As I proudly supported the NDP in the federal election, plastering signs all over my property ( plus my monthly donation) I, today, got the "can we put a provincial sign on your lawn" phone call.
I'll admit, I haven't much followed the provincial platforms. An e-mail here, a news article there, but my heart hasn't really been in it as this is, after all, Ontario and - who are we kidding - the NDP doesn't have a chance in hell in this province.
But I scolded myself for not at least having a thorough grasp of what awesome - though totally wasted - plans they have in store. And began to research.
And research.
And research.
Are you there, NDP? It's me, Alex.
Part of Ontario's education system for the past 18 years of my life. The last three spent navigating the extraordinarily expensive [tax-supporting, job providing] world of post-secondary education. And what does your Ontario plan have in store for me?
If anyone can figure that out, let me know. Because all I can find are old plans to phase out the textbook and technology grant, and an article from the CFS arguing lower tuition costs as opposed to an East-Coast NDP student debt cap.
I am going to be in school for the next four years at least. I am going to finish my undergrad, and earn a masters degree (possibly two) and then I am going to come and work for YOU, my government, and attempt to make Canada's health care even better.
And how do you reward me, and all the other students in Ontario, for paying higher tuition fees than any other province, for denser classroom volumes than any other province, just so we can make our province a better place?
...?
Thanks.
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Fwd: FW: It is only the beginning...
I received a Fwd: today that really pissed me off, and since my dogs are passed out on the couch (and don't really understand the Media's perpetuation of intolerance) I have decided, after a long absence, it is time for a [minor] rant.
The subject line of this e-mail read Fwd: FW: It is only the beginning...
Ominous? I thought so. I so rarely read forwards (my wonderful hotmail settings so diligently filter everything with an 'F' and a 'W' and a colon combination into my junk mail) but I thought, before hitting "delete all" I'll indulge, I'll open one - just one - for the first time in, oh say, two years?
I was greeted with the scanned image of a newspaper, an article from the Toronto Sun (I should have stopped reading right then and there) entitled Snap. Ka-Pow! Fat lip but fat chance punch leads to charges.
Now, I understand the frustration of all the upper middle class white folks with their high salaries and safe suburban neighbourhoods and job advantages being really upset at all those damn non-conformist foreigners coming in here and having the nerve to like, settle in our cultural mosaic. We were going to build another Tim Horton's there, you know.
But what really grinds my gears is that - okay, here's a scenario for you: two white girls. Altercation. Exchange [spitting of] words. Punch in the face. Girl B has a black eye and a bloody nose. Girl A is screaming bloody murder and being held off Girl B by two friends. Clear-cut case of assault, yes? Wrong! Watch in amazement as Girl A is questioned. Did you provoke her? Did you step toward her first? Did you raise your hand or arm? What did you say to her before she struck you? It is unclear if Girl B used a closed fist or an open hand. The girls are separated and told to mind their own business. It is recommended to Girl A that she not press charges. [I was there for the whole thing]. Does that make the news?
This is the kind of "flaw" in our system that comes up over dinner. All the time. This situation happens regularly. And it's never taken very seriously because - thank god - in most cases injuries are minor and everybody walks away slightly pissed off but able to move on with their life without PTSD. So why is this article such a big deal?
Because a muslim woman yelled at a white guy.
I am NOT saying I don't understand where this dude is coming from. He's in public, enjoying his new camera, and he is aggressively approached by a stranger who tells him not to take their picture because of religious reasons. But I see several problems with this whole thing.
ONE: I find it highly unlikely (given the tone of this article) that Jimmy Angry simply stated that he could take pictures wherever, of whatever, and that he expressed this view in a calm manner. If you read between the lines of his little "this is a democracy" speech, my interpretation (and in my opinion, how Ms Villain probably felt too) was that he was saying "get the fuck away from me you Arabic bitch. This is my country and I'll shoot what I want to".
TWO: Instead of launching into a speech about civil rights in the first place, would it not have been easier to simply state "I wasn't photographing you, I was taking pictures of _______."
THREE: WHY is this story being forwarded at ALL, and why is it being prefaced with VERBATIM! QUOTE! "We should be very afraid.............very afraid................we all have to say STOP.........enough........."
