‘LETTITOR ce -
“You said you didn’t give a fuck abouthockey — ._. P.S. Oh, one more thing: can all you right-wingers stop calling what the
Andi heard that he y Coalition is doing a “coup?” A coup is something that happens that results in
HEVEr REGIE SOMEONE SAY t efe ore _violence and bloodshed, not a slight leregilatity in Parliament. The fact that you
—The T: rapioriir Hi, ip, “F ireworks’ : oo people refer to this minor situation as a “coup” shows just how divorced from
reality you are, and how little perspective ‘you possess.
Okay, I’Il make the right wing a deal; you guys can act without perspective

Ga me over, Stephen and call this a “coup,” but if that’s the way it’s going to be, us on the left

can call Stephen Harper a “fascist” and a “Nazi” all we want. Yeah, it would

December 3 1" ended 2008 with a bang as usual, but for Canadian sports fans,‘ be slanderous, anu and irresponsible, but i no different than what you
there was a special treat this year; Canada beat the Americans in the Word | ee hypocrites are doing. Just desserts, I'd say.
Juniors of hockey.

Hell of a game, too. We were down by three goals, then came back and won
seven-to-four. Not bad, I’d say.

I guess the TSN camera crew got bored watching the absolute rout taking
place on the ice, because they began to scan the audience, filming the fans who
were losing their minds over this win. But there was one fan who wasn’t losing
his mind and getting excited. In fact, this particular fan looked like ae was about
as animated as a walking corpse.

Turns out that walking corpse was Stephen Harper, who had come to watch
the game with his family. At first I felt angry at the camera crew for blemishing
an otherwise perfect game-by showing us the country’s favourite snake in the

_ grass, but then I started feeling something I’d never felt before. They say on that
day, my heart grew two sizes bigger.

l actually began feel bad for Stephen Harper. Never thought I’d ever say
that, but it happened. I felt bad for him because it must have been so strange for
him to cheer against the Americans for once. It must’ ve been like going through
the looking glass for the poor guy. He’s probably still not sure how he pulled it
off himself.

_ After all, here’s a guy who’s supported the Americans on everything; their
anti-cavironmentlisci, the War in Iraq, hell, I bet Stephen would let them
implement Manifest Destiny if they asked nice enough. Cheering for Canada for
once must have been the bravest thing Stephen Harper’s ever done. Well, not
the bravest; dealing with that whole Coalition thing must have taken the cake.

.When I think about the courage, the guts, the sheer ballsiness it takes to tell
Canadians that the opposition parties are subverting democracy by forming a_ .
coalition, and then to subvert democracy yourself by suspending Parliament and a
continuing to rule as if you had a real mandate... well, that’s true heroism. _ ;

 

Your friend in high Beli, ‘ oo. | .

   

 

 

 

 

I am astonished that this article [“Feminism: Providing a foundation for easier sex,” Issue #13 Vol. 35, December 1“, 2008] was published. It is sexist and badly written. The author claims
to understand and represent feminism (an entire academic and political movement) but clearly fails to do so. The most authentic part of the article is a statement of frustration with social
expectations that constrain members of both sexes but he doesn’t show any sign of understanding this. Publishing this article during the week of the anniversary of the Montreal Massacre
shows either complete ignorance or a deliberate poke in the eye of those who champion higher ideals such as equal rights for members of oppressed groups.

In 1989, fourteen young women were shot and killed at Montreal’s L’Ecole Polytechnique by a single gunman in an effort to eradicate feminism. The women were engineering students
and they represented a threat to patriarchal authority. This was an isolated incident but it is part of a larger cultural context in which violence against women is common. It is one incident
in a series of pressures which keep women marginal. There may be no one individual oppressor, but women are vulnerable economically, sexually and socially in a world that invests a lot
in what women should or should not be.

In the early part of the last century, people were sometimes killed because they were black. They may have been killed for being “uppity” and black. To exceed one’s social position has
long been punishable by death. For a long time these racial murders were seen as private, as one man maintaining order in his own domain. It has taken a concerted shift of consciousness to
see and respond to these attacks as part of a systemic oppression.

Why does this matter? If Brendan had been talking about black people and had suggested they be “allowed to compete vigorously in the market society,” [emphasis added] he would
have been scorned. Who is he to allow anything? And what does he think women have been doing anyway? To equate “the laws of insanity” (by the way, where do they keep these laws?)
with “the imagination of feminism” doesn’t make any sense. If having a penis was all it took to protect a person from violence and discrimination, feminists might want just that, but what
we really want is freedom from oppression for all people!

The editorial staff at The Other Press has an obligation to raise the bar. I believe that we all need to do our best to make the world a better place. We all need to work hard to root out
unconscious behaviour and think hard about what we’re creating. A college newspaper represents the best and the brightest. It sets the tone for a generation and the new generation will be
responsible for a lot. It is essential that the people at The Other Press take responsibility for the content of the newspaper. We can do better than this and we should!

—Enmily Mclvor