The Athenaeum

Tag: news

  • The Good, The Bad, and the Non-Compliant

    The Good, The Bad, and the Non-Compliant

    The Valley is filled with a bevy of restaurants from which Acadia students are privileged to choose. Picasso’s, Lib Pub, Sushi Fang, The Naked Crepe, and many more well-attended establishments. The wider Annapolis Valley area is without a doubt a fantastic place to eat. I’m sure that nearly everyone that attends Acadia has had at least a few delicious meals at one of the previously mentioned restaurants. Sitting in my living room, reminiscing with friends about Wheelock Dining Hall and our days in residence, we began to talk about how dirty some people claim meal hall is.  Instantly I was curious and began my standard Google-based investigation. I started by asking myself if I thought there were food safety or health code violations at Wheelock. If there were, how could they be verified? This led me to a larger issue. Are there health code compliance issues with the popular restaurants in town? Again, where would I be able to find this information? As always, Google had my back. Entering the phrase, “Nova Scotia Health Inspector” directed me to public health inspection records.

    The Province of Nova Scotia Health Inspector’s website provides a form from which you can instantly request the electronic inspection records for any establishment in the province for the last decade. All you have to do is input some basic information like the name of the establishment, the address, and the period for which you would like to see records. I decided to examine some of the most popular destinations for students both in Wolfville and in the surrounding area.

    They include:

    • Pronto Pizza
    • Picasso’s Pizza
    • Paddy’s Brew Pub
    • The Naked Crepe
    • Troy’s Mediterranean Restaurant
    • Library Pub
    • La Torta Woodfired Pizzeria
    • Sushi Fang
    • Wheelock Dining Hall (Operated by our friends at Chartwell’s)
    • Subway

    In order to get a better picture of historic compliance issues I examined the Nova Scotia Food Establishment Inspection Reports for these establishments from January 1, 2008 through April 5, 2018. Records are removed from the online database after more than three years so the records I have access to are no older than that. How do the various student-frequented establishments stack up when compared to one another? As is the case of a few of these establishments, I feel it is necessary to get specific with what health inspectors revealed during their unannounced examination of these eateries. All health code violations are up to the interpretation of health inspectors. Not all violations represent a serious risk to health, however, it is worth noting that based on the documents I have examined, all of the restaurants do have some violations. I should reiterate, not all violations are serious. The definition of a “Deficiency” under the provincial health codes according to the Nova Scotia Provincial government is “Requirement(s) of the Regulations or Code not being achieved by the food establishment. The word deficiency is often used interchangeably with the words violation, or infraction.” Let’s see what the restaurants of Wolfville have crawling in their back rooms.

    Pronto Pizza is one of Wolfville’s establishments frequented by weekend warriors and is also one of the most concerning establishments. On June 5, 2015, the inspection lists no deficiencies. On December 3rd, 2015, the remarks include a failure to store potentially hazardous foods properly, cleaning required of all shelving, rear wooden counter, milk fridge and some shelving and surfaces in 2 door commercial fridge, washroom toilet fixtures, under and behind equipment some wall areas and all floors. Further, inadequate sanitation systems were observed. However, most concerning of all reported deficiencies is listed as, “FAILURE TO OBTAIN A VALID PERMIT PRIOR TO OPERATING A FOOD ESTABLISHMENT.” More than one year later on September 26th, 2016, the same deficiencies as December 3rd, 2015 reappeared but the permit issue was remedied.

    Picasso’s Pizza makes a rad donair but during visits in October and December of 2017 the health inspector noted on both occasions that there was a “Failure to protect food from contamination” and the comments from the October inspection read, “Store chemicals separately from food & packaging. All food & packaging to be stored >6 in./15 cm. minimum off floor. Dry ingredients containers rusted and not acceptable for food contact.”

    Next, we move to Paddy’s ,The Naked Crepe, and Troy’s Mediterranean Restaurant. All three of these businesses seem relatively well in order based on their inspection reports. Both Paddy’s and The Naked Crepe received no infractions on their most recent inspections.  In the case of Paddy’s there were consistent infractions during four inspections over two years for “failure to store potentially hazardous food at a temperature of four degrees celsius or less.” The Naked Crepe had only minor infractions revealed in their September 2017 inspection. Troy’s received notices to comply over inadequate hand washing stations in their most recent inspection that took place in February of this year.

    Next we turn to the Lib Pub. There is nothing significant to report here other than excellent food and drink. It has been more than two years since their last inspection during which time some basic temperature monitoring devices were reported as not calibrated properly and a dishwasher that could use “Daily water temperature and chemical sanitizer concentration records.”

    La Torta Woodfired Pizzeria, I’ve never personally eaten here nor have I heard positive or negative reviews related to the pizza place. Their inspection on April 4, 2018 revealed only minor deficiencies that weren’t related to food safety.

    Unfortunately the previous records of relative excellence or acceptability end here. Sushi Fang is without a doubt the worst example of food safety I was able to find. There are some direct quotes from their report that are worth sharing. All inspections took place between July 2015 and February 2018. There were regular violations indicated that suggest Sushi Fang’s operator does not adequately train their staff in safe food handling. Some noteworthy observations from the February 2018 inspection, “Food handler certification of the owner has expired” and, “Raw foods must be kept separate and always stored below ready to eat foods (corrected). All utensils and work surfaces must be maintained in a clean and sanitary condition (corrected). Foods must be stored a minimum of 15 cm (6in.) off of the floor (corrected). Foods when returned to storage must be labelled and dated to ensure proper stock rotation. Fresh raw seafood intended to be consumed raw must be dated and ensure frozen >= 7 days at -20C to ensure parasite destruction.” Or, my personal favourite, “Vermin-proof /seal small opening in building.” This restaurant has some ridiculous violations that would indicate food safety is a serious problem there.

    Of course, we have to check out Wheelock Dining Hall operated by our friends at Chartwell’s. During their inspections between the February 24, 2016, and  December 18, 2017, there were eleven deficiencies noted with nine notices to comply issued. Some of the issues did have to do with food safety and “failure to protect food from contamination” the notes from the inspector indicate lack of sneeze guards and uncovered food being left out for long periods of time.

    Subway has some pretty decent sandwiches but their record is rough. Over seven inspections in the last three years there were nine total deficiencies with nine notices to comply issued. The comments “The operator has failed to ensure the food handlers have the necessary training” appears five times over two years.

    With all that being said, it seems these health codes are in some cases too specific. They capture issues that are not related to food safety. For example some of these establishments were issued deficiencies based on “lighting intensity” or the lack of a schedule to maintain their dishwashers. On the whole, the restaurants I’ve examined here are probably ok to eat at. The fact is, you should always use your best judgment when eating out. For example, eating sushi in the Annapolis Valley is probably already a risky activity.

     

    I would encourage my readers to verify the validity of this article by visiting: (https://novascotia.ca/agri/foodsafety/reports/Request.aspx).

     

    Disagree with me? Write for the Ath.

     

  • The Real Problem with The Dome

    The Real Problem with The Dome

    The Dirty Dome has a dirty little secret. No, it’s not some money laundering scheme or anything necessarily illegal. However, this little secret is scary, scuzzy, vile and downright wrong. You would think that bar staff would have the safety of their patrons in mind while on their premise. There are plenty of checks in place to ensure people who are entering the bar are not too drunk, too dangerous, or too unpleasant. One would think that as a business owner you would want people to feel safe while in your bar or at a minimum, that worst case scenario, those big burly guys that have thrown us all out at some point could step in and protect people in need. The worst part? You’re probably thinking that I’m talking about some bar fight resulting from a spilled drink and some slurred zingers. That’s not even close; I’m talking about downright sexual harassment and The Dome’s reaction to a girl seeking refuge from an assaulter. 

