Oh.

Via Boing Boing. Boob Job piggy bank for little girls' (?) rooms. Or why not just lay back on some greasy lipstick and think about how to get a better body. yeah, this looks really comfortable:

Slap the GAP

The University of Calgary earned some social justice points yesterday after the anti-choice pro-life campus group set up its hideous posters [LINK and LINK]. I don't understand the University's change of heart, though, because the Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) has set up its booth in the past with the U of C's permission, citing free speech (the same group which drove a foetus van around Calgary). It makes me wonder why an internal group is threatened with legal action but an external organization is given the green light. I dug back into the Calgary Feminist Meetup Group's message board from 2006 when the GAP set up at the U of C and one user wrote the University requesting an explanation for why such a hateful message would be supported by student council and I will reiterate her reported response from External Relations:

Every year pro-life approaches us on their project and every year we have to struggle with a determined group of students firmly wishing to see it happen and an equally determined group who want to keep it away. It should be noted that the “GAP” agenda is to cause controversy and confrontation in order to generate the widest possible dispersal of their message. We at the Students' Union haves struggled with this group not over their message but rather in the sensational, aggressive, and ultimately hurtful way they choose to propagate it. Understanding this we have to try and balance the needs of the student body to conduct their daily business in a safe and comfortable environment with the obligation to honor the principle (and law) of the freedom of _expression. This year our compromise with the pro-life club was that they would be able to display their material on the South Lawn if they agreed to a) have the display encircled by a snow fence, b) place warning signs in front of their display warning students of the offending images ahead, and c) have the billboards facing inwards so that students would have to walk into the display willingly rather then be passively exposed to it. We thought this was a reasonable compromise the pro-life club however refused our terms over condition c) and threatened a legal challenge. We discontinued communication and redirected them to the university.

I think the universities position on this issue can best be summed up in this excerpt from Vice-President Roman Cooney's message to another concerned and angered student on this issue:

"...I, too, find this exhibit extremely offensive and let me assure you that the University does not, in any way, sanction this event. Our dilemma is that the law is quite clear. Under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms we could not compel the group to reorient their signs so that people on campus would have a choice as to whether or not to participate. We made numerous requests to have the signs face inward, or be located in another spot, and these were rejected by the group and its legal counsel.
For the same reasons we are not in a position to tell the group what it can, and cannot, display. The alterative was a lengthy and costly court fight that has already been lost on other campuses. Under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in particular those sections regarding freedom of _expression, Campus Pro-Life has the legal right to display these images, regardless of their impact on the community. In law, error falls on the side of the greatest latitude for freedom of _expression. Therefore, the choice for the University was not whether to endorse or reject this display, but whether to reject or uphold the principle of freedom of _expression. If you believe in the Charter, you must believe in the principles it upholds, even when those principles are being abused, as I believe they are in this case.

In fact, I agree with many of your points. But the University cannot ignore the law and more importantly the principles behind it.

I would urge you to contact the organizers through Drew Brown at enable_consulting@hotmail.com and share your views. I think it is important that others on campus express their concerns about the confrontational manner in which this group makes its argument.

Your points are well taken, but they need to be raised with the organizers, who are ultimately responsible for this display.

Sincerely,

Roman Cooney
Vice-President, External Relations"

I hope this helps in your understanding of the issue and some of the work and thought that has gone into this before allowing pro-life display on campus.

Sincerely,

Bryan west
President of the 63rd Student Legislative Council

I dot support the GOP's booth set up nor the campus pro-life's sick signs. But why the double standard? Upon further investigating, it seems that American-based GAP has a powerful legal team that sues any organization standing in its way and the University of BC's relationship with them goes way back... U of C just doesn't seem to want to dig its heals in against the powerful GAP and risk a lawsuit. Perhaps the U of C could use UBC-Okanagan as a shiny example of bravery in this campus pro-life organization's behaviour:

VICTORIA (CUP) — A ruling out of the B.C. Supreme Court has supported one student union’s decision to revoke a campus pro-life group’s club status.

