This is far from the Utopia of Alberta

September 4, 2008

Another piece of mine printed in the Gateway today. I have the original here, because I’m not a fan of the editing, but you can check it out for yourself here. Read the second comment if you really want to get upset, with gems like, transgendered students are “confused.” Anyway, read on:

Two years ago, I stumbled onto the U of A campus for the first time as a student. Having come to the university from a small town in rural Alberta, I was most looking forward to a liberal atmosphere. Yes, no more sexism, racism, and homophobia, among other things.

While I was wrong in believing that interpersonal discrimination happens to a far lesser extent than it did in my hometown, I was struck by the more insidious inequalities that are reinforced on our campus. Despite what we may believe, our beloved U of A is no haven of equality.

First, there’s the classic example: tuition fees. Many of us pay upwards of a few thousand dollars with little difficulty, but a lot of us also have a little something called “class privilege.” Any introduction to sociology will point out there are vast numbers of people who simply lack the economic means to attain a post-secondary education.

I can hear you chime in, “But there are scholarships! And bursaries!” While this is true, most of these funds are awarded to students taking at least four courses per semester, despite full-time status requiring students to complete only three courses each semester. That means that people who really need the funding – single parents, (dis)abled persons, classed individuals – often don’t receive it.

But what of those of us who can afford our education? Chances are, unless you’re a white, able-bodied, heterosexual, middle-class male, you might have your fair share of problems. The inequalities may be difficult to perceive, but that doesn’t make them any less harmful.

Consider first that the risk for sexual assault is four times higher for college-age women than any other group, and while university-endorsed frat culture isn’t solely to blame for the problem, it certainly plays a part. Transgender students lack gender-neutral washrooms throughout campus and, as a result, must choose between refusing to use them and risking shame and possible violence. Additionally, current wheelchair access across the university is something to be truly embarrassed by, in addition to the fact that many services are ill equipped to serve those with disabilities, including the Centre for Writers. According to their website, “any student at any level of his/her degree is welcome to make an appointment.” They fail to mention that they can’t help blind students.

Students aren’t the only ones who face these issues; staff face a number of similar problems themselves. According to Human Resource Services, leaves for biological parents can be up to 50 weeks (25 weeks paid and with benefits), while adoptive parents receive a mere 10 paid weeks with benefits. This effectively limits heterosexual adoptive parents and gay and lesbian couples from attaining equal parenting opportunities.

The list goes on: Regardless of affirmative action, the number of staff who identify as visible minorities in the Faculty of Arts – often regarded as the most liberal faculty – is unbelievably low. In 2007, only 8.3 percent of staff and faculty who completed the Employment Equity Census Questionnaire identified as members of visible minorities. In addition, of the current 93 Canada Research Chairs – who have significant decision-making power regarding the direction of the university – 22 are women.

Despite all of this, I’ve only scratched the surface. Call it what you will, but the oppression of non-privileged groups is alive and well at the U of A, and it’s important to realise that and not assume some inherent liberalism exists throughout campus. There are groups that work to better things, however, such as Specialized Support and Disability Services and the Women’s Centre. As students, we’re then presented with two options: we can join the efforts to combat these problems, or we can contribute to them through our own complacency.


Maybe I’m a Sucker

August 31, 2008

Part of me feels I should ignore this comment, but I’m also big on learning from mistakes. So, here’s a comment from Hobbes/GRad that was caught in my moderation queue:

“I guess, in a nutshell, I want an example of my disrespect. I’m not being smart alecky here, but I just really do want to see where I was rude because I didn’t see it and I’d like to learn from my mistake.”

First, please follow the discussion policy, despite (what I perceive as) the disrespectful comments he’s made in the past. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt here and take this as a valuable teaching opportunity.

At that, though, have at him, everyone.


Back from Toronto

July 24, 2008

Hey everyone! I got back from Toronto late Tuesday night and I took the day off yesterday to recuperate. It was a pretty great trip and gave me some much-needed time to relax and hang out with one of my favourite people. I checked out the Niagara Falls, which were amazing, and generally just saw the sights around Toronto. Here are a few photos for your (potential) enjoyment:


I can’t escape sexism anywhere, of which I’m sure most of you are fully aware.


