«) Left-handed people have it the worst (¥ No excuses for sexual misconduct (¥ The #MeToo movement needs more patience And more! Metro Vancouver's municipal borders are horrifying > They were bad decades ago and they’re just getting worse Greg Waldock Staff Writer TT": Lower Mainland’s border gore is out of control, and it’s time to clean it up before expansion makes everything even worse. We have three Langleys (four if you count the historic Fort Langley site), two North Vancouvers, two Coquitlams, and one Lulu Island that manages to be completely covered by Richmond except for its entire peninsula, which is somehow part of New Westminster. It’s a confusing mess—anid that’s not even mentioning the cluster of small North Vancouver townships like Belcarra and Anmore, or the poetically named Electoral District A, which takes up a quarter of any Lower Mainland map and has a population roughly equivalent to a crowded SkyTrain. In short, it’s a disaster. It’s not hard to see how this happened. The Lower Mainland in the 19th and 20th centuries was a collision of many worlds: The rural Canadian farmstead, the exploding Pacific metropolis, and the European aristocratic mansions. It’s tempting to say that the Pacific metropolis simply overtook the other worlds to birth modern Vancouver, but that would be far too simple. Each different community asserted its personality and shape as the population grew in the latter half of the 1900s. Growth ended up being extremely uneven, municipalities couldn't change in time to cope, and Metro Vancouver was left with nearly a dozen different towns featuring wildly varying levels of wealth and poverty. This inability—and sometimes unwillingness—to change with the times is why one Langley pretends to be a farm town, the other pretends to be a pure Chectionad Dewinct 4 Image via Wikimedia suburb while also being an actual farm town, and Surrey is both absurdly massive and was once one of the poorest and most dangerous cities in Canada. While this problem isn’t catastrophically dire, it is incredibly inconvenient and confusing. It turns into a legitimate issue when electoral borders are factored in. Federal and Provincial ridings have different borders, and aren't in line with exact neighbourhoods and towns, but often share names—even when the names are outdated. For example, Clayton Heights borders the Langley township but is federally in the massive South Surrey riding. In a region already struggling to get voters to the polls, having a labyrinth of nearly identical names blocking people from finding their voting stations is a pretty big disincentive. I'm not going to suggest a solid alternative. Careless border placement is what started this in the first place, and I would probably just end up slapping a grid on the whole thing and calling it a day. However, the borders need to change, and there needs to be a system in place to allow them to do that. Metro Vancouver has not stopped growing, and neither has its neighbours. Abbotsford is one of the fastest-growing cities on the country, growing wider and denser all at once, and might even become part of Metro Vancouver someday. This problem is going to get worse before it gets better, unless all these municipalities do what municipalities almost never do: sit down together and figure out a way through their own red tape. What gets your goat: Couple profiles on Tinder >Go somewhere else to find your third Jessica Berget Opinions Editor I there anything more frustrating than not getting a message back on Tinder? The answer is yes, there is: Couple profiles. Don’t believe me? Just imagine you're swiping through the local singles in your area, you see a cute girl’s photo and, as you look through her profile, you realize that not only does she already have a boyfriend, but they’re just looking fora “sexy girl to have a fun time with.” Ugh. Tinder is predominantly seen as an online dating app, but it’s also used to help people find friends, get hook-ups, and, of course, engage in threesomes. Many straight couples use the app to find their “unicorn’—someone who joins a couple as a third partner for sex. Sometimes this even means being romantically and sexually exclusive with that couple. The term “unicorn” is used in this case because people willing to engage in threesomes—much less with strangers over the internet— are often rare and hard to find. As someone who is interested in both men and women, it is irritating to me when couples make profiles looking for bisexual or lesbian women to spice up their sex life. To find these “unicorns,” couples must edit their profile to be interested in women so that only women come up on their feed. Unsurprisingly, many of the profiles on Tinder, if you have your settings set to only show women, are straight couples looking for bi or lesbian women to be their third, which is frustrating when you're just trying to meet other women. Of course, not all couples who do this are straight, but it seems there are a significant amount of them in the way they fetishize gay women, especially when referring to them as “unicorns,” a term that I think has some underlying problems. Couples should know better than to use gay or bi women’s spaces to get their own needs met. There are not a lot of women who identify as bisexual or lesbian on Tinder as it is, so to make a profile for you and your partner to clog my Tinder feed with your “unicorn- hunting” nonsense is invasive of gay women’s space. There are already many apps or ways for couples to find thirds in their sexual liaisons, so please stop using the lesbian section of Tinder. I’m not saying there is anything wrong with having threesomes—if that is something you are interested in or how you want to express yourself sexually, Illustration by Cara Seccafien have at it. However, there are many better and non-intrusive ways to go about doing this that don’t infringe on the lesbian or bisexual section of a dating app. Gay and bi women are already sexualized enough in pornography and the media, so don’t bring that to one of the only places women can go to look for other women to date.