowl—one candy each,” Coish said. “The candies are either both red or both green. The strange thing about these quantum candies is that the colour is not predetermined; you can actually do a check […] to show that they don’t have any special colour before Ada and Minerva look into their loot bags. It’s only after they look into their bags that they see if they [both] have [either] a red candy or [green] candy.”

Associate Professor Michael Hilke, also in the Department of Physics at McGill, explains the mystifying concept using the analogy of two quantum ghosts who are entangled by their arms and mouths, one haunting Montreal and the other haunting Toronto. 

Using ghost cameras, Hilke photographs the Montreal ghost’s arm and his daughter photographs the Toronto ghost’s mouth at the exact same time. If he photographs the Montreal ghost’s left arm, the Toronto ghost’s mouth will always be captured open. Every time Hilke chooses to photograph the right arm however, the Toronto ghost has a closed mouth. Choosing which arm to measure dictates what the corresponding position of the mouth will be, because of how the features are entangled. 

The strength of measurements, or in this analogy, ‘photo quality’ determines the strength of the outcome of the entangled characteristic. So, should the lighting be insufficient to obtain a good photo, and only a blurry indistinguishable arm of the Montreal ghost is captured, Hilke’s daughter will capture a blurry mouth on the Toronto ghost.

It may seem as though one quantum ghost or candy sends a quick secret message instructing the other’s outcome, however, distance does not affect entanglement—so the message doesn’t actually exist.

“The thing is, forces and information can only travel as fast as the speed of light,” Coish wrote. “If [in the candy example] Ada and Minerva are far enough away from each other when they look in their loot bags and they look at roughly the same time, they can rule out the possibility that a signal or force could have travelled the distance between them in that time.”

Coish clarified that experiments have already shown the lack of a signal between entangled fields; experiments using photons, atoms, and electron spins in diamonds have been used to measure said connection.

Hilke explained a scenario in which two particles are entangled, where one remains on earth and the other is sent to another planet. By observing the state of the particle on earth, the extraterrestrial particle’s state is simultaneously modified.

When asked about the quantum realm’s philosophical impact, Hilke’s response may keep some readers up at night. Nothing at the particle level is deterministic; our conceptualization shouldn’t be of a deterministic world, but instead a probabilistic one, in which nothing can be predetermined. 

 

News, SSMU

Democratize SSMU motion of non-confidence in President fails at Fall General Assembly

by Audrey Carleton & Ari Charles on

More in News:

On Oct. 16, a student activist group’s Facebook event titled “Democratize SSMU campaign” appeared on McGill students’ newsfeeds. The group, whose membership is anonymous, formed after the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) Board of Directors (BoD) ratified a SSMU Judicial Board (J-Board) ruling on Sept. 17. The J-Board had previously ruled the Winter 2016 referendum motion mandating SSMU to support the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement as unconstitutional. On its event page, which has since been taken down, Democratize SSMU listed its goals: To end abuses of power, conflicts of interest, and the neglect of duties within SSMU governing bodies.

“[Democratize SSMU formed out of] frustration and a desire to change the current composition of many of SSMU’s governance bodies,” an organizer for Democratize SSMU, who chose to remain anonymous to avoid personal attacks, said in an interview with The McGill Tribune. “Frustration due to the fact that they’re not democratic, not transparent, not representative, and very shady in terms of how they organize.”

The group mobilized at the Fall 2017 General Assembly (GA) to submit a motion of non-confidence in SSMU President Muna Tojiboeva to the agenda. The motion came to the floor four days after SSMU Vice-President (VP) Student Life Jemark Earle read a statement on behalf of the other five SSMU Executives at Legislative Council on Oct. 19, asserting that Tojiboeva had acted on their behalf in a non-transparent manner. In response, Tojiboeva alleged that she was a victim of workplace harassment.

According to Democratize SSMU, Tojiboeva’s own miscommunications about the processes for submitting motions to the GA agenda fell in the way of its attempts to put forth the motion. Section 13.2 of the SSMU Constitution requires the BoD, Councillors, or SSMU members to submit motions to the agenda two weeks prior to the GA. While Tojiboeva stated that the GA date was posted on the SSMU website in September, there is no evidence to show that she formally announced this submission deadline to SSMU membership beyond this post. Although all parties were allowed to submit their motions late, each motion subsequently required a two-thirds majority of votes at the GA to be added to the agenda—whereas on-time motions are automatically added, and in turn, voted upon with a requirement of 51 per cent to pass. The motion of non-confidence failed to garner a two-thirds majority—with 61 per cent of students attending GA voting in favour—and as such, was not added to the agenda.

