By Kayla Freeman, Contributor
Since 2019, metal straws have taken over. Every day, I see at least 50 metal straws in peoples’ beverages. That should be a good thing, right? To some extent it is, but people aren’t choosing sustainability for the right reasons. Using a metal straw is currently a trend, but are metal straws even the right answer to saving our oceans and marine life?
Of course not. Imagine if saving the environment was that easy. Every day, 500 million disposable plastic straws are used and will likely end up in our waterways. This statistic can scare many people into thinking that the solution lies in replacing plastic straws with their metal counterparts. However, many people fail to realize what materials and emissions go into making a metal straw.
The energy used to create one metal straw is roughly equivalent to creating 90 plastic straws, and also produces carbon emissions equivalent to 150 plastic straws. This may not seem like a lot, but in order to offset the environmental impact of creating a metal straw, it must be used over 150 times.
We also need to consider the harsh reality of nickel mining that is necessary in order to create these trendy accessories. The Philippines is a predominant nickel supplier. Much of the soil in Palawan, a major nickel supplier in the Philippines, has been reduced to a wasteland.
Metal straws are not the only items that are made out of nickel, meaning that they are not the sole contributors to the destruction of soil in Palawan. However, they are trendy accessories and are produced excessively. This is evidenced through the variety of designs metal straws are offered in. Our materialist society does not hesitate to contribute to this “fast fashion” accessory, with celebrities such as Jeffree Star capitalizing on the movement by coming out with their own packs of metal straws. The excessive production of metal straws contradicts the environmentalist intentions that they are meant to fulfill.
If you’re purchasing a metal straw, you would assume that it would be made out of metal, right? Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Many of these items are not labelled due to their “eco-friendly” branding strategy as they are not required to list any ingredients since the straw is not being consumed. Safe metal straws should be made with food-grade stainless steel as any other materials may corrode over time. Safe metal straws should be made with food-grade stainless steel as any other materials may corrode over time.
Additionally, painted or coloured straws also pose a risk of either contaminating the drink or containing unsafe chemicals such as Bisphenol A (BPA), which is known to cause an array of health risks. Metal straws might not be the only alternative to disposable plastic straws, but they are very popular because of their durability and cost-effectiveness.
Make no mistake, I think that we should try to be as eco-friendly as possible. But if you are going to opt for a reusable straw, try to purchase locally and support Canadian businesses, such as Glass Sipper. It’s important to keep in mind that when you are trying to be sustainable to be aware of what goes into the production of “eco-friendly alternatives” because sometimes the good intent gets lost in the action.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
By Ember, Contributor
Recently, there’s been a lot of push for individual initiatives to combat climate change. This can be considered admirable and noble – but they hardly scratch the surface of the problem. These initiatives tend to overlook industries as the largest contributors to climate change, the Global North’s role in plastic pollution and they place misdirected blame on disabled people.
In a scientific paper that outlines that the Pacific Ocean is rapidly accumulating plastic, Laurent Lebreton et al. states the following findings.
“Over three-quarters of the [Great Pacific Garbage Patch] mass was carried by debris larger than five cm and at least 46 per cent was comprised of fishing nets. Microplastics accounted for eight per cent of the total mass but 94 per cent of the estimated 1.8 (1.1–3.6) trillion pieces floating in the area,” they say.
Almost half of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch’s mass is abandoned gear from industry fishing. Another 20 per cent of the mass is thought to be remnants from the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami in Japan. In comparison, Seth Borenstein, a journalist, noted the extremely small proportion of plastic waste made up of plastic straws.
“Straws on average weigh so little – about one sixty-seventh of an ounce or .42 grams – that all those billions of straws add up to only about 2,000 tons of the nearly nine million tons of plastic waste that yearly hits the waters,” Borenstein said.
Banning plastic straws seems pretty asinine when you consider a few different factors. It’s interesting how alternatives like the new Starbucks lids were created to replace the use of plastic straws, but they have been found to contain an equivalent amount or more plastic than what a plastic straw contains. Christian Britschgi, an associate editor at Reason, described the miniscule impact of the Starbucks nitro lids.
“Right now, Starbucks patrons are topping most of their cold drinks with either 3.23 grams or 3.55 grams of plastic product, depending on whether they pair their lid with a small or large straw. The new nitro lids meanwhile weigh either 3.55 or 4.11 grams, depending again on lid size,” said Britschgi.