That didn’t stop me from trying anyway.


And here I am at the beautiful Falls.


When Walking Women Home is Problematic

June 22, 2008

I vlogged about the recent rapes that have been happening in my neighbourhood lately and covered victim blaming too, but I feel that doesn’t even begin to address the many discourses surrounding rape. So, when I was walking home last night past 2:00 with some friends (let’s call them Steve, Susan, and Erin), we came to the time for us to return to our homes. Susan and I lived closest, and Steve not much further. I said to Erin that I would go home to get my bike while she walked to Susan’s house, and then I would walk her home. I then asked Steve if he needed someone to walk home with him, to which he said he’d be fine. So, the women and men split up and I walked with Steve as far as my apartment, and then we went our separate ways. I grabbed my bike and met Erin some blocks away. It was here when she asked me, “Why does Steve get the option of being walked home when I don’t?” And rightly so.

There are a number of problems with this scenario, and I’m not sure I know any solutions, but allow me to at least lay out the problems as clearly as possible (and call me out on any I miss). Before, though, perhaps some things should be made clear, to put matters in context. First, there have been sexual assaults in the area I live in. Even if that weren’t the case, though, women are still sexually assaulted at a frighteningly high rate, with some studies stating 1 in 4 women will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime. The 1993 Violence Against Women Survey showed that half of all women in Canada will be physically or sexually assaulted. Women are victims of sexual assault far more often than men. That’s some of the context. Now, on to the problems.

First, something that didn’t occur to me until later, is that my actions reinforce the stereotype that women are assaulted by strangers while walking alone at night. This isn’t the case in the majority of situations. Some studies cite that 69 percent of women are sexually assaulted by men they know. Statistically, I pose more of a threat to friends that I walk home than a stranger jumping out from an alley or a bush, and that’s something I’ve failed to take into consideration when in situations such as the one described above.

Second, my behaviour reinforces the idea that women need to be protected by men. While this certainly wasn’t the logic behind my actions, my friend pointed out (and I completely agree) that it appears that way to others. The fact is, I’m male, and even if I want to walk a friend (who happens to be a woman) home because I think people are safer when they’re with others, and even if I want to walk her home as a friend, not a male friend, this isn’t the way it appears to others. To most other people (and certainly people who don’t know me), I’m just another guy walking a woman home to protect her from the crazies just waiting to assault a woman walking home. The fact that I didn’t walk Steve home further exemplifies this.

Third, and perhaps the most troublesome, is the element of choice that my friend brought up. She’s right: I essentially told her I’d be walking her home, while I asked Steve. Not only that, but if she had refused, I would have insisted kindly. When Steve refused, I gave him an “Are you sure?” and that was that. If Erin absolutely refused to be walked home, I would have relented, but likely only then. And that’s not okay. While I might think at the time a refusal is simply an unwillingness to be a burden to another person, that’s not necessarily the case. A “no,” in whatever form, needs to be adhered to.

With past experiences, I’ve been placed in situations where I’ll be leaving a venue with a woman I met that day or night, and I’ll often ask to walk her home or to her car. In situations where I’ve received a “no,” I’ve complied immediately. With good friends, and probably with acquaintances, I’ve likely always insisted at least once. Why should it be different? In my mind, this is probably once again due to the stereotype that women are assaulted by strangers, something I’m aware of, but haven’t been when placed in these situations. Feminism is about choice for women, though, and if I’m depriving anyone of choice, that, in my mind, isn’t okay.