“We, Democratize SSMU, were forced to submit a late motion, faced an uphill battle to get two-thirds majority just to get this on the agenda at the GA,” the organizer said. “[Had Tojiboeva] opened submissions on time, and we submitted our motion on time, and it was automatically on the agenda, and we only needed a simple majority to pass a non-confidence motion, we would’ve had 61 per cent of the vote, and that would’ve passed [….] Had she done her job, the General Assembly would’ve voted non-confidence for her.”

Following the approval of the agenda, the GA moved into regular business, including the approval of the SSMU Auditor and the ratification of the 2017-18 SSMU BoD, whose year-long term begins on Nov. 15. However, while Board members are typically ratified as a bloc, such that members vote to approve or disapprove the entire Board, SSMU VP Internal Maya Koparkar motioned to divide the question. This motion passed, and the nominated directors were ratified as individuals. Of the 10 nominations, seven were ratified for year-long terms, while three members—Noah Lew, Josephine Wright O’Manique, and Alexander Scheffel—failed to be ratified. Both Lew and Scheffel are members-at-large of the current BoD, and were the only two nominated directors who would be returning for second terms.

After the ratification, SSMU members alleged that Democratize SSMU was behind the choice to divide the question. According to Koparkar, dividing the question was an attempt to improve transparency in the selection of the BoD given the controversy over the constitutionality of the Board’s makeup earlier this semester.

“I am definitely not a member of Democratize SSMU,” Koparkar said in interview with the Tribune. “When all of those conflicts were going on regarding the constitutionality of the Board, someone had alluded to the fact that the Board wasn’t democratic because it wasn’t composed of elected members [….] Someone suggested dividing the question as a way of adding legitimacy to this process, which I felt was fair, especially given that we voted on the councillors for BoD in this manner at Council a couple weeks ago.”

The ratification vote occurred just one week after the BoD’s vote in confidential session to suspend VP Finance Arisha Khan for a two-week period on Oct. 16 for a breach of confidentiality. At the meeting, SSMU General Manager Ryan Hughes presented the results of an investigation into suspicions that Khan had leaked confidential information to student media. Hughes showed directors a confidential email that Khan had forwarded to a SSMU member who is not part of the executive and is unaffiliated with the student media. During the vote, Khan was at a conference on behalf of SSMU and said she was not warned of the vote prior to the meeting. The Board’s failure to notify Khan would violate article 6.8 of the SSMU Constitution, which stipulates that a Director shall have the right to put forth reasons opposing the proposed removal from office.

“Noah Lew and Alexandre Scheffel are both members of the Board of Directors that voted to suspend [VP] Khan from the Board of Directors when she was away at a conference on foster care without her being given the chance to defend herself,” the Democratize SSMU organizer said. “In the constitution it says that a Board member can be voted off from their position but they will be notified of the time and place of the meeting and shall be present, [and have] the right to be present to defend themselves. But she wasn’t notified [….] It’s unconstitutional what they did.”

Following his failed ratification, Noah Lew asserted in a widely-shared Facebook status that the students voting against him were motivated by religious prejudice, citing Democratize SSMU’s mention of his name, his affiliation with Jewish organizations, and his conflict of interest in its Facebook event description. Many members of the McGill community expressed anger and disappointment with the alleged anti-Semitism behind Lew and Scheffel’s failed ratification, including David Naftulin, U1 Arts, a vocal member of the Jewish community on campus.

“[Lew] is being ostracized in a political witch hunt because he is active in his [religious] community,” Naftulin said. “I posit that any [member of another] minority group that was active in a mainstream organization that advocated for their community would be under no such scrutiny at SSMU. And that is the anti-Semitism. It is a double standard.”

The allegations of discrimination prompted McGill Principal Suzanne Fortier to issue a statement to the student body on Oct. 25, reaffirming McGill’s values of tolerance and respect. She also detailed the administration’s plans to investigate alleged discriminatory bias or intent behind the results of the vote.

“The allegation is that votes were taken, and that on account of people’s perceived religious affiliation, the vote against [the BoD members] was negative,” Fortier said in an interview with the Tribune. “So, they were singled out on account of religious affiliation. So that is the allegation, and that’s what we will investigate [….] I think we need to ask ourselves the question of, how many people on our campus are subjected to situations that are discriminatory or disrespectful.”