Point blank, this “solution” is performative – it is a cheap tactic spearheaded by a corporation to make the common folk feel like they’re making a difference in regards to climate change when it really amounts to nothing.
Then why not use paper straws or reusable straws? Well, because these options are awful. Often times, banning plastic straws does not take into account how alternative straw materials can be detrimental to disabled people.
“Biodegradable [straw] options often fall apart too quickly or are easy for people with limited jaw control to bite through. Silicone straws are often not flexible – one of the most important features for people with mobility challenges. Reusable straws need to be washed, which not all people with disabilities can do easily. And metal straws, which conduct heat and cold in addition to being hard and inflexible, can pose a safety risk,” said Godoy.
Another thing to keep in mind is that biodegradable straws can also be made of soy – a common allergen – and because it isn’t food, corporations aren’t required to disclose ingredients on the packaging.
Putting the responsibility on disabled people to survive in public without plastic straws because you don’t believe stores should offer straws is venomous.
It’s not that disabled people don’t care about the environment – we absolutely do. But instead of demonizing us for existing, shouldn’t able-bodied people help create an accessible, environmentally friendly alternative to plastic straws?
Currently, I am a student studying earth and environmental science, and I’m aiming to get a minor in sustainability. I am also disabled and I realize that climate change is larger than any one of us.
However, it’s important to note that often disabled people are the ones being accused of holding the environmental movement back, while corporations are conveniently cropped out of the frame. The big picture of climate change and environmental collapse is large enough for all of us to fit inside – so please don’t forget that industries play a large part, too.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
By Nicholas Marshall, Contributor
Grits. Reds. Libs. We need to talk. Let us consider Justin Trudeau’s domination in the 2015 federal elections. Here, Trudeau, the son of the heavenly father of our Constitution, descended from the lofty peaks of Canadian society to liberate our wretched souls from the clutches of Harper’s conservative austerity. I take it you were feeling pretty confident this time around. Trudeau was a media darling, beloved on the world stage and, in contrast with our neighbors to the south, a head of government that was hoping to unite our diverse population with Canada’s virtues of multiculturalism and equality.
But then, the scandals started rolling in. They began as relatively innocuous misdemeanours; his trip to India donning garb of another culture may have seemed like a substantial embarrassment, but it was only foreshadowing whats to come.
Things started to get more serious when the Liberal government approved the expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline. The Trans Mountain pipeline is poised to carve a path straight through the Liberal rhetoric on climate change, and undermine every word that spilled out of Trudeau’s mouth about protecting future generations.
Nothing could have prepared us for the big fish: the SNC-Lavalin scandal was a disaster for public confidence in our prime minister. A private corporation lobbying the government to change the law in their favour so that they could escape conviction was and is an international scandal. But to also pressure and demote your attorney general and then lead a coverup inside your own cabinet demonstrates a profound lack of respect for the political process and the rule of law. In fact, according to the ethics commissioner, the sitting prime minister had broken the law. At least things couldn’t get any worse, right?
We soon learned that the prime minister was “two-faced” in more ways than one.
So, where do we go from here? Justin Trudeau has been involved in scandal after scandal, while Andrew Scheer, the Conservative party leader, is climbing in the polls. Scheer, the leader who pinky promises that his personal opinions about gay people won’t inform his policy decisions.
So what do we do?
The truth is, most people like how the Liberals brand themselves, but in practice they don’t like watching their feminist darling sell war machines to Saudi Arabia. So, perhaps it’s time to wake up to the fact that Liberals campaign themselves as New Democrats and govern themselves as Conservatives, especially when they know no one is looking.
This election, it’s time we build our image of the Liberal party based on actions and not on words. We should recognise that the policies the Liberals win on are the actual policies of the NDPs and the policies they sneak in behind our backs are Conservative.
And, we must keep in mind that when Canadians don’t have the appetite for a scandal-ridden Liberal, voting Conservative is a counterproductive exercise in masochism (see Doug Ford). When your sheep start to bite, you don’t start shearing wolves.
This election has only just begun, so now is the time to get to know your candidates and evaluate them based on what they offer you as a citizen. Take nothing at face value, and remember that these people may not be exactly what you expected. But if you give it time, I’m sure they will all reveal their true colours to you.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
The Campus Store will no longer be selling single-use plastic bags in an effort to make McMaster University more sustainable.