STOP.... enough.... what? That the rules surrounding what designates assault are too fuzzy? Too easy? Maybe. But what this article says to me, and what the preface of this forward said to me, and the fact that it was being forwarded AT ALL says to me "Get mad about this. We need to take back what's ours!"
Maybe she was totally psycho and if he hadn't escaped from the "mob" of angry Arabs he would have been seriously injured. It is not okay that she punched him. It is not okay for anyone, ANYONE, to punch anyone else.
But how much do you hate what she is in the first place, before an assault, for you to sit down and write an article about how little Toronto respects the rights of the white man?
I feel like my race is always just waiting for an excuse. From a woman punching (and not injuring) someone on the streets of Toronto (because that's seriously the biggest issue of violence we have in the city) all the way to acts of terrorism, every time you receive a Fwd: FW: about it, some white guy just self-validated his intolerance.
The subject line of this e-mail read Fwd: FW: It is only the beginning...
Ominous? I thought so. I so rarely read forwards (my wonderful hotmail settings so diligently filter everything with an 'F' and a 'W' and a colon combination into my junk mail) but I thought, before hitting "delete all" I'll indulge, I'll open one - just one - for the first time in, oh say, two years?
I was greeted with the scanned image of a newspaper, an article from the Toronto Sun (I should have stopped reading right then and there) entitled Snap. Ka-Pow! Fat lip but fat chance punch leads to charges.
Now, I understand the frustration of all the upper middle class white folks with their high salaries and safe suburban neighbourhoods and job advantages being really upset at all those damn non-conformist foreigners coming in here and having the nerve to like, settle in our cultural mosaic. We were going to build another Tim Horton's there, you know.
But what really grinds my gears is that - okay, here's a scenario for you: two white girls. Altercation. Exchange [spitting of] words. Punch in the face. Girl B has a black eye and a bloody nose. Girl A is screaming bloody murder and being held off Girl B by two friends. Clear-cut case of assault, yes? Wrong! Watch in amazement as Girl A is questioned. Did you provoke her? Did you step toward her first? Did you raise your hand or arm? What did you say to her before she struck you? It is unclear if Girl B used a closed fist or an open hand. The girls are separated and told to mind their own business. It is recommended to Girl A that she not press charges. [I was there for the whole thing]. Does that make the news?
This is the kind of "flaw" in our system that comes up over dinner. All the time. This situation happens regularly. And it's never taken very seriously because - thank god - in most cases injuries are minor and everybody walks away slightly pissed off but able to move on with their life without PTSD. So why is this article such a big deal?
Because a muslim woman yelled at a white guy.
I am NOT saying I don't understand where this dude is coming from. He's in public, enjoying his new camera, and he is aggressively approached by a stranger who tells him not to take their picture because of religious reasons. But I see several problems with this whole thing.
ONE: I find it highly unlikely (given the tone of this article) that Jimmy Angry simply stated that he could take pictures wherever, of whatever, and that he expressed this view in a calm manner. If you read between the lines of his little "this is a democracy" speech, my interpretation (and in my opinion, how Ms Villain probably felt too) was that he was saying "get the fuck away from me you Arabic bitch. This is my country and I'll shoot what I want to".
TWO: Instead of launching into a speech about civil rights in the first place, would it not have been easier to simply state "I wasn't photographing you, I was taking pictures of _______."
THREE: WHY is this story being forwarded at ALL, and why is it being prefaced with VERBATIM! QUOTE! "We should be very afraid.............very afraid................we all have to say STOP.........enough........."
STOP.... enough.... what? That the rules surrounding what designates assault are too fuzzy? Too easy? Maybe. But what this article says to me, and what the preface of this forward said to me, and the fact that it was being forwarded AT ALL says to me "Get mad about this. We need to take back what's ours!"
Maybe she was totally psycho and if he hadn't escaped from the "mob" of angry Arabs he would have been seriously injured. It is not okay that she punched him. It is not okay for anyone, ANYONE, to punch anyone else.
But how much do you hate what she is in the first place, before an assault, for you to sit down and write an article about how little Toronto respects the rights of the white man?
I feel like my race is always just waiting for an excuse. From a woman punching (and not injuring) someone on the streets of Toronto (because that's seriously the biggest issue of violence we have in the city) all the way to acts of terrorism, every time you receive a Fwd: FW: about it, some white guy just self-validated his intolerance.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Tentative Idealism
As overjoyed as I am at the outrageously exciting surge in public support for the NDP, I find myself shaking my head along with a significant portion of voters - both pro and antagonists in this political debacle - out of wonderment and concern over the situation surrounding some of our newly elected MPs.
