Showing posts with label women's rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label women's rights. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 9

SLUTWALK Fredericton - Because we've had enough!

SLUTWALK Fredericton is here! August 12th, 2011. We'll be meeting in the Tannery shortly before 8pm for the walk.

But why?
On January 24th 2011, a representative of the Toronto Police Force gave the public insight to how they really feel about victims of sexual assault by stating women should "avoid dressing like sluts".

Historically the term "slut" has held negative connotations and been used to shame women (and men) for their sexual practices. And whether it has been used as a serious insult of character, or an everyday insult among friends, the intent behind the word is malicious, so we're taking it back. We are re-claiming "slut".

We live in a society where we teach young women to protect themselves against rape, and to expect sexual assault at every corner. Our strategies need to change. The dialogue needs to switch from "don't get raped" to "do not rape". Young women need to be taught "it's OK to say no".

Slutwalk is a demonstration, a way for us (men and women alike) to take back the word "slut", to not feel pressured into sex because of what we're wearing. A low cut top is not an invitation.

Let's put an end to "slut-shaming."

Slutwalk is an anti-bullying, anti-rape demonstration. It's about educating people to respect boundaries.

It's about freedom of expression, it's about feeling safe when you're out at the club having fun. It's about freedom of choice and sexuality.

The facebook event page can be found here.

Wednesday, October 20

Pro-Choice Call to Action

Dear Pro-choice Supporters,

Please send a letter to your MP asking them to vote against the private member's bill C-510, "an act to amend the Criminal Code (coerced abortion)." The bill was introduced in April and is scheduled for 2nd Reading vote on Nov 1.

Please check out the following link to some media coverage:
"Abortion vote inevitable, MP says"

For more info on the bill, see the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada's press release in:
How you can help defend women's rights?

Below is a sample letter that you can copy and paste into an email or a letter. Feel free to edit the letter or write your own. Address your email to your MP.

Look up your MP HERE.
________________________________
Sample Letter/Email:

Subject: Please vote against Bill C-510

Dear [insert your MP's name]

I'm writing to ask you to please vote against Bill C-510, an act to prohibit "coerced abortion", which is slated for a 2nd reading vote in Parliament on Nov 1.

Bill C510 is a private member's bill that would amend the Criminal Code to prohibit coercing a woman into an abortion via physical or financial threats, illegal acts, or through “argumentative and rancorous badgering or importunity”. It was introduced on April 15 by anti-abortion Conservative MP Rod Bruinooge (Winnipeg South), who chairs the Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus.

I'm pro-choice and part of Canada's pro-choice majority. I believe this is an unnecessary bill that promotes abortion stigma, paternalizes women, and puts providers at risk. The bill is redundant because threats and illegal acts are already illegal under the Criminal Code, and counselors at clinics already screen for possible coercion in women seeking abortion. However, the anti-choice movement falsely believes that clinics coerce women into abortions, so we fear this bill may encourage frivolous charges against providers, as well as harassment and violence. The bill patronizes women by implying they are frequently coerced into abortion, but the vast majority of women make their own decision to have an abortion and take responsibility for it. If the intent is really to protect women from abusive partners, we need better and more comprehensive solutions than this bill.

The bill is supported and promoted by Canada's anti-abortion movement. It represents their latest attempt to get a foot in the door towards recriminalizing abortion. The bill refers to a fetus as a “child,” making it another Trojan Horse for smuggling fetal rights into law. As you may recall, the "Unborn Victims of Crime Act" from 2008 (Bill C484) passed 2nd reading
because its deceptive language fooled a number of pro-choice MPs.

Thank you in advance for voting against Bill C510.

Sincerely,

Saturday, August 15

We need fewer barriers to abortion, not more

"In recent days, a number of private clinics in Quebec – including the legendary Morgentaler clinic – have said they will stop performing abortions.

That access to abortion should be threatened, after decades of battles in the courts, is a shocking development.

It is also a reminder that the battle for reproductive rights is never done because there are a cruelly endless number of ways to undermine access. Prince Edward Island still offers no abortion services at all. New Brunswick requires referrals from two doctors. Women in rural areas of the country often have to travel hundreds of kilometres for care. Some provinces cover only the cost of abortions performed in hospitals, creating a financial barrier."