According to Donna Shapiro, the campus store director, the store was selling over 20,000 plastic or tote bags each year.
“We look at the waste on campus and we look at the plastic bags. Those bags are heavy duty plastic bags. We’re not talking about Walmart plastic bags, because they have to hold textbooks,” said Shapiro.
The Campus Store has previously taken measures to reduce the environmental impact of bag sales in the past, charging 15 cents per plastic bag. While the initiative failed to reduce plastic bag sales, it prompted the store to look into other more sustainable alternatives.
Louise Walker, the sales floor manager at the Campus Store, said it took their team a long time to evaluate alternatives such as paper or compostable bags. Each time they pursued an option in hopes that it would pose a solution, she said, they realized that it was much worse than plastic.
Eventually, she reached out to the university and got into contact with Kate Whalen. Whalen is the former developer and manager of McMaster’s office of sustainability as well as the current senior manager of academic sustainability programs at the university.
While many at the Campus Store supported the elimination of single-use plastic bags, they also considered student needs.
“I think my biggest concern was that the thought of a customer coming here and not being able to put their items in [a bag]. So Kate [Whalen] helped us think about the donation bin, where we could take donation plastic bags,” explained Shapiro.
The donation bin encourages shoppers to bring their own bag. If customers do not have their own bags, they can reuse a donated plastic bag or purchase a water resistant tote bag for 75 cents.
“The goal is not to sell the bag — the goal is for students to bring a backpack, their own recyclable bag or to carry it in their hands,” emphasized Walker.
The campaign, called “Maroon is the New Green,” launched on Aug. 24. The initiative is the first of many steps the Campus Store intends to take to make McMaster more sustainable, according to Walker.
“We’re looking at changing a mindset. People are used to bringing their bags to the grocery store but they’re not used to bringing their bags here,” said Walker.
The Campus Store’s remaining plastic bags, as well as bags donated by the store’s staff have been filtered into the donation box.
The store’s green team, a group of staff interested in supporting more sustainable practices, is now working closely with a group of students in the SUSTAIN 3S03 course to raise awareness of the campaign and continue to help the store look at greener alternatives.
The Campus Store is already looking at what reusability could look like in the future. They are working with student groups to create more sustainable products, such as washable cutlery sets and stainless steel straws.
“It fulfills two things: it’s a student entrepreneur we will be supporting, but also they are reusable materials,” said Shapiro.
She added that the Campus Store is always open to feedback about how they are able to improve a process. Students are encouraged to provide feedback to the Campus Store regarding their green initiatives at [email protected].
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
Faced with uncertain futures as a result of a rapidly warming climate, young people in Hamilton are joining a worldwide movement to urge leaders to take immediate and far-reaching action on the climate emergency.
Since March, a student-led activist group has been coordinating regular demonstrations outside of Hamilton city hall as part of the Fridays for future movement.
The strikes bring together students, environmental organizations and citizens in Hamilton.
The environmental community of Hamilton students, an alliance of environmental groups across the Hamilton and Catholic Wentworth district school boards, helps organize the climate strikes. They are also supported by Fridays for future, who organize climate strikes around the world.
The Fridays for future campaign began in August 2018 when Greta Thunberg, then 15, protested for three weeks in front of the Swedish parliament instead of going to school, demanding that leaders address the climate crisis.
Inspired by her actions, students from around the world began holding regular strikes to demand that their leaders take immediate action to address the climate crisis. Many protestors referenced a recent report from the United Nations international panel on climate change to highlight the urgency of the climate crisis.
The 2018 IPCC report found that it is of critical importance to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre industrial levels. According to the report, any warming above that threshold will run the risk of long-lasting, irreversible changes resulting in major loss of life.
The report states that, in order to meet the warming target, it will be necessary to substantially reduce emissions worldwide. Meeting the 1.5°C limit would require reducing emissions to 45 per cent of 2010 emission levels by 2030, and net zero by 2050.
“Limiting global warming to 1.5°C would require rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society,” stated the report.
Many of the young people who will bear the greatest effects of the climate emergency are not yet old enough to vote. The Fridays for future movement provides a means for young people to demand that policy makers make the necessary changes to preserve the planet for future generations.