    My friends and I were out celebrating Keith’s birthday in Halifax. It was shaping up to be an amazing night, we arrived at The Dome at the perfect level to enjoy our time there – we all know what I’m talking about…  My friends and I wanted to go outside to get some air while a friend of ours (let’s call her Rachel) was talking to someone interested in buying her a drink. All seemed fine so we carried on our way out the door. Roughly 15 minutes later, I start getting frantic phone calls and messages from Rachel begging us to come find her. When we got back into The Dome she was visibly shook. She went on crying and explaining how this guy refused to accept no as an answer. To him, these drinks were a direct route to getting what he wanted. Now, some people say, “Well she shouldn’t have accepted the drinks in the first place” or “She was likely leading him on” but this was clearly unwanted and she made that known. This guy was grabbing at her, asking her to come home and insisting on buying her more drinks when she was visibly too drunk to start. All this said, my friends and I decided it was time to leave and that we’d take the night elsewhere. We thought surely this night could only get better. It did not. What happened in the next 30-40 minutes has forever destroyed my trust in the bouncers at The Dome and to an extent, the Halifax Regional Police.  

    As we were leaving the bar, a couple of bouncers saw Rachel, who was very drunk and crying, and motioned us to the door to take her home. As this was our intention anyway we reassured the bouncing staff that we were on our way home. We ended up leaving the bar through Cheers upstairs only to realize that the girls had forgotten their jackets down at coat-check in The Dome, so Rachel and I stood outside while my friends grabbed their jackets. Rachel, still distraught from the encounter and a victim of sexual harassment, stood outside with me sobbing about the experience. It was heart-wrenching to see a friend endure something like that and I was very concerned. All of the sudden, my friend tries hiding behind me. I didn’t’t see it right away, but the guy who was harassing her actually followed us all the way from downstairs at The Dome, to outside of Cheers. As soon as I recognized him I told him he needed to go away and that these advances were unwanted by my clearly distraught friend. She went on to tell him to leave her alone and that she just wanted to go home. He then continued to try and convince her to allow him to cab home with her and he would put her to bed. At this point, I was fuming and needed to do something. I should have just socked him in the face and taken the consequences of defending my friend from an unwelcomed advance. I could have lived with that. Sadly, instead, I reached out to a bouncer who was at least twice my size and had been watching the entire event unfold. I told him point blank the story of what this pervert did downstairs and how he wouldn’t leave my friend alone. I told him that she felt uncomfortable and trapped. I simply asked for him to get this guy away from my friend. His response to me trying to protect Rachel from sexual harassment? “Doesn’t look like an issue to me.” Strike one. How the hell as someone who is supposed to protect patrons can you respond to a direct complaint of sexual harassment that you are literally witnessing by essentially saying it’s a non-issue? Rachel was clearly distraught about this situation, her friend reached out to the establishment for help in the situation and was essentially told it’s a non-issue. This in itself would have had me fuming and forever angered at The Dome, however, this story get’s much, much worse. 

    After continued attempts to evade this guy, my friend finally approached the bouncer and tried to get his attention as she felt like she needed immediate help. What he does next leaves a sick taste in my mouth and a shattered perception of safety. Instead of assisting her and simply escorting her to a cab while keeping this guy away, he slams her into a wall and starts ranting to her about how she is going to the drunk tank and how she is way too drunk. The entire time my friends and I were telling the bouncer exactly what had happened and why she reached out. Regardless, he called the Halifax Regional Police and they cuffed her and threw her in the paddy wagon. At this point things were more or less out of our hands. As she was being detained, I asked to talk to the officers, as they didn’t know any of the previous stories from that night. While I understand that police officers must set an example, I shared this entire story and they still deemed it necessary to keep my friend, who had been sexually harassed, wrongfully detained and left completely alone to arrive at to the police station up the road.  

    If this is how unwanted sexual advances are treated by both the authorities and bouncers I’m terrified for my friends. This is a clear example of an establishment that not only see’s sexual harassment on a regular basis but also enabling it. This bouncer single handedly allowed a girl to continue to be sexually harassed right in front of him, with testimony from her friends on the situation, visible indicators of discomfort, and eventually a blatant call for help. Not only did he stand idly by and watch this happen, he punished someone who had been through a vile and disgusting experience to the point where he inflicted physical pain and had her arrested. Is this how we respond to sexual assaults and harassment? I certainly hope for the sake of all those who attend The Dome you never have to go through what my friend did. I can’t speak for everyone but I can certainly speak for myself when I say I will never trust that establishment to keep my friends or me safe. I have seen nothing to this point to prove me wrong and I urge discretion and caution when entering The Dome. It’s a dog-eat-dog world in there where you’re left defenseless and are punished for seeking help. Be careful. 

  • This Bud’s for You

    This Bud’s for You

    The Liberals are finally talking about delivering on one of their key campaign promises, legalizing marijuana. I don’t think I’ve ever seen stoners so excited in my life. Don’t get me wrong, the idea of legal pot is alright by me. I’m not an advocate of using illegal drugs, but then again, weed doesn’t quite have that “illegal” connotation to it anymore. People were starting to get impatient, especially millennials, with the activity surrounding a campaign promise that in some cases likely changed the way some millennials voted. With impatience growing, and an election in 2019 the Liberal party announced that they would introduce legislation that would see marijuana legalized by July 1st, 2018. To summarize, this legislation would be difficult to pass but the short version is that marijuana will be legal for recreational use and you’ll be able to grow up to four plants in your house. Ottawa will license bulk producers and will set the legal age to purchase at 18.

     

    However, the government has left many decisions up to the discretion of provincial governments, for example, although Ottawa may say the legal age to purchase marijuana at 18 the government of Alberta may set the age at 20. In an interesting move, the Liberal government will also leave it up to the provinces to set the price which will likely result in prices that vary province to province. The curious thing is the logic behind legalization. The Liberal party website says: “Canada’s current system of marijuana prohibition does not work. It does not prevent young people from using marijuana and too many Canadians end up with criminal records for possessing small amounts of the drug.” The intention here is clear, create tax revenue, keep weed out of the hands of children, and make the voters happy. It all seems benign enough but my curiosity says that there’s more to it than the government would have us believe.

     

    First lets examine the claim that the regulation of something can keep it out of the hands of children. In 2013 the World Health Organization published data that said that Canadian teens led the developing world in marijuana use. 29% of 15 year olds admitted to using marijuana in the last year in that study although experts consulted said that number could vary slightly by age group and region. Compared to alcohol, these numbers are low. In 2012 the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse showed that people between the ages of 15 and 18 had used alcohol at a rate of 56%, now although these studies reviewed different age groups it is somewhat clear that legalization and regulation don’t necessarily result in sober youth. Upon further examination of some sources, Statistics Canada corroborates that the use of alcohol amongst youth was far higher than that of marijuana in 2011. So, if the claim that legalization is going to keep pot out of the hands of youth has been examined correctly, it seems to be false. After all, alcohol has a long history of both being legal and being consumed by those not of age. If we administer alcohol and marijuana in the same way, one can likely assume that access will be no different if the demand is there, and the demand very clearly exists.