According to the organizer, the BoD ratification was not on Democratize SSMU’s radar when mobilizing students to attend the GA. Rather, the motion of non-confidence was their only goal prior—and the BoD ratification vote only became important once the former motion failed.

“A lot of people […] have made it out to seem that this movement came to the GA to unseat these three directors, which is totally false,” the organizer said. “We came to the GA for one reason, the non-confidence motion [….] The principal’s email makes it seem like we mobilized against those directors, but we didn’t. Democratize SSMU has broad goals of constitutional reform.”

In the week following the GA, Director Jonathan Glustein petitioned the SSMU J-Board to rule the division of the BoD motion unconstitutional, calling for the upcoming online ratification to vote on the new members as a bloc. The J-Board intends to hold hearings to determine the constitutionality of dividing the motion and, in the meantime, all the directors will retain their positions.

Further, the BoD passed a motion to form a committee to investigate anti-Semitism on campus at its Oct. 29 meeting. The committee’s membership will include representatives from Jewish cultural groups.

McGill, News

McGill Student Housing to continue overbooking residences and partnership with Evo

by Jackie Yao on

More in McGill:

Faced with an increased demand for student housing this year, McGill Student Housing and Hospitality Services (SHHS) has partnered with Evo Montreal to provide first year students with living accommodations. The situation stems from SHHS’ guarantee that all first-year students under the age of 22 and admitted to McGill before a deadline over the summer would receive on-campus housing. Every year, eligible students rank McGill residences in order of their preferences upon paying a residence deposit, and are given a randomly generated lottery number. Students who obtain a lower number had a higher chance of receiving their preferred residence.

In practice, SHHS has a policy of accepting more applications to live in residence than there are rooms available. According to Senior Advisor of Customer Relations for McGill SHHS Susan Campbell, McGill residences annually receive 150 to 250 more room applications than rooms available. Usually, this excess demand is satisfied because approximately the same number of students cancel their residence reservations before moving in. But this year, there were not enough room cancellations to accommodate the excess 140 students. These students were then moved into Evo Montreal, a student residence opened in 2014 and located on Sherbrooke street.

Campbell disclosed that the university does not plan to change its overbooking practice, despite excessive housing demand.

“Unfortunately, we cannot control that some students will cancel or simply not show up for a multitude of reasons after the lottery is held and residence rooms are assigned,” Campbell wrote in an email to the Tribune. “Without [overbooking residences], we would have many empty rooms and we would have many students disappointed that they aren’t eventually assigned a residence, when in fact, there was [a room] available.”

Nevertheless, McGill SHHS hopes to ease first-year students’ move-in process. As for the administration’s plans on reducing the number of students overbooked in the future, Campbell admitted that it is difficult to predict demand and cancellations each year.

“The number of students requesting housing changes from year to year,” Campbell wrote.  “We are committed to finding housing for all students who request housing and send us their deposit on time.”

Whereas Evo rates normally start at $775 per month for a 12-month lease, students accommodated at Evo through McGill Housing pay $1,100 per month for eight months. McGill students housed at Evo can run for Residence Council, participate in all Residence Life events, and, along with students living in University Hall and MORE Houses, are part of the MORE’s First-Year Residence Community. The Evo building is comparable to McGill hotel-style residences, but with amenities including an indoor heated pool, a game room, and a theatre. For Kagame Jean, U2 Arts and a floor fellow at Evo, the student residence provides a unique spin on McGill Rez Life.

“Being a floor fellow [at Evo] has been amazing so far,” Jean said. “Students in [Evo] have the opportunity to enjoy what could probably be referred to as extras that other rezs do not necessarily have [….] Moreover, we are never left out on anything [in the] first year residences community.”

While the process of relocating has caused many students uncertainty, many have come to enjoy Evo’s luxuries. Owen Quinn, U0 Engineering, is grateful that SHHS has placed him into Evo.

"I've had a great experience with the whole residence relocation bonanza,” Quinn said. “Even though it took me awhile to get placed here, I'm super happy that I got put into Evo [….] Evo is playing 3D chess while every other rez is playing checkers."