“The older generation, they might be more concerned with short term economic gain, but that’s because they’re not going to be around to see when our planet is on fire,” said Stephanie Foucault, an organizer of the Hamilton climate strikes. “The youth need to step up and really take charge of their future.”
The Fridays for future campaign is calling for an end to fossil fuel, demanding support for workers and developing countries during the transition to a renewable economy.
In Hamilton, protestors spoke specifically about the need to hold city councilors accountable to their pledge to substantially reduce the city’s emissions.
“Hamilton declaring a climate emergency is a great step, but we want to make sure that it’s followed up with some tangible action,” said Emmalee Frketich, co-founder of ECHS.
According to Angela Dittrich, an intern at environment Hamilton who was present at a climate strike held on May 24, transportation is a key area in which Hamilton can make changes to meet the emission reduction targets. For example, Dittrich stated that eliminating Hamilton street railway area rating would increase funding, which could lead to service improvements and make HSR service more equitable.
The fridays for future group plans to continue holding regular strikes to bring climate issues to the attention of leaders and citizens in Hamilton. Young people’s futures are on the line, and many feel that they have no choice but to stand up and demand change.
“It’s very frustrating to see how people are killing our earth,” noted a grade three Lyons Gate Montessori student present at one of the strikes. “If someone’s going to speak up we thought it might as well be us to help the earth.”
On Jan. 30, 2017, the McMaster Students Union announced plans to eliminate single-use plastic water bottles from Union Market as part of a strategy to work towards a more sustainable campus.
However in the fall of 2017, the newly elected board of directors decided to return single use bottled water to Union Market. Soon afterwards, boxed water was pulled from shelves.
Proponents of the boxed water project say that it was the first step of a plan to work towards sustainability on campus. According to others, the project was doomed from the beginning.
Former MSU president Justin Monaco-Barnes introduced boxed water as a more environmentally friendly alternative to bottled water. Monaco-Barnes was elected on a platform of sustainability, and had included the implementation of boxed water in his campaign.
Boxed water cartons are recyclable and made from well-managed forests. Furthermore, less energy is required to ship, produce and package boxed water bottles.
Prior to making the decision to phase out single use plastic water bottles, the MSU Advocacy team, led by Blake Oliver, had compiled a research report considering the sustainability, marketability, and financial considerations of implementing boxed water.
According to Monaco-Barnes, boxed water was meant to be the first step in a long-term plan to push the university to eliminate single use plastic water bottles altogether. By taking a moral stance against single use plastic water bottles, the board of directors hoped to encourage the rest of the university to follow suit.
Monaco-Barnes stated the next step in the project would have been to implement a water bottle filling station at Union Market complete with options for adding flavour and carbonation.
“By selling plastic water bottles again and undoing this ban, the MSU has effectively undone not only the work that was put into this effort, but has also undone the planned multi-staged process by removing the underlying principle,” stated Monaco-Barnes in a letter responding to the decision.
According to Jeffrey Campana, the current Union Market manager, the main issue with boxed water was the financial losses. Bottled water had been one of Union Market’s top selling items, and the switch to boxed water led to revenue losses resulting from both a lack of student interest and a lower profit margin on boxed water.
Campana was a cashier at the time that boxed water was introduced. He stated that the lack of interest in boxed water was a result of a higher cost, reluctance to purchase an unfamiliar product and an ineffective advertising campaign.
Boxed water was more expensive than the least expensive bottled water. For example, Eska was sold for $1.13 for a 500 mL bottle, while a box of water the same size cost $2.49.
Additionally, Campana noted that students were hesitant to purchase boxed water due to its unusual design. Since there were other places on campus that continued to sell bottled water, consumers were not forced to make the switch to boxed water.
Campana also stated that students were not effectively incentivized to purchase boxed water. In early January the MSU produced posters and infographics giving information about the environmental impact of bottled water. The graphics were displayed in Union Market.
However, according to both Campana and the 2016-2017 Union Market manager, a more robust and long term marketing campaign might have made boxed water sell more successfully.
The previous Union Market manager stated that she had not been properly consulted when deciding to phase out bottled water and market boxed water. The decision to transition to boxed water came as a directive from the board of directors instead of being a result of collaboration with Union Market Management.
Generally, the part time manager of Union Market is responsible for deciding what items to stock. However, since Union Market is owned and operated by the MSU, the students union president and board of directors can make decisions about what is sold.
