Photos by Matty Flader / Photo Reporter

Recently, Hamilton has seen an influx of craft breweries establishing themselves around the city. With craft beer on the rise, MERIT Brewing Company is one of the industry leaders, brewing locally in their space on 107 James St. North. 

Co-founder of MERIT and McMaster alumnus, Tej Sandhu, wanted to create a communal, welcoming space by combining a tap room, brewery, kitchen and bottle shop. 

“Really what we hope it is, is a space for community around [MERIT]. So much of what we built this place to be is to facilitate conversation, facilitate our community, and facilitate a great experience for people around these things that we love producing . . . in a space that is easy to get to, that is accessible, that’s inclusive, that is open and that is friendly and warm. Those are things that we had as our goal for what we wanted the space to be but for what we keep as our goals for everything we do as well,” said Sandhu.

On Oct. 1, the Ontario Craft Brewers, a membership trade association that represents local breweries in Ontario, participated in a government roundtable in the Niagara region. The OCB represents the voices of approximately 30 per cent of craft breweries around Ontario

“We participated in the roundtable to provide our perspective and make sure the voice of local brewers is heard on potential changes to the alcohol system, which are critical to our future growth and success,” said the OCB via their Twitter account. 

(1/2) The Ontario Government is currently consulting on potential reforms to Ontario’s beverage alcohol sector. As Niagara is home to many craft producers, the govt hosted a series of roundtables this weekend w/ reps from craft wineries, distillers, cideries, and breweries.

— Ontario Craft Brewers (@OntCraftBrewers) September 29, 2019

(2/2) We participated in the roundtable to provide our perspective and make sure the voice of local brewers is heard on potential changes to the alcohol system, which are critical to our future growth and success.

— Ontario Craft Brewers (@OntCraftBrewers) September 29, 2019

The association also shared photos with Sam Oosterhoff, a Progressive Conservative member of provincial parliament from the Niagara-West riding. Oosterhoff has claimed that he wants to remove abortion rights. Additionally, he has actively opposed Bill 128 — the All Families Are Equal act, a piece of legislation that removes the words "mother" and "father" in favour of gender-neutral terms allowing all parents to be treated equally. He continues to defend his socio-political beliefs when confronted by the media. The tweets promoting Oosterhoff with the OCB were taken down after being posted.

 

Although not an OCB member, MERIT Brewing Company released a statement about the OCB’s event via their Facebook page on Oct. 1. 

“MERIT was not part of this discussion, nor are we members of the OCB, but we would like to say that we are unequivocally against the views of MPP Oosterhoff and outraged over the OCB’s decision to promote their work with him as some sort of gain for the industry or brushed off as part of their responsibility to work with the government,” said the statement.

MERIT turned their attention to the community that was being affected by the OCB’s statement.  The team reflected on their values of creating a welcoming, diverse space but found that the industry association that indirectly represents them was doing the opposite.

“While working together with the government is a good thing — when there's someone whose beliefs, outside of beer . . . are directly attacking not only owners of the businesses but staff members, people who are our guests and our consumers, that really strikes a chord as something that . . . the OCB did without thinking [about] what the implications are,” said Sandhu. “. . . We were angry because even if you're not an OCB member, the OCB indirectly represents our industry. They are the only association that we have. Their stance [on] promotion and their communication is reflective of our entire industry in Ontario.”

The OCB has issued an apology on Twitter. 

pic.twitter.com/g7kOYq48PY

— Ontario Craft Brewers (@OntCraftBrewers) October 1, 2019

Sandhu emphasized that MERIT, and all members of the OCB, had the responsibility to hold higher organizations accountable for their actions. 

While MERIT had voiced their concerns on an industry level, Sandhu also reflected on local level concerns in Hamilton. 

On Oct. 1, as a part of Hamilton’s “Fast 40” initiative, local and fast-growing businesses were recognized for contributing to the city’s economic development. MERIT Brewing Company was one business amongst many to receive the award given by mayor Fred Eisenberger.  In light of tensions between Eisenberger and the LGBTQA2S+ community, while MERIT claimed their reward, they left shortly before a photo opportunity with Eisenberger.