     

    The next argument that is made in the case for legalization is that the sale of marijuana will create a great deal of tax revenue. CIBC estimates that this revenue will be in the neighborhood of five billion dollars, but only if all the underground sources are “curtailed”. If we take into account that the illegal marketplace is going to have prices far below that of the legal market it seems that the criminal market will likely not be slowing down any time soon. Given the international obligations Canada has to prevent the illegal export of marijuana, we likely won’t see the government saving money on law enforcement budgets. There are some figures from the consulting firm Delloite that would suggest the supporting industries “growers, infused product makers, testing labs, and security” would be “worth between $12.7 billion to $22.6 billion”.

     

    The financial argument for legalization seems to be a strong one. Although there are other factors that deserve consideration, road safety, health, and criminal justice for instance. Justin Trudeau has said that all of the revenue from the newly created marijuana industry will be invested in addiction treatment and public health, effectively meaning that we have nothing to worry about from a public health standpoint (although we will still have to worry about that soaring deficit). Even better for the legalization argument is that following legalization in Colorado road accident fatalities are actually at an all time low, an astounding 13 year low to be precise. It is important to recognize that this could be from a number of factors and the data actually doesn’t indicate marijuana has had anything to do with it. The real saving grace of the legalization argument (other than that most people I know love weed) is that we’ll be saving major cash in criminal justice administration. 67% of drug offences in Canada involved marijuana, removing those offenders from the system will undoubtedly save the government some money.

     

    To conclude, the logical answer is to very carefully legalize and regulate marijuana. I am of the opinion that we’re headed that way as it is. So yes, legalization is a great idea, but not for any of the major reasons cited by the Liberal government. As someone who has never been a huge fan of the Liberals, I can honestly say that this is a move I can wholeheartedly support. Smooth move Trudeau, this bud’s for you.

  • Fog Off

    Nolan: Hello Alex, thank you for joining me today. Would you mind telling us a little about yourself?

    Alex: Thank you for taking the time to talk to me. I am a third-year sociology honours student, and I am a Brand Ambassador for Fog Off Clothing Company. I am a proud Maritimer, and I find it hard to describe myself on the spot [laughs].

    Nolan: Good thing I know a thing or two about you. Can you tell us more about Fog Off?

    Alex: Fog Off is an Atlantic Canadian clothing brand that started in 2014. Fog Off donates ten percent of their sales to the Mental Health Association and/or Mental Health Foundation in each province. They are not just using their brand to create discussion and change surrounding mental health, but their goal is also to give back to the cause.

    Nolan: How long have you been a Brand Ambassador for Fog Off?

    Alex: I have been an Ambassador since February.

    Nolan: Good for you. Do you mind elaborating on the company’s mission statement?

    Alex: Sure. Fog Off is trying to send a message that everyone can relate to. We all have mental health, and we all struggle with our mental health at some point in our lives. Fog Off defines this as a ‘Mental Fog,’ which may include stress, depression, anxiety, bullying, sickness, addiction – you name it. If we are not struggling, we know someone who is. The goal is to spread the message that ‘no one has to walk along a foggy path alone, but also that fog eventually lifts’.

    Nolan: This sounds like a wonderful cause. How can we get involved or help contribute?

    Alex: Well, I believe that a major part that everyone can help with is creating discussion. I will say that overall, Acadia students are doing well in this respect. Sharing individual stories with each other is a major part of that discussion, and you can always share your experiences anonymously if you are uncomfortable speaking your mind. Fog Off Clothing donates ten percent of their sales to mental health initiatives, and I strongly suggest checking out their website to see their products online, or at their partner store Psudio.

    Nolan: That sounds wonderful. What is the website address, and what type of products are available for purchase?

    Alex: The website is www.fogoffclothing.com, and they have everything from anchor bracelets, to doggy bandanas, sweaters, t-shirts, car decals, toques, and lots of other awesome products. On their website, they also have a link to the story behind the brand, and the associations, foundations, and societies that they support. Also, if you make a purchase online, you can receive 10% off your purchase by using my promo code: Pulchny001.

    Nolan: Would you mind sharing your experiences with mental health and why you wanted to get involved with Fog Off?

    Alex: Sure, when I was younger I never understood the concept of mental health. I thought that you only had mental health if it was something that you struggled with. As I was growing up, I watched my sister go through some tough times with her mental health, and it made me weary of talking about my own. I was afraid that if I was open about it, I would be labelled and people would treat me as such. I still find labels hard to deal with which is why I got used to bottling up my emotions. Now that I understand the concept of mental health better, although it is still difficult to talk about my feelings, I can now discuss them with a handful of my peers. When I heard that Fog Off Clothing was in search of Brand Ambassadors, I jumped at the chance. Acting as a Brand Ambassador has provided me with a medium to discuss mental health and help end the stigma surrounding it. The opportunity also provides me with the chance to meet people who are open to discussing mental health and their experiences may be similar to my own. If they have different stories it broadens my perspective on the topic. The Ambassadors are all extremely supportive of each other, which makes it a great community.

    Nolan: Thank you for sharing that. I too used to have a misunderstanding, if you will, of the concept of mental health. I too realize now that mental health impacts us all, and that labels can be discouraging to some. What advice do you have for anyone who finds it difficult to discuss their mental health, and struggles with the concept of mental health labels?

    Alex: It is hard to give advice on mental health in a general sense, but I will say that it is important to find someone who you can be open with. It took me a long time to find somebody who I was able to discuss my struggles with. Labels are tricky because sometimes they help people find who they are and how to deal with a situation, and other times it may create a larger self-struggle. For myself, I know that I have anxiety, but I also know we all have differing levels of anxiety. To be physically labelled as having anxiety would make it more difficult to cope with it. It would be like introducing myself as ‘Hello, I am anxiety’. Take any label with a grain of salt because you are the only one who can implement your label. You are who you want to be. If someone puts a label on you, you can choose to say: ‘I am not that label, but thank you – I am human. I may experience the label, but I am not the label’.

    Nolan: Thank you for sharing. I have battled labels, and previously written an article discussing my opinion on the matter, and it is refreshing to have a perspective from the other side. I find labels empowering, and I am glad that the readers can hear someone else’s story on the matter. Is there anything more you would like to share?

    Alex: Just one more thing, on the topic of sharing your experiences and what you are going through: we have some great resources on campus including the Mental Health Society, counselling services, and the Acadia Women’s Center, and I am certain that although they may be strangers, they are here to listen and support you. Sometimes, it feels better to talk to a stranger.

    Nolan: Thank you again for sharing your story.

    Alex: It was great to have the opportunity to share my story and talk about an amazing clothing company.

  • Sponsoring Students at Acadia

    Hidden in the long list of fees that appear on every Acadia student’s account statement, it is easy to overlook the one dollar a year that goes towards WUSC. WUSC stands for the World University Service of Canada and is a non-profit organization based out of university campuses across the country. WUSC’s aim is to create a better world by promoting education, employment and empowerment in Canada and around the world. Many Acadia students don’t know that this small fee they pay each year actually goes towards supporting one of WUSC’s biggest initiatives, the Student Refugee Program. The money raised from this small levy goes towards sponsoring a student from a refugee camp to come and study at Acadia. This fee along with the financial assistance provided by the university and various community organizations helps to cover the cost of tuition and living expenses for the student. A small group of Acadia students serve on the Local Committee and are responsible for filling out the paperwork to help sponsor a new student each year. The Local Committee receives applications from students all around the world interested in studying in Canada and decides together which student would be a good fit for our university. When the student arrives, it is the Local Committee members and the faculty representative, Julie Snair, who go to the airport to welcome them and provide support to them throughout the rest of the year and beyond. This is important as the transition can be challenging and while students who have lived in Canada their whole lives may not understand the difficulties of resettlement, they can still do their best to make sure the student feels as welcomed and supported as possible.

