The study was conducted in collaboration with DEN’s student research team and professor Jeffrey Denis from the faculty of social sciences. It examined student experiences with racism at McMaster to inform efforts to create a more inclusive campus.
In the fall of 2023, DEN ran an Instagram poll asking followers if they had experienced discrimination on campus. Of the approximately 120 students who responded, 43 per cent reported experiencing racism.
Leilani Xue, a third-year sociology student and assistant director of DEN who worked on the research study, told The Silhouette that first-year students reported the highest instances of racism.
Xue noted that, upon reviewing other research studies on university campuses, the team identified a lack of open discussion and information about racism and discrimination at the undergraduate level. This, combined with the poll results, prompted the development of a larger research study examining how students of diverse backgrounds experience belonging, perceive discrimination and racism, and how these perceptions shape their overall comfort and sense of safety on campus.
From March 1 to 22, 2024, DEN’s research team collected 283 survey responses. The survey explored participants’ demographics, personal experiences with racism or discrimination, instances where they had witnessed racism, and their awareness of and satisfaction with campus services and resources.
The finalized report found that 16 per cent of students reported personal experiences with racism, while 37 per cent reported having witnessed it on campus.
Middle Eastern or West Asian students, followed by Black students, were most likely to report experiences of racism. Black, Middle Eastern, Latin American and South Asian students were most likely to report witnessing it.
Among religious groups, Jewish and Muslim students were the most likely to report experiencing discrimination, followed by Sikh and Hindu students, who reported feeling more affected than Christians or those without religious affiliations.
Most students who experienced racism said it significantly impacted their mental health, while many were unaware of campus resources. Those who knew about them often did not use them or report incidents.
Most students who experienced racism said it significantly impacted their mental health, while many were unaware of campus resources.
The report also provides recommendations for McMaster University to foster a more inclusive campus. These include increasing diversity among faculty, staff and university leadership and encouraging instructors to diversify curriculum content and discuss available resources. The team also suggested evaluating anti-racism and cultural competency training initiatives and raising awareness of the reporting process for racial discrimination.
Now, DEN’s research team is preparing for a second phase of research, set to launch between March and April 2025. This new study will collect qualitative data through focus groups, allowing researchers to engage directly with students, particularly those who identify as Black, Indigenous or as people of colour.
“Our first study helped us get a general understanding of [racism and discrimination on campus] . . . but now we want to actually talk to students and hear about their experiences on a lived experience level,” said Xue.
Our first study helped us get a general understanding of [racism and discrimination on campus] . . . but now we want to actually talk to students and hear about their experiences on a lived experience level.
Leilani Xue, Associate Director Diversity + Equity Network
Their goal for this second study is to collaborate with students, faculty and staff on campus to inform inclusive, student-centred policy changes.
The full study, published earlier this year, can be read online. For more information about DEN and the work it does, interested students can visit its website and Instagram.
The McMaster Students Union conducted the 2024 Your City Survey to gather student input on transportation, housing and food security, helping to shape its municipal advocacy priorities
The MSU Your City Survey, which closed on Dec. 4, 2025, collected feedback about McMaster students’ perceptions and experiences in Hamilton, covering topics such as housing, transit, food security and policing. The survey is anonymous but participants have the option to provide their email for a chance to win a gift card to the Grind.
The MSU developed the survey in 2011, running every few years, to address students’ concerns about Hamilton. It asks students about their perceptions of Hamilton’s job market, cultural scene and their likelihood of living in the city after graduation.
In 2015, the Your City Survey was updated to assess whether students’ perception of Hamilton had improved since its launch. The most recent collection of data was in 2018. The questions in the survey shifted focus to transit and neighbourhood safety, while also asking commuter students about their perspectives in Hamilton.
This past year, the survey aimed to inform the MSU’s municipal affairs priorities, including advocating to city councillors and submitting feedback on students’ experience with the housing market, transportation, food security and policing in Hamilton for the upcoming pre-budget submission to City Council.
According to Kerry Yang, the associate vice-president of MSU Municipal Affairs, a document outlining McMaster students’ priorities and concerns for the budget and the city’s plan will be created and presented to city councillors at a later date.
Yang, whose role involves lobbying city councillors and engaging with students on municipal priorities, shared her thoughts on how the survey has evolved since 2018.