“There has been a ton of conversation internally about the handling of the LGBT community, the mayor’s response to the concerns that have been raised and the threat to our staff that are part of the community as well. [Our] action wasn’t meant to be a massive ‘F-U’ to the mayor, it was a way we could ask for accountability. It was something that was small that we thought would have, at the very least, an impact on showing our staff and our guests that we are standing up for them and not standing with someone who isn’t protecting them,” said Sandhu.

MERIT Brewing Company does not see themselves as a voice for marginalized communities, but rather as a microphone that allows their voices be heard. MERIT felt that their action was a step towards greater accountability among local leaders.

Regardless, you don't take a picture of brewery owners smiling and raising a glass with this guy. It's horrible PR. pic.twitter.com/W7njlY6jMu

— Robin LeBlanc, from work (@TheThirstyWench) September 30, 2019

Eisenberger has asked to sit down and meet with MERIT. While the company did not confirm a meeting before this article was released, Sandhu hopes to open a door for members of the community to start communicating with the mayor.

“Conversation is not enough; action needs to follow a conversation . . . You still need to have conversations to get to action . . . We’re trying to do our part. It’s inherent and embedded in what MERIT’s about, from why we are called “MERIT” to what we strive to do here and have be our experience. This is something that we feel is not only our responsibility, it’s our privilege to be able to speak out on these things and it’s something that we are doing because we’re passionate about it,” said Sandu.

Local businesses like MERIT Brewing Company are lending their voice to members of marginalized communities in hopes of not only starting a conversation but also demanding action. 

The Silhouette has reached out via email to Ontario Craft Brewers and the office of MPP Sam Oosterhoff for comment; however, we have not received a response.

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

 

Shloka Jetha is a woman who has always been on the move. After growing up in seven countries, the 23-year old has finally settled in Toronto and is pursuing her dream of working with at-risk youth. Part of what appealed to her about the new Professional Addiction Studies program at McMaster Continuing Education is that it’s online, which means she can set her own schedule and study on-the-go when she’s away from home.

But of course the biggest draw is the way Jetha feels the program will complement and expand upon what she learned in her McMaster degree in sociology, as well as what she is currently learning in a Child and Youth Care program at another school. With the goal of someday working in a clinical setting like the Sick Kids Centre for Brain and Mental Health, Jetha believes the more practical information she has about addiction and mental health, the better.

“I’m learning a lot in my current Child and Youth program,” Jetha enthuses, “but for me there is a bit of a knowledge gap that the McMaster Professional Addiction Studies program will help to close. It’s an incredibly complex field, every situation is new, and you need to be able read between the lines and understand the difference between what a troubled kid is saying and what’s actually going on in their life.”

Jetha believes that having the rich background knowledge the Professional Addiction Studies program will provide, and being able to link that information to her work in the field, will help her excel faster. Most importantly, she feels it will make her better and more effective at helping and healing kids in crisis.

“I’m specifically looking forward to gaining more knowledge about pharmacology, but also about other things as it’s difficult to learn on the job,” Jetha says. “I can learn a tremendous amount from the kids I work with, and that’s invaluable experience, but coming to them with a deeper knowledge base will allow me to talk with them about drugs and alcohol in a way I otherwise couldn’t.”

Jetha has been fortunate not to be personally touched by addiction, but has lost friends and people in her community from overdose. She is also familiar with the impact of this complex issue through the volunteer work she has done.

Even though this is an incredibly demanding career path, it’s one Jetha is proud and honoured to walk. She feels the good outweighs the bad and is determined to continue learning and helping as much as she can. The Professional Addiction Studies program at McMaster Continuing Education is uniquely designed to help her achieve that goal.

