Beth
Links to the release:
English: http://bit.ly/1RPZkaF
Français: http://bit.ly/1R5fy2K
..............................................................................................................................................................
WHICH IS THE BEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD TO BE A WOMAN?
by Erin Anderssen, The Globe and Mail, March 7, 2016
Canada has fallen again – to a shameful 30th place - in the global gender rankings thanks in part to a widening wage gap and still relatively low female participation in government. Erin Anderssen looks at revealing statistics – from hours spent on housework to lengths of maternity leave – to gauge today’s degree of gender parity.
See the rest at:
http://www.theglobeandmail.
......................................................................................................................................................................CANADA’S LEADING WOMEN’S GROUPS SEEK CO-ORDINATED ADVOCACY
by Janet McFarland, Globe and Mail, Mar. 07, 2016
http://www.theglobeandmail.
Some of Canada’s leading women’s groups are testing new ways to unite through collective lobbying campaigns to spur action on women’s issues after almost two decades without a national organization to take the lead on advocacy.
For almost 30 years after it was founded in 1972, the National Action Committee on the Status of Women (NAC) played a unifying role for the feminist movement in Canada, serving as the glue to rally more than 700 member organizations to lobby governments for fundamental equality reforms, including pay equity and the inclusion of equality rights provisions in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. But the NAC closed in 2001, and advocacy work on women’s issues splintered among issue-specific organizations that worked independently or in small groups. The approach has left no major national voice to speak with a broader view on women’s causes.
Some of those groups are now saying it might be time to reconstruct a national women’s organization for Canada under a new model to give women’s issues more prominence among policy makers. The emerging solution of choice for many is not another national organization such as NAC, but more flexible broad-based, ad-hoc alliances that come together on pressing issues and disperse after a campaign is over.
Last year, for example, about 25 organizations started talks about organizing a federal leaders’ debate on women’s issues. Word of the project, called Up for Debate, spread quickly, and to the delight of organizers, endorsements poured forth from every quarter of the women’s movement – including unions, faith-based groups, health organizations, issue-focused women’s groups and local violence shelters across Canada.
Kelly Bowden, acting director of policy at Oxfam Canada, who helped steer the alliance, said she felt a “bubbling” energy as 170 organizations came forward to lend their support, persuading her there is an untapped appetite for collective action on women’s issues in Canada after years of relative quiet amid widespread budget cuts in the sector ( . . . )
The alliance proved that women’s groups can unite on broad policy issues despite differences that have evolved in approaches to feminism over the past 20 years, said Kim Stanton, legal director at the Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund ( . . . ) Other coalitions have also emerged over the past two years, notably on the issue of violence against women ( . . . ) The approach is favoured in part because it is practical. NAC faded away over the 1990s not only because governments cut its funding, but also because it was unable to find consensus on its approach among its diverse and sometimes fractious members. Alliances can be more flexible, allowing participants to lend support when they agree with an approach, and remain on the sidelines when they do not ( . . . )
..............................................................................................................................................................
WHY ARE QUEBEC’S ELECTED WOMEN OFFICIALS AVOIDING THE FEMINIST LABEL?
by Sarah Ratchford, March 7, 2016
http://www.vice.com/en_ca/
Throughout the past week, the current and former ministers of women in Quebec made headlines after publicly eschewing the feminist label. Instead of identifying as a feminist, current Ministre de la condition féminine Lise Thériault said she was "more egalitarian" than feminist, while the former minister, Stéphanie Vallée, said she is "not of that generation" ( . . . )
Why would two women in power, two women who have held the position Ministre de la condition féminine, avoid attaching to a label designed expressly to support women? Their choice feels even odder given that the federal leader of their party publicly preaches staunch "because it's 2015" feminism.
Judith Lussier is a columnist with Metro in Montreal, and she says she thinks the minister of women has a duty to know what feminism actually is, rather than just thinking of feminists as caricatures. "We ask for ministers to be competent in their field," she told me over the phone from Montreal. "I think [Thériault] showed a lack of competence. She didn't read about feminism, and she is not very knowledgeable in that field." Lussier said this would have been a good opportunity for Thériault to make a statement about true equality, but instead, she chose to reinforce misconceptions.