Features

A legacy of student activism

by Domenic Casciato on

More in Features:

Quebec’s student unions and federations are some of the most politically active and mobile student networks in the world. Since the first general student strike in 1968, national student federations have organized six more massive strikes in Quebec. Twenty-first century political activism in the province has largely become organized around the student associations of CEGEPs and universities, mobilized by national student federations. Although many of the unions and federations associated during the 2012 general strike—the latest in Quebec’s history—have disbanded, student unions and federations like the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) continue to mobilize their members in smaller ways around a myriad of political issues. In the sociopolitical landscape of post-2012 Quebec, student unions have become the primary vehicles for political mobilization.

Science & Technology

Gravitational waves when neutron stars collide

by Antoine Vandenborre on

More in Science & Technology:

A global effort, with contributions by McGill astrophysicists including Assistant Professor of Physics in the McGill Space Institute (MSI), Daryl Haggard, and postdoctoral researcher Melania Nynka, has detected gravitational waves coming from the collision of two neutron stars in orbit. Among the many implications of this discovery, the origin of certain elements—such as gold—emerged. 

Gravitational waves are piquing the public’s interest in physics. These waves are disturbances in space-time caused by the collision of large astronomical bodies as they orbit each other at increasing velocity. Theorized by Einstein in 1916, evidence for the existence of gravitational waves has only recently become available—the 2017 Nobel Prize in Physics was given to Rainer Weiss, Barry C. Barish, and Kip S. Thorne, for their contributions to the detection of the gravitational waves and the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO). Previous recordings of gravitational waves were from the merging of black holes. 

Recently, the first emanation of these waves from the collision of two neutron stars has been confirmed by scientists across the globe, including Haggard and Nynka; marking the first of these types of collisions to release gravitational waves and light radiation.

“[This] signal lasted much longer than the first four,” Govert Shilling wrote for the Sky and Telescope. “[Instead] of a fraction of a second, like the earlier detections, the spacetime ripples lasted for a whopping ninety seconds.” 

Furthermore, electromagnetic radiation was released by the collision in the form of a flash gamma radiation, detected by both NASA and the European Space Agency. This combination of different types of emissions released from the collision has never been seen by astronomers.

Haggard was involved in the discovery, and explained that neutron stars sometimes pull on another neutron star to form a binary system—when two stars rotate around the same center of mass. As they orbit closer to each other, the final collision releases gravitational waves and violent bursts of gamma radiation out into distant space. The gravitational waves travel at the speed of light, virtually unimpeded throughout the universe. By the time they reach Earth, the warping of space-time that the planet experiences is about a fraction of the width of an atomic nucleus, and has a negligible effect.

The effort to detect such events is enormous. Nynka, who also worked on this project at the MSI, stressed that this slight detection was monitored heavily.

 “[One] third of the entire astrophysics and astronomical community, around the world, was involved in observing this,” Nynka said.  

These events are hard to detect because of the accuracy required. Lasers travelling long distances have to be perfectly calibrated so that only a gravitational wave will warp the path of the lasers out of sync with each other. Nynka pointed out that varied sources, such as waves on a shore, passing trucks, or distant seismic activity, can throw off results.  

However, with the project successfully confirming the presence of gravitational waves resulting from two colliding neutron stars, other downstream implications of the discovery emerged. The data confirmed theories about the cosmic origin of heavy elements, like gold. 

The early expansion of the universe was too rapid, and the temperature changes too great, to be able to produce many of the heavier elements. However, many astronomical collisions were theorized to be able to produce the right temperatures, which sustained over a sufficient amount of time, can generate these elements. 

Haggard explained that dying stars undergoing supernova explosions become increasingly dense, and have so much gravity inside them that they force protons and electrons together, creating a vast supply of neutrons. Thus, neutron star collisions can potentially provide the right conditions for mid-weight range elements, like iron, to capture neutrons and acquire mass. Haggard explained that sometimes this even happens on earth—during the fallout of a thermonuclear explosion.

It may be romantic to say that the gold in our wedding rings came from distant bursts of colliding stars. To astronomers, however, these findings may help better understand how matter forms and coalesces in the universe—clumping together to turn space dust into planets and, eventually, life. 

 

McGill, News

AUS Council condemns Bill 62

by Sebastien Pentland-Hyde on

More in McGill:

On Oct. 25, the Arts Undergraduate Society (AUS) Legislative Council held its fourth meeting of the Fall semester. Councillors passed motions to condemn Bill 62, reduce quorum requirements for General Assemblies (GA), and lower the Ferrier computer lab student fee.