As Atlantic Canadian feminists, the struggle for access to abortion is not a new story to us, but the recent developments in Quebec have been a slap in the face for many women's rights advocates who thought we had permanently gained some ground. I am hoping this dismay continues and draws some more attention to the appauling lack of access in our provinces.

Thursday, August 13

Call for Solidarity from the Coalition for a Carleton Sexual Assault Support Centre

Please circulate this info to everyone who are interested in supporting women's rights at Carleton University. We need people to write emails, and especially to join our rally next Monday.

Carleton University is being sued by a female student who was brutally sexually assaulted, on campus, while completing her laboratory work, in 2007. In response, the university states that the victim's injuries were "caused or contributed to by the Plaintiff through her own negligence... she was not keeping a proper lookout for her own safety".

We urge all community members who believe in women's rights to email your thoughts to:


The Coalition for a Carleton Sexual Assault Support Centre is launching a campaign in response:
"Accountability, safety, respect, dignity: We're Asking For It!"

We are organizing an emergency rally for next Monday, Aug. 17th:

A demonstration, organized by Carleton Students and members of the Ottawa community, is being held to bring attention to Carleton's stance on sexual assault. Student demonstrators will meet at at 2:30pm in the atrium of the University Centre and will head to the CU's administration offices at 3:00pm to present petitions and opposition letters. We will then march to the Bronson/Sunnyside entrance where we will be joined by members of the larger community for a rally from 4:30-6:00pm.

For more information:

To get involved, contact: coalitionforcarleton@gmail.com

Friday, August 7

To the Women of Pennsylvania

An open letter from the Collective of Vancouver Rape Relief and Women's Shelter

We want to send our condolences to the friends and family of the dead women in Pennsylvania. We send our best wishes to the wounded. Women live with so many normalized threats to our lives that we hardly notice how much we do to avoid sexist violence. What a brutal reawakening that there is no safe place for women.

The numbers of women killed by men continue to rise mostly one at a time but they are not isolated. This year is the 20th Anniversary of the Montreal Massacre and feminists said then as we repeat now "The Motive is Misogyny". This "lone gunman" shares a fear and hatred of women with the men who beat their wives, rape, harass and prostitute women and children. Although he
did not target women as feminists, as was the case with the Montreal Massacre, George Sodini was determined to send a message to all women. But we refuse to listen and we refuse to obey.

The day after the Montreal Massacre on behalf of the Canadian Association of Sexual Assault Centers, the collective of Vancouver Rape Relief and Women's Shelter sent a message to the women in Montreal. It is a no coincidence that the same words apply in this Pennsylvania Femicide.

"We will not excuse his acts when we know of the sadness and failure of his life. We will not blame his mother or lover or the women who refused to be his lovers. We will not blame the women he names in his letter from the dead. We will not blame the feminists who fought for women's liberties.

We hold responsible the men who taught him to expect women to fill his every need. We hold responsible the men who failed to teach him to live with moments of disappointment and anger without reprisals."

From our rape crisis line and transition house for battered women and their children in Vancouver, Canada, we brave on. We find reassurance in the other feminists struggling for equality and freedom everywhere in the world. We have to continue to stand together and we must continue.

Tamar Eylon,
On behalf of the Collective of Vancouver Rape Relief and Women's Shelter
Member center of the Canadian Association of Sexual Assault Centers

Monday, July 27

CALL OUT for N.B. Media Co-op Advisory Board Representatives

This is a call out for all those interested in representing one of the identified groups or issues on the N.B. Media Co-op Advisory Board. Representatives will be elected by the N.B. Media Co-op members.

About the N.B. Media Co-op:

The New Brunswick Media Co-op proposes a grassroots, democratic, reader-funded alternative to the corporate press. We're looking for readers, contributors, members, volunteers and sustainers. The Media Co-op belongs to all members and contributors. All forms of media (print, radio, video) are welcome for inclusion on our website and our monthly publication, The Brief (both soon to be launched). Our approach combines journalism, community organizing, and online collaboration to create a financially sustainable, independent, member-run Media Co-op network that spans the country.

Advisory Board members will:
  • Work with the editorial board and contributors to ensure that their group/issue has a voice, and is represented fairly;
  • Suggest potential news stories or topics for coverage;
  • Attend 4 meetings per year;
  • Act as a liaison between their group, the editorial collective, and, if needed, the contributors;
  • Monitor what is being produced by the N.B. Media Co-op to ensure ethical reporting;
  • Keep an eye out for potential new contributors;
  • Promote the N.B. Media Co-op, and encourage new members and sustainers;
  • Commit to 1-2 year terms on the board.
Representative Positions Open:
  • Acadian/Francophone New Brunswick
  • Anti-Poverty/Social justice
  • Arts & Culture
  • Disabled
  • Environmental Justice
  • Farmers/Rural
  • Gay, Lesbian, Transgendered, Queer
  • Health
  • Indigenous
  • Labour
  • Multi-cultural
  • Post-Secondary Student
  • Women
  • Youth (High school or younger)
To apply: Submit 1-2 paragraphs about yourself stating your interest in the position and your experience with the group/issue you would like to represent. Submission of interest must be sent by August 3 to admin@nbmediacoop.org

Wednesday, July 22

New group aims for more women in N.B. politics

This initiative is spearheaded by a "Progressive Conservative insider" and claims it is going to be "a broad-based, multi-partisan organization".

I find that exceptionally hard to believe since even this article is highly biased toward the implementation of a Tory report suggesting the parties need to be offered more money to run female candidates and that proportional representation would increase the number of women in government. Insinuating they would have implemented these changes had they not lost the last election. HA!

Are they really suggesting that women aren't in politics because the parties aren't letting them in? How about the fact that the traditional, capitalist, political structure that we adhere to is also *gasp* patriarchal? When this initiative fails they will say "women aren't interested in politics", and when it has marginal success every time a female politician screws up they will say "so much for affirmative action".

I'd also like to send a special thank-you out to the good old boys who comment on CBC. Seriously, when are we getting that middle finger option I've been requesting? Sometimes a thumbs down just isn't enough.

Monday, July 20

Ohio Law Would Give Men Final Decision in Abortion

A Republican lawmaker in Ohio has re-introduced a bill that would give a man the final choice on whether the woman he got pregnant could have an abortion.

Dubbed the “father’s right bill,” it would give the man the right to stand up and say he doesn’t want the fetus he contributed DNA to to be aborted. But it says nothing about then forcing him to be a good father or provide financial stability.

Its sponsor, Rep. John Adams (who has
reintroduced a bill first put forth in 2007), has stated publicly that this is an attempt to “keep the two people who have created that child together.”

This is why feminists can't retire.

Tuesday, June 23

Opposition NDP slams Tory politician for 'sexist' remarks on blog

"The blog posting was framed as a bit of advice for girls that suggested "men are attracted to smiles, so smile and don't give me any of that equal stuff. If you want equal, it comes in little packages at Starbucks."

The blog also said there's "nothing that a man wants less than a woman scowling because he thinks he is going to get shit for something and he has no idea what."

Notley [NDP] said the comments suggest a lack of respect for women and a failure to understand women's struggle for equality.

"What does it say about Alberta when a government MLA is telling young girls that their understanding of equality can be found in a diet sweetener at Starbucks?" Notley asked in a news release.

"Equal is a woman's right, not a Starbucks sweetener.""

New favourite line: "If I were sexist I think I would certainly know about it by now." Um, dude, we just told you...

Saturday, June 20

Joyce Arthur: Facts and fictions about sex trafficking and Vancouver's 2010 Olympics

With the 2010 Winter Olympic Games only seven months away, there is growing speculation that trafficking in women will increase significantly in Vancouver. A major new report lays these fears to rest by debunking the alleged link between a boom in sex trafficking and large sporting events.

Download: Human Trafficking, Sex Work Safety and the 2010 Games

The 150-page report, Human Trafficking, Sex Work Safety and the 2010 Games, was commissioned by Vancouver's Sex Industry Worker Safety Action Group (SIWSAG). Warning that ill-informed assumptions about 2010 and trafficking may actually endanger sex workers, its recommendations focus on the real concern: that Games-related street closures and the planned security regime risks displacing sex workers into more dangerous and isolated areas. The report also notes community fears that street-level sex workers may be moved in an effort to "clean up the streets".

The report echoes the 2009 Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women report on sex trafficking and the 2010 Olympics, which found that "an increase of trafficking in persons into forced prostitution does not occur around sporting events". Further, the RCMP has stated that there is no evidence to suggest an increase in human trafficking during the Games (Vancouver Sun, January 7).

In the moral crusade against prostitution, trafficking is often wrongly conflated with sex work, a position first argued by the Bush Republicans who refused American funding aid to sex-worker and anti-trafficking organizations that support the decriminalization of sex work. However, trafficking in persons involves the coerced movement of a person into a situation of forced labour, while sex work is the consensual exchange of sexual services for money.

The great majority of sex workers are not trafficked or controlled by "pimps". Most are in business for themselves or work through an agency, and most work indoors, not on the street where it's far more dangerous. Conflating trafficking with sex work is wrong and, worse, can mask the real issues of violence and exploitation that occur within both trafficking and sex work. For example, trafficking victims in other economic sectors, such as construction or farm work, are ignored in the moral panic over sex trafficking.

Sex trafficking is a serious crime, but a wide range of factors makes it difficult to prevent or detect. Global estimates of trafficking victims are often no better than "guesstimates" and can be grossly over-inflated, especially prior to large sporting events. An estimated 40,000 forced prostitutes were expected in Germany for the 2006 World Cup, but they failed to show up. About 20,000 forced prostitutes were anticipated for the 2004 Summer Olympics in Athens, but only 181 trafficked persons were actually reported in Greece for all of 2004.

Sex workers have the same right to travel and migrate as anyone else, but when they are wrongly labeled as trafficking victims, it leads to extreme human rights violations. In many countries-including Canada-this means violent raids of brothels, and the harassment, criminalization, detention, and deportation of sex workers, most of whom are voluntary workers. A huge concern is that misguided enforcement campaigns take place with no input from affected groups, including sex-worker groups, trafficked persons, migrant workers, unions, and relevant labour sectors.

The tendency to focus on international trafficking also means that domestic trafficking is given short shrift. But forced migration from rural areas of Canada to the cities is an enormous problem for aboriginal women and girls, who live with a devastating legacy from colonialism and forced assimilation. According to the Native Women's Association of Canada, many "are driven into domestic trafficking as a result by poverty and conditions on the reserve, sometimes by conditions of abuse".

The RCMP estimates that "600 women and children are trafficked into Canada each year for the purpose of sexual exploitation" (SIWSAG report). Anti-trafficking initiatives are critically important, but grossly inflating the level of trafficking and treating all female sex workers as trafficked victims does nothing to improve their safety-it only exacerbates their stigma and marginalization.

We must involve affected stakeholders and apply an evidence-based approach to prevent trafficking, rather than misrepresent the issues with scare-mongering, sexist rhetoric. Most importantly, our focus must be on ensuring the safety and full human rights of sex workers before, during, and after the 2010 Games.


Joyce Arthur is a cofounder of FIRST, a feminist group advocating for the rights of sex workers and for the decriminalization of prostitution.

Thursday, June 18

CUPE wins rights for NB casual workers

"A New Brunswick court has struck down part of the province's labour law that strips casual workers of basic rights.

In a decision released today, Justice Paulette Garnett of the New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench ruled that the New Brunswick Public Service Labour Relations Act is contrary to section 2(d) of the Charter of Rights which protects the right to freedom of association.

“We are very pleased with this victory. We have casual workers in this province who have been working as ‘casual’ in the public sector for years. Those workers have no rights, earn less and have no benefits,” said CUPE New Brunswick president Daniel Légère.

Justice Garnett said for many years the province, as an employer, has subjected casual workers to practices which can “only be described as unfair.”

The judge is giving the province one year to remedy this situation.

CUPE launched legal proceedings in September 2005 to obtain rights for those workers.

Thousands of temporary or seasonal workers employed by the province could be affected by this decision.

The fight over casual workers has been waged multiple times over the past two decades."

Thursday, June 11

The Dangers of Knowing: Boy or Girl?

This article came through my inbox this morning, and I have to blog about it - there are so many things wrong with it, I don't even know where to begin.

The article talks about an at-home test you can take to determine whether your soon-to-be baby is a boy or a girl. First, I have a huge problem with the gender binary. What if your child doesn't identify as a boy or a girl once they have some time to think about it? What then?

Mostly, however, it unimpresses me greatly that people still want to know the sex of their child before it is born. What difference can it possibly make? The article mentions, TWICE, the need to know "pink or blue" (presumably referring to the child's clothing, room decor, etc.). Really? Really? I personally find our need to assign gender-specific colours to our babies incredibly weird. What would happen if you put your daughter in a blue nursery? Would she be damaged beyond repair?

From the article:

Manufacturer IntelliGender advertises the Boy or Girl Gender Prediction Test as “a fun way to discover more about your baby and share the news of pink or blue as early as possible.”

Besides the offensive "pink or blue" notion, there is the idea that the news of the baby's sex needs to be shared "as early as possible". Who cares? When someone tells you the news that they're having a boy, you would be excited for them, yes? Wouldn't you have the exact same reaction if it was a girl? So why on earth does it matter - wouldn't you rather know that the baby is healthy?

The other issue the article brings up is sex-selective abortion. Which, while appalling, has got to be better than sex-selective infantacide, yes? Wouldn't we rather that people disposed to this kind of behaviour found out the baby's sex as early as possible? It's a gruesome thought, I know. But what really bothers me about articles like this, and 99% of articles on sex-selective abortion, is that they refuse to acknowledge that the actual act of sex selection (whether through abortion, infantacide or neglect) is only a symptom of the problem. It cannot be stopped by outlawing abortion (or requiring a reason fitting with the doctor's standards). The root of the problem is quite obviously the cultural attitude towards women. If men and women are not equal, and especially if it is to a family's economic benefit to only have boy children, of course the problem will exist. It has little, if anything, to do with the availability of tests like this (and other sex-determining medical tests) or abortion and everything to do with the need/desire to do away with girls in the first place.

Thoughts?

Wednesday, June 3

Government of Canada to amend Indian Act in wake of landmark BC ruling

"On April 6, 2009, the British Columbia Court of Appeal ruled that certain registration provisions of the Indian Act are unconstitutional as they violate the equality provision of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms...

The ruling stems from a civil law suit that Sharon McIvor launched in October 1989, in her bid to acquire Indian status for herself and her son. She claimed that section 6 of the Indian Act was discriminatory in that it treated the descendants of Indian women who married non-Indian men differently from the descendants of Indian men who married non-Indian women."

Backgrounder - McIvor: an Overview

"From 1869 to 1985, an Indian woman who married a non-Indian man would lose her status as an Indian under the Indian Act and her children were not entitled to status. However, an Indian man who married a non-Indian woman would retain his status and his wife and children would gain status. Moreover, if a child's mother and paternal grandmother did not have a right to Indian status other than by virtue of having married Indian men, the child had status only up to the age of 21(commonly referred to as the Double Mother Rule)."

Sunday, May 24

Declaration of Malalai Joya, Afghan MP


"In the face of harassment and threats, women took to the streets to demand the scrapping of the law that would legalize rape within marriage and codify the oppression of our country’s Shia women. Just as the U.S. air strikes have not brought security to Afghans, nor has the occupation brought security to Afghan women. The reality is quite the opposite.

This now infamous law is but the tip of the iceberg of the women’s rights catastrophe in our occupied country. The whole system, and especially the judiciary, is infected with the virus of fundamentalism and so, in Afghanistan, men who commit crimes against women do so with impunity. Rates of abduction, gang rape, and domestic violence are as high as ever, and so is the number of women’s self-immolations and other forms of suicide. Tragically, women would rather set themselves on fire than endure the hell of life in our ‘liberated’ country."

Use these links to read her entire declaration in English, or French.