If she had been consulted, the previous Union Market manager stated that she would have worked towards a long term advertising plan in preparation for the introduction of boxed water.
“I don't think it would have had the same results had I been a part of it like effectively,” she stated.
In addition to being more expensive for consumers, boxed was also more expensive to produce. This meant that Union Market made less money off of each unit of boxed water sold than what they made off of bottled water.
“I think it's a great product, I just would never sell it. Simply because I don't make money off of it, the MSU doesn't make money off it,” said Campana.
For Monaco-Barnes however, the overall purpose of the campaign was not to sell more boxed water. Ideally, students would switch to reusable water bottles and would therefore stop buying water from Union Market altogether.
Monaco-Barnes had anticipated that a revenue loss was likely to occur. However from his perspective, the environmental considerations outweighed the financial losses.
“Because it's such an important cause, becoming more sustainable and reducing carbon footprint, I think it's okay if it's going to take a bit of a financial hit,” said Monaco-Barnes. “That's the crux with sustainability […] if it was an easy, cheap, simple solution, everyone would be doing it," he added.
To help offset some of the financial losses from the removal of bottled water, the board of directors decided to raise the costs of other best-selling items at Union Market such as chocolate milk. In 2017, the price of chocolate milk increased from $1.86 to $2.25.
According to MSU General Manager John McGowan, prices were raised so that Union Market could continue to financially support its cost centres. However, they not raised to the point of recoupling the lost revenue from bottled water, as this would have made prices unaffordable.
According to the Union Market manager at the time, however, this price increase was not enough to make up the losses from bottled water sales.
Bottled water has since been reintroduced, meaning that Union Market is no longer facing revenue losses resulting from its absence. However, the price of chocolate milk has not been brought back down, despite being raised to help compensate the loss of bottled water.
Campana noted that the price of chocolate milk may still have increased due to inflation.
“$1.86 is miles away from being financially sound in 2019,” stated Campana.
Monaco-Barnes noted that the structure of the MSU makes continuity difficult. Due to the high rate of turnover in student government, long-term projects often do not get seen to completion.
While the overall project was ambitious, the implementation gap and lack of year to year continuity meant that the boxed water plan was short-lived.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
By: Drew Simpson
On Feb. 26, the Green is not White environmental racism workshop took place at the Hamilton Public Library’s Wentworth room. The free, open-to all workshop, garnered intrigue from attendees interested in learning about environmental racism.
Presenters sat on a raised platform and the room was filled with chart easel pads, activist posters and resources. The Green is Not White workshop, which is organized by Adapting Canadian Work and Workplaces in partnership with the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists, Environment Hamilton and the Hamilton Centre for Civic Inclusion started its seven-hour agenda with a land acknowledgement, icebreakers and then laid down foundational knowledge.
Environmental racism is originally defined by Prof. Benjamin Chavis as the racial discrimination and unequal enforcement of environmental policies. The types of environmental racism have expanded since this 1987 definition and currently encompass air pollution, clean water, climate migration, extreme weather, food production, gentrification and toxins in the community and workplace.
[Best_Wordpress_Gallery id="237" gal_title="Green is not white 1"]
The crust of the issue is that ethnic minorities are disproportionately exposed to environmental hazards. Black and Indigenous populations are most affected by environmental racism, yet this makes it no less of a collective issue. Local case studies were highlighted to drive this message close to home.
For example, most of Hamilton’s waste facilities are clustered just north of and within residential areas. This includes a proposed electronic waste processing facility, which can cause lead and mercury exposure, and an existing chemical wastes facility that is known for chemical explosions causing evacuations and serious injury. Loads of biosolids have been trucked through neighbourhoods posing disease risks from pathogens, concerns of terrible odours and ammonia use for steam filtering.
Studies show that Hamilton neighbourhoods with single-parent families and low education are the most exposed to air pollution. Since these neighbourhoods have fewer resources and are systematically marginalized, they are targeted by acts of environmental racism. The hashtag #EnvRacismCBTUACW continually discusses case studies across Canada.
[Best_Wordpress_Gallery id="239" gal_title="Green is not white 2"]
Along with the extensive examples of Canadians and Hamiltonians living in dire conditions due to environmental racism, as well as the government’s oversight of this issue, various Hamilton organizations have taken it upon themselves to drive change.