Council condemns Quebec National Assembly Bill 62

Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) Arts Representative Jennifer Chan presented a motion to condemn the Quebec provincial legislature for passing the controversial Bill 62, a new law which prohibits citizens from covering their faces while giving or accessing public services, on the basis of religious neutrality. Chan framed the bill as singling out Muslim women, thus going against AUS’ mandate to represent all Arts students equally, and called for the Supreme Court of Canada to rule on its constitutionality.

“[Bill 62] infringes on not just federal guidelines, but also our mandate as AUS,” Chan said. “We condemn it publicly […] and also [ask] for the McGill administration to publicly condemn [it].”

McGill has not condemned the law, but Principal Suzanne Fortier has assured students that McGill’s policies and practices will not be influenced. Chan was not satisfied, and pointed to the importance of actively recognizing McGill’s core values.

“[We must] ensure that students from diverse cultures, ethnic origins, sexual and gender identifications, religious or faith backgrounds, and all types of disabilities receive equitable treatment in the provision of, and access to, [AUS’] services,” Chan said.

Chan’s motion passed unanimously with one abstention.

General Assembly quorum lowered

AUS Vice-President (VP) Academic Madison Wilson and President Erik Partridge moved a motion to reduce the AUS General Assembly (GA) quorum, lowering the minimum number of students needed to hold a GA from 150 to 75 because of traditionally-low voter turnouts.

Additionally, Arts Senator Isabella Anderson called for reducing the current quorum to pass resolutions on AUS strikes and boycotts from 500 to 250.

“If there is something as serious as an AUS strike or boycott, [students] will show up,” Anderson said. “They show up to the GA at SSMU when they care about the issues.”

World Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies Student Association (WIMESSA) VP External Andrew Sandock argued that 250 was an unreasonably high number given that the power to call general strikes and boycotts are vital tools for minority voices, which wouldn’t have popular support or mobilization.

“There are a lot of smaller boycott and strike movements that exist that will never be able to get a quorum of 250 people,” Sandock said. “We’re talking about everything from Free Tibet movements, to Burma, to police brutality, to environmental change. It’s very difficult to rally when you have such a small movement.”

The motion, as well as its amendment for a quorum of 250 for strike and boycott resolutions, passed.

AUS Proposes Arts Computer Lab Fund Fee Referendum

AUS President Erik Partridge proposed including a question in the AUS Fall Referendum to reduce the opt-outable Arts Computer Lab Fund Fee from $7.85 to $3.85. AUS runs a few dozen computers across campus but, according to Partridge, their usage has declined since 2011. Students use, on average, 12 per cent of all arts computers during business hours.

Partridge expressed his desire to reduce the number of computers by 60 per cent and open up the space for group study areas. As an alternative to the desktops, he encouraged students to use the AUS laptop-lending program. Although the usage of this program has increased twofold yearly since its introduction, there are only 40 computers available for rental.

Students will also be voting on a proposed $3 increase on the AUS base fee, from $13.50 to $16.50, to keep up with inflation, as the fee last increased in 2013. Both proposals will go to referendum.

AUS Council will next meet on Nov. 8 at 6 p.m. in Leacock 232.

Men's Varsity, Sports

McGill Redmen lacrosse leaves Gee-Gees aghast in sudden-death playoff

by Patrick Beacham on

More in Men's Varsity:

McGill Redmen lacrosse (12-1) stormed Molson Stadium at their Oct. 28 game as they went head to head with the University of Ottawa Gee-Gees (4-9), battling for a qualifying berth at the  2017 Baggataway Cup. McGill ran away with the game after taking the first quarter 4-2, ending with a definitive 17-6 victory.

After losing to Ottawa in 2016 during a sudden death playoff, the Redmen have now defeated the Gee-Gees three times this year, increasing their scoring margin each game.

“It’s always tough to beat the same team three times,” Redmen Head Coach Tim Murdoch said. “It was a total team win, and I think that our bench depth was really on display tonight.”

The Redmen attack line rushed the ball up the field with increased intensity each time, and Ottawa could neither keep up with McGill’s rotations, nor protect their goal from an onslaught of flying shots.

“We have threats from all over the field,” Murdoch said. “We have a lot of depth, and that’s going to really serve us well in the playoffs.”