“I think how it’s evolved is this survey is probably the most comprehensive one to come out. It’s not just focused on housing, transit but has sort of all topics we typically want to know from students. Because it’s been so long since we did a survey, it was important that this one would be all encompassing and give us a really good snapshot of what the student experience is like,” said Yang.
... because it’s been so long since we did a survey, it was important that this one would be all encompassing and give us a really good snapshot of what the student experience is like.
Kerry Yang, Associate Vice-President of Municipal Affairs McMaster Students Union
When developing the questions for this year’s survey, Yang mentioned they reviewed previous surveys and made an effort to not only ask about students’ housing and transit experience. This survey also inquired about what would encourage students to stay in Hamilton, such as affordable housing options and having a vibrant community with public parks and trails.
“I think the diversity of the questions this year and also just how comprehensive it is, is definitely an improvement in the survey which will hopefully serve as a basis for future surveys. The benefit of asking the same questions year after year is that it makes the survey easy to compare over time,” said Yang.
I think the diversity of the questions this year and also just how comprehensive it is, is definitely an improvement in the survey which will hopefully serve as a basis for future surveys. The benefit of asking the same questions year after year is that it makes the survey easy to compare over time
Kerry Yang, Associate Vice-President of Municipal Affairs McMaster Students Union
Yang noted that she anticipates differences in the results compared to previous surveys, as the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the rental market and other aspects of student life.
Additionally, Yang mentioned that one potential policy recommendation, based on questions in the survey, to be brought to city councillors would be to pass a cooling bylaw that aligns with the existing heating bylaw.
Yang explained that there are currently regulations requiring heating to be turned on at certain temperatures during specific times of the year, but no similar rule exists for cooling. She noted that many students both on-campus and off-campus lack air conditioning which leads to uncomfortable living conditions.
“We are going to propose directly to the city that they implement the same or similar bylaw where students are being protected from the heat,” said Yang.
The results of the Your City Survey are expected to be released later this year.
I often find myself faced with the internal battle of whether or not to wear makeup on a daily basis. For the most part, I take the time to apply my everyday look. Days when I’m tired or in too much of a rush to do my makeup I fear that I’ll be judged for not caring about what I look like. Why is it that if we go a day without looking the way people are used to seeing us, unwanted comments are almost inevitable?
“You look tired.”
“Are you sick?”
We’ve all been victims to the subtle shaming of a makeup-less face. But as often as women are shamed for not wearing makeup, we are also shamed when we become dependent on it.
TV ads featuring the best looking celebrities have always taught us that we need makeup to be as beautiful as them. For some reason, a woman is only powerful and desirable if she looks put together. The way she achieves this is through her perfect eyebrows and the right shade of lipstick. Studies have shown that women who wear a considerable amount of makeup are always taken more seriously than those who opt for a more natural look.
A New York Times article from 2011 entitled “Up the Career Ladder, Lipstick in Hand” states that makeup makes women appear more competent and amicable. According to the article, makeup can also increase people’s perceptions of a woman’s likability and trustworthiness. If makeup can enhance these valuable workplace traits, is whether or not we choose to wear it really our choice? In 2014, an article from the Huffington Post called “Makeup Is Not A Prerequisite For Success” challenged the notion that makeup is necessary for workplace professionalism. Sally McGraw argued that there are no laws stating that women must wear makeup in the work-place, and that there are other ways to look professional without makeup. Although these articles represent completely different opinions of makeup in the workplace, both contribute to the manipulation of what women should consider the “right” way of thinking.
Women are shamed regardless of whether or not they wear makeup. An example of this is the recent social media trend featuring a woman’s before and after makeup pictures with the caption “Girls, stop lying to us.” This form of shaming a woman for wearing makeup is particularly hurtful because it targets what she looks like without makeup, while simultaneously shaming her for altering her natural appearance. It is the perfect example of how society convinces us that we aren’t good enough regardless of what we do. Even celebrities are victimized as soon as they are spotted without makeup in public. “Demi Lovato leaves the gym looking like a mess” is considered a worthy piece of news in modern media, because breaking the illusion that celebrities always look like they are red-carpet ready is somehow frowned upon.
While society is busy looking for ways to tell women what they should and shouldn’t do with their appearance, they’re failing to remember one very important thing a woman has complete control over her decisions. Although makeup is something that has become normalized, opinions regarding how or when a woman should wear it are unwanted and unnecessary. Women do not need makeup to feel beautiful, but there’s no doubt that we will continue to wear it, and we shouldn’t be shamed for that choice.
