Published by the SPT, a student society of McGill University
Congratulations on starting your journey. While McGill is renowned for its academics and research, it can be extremely daunting to navigate, especially as a new student. That's why we made the McGill 101 Issue, to help ease your transition into university life and answer questions you have about McGill and Montreal.
Projects to continue through Spring 2017
Major construction projects on and around McGill’s downtown campus are set to cause inconveniences and challenges for students lasting through the 2016-2017 year. The City of Montreal’s Promenade Fleuve-Montagne urban project–part of next year’s 375th anniversary celebration of the city’s founding–is a beautification initiative aiming to improve the comfort and safety of pedestrians, who make their way to and from the St. Lawrence River and Mount-Royal.
According to the project’s vision, the work will include replacing the sidewalks as well as sewer, water, and gas mains on Sherbrooke from Peel to University. Additionally, McTavish will be made more pedestrian friendly between Sherbrooke and Docteur-Penfield, while maintaining easy access for emergency vehicles. Work is scheduled to take place from 7 a.m. until 6 p.m. every week from Monday to Saturday.
According to Associate Vice-Principal (Facilities Management and Ancillary Services) Robert Couvrette, university personnel have been working closely with city officials and Montreal police. This partnership aims to reduce any inconvenience and disruption caused while keeping McGill’s roughly 30,000 downtown students safe as they traverse campus.
“We have had many meetings with the City in preparation for this work and we […]now [have] a weekly meeting with them,” Couvrette said. “We are in constant communication to be sure every aspect of the project goes well in terms of security, the safety of the McGill community, work coordination […], and so forth.”
According to McGill’s construction advisory page, the city agreed to halt work during both the Spring and Winter examination periods to allow students to study without disruption by construction activity and heavy machinery. As for the university’s contribution, the number of McGill security personnel on duty in the areas surrounding the construction has been increased. The MacDonald campus shuttle has been relocated to the east side of McGill College street, just south of Sherbrooke.
Deputy Provost (Student Life and Learning) Ollivier Dyens advised students to give themselves extra time to get to classes, stay on the designated pathways for crossing construction zones, and to follow instructions from police, McGill security officers, and construction workers.
“Above all, be patient, keep calm, and carry on,” Dyens told the McGill Reporter in August. “We’re stuck with this City of Montreal road construction for several months. The University is in close touch with the City to try to minimize the disruption, but these are massive infrastructure improvement projects and they will be noisy, dusty, and inconvenient.”
Students have expressed their disappointment with the fact that McTavish has become an open pit for the second time in three academic years.
“I have to think a lot more about all of my previously simple commutes again,” Emilie Macfie, U3 Political Science, said. “I have enough to deal with as a student and each time I get stopped by a huge truck pulling out of McTavish, or find out that my way to class or a meeting is blocked, it adds a lot of inconvenience to my day.”
Couvrette also urged students to be patient and to tolerate any unforeseen delays or problems that might occur during the next eight months, but was optimistic about the project finishing on time.
“Given that these projects are connected to a centrepiece project for the city's 375th anniversary next May, there will probably be a greater sense of urgency than might otherwise be the case,” Couvrette said. “Digging up old pipes and other infrastructure is never without surprises; delays are common and aren't necessarily anyone's fault. It's like home renovation – you never know what you're going to get when you open up a wall.”
Renowned authorities such as the Times Higher Education (THE) and the Centre for World University Rankings (CWUR) have attributed many different rankings to McGill in the past year. With such an onslaught of conflicting figures—sixty-fourth, forty-second, thirty-eighth, thirty-fifth, twenty-fourth—McGill’s position as a leading academic institution is becoming more and more difficult to ascertain, particularly if this decision is based solely on numerical figures.
University ranking systems are often incomplete in nature and rely on perception rather than factual evidence, which contributes to the confusion surrounding McGill’s standing in the academic world. At first glance, rankings seem to indicate a decline in McGill’s quality: The university has dropped from 35th place in 2011 in THE’s World University Rankings to 38th in 2016, and has dropped six places in Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Rankings in the past year alone. However, this numerical picture of a deteriorating institution is not supported by sufficient evidence to be plausible.