    This program is unique in that it encourages students to sponsor other students in need around the world. Whether it is through organizing fundraising initiatives or raising awareness about the refugee crisis on campus, the Student Refugee Program has a lot to offer both the students being sponsored and those doing the sponsoring. This program is actually the only one of its kind in the world that pairs the idea of youth to youth sponsorship with refugee resettlement and education. It aims to not only provide the youth who must flee their countries with a safe place to call home, but also to provide them with the opportunity to gain new skills and a world-class university education. Students can choose to enrol in any degree program they wish and have generally been very successful with 85% of students sponsored finding work in their desired field. Many decide to stay in Canada after completing their degrees but many also decide to return to their home countries to try and make a difference there.

    While Acadia only sponsors one student per year, the student who comes adds to the diversity and culture of the University and the Wolfville community as a whole. They provide Canadian and international students with the opportunity to learn about other cultures and world issues in a more personal way. It also offers students the chance to make a difference in someone’s life when all the problems in the world can seem overwhelming. While there are certainly major challenges and issues that need to be addressed in order to prevent the mass displacement of young people and their families, this is one way that Acadia seeks to help. In light of the Syrian Refugee Crisis, and other devastating humanitarian catastrophes around the world right now, WUSC Acadia is hoping to expand what they do by looking for new members, fundraising, and spreading awareness. There is also the possibility of holding a referendum in the coming years to increase the student levy. The goal would be to raise the levy by a small amount, likely just a dollar more, to either increase the support for the SRP students already at Acadia or to possibly increase the number of students Acadia is able to sponsor. Additional projects include raising awareness and fundraising for the Shine a Light Campaign which seeks to improve the accessibility of the Student Refugee Program to women and girls who are currently under-represented in it.

    Students who are interested in getting involved are encouraged to find the WUSC Acadia Facebook group or to email Co-Chair Rhys Winder ([email protected]) for information about joining the local committee.

    For sources and more information visit http://www.wusc.ca/en/program/srp-resources

     

     

  • Things That Should Have Been Curbed in 2016

    Things That Should Have Been Curbed in 2016

     

    1) The notion that “White Privilege” is offensive and racist towards White People.

    Racism, cultural appropriation, and discrimination have been a hot-button issue throughout history. With the rise of social media platforms, along with the recent election of Donald Trump, there is a plethora of conversation online (and in print) about the hateful rhetoric that seems to be plaguing today’s society. Unfortunately, when people feel that their privilege is being threatened, they enter an automatic defense mode. It is often presented in such a manner where the defendant makes claims of innocence, justifying their feelings of discomfort by exclaiming that they are not guilty of racism, and that if their race is being questioned, that they are automatically being discriminated against. White privilege is not racist; it is not offensive in any way. It is a method of explaining the favorable treatment that white people often receive. There are no systems of oppression designed against white people. Thinking that reverse racism exists is what perpetuates the notion of white privilege further into the foundations of our society. It is a mechanism that is used to validate the comfortable position white people hold in society. Validating your own comfortable position by attacking a marginalized group (by saying white privilege is offensive, racist etc.) is a subtle way of invalidating and shutting down any group who’s LIVED EXPERIENCE has ever been one of systemic oppression. In extension, these feelings can often be described as “white fragility,” a state in which minimum amounts of racial stress becomes intolerable, triggering outward displays of emotion, such as anger, and behaviours such as argumentation. Yeah, this definitely could have been left behind in 2016.

    2) That any Indigenous culture should just “get over” colonization.

    Really? This one amazes me every time I hear it. Let us take a brief moment to recall Canadian History because we are not innocent in the ways or racism and cultural oppression. Residential schools were opened in conjunction with the Catholic and Protestant Churches and the government. Their aim was to remove any form of Indigenous culture from Indigenous children by forcefully removing them from their homes, placing them in schools where they would be taught Western values. As such, a cultural genocide was committed. Often, when hearing the word “genocide,” events such as the Holocaust, Bosnian, and Rwandan genocides. That is because Canada has attempted to repress its history. The horrors of the Residential schools did not end until 1996. Yes, most of us were living when the last school shut its doors. During their time in the Residential schools, Indigenous children were beaten, sexually assaulted, and mentally abused by their instructors. Often, these traumas were difficult to cope with. A stigma surrounds Indigenous peoples in Canada. Many people chose to believe that status cards, funding, government aid, and the Truth and Reconciliation Committee should all be abolished. They question why we should continue to apologize, and why we should continue to work towards mending our relationship with Indigenous peoples. What does it take to get over something like this? How could you possibly put a numerical value on an apology, how can you, a white person, get to dictate the appropriate measures for reconciliation after a cultural genocide has been committed? When you say these things, you act as though you assume the role of the oppressed, you may think you understand their oppression, but you simply do not. I know I do not understand, I never could. However, it is important to listen, to engage in conversation, and to be respectful of what you cannot understand. Please read the above statement about white privilege and then rethink your questions and sweeping generalizations about Indigenous peoples and Indigenous culture.

    3) “She was asking for it”- REALLY?

    For God sakes. How is this type of conversation STILL taking place? Did we not learn after Jian Ghomeshi and Brock Allen-Turner? I simply do not understand. The legal process further victimizes rape victims. Belittlement and slut-shaming occur in the courtroom in order to find loopholes in the victim’s statement. By asking her, “did you say no?” you are questioning her pain and her experience. By asking her, “how much did you drink?” you are assuming that all drunk women are ‘asking for it’, by asking her “what were you wearing” or “how many men have you slept with in the past”, you are slut-shaming her. Although there are false reports of rape, the treatment of victims in the courtroom is inexcusable. This is the reason that rape and sexual assault are so underreported. This process favours the accused, often bringing into play irrelevant aspects of his character, his achievements, and what he strives for in life. However, this does not take into account aspects of the victim’s character, her (or his) achievements in life, and how what she/he had strived for may feel as though it has become so out of reach. It’s simple, folks. If you can’t say no, you can’t say yes. There is no in-between; there is no grey area. There is yes, and there is no. Stop blaming the victim. Stop validating your need for supremacy. Stop questioning the pain of others, instead, start regarding it.

    4) Feelings of self-doubt, as brought on by Instagram and other forms of Social Media.

    I am guilty of this. Most people are guilty of this. It is so easy to feel self-doubt, and it is so easy to think that your value decreases based on the perceived notion of “perfection” in the others who you see on social media. In the last 10 years, we have “networking” apps explode. The original purpose of these apps was to stay in touch with your friends, to be able to connect with people you haven’t seen in a long time and to keep others updated on what is going on in your own life. However, it feels as though there has been a shift in the dynamic, a change in the way we behave on the Internet. Often, all we see is the picture. We believe that everybody’s lives are perfect and full of happiness based on how they display themselves on social media. Getting the “perfect picture” and pairing it with a “fire” caption that will get you over 300 likes is often a goal of most people. I know I am not innocent. There have been multiple occasions where I have found myself thinking, “if I went to the gym more maybe I would look like her and then I would be as happy as she appears.” I know this is wrong. After a conversation with one of my roommates, I found out that she was feeling the same way. She talked to me about how miserable looking at Instagram makes her. It caused her to question her own happiness by constantly comparing it to other girls’ social media pages. So, she slowly began to stop looking as much. As did I. I’ll leave this point here: everybody has their issues, but we have been conditioned to try and keep our problems to yourself. A picture is just that: a picture. You see what the poster wants you to see, just remember that your self-worth should not be determined by a like or how the world views your Instagram page.

