My husband and I have been watching The Handmaid’s Tale. Its dystopian depiction of women’s oppression seems highly improbable — or is it?
I’ve just finished reading Allison Hanes’s thoughtful column in remembrance of the 14 women so tragically murdered 35 years ago.
As always, I’m left with a profound sadness for all that they and their families have lost through this senseless killing. But more than that, today I am also filled with dread.
My husband and I have been watching the series The Handmaid’s Tale based on Margaret Atwood’s book, a dystopian depiction of women’s oppression. A highly improbable reality — or is it? Looking at the recent U.S. election and the rise of the right there and elsewhere gives me chills.
Let this day be a solemn reminder of all that has been lost, and as Hanes remarks, let us “reflect on the roots” of toxic attitudes.
Mary Orlowski, Dorval
Random cop checks don’t make us safer
Whatever happened to the right to live without being stopped and questioned by police for no clear or legal reason?
I don’t buy the excuse that the public is less safe without random police checks.
Gordon Youngson, Kirkland
Penalizing versus rewarding doctors
Bill 83, which would force new doctors into the public system for at least the first five years of their career, seems like a classic example of myopic vision.
Does Health Minister Christian Dubé really believe that if he penalizes new doctors he will fix our ailing health care system?
Could he first address the root causes that compel doctors to leave the public system — or Quebec altogether — before proposing a bill that may well cause an exodus of even more doctors and further deterioration of health care?
Myopic vision seems to prevent political leaders from properly addressing other challenges, such as the frequent turnover of middle management in public health institutions, which has an important impact on health care delivery.
I think it would be helpful if we sought a better understanding of how people react to penalties versus rewards — and recognize the difference between intention and impact.
Ella Amir, Montreal
Double standard on encampments
The hypocrisy and double standards of the City of Montreal seem to have no bounds.
On the one hand, sections of an encampment for the unhoused, populated by poor souls doing little harm and who are not without a home by their own choice, have been forcibly dismantled by the city.
On the other hand, student protest encampments, there because the protesters choose to be, are left untouched and not removed by the very same city administration, despite reports of vandalism, public disruption, intimidation and property destruction.
How sad that rules and standards are not applied evenly by the city.
Allen Rubin, Westmount
Submitting a letter to the editor
We prioritize letters that respond to, or are inspired by, articles published by The Gazette. If you are responding to a specific article, let us know which one.
Letters should be sent uniquely to us. The shorter they are — ideally, fewer than 200 words — the greater the chance of publication.
Timing, clarity, factual accuracy and tone are all important, as is whether the writer has something new to add to the conversation.
We reserve the right to edit and condense all letters. Care is taken to preserve the core of the writer’s argument.
Our policy is not to publish anonymous letters, those with pseudonyms or “open letters” addressed to third parties.
Letters are published with the author’s full name and city or neighbourhood/borough of residence. Include a phone number and address to help verify identity; these will not be published.
We will not indicate to you whether your letter will be published. If it has not been published within 10 days or so, it is not likely to be.
Please send the letter in the body of an email, not as an attachment.