Legal cases instigated by a pro-life student group is expected to have cost the student union at UBC–Okanagan about $45,000 as they successfully defended their right to not support the club.

Though the student union does not have a pro-choice mandate, they have not supported Students For Life since 2006, after the group refused to grant the student union’s request that they not poster campaign material from the Genocide Awareness Project, which included graphic images of aborted foetuses.

All in all, I'm pleased the University took a stand against the pro-lifers' violent "comparable" abortion posters (a Rwandan child killed by a machete, to name one) and support the committed pro-choice students and staff's actions against the foetus fetishists' desperate attempts at argumentum ad populum that really just piss people off.

Daft Taft

This morning CBC radio confirmed the passed motion in the Edmonton legislature that Rodeo is well on its way to being Alberta's official sport. My animal complaints aside, it irritates me that white male-dominated rodeo is officially the sport of this fine and balanced province. Women's participation is limited to barrel racing, flag bearing and, oh yeah, being pretty. Miss rodeo, anyone? Ah, rodeo beauty pageants. Cowboy inspiration.

Sexist Stereotype Saturation

I was just browsing through a real estate magazine and noticed that every article in the 47 pages features a male real estate professional's opinion/commentary and his face-profile "business" photograph. Reading through each article, I came to the article, "Calgarians shop 'till they drop - $22.8 billion into cash registers".
I couldn't even the article because I was so distracted and insulted by the banner design inserted (certainly not a profile photo of a female business woman quoted in the article):

Of ten images of full-bodied skinny white women, three are wearing mini skirts, all but two are wearing stilettos, most are in skin-tight tops or pants, and one is even wearing a school girl skirt complete with bikini top and thigh-high visible stockings. And they all just look so HAPPY! Because that's what women love to do best is shop! Neat!

What's all the Feminist Fuss?

"I'm not a feminist, but..."
"I wouldn't say I'm a feminist, but..."
"...but I'm not a feminist."
"I'm a humanist, not a feminist. Feminism is dead."

Really. I've heard these disclaimers over and over again. The look of discomfort and defence in friends' eyes when I respond, "I am, absolutely I call myself a feminist and proud of it." This week the 2008 Global Gender Gap Report was released by the World Economic Forum. Reuters reports that:

Averaging 130 national scores, the report found that girls and women have reached near-parity with their male peers in educational attainment, health and survival, in both rich and poor countries.

Indeed, the most common argument against the necessity of feminism. To the contrary, though, Laura MacInnis continues:

But economically, in terms of workforce participation and earning opportunities, and politically, in terms of empowerment, the gap between the sexes remains large.

In 2007's report, Canada was ranked at #18, ahead of the United States by 13 points. In 2008 the United States was ahead of Canada by 4 points and Canada fell to #31. Canada scored #30 in estimated earned income. Average for female was (USD) $25,448.00; male $40,000.00. The most inequality for Canada was Political Empowerment. The female to male ratio of women in partliament as 21:79; Women in ministerial positions was 16:84 and Years with female head of state was 0:50 (0.1 - Kim Campbell for all of five months). To view the complete report for Canada, click here.

Women and men are NOT equal in Canada. Political empowerment has a long way to go towards equality and that seeps into the women's psychologies. It seeps into mine. Wage inequality affects my well-being and sense of respect every day I sit down in my office. Sure, Canadian women have equal educational attainment, health, and survival but there is much work to be done. I embrace feminism for this reason. There's enough voices claiming it's over. In the words of Mahatma Gandhi, "be the change you want to see."

Bush Concern

While all eyes are on the American election tomorrow, and news will cover the results, don't forget to keep an eye on what Mr. W. Bush is up to. He's still in power and with his loss of it there's some scary stuff he's going to try. Here's some of it:
Bush Rushes Harmful Environmental Laws