I would like to believe, at the end of the day, that Miss Brosseau would not have submitted herself as a Member of Parliament candidate were she not entirely serious about taking on the role of representative to an entire riding. Her conduct surrounding the campaign, however sensationalized by the media, does make me wonder - however - exactly how serious this young lady is about her new role in the government.
As for all of the skepticism about Miss Brosseau's appropriateness as a representative, I find this whole argument irrelevent as she is who the voters of that riding elected. It was no secret that French is not her first language, and the voters chose her anyway. And if they voted NDP without bothering to research their candidate, and are now pissed to find she is not a true QUEBECOIS, sucks to be you. Should have taken ten minutes to educate yourself on what you voted for.
I hope Miss Brosseau steps up to the plate, and sets an example. I hope she, among many others, does not live up to the Tory vision of and NDP Parliament becoming a childrens' sandbox full of squabbles and people who don't take their jobs seriously.
I think that this is a true opportunity for Canadian politics; I believe, from the bottom of my heart, that youth enervation in the political spectrum has been desperately needed for some time. That fresh faces are required for fresh issues, fresh decisions, and to get to the heart of the questions Canadians are asking that seem to become lost in transit from our communities to Parliament. I hope that, out of desperation to appease their leader, Mr. Layton, out of contempt for the unchallenged authority of Mr. Harper, and out of duty to all the Canadians these young MPs represent, that they will take their jobs more seriously than the representatives we have become so apathetic towards that we don't even know their names.
So Miss Brosseau took a vacation to Vegas. Now that her job has begun, is she not present? Is she not working with Mr. Layton? Is she not about to step up to the plate?
Interesting that so many Tories are spitting on a vacation to Vegas before this young lady has even been employed, while their own MP seats remain empty through the majority of the year.
I'd like to see what these folks have got to say. I'd like to give them a chance. But for Christ's sake, please don't embarrass those of us, old and new to the NDP, that have put our faith in you!
I would like to believe, at the end of the day, that Miss Brosseau would not have submitted herself as a Member of Parliament candidate were she not entirely serious about taking on the role of representative to an entire riding. Her conduct surrounding the campaign, however sensationalized by the media, does make me wonder - however - exactly how serious this young lady is about her new role in the government.
As for all of the skepticism about Miss Brosseau's appropriateness as a representative, I find this whole argument irrelevent as she is who the voters of that riding elected. It was no secret that French is not her first language, and the voters chose her anyway. And if they voted NDP without bothering to research their candidate, and are now pissed to find she is not a true QUEBECOIS, sucks to be you. Should have taken ten minutes to educate yourself on what you voted for.
I hope Miss Brosseau steps up to the plate, and sets an example. I hope she, among many others, does not live up to the Tory vision of and NDP Parliament becoming a childrens' sandbox full of squabbles and people who don't take their jobs seriously.
I think that this is a true opportunity for Canadian politics; I believe, from the bottom of my heart, that youth enervation in the political spectrum has been desperately needed for some time. That fresh faces are required for fresh issues, fresh decisions, and to get to the heart of the questions Canadians are asking that seem to become lost in transit from our communities to Parliament. I hope that, out of desperation to appease their leader, Mr. Layton, out of contempt for the unchallenged authority of Mr. Harper, and out of duty to all the Canadians these young MPs represent, that they will take their jobs more seriously than the representatives we have become so apathetic towards that we don't even know their names.
So Miss Brosseau took a vacation to Vegas. Now that her job has begun, is she not present? Is she not working with Mr. Layton? Is she not about to step up to the plate?
Interesting that so many Tories are spitting on a vacation to Vegas before this young lady has even been employed, while their own MP seats remain empty through the majority of the year.
I'd like to see what these folks have got to say. I'd like to give them a chance. But for Christ's sake, please don't embarrass those of us, old and new to the NDP, that have put our faith in you!
Monday, May 2, 2011
Pick a Side, This is War
Finally, there is an opposition party that will actually OPPOSE. While a Conservative majority is far from paradise, 104 of my country's seats are - in a historical moment for the New Democratic Party - occupied by the new opposition party of Canada, the NDP. Now that we have some weight, let's see some political WAR!