    5) Islamophobia.

    Islam is a religion of peace. Often, people do not believe this when it is brought up in conversation. The first time I heard this was in my 11th grade world religion class. Our teacher told us that Islam was the closest religion to Christianity. She was right. It is not Islam you are afraid of, it is the “otherness.” The sense that you see something different, and that you are uncomfortable within a realm of your own privilege is what sets you off. This rhetoric gained prominence after 9/11. We were scared of them. They were scared of us. Although I am not an expert in Islamic studies, I know many men and women from the Arab world who identify as Muslims, and I can honestly say that they are much nicer than many other people I know. If we remove the concept of the “other,” perhaps we will all be able to see each other as we are: human.

  • Rape is Not Fornication

    A shocking decision arose at an Idaho court in early February in the sentencing of a 19-year-old man with the rape of a 14-year-old girl. After pleading guilty to charges of statutory rape, Cody Duane Scott Herrera has been sentenced to celibacy until marriage, in addition to an intensive year-long therapy program.

     

    After the initial sentencing of five to fifteen years of prison time, Judge Randy Stoker suspended his decision in favour of a one-year “rider” program instead. A “rider” program refers to the immersion of an inmate into a therapeutic program with the intention of reform. Herrera will be subjected to this therapeutic treatment, and, upon successful completion of the program, is faced with the probationary condition that he will not have sex with anybody until he is married.

     

    The judge’s final decision was made in light of Herrera’s admission to pre-sentence investigators that he had had sex with over 34 partners so far at only the age of 19. The judge reported to “have never seen that level of sexual activity by a 19-year-old,” according to Times-News.

     

    While this decision may come as shocking to many, fornication laws have been institutionalized in Idaho, in section 18-6603 of their state laws, which state that “any unmarried person who shall have sexual intercourse with an unmarried person of the opposite sex shall be deemed guilty of fornication, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $300 or imprisonment for not more than six months or by both such fine and imprisonment; provided, that the sentence imposed or any part thereof may be suspended with or without probation in the discretion of the court.”

     

    This rarely enforced fornication law, added to Idaho’s Statutes in 1972, enabled Judge Randy Stoker’s restriction of Herrera, as individuals on probation cannot break any laws — fornication laws included. In Stoker’s own words: ”if you’re ever on probation with this court, a condition of that will be you will not have sexual relations with anyone except who you’re married to, if you’re married.”

     

    The judge’s controversial sentencing has been under scrutiny for its constitutional legitimacy, as it could be interpreted as infringing upon the constitutional right to procreation. As such, it is speculated that if Judge Stoker’s decision were to be appealed, it would likely not stand up in higher courts.

     

    Another concern with Stoker’s sentencing is its lack of enforceability — while probation officers are vigilant in the monitoring of their offenders’ behaviors, keeping track of their sexual activity takes that scrutiny to the next level, and will likely be very difficult to enforce.

     

    Additionally, many have criticized the judge’s decision as yet another example of the policing of sexuality in our society and as largely reflective of dominant ideas of what is normal for sex (and by extension, sexuality) and what is not. Fornication laws indicate the extent to which sexuality has been and continues to be cemented within institutionalized judicial systems, often serving to marginalize and exclude certain sexualities and sexual practices by reinforcing outdated conceptions of an “appropriate” sexuality.

     

    Critics have additionally taken Stoker’s judgment as just that: judgmental. In his decision, Stoker serves to judge Herrera based on how many sexual partners he has had and not on what he’s really on trial for: the rape of a 14-year-old girl. In his focus on how many sexual partners Herrera has had, Stoker serves to treat Herrera as the victim (of a sex problem requiring therapy) and is ultimately failing to recognize who the legitimate victim in this scenario is. Many argue that while it can be agreed that Herrera has issues with sex (as highlighted by his rape of a minor), and should seek treatment for that, that treatment should be in addition to his charges, not supplemented by them.

     

    Decisions such as Judge Randy Stoker’s highlight the myriad of ways in which sexual assault cases are built to favour the perpetrators of sexual violence over the victims. The sentencing of Herrera via fornication laws is additionally problematic as it attempts to parallel the concept of fornication with that of rape — which are not even closely comparable.

  • Girl Trouble

    When asked about my interest in writing this opinion, the first thing I thought was “I am walking into a minefield.” I am, along with most men I know, afraid to talk about women’s issues. Part of that comes from the fact that I am a tall, privileged, white man but the other part is that I’m afraid of being attacked for either saying or doing the wrong thing. All my life I have been surrounded by strong women and have always believed that someone’s actions are what should define their success in life, not their gender. I felt compelled by their example to speak my mind on this topic, even though it might be uncomfortable at times.

    For most of human history, women got sidelined in what rights and opportunities society afforded to them. Thanks to the feminist movement there has been real progress towards equality. Sadly, alongside these advances, there has been a swing away from the equal opportunity of women to “man bashing’, by a small but loud segment of the feminist movement. This group disallows men to claim any suffering or mistreatment as they believe their gender precludes them from understanding the experience of women. When these individuals are called out for their comments, they often fire back with accusations of sexism even if untrue. These unjustified assaults have made potential allies cautious and emboldened those who do wish to stop the spread of equality through society.

    I was the only boy in the school choir through most of middle school. In high school, I continued to be part of the vocal music groups including an all-male choir. The choir included straight, gay and transgendered young men. Throughout those years of school, the choir guys often were targeted as “the faggots.” When I have discussed this treatment with people, the most common reaction is that these actions were just “boys being boys.” I have often a time seen the surprised look on someone’s faced when I revealed that this bullying was predominantly lead by women in the schools I attended. I was treated as less of a human being because I enjoyed singing and dancing on stage because I embraced my so-called “feminine side” (a description I abhor). This kind of double standard continues beyond areas of life where men choose to express themselves in creative or sensitive ways.

    Like many people here at Acadia and across the world I was the target of bullying through the entirety of my time in school. My mother still talks about when I would come home with bruises on my back from when someone had shoved me into a wall or onto the ground. Not only did I have to deal with the physical injuries inflicted on me, but also the ones that left me questioning my worth a person. I am unashamed of the fact that I have and continue to see a counselor to deal with these issues. I have also never tried to hide the facts about what I have endured and I that have sought help to deal with many of the issues with which I have had to grapple. When we talk about feminism, it is often a topic of strength. The strength to fight back, the power to express yourself and to overcome the stupid notion that women are weaker than men. But sensitivity and creativity when displayed by men are still viewed as weakness by society. For a man to admit that he has suffered abused means, he will be perceived as weak if he seeks help to reclaim that basic sense of dignity and purpose of which he feels stripped.

    As I have worked my way through creating this article I have tried to think of ways I could suggest to help bridge the gap we face as I did not want just to critic but build. I am not an expert on gender equality issues, nor will I claim to be so I reached out to others so I could look past my point of view. While there were more than a few differing opinions and thoughtful suggestions on how we can all better ourselves as individuals what I always heard was it is important to have a dialogue. I am aware that many, if not most of you reading this will disagree with what I have had to say. I hope you find a way to express what is on your mind as every person can add something to this dialogue. I would consider myself to be an open-minded person, so I am sure I could learn a thing or two.