Thériault says she's more egalitarian than feminist. In her book Les libéraux n'aiment pas les femmes, Aurélie Lanctot talks about how feminism ( . . . ) does not matter to Liberals, who stress the belief that given equal opportunity under the law, anyone can succeed. There's this idea that the term "feminism" somehow insinuates that being a woman is an inherent handicap in the world ( . . . )
But while it's absolutely true that all people have great capacity to succeed, not everyone is given the same chances to develop or be seen due to systemic injustices ( . . . ) In failing to recognize that, Thériault and Vallée are ignoring women's realities. The result is tone deaf, privileged statements ( . . . ) The trouble is, their sentiment ignores the fact that we're not quite living in a free and equal society. As Lussier says, there are barriers set up to prevent women from doing whatever they want, and there are inequalities among women ( . . . )
Kimberley Manning is Principal of Concordia University's Simone de Beauvoir Institute, and she thinks the comments may have more to do with the province's finances than with any real political sentiment. "This might be more about what's going on in terms of austerity in Quebec right now, and the desire to focus more on individual solutions rather than collective, feminist solutions," she says. "Collective, feminist solutions cost money, right?" Either way, she says, she was surprised to hear what the two women had to say. "I think of Quebec feminism as one of the strongest forces of feminism in the country. Not all provinces have status of women ministries, or have the daycare we have here."
In a letter quoted in La Presse, Theriault said she is a feminist in her own way, but that she doesn't want to be associated with a movement that is against men. Not only is that a misunderstanding of what the movement means, but it also undermines the progress that those within the movement are still trying to make ( . . . )
Manning says it would behoove Thériault to work with feminist groups in order to gain a better understanding of women's issues and a greater appreciation for the work that's being done ( . . . )
WHY ARE QUEBEC’S ELECTED WOMEN OFFICIALS AVOIDING THE FEMINIST LABEL?
by Sarah Ratchford, March 7, 2016
http://www.vice.com/en_ca/
Throughout the past week, the current and former ministers of women in Quebec made headlines after publicly eschewing the feminist label. Instead of identifying as a feminist, current Ministre de la condition féminine Lise Thériault said she was "more egalitarian" than feminist, while the former minister, Stéphanie Vallée, said she is "not of that generation" ( . . . )
Why would two women in power, two women who have held the position Ministre de la condition féminine, avoid attaching to a label designed expressly to support women? Their choice feels even odder given that the federal leader of their party publicly preaches staunch "because it's 2015" feminism.
Judith Lussier is a columnist with Metro in Montreal, and she says she thinks the minister of women has a duty to know what feminism actually is, rather than just thinking of feminists as caricatures. "We ask for ministers to be competent in their field," she told me over the phone from Montreal. "I think [Thériault] showed a lack of competence. She didn't read about feminism, and she is not very knowledgeable in that field." Lussier said this would have been a good opportunity for Thériault to make a statement about true equality, but instead, she chose to reinforce misconceptions.
Thériault says she's more egalitarian than feminist. In her book Les libéraux n'aiment pas les femmes, Aurélie Lanctot talks about how feminism ( . . . ) does not matter to Liberals, who stress the belief that given equal opportunity under the law, anyone can succeed. There's this idea that the term "feminism" somehow insinuates that being a woman is an inherent handicap in the world ( . . . )
But while it's absolutely true that all people have great capacity to succeed, not everyone is given the same chances to develop or be seen due to systemic injustices ( . . . ) In failing to recognize that, Thériault and Vallée are ignoring women's realities. The result is tone deaf, privileged statements ( . . . ) The trouble is, their sentiment ignores the fact that we're not quite living in a free and equal society. As Lussier says, there are barriers set up to prevent women from doing whatever they want, and there are inequalities among women ( . . . )
Kimberley Manning is Principal of Concordia University's Simone de Beauvoir Institute, and she thinks the comments may have more to do with the province's finances than with any real political sentiment. "This might be more about what's going on in terms of austerity in Quebec right now, and the desire to focus more on individual solutions rather than collective, feminist solutions," she says. "Collective, feminist solutions cost money, right?" Either way, she says, she was surprised to hear what the two women had to say. "I think of Quebec feminism as one of the strongest forces of feminism in the country. Not all provinces have status of women ministries, or have the daycare we have here."
In a letter quoted in La Presse, Theriault said she is a feminist in her own way, but that she doesn't want to be associated with a movement that is against men. Not only is that a misunderstanding of what the movement means, but it also undermines the progress that those within the movement are still trying to make ( . . . )
Manning says it would behoove Thériault to work with feminist groups in order to gain a better understanding of women's issues and a greater appreciation for the work that's being done ( . . . )