Applications for Spring term are open until April 29, 2019. Learn more at mcmastercce.ca/addiction-studies-program

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

Photo from Silhouette Photo Archives

By Maanvi Dhillon

*CW: This article contains discussion of sexual assault*

[spacer height="20px"]During the summer, an Ontario Superior Court Justice ruled in support of an accused person’s right to use extreme intoxication as a defence in sexual assault cases. The rule has implications on campus as McMaster University continues to make progress in providing adequate support for victims, training for staff and responses to sexual assault cases.

Justice Spies’ ruling was not the first of its kind. According to The Globe and Mail, the Supreme Court ruled in 1994 that extreme drunkenness could be a defence to sexual assault, and several judges have agreed since, despite a federal law that attempted to counter the ruling and prevent the use of the defence. Nevertheless, the recent decision has evoked condemnation as many fear it could undo years of work in advancing the rights of sexual assault victims.

Meaghan Ross, the university’s sexual violence response coordinator, explains that the decision adds to the barriers for survivors who are willing to access the justice system. In addition, it can worsen the psychological and emotional effects of assault by perpetuating victim-blaming myths.

“Many survivors internalize widespread victim-blaming myths, such as the false belief that a survivor is responsible for the sexual assault perpetrated against them,” she said. “This can create lots of confusion and shame and can have the effect of discouraging survivors from disclosing the sexual assault, along with many other barriers to disclosing they encounter.”

Ross also notes that while the legal technicalities of the ruling are important, public discussion will also have a long-standing impact.

According to the Sexual Assault Centre (Hamilton), only one in three Canadians understand what sexual consent means. With public attention paid to this ruling, more and more people will hear about it and potentially develop misunderstandings about their responsibility for their actions while intoxicated.

From her experience working at McMaster, Ross says she commonly gets asked questions about the relationship between alcohol and consent.

“Another concern sexual violence advocates share is whether the ruling may adequately consider individuals who intentionally use alcohol to facilitate sexual assault, as well as what message may be sent to individuals who make irresponsible and harmful behaviour choices when alcohol is involved,” she said.

Many of the barriers to justice for sexual assault victims are higher for marginalized communities, including racialized women, LGBTQ+ women, Indigenous women and women with disabilities.

“[It is important to] understand the complexity of sexual assault impacts on a diversity of survivors, especially those from most socially marginalized communities who experience sexual violence at disproportionately higher rates,” said Ross.

Currently, it is unclear whether the federal or provincial government will try to contest the ruling. However, the decision will likely remain for some time.

Ross emphasizes the power that students have to participate in relevant conversations and voice their concerns. In particular, she commends the work that various student groups are doing to advocate for better sexual assault and violence policies on campus as the university strives to develop a “survivor-centred approach” to handling these instances.

She also encourages students to get involved in activism off campus, including protests against the repeal of provincial sex education, student organizations like OurTurn and Silence is Violence and campaigns by student advocacy groups like Ontario University Student Alliance and the Canadian Federation of Students.

[spacer height="20px"][thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

https://www.facebook.com/TheMcMasterSilhouette/videos/10155786185485987/

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

By: Justin Parker

Alcohol and sports have a longstanding relationship. Whether it’s watching a game on TV at a bar or waiting in line at the concession stand, many spectators enjoy a drink while watching the game. This relationship gets a little bit more complicated for collegiate sports.

At a venue where a significant percentage of attendees are likely underage, it is much tougher to ensure a safe and legal drinking environment for everyone watching the game. Ultimately, everyone wants to have a good time, relax and cheer on their team. Uncontrolled alcohol use can ruin that, but a total lack of alcohol can also lessen the experience.

Currently, you can buy beer at every Marauders football game, but it must be consumed in the beer garden in the north end zone. In addition to this, there are occasional volleyball and basketball games that will offer beer to be consumed in the mezzanine while watching the games.

The selling of alcohol at all events hosted by McMaster is under limitations set by the campus-wide liquor license held by the university. A four-page administration policy for alcohol can be found online. Gord Arbeau, director of communications at McMaster University, sums up the view of the policy.