I found myself ending off this past summer vacation seeking out new niches in the music world. One genre that really caught my ear was something that is known as “industrial.”
Industrial music—if I had to try to define it—is an experimental genre that is a chaotic cluster of lo-fi, harsh noise. The key ingredient to the industrial sound is distortion—not only of instruments, but also of voices and voice clips. Most notably, Throbbing Gristle, Cabaret Voltaire, SPK, Genesis P-Orridge, and Boyd Rice are prominent contributors to the industrial music genre.
When looking for recommendations, I had a song called “Turn Me On Dead Man” suggested to me, which was performed by the latter-most on that list. After the first 30 seconds of that three-minute video, I excitedly began to look up other songs by this artist—also known as Non—because he had the exact vibe I was looking for. After a quick Google search, I was overwhelmed by the results that popped up about this artist. Rice is best known for being a racist, misanthropist, sexist, nihilist, and last—but not least—for playing a large role in Anton LaVey’s Church of Satan. I paused the song I had been listening to so that I could focus on reading an essay he had written, titled “Revolt Against Penis Envy.” By the end of it, I was hoping to find out that what I had read was a satirical piece, but I was wrong. The ideas about rape, maintaining superior status to women, and general ideas of oppressing less privileged groups were so outlandish that I could hardly believe that someone genuinely had these ideas and published them on public forums. Unfortunately, the aforementioned essay was written in earnest; every problematic statement featured in this piece really was a recurring ideal that appeared in Rice’s interviews. I was in a nervous sweat by the time I got to the end, which Rice punctuated with reiterations of his philosophies: “Long live oppression! Long live love! Long live rape!”
The unfortunate thing with this sort of situation is that it’s very common in all facets of media and art. Many, many artists are problematic. The spectrum of problems is wide and far; there are perpetuators of archaic ideas, and further enactors of despicable actions. Whether it’s Woody Allen with his adopted daughter, Sean Penn with Madonna, Chris Brown with Rihanna, or Lena Dunham with just about everything, us consumers are faced with making a moral decision: do we value the consumption of art more than we do our own moral standing?
Such a question is difficult to grapple with, since the idea of the artist is intrinsically linked to the piece of art itself, which we more often than not happen to take for granted. Really, this question is not one that is answered consciously, but through the act of being ignorant and passive about what is being consumed. It isn’t always necessarily the case where an individual is decisively consuming a problematic piece of media—often, when the problematic history of an artist is brought to the attention of this consumer, they become open to learning about who this artist is as a person and what that means for the art they produce.
The problems come in when an individual is educated about the producer of art, yet chooses to ignore the situation. There is a revisiting of this question posed earlier: is the consumption of art valued above an individual’s moral standing? And if so, why? The argument that art can be separated from the artist and subsequently appreciated by an audience relies heavily upon the idea that a work of art is not an extension of an artist. To assume that an artistic piece is not a reflection of the artist’s ideals and interpretations of his experiences is absolutely unreasonable. I argue, absolutely, that any piece of art is a direct reflection of the artist himself.
In conversations along these lines, I can’t help but bring Roland Barthes into the equation. His essay titled “The Death of the Author” touches on this very issue. Essentially, Barthes argues that the image we get of an author is through his writing. According to Barthes, an author—Barthes is referring to writing, specifically, in his piece, but it is easily applied to all media—is born through his writing: we cannot conceive of the writer without first reading his work. The writing only exists through the interpretation of the reader. In Barthes’ opinion, interpretations of the piece of art as a whole are the basis of our understanding of the author. The author’s role in producing a body of text is a misconception of productivity. The author does not produce the text – he is influenced by many factors.
Through a metaphor posed by Barthes, the author is traditionally thought to “nourish” his writing, much like a “father to his child.” However, Barthes argues that the author is born “simultaneously” with his work. The main idea I am pulling from Barthes’ essay is that the author is a product of his writing, which is then interpreted by the readers. The entire work hangs on being read, and this reading colours the reader’s perception of the artist who has produced the work.
Needless to say, in lieu of all of this, I had to drop Boyd Rice from my slow-growing collection of industrial artists. The good news, though, is that there are many other talented artists in the same vein for me to explore. And fortunately, that can also be said about every other art form.
