The Good, The Bad and the Ugly

The Good: "Africville Apology Coming"

Residents of a black diaspora/suburb in Nova Scotia were kicked out of their neighbourhood in the 60s under the pretense of building a bridge. In reality, it was systemic racism aimed at "cleaning up" Halifax. Congratulations to the former residents of Africville on your victory!

The Bad: "Women Lose Ground in Push for Equality: Report"

Anyone who has been paying any attention didn't need this report to confirm that womyn have been sliding backwards in Canada since the Conservatives got into power. (Although the Liberals have been no better...)

Do yourself a favour: Do not read the comments on that article. In 24 hours online, it has over 500 comments and the vast majority prove what this report is saying: womyn have a long way to go.

The Ugly: "Woman Who Traded Kids for Pet Bird Sentenced"

That's just fucked.

The Old Boys Club, Indeed

In case you really didn't believe that politics was an Old Boy's Club that was less than keen to ladies, here's more to convince you otherwise.

An Ottawa Conservative MPP had her evidence dismissed in the trial against Ottawa mayor Larry O'Brien because, and I quote, "the defence was able to demonstrate that there were a number of rather significant things going on in her life when she gave her statement to the police. … ” “She was commuting regularly to Toronto for her work, leaving her husband and child in Ottawa". (source)

To add insult to injury, this dismissal was overlooked in the reading of O'Brien's sentence of not guilty and according to the MPP in question, her supporters were hard to come by. Once the news became public however, Equal Voice and others came out to dismiss and criticize the 69 year old judge's decision.

I'd add comment on this but I think it's rather obvious at this point: The idea that evidence from a female politician is invalid because she was busy being a politician AND a mother when she gave her evidence to police is beyond fucking insulting; it is sexism in the purest form. It is the reason why so few womyn enter politics and it is the reason why Canada is far from the beaming democracy it claims to be.

So if you still need evidence to believe the sexism in Canada's politics, there's no hope for you and you might as well join the commenters of the original Globe and Mail article. They are spewing such "clever" quips as "To all of the male posters here, every had a woman tell the truth in divorce court? Story is settled." (Great use of the word "every" kept from the original posting).

Fight for your Right to Party

Canadians might be apathetic, but as I've said before, they love their booze.

We don't vote and are generally lazy bastards, but don't take away our booze!

But in all seriousness, I think this doesn't just have to do with booze; I think it's generational, too. Pensioners, especially ex-union members, are tough as nails and don't get pushed around easily. They fight for their rights. Which is commendable these days, even if it's regarding beer.

Mmmm.... Controversy.

There are few things that I love more than food and controversy. Today, we get a meal of both!

So I have rather mixed feelings about the position of Governor General but I have very good feelings about this particular GG. I've met her on two different occasions and was really impressed with how knowledgeable she really is in the areas in which she throws herself into. She's incredibly warm and although not 100% genuine (By that I mean that you can tell that she's "on") she's pretty great.

But apparently, by eating a piece of raw seal meat while visiting the North, she's 10 levels of awful.

Seriously? Give me a break.

Never mind the animal rights activists who've been touting the "CLUB SODA, NOT SEALS" crap for years, critics across the Pond are saying that what she did was a political act and that the GG is supposed to do ceremonial acts only.

Let's break that down.

Political Part: It's only been deemed political because mostly overseas critics (I'm looking at you, McCartney) have viewed the seal hunt as political. Hunting animals as a whole is not inherently political. It's been going on forever and if I'm correct, the Queen herself is a big fan. Hence why she's got dogs!

Furthermore, people use the "Ceremonial Symbol Only" balogna all the time but the Monarchy is pretty freakin' political in itself and much more controversial than eating meat, I would argue.

So GG -1, Critics - 0

Controversial Part: Regardless of how it became that way, yes the seal hunt in Canada is controversial. Personally, I'm a huge supporter of the seal hunt but that is not the point here. Attending the Inuit ceremony/event was not deemed controversial but only when she ate some of the meat was it deemed that way. Okay... well what if she hadn't eaten the meat? What if she had been offered and then refused? What kind of controversial message would that send? It would certainly be a giant slap in the face of Inuit people and seal hunters, too.

Once again, GG -2, Critics - 0

As far as I'm concerned, seal hunting is an indigenous way of life and a huge economic boost to people living in the North and on the Canadian Coast. And until anti-hunting asshats can come up with a more environmentally friendly and sustainable means of making money, then they can shut the hell up. And leave Madame Jean out of it, too! If for no other reason than the fact that she has fabulous shoes and used to host one of my favourite shows.

Can I get a what - what!

"More women in senior roles boosts financial performance: study".

"Ironically, the current recession, a time when firms are seeking to find new ways to stay in business, is exactly when companies should be figuring out strategies to put more women into executive chairs, the report said."

Finally, I can write about the recession and tag it in the "Good News" category.

Is there an Echo in the Building?

And the "C" word strikes again!

Keeping in mind that the source isn’t exactly impartial but, a Toronto lawyer has publicly come out in support of the increasing numbers of womyn who are being laid off while on Maternity Leave.

The excuse given? The economy.

Technically, it’s illegal to lay someone off when they are on Mat Leave. That’s the whole point; that you help society reproduce while we hold down the fort until you come back. BUT! If the company is “doing multiple lay offs” then its okay. And what is happening is that while womyn are away, the new person they hired in the interim is cheaper because they’ve just started and so the company would rather keep someone with less seniority than pay the rates of the womyn who left.

Wow.

I guess the only solution is for babies to make and raise themselves. Well, we could socialize people to be equal partners in the child raising department and create child friendly work environments but the first solution is probably more likely.

Who Pays?

Mmmm... recession. It seems we can speak of nothing else these days. With good reason, of course.

Recession talk leads to the next big "C" word. (Not C-U-Next-Tuesday, you dirty kids) but cuts. Job cuts, budget cuts, tax cuts, etc. Everything is cut. It's a scissor fest these days. And without any real critical analysis, it would appear that the cuts are not discriminatory. Sure, they are in terms of class, because let's face it: It's Jim, Bob and Jane who are making the cars that are losing their jobs and not Robert So-and-So who runs the joint.

But the evil "c" word is also becoming a way to really conveniently "do away" with things that folks weren't too happy with to begin with.

Exhibit A: We've got Women's Studies at Guelph that has been chopped due to "budget constraints". Ahh yes, that other evil "c" word. This would seem like just another run-of-the-mill, aww-shucks cut if it weren't for the fact that "Cutting the Women's Studies program will save *less than 0.17%* of the University's predicted $46 million shortfall. And yet Women's Studies is the only program in the university that's slated to be cut." This was written in a petition to save the program; the program has now officially been cut.

You gonna tell me that this isn't just a wee bit suspicious? I'm not saying this is a full on witch hunt but when cuts are needed and the first thing to do is Women's Studies, which represents such a measly part of the total budget, one's gotta start asking questions.

Exhibit B: Oh Alberta! The land of bounty! Or not. Seems they're hurting in the Health Care department so they are making cuts, too. Massive cuts, it seems. Although there have only been two major cuts announced and they are *drumroll please*

Chiropractor services: Which will save them 53 million a year

and

"Sex Change Surgeries": Which will save them 700,000$ a year.

"The latter move has become particularly controversial. " No shit, CBC.ca 53 million vs. less than one million. Hmm...

I get that these will be two of many cuts but once again, you gotta start thinking this through. It's no coincidence that when the axe comes down, things like Women's Studies and sex re-assignment surgery are seen as disposable and easy to chop.

Women's Studies is chronically underfunded everywhere and in the case of Guelph, represents peanuts in terms of financing. Sex re-assignment surgery in Alberta, with only 26 people currently undergoing it and 20 people on a waiting list, represents such small numbers in terms of people and in terms of money, but represents so much to the livelihood of trans people that it makes no sense to see it go at this point. Unless there's a hidden agenda at play here.

Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I call bullshit on both the University of Guelph and the province of Alberta.

Back To Basics

According to a new report by the Canadian Council of Learning, 20% of Canadian university students can't read above a 3rd Level, which means that they are functioning illiterates.

As a Canadian, I hope this shocks you but I must say that as a TA in a Canadian university, this doesn't shock me at all. Some of the stuff I read would give an English Lit Doctor, heart palpitations.

I suppose I spoke too soon when spoke about the Big Decision. I suppose the decision shouldn't be "College" or "University" but rather "Dr Seuss" or "Judy Blume"? Hell, even R.L Stine would do the trick. Anything to get people reading, I suppose.

Because this is not just a problem for the TAs of the world who are forced to read papers with spelling mistakes on the title page or 6 page papers with no paragraph break, the truth is that statistics like this are a real smear on anyone's BA. If I have a BA and you have a BA, but I can read at a university level and you're at the junior high level, suddenly my BA doesn't look so good.

But above all else, it is a true disgrace that in Canada, in 2009, 20% of university students are functionally illiterate. Think about those that didn't make it into university and then the statistic really starts to sink in.

We are in a world of hurt if we don't get this addressed.

And the Conservatives Continue with their Classy Ways

Taken from the March 2nd Question Period in the House of Commons:

Irene Mathyssen (London-Fanshawe, ON, NDP): Mr. Speaker, yesterday was International Women's Day. Unfortunately, in Canada, our celebrations were marred by the regressive actions of this Government when it killed pay equity. Worse, they've insulted Canadian women by telling us that this decision was in our best interests. Mr. Speaker, women are not naive. We're sick of the half truths and we will fight back. Will the Government table any legal opinions that show it has contravened the Charter, and if not, what is this Government hiding?

Hon. Vic Toews (President of the Treasury Board): Well, Mr. Speaker, this Government thought it was wrong that women would have to wait for 15 or 20 years to achieve pay equity in the workforce, and so we brought forward legislation that was, in fact, partly inspired by the Liberal taskforce on this issue in 2004. And, in fact, we, in fact, ensure that … and I know the Member from Beaches got an issue and maybe she can speak later, but she just keeps on whining and whining and yelling, but it's very difficult for me to speak in these kind of circumstances. (FC's Note: Emphasis mine).

Irene Mathyssen (London-Fanshawe, ON, NDP): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This Minister is so constable sending (FC's Note: I think this is supposed to read as condescending) and we're tired of the sales job. We can see through it, which is with disproportion at alI affected by the recession. Globally, 70% of the poor are women and in wealthy countries like ours, women are the majority of the poor. Women still earn less than men, and as a result, have less to fall back on when times are tough. Killing pay equity is an afront to women's human rights. Can this Government explain by muzzling women was necessary as part of their so-called economic plan? Or are they admit that it's ideologically driven and a swipe at human rights?

Oh the Conservatives; an ever classy bunch.

Screwed Over Employees Don't Take It Lying Down

... and this is news?

"Shocking" new report states that 59% of employees in an American study, took information with them when they left.

"Of those:

• 65 per cent took email lists.
• 45 per cent took non-financial business information.
• 39 per cent took customer information, including contact lists.
• 35 per cent took employee records.
• 16 per cent took financial information."

Is this really that shocking? It isn't good, don't get me wrong. As a frequent internet shopper and Debit Card addict, I don't like thinking about where my information has been and is going. But I also can't blame people, especially in a recession where job competitiveness is high and jobs in general are hard to find.

So when you get fired from your only chance at a paycheck, you're a little bitter so you take a little something with you. Or the competitor says that if you come and join them, they'll sweeten the deal if you sweeten your end with say... a list of contacts. Tit for tat, in either instance.

I can understand why people do it. But I also see how it's a vicious circle. You hate your job because your employer treats you like a child and micro-manages your every move, so you leave and take something with you for revenge, therefore reinforcing that you probably weren't very trustworthy to begin with and needed to be monitored.

See what I'm saying?

The only winners here are the researchers of this study. This is the kind of research I wish I was doing. I wish I was being paid to be Captain Obvious.