Women of diversity lead at city hall
Metro notes that with SMF as mayor – she was sworn in on Thursday evening – and Ericka Alneus leading Projet, both parties have women from diverse backgrounds in charge.
-
Kate
Reply
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Blork on Women of diversity lead at city hall
- Blork on Women of diversity lead at city hall
- patatrio on Deros’s loss in Park Ex confirmed
- Ian on Big idea for redoing the Met
- Ian on Women of diversity lead at city hall
- Tim S. on The tunnel boring machine is in place
- Blork on Women of diversity lead at city hall
Pages
Other levels of gov’t
Sideblog projects
Enviro Montreal is a Bluesky feed that follows local environment news. Also available on Mastodon.
Archives
Pages rescued from montreal.com
Meta
DeWolf 12:32 on 2025-11-14 Permalink
It’s good that municipal politics finally reflects Montreal’s diversity — which wasn’t the case for a very long time — and it happened without seeming like such a big deal.
DeWolf 12:37 on 2025-11-14 Permalink
On a similar note, SMF ended her swearing in ceremony with a short speech in Spanish directed at the Latino community, which must be a first at City Hall. Plante spoke Spanish as a second language but I don’t recall her using it in any official capacity in Montreal.
Ian 14:38 on 2025-11-14 Permalink
Yes, it’s intersting that the two women, POC, is not being picked up … but it is very good to see. Even if SFM isn’t progressive, this is progress at the municipal level. Nice to see a woman POC heading up PM, too. Diversity has inherent value, especially given the ethnonationalist tendencies of our provincial politics.
steph 17:30 on 2025-11-14 Permalink
Bonjour-hi-hola. Works for me.
Joey 18:00 on 2025-11-14 Permalink
The La Presse article about her swearing-in yesterday implied at the end that she might invite a councillor from Projet Montreal into her exec committee (I think she responded to a question about it by reminding the reporter that the committee can be made up of councillors from any party, not just Ensemble). If that is the case, I will be impressed again by her political instincts; she has the good sense to enter a mayoral race that she would have a decent shot at winning despite having not real profile or ideas. Since winning she has toned down the heat a bit and abandoned some of the more frustrating/controversial aspects of her platform (bike lane review) and, earned or not, can take some credit for the end of the STM strike that was supposed to run through the end of the month.
The combination of sharp instincts and not much in the way of values or principles can be very lucrative in politics… kidding aside, I think the perspective most of us on the left share (the Airbnb mayor of doom, etc) is maybe a little overheated?
PatrickC 18:40 on 2025-11-14 Permalink
As I commented on election night, the CBC right away described SFM as belonging to a “racialized minority.” I have to say I like the French expression “personne issue de la diversité” better.
Kate 20:13 on 2025-11-14 Permalink
Joey: good points, thank you.
PatrickC: Books have been written on where western society has drawn the line that can be described as “racialized”. Would SMF be deemed racialized in the U.S. because she’s Latina?
I admit I don’t think of her as racialized but I may not have fully developed antennae for this.
Ian 20:58 on 2025-11-14 Permalink
Chilean is Latina, Latina is racialized, POC, visible minority – whatever you wnat to call it. SFM was raised here since 1980 – she and her family were Pinochet refugees.
Blork 22:11 on 2025-11-14 Permalink
I personally hate the term “racialized.” To me it sounds like something that has been foisted upon the person, like “traumatized” or “brutalized.” Or something that implies some kind of transformation, like “radicalized.”
Although one could argue that these folks are JUST PEOPLE and that political forces are slathering this “racialized” identity upon them, as if they were in need of some extra process, like posterizing an image or Martinizing your laundry.
Ian 00:33 on 2025-11-15 Permalink
You could also argue that insisting people are “just people” is a very dominant-culture thing to say, that implies you don’t want to have to think about race and/ or racism in our society.
I’m not saying that this is what you’re saying, but it’s important not ot cross over into “I don’t see colour” territory.
Blork 01:11 on 2025-11-15 Permalink
Yeah, I get that, and I’ve always thought the “I don’t see colour” thing is stupid. (See the colour: it’s part of who the person is. Celebrate it even. But don’t judge it.)
It’s the word itself I don’t like, and the way it’s used. It sounds like something’s been smeared on them. It sounds to me like an equivalent to “handicapped,” which is a lessened ability to do something, and we should make accommodations for to allow the handicapped person to live a full and independent/integrated life. But being non-white isn’t a handicap. Or if it is, it’s a societal shortcoming, not a personal/individual thing, so the burden of the label shouldn’t fall on the non-white person, it should fall on society to stop doing whatever it is that makes being non-white a handicap. Maybe starting with avoiding gnarly labels that point the finger at the non-white person as the one who is smeared with something different.
Blork 01:30 on 2025-11-15 Permalink
Reeling it back in a bit: I want to repeat that’s it’s the word I object to, the fact that it’s an adjective, like “sanitized.” It implies something was done to them. It implies that white people are raceless. It sounds like non-white people were “normal” until somebody “racialized” them.
It’s a word thing. A linguistic thing. Why not just call these mayors “non-white” instead of making it sound like they were just fine until somebody applied something racial to them?