Women's Issues

The language we use matters. This is because language frames the debate. Lakoff would be the first to say this. The very fact that we are calling the group of refugees seeking asylum at the border a "migrant caravan" instead of "asylum seekers" speaks to this very issue. The way we discuss women's issues is also a problem. Why are they called "women's issues" when the issue is not with women, but with male violence and toxic masculinity. Women are always at the centre of the discussion and men always seem to be left out. And when you're left out, you cannot be held accountable.

Until we all focus on the root of the problem — men as a group that comprises some sick, sicker, sickest individuals — girls and women will never be truly safe and able to enjoy their lives freely. The passive voice we use to discuss violence against women is harmful. The focus on crime properly belongs on men and the numbers of men who harm and destroy women.

"Calling gender violence a women's issue is part of the problem. It gives a lot of men an excuse not to pay attention." - Jackson Katz

This week, the UN announced that the most dangerous place for women is the home. Out of an estimated 87,000 women killed last year, some 50,000 — or 58% — were killed by partners or family members. This is not surprising. I am well aware that while the majority of intentional homicide victims are male and killed by strangers, women are far more likely to die at the hands of someone they know. Most likely, a male partner, friend or family member.

Women pay a high price for gender inequality: their lives. And they have a right to be outraged. They have a right to protest without being called "feminazis". It seems men have no idea what it is like to live as a woman. To not know which one of your male friends is charismatic on the outside but an entitled prick on the inside. Obviously, nobody can read minds, but for women, our bodies and well-being are at stake. At the same time, we have to be mature enough not to project the worst of men onto all men. Being cautiously optimistic is a balancing act; one that cannot ever be perfectly executed.

Our Turn

I’ve been dreaming about the feminist utopia in Herland. The book describes an isolated society entirely composed of women. The result is an ideal social order free of war, conflict and domination.

But what would society look like in real life if women ruled? Would it be better or worse? I remember back in high school a well-known, all-girls private school realeased a set of promotional posters for a campaign called, “If Girls Ruled”. The gist was, the world would be a better place and that men are the root of all that is bad. The boys schools took this to heart. Well, duh. It was a lengthy debate topic in their classrooms and even teachers were getting heated about it. I want to make clear, the ad never mentioned boys or men, but it implied a lot; about men, about masculinity and about male leaders. This was one of the boldest feminist campaigns I had ever seen. It was unapologetically candid. 

Obviously, we don’t know what the world would look like if women ruled. But we do know that what’s happening now is not working. We have nothing to lose and everything to gain by giving women a shot. While we can’t say for sure whether women would behave any better (women can be just as selfish as men) we do know that women tend to lead differently than men. They’re more likely to be collaborative and encourage dialogue. My personal take is that there would definitely be fewer pissing contests and wars. That’s not to say women don’t have egos, they do, but their sense of self is not tied to dominating others. 

So what do we do? Do we throw out the baby with the bath water? Some would say yes but that doesn't seem fair. What I know is that as a society, we need to return to our roots and embrace our humanity. The leaders for that crusade? Women.

Why are men so disappointing

His name is Andrew and he doesn’t have a bed frame.

His name is Nathan and his mom does his laundry on the weekend.

His name is Clark and he thinks Jordan Peterson is the greatest intellectual on Earth.

His name is Joe and he stares at you at the gym.

His name is Adam and he bugs you about sending pics.

His name is Kevin and he calls the waitress “darling” before tipping her 10%.

His name is Jack and he rubs his junk on you while dancing at the club.

His name is Chad and you can smell his Axe body spray a mile away.

His name is Brody and he thinks any female authority figure is a total bitch.

His name is Eric and he thinks that #MeToo is a witchhunt.

His name is Josh and he thinks that periods are gross.

His name is Alex and he says he’s a nice guy but he’s nothing of the sort.

His name is Mohammed and he complains about the friend zone.

His name is Tony and he thinks women like to be jackhammered.

His name is Connor and he’ll cut you off when you speak because he thinks he has something more important to say.

His name is Antoine and he thinks the street is his personal urinal.

His name is James and he ignores the sexist or demeaning comments his friends make about women because he’s a spineless jellyfish.

His name is Lucas and he’s scared of the word feminist/women having power and freedom.

His name is Thomas and he thinks talking politics is a sport.

His name is Charlie and he’s rude and dismissive to girls who aren’t super models.

The Pay Gap

Discussion about the pay gap can be excruciating because it is a very complex topic. I don't care do debate how many cents on the dollar women make. Sometimes it is foul play and other times it's fair.

Pay equity means equal pay for work of equal value. But how do we decipher what is valuable and what is not and who gets to make those decisions? Since we live in a patriarchy, obviously men do, and it is becoming increasingly clear that traditionally female careers are undervalued and underpaid.

"Janitors, two-thirds of whom are men, make $12.13 per hour, while maids and housekeepers, nearly 9 in 10 of whom are women, make $9.94 per hour." PBS

Today's workforce remains profoundly segregated by gender. I pose that women's work is undervalued because women themselves are undervalued. We see this in other arenas too. Recently, I heard a young girl talking sports with a few of her male friends. She brought up gymnastics. Her male friends stopped her and said, "That's not a real sport!"

Now it may be they just don't like gymnastics, but the more plausible answer is that gymnastics is a female dominated sport and therefore they undervalue it for that very reason. Women are put down in very subtle ways every day. "Don't throw like a girl. Don't be a sissy!" We're taught to hate ourselves. Maybe not directly, but subtly over the years it builds up often leading to things like self harm and anorexia or bulimia.

If you think you're not worth anything, you dare not ask for anything -- not the raise you deserve or the respect you are due as a fellow human being. In result, many women are impoverished or dependent on men. They stay on the street and get sexually assaulted. They stay in abusive relationships and get killed.

We hear time and time again about the "business case for change". In our capitalist society, it seems that doing the right thing doesn't matter in the slightest. It's the money that talks. And we know that equality in the workplace means billions of dollars for the economy. But why is the business case for change not working in the way we thought it would? Because men fear women having power and freedom more than they like money. My guess is because they think we'll treat them the way they've treated us.

Note: Addressing the low pay and poor advancement opportunities in women’s work is essential to confronting systemic racial and ethnic inequality. Women of color are disproportionately represented in these jobs: They are a third of the female labor force but nearly 45 percent of women in these jobs.