The Gee-Gees were seldom able to get the ball up into their offensive end, let alone generate scoring opportunities. Save for some brief moments during Ottawa’s last attempts to make a comeback, McGill fifth-year goalkeeper William Waesche easily blocked opposing shots and lobbed the ball up to the offense for swift transitions.

“In any great defence, it takes a lot of help from the offence to set the tone,” Waesche said. “I thought today was a very offence-led effort. As a goalie, I was really happy with being supported from the other side of the field.”

The Gee-Gees, after enduring numerous Redmen offensive blitzes, were visibly deflated. In their last breath, they managed to put up two final goals at the end of the third quarter. McGill then swept the fourth quarter with a 4-0 shutout.

“We played 80 minutes of team lacrosse and it’s the first time we did that all season,” Redmen first-year midfielder Gardie Herr said. “We didn’t have a lull after the half which usually happens to us. It’s just nice to go out there and win.”

It is still uncertain whom McGill will face in the first round of the Baggataway Cup, though it will likely be either the Queen’s Gaels or the Western Mustangs. Heading into the national playoffs—hosted in Kingston between Nov. 3 and 5—the Redmen will use the upcoming week to sharpen up and prepare to take another stab at the championship.

“We’re just focusing on bringing the intensity every day,” McGill first-year defenceman Oliver Bolsterli said. “And just getting better every day of the week so we’re ready to roll on Saturday.”

 

Moment of the Game

Immediately following a faceoff in the third quarter as Ottawa was deteriorating, first-year midfielder Gardie Herr was cornered by two Gee-Gees who proceeded to strike him in the face with their sticks, knocking him to the ground.

 

Quotable

“It’s a great feeling [to go back]. There’s nothing better than playing for a championship.” – Bolsterli on getting back to the championships after last year’s upset.

 

Stat Corner

Three Redmen—Liam MacDonald, Maxime Murdoch, and Goose Bolton—dominated the scoresheet, accounting for 11 of the team’s 17 goals.

Arts & Entertainment, Music

Nuné Melik fights for inclusivity in Classical music

by Maxime Scraire on

More in Arts & Entertainment:

“Do you mind if I shoot the interview?” Nuné Melik’s friend asked as we settled in The McGill Tribune’s office.

“It is pretty much just to brag [on social media] about how important and famous I am,” Melik added with a self-deprecating smile.

She might not be famous just yet, but after only a few minutes in her company, it becomes clear Melik is on her way to accomplishing great things.

In the past year alone, the up-and-coming classical violinist played at Carnegie Hall and the United Nations after winning the Waldo Mayo Violin Competition, published a volume of her own poetry, and released a crowdfunded record with her long-time musical partner, pianist Michel-Alexandre Broekart—all while pursuing her doctorate studies in music at McGill. She is now touring North America, playing in a handful of major cities before the year’s end.

The album, her first, is the result of seven years of relentless work, including extensive research on Armenian classical music, and two years of recording. The result, Hidden Treasure: Classical Armenian Music for Violin and Piano, is an emotionally-charged introduction to both her formidable talent and classical Armenian music.

“I’m really proud of this project, and I’m not easily satisfied with myself,” Melik said.

Of Armenian and Georgian descent, Melik is passionate about shining a light on the music she grew up with, and strives to give a voice to the neglected composers who shaped her.

“I want people to learn about this music, or at least acknowledge its existence,” Melik said. “Because today, it’s as if it’s not even there, you know? It’s wrong. [Our music] is beautiful. It has its value.”

Her album stands in opposition to her classical contemporaries,  many of whom she criticizes for abandoning those who stand in the margin.

“We’ve been running circles around absolutely the same repertoire for centuries,” Melik said. “Everything that is not Beethoven, Mozart, or Shostakovich is not even worth being considered.”

With Hidden Treasure, Melik forges her own path as a curator, recording not what she knows will make her famous, but what she believes needs to be heard.

“The main message is really just to celebrate that we are still here, and that we continue to create things,” Melik said.

In addition to popularizing Armenian music by both playing and recording it, Melik seeks to make the music more accessible to classical performers. Over the past few years, she has traveled to Armenia three times, to gather sheet music that cannot be found in North America. Her travels were worthwhile.  

“I have, I think, the most impressive library of Armenian music in North America right now,” Melik said.

Melik is now considering launching an electronic library on her website, to which access would be granted on a pay-what-you-can basis. Meanwhile, she continues to work on her doctorate thesis and is shooting a documentary feature on Arno Babajanian, an Armenian piano virtuoso whose three-piece “Violin Sonata in B-Flat Minor” and “Elegy” are featured on Hidden Treasure.