“McMaster prioritizes community safety and ensuring campus and our events are welcoming and inclusive,” Arbeau said. “The alcohol policy reflects that priority and supports this approach. Certainly, when alcohol sales are permitted by the policy, the university fully expects those permitted to sell alcohol follow our rules and the laws of Ontario.”

Being able to sell beer to fans in the stands might raise sales, but this would give the university less control over who is exactly drinking beer after it has been purchased.

While these regulations are meant to ensure a safe environment for drinking, there is also an administrative recognition that some spectators want to drink alcohol and have fun. It is a constant balancing act to ensure alcohol is not consumed in excess at events held on campus, but it is better to have spectators drinking in a controlled environment rather than an off-campus party pre-game.

“It’s just trying to balance things in terms of giving fans what they want, but also making sure we have a safe environment while trying to encourage the appropriate behaviours,” said Glen Grunwald, the director of athletics at McMaster.

Beyond ensuring a safe environment, the university also has financial considerations for these events. As it stands now, the university isn’t selling a lot of alcohol at the moment.

“We think it helps football, but when we do have it at basketball and volleyball we don’t have a lot of sales,” said Grunwald. “We’ve talked about it, but again, the cost of setting up the beer garden and hiring staff, doesn’t really justify the amount of money we make in terms of revenue and sales we have for beer.”

Being able to sell beer to fans in the stands might raise sales, but this would give the university less control over who is exactly drinking the beer after it has been purchased, so it is limited by the liquor license.

Would more alcohol lead to a higher attendance rate? For the 2016-2017 season, McMaster ranked second in Ontario University Athletics conference for football attendance. Basketball and volleyball recorded less attendance than football, but all rank in the top ten in the OUA in their respective sports (men’s basketball ranking the highest at fourth).

Offering more alcohol available wouldn’t hurt attendance, but it likely won’t significantly increase the average attendance. Having some alcohol in a controlled environment is better than nothing, and as long as fans can cheer on their team in a safe space, there is no need to increase availability.

[adrotate banner="16"]

[feather_share show="twitter, google_plus, facebook, reddit, tumblr" hide="pinterest, linkedin, mail"]

To suggest that university students are buying into the culture of partying and binge drinking as an expected part of campus life is an all too clichéd and patronizing generalization. The myth of the “party campus” does not exaggerate the existence of large-scale frosh and homecoming house parties, but it does exaggerate their occurrences and popularity.

In popular media, post-secondary institutions are still synonymous with Hollywood depictions of young people, enjoying their newfound freedom through excessive partying, cheap beer, drugs and sexual liberation.

There’s some truth in these depictions, but they are mostly stories told about a minority of students. While this myth has not influenced the behaviour of the vast majority of students, it has created a perceived norm among undergraduates. More significantly, it has skewed measurements of how much alcohol is too much.

Binge drinking — five or more drinks for men, and four or more for women in one sitting — is inevitably part of not just university life, but young adulthood as a whole. The Canadian Campus Survey in 2004 reported that 28 percent of students across Canada are heavy drinkers, and 32 percent of undergraduates meet the criteria for “drinking hazardously.”

Even underage drinking, while clearly frowned upon, is widely accepted as an essential part of the coming-of-age university experience, and few university students would argue for strict, effective steps to be taken to end this practice.

The danger of this drinking culture does not lie in an inability to see one-time excessive drinking as a threat, but in the way its complacency prevents students who regularly drink unhealthy amounts of alcohol to recognize their behaviour as problematic.

The Reality:

McMaster participated in the National College Health Assessment (NCHA) in 2013. The study ultimately concluded that students overestimate the norm for alcohol consumption levels on campus.