Extreme caution should be exercised before jumping to conclusions about McGill’s supposed decline. The ranking data itself is unreliable, as information accessible to the general public cannot be traced back farther than 2011. Furthermore, depending on the institution’s chosen method, scores from one year to the next are not necessarily calculated in the same manner. Consequently, not all rankings published by a given institution are equivalent. THE, for instance, states in its 2016 rankings methodology that “because of changes in underlying data we strongly advise against comparison with previous years.” If ranking methodologies each year are not comparable, then it is virtually impossible to observe a meaningful decline in McGill’s ranking.
Even if McGill’s ranking has fallen in the past five years, this decline is too negligible to credibly be labelled as such. Based on both THE and QS’s figures, McGill remains within the top fifty universities in the world regardless of which ranking one refers to, rendering this decline relatively insignificant on a larger scale. Furthermore, McGill’s global ranking score has progressed from 71.7 to 72.6 since 2011. This suggests that the university’s academic value has increased in absolute terms, making this decline in rankings even less noteworthy.
Many different factors are taken into consideration when ranking institutions calculate a university’s overall score and relative ranking. These factors include faculty-to-student ratio and research influence; however, a large part of this score is determined by public perception of a given university, contributing to the futility of using university rankings. In order to measure a university’s reputation, both scholars and employers are called upon via an invitation-only survey to name up to ten universities which they believe to be the best in the world. This highly subjective evaluation of worth makes up 50 per cent of QS’s World Universities scoring procedure, and 33 per cent of THE’s method.
The emergence of alternative ranking systems further underlines the growing power of perception in determining universities’ ranks. THE’s World Reputation Ranking, for instance, only compiles the opinion of scholars. Therefore, the sizeable role of perception in ranking methods generates rankings that cannot be taken as objective truth. The rankings’ fundamentally biased nature only paints a partial image of McGill’s quality as an academic institution.
The inherent flaws in university ranking systems—including incompleteness, exaggeration, and dependence on perception-based evaluation—lead to the misrepresentation of McGill’s value. Therefore, it is important for current and prospective students to consider non-numerical factors, such as quality of facilities, faculty, campus location, vibrancy of campus life, and successful or notable alumni when evaluating a school’s value. Such factors can offer a much broader depiction of qualitative excellency.
Like most new innovations, Uber has been met with backlash, especially from taxi services and government policy. The Quebec government’s Bill 100, drafted to regulate and collect tax revenue from Uber, is one example of the increasing tension between the traditional regulated form of business, and online means of conducting business. Quebec government must recognize a new generation of consumers who prefer services at the click of a button and will not be easily dissuaded from using Uber.
The Quebec government’s outdated solution is exemplified by former Transport Minister Jacques Daoust, who thought Bill 100 would not be met with any opposition. It must have been a shock for Daoust to be called out by Jonathan Marleau, president of the youth wing of the Quebec Liberal Party. Marleau, like many of others, saw Bill 100 for what it was: An outdated government ploy to eliminate Uber. The government should instead respect the choice of a younger generation of consumers and seek a compromise with Uber, while allowing taxi companies to adapt and compete with the new service.
Understandably, the Quebec government must collect tax revenue from Uber. Yet the company has already presented a way to provide funds for tax revenue by charging each client a seven cent tax per ride. The government should agree to this type of compromise, and allow licensing of drivers and fare pricing to remain under the control of the business. Ultimately, Quebec policy-makers took a step forward by agreeing to negotiate a pilot project with Uber regarding tax revenue and regulation. However, the project’s future is still uncertain, as it has not yet been completed and may not meet its Sept. 8 deadline.
Montreal taxi drivers have clearly been on the losing side against Uber: They claim to have suffered a 30 per cent drop in customers since the advent of the ride-sharing app. No surprise, given Uber as a transportation service surpasses taxi companies in many ways. The online transaction is hassle-free, and the rates are often cheaper. The driver is familiar because each one has an online profile and can be rated for his or her quality. Additionally, more often than not, the drivers themselves can be far more friendly because service is emphasized in Uber’s business model. Taxi companies should take note of these service-oriented business practices and try to implement them, instead of lobbying for heavy regulation of Uber. They should demand a pilot project of their own in order to renegotiate the lessening of heavy government regulation that hinders their competition with Uber.