    Over the last century, there have many strides forward in gender equality. In our nation, women have moved from being treated as second class citizens in almost every situation and are now viewed as equals. While we certainly have much further to go, I do not believe any reasonable person can look at what has changed and say it is not getting better. As we continue to push forward, we must not allow ourselves to become blind and only shift our biases from gender-based to those of one’s character

  • Have Hope for 2017

    Sitting down at the dinner table with my family I faced an awkward conversation. It started with griping about the state of the world: America, Europe, crisis after pandemic after crash. It was a depressing start to a conversation, to say the least. The picture that was painted was one resembling the worst of the first Mad Max film, or the beginnings of Roland Emmerich’s 2012: undesirable and unnecessary.

    After some thinking, I chimed into the conversation. Yes, I wasn’t going to lie, things did look bad. There were a lot of things that were beyond the scope of positivity. But after the dinner was over I stopped and asked my parents: why did they think things were so bad? Their answers were different in their wording but the general message was the same: things were changing and they were changing in a direction they didn’t like.

    It’s undeniable that the world is changing. Former reality TV star Donald Trump is now President of the United States, the UK is (trying to begin the process of) leaving the European Union, Syria is falling back under the control of Bashar Al-Assad, and the Islamic State is branching out around the world, with attacks occurring everywhere from Christmas markets in Berlin to bazaars in Turkey and malls in the United States. It’s a different world, and it’s one that doesn’t have the prettiest face. By a lot of metrics, the world is sliding back into a reality eerily reminiscent of the 1930s, with fascism, racism, and neo-Nazism on the rise and tensions erupting around the world. This all came to the boiling point in 2016, a year we’re all very glad is over.

    Denying that the world is facing a challenging new reality is arrogant and irresponsible. To say that everything is going to be fine and dandy is dangerously naïve. But it doesn’t warrant being pessimistic about the future.

    2016 will be a year that will be long analyzed by historians of the future. We lost countless stars, from David Bowie to Prince and Carrie Fisher, we saw the worst of humanity in Aleppo, and we saw hate take precedence over love through xenophobia and racism. Needless to say, it was a year that will live in infamy.

    But it doesn’t warrant despair. In the face of adversity, the worst thing one can do is curl up in a ball and refuse to believe that anything they do can change things. Even the littlest of things, from throwing your coffee cup in the recycling or telling somebody they look good today, makes a difference. It may be small and but it is not insignificant. Maya Angelou once said “people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel”. In the face of an uncertain future it makes all the difference to be there for one another.

    As much as those around us may want to pessimistic about 2016, there were just as many reasons to be optimistic. The Colombian government signed an agreement with the FARC, ending a decades long conflict that had killed thousands. Tiger numbers around the world were on the rise for the first time in 100 years. A solar powered airplane flew across the Pacific Ocean. World hunger has reached its lowest point in 25 years. People pouring buckets of ice over their heads raised enough money to help isolate the gene that causes the disease. When you look back over the bigger events, last year wasn’t so bad.

    It’s impressive how far we’ve come in the past year. The Paris Agreement has been signed, and even though there are plenty of climate change skeptics and outright deniers in high office, the ball has begun rolling towards a greener future. We’ve seen compassion in Canada, with our own Prime Minister personally greeting refugees fleeing war and utter devastation. Love him or hate him, it takes someone with genuine character to take ownership of an issue and face the fruits of their labour head-on. Even here at Acadia, our first year population has grown by 25%. New blood and new minds are being welcomed into Wolfville, a stark contrast from the previous year’s intake.

    I have hope for 2017. There are elections coming up around the world where candidates are basing their campaigns on an ‘us vs. them’ message, fearmongering and hatemongering. But while there are those candidates, there are just as many promoting what makes democracy worth fighting for: peace, compassion, tolerance, justice, and love. The fight for a free and fair society isn’t an easy or bloodless one. Relationships are ruined, reputations are soured, and feelings are hurt. But if you truly believe in something worth fighting for, stand up for it.

    There will always be headlines that strike fear into our hearts. There will always be those who preach hate and practice malice. There will always be those who believe that the impossible is exactly that- impossible. And yet there will always be those tiny instances of human compassion that amount to something greater. There will always be those who preach love and practice tolerance. There will always be those who believe that the impossible is exactly the opposite- possible.

    Let’s not despair for 2017. Let’s go out and make it a good one.

  • The Feminist Killjoy: Misconceptions

    My journey with feminism has been long and complicated and has most definitely evolved over the years. Looking back, it is abundantly clear that my parents raised me and my two sisters to be little feminists pretty much straight out of the womb. However, it took me quite some time to accept the label myself and to begin to engage with feminism as a political movement. That being said, self-identifying as a feminist is tricky. By this, I mean that along with accepting and embracing this label of feminist, or being a feminist, you are faced with the plethora of negative connotations that come with that label. I learned about the negative connotations behind the feminist label even before I truly began to understand the purpose and importance of feminism. The first time I was called a feminist was in a class discussion in high school when it was used as some kind of insult

    Somewhere, somehow along the way, being a feminist in people’s minds became synonymous with being a “man-hater”. This, I am telling you right now, is absolute complete and total bullshit. Now, I will gladly accept the label of an angry feminist because honestly, I am angry. A lot of the issues that the feminist movement is fighting against make me really fucking angry. Such issues range from my person (and ongoing) experience of being cat-called when I’m walking outside at night, to the fact that the current President of the United States was elected even though it was blatantly clear he has no concept of what sexual consent is and bragged openly about sexually assaulting women. Now, because those things make me really fucking angry, does that mean I hate men? No! Absolutely not.

    Here’s the thing, yeah those things make me angry but I also am educated enough on feminism to recognize that to direct my anger at individuals (read: individual men) for those actions is misguided. So, while I may in the moment yell obscenities at the guy cat-calling me from his car, I know that my anger is really with the systemic socialization of our society that teaches people that yelling at people while they’re walking alone at night is okay.

    The point of feminism is not to hate on men. Feminist scholar bell hooks said it best when she articulated the aim of feminism when she wrote that “feminism is a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression”. All of us in society have been socialized to accept sexist oppression, including men. Feminism is not an us vs. them battle, it is not women vs. men. It took me years to unlearn all the harmful sexist behaviors I had been taught my whole life, and I am still not there yet. There are ways I’m sure I myself still reproduce sexist oppression. Yet, through my understanding of feminism I have been able to grow as a human being and have learned how to treat other human beings better, both women and men. When you call feminism “man-hating”, you’re completely missing the point of feminism. You are reducing the sexist oppression that negatively affects everyone, regardless of gender identity – and the anger that comes with living under such a system – down to an individual level. To suggest that feminism is man-hating, it suggests that feminists are just angry, or that feminists simply do not like men. This ignores everything feminism is actually fighting against and instead just perpetuates the system of sexist oppression.

    At the end of the day, feminism is a movement that is working towards making the lives of others (and ourselves) better. Yes negative connotations and stereotypes of feminism unfortunately continue to exist. And yes, I will admit that these stereotypes initially made me hesitant to claim the label myself. However, once I realized that anybody who thinks me labelling myself as someone who cares about equality and the well-being of others makes me crazy is not somebody I want in my life, I got over it. So yes, hello, here I am, an angry (not man-hating) feminist. To anybody who knows me well, you’re already aware of this. To anybody who doesn’t – now you know.