This workshop was the third part of a four-phase action research initiative on environmental racism by ACW, which develops tools to better the environmental conditions of jobs and the workplace and CBTU, a coalition that breaks the silence on African-Canadians’ labour issues. While this third stage involves community engagement, the fourth and final stage involves a joint report and video that will be housed on both the ACW and CBTU websites.
The slogan “Green is Not White” highlights that green jobs and environmentally safe conditions should not be reserved for white people. People of colour are most likely to work and live in dire conditions, and therefore deserve economic justice and access to clean water and land.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
By: Rya Buckley
Mia Sandhu’s paper cut outs depict images of women partially or entirely nude, amidst backgrounds of leaves or behind curtains. She began working on these figures four years ago as a way of working through her own ideas about women’s sexuality.
Sandhu is a multidisciplinary artist currently based in Toronto. Her work has been exhibited in Toronto, Kingston, Halifax and Hamilton. She is a member of The Assembly gallery here in Hamilton, has done an artist residency at the Cotton Factory and also exhibited her work at Hamilton Artists Inc.
Last November, Sandhu exhibited her collection Soft Kaur at The Assembly, which featured playful figures who are comfortable with their sexuality. The name of the exhibition, which alludes to both to the softness and fierceness of women, incorporates the half Punjabi artist’s cultural background into her work.
“It's the idea [of] a female warrior spirit and the idea of equality that exists… Singh and Kaur are these given names and it was designed to eliminate status and… [create] men and women as equal. And I liked the play on this idea of soft female spirit slash warrior spirit [and] also the sexual undertone,” Sandhu explained.
There are other motifs in Sandhu’s work that suggest a dialogue between Sandhu’s culture and her evolving ideas on sexuality. A lover of Indian fabrics, silks and tapestries, Sandhu includes these aesthetic features in her work through the exotic plants in the environment her figures reside in. With the evolution of her work, she now references more domesticated plants that humans have formed a relationship with.
The silhouettes that are seen in Soft Kaur are also the result of Sandhu’s art’s progression. Her earlier work featured brown-bodied figures because Sandhu felt it more appropriate to use brown bodies in a work related to her upbringing and culture. Over time Sandhu employed more silhouettes in order to represent any woman, regardless of race.
The silhouettes do not broadcast as a uniform but as a canvas onto which women can project their own sexuality and ideas about sexuality. Sandhu is a believer in the fact that no one should decide for a woman how she should be represented sexually in society.
“I want women to be safe and I want them to feel safe and feel free and strong and empowered… [W]e're autonomous [and] each of us should choose for ourselves how we want to be represented sexually or in any other way because we're individuals. Hopefully we're not represented with any sort of attachment to shame. We should just be proud of who we are,” Sandhu said.
Facilitating space for women to speak about their ideas on sexuality was one of Sandhu’s aims behind this body of work. She finds it interesting to observe how her audiences connect with and interpret her art. By enabling dialogue, she finds that women can begin to realize the experiences that they share.
Exhibiting at The Assembly also gave Sandhu a location to speak with others about her work and to receive feedback. One thing that she appreciates about the Hamilton art scene is the sincerity of the participants who she feels are open to talking about important issues and are creating art that is driven by content.
While there is no linear narrative to Sandhu’s work, the content is obviously evolving as Sandhu’s own views develop. One of the motifs whose symbolism has changed over the years is the cloak that Sandhu’s figures have covering and revealing their bodies.
“[The cloak] represents shame, it represents personal space and it represents a number of other things as well… But it's like they're choosing how much of themselves that they're revealing and then as the work evolves, it's like the… cloak… stops being on them directly and starts being like in their space around them and they're allowing you in, or not letting you in,” explained Sandhu.
Through her work, Sandhu is also choosing to what extent she decides to let her audiences in. She is working on a new set of drawings and will continue to explore women’s sexuality and empowerment in the future. Her artwork is her diary, the paper cut outs and pencils replacing the thousands of elusive words that would be required to speak on the complicated ideas that she depicts.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
On Jan. 30, the annual Bell Let’s Talk Day, an advertising campaign created by Bell Canada, took the country by storm. In an effort to raise awareness and combat stigma surrounding mental health in Canada, Bell donated money to mental health funds for every social interaction with campaigns hashtag.
While the world tweeted, snapped and Instagram-ed away, The McMaster Women’s Athletic Leadership Committee took it one step further and hosted their first-ever Bell Let’s Talk event.