The album release might feel like the end of a chapter, but for Nuné, there is no slowing down.

“I’m leaving for Mexico [on] Monday. I’m going to give masterclasses [and] play with the orchestra,” Melik said. “I’ll most likely present the album also.”

She also has a Canadian tour planned with Jeunesse Musicale and a Chinese tour coming up in 2019.

“I just want to impact the world in a better way,” she says. “I don’t know if I’m gonna succeed, but at least I’m trying.”

While Melik continues to push the boundaries of the exclusive classical music canon, no one will contest that.

 

Ask Ainsley, Student Life

Ask Ainsley: How can I have a safe one-night stand?

by Ainsley on

More in Ask Ainsley:

Dear Ainsley,

Now that I’m in my first year of university, I feel like a lot of my friends are having one-night stands. I’ve never had one before, but I want to prepare myself for the possibility. Do you have any tips on how to have a safe one-night stand?

Sincerely,

Contemplating casual sex (CCS)

Dear CCS,

I’m so glad you’re thinking about this—being safe when engaging in a one-night stand is super important! We tend to view these encounters as having ‘no strings attached,’ but we often forget to think about the potential repercussions of casual sex, especially when it’s with someone new.

When going into a one-night stand, just as in any sexual situation, it’s extremely important to make sure you’re both giving enthusiastic and continuous consent. If you’re at a party and have been drinking, remember that your own and others’ abilities to make rational decisions and give consent might be compromised. If you have the slightest inkling that someone is too drunk to consent, trust your gut, and do not try to engage in sexual activities with them. When you go out, try having one designated friend stay sober and check up on the group in the event that anyone gets too drunk to consent. And, even if you’re sober enough to make decisions on your own, if you’re having doubts about going home with someone, remember that it’s more than okay to change your mind.

If you have decided to go home with someone, it’s a good idea to tell a friend where you’re going and with whom. Regardless of how good things might go, it can be helpful to have someone looking out for you.

Once you’ve made it to your home or theirs, you still have the option not to have sex. Often during one-night stands, there are pressures or expectations to engage—but you are never obligated to do anything and you have the full right to say ‘no’ at any point in the evening.

In the case that you do decide to have sex, be sure to use protection. There are several kinds, ranging from condoms to the pill, so decide what’s best for you. Either way, you want to make sure you are protecting yourself against STIs and, if applicable, pregnancy. I know it can be intimidating to bring up the topic of birth control with someone you don’t know very well, but the fact that you’re not familiar with each other—or your practices—makes it even more important.

If it’s your first time venturing into a one-night stand, don’t forget to have fun; there’s no shame in enjoying the night. Keep in mind, though, that because you don’t know this person very well, a one-night stand might not be the best time to push sexual boundaries. This is probably not when you want to try unconventional sexual positions or sex toys, unless you and your partner have both explicitly consented to that beforehand. While it’s important to feel comfortable expressing yourself sexually, if you just met the person you’re with, they may feel pressured into saying ‘yes’ to things because they don’t yet know you well enough to say no. If there’s a time to keep things simple, it’s now.  

When it comes to spending the night, it’s important not to have too many expectations. Don’t assume that you will sleep over at someone’s place or that they will stay over at yours, because for some people, sharing a bed is more intimate than sex. If you find yourself wanting to say a simple “bye” post-sex, honesty is your best bet. Kindly tell your partner that you prefer to sleep alone, or that you’ve got to be up early the next day. They should respect your decision, just as you should respect theirs.

On another note, it’s definitely worth communicating your long-term expectations with your partner post-sex. Whether you want your one-night stand to remain one-time, you want to see the other person again, or you want to take things to a new level emotionally, let them know, and hear them out if they want something different. Romantic comedies tend to portray tired tropes of one-night stands as the beginning of a happily ever after. Sometimes this is the case, sometimes it isn’t, and the only way you’ll know is if you talk about it.

One-night stands can be fun, but they require care and communication. The best advice I can give you is to prioritize your happiness, comfort, and certainty surrounding the decisions you make. Everyone has their own preference when exploring intimacy and sexuality, and it’s all a matter of personal choice when discovering what you want.

Stay safe,

Ainsley

1 … 624 625 626 627 628 … 1,363

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue