Making babies in Canada could result in nutjob nationalists

Given that it's part of the Asper Empire, I suppose we can't expect much of the Gazette, but this piece it published online yesterday, entitled "Making babies in Canada could save money", is particularly appalling.

Author Dianne Rinehart's premise is that our governments should invest in artificial reproductive technologies rather than immigration, because the latter costs $1.6 billion in "departmental and resettlement costs," and growth from immigration currently outnumbers domestic births by three to one.

The first thing that strikes me about the piece is the barely-contained fear that "real Canadians" will be outnumbered by immigrants. It rears its ugly head every time the author throws in a statistic about rising immigration numbers as a self-evidently bad thing. That concern is probably racist and certainly stupid: after all, everyone but our First Nations were immigrants to Canada at one time, and look how we treat the original inhabitants!

The economic argument, as well, is completely disingenuous, even if Rinehart had provided a cite for her dollar figure. Consider, if you will, the financial implications of waiting for Canadian babies to contribute to the domestic economy. The Canadian Council on Social Development estimated that in 2004 it cost families on average $166,000 to raise a Canadian infant from birth to age 18. I really can't see how it could possibly cost more than that to simply open the doors to foreign nationals, who are often already trained and very willing to go to work.

Furthermore, and with all due respect to struggling would-be parents, I have a real problem with invasive, espensive fertility treatments. For one thing, it seems foolish to go to such lengths to increase the population of a planet already bursting at the seams. We especially don't need more citizens of so-called first world countries who damage the environment disproportionately. Secondly, it bothers me that many people will stop at nothing to create of and for themselves a little genetic replicant. There are so many children that need someone to care for them, and I don't care if you pull a Brangelina and truck them in from far-flung locales, or head to your local Ministry of Children and Family Development office: there's just no need (unless you're a couple of geniuses trying to breed the next generation of cancer-curing scientists) to replicate biologically when it involves such ridiculous expense and limited success rates. My final complaint is that any R&D and other government funding that go towards developing newer and better fertility treatments are at the expense of more pressing medical concerns. As we all know, there are just not enough health care dollars to go around.

The kicker in the article at hand, and I'll quote the paragraph in full, is where Rinehart states the following (after explaining that artificial reproductive technology is a better use of health spending than palliative care or heart disease):

Finally, if it's all about money - and not about families - consider what
else New Scientist reported: The findings "concluded ART could be as effective
at increasing birth rates as other proposed policies, such as raising the level
of child benefit" and - wait for it - "but would cost less."

This is the most ass-backwards logic of all. It first requires us to accept, as I clearly haven't, that encouraging population growth via domestic birthrates is prima facie superior to encouraging immigration. Then, it suggests that because it costs less, government money is better spent on artificial insemination than on actually increasing child benefits to struggling families. What a brilliant idea! Forget helping the parents who are currently trying to raise their existing children with little to no assistance from the state....we should do biological backflips and get them to pop out some more!

The author dresses her elitist and xenophobic wolf of a position in the sheep's clothing of feminism (commiserating with women who are maligned for delaying pregnancy) and environmentalism (claiming, nonsensically, that immigration contributes to congestion and pollution, since most new residents head to the urban centres. In reality, city living is well documented to actually reduce environmental pressures, because people are more likely to live in smaller residences, to commute less to work, and to take advantage of the other ecological efficiencies that result from high population density.).

In reality, though, her proposed solution is just straight-up white supremacism of a particularly crazy brand, and that's pretty disturbing even given the Gazette's well-known biases.*


*Of which you're well aware, right Scottay? Maybe you shouldn't show them your portfolio...

RIP Bertha Wilson

Canada's first female Supreme Court justice, Bertha Wilson, passed away this Saturday.

Justice Wilson sat on the SCC between 1982 and 1991, and was a staunch Charter supporter and author of a number of woman-friendly judicial opinions, perhaps most notably in R. v. Morgantaler and R. v. Lavallee (which accepted battered woman syndrome as a defence to murder).

Although she apparently did not call herself a feminist, Justice Wilson was avidly pro-choice and upon retiring from the bench chaired the CBA's Task Force on Gender Equality.

Justice Wilson had also been the first woman appointed to the Ontario Court of Appeal. She was 83 at her death.

* Photograph: Michael Bedford, Supreme Court of Canada collection

Support VWSAC

I don't know Tom Williams, and I don't really care about his beard, but I think it's great that he's raising funds for the Victoria Women's Sexual Assault Centre.

VWSAC is a fantastic organization that helps hundreds of victims of assault every year. I volunteered there for the three years that I lived in Victoria and was very impressed with the quality of services they provide, all with limited funding and a small staff. In addition to individual and group counselling services, they also run a 24-hour crisis line and have volunteers with pagers who respond to emergency calls, meeting victims and accompanying them for post-assault hospital visits. There's also a great youth component run by Project Respect, promoting its acclaimed "Yes Means Yes" programme.

VWSAC always needs community support and I encourage you to help them in the great work they do. Click here to go to the GiveMeaning donation site.

What's the problem with homelessness in Kamloops?

The answer isn't, as you might expect, "uhh...because...people have no homes??"

According to Gay Pooler, general manager of the Kamloops Central Business Improvement Area, the problem is that it makes the streets just gosh-darn unattractive. In Monday's Kamloops Daily News, she told reporter Jason Hewlett that "we need to keep the streets pretty and safe." When he pointed out that "[m]ost homeless aren't dangerous," Pooler countered that "It's all about perception." Well, we wouldn't want the shoppers and business owners in our squeaky-clean downtown to have to face the fact that there are people in this city with nowhere to live (and forget about how safe that situation is for the people actually in it!).

She wants the RCMP to exercise "zero tolerance" when patrolling the downtown. Ron McColl, the manager of corporate programs and projects for the City of Kamloops, has described a new initiative where officers and outreach workers will interact with the expected influx of homeless people in order to find them housing and keep the streets "clean and safe." He didn't elaborate in the article, or in an interview yesterday on CBC Kelowna, about where these proposed homes will be found, but at least it shows some degree of awareness on the part of the City.

Not so for Pooler. In last week's Downtown Echo, she stated that the minimum wage should sit at $8.00/hour because "some people aren't worth more than $8," and anyone worth more than that is already being paid it. This week, in her "KCBIA Notes," she describes how she wants to see the local RCMP using the so-called Safe Streets Act, the Trespass Act, and municipal panhandling bylaws against "abnormal users" of the downtown, who should "not be comfortable on our streets."

This kind of anti-poor insensitivity and NIMBYism, apparently, is not just for barbers and councillors.

Nyuk nyuk

I was wasting time the other day reading archives of the Canadian blog Precedent: The New Rules of Law and Style and came across a post concerning a US lawyer who sued the website DontDateHimGirl.com which purports to be a resource for women and lists the names of alleged cheaters. No word yet on whether the noted Kamloops lawyer whose name appears on the site is aware of same, or intends to file suit.

Whither my Bitch?

I was just up at Chapters this afternoon, using up a giftcard (Ian McEwan, Douglas Coupland, Wayson Choy...I'm in heaven!), and in shopping for magazines found that the local store appears to no longer carry any of Ms., Bitch, BUST, or Herizons. Instead, in the "Lifestyle" section where these titles are usually found (and not with the Harpers and Walruses in the current events section for some reason), shopping magazines like LouLou and Lucky have sprung up to fill the void.

One more reason I guess to shop small/local. Hello, Bob's PX!

Trading jobs

Courtesy of my darling brother at BCIT, a news release about a conference being held this weekend at SFU about women in the trades.

Although I'm a lazy slob who wouldn't touch physical labour with a ten-foot poleaxe (gonngggg), I think there is a glaring need for something to be done about the dearth of female tradespeople. I personally don't know a single woman working as a mechanic, electrician, bricklayer, or the like. I hear endless laments about how "kids these days" are all going to university and foresaking skilled labour, and how industries from forestry to plumbing are suffering when the old guys retire and nobody moves in to fill their spots. This is happening to an even greater extent in the trades than other fields. So isn't it kind of a no-brainer that industry look to a previously untapped labour source?

Although women have been gaining ground in the "professions," it is still very much the case that girls who don't follow highschool with post-secondary education will end up in the service industry, custodial jobs, or even child-rearing, rather than taking more remunerative work in the trades. In 2002, only 2% of registered apprentices in the top 15 trades were women. By 2004, women accounted for just 7% of employees in transportation, trades, and construction work. (See this StatsCan report from 2005.)

So, why are so few women choosing this type of work? The selection of workshops at the SFU conference offers some explanation. Fully half off them focus on either recognizing sexist mistreatment, avoiding sexist mistreatment, talking back to sexist mistreaters, or filing complaints of sexual harassment. Presumably this is still a major issue and a barrier to women entering the skilled trades. Now, I don't think the solution lies in educating tradeswomen about systemic discrimination. They're not the ones causing problems. But that's a long post for another day.

An article on www.apprenticetrades.ca cites the lack of female role models and "examples of ordinary women who have built a successful career working in a trade" as another reason that girls don't gravitate towards these jobs.

Finally, many women, and men too, also tend to think that female workers aren't strong enough for physical labour. In many instances, however, this is unwarranted discrimination. Take for example the 1999 Supreme Court of Canada case, British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v. BCGSEU, in which the complainant, a female firefighter working without trouble for three years, had been fired for failing to meet new physical standards put in place. Unanimously, the Court held that, excepting "undue hardship" to an employer, industry standards must accommodate differing abilities and must only be imposed in good faith and where necessary and logical. Where an imposed standard is not a "bona fide occupational requirement," it will not be a justifiable form of discrimination.

A recent Conservative press release ( "Women in Trades Get Another Boost From Canada's New Government") indicates that Harper may be doing something right for a change. Let's hope it sticks.

Happy Birthday, Charter!

Today being the 25th anniversary of the creation of Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms, I'll celebrate with a list of the great Charter cases that defined women's rights in this country*:

1. R. v. Morgantaler: the seminal case in 1988 that legalized abortion in Canada. Dr. Morgantaler, convicted under the Criminal Code provisions which restricted access to abortion, successfully argued that those limitations violated women's s. 7 right to security of the person. The offending provisions were struck down and Dr. Morgantaler's conviction overturned.
   
   
2. Symes v. Canada: a 1993 case in which a full-time lawyer (and founding member of the Women's Legal Education and Action Fund) maintained that her nanny expenses should be tax deductible. In an interesting male/female split among the Justices, Ms. Symes' appeal was dismissed. Justice L'Heureux-Dubé's dissent provides an incisive commentary on the "double shift." I remember an intense debate in my feminist legal theory class about whether Charter cases such as Symes merely reinforce white, middle-class privilege at the expense of legitimate uses of s.15.
   
   
3. M. v. H.: in 1999, the SCC held 8-1 that the Ontario Family Law Act discriminated against same-sex partners, contrary to s.15(1) of the Charter. M. was thereby permitted to bring a claim for spousal support against H. following the break-down of their relationship.
   

And some not-so-great cases:

1. Newfoundland Labrador Association of Public Employees v. Newfoundland: in 2004 the SCC unanimously held that although the government reneged on pay equity agreements with its female employees, this violation of the Charter's equality provisions was justifiable under s.1 given the province's fiscal crisis. The debate over in which cases financial limitations are appropriate justification for rights violations continues to work itself out in the courts.
   
   
2. Attorney General of Canada v. Lesiuk: in 2003 the SCC denied leave to appeal a Federal Court of Appeal decision against Kelly Lesiuk, a registered nurse who argued that the Employment Insurance Act violated s.15 of the Charter because it is primarily female workers who do not meet its minimum hourly requirements for EI.
   

So many important equality rights cases were aided by the Court Challenges Programme, a recent victim of Stephen Harper's apparent disregard for access to justice. It's so, so important that claimants of all income levels are able to take advantage of our constitutional protections. Apparently Stephane Dion has pledged to reinstate the CCP so let's keep our fingers crossed.

*Caveat: I'm no ConLaw expert, just an SCC fangirl.

Edited to add: I see that the Globe has a very instructive list of the most important Charter cases as seen by a handful of constitutional experts.

The benefactor

This week's Nature has a short article in its "Jobs" section called "The benefactor" in which author Maria Ocampo-Hafalla explains how despite all her high-level scientific training and education at a women's college, her mission in life is to become a "kept woman."

Ocampo-Hafalla has groomed herself for the role, directing her interests and activities to become the most attractive candidate. Now, she does her best to satisfy her benefactor in exchange for financial security and perks such as a personal allowance.

Her benefactor, of course, is the foundation that funds her post-doctoral fellowship (she's a research fellow at Cancer Research UK's London Research Institute). It's a clever take on traditional gender roles and an interesting commentary on women's participation in the business of science.

Kamloops kids protest homophobia

The Kamloops Daily News reports that a group of students at Brocklehurst Secondary are staging a protest against homophobia.

The Gay Lesbian Alliance at the school is holding a Day of Silence to raise awareness about the difficulties faced by GLBT students. Although not mentioned in the KDN article, this is apparently a continent-wide action taking place April 18 and kicking off Pride Week.

Silencing highschoolers alone takes Herculean effort, so good on them!

Great (Canadian) book review blog

Stumbled across Frieda's Feminist Book Blog this afternoon and have found all kinds of good suggestions for my "to-read" list. Unfortunately it hasn't been updated lately, so hopefully more quality reviews are forthcoming.

Women outnumber men online

From CBC news: a recent study has found that female Internet users outnumber male users in the US. Canada's most recent statistics are from 2005 and indicate an approximately even divide.

Hopefully the media and other generators of Internet content will take note.

(Possibly) good news from StatsCan

Today Statistics Canada released a brief review of the Canadian economy in 2006 which contained some encouraging findings about women's participation in the labour force.

Unemployment among adult women was at record lows, falling for the sixth year in a row below rates of unemployment among adult men. Interestingly, the picture north of the 49th parallel is quite different than south of it:



Apparently, 2006 was the first year in which university-educated women in Canada exceeded the number of university-educated men. The report extrapolates from this statistic that there must therefore be an increased supply of skilled workers in Canada. I'm not entirely convinced that one can conclude from the figures that (more educated women) + (growth in female employment rates) = (greater number of women in professional and other skilled placements). Given what we know about women's earning power versus that of men, I think it's equally as likely that many more women, facing economic crisis, are taking on work that is part-time, underpaid, and in positions not necessarily reflective of their career training. Regardless, the increasing number of women employed in Canada is a promising trend.

Earlier this month StatsCan had reported that employment growth for women in the twelve months between March 2006 and 2007 was nearly double that of men. On its face, greater participation by women in the workforce would appear to be a positive development. However, I'm concerned with the overrepresentation of senior women in this statistical picture. As it turns out, "[w]omen aged 55 and over attained a record high employment rate of 25.8% in March. While the employment rate for women aged 25 to 54 has been increasing for several decades, the upward trend in the employment rate for older women began in 1997."

This seems to me to suggest that more women, upon reaching what would normally be retirement age, continue to work. Whether this is by choice or out of financial necessity is not, of course, represented by the sort of raw data StatsCan deals in. Poverty among elderly women is a particular problem in Canada, because of higher average female life expectancy and the fact that women often lack sufficient pensions or other financial support in their golden years.

Overall, the economic situation for women, at least as regards employment, appears to be improving, and I hope the trends seen in 2006 continue apace.

Sayonara, Stronach

As you've probably heard, the Honourable Belinda Stronach announced today that she's stepping down from politics to re-enter the business world that she left only three short years ago.

Stronach became a poster child for liberal feminism (see this excellent Tyee article from a couple years ago) when her ex-colleagues in the Conservative party had a field day bringing out their favourite sexist slurs. But is she actually a feminist?