     

     

  • The Feminist Killjoy and a Narrative so Crucial to Today’s Culture

    Recently, I have become uncomfortable with my comfortable existence. After reflecting on the discourse of my life, I have realized that I had become content with the social norms that have been engrained in me as core values since I was a small child. I was taught to be feminine, but not too feminine. I was always told how important education was, but would always feel slightly overlooked when attempting to express my intelligence. I was told that it was important to have male friends, but not too many or else people may get the wrong idea about what kind of person I am. I was continually told to smile if my face was resting, and I would oblige. Why? Who was I trying to impress? Why did I feel as though I had to smile for no reason, especially if I did not feel like it? Why did it bother me so much to feel as though I had to keep my opinions to myself, especially if I did not agree with someone when they were talking? Unfortunately, we have normalized a culture where women need to fit into a tidy definition of what is acceptable. We have constructed ideas that are specifically designed to leave a large majority of us on the sidelines. In 2016, Erin Wunker published Notes from a Feminist Killjoy: Essays on Everyday Life. This text explores the concept of the feminist killjoy, patriarchal culture, and what it means to be discontent with how normalized our everyday experiences have become. If you are a feminist, this article is for you. If you are not a feminist, perhaps you should read this twice.

     

    First and foremost, let me begin by stating that I am not a bra-burning, man-hating woman. I wear a bra, I love men. I identify as a white, cisgender female who comes from a middle class family, attends university, and has good friends, a nice boyfriend, and more privilege than many other people in the world. By means of the Westernized definition of what it means to be normal, I fit neatly into this category. However, it is important to acknowledge and understand the struggles that others are faced with, further exploring how normalized western behaviors have had such a negative impact on those, including myself, who have felt a burning discontent about the status quo and the ways in which we live our everyday lives.

    As a starting point, Wunker’s definition of patriarchy is necessary. She defines patriarchal culture as a culture in which masculinity- in people and in things- is privileged as inherently foundational to other states of being. In a patriarchal culture, systems, institutions, and social interactions reinforce this hierarchy. When you live in a patriarchal culture, as in any culture, you begin learning its rules and regulations, as well as the way you fit into them, almost immediately. It’s important to note that patriarchal culture is not an equitable culture (19). The definition of a patriarchal culture is not aimed at attacking all men, as many men do not fit neatly into this definition either. Patriarchal culture was a bi-product of upper class, white males. It was a means to an end; a way to ensure the status quo favored their way of life. However, its affects are extremely damaging. We are all born different, but end up inherently the same. We have continued to perpetuate this normalized cycle, further suppressing the majority of the population to favor a few. We have become comfortable within the means of our controlled existences. Thus, the birth of the feminist killjoy.

    Wunker: The feminist killjoy takes pleasure in the works of interrupting the patriarchal norms that pass as joys. She is someone whose existence makes sense when we situate her within the context of an intersectional feminist critique of happiness (44). The feminist killjoy is not content with the current status quo; she pushes for equality and ignores the norms that are continually thrust upon her. When I was younger, I would often find myself remaining quiet in conversations that would bash feminist motives, often portraying them as violent and man-hating. I was scared to speak out about my burning need for equality. I wanted the unequivocal respect that is felt between two men when they meet, I wanted to be viewed as human, as an equal. I still want these things. I am not sure when I became more open and comfortable with being a feminist killjoy, but I want to try and make a difference, I want to try and change the conversations we are having today.

     

    Many women are content with claiming that they are not feminists in order to avoid uncomfortable conversations and exchanges in their daily lives. However, how can these claims be made when we continue to reap the benefits of the women who came before us? When we step into the voting booth, when we wear skirts that are cut above the knee, when we are given equal opportunity to enter the workforce and the education system we often forget that these opportunities were granted to us through the hard work and suffering of the women who came before us. In today’s society, it is crucial to remember that, although we are all in some ways different, our struggle is the same. As Chimamanda Ngozi Adichi said, men and women, all of us, need to work together to change the conversations we are having with children today. We need to ensure that they are valued, and that they know how important individual expression outside of social constructs are. To be a feminist is to believe in equality for everyone, it is to strive for a world of equal opportunity, of acceptance, of love for everyone. Perhaps this is overwhelming to some, but to many, it is an opportunity to fight for social justice and equality for every individual.

     

    For reference, please pick up a copy of Erin Wunker’s work.

     

    Erin Wunker, Notes from a Feminist Killjoy: Essays on Everyday Life (Toronto: Book Thug, 2016), 7-204.

  • Canadians Are Racist Too

    Social action seems to be running rampant in the United States currently, pushing against systemic racism in the United States. Indigenous peoples in the United States are standing to protect their lands at Standing Rock and the Black Lives Matter movement is demanding an end to mass incarceration, to end the systemic racism in the American justice system. With this backlash against racism in the United States, people in Canada are feeling pretty lucky to live in Canada. But are we any better off in Canada in terms of racism? Or are we equally as racist in Canada? Can inequality be equal? A June 2016 research article published in Social Science & Medicine explores this.

    In “Equally Inequitable? A Cross-National Comparative Study of Racial Health Inequality in the United Sates and Canada,” University of Toronto’s Chantel Ramraj, and Duke University’s William Darity explore the strong relationship between race and health in American and Canadian society, and find that in their comparison of America’s black population with Canada’s, Black Canadians have overall better quality of health than Black Americans. This research is based off of 10-year data collection from the National Health Interview Survey in the U.S., and the Canadian Community Health Survey in Canada (from the years 2000-2010). Studying a variety of health outcomes (such as asthma, heart disease, hypertension, etc.), as well as self-reported health satisfaction, and behavioral risk factors (such as smoking), the researchers conclude that “racial inequalities in health are biological expressions of racism and not of racial difference,” further serving to situate the connection between race and health as a “function of the societal context [in] which it operates.”

    So, if black Canadians’ health is better than that of black Americans’, does that mean Canadians are less racist? Definitely not. The study additionally highlights the fact that racial inequalities exist in both of the countries under study, but that which differs between the countries is which racial groups they affect. In Canada, for instance, while our black and Hispanic populations are in comparatively better health than that of America’s, our Aboriginal populations suffer immensely from racial inequality. Ramraj and Darity show that in both the United States and in Canada, those who identify as Aboriginal were found to have the highest prevalence of most of the chronic conditions under study, rated their own health to be the lowest, and had the highest prevalence for current or former drinking when compared to all other demographics under study, with the exception of Whites in the U.S., who scored the highest for alcohol use. These such health trends among Aboriginal peoples in Canada persisted “regardless of demographic, socioeconomic, and behavioral covariates, whereas in the U.S., socioeconomic factors explained [only] some of the relative inequality between aboriginals and whites.”

    Further, this research points these health implications of racial inequality as stemming from distinct historical periods: slavery in the United States, and colonization in Canada. As colonization allowed for an increasing of the amount of processed foods (and associated consequences for health) and for an unequal distribution of “economic resources and employment opportunities available to aboriginals,” aboriginal peoples have disproportionately been put under stressors due to colonization when compared to white Canadians. These stressors additionally serve to influence health behavior in adverse ways, and manifest in physical health issues. As such, colonization and colonial legacy acts as a crucial societal determinant for the health of aboriginal peoples in Canada. Black people in the United States, similarly, are far more likely to be “descendants of ancestors who had been exposed to the U.S. system of plantation-based slavery, widespread government-sanctioned segregation, and ongoing discrimination and racism,” thereby leading to their current race-related health issues.

    So, can you be equal in inequality? Chantel Ramraj and William Darity show that Canada and the U.S., are both equally inequitable in their treatment of racialized groups, which has grave effects on the lives and health of the individuals affected. Ramraj and Darity demonstrate the strength that race holds as a predictor of “major sources of morbidity in both the United States and in Canada,” and how this relationship (between health and race), can be addressed at a societal level, where social policies, which dictate the distribution of “social and economic resources within a society,” can begin to be addressed. Furthermore, this research has important implications in its demonstration of the degree to which race and health is context-dependent and can, therefore, be modified by social action.