When asked about the amount of drinks participants consumed the last time they “partied,” 24 percent said they didn’t drink, 29 percent of students consumed three to five drinks, and 24 percent of students consumed six to ten drinks. When asked what they thought the “typical student at Mac” drank, students estimated that 45 percent of students consumed three to five drinks and 43 percent of students consumed six to ten drinks. This data indicates that most students drink a limited amount, but many believe the majority of McMaster students drink heavier, thus promoting a larger acceptance of binge drinking, and possibly leading to a perceived need to drink more.

The vast majority of students said that they experienced at least one of the negative consequences associated with binge drinking: getting in trouble with police, non-consensual sex, unprotected sex, physically injuring someone else, or contemplating suicide. About 25 percent of students experienced other minor, negative effects associated with drinking, such as feeling some kind of regret about something they did while drinking.

Arrive and Thrive:

Raising awareness about student behaviour, substance-based or otherwise, is an important part of many campus initiatives. Arrive and Thrive is a comprehensive McMaster project that has been funded through the Mental Health Innovation Fund provided by the Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities. The focus of the project is to help students develop approaches to deal with mental health and addiction issues, with a focus on students who are transitioning into university.

The campaign, due for a fall launch, consists of three parts. First, Arrive and Thrive Online will launch as a questionnaire designed to help students identify their current habits and coping strategies, offer immediate feedback about how their habits compare to their peers’, and suggest further resources both online and on campus if they feel that they are experiencing difficulty. The second portion, titled Pause, will allow students to meet with a professional counsellor trained in the area of substance use and addiction on a self-referred basis. The final part of the service will introduce a series of interventions and courses to support healthy habits and coping with problematic ones.

“It’s tough because you have this perception that it’s a rampant problem and if I don’t do it, I’m not conforming to the norm. But then, you don’t want to minimize those people that are in the far side of dangerous drinking,” says Arrive and Thrive Project and Research Coordinator Allan Fein.

“Most people will have a positive and fun experience associated with drinking and alcohol, and it’s the few that we really need to focus on. How do we target those people in a way that’s not demeaning to them and not putting them down and not victimizing them or blaming them, but is helping them?” added Fein.

“It’s really about a harm reduction approach, trying to take the person and say, you know, you’re a whole person, you’re not just an alcoholic, you’re not just someone who is dealing with mental health but you are a whole person and let’s deal with you as a whole person and figure out the best way for you to be most successful.”

Dr. Catherine Munn, who is also heading the project, stresses that “people drink for a reason and the reasons are unique to each individual who drinks … It’s really about educating everyone about what is healthy drinking and what is risky or problematic drinking.”

Problematic drinking habits are linked to the motivations behind the habits. Alternatives for Youth is an organization that provides services for youth with addictions. Their Executive Director, Penny Burley, referred to the 2004 Canadian Campus survey that asked students to identify the reasons they drank.

“Largely the reasons youth identify were to be social and to celebrate … when we look at the youth that we work with, often those are the initial reasons for engaging in drinking or other substance use, but overtime, for some people, it can become about anxiety, mood issues. It can become about various mental health concerns, it can be about stress, about coping. So while in the survey there are fewer people who tend to identify that’s the reason they drink. It often becomes the reason why they continue to drink.”

Burley believes that there is a need for a widespread approach that aims to educate and raise awareness about low-risk drinking guidelines and offers alternatives. “I think there’s a responsibility as a community, as a society, to work on changing that culture somewhat. And so when I look, there are university campuses that have policies and protocols to try and shift that culture — things like having dry frosh weeks. It won’t eliminate alcohol use by any means, but it gives youth an alternative.”

An Alcoholics Anonymous volunteer, who shall remain nameless due to AA policy, shared her story with The Silhouette, and the concerns she has about young people lacking the resources to recognize problematic alcohol consumption. She described what she felt separated her personal experience with alcohol from that of others around her. “If I was partying and drinking, there would be people who come to a point and they’d say ‘I’m going to bed, or I’m going home, or I’ve had enough,’ but not me. I was always looking for that next drink, always thinking about that next drink.”