The event consisted of McMaster student-athletes sharing their personal stories in an open and safe environment that was open to the entire McMaster community. Five student-athletes, Sabrina Schindel, Allison Sippel, Aurora Zuraw, Nicolas Belliveau and Louis Sharland, took the floor and led discussions on depression, eating disorders, language and anxiety and men’s mental health.
http://www.instagram.com/p/BtRPDA0BkSb/
The event was a success with a great turn out that included open discussion and much-needed conversations on mental health and how it affects athletes, in addition to the right steps that need to be taken to combat different stigmas.
“At first, I was expecting it to be a small event with just members of WALC, but to have my teammates, friends and people I didn’t even know come out to support was so amazing and inspiring,” said Sippel, the initiator for the event.
The idea for the event came up after Sippel, a cross-country runner, wanted to be able to create an open space for people to be able to talk about their battles with mental health.
“I feel like if we are able to create a space where people are open to talking, there would be less of a stigma around it,” said Sippel.
She first wrote down her story after she got out of the hospital after suffering from an eating disorder. After reading it to her close friends and family members, she never really shared it with the public. But when the idea of creating an event for Bell Let’s Talk came up, the idea of the panel sharing personal stories came to mind.
Working with Claire Arsenault, McMaster’s Athlete Services Coordinator and WALC, the panel that would originally be a conversation for members of the committee grew to more.
“I was happy that male athletes joined in and it was really inspirational that the group of us could be able to share our stories,” said Sippel.
🗣️ #OneTeamForMentalHealth 🗣️
Ask someone how they are doing.
📸 @MPHcentral#WeAreONE | #BellLetsTalk pic.twitter.com/OlmEeBWH9r
— Ontario University Athletics (@OUAsport) January 31, 2019
Each speaker shared their story then opened up the floor for discussion, answering questions in regard to their experiences, advice for others and much more.
During the panel, Sippel shared her story about how her eating disorder led her to be hospitalized when she was 14 years old. After losing too much weight and no longer being allowed to run, her journey to bounce back was not easy.
“This illness had turned mind against body and person against person because nurses were trained to trust no one,” Sippel explained about her time in the hospital.
Eventually, Sippel showed signs of improvement and was allowed to leave the hospital and return to her everyday life. Fast-forward to today, and she is now running on the Mac cross-country team while trying her best to stay on top of her condition.
“It’s a lifetime of fighting against my mind so I never had to go back,” Sippel said.
For Sippel, having the student-athletes lead this conversation was important for a number of reasons.
“I feel like a lot of times, it is frowned upon to express our feelings. If we start the conversation, there is no better way to set an example for our fellow students,” said Sippel. “Hopefully five students sharing their stories can spiral into something bigger and start a movement.”
https://www.instagram.com/p/BtREZWEh1QA/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet
Schindel, another one of the five student-athletes who shared their stories, is a lacrosse player who suffered from depression. Through the ups and downs of dealing with her battle, she eventually discovered that staying busy and active is what kept helped her out the most. This meant that when her lacrosse season was over, she would have to find something to keep her occupied so she did not fall down that dark hole again.
“Realizing that no one is beyond help and getting in front of my depression before it could do the same damage it used to,” Schindel explained as the steps she takes to keep herself from falling again.
Schindel’s story, though devastating, is more common amongst young people than one may think. This is why it is so important that these conversations are happening. Having the bravery to start the conversation, and sharing tips and resources with their fellow students is a great way for Marauders to do their part in helping end the stigma surrounding mental health.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
According to a 2012 survey from Euromonitor, more than half of global consumers took environmental considerations into account when making purchasing decisions.
However, choosing to eat sustainably is not a simple box to check, but rather a complex set of considerations. Small farms, organic certification, and local farms are generally accepted as guidelines for environmentally sustainable produce. But what do these considerations really mean, and how do they affect cost?
Advocates of small farms argue that they allow for environmentally friendly farming practices that larger farms tend to discourage.
Large farms are often monocultures, meaning that fields only produce a single crop. Monocultures are easier to manage than farms with high diversity, and they tend to produce higher yields. However, monocultures are more prone to pests, diseases and weed infestations due to the lack of diversity.
Since small farms cannot produce a high yield on a single crop, they often have more diversity. Practices such as crop rotation and intercropping are commonly used methods to plant multiple products in smaller fields. These practices have the environmental benefits of improving soil fertility and reducing dependence on fossil fuels and pesticides.
However, since small farms produce smaller yields on individual crops, it can be hard to compete with larger grocery stores.
According to Shane Coleman, the owner of Dilly’s Farmacy at the Hamilton Farmers’ Market, it can be difficult to match the prices offered by major grocery stores, especially when they offer specials during peak season.
“Grocery stores sell maybe 5000 items. But they choose what’s in season and they’ll sell that at a very cheap cost,” stated Coleman.
The concept of economies of scale explains why large grocery stores can afford to offer specials. The more a manufacturer can produce, the less production costs. Therefore mass produced products cost less for the consumer.
However, Coleman still tries to keep costs on par with the major grocery stores. The average cost for a pound of tomatoes at Dilly’s Farmacy this past week was $2.50. This was cheaper than the $2.90 average at Fortinos, but more expensive than Nations Fresh Food, whose tomatoes came in at an average of $1.90.
These disparities are not only due to farm size. Organic certification and farm location also have considerable impacts on price, quality, and environmental impact.
If a product is labeled organic, it means that every step of production has complied by a set of rules aimed at maintaining environmental and human health.
In Canada, any agricultural product that is labeled organic is regulated by the Canadian food inspection agency.
Rules for organic products in Canada limit or restrict the use of pesticides and fertilizers genetically modified organisms and synthetic organisms, among other limitations. Organic farmers also must use growing practices that reduce dependence on fossil fuels and pesticides, such as crop rotation, composting and non-pesticide pest control.
The organic label has the benefit of holding producers accountable and assuring consumers that standards have been met. According to public services and procurement Canada, standards recognized by producers, users, and government allows for “easy identification of product ingredients through labeling and common language, promotion of user confidence, and representation of a variety of views and expertise.”
However, not all farmers get organic certification, since it can be expensive and time consuming for small farmers to fulfill the requirements.
Certification costs can range from a few hundred dollars to over two thousand dollars. The more products that a farm produces, the more expensive certification will be. Therefore, for small farms, organic certification can be unaffordable.
It is also more expensive to grow organic food, since preservatives are not permitted to extend shelf life. Crops are lost to pests and considerable effort has to be made to prevent comingling between organic and non-organic crops.
The organic certification can be beneficial to assess quality and environmental impact at major grocery stores, where consumers are unable to communicate directly with producers. However, farmers’ markets give consumers the ability to ask farmers questions about their growing practices.
“You know the person, you talk to them,” said Coleman. “Usually the people that work at the market are really knowledgeable about the produce.”
Food produced locally is generally more fresh and nutritious and better for the environment due to shorter transportation time.
According to Gord Williams, partner at Williams Brothers at the Hamilton Farmers’ Market, the fresh food he offers sets him apart from major grocery stores. Since produce can be harvested and sold on the sameday, it is picked when it is at its ideal ripeness.
Though it seems counterintuitive, local produce can be more expensive than produce imported from outside of Canada. This is because utility and land costs are often lower outside of Canada. Canadian growers, especially those near large cities, must contend with high production costs in order to meet their yields.
While many environmentalists encourage local diets in order to promote sustainability, this only addresses part of the puzzle of what it means to eat ethically.
Many farms across Canada rely on migrant labour to work physically demanding, and sometimes dangerous, jobs. According to Coleman, it is difficult to find Canadians who are willing to do farm work.
Therefore temporary foreign agricultural workers come from countries where work is scarce to work on farms in Canada for minimum wage. Seasonal agricultural workers have reported substandard living conditions and unfair working conditions, as well as abuse.
Despite the environmental and benefits of eating Ontario produce, ethical questions remain.
Fruit and vegetable costs are highly dependent upon climate and growing conditions. In 2016, the costs of produce spiked in Canada in part as a result of water shortages in California. Because of climate change, fruit and vegetable prices are likely to continue to vary more than ever before.
The impact of rising produce costs is unevenly distributed. A 2016 survey from the University of Guelph Food Institute found that young people, low income households and people with less education are more vulnerable to price fluctuations. People in these groups are likely to stop buying fresh produce if the prices rise.
Environmentally sustainable food can be costly in the form of time and money for both consumers and producers. Sustainability is not a box to check, but rather an ongoing set of considerations that continuously fluctuate.
[spacer height="20px"][thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