Another issue comes up, though. If I chose to simply go home and not walk a friend home and something did happen, I would feel guilty, not as a man who’s duty it was to protect his friend, but as a friend who should have been there for another friend. The same holds for both female and male friends: If something had happened to Steve on his way home, I would have felt incredibly guilty for not going to his home with him, yet I didn’t insist that I walk him home after his initial “no.” What is the solution? I don’t think it should be denied that sometimes people simply don’t want to burden another person, be they acquaintance or good friend. Should a “no” that results from those feelings be given the same weight as a more direct “no?” The trouble is, we can only determine so much by tone of voice, so the answer is probably “yes.” That might not rid a compliant friend of the guilt resulting from a friend’s assault (if it ever happened), but the answer to that is, in my mind, that we probably need to respect other people’s autonomy more than we do. Furthermore, if I respect a male friend’s autonomous choice to walk himself home but deny a female friend the same choice, never mind statistics or uneasy feelings: that’s sexist.

I’ll have moments like this in the future, I’m sure of it. Despite my best intents to rid myself of sexism, it still lurks beneath my privilege, and this won’t be the last time I discover I still harbour some sexism. All I can hope for is that when I write posts like this they get people thinking so we can move beyond the problems.


Hey! That’s Sexist!

June 5, 2008

I’ve been following Geekologie for a short while now, mainly through a friend’s shared items on Google Reader. While a lot of the stuff the author posts about is fascinating, he’s also a wee bit sexist in a lot of his posts. Take one of his latest posts on a restaurant that features toilets as seats, covered bathtubs as tables, and other washroom assortments as an example. When discussing a young boy who couldn’t finish his meal because he was grossed out, this is what he writes:

Wow, Lin Li-ju, it sounds like your son has a problem. Namely that he was born with a vagina and doesn’t know how to appreciate the finer things in life.

Yeah, because people with vaginas (i.e. women and transgendered persons) have bad taste. I seem to have missed the logic to this. Oh, that’s right, there is none. Why? Because it’s another example of sexism and there is no logic to it.

Clean up your act, Geekologie.

Update: I was hoping he’d get a pingback on the post, follow it here, and catch on, but just to make sure he does, why not send him an email telling him this is unacceptable?


Sexism Sells - But We’re Not Buying It

May 24, 2008

Check out this great video by the Women’s Media Centre that tackles sexism in the media.

Be sure to sign their petition, too, and spread the video around. I think this is one of those things that is perfect for showing people who refuse to realise that sexism not only exists, but is extremely prevalent and unrelenting.


Contending with the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, Bill C-484, and Violence Against Pregnant Women

April 14, 2008

This past Friday, I attended a lecture by Dr. Rebecca Stringer, a professor from the University of Otago in New Zealand, who presented, “Fact, Fiction, and the Foetus: Violence Against Pregnant Women and the Politics of Abortion.” It was, primarily, an academic approach to the Unborn Victims of Violence Act (UVVA) in America.

America previously used the “born alive” rule when dealing with harm inflicted on the foetus, which held that matters such as homicide or assault only applied to children outside the womb, so that a foetus in utero, if harmed, would result in no charge against the person who had harmed it. UVVA overturned this.

Smash Patriarchy!


Are you an MRA? Introducing an Exciting New Guide to Help you Answer the All-Important Question!

April 11, 2008

Oh, Men’s Rights Activists: Where would we be without you? Well, on numerous occasions, my blog stats would have been a lot lower (and they’ll probably be much higher after I post this). I’m afraid the benefits - for me, at least - don’t extend beyond that. MRAs are, ultimately, harmful to many goals for equality, and, perhaps worse, are harmful to their own cause: No one wants to grant more “freedoms” (I hear that’s what they call them) to assholes. Of course, I don’t want to discount the good intentions of many men who are combating injustices committed against them, such as violence against men, or, at times the unfair treatment they receive in court systems, especially regarding custody battles - these are, I feel, legitimate concerns when dealt with properly (i.e. by not distorting statistics). To avoid confusion, these men may be referred to as feminists, or pro-feminists, or, to ensure maximum comfort, feminist-friendly men. These men are not assholes. MRAs are assholes. So, to avoid being a terribly misguided, misogynist, MRA douchebag, here’s an easy guide to help you find out if you already are one:

Smash Patriarchy!