Left vs Right
What side are you on?
And just for good measure, one more reason to hate Stephen Harper...
"In 2008, Luc Pomerleau, a biologist at the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, discovered secret government plans to weaken regulations & allow corporate food producers to conduct their own safety inspections. Pomerleau leaked the news and was immediately fired. Then the listeriosis meat outbreak killed 17 Canadians," (click for more examples of Harper's idiocy).
FYI - I was one of many Canadians who suffered from the listeriosis outbreak. While I was fortunate enough to survive, it was the most excruciatingly painful experience of my life, and I face ongoing digestive issues as a result.
Left vs Right
What side are you on?
And just for good measure, one more reason to hate Stephen Harper...
"In 2008, Luc Pomerleau, a biologist at the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, discovered secret government plans to weaken regulations & allow corporate food producers to conduct their own safety inspections. Pomerleau leaked the news and was immediately fired. Then the listeriosis meat outbreak killed 17 Canadians," (click for more examples of Harper's idiocy).
FYI - I was one of many Canadians who suffered from the listeriosis outbreak. While I was fortunate enough to survive, it was the most excruciatingly painful experience of my life, and I face ongoing digestive issues as a result.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Society teaches "don't get raped" rather than "don't rape"
The heinous gang-rape by over 20 male individuals of an 11-year old girl in Texas has torn the community apart because "These boys have to live with this the rest of their lives," says Sheila Harrison, empathist for rapists, in Blaming an 11-year-old victim.
Coverage of this story in the New York Times reported quotes on the young girl dressing older than she was, wearing make up inappropriate for her age, and hanging out with older guys in a rough neighbourhood. While Nicole Colson, writer of Blaming an 11-year-old victim, addresses the astounding lack of empathy or concern for the victim by the community (and media), what the community, Colson, the New York Times all seem to have in common is a lack of speculation on the nature of the crime itself.
Colson writes that instances of "blaming the victim" are blatantly obvious in this case. It seems to have been implicitly suggested that the young girl appeared to be much older than she was.
"She looked and acted older than 11." Is that the defense of the 20 men who assaulted and raped her, while taking picture and videotaping the violation as if it were a sport?
If she were 30 years old, would it still be okay that a woman was repeatedly assaulted and raped?
It seems as though this is semantics to the community in question, as the parents of the victim have been urged to relocate due to harassing phone calls from community members, angry about charges against the perpetrators.
Thirty-six percent of female victims of spousal violence and less than 10% of victims of sexual assault reported these crimes to the police in 2004.5
Coverage of this story in the New York Times reported quotes on the young girl dressing older than she was, wearing make up inappropriate for her age, and hanging out with older guys in a rough neighbourhood. While Nicole Colson, writer of Blaming an 11-year-old victim, addresses the astounding lack of empathy or concern for the victim by the community (and media), what the community, Colson, the New York Times all seem to have in common is a lack of speculation on the nature of the crime itself.
Colson writes that instances of "blaming the victim" are blatantly obvious in this case. It seems to have been implicitly suggested that the young girl appeared to be much older than she was.
"She looked and acted older than 11." Is that the defense of the 20 men who assaulted and raped her, while taking picture and videotaping the violation as if it were a sport?
If she were 30 years old, would it still be okay that a woman was repeatedly assaulted and raped?
It seems as though this is semantics to the community in question, as the parents of the victim have been urged to relocate due to harassing phone calls from community members, angry about charges against the perpetrators.
Half of Canadian women (51%) have experienced at least one incident of physical or sexual violence since the age of 16.1
Every minute of every day, a Canadian woman or child is being sexually assaulted.2
One to two women are murdered by a current or former partner each week in Canada.3
Spousal violence makes up the single largest category of convictions involving violent offences ... in Canada over the five-year period 1997/98 to 2001/02. Over 90% of offenders were male.4
- Statistics Canada, The Violence Against Women Survey, The Daily, November 18, 1993
- Canadian Research Institute for the Advancement of Women, Fact sheet: extrapolated from Ontario Women’s Directorate, Dispelling the Myths about Sexual Assault. Fact sheet, Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 1998
- Dauvergne, M., (2002), Homicide in Canada - 2001, Juristat 22(7), Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Statistics Canada.
- Statistics Canada, Measuring Violence Against Women, Statistical Trends 2006
- Ibid
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)