“I used to come home and I’d think I was going to the bar on Friday night and even before I got there — I remember one time I was sitting there — and I was thinking about the night and I remember saying, ‘oh, I could just feel the rush of that drink and what it was going to do for me and I could talk to people and you know, be more friendly and open and not be an introvert,’ … it was a high for me even before I got the drink.”

She further stressed the importance of recognizing a problem, “It’s physical, it’s mental, it’s spiritual for us, you know. We don’t have anything left because alcohol takes everything away. And if you’re younger you have to think you’re going to save yourself all those years, all that pain, but you can’t force it on anyone. If they’re not ready, they’re not ready.”

When Arrive and Thrive makes its official launch this fall season, it will come as an invitation for students to be conscious about the choices they make. Its aim isn’t to tell students that the decisions they are making are wrong, or that there is something inherently shameful about these decisions. It will offer online questionnaires, professional help, courses and extended services in an attempt to reach parts of the student population that may be otherwise left without the outlets to ask the right questions, and seek help if they need to.

For additional information and guidelines for safe drinking, this brochure by the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse is a good starting point. Additional information about the CSAA is available on their website.

Monopolies are not in the interest of consumers. That’s why almost every country in the world, including Canada, has a competition bureau of some kind to prevent and to break up monopolies.

Without getting into the nitty-gritty, a monopoly is formed when there a single party that holds a significant share of a particular market. Through the power of exclusivity, a monopolist is able to raise prices above what would be bargained through a free market, which robs consumers in the interest of making ungodly amounts of profit.

A perfect example of a monopoly would be the Liquor Control Board of Ontario, or the LCBO for short. Established in 1927 by the Lieutenant Governor, the LCBO (along with the Beer Store) holds a monopoly over liquor sales in Ontario.

This should come as a shock no one, but the LCBO rakes in billions in revenue. In 2013-14, revenues reached $5 billion. That tidy sum only figures to rise going forward, according to a 2013 report from the Ministry of Finance.

Given the LCBO’s utter dominance over the liquor market, multi-billion dollar revenues simply comes with the territory. With no competitors to manage price, the LCBO has free reign to hike up prices as they see fit.

Steep markups typify the LCBO’s greed. Supplier price and freight cost of spirits only accounts for 17 percent of retail price, according to a study by York University. That translates to a markup varying between 145 and 131 percent of total landed costs. And that’s before taxes, meaning the extra price does not necessarily translate to heftier governmental coffers. The LCBO robs its unwilling customers through superfluous and non-competitive premiums.

Astronomical prices aside, the LCBO also restricts the growth of small-scale wineries and microbreweries. Take the beer market, for example. The Beer Store (jointly owned by three mega-breweries Molson Coors, Anheuser-Busch, and Sapporo) accounts for 80 percent of market share with the other 20 percent belonging to the LCBO. Between the two giants, there’s no room for growth.

The solution would be to privatize liquor sales like Alberta did in 1993. The transition to privatization translated to positive outcomes for both businesses and its consumers.

After privatization, employment in this sector rose from 1,300 to 4,000, while the number of retail liquor outlets ballooned from 200 to 1,300.

Markups also dropped, which led to lower prices. A standard 26 oz. of Smirnoff that costs between $24 and $26 in Ontario can be purchased in certain stores Edmonton for $18, according to the Edmonton Journal.

By handing the right to individual businesses to sell liquor and allowing for the invisible hand of the marketplace to mould the market, a more equitable and fair market was established.

The gambit to all of this is tax revenue, which serves as the excuse for the LCBO’s existence. It’s repeatedly argued that the LCBO is essential to governmental funding. Ontario simply cannot afford to lose the $1.74 billion in income that the LCBO provided in 2013-14.

But that’s a short-sighted view. Tax revenue on a per-capita basis is actually higher in Alberta than it is Ontario, as found by a study in Maclean’s.

As was started from the outset, there’s a reason why countries have competition bureaus in place – to protect consumers from exploitive and wasteful monopolies. With that in mind, it’s high time to end the LCBO’s reign.