  • Forty, Fertile, and Thriving

    Older moms are the new normal. Maritimer Meagan Campbell highlights recent Statistics Canada findings that claim that “for the first time in recorded Canadian history, mothers over 40 are officially having more kids than teens are.” While this may come as a shock to many, Demographers have allegedly been anticipating this trend since its gradual emergence in 1974.

     

    In the medical community, women who have children over the age of 40 have been dubbed “mothers of advanced maternal age,” and their pregnancies are often referred to as “geriatric.”  Many, including Elizabeth Gregory, a professor at the University of Houston, attribute this cultural and medical shift towards delayed motherhood to that of new technologies, wherein women can control their fertility in ways which they could not have before. Along with medical innovations increasing delayed parenthood, social factors too play an important role, as our society has become increasingly accepting of women’s choice to delay having children, or to choose not to have children at all.

     

    But not only are women choosing to have children later, it seems that teenagers have simultaneously been experiencing a decline in pregnancy rates. A Canadian research report called “Sexuality and U” attributes these trends in teen pregnancy to be reflective of “increasing levels of effective contraceptive use, greater access to reproductive health services, exposure to higher quality sexual health education, and/or a shifting of social norms in a direction that provides greater support for young women’s capacity to exercise reproductive choice.”

     

    It is important to note that while these trends of birth are reflective of a national trend, it must be taken into consideration the vast differences between the statistics seen nation-wide, and their application to areas in which we live. Based on research by the Sex Information and Education Council of Canada, in Nova Scotia (and in most of Atlantic Canada) we have seen teenage birth/abortion rates rising (by 15.1%) in the period of 2006-2010, whereas in other areas of the nation these rates have been declining considerably. So while in Canada teen pregnancy is in general on the decline, these statistics are not reflective of Nova Scotia or what you may have personally observed or experienced.

     

    In a perfect world, women could have it all, but in reality it often comes down to the choice between having children and establishing a career. While it is now possible for a number of Canadian women to become mothers of advanced maternal age, it cannot be ignored the extreme privilege associated with this phenomenon — as fertility treatments are highly costly, and not available to all. Pregnancies among women over the age of 40 are increasingly seen among women of higher socioeconomic status, who wait until establishing their careers before turning to motherhood, which is a luxury afforded to few.

     

  • Reefspiracy

    In a satirical article in Outside Magazine entitled, “Obituary: Great Barrier Reef (25 Million BC-2016),” Rowan Jacobsen describes the tragic death of the Great Barrier Reef, the world’s largest coral structure. Rich in marine life, and stretching for more than 2,600km along the Eastern Coast of Australia, many were shocked upon reading of the Reef’s alleged death. The article has gone viral, reaching more than 1.42 Million shares since its release on October 11, 2016. For an Obituary, it is quite entertaining, and serves to inform readers about many of the distinct historical and marine qualities of the Reef — but has one main issue: it is scientifically false.

     

    Upon going viral, Jacobson’s article has sparked massive controversy in the scientific community through its claim that “climate change and ocean acidification have killed off one of the most spectacular features on the planet.” According to a multitude of sources the reef is, however, still living—with preliminary findings from Australia’s Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority revealing, “22 percent of coral on the reef has died due to the worst mass bleaching event on record. But […] more than three quarters of the corals are still alive, in various states of health — and in dire need of being protected.” As of yet, no scientist or scientific organization has pronounced the Great Barrier Reef to be dead, and the initial article in Outside Magazine does not offer any supporting scientific evidence to back up its claims.

     

    Despite their outcry, the Great Barrier Reef is, scientists admit, in a state of crisis — with a report from the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies revealing that the reef is at great risk of extinction, with 93% of the reef affected by bleaching (which happens when it is submerged in too warm water for too long). This viral article could be the last thing that the reef needs, as it dismisses all of the ways in which human effort can still try to save the reef by painting it as too far-gone. This type of exaggeration of the state of the Reef conveys a situation of less hope, rather than trying to mobilize the public to take actions to try and reverse the damage.

     

    Claims such as those by Outside Magazine have further implications — for the Australian economy: The Great Barrier Reef generated an estimated $5.7 billion for the Australian economy as of 2011-2012, and created 69,000 jobs, all of which could be severely impacted by the viral claims of the Reef’s death.

     

    Aside from the false claims present in the Obituary, Jacobsen does raise an interesting point surrounding the incentive by the Australian Government to paint the Reef as in better condition than reality depicts — detailing the Australian government coercion of the United Nations, wherein they successfully got them  “to remove a chapter about the reef from a report on the impact of climate change on World Heritage site,” which was justified by the Department of the Environment of Australia as due to concerns over lost revenue in tourism. By all accounts, it may be in the Australian government’s (and economy’s) best interest to minimize the public’s knowledge of the Reef’s state.

     

    While some see Jacobsen’s viral article as ignorant and discouraging to any efforts to save the reef, some look at this hyperbolic obituary as the very wake-up call that the world has been awaiting. Professor John Pandolfi from the ARC Centre at the University of Queensland states that, “It is critically important now to bolster the resilience of the reef, and to maximize its natural capacity to recover.” The reef is, by all accounts, dying — but it is not dead. So, is it a Reefspiracy? See for yourself: The original article published by Outside Magazine can be found at: https://www.outsideonline.com/2112086/obituary-great-barrier-reef-25-million-bc-2016

     

     

     

  • The Votes Are In

    The people have spoken, the votes are in, and the ballots are counted. The 2016 municipal election for Wolfville took place on October 15th and the outcome was far from the norm – 5 out of the 6 elected councilors are women. “We are a progressive town,” says elected councilor Wendy Donavon and I couldn’t agree more. This contrasts Halifax whose council is the least equally gender representative that they have been in years with only 2 female councilors out of 16. Leading the votes was esteemed councilor Carl Oldham with 767 votes. He was followed in order by Wendy Elliot, Wendy Donovan, Mercedes Brian, Jodi Mackay, and Oonagh Proudfoot. This council is made up of three returning candidates and three new representatives, lead by Mayor Cantwell.  With an equal mix of returning candidates and fresh perspective, a previously minute female voice refreshingly liberated and a Mayor so good at his job no one will run against him, I think that town of Wolfville is in for a prosperous term. Thank you to every Wolfville resident and politically awakened student who took the time to ensure his or her voice was heard this election season. 

Betzillo positions itself as a versatile gaming hub where structured bonuses and adaptive gameplay mechanics support both short sessions and extended play.

Built with a focus on innovation, Spinbit integrates modern casino architecture with rapid transactions, appealing to players who value speed and digital efficiency.

Ripper Casino emphasizes bold entertainment through high-impact slot titles and competitive promotions crafted for risk-oriented players.

A friendly interface and stable performance define Ricky Casino, offering a casual yet reliable environment for a wide spectrum of gaming preferences.

King Billy Casino channels classic casino spirit into a modern platform, delivering recognizable themes supported by contemporary reward systems.

Immersive visuals and layered slot mechanics are at the core of Dragonslots, creating a narrative-driven casino experience.

Lukki Casino appeals to players seeking direct access and minimal friction, focusing on fast loading times and intuitive controls.

Casinonic provides a structured and dependable gaming framework, blending modern slots with transparent operational standards.