Get Rid of Sexism on Campus!

April 1, 2008

Last week on the University of Alberta campus, The Vagina Monologues were performed, and this was, of course, greeted by right-wing jerks. Indeed, they felt compelled to tear down the posters promoting the play and asserted that “vagina” is a dirty word. Well, have I got something for them. While they’re so focused on how the word “vagina” shouldn’t be mentioned around campus, they’re letting obvious forms of woman-hate go without hesitation! I’m proposing action against this blatant ignorance, so we can finally free ourselves from the oppression of the patriarchy! There are, naturally, a number of things through which the patriarchy manifests itself, and these must be stopped.

First, no more hand raising in class to get the professor’s attention! A raised hand is most certainly a representation of an erect penis, and, therefore, leaves women out in the cold in the classroom. I propose that, instead, when we wish to address a concern or add a point, students should imitate orgasm. In this way, the sexuality of the female species will not go ignored on campus.

Second,  along the same lines, pens and pencils must be eradicated! Phallic objects by design, if we are to truly eliminate the patriarchy on campus, we need to abandon these horrible creations. What would we write with, then, you ask? Why, menstrual blood, of course! Only then can students truly rid our campus of sexism! (For those of you who are a tad squeamish, I suggest buying an ink pad and a sponge.)

Another point I’d like to address is that of architecture. Are all architects misogynist pigs? It would seem so! Even the Humanities Building is shaped like a phallus! Why must these men create buildings from the ground up? It’s an obvious attempt to celebrate the penis, of course. If we are to truly eliminate sexism on campus, we must create new buildings that celebrate woman’s innate femininity. So tear down these manifestations of phallocentricism and let’s celebrate the vagina!

These three points are not all that I could porribly address, but it’s a start. Together, we can eliminate sexism on this fine campus by ridding it of all things phallic!


Steak and a Blowjob Day

March 6, 2008

I think I first heard about Steak and a Blowjob Day just last month, a week or so before Valentine’s Day. Is it surprising? Not really.

SABD happens on March 14, a month after Valentine’s Day, of course. Put forward as a response to Valentine’s Day, it is “a holiday for men.” Not problematic, you say? Well, listen up, asshat.

There are a number of problems revolving around SABD. Let’s start off with something light: SABD relies solely on stereotypes of men. Pretty obvious stuff, I think. Not all men eat or even like steak. Hell, the idea of eating a slab of flesh from the body of an animal more than repulses me. It’s also foolish to assume that all men enjoy oral sex (or even sex at all). This is the first problem of SABD: It essentializes all men. Don’t think the problems stop there, though.

Another issue with SABD is it seems to put forward the idea that the other 364 (365 if it’s a leap year) days of the year aren’t men’s days. That’s right: the facts that men make significantly more than women; that men generally don’t need to worry about being raped when walking down the street at night; that men hold the power in society, and so on, are quite plainly being overlooked. Notice my day count: I include Valentine’s Day. “But that’s bullshit! I spent so much money that day, planned weeks ahead, and was stressed out the entire time! How can that be a man’s day,” you say? Well, friend, it is a man’s day because it essentially permits you to treat your lady friend like a second-class citizen for the rest of the year in our fucked up culture. Not only that, but chances are you expected a little something in return and probably got it. In short, stop complaining, you ingrate!

The last real problem with SABD that I’ll address (although there are certainly more), has to do with the fact that it’s being purported as a “man’s day.” I have a real problem with this. Could it be a man’s day? I suppose it probably could, but it would depend on what one’s definition of a man is. Since this is my blog and my piece, though, I’m telling you it’s not a man’s day. But then you say, “So, if it’s not a man’s day, is it a day for the bitchez? Or are you gonna tell me it’s a day for dem people with vages and dicks? ‘Cause man, you wrong there!” And I say you’re right, I would be wrong there if that’s what I was saying. But I’m not saying that. I’m saying that SABD is not a man’s day, friend, because it is a day for sexist douchebags. And you, my friend, are a huge fucking sexist douchebag.