The beauty of Uber’s success is that it is a new, innovative way of thinking about urban transportation. Uber’s Global Mobility Policy Lead, Andrew Salzberg, explained in a CBC interview that the company is also looking into ride sharing as a more environmentally friendly and efficient mode of future city transport. Uber has demonstrated that the use of phones presents a revolutionary opportunity for getting around, and has set new standards for convenience and service.
The jury is still out on whether Montreal will be like Calgary, where tough policy drives Uber out, or like Toronto, which embraces Uber as an important new mode of transportation. Let us hope that Montreal chooses the latter.
The Department of Bioengineering opened its undergraduate program to 30 incoming U0 and U1 students this Fall. According to Antonella Fratino, Administrative Assistant at the Department of Bioengineering, the undergraduate program is the first of its kind in Canada.
After the graduate program was established at McGill in 2012, the proposed undergraduate program underwent two years of extensive internal review within McGill. Program requirements were finalized and courses were approved over the course of the internal review. An external review by the Government of Quebec began in the Fall 2014 and gained final approval by Mme. Hélène David, Quebec’s Minister of Higher Education, three months ago.
According to Fratino, students in the undergraduate program will learn a key set of concepts that focuses on the interdisciplinary, biological nature of engineering.
“We have created a program that puts emphasis on the fundamental principles of engineering and its underlying bases, such as physics, math, and chemistry,” said Professor
Georgios Mitsis, Chair of Undergraduate Studies in the Department of Bioengineering. “What makes our department different from other departments is that we wanted to give [our undergraduates] a solid foundation in biology as well.”
“We want to give our students the background to work in both domains of engineering and biology,” Professor Mitsis added.
The curriculum is separated into three streams: Biological materials and mechanics, biomolecular and cellular engineering, and biomedical, diagnostic, and high throughput screening mechanics. Students will also be given the opportunity to undertake a research project and will be required to conduct a senior design project during their final year.
“The undergraduate bioengineering program will allow students to hone in on what direction they want to go into,” Fratino said.
Professor Mitsis hopes the program will equip students with the ability to apply biology to engineering and vice versa.
“Biology is astonishing. It is a great source of inspiration,” he said. “If you study a biological entity and you study how it functions and how it adapts to its environment, then you can study that in a quantitative manner and try to replicate its function in an engineering design. It’s a two-way street: You can try to use engineering to improve human health, like in prosthetics, but you can also use the healthy organism to try to improve engineering design.”
The program will offer courses in all fields of the sciences and aims to produce well-rounded students. Like other McGill engineering programs, entrance into the bioengineering program is highly competitive, requiring satisfactory academic standing and a high GPA.
Maya Kenton, a U1 student, entered bioengineering in hopes that the program will allow her to combine pediatric oncology research with engineering design. Other students hope to go into the biotechnology industry or bioengineering research.
“I don’t know what to expect yet,” Kenton said. “But I’m excited to learn.”
According to Professor Mitsis, the program hopes to accept 60 undergraduate students each year and centralize all bioengineering professors in the downtown campus in the future. Like any new program, they hope to gain more diverse faculty members and to develop further connections with researchers and companies.
When asked how she felt about the recent launch of the program, Kenton chuckled: “We are the guinea pigs of the department.”
Even so, Kenton is optimistic about the program. “Bioengineering is a wonderful department. In bioengineering, we can make a big impact,” she added. “I think it’s the future.”
Know Your Team: McGill Men’s Hockey
February 24, 2026
Taking the NHL by storm: The habits behind 19-year-old Macklin Celebrini’s breakout
January 27, 2026
Chilled rivalry: Martlets Hockey fall to Italian National Team in pre-Olympic exhibition
January 13, 2026
It’s 2 p.m. on a Tuesday in Sept. and Emily Davies, assistant-captain of the McGill Martlet hockey team, is pulling up to McConnell Arena on her bicycle for a pre-practice leg workout. Half a world away and six hours behind, Kaitlyn Salter, captain of the women’s lacrosse team at University of St. Andrews in Scotland, is partaking in an early morning skills session. Both are elite athletes, yet both trained very differently over the summer to prepare for their respective seasons.
“I receive my [summer] training programs from a hockey-specific gym,” Davies said. “I often train there if I’m in the area on weekends.”
Davies is also an active member of an off-season hockey league, which she believes is integral to keeping her hockey-specific skills sharp when Martlet hockey isn’t in session.
Salter, conversely, adopts a training regimen that allows her to stay healthy and take time off from lacrosse-specific training during the summer. Her sports training is independently organized–she works out at the gym in the building where she works, plays tennis with friends and adheres to a healthy diet.
“The training I do in the summer is very cardio- and strength-tailored,” Salter explained. “It helps me with my game, in the sense that I can run across the entire field for the 60-minute game time period [… but] the other half of lacrosse training is maintaining good stick skills. This is something that I think my summer training schedule lacks in, as I leave my stick at my flat in the UK during the summer.”
The different attitudes towards summer training could reflect a cultural difference between North America and the United Kingdom. It’s no secret that college sports in the United States are taken quite seriously–a phenomenon that has diffused into Canadian values as well. With college sports often televised in North America–the CIS women’s hockey finals airs live on Sportsnet 360–pressure to perform is often heightened for athletes.
Salter, however, believes the difference in training is based not on country, but rather on popularity. She notes that American, Canadian, and British players on her team all play with “nothing short of intensity” when representing St. Andrews. However, lacrosse is not as popular a sport in the UK as it is in the US, where college teams practice five times a week in addition to fitness sessions every morning.
“That is definitely a level of intensity that we just don’t have at St. Andrews, as lacrosse isn’t a popular enough sport,” Salter clarified. “But, we do have this level of intensity with our men’s rugby team. This is probably due […] to the fact that in the UK, rugby is a very popular sport.”
Though both Davies and Salter have reached the pinnacle of achievement at their sports–winning league titles and assuming leadership roles on their teams – each has a different personal philosophy regarding summer training.
Davies maintains, “if an individual is seriously committed to a sport, they should just focus on training for that sport.”
However, according to Salter, “in the summer there should be a fine balance of doing what will keep you in shape for your sport, but also what you enjoy doing.”
Davies believes that hockey-specific training gives her an edge heading into the season: She has developed her strong stamina through summer training and her strength through weight training. This has helped refine her game during her summer ice sessions.
Salter, too, feels ready for camp. Though she acknowledges that her stick skills can still improve, her intense running schedule has put her in a prime position to excel at her “least favourite fitness drill–hill sprints.
Ultimately, the different training philosophies to which athletes ascribe are personal choices, built on preparing for the year ahead, both in mind and body. Davies, perhaps, encapsulated this idea best with her ideology.
“[Setting] yourself up for success […] when the season starts is the most important thing,” Davies said. “If an athlete is prepared physically and mentally for the year, then they’ve done their job.”
A group of McGill researchers have developed a technique to create large-scale drawings with a small drone called Crazyflie. The Computer Animation and Interaction Capture Lab, led by Computer Science Associate Professor Paul Kry, published their results in the most recent issue of Expressive. Their research outlines a breakthrough method of using robots to create unique works of art.
This novel research out of Kry’s Lab all started with a NSERC USRA (Undergraduate Summer Research Award) given to an undergraduate student in his lab. Kry’s students spent many hours in the lab to design the intricate algorithms required to create stippled works of art.
Inspired by the myriad blank walls in McGill’s buildings, the team tested their drone by creating drawings of Alan Turing, Grace Kelly, and a teapot.
There have been previous instances of combining robotics and programming with art. A London art gallery exhibited a robotic arm that could produce portraits while a project out of MIT programmed drones to provide rim illumination, where a drone illuminates the contours of a model by providing a three-dimensionally adjustable light source.
There are number of advantages with the lab’s design of the painting drone. The drone—a quadrotor flying robot—is much safer to handle than its heavier counterparts. At 27 grams, it weighs about the same as a AA battery.
Instead of the traditional brush stroke technique of painting, the lab designed the drone to reproduce an image via a stippling technique, which produce dots rather than lines. The rationale is that continuous contact between the brush and the canvas surface—typical to the brush stroke technique—is extremely difficult to maintain and is more prone to errors.
The drone is also self-correcting. It takes its errors into consideration as it calculates where to paint the next dot.
Despite the drone’s innovative artistic technique, there are several issues that, once resolved, would result in a much more satisfactory user experience. The drone’s lightweight design makes it infeasible to use outdoors because a slight gust of wind could cause it to veer off course. In addition, the battery lasts only five to six minutes, and is somewhat of a nuisance to recharge.
“One solution is to tether it to a power source, but it’s not ideal as it would limit the drone’s range of motion,” Kry said. “I think the better way is to use inductive charging, like the ones used by smartphones.”
Instead of a charging cable, inductive charging could allow the drone to charge wirelessly similar to the charging stations of a Samsung Galaxy.
In addition to physical improvements, there are some improvements that can be made for the drone’s artistic execution. For example, a line is apparent underneath the portrait of Grace Kelly’s left eye. The artistic quality of Grace Kelly’s ‘tear’ was a result of too much ink on the sponge brush.
“It’s not about robots making art,” Kry said. “It’s a group of computer scientists designing a program to create something aesthetically pleasing. The drone takes the algorithms we designed and turns it into something unique.”
Many of these factors—a little wind here, too much ink there—are often beyond the lab’s control. Nonetheless, Kry’s lab hopes to expand their artistic repertoire. A further avenue of experimentation includes changing the colour of the ink in certain areas as well as co-ordinating multiple drones to shorten the time required to complete a project.
Kry’s research and algorithm design brings forward an exciting and inventive step to the crossroad of art and science.
‘Kanga I, II, III’ brings Projections: SANKOFA’s afrofuturist vision to Trottier
June 23, 2026
Know Your Artist: Theodore A. Harris
May 27, 2026
The forgotten history of the Montreal coffeehouse
April 7, 2026
“These are the future of Saturday Night Live, and television, and movies,” Hannah Crichton, Just For Laughs (JFL) Programming Consultant, said as she introduced the New Faces: Characters show at Montreal’s 34th Annual JFL comedy festival.
Comedic all-stars like Hannibal Burress, Amy Schumer, and Kevin Hart were all once featured in JFL’s New Faces, setting a high bar for this year’s cast. With their seven-minute sets of hilarious improv-style character sketches, this year’s New Faces did not disappoint.
After winding down from their two successful shows at JFL, two New Faces cast members–Lily Sullivan and Natalie Palamides—each spoke with The McGill Tribune to discuss the sources of their comedic brand and the lessons they’ve learned about being rising stars in show business.
If her witty characters featured on her YouTube channel or her work with BuzzFeed were to be any indication, Lily Sullivan was bound to amuse in her performance with the New Faces: Characters cast at this year’s JFL. The L.A. sketch comic, who got her start in Chicago, delighted the audience with her set, which was primarily an assortment of ridiculous twists on everyday characters.
Sullivan combines the relatability of spot-on impressions with the shock value of last minute twists to the scenarios she develops onstage. Her portrayal of Francesca, an assertive Portuguese restaurant owner seeking a social media representative to combat online complaints of hair found in the food, was a particular standout. Sullivan kept the audience laughing with a series of punchy lines in a hilarious accent, only to reveal at the end of the sketch that Francesca has been running a hair salon out of her restaurant’s kitchen the whole time. Sullivan’s comedic power lies in her ability to develop a character’s story while building up to a climactic twist at the end of a sketch.
Sullivan attributes her ability to develop witty characters and storylines in part to her training in improv theater. After performing in the improv group at Bates College for all four years of university, Sullivan moved to Chicago to perform with The Second City—the starting ground for greats such as Tina Fey and Amy Poehler. Through her training, Sullivan developed the ability to derive scripted sets from once-improvised characters that landed well in improv shows.
“A lot of the way that Second City works is you’ll improvise a scene, and then if it goes well you re-improvise it and re-improvise it until you have it scripted,” Sullivan explained. “If I have a good improv scene in a show, I’ll try and take something from that [for a sketch character].”
After conquering the endless demands of improv theatre in Chicago, Sullivan moved to L.A., where she has recently been transitioning from performing in live shows to auditioning for film and television. One of the biggest challenges in doing so has been getting acclimated to performing for one or two casting directors, instead of audiences of hundreds.
“Right now, I feel like in L.A. I’m learning how to audition for TV and for movies, and that’s a whole other skill that […] I didn’t do in Chicago very much,” Sullivan said. “I did a lot of live shows, and I did a lot of improv auditions, so now I’m learning how to audition in front of some TV producer or TV casting director, and that’s a whole other ball game. You’re just with one person alone in a room.”
Meanwhile, Sullivan continues to write and create characters. Post-JFL, Sullivan plans to write a show that takes place in a restaurant, using various sketches she’s already written and performed. Like any writer, Sullivan is no stranger to the pain that goes into the creative process, but she recognizes the necessity of taking risks in order to grow and develop.
“I think a lot of people are scared to create things because they’re scared of what people will say, or if it’s good or not,” Sullivan said. “I think the truth is [your work is] just going to be bad for a long time, so just do it anyway, and then, you know, over time it’ll get better […] If you have good taste in something, the reason that your work is frustrating you is because you have good taste.”
While many writers—comedic or otherwise—are prone to never being satisfied with their own work, Sullivan left her audience contented in her performance at JFL. Having mastered the art of the slow build, Sullivan’s set was relatable, witty, and deeply amusing.
Taking a break from her busy schedule performing at the Upright Citizen’s Brigade (UCB) theatre in Hollywood and voicing Buttercup in The Powerpuff Girls reboot, Natalie Palamides came to Montreal to perform seven minutes of eccentric caricatures in the New Faces: Characters cast.
Palamides set the tone for her unconventional set the minute the lights came on to an empty stage. After inching and grunting her way across the floor in a sleeping bag from the corner of the small Mainline Theatre stage, she carried out her portrayal of a British worm who had just made its way above ground for the first time. After killing the worm with overexposure to the sun, Palamides seamlessly transformed into her second character, a demonic orphan looking to be adopted by an audience member, despite occasional blackouts in which she screams profanities in a hauntingly deep voice. Palamides’ characters are imaginative and wild, leaving her JFL audience simultaneously bewildered and entertained.
For Palamides, coming up with a perfect sketch character is a matter of practicing it onstage repeatedly and adjusting according to audience feedback.
“I definitely love coming up with oddball characters, and I like doing things that are kind of out of left field,” Palamides said. “The first time I put a character up, it’s heavily improvised, and I’ll just try and discover new things as I go […] If I have a character that really clicks with the audience after the first time I try it, I’ll continue to develop it, and I just do that by putting it up at more shows over and over again.”
Beyond its utility in helping her develop sketch characters, Palamides’ audience plays an integral role in keeping her on her toes. In her demon orphan sketch, for example, Palamides attempts to convince a front row audience member to adopt her by signing an adoption certificate, only to shock them right as pen is put to paper by transforming into demon mode, screaming profanities, and lifting her petticoat to reveal a fake bloody penis.
Being open to various types of reactions from the audience provides an element of surprise that makes every performance more exciting for Palamides.
“There’s always some fun moments whenever you interact with the audience,because you kind of don’t know what’s going to happen,” Palamides said. “It can get so rigid, doing the same characters over and over again, the same script, so it’s fun to throw in a curveball, even for myself.”
After her successful run at this year’s JFL, Palamides has returned to L.A. to continue to write and perform at UCB. Despite not knowing what her comedic future holds, and cognizant of the painful reality of being Palamides remains optimistic about continuing to do what she loves.
“Every day is a challenge, but you just gotta keep going,” Palamides said. “Constantly in Hollywood, you’re getting knocked down. […] It is challenging, but I see it more as just I’m doing what I love to do, and it’s fun, and it’s exciting to get to create new things, and I love it.”
~
To see more of Palamides’ work visit her website.
A top ten spot on the iTunes comedy podcast charts is not the only achievement of Krystyna Hutchinson and Corinne Fisher of Guys We Fucked: The Anti-Slut Shaming Podcast (GWF). The duo also achieved the highest number of ticket sales for both of their live podcast recordings at 2016’s Just For Laughs comedy festival in Montreal. Greeting long lines of avid listeners, Hutchinson and Fisher, also known as the comedic duo Sorry About Last Night, talked relationships, sexual boundaries and preferences, and past sexual experiences with fellow comics Ms. Pat and Big Jay Oakerson at each of their respective recordings.
Through GWF, Hutchinson and Fisher aim to challenge the limits placed on sexuality by interviewing fellow comics, professionals in the world of sex and sexual health, and, yes, guys they’ve slept with. Leaving no topic in the realm of sex unexplored, the duo record candid and humourous conversations in what began as an attempt to address slut-shaming and liberate women in their sexual endeavours.
“The podcast started as very much what the title would imply,” Fisher explained. “Us interviewing guys we fucked, learning about ourselves through people who we have shared intimate experiences with, and trying to knock down the stigma of the promiscuous woman.”
Since its foundation in 2013, GWF has garnered a following of over half a million subscribers on Soundcloud, inspiring their growing audience to explore and discuss their sexuality more openly with friends and partners.
“I love how the podcast is growing and morphing into something so much larger than we ever could have predicted,” Hutchinson said. “I was shocked, at first, by the positive impact GWF has had on women and men, but now that we’ve been doing the show for over two years, I see the lack of honest and impactful conversations around sexuality.”
Every GWF podcast episode opens with Hutchinson and Fisher recalling their past weeks to one another, in what sounds like two good friends chatting over coffee. Before cutting to their interview with the week’s guest, Hutchinson and Fisher respond to several listeners’ emails, often giving advice in matters of sex and relationships. By openly discussing sex and sexuality with their guests, their listeners, and each other, Hutchinson and Fisher break down the stigma associated with sex and sexual freedom.
While Hutchinson and Fisher cover a broad range of topics relating to sexuality in the podcast, one theme that comes up frequently on GWF is sexual assault. The comedy duo views discussion of sexual assault as an important first step in addressing rape culture and stigma that survivors of sexual assault face. Hutchinson revealed how commonly listeners ran into problems due to a lack of educational resources on these topics.
“How do you know you were raped if you don’t know what rape is? We’ve received several emails [from listeners] with the subject line, ‘Was I Raped?’ That breaks my fucking heart,” she said.
Hutchinson and Fisher’s weekly question-and-answer sessions have also helped bring attention to institutions in cases of sexual assault. After reading one listener’s story of her sexual assault by an Airbnb host in August 2016, Airbnb then banned the perpetrator from hosting. Additionally, by sharing a listener from Edmonton’s story of sexual harassment on the ice as the only girl on an all-male hockey team in June 2016, the duo called attention to Hockey Alberta’s lack of a formal sexual harassment policy and lack of action to protect the survivor.
As is the case with Hockey Alberta, many university campuses across North America also lack a formal sexual assault policy. McGill is no different, with some of the most recent news being the failure of McGill administration to adopt the Sexual Assault Policy Working Group's proposed policy on sexual assault. To Hutchinson and Fisher, institutional neglect of sexual assault cases on university campuses plays a large role in perpetuating rape culture among student bodies.
“Administrators play a huge part in a student’s chances of being sexually assaulted,” Hutchinson said. “They prioritize their reputation over justice. If colleges are not properly punishing students who have been found guilty of sexual harassment, what kind of message does that send?”
While also sending a message of acceptance toward sexual assault, failing to implement an institutional sexual assault policy places members of any institutional body in danger.
“Society doesn't really have a responsibility to keep us safe,” Fisher said. A school or a hockey league, however, do. And this is the difference. For organizations and institutions to continue to be successful, they must keep the people who make up the organizations and institutions safe, otherwise they will ultimately crumble.”
While the pro-survivor, sex-positive messages of GWF are particularly relevant on North American campuses, their audience and impact reaches far beyond. Inspiring listeners to speak openly about sex and sexual assault, Hutchinson and Fisher chip away at rape culture one episode at a time.
To listen to Guys We Fucked: The Anti-Slut Shaming Podcast, visit their soundcloud or Hutchinson and Fisher’s website.
An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that Guys We Fucked occupied the number eight spot on the iTunes comedy podcast charts. In fact, they currently occupy the tenth spot on the iTunes comedy podcast charts. The Tribune regrets this error.
McGill University has an extensive system of governance bodies that manage its affairs from the undergraduate level up to administration. Making sense of this immensely complicated system is challenging to the untrained student, so we’re here to help you understand the who’s and what’s of this year’s campus politics.
SSMU
Who they are and what they do
The Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) represents all undergraduate students at McGill, as well as students in professional degree programs, including law, dentistry, and medicine. SSMU advocates on behalf of students to the administration, and to provincial and federal governments, manages services such as student groups and minicourses, and operates businesses such as Gert’s and the Student-Run Cafeteria (SRC).
SSMU is led by seven executives who are elected annually during the Winter semester. The Legislative Council is the legislative body of SSMU, and consists of the executives and 30 councillors elected from faculty associations and certain student demographic groups, such as First Year Council. The Legislative Council is responsible for large-scale policy and decisions pertaining to the society’s finances. At least once a semester, members of the society have the opportunity to vote in referenda and participate in General Assemblies, with the resulting policies decided through these platforms becoming SSMU regulations.
The SSMU Judicial Board (J-Board) consists of seven students, most of whom are from the Faculty of Law. They make rulings on cases in which any individual, organization, or referendum associated with the society is alleged to have violated the SSMU Constitution or Bylaws. Decisions of the J-Board can only be overturned by a four-fifths majority vote by SSMU’s Board of Directors.
Recent actions
Last year, SSMU Council passed a Policy on Indigenous Solidarity that laid out ways in which the society can pursue its social justice goals for indigenous students. Council also passed a new climate change policy. In the Winter 2017 referendum, students voted to add a seventh executive portfolio and to redistribute responsibilities among the executives. A motion to increase the society’s budget failed leading to a round of budget cuts.
On the agenda this year
This is the first year that SSMU has a Vice President (VP) Operations, and a VP Student Life. The roles of most of the executives have been adjusted as well, so it will be a year of precedent-setting for these student leaders. Furthermore, the executives are faced with the added challenge of operating the SSMU on a smaller budget. The SSMU Sexual Assault Policy Working Group’s policy was recently rejected by the administration, ensuring this year will see extensive discussions on the creation of a new policy proposal. Furthermore, the J-Board recently ruled against divisive motions, such as last year’s motion in support of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel, a decision that is sure to be the subject of discussion in coming months.
PGSS
Who they are and what they do
The Postgraduate Students’ Society (PGSS) represents all graduate students and postdoctoral students. It is comprised of six executives, four commissioners, and eight staff members, who advocate for postgraduates at the university, provincial, and federal levels. The PGSS is housed in Thompson House, and is a source of social activities and support for its members. PGSS Council is the governing body of the society and meets monthly to vote on policies pertaining to the long-term vision of the society. Councillors are elected from various postgraduate faculties and student groups.
Recent actions
Last year, PGSS Council unanimously passed a motion calling on McGill to divest from oil and gas industries. Additionally a traditional territory acknowledgement that will be displayed predominantly on the PGSS website and be read before each Council meeting was approved. PGSS has just completed its second graduate student orientation, which featured expanded programming.
On the agenda this year
This year, PGSS executives have promised to focus on the political role of the society, increasing their representation in activism on issues approved by their constituency. This includes increased emphasis on environmental sustainability initiatives. Expanding programming for graduate student orientation will likely be a focus as the new program continues to find success.
McGill Senate
Who they are and what they do
The McGill Senate is an administrative body with jurisdiction over the academic policy of the university. It serves as a platform for representation at the administrative level. There are 107 voting members, including professors, support staff, students, SSMU executives, and representatives from McGill’s senior administration. Thirteen student senators are elected annually to represent each academic faculty. The Senate has multiple committees on specialized issue areas that advise on policy such as honorary degree recipients, enrollment, and student affairs.
Recent actions
Last year, the Senate passed a motion to establish a statement on academic freedom intended to reaffirm McGill’s commitment to research. They also extensively discussed tuition deregulation and a new commitment to increasing funding for refugee students.
On the agenda this year
Last year, the Senate deferred $1.3 billion of maintenance upgrades to campus buildings, renovations that will most likely be a topic of discussion again this year. The Senate will make further revisions to the Student Assessment Policy.
McGill Board of Governors
Who they are and what they do
The McGill Board of Governors (BoG) has final authority over all university affairs. It is comprised of 25 voting members, including one representative each from PGSS and SSMU, and members of senior administration, as well as two non-voting student observers. The Board manages all university property, appointments of personnel, management of investments and finances, ethics and human resources. Usually, the board meets six times per year.
Recent actions
Last year, the BoG voted not to divest university investments from fossil fuel companies, a decision that was met by student and alumni backlash. They also launched a study into the acquisition of the Royal Victoria Hospital (RVH) and how it can be turned into classroom space.
On the agenda this year
The acquisition of the RVH site, as well as divestment from fossil fuel companies and ethical investment, are sure to be continued subjects of conversation for the BoG this year. Given the provincial government’s continuing austerity programs, limitations of the university budget will likely be debated.