I think that anyone who has aligned themselves even briefly with the Conservative Party of Canada is on pretty shaky ground in that regard, but let's look at her track record, courtesy of the Hansards and a fantastic website called howdtheyvote.ca (started by a Kamloops kid, by the way):

• For two years, Stronach has sat on the Standing Committee on the Status of Women to some good effect. She participated frequently in Committee talks and often took Bev Oda to task for the Minister's cuts to SWC;
  
  
• Back in the days of her battle with Stephen Harper for the CPC leadership, she came out as pro-choice and a supporter of gay rights (an arguably bold move considering the electorate to which she was hoping to appeal);
  
  
• As everyone knows, she voted in favour of "An Act respecting certain aspects of legal capacity for marriage for civil purposes" (e.g. the same-sex marriage bill), going against the CPC party line in its first and second readings;
  
  
• She voted against two Conservative attempts to raise the age of consent for sexual acts from 14 to 16;
  
  
• Stronach chaired the National Liberal Women's Caucus in 2006 which published its well-intentioned, if frosting covered Pink Book of ideas for women-centred policy alternatives;
  
  
• She was a role model, not perhaps for her achievements while in office but because she did not back down in the face of immense criticism from her detractors who evidently took issue with a young single mother daring to join their fray;
  

She remains a fiscal conservative and a product of white, upper-class privilege, but so do many of the women who lead the fight for equality in this country. Kim Campbell-style, she played the "call me Belinda" card a bit too much for my liking (see her website for example), and she rarely voted outside party lines. But despite all that, plus her many publicity gaffes and failure to accomplish much of substance during her tenure, I would say that Belinda Stronach did, in a limited sense, represent feminist values while in office.

Incidentally, her departure may seem an unfortunate blow to a Liberal party struggling to fight gender imbalance among its MPs, but it may actually be a boon: now Dion can fly in a female candidate of greater skill and substance. Too bad for the people of her riding that Martha Hall Findlay was already shuffled off to Willowdale.

City social planning and homelessness

A social plan costing in the range of $75,000.00 is under discussion at Kamloops City Council. (And it would appear that Councillor John DeCicco is as ignorant about poverty as he is on GLBT issues. Guess he feels a bit foolish complaining about those picky beggars now that even the Salvation Army and the New Life Mission are complaining about the quality of food found at the Food Bank!)

Homelessness in Kamloops clearly doesn't approach the levels found in larger (and warmer) cities in the province. However, the number of people on the city's streets grows each year, with a particular increase in the number of homeless women. The last year for which statistics on homelessness in Kamloops are available is 2005. At that point, the Kamloops Community Committee on Homelessness reported 168 homeless people in the City, in a count that took place in late November. Although the male-to-female ratio of the homeless in Kamloops is much greater than in some other BC cities (e.g. 22% in Kamloops versus 37% in Victoria), there is a worrying dearth of facilities and services directed at homeless women in particular.

This was a problem in 2003 according to service providers, and continued in the 2005 report to be a chief complaint among survey subjects (the homeless themselves). There are limited women-only shelters, particularly emergency shelters, and limited food provision services for women. It can be traumatizing for women, especially those who have suffered abuse, to use the soup kitchens which are populated mainly by homeless men. Now, with the in-fighting going on lately among the groups who provide food for the homeless and disadvantaged, it may become an even greater problem. The City, in devising its social plan and allocating funds, should look into remedying this.

(As an aside, I'd love to see this Toronto project replicated across Canadian municipalities. Maybe it would raise awareness among those barbers...I mean, City Councillors...I mean, citizens...who find it so easy to ignore the people in need who are standing right outside their shop windows.)

Told you so...

"'Normal' pregnancy weight may be too much"

Listen up, birth-giving machines! Make sure you're gaining weight, but not too much, and not too little, and apparently not even the "recommended" amount: the health of a future generation depends on it! Furthermore, the pre-pregnant amongst you had best control your chocolate cravings as well, because a middling middle makes you a less-than-ideal fetal receptacle.

Next week: "Watching TV while pregnant causes media-savvy toddlers" and "Expectant mothers advised to stop laughing: amniotic fluid jiggles with giggles."