By: Julia Busatto

I used to be under the impression that the love of my life would be standing beside a keg waiting to fill my red solo cup with swamp water beer. He’d notice me although I was merely one in a sea of a thousand girls jammed into a tiny backyard. He’d stop getting “turnt” so he could actually remember my name the next morning, and text me although I refused to give up the goods on the first night. But if you’re looking for true love beside the keg, you’re probably looking in the wrong place. Red Solo Cups are called “solo” for a reason.

Finding true love at keggers is nearly impossible. Number one, it’s a kegger. The lighting is dark, the place is too crowded, the floor is sticky, and some girl just spilt her birthday cake vodka all over your DIY crop top. Romantic, right?

The first disadvantage is noise. I’ve tried holding substantial conversations with members of the opposite sex at keggers, and it proves to be a strenuous task. The EDM blaring in the background makes it impossible to block out the “unst” no matter how hard you try. Every so often the guy you’re talking to yells, “yo bro what’s up?” to guys passing by and they stop to engage in ritualistic manly greetings. Your vocals are in constant strain as you yell into his face, praying to god that you don’t spit.

The second disadvantage is environment. Keggers can be dark, dingy, and downright unflattering. Everyone is sweaty, and you constantly feel like throwing your elbows up to defend yourself from the shuffling crowds. It is hard to select a mate when you feel like everyone there has groped you. Not to mention, you feel like you have been cast into a pit of hungry vipers all waiting for the right girl to fall into their lap so they can take a bite. And the smell—yikes.

The third disadvantage is motives while drunk. I don’t want to make grotesque generalizations, but a lot of the men I’ve encountered at keggers aren’t thinking about taking me home to meet their mom, and vice versa. We’re just simply not interested in considering the person we meet at a kegger as a potential serious partner; they only seem like a temporary distraction that will keep us amused for the night. The environment is too causal and crazy, the people are too drunk, the beer too gross, and the smell too bad to take anything, let alone a potential partner, seriously. We’d rather return to the line to fill up our cup than continue talking to the person whose face we’ve spent the last ten minutes trying to decipher. We’re drunk, our perception is skewed, and the last thing on our mind is a dinner date and movie.

Save yourself the trouble and try the grocery store.

New numbers on last year’s student conduct violations were released at the University Senate meeting Wednesday. The total number of major violations committed was 199, up from 162 the previous year and the highest in five years.

The most notable increase from 2010-11 to 2011-12 was the number of violations involving alcohol, which jumped from 46 to 68.

“Early in September we saw a lot of the Major A [Alcohol] and Major B [Drug] violations,” Tim Cameron, student conduct officer, said at the Senate meeting.

Security does a sweep for drugs and alcohol in September, particularly in the areas behind residences, to set a tone at the beginning of the year.

‘Major’ violations include offences involving alcohol, drugs and weapons, among other offences like stealing, vandalism and physical violence.

One point raised at Senate was that stealing was second highest major offence committed (50) last year, behind incidents involving alcohol (68).

According to Cameron, there have been perplexing trends of theft each year for the past few years.

“Pretty much every incident last year was shoplifting from La Piazza,” he said, noting that the items stolen averaged about $1.50, with the most expensive being about $12.

Most students’ justification was along the lines of being late for class and wanting to pick something up on the way, said Cameron, some with “the underlying attitude that they’re paying too much to be here anyway.” But in some cases, mental health was a factor.

Engineering and Social Sciences had the most students committing violations last year, with 47 and 38 respectively. Business was close behind with 29 out of 2,297 students committing offences. Nursing, Arts & Science and Graduate students had only 1 violation each.

The number of students in violation last year breaks down to 140 males and 28 females, with some students committing more than one violation.

Cameron noted that the numbers from the Student Affairs report could be more so an indication of how many students get caught than how many are committing the offences.

The number of students who were caught violating the code of conduct is roughly 0.8 per cent of the student population. Notably, more serious offences would have been reported to and handled by the Hamilton Police.