Opposed to Better Men. I Don’t Get it.

A commentary about male privilege.

Advertisements

Gillette, a company owned by Procter & Gamble, released their “We Believe” ad a few weeks ago. It’s an ad that addresses issues such as toxic masculinity, sexual harassment and #metoo. If you haven’t seen the ad, here it is.

When I saw this ad, I applauded Gillete. I thought, “finally a company brave enough to take a stand against an injustice. The #metoo movement has educated us on how prevalent sexual harassment is in the 21st century, especially among celebrities and politicians.  I’ve heard the excuses men use, excuses like, women ask for it because of how they dress, #MeToo is just a “male witch hunt” and I Was Drunk.

I celebrate this ad because it promotes the idea that men can, and need, to do better, men need to hold each other accountable, and women need to be treated with respect.  The ad reminds us that young boys watch us and model what they see.

That is why I applaud this ad and this company.  I have a wife and two daughters, and I want them to live in a world where they feel safe and equal.  The ad didn’t offend me, even as a man, yet the backlash to the ad surprised me.  Am I missing something? Am I different from other men. (That is not a negative thing either).  Even after researching, I still don’t understand. Why is there opposition to an ad like this?

Business Insider’s article, People are trashing their razors, reports that some people have taken to social media to say they are boycotting Gillette and even posted photos and videos of themselves discarding Gillette razors.

Canada’s Global News’ article,  Gillette’s new ad tackles toxic masculinity, says,

“The ad sparked wild backlash, with some arguing the company was ‘moralizing’ or ‘virtue-signalling.’”

Instyle’s article, Everything to Know About the Gillette Boycott,  has a selection of Twitter reactions. Here is a sampling.

Hey [Gillette]. I have an idea, stay out of politics. Real men already stop other guys from acting badly. A razor company should want me to shave with your product. And, btw, I’m extremely masculine. And there’s nothing wrong with that.

So nice to see [Gillette] jumping on the “men are horrible” campaign permeating mainstream media and Hollywood entertainment. I for one will never use your product again.

Look [Gillette], I know your heart is in the right place.  But there’s a line.  And that line is where my razor blades start issuing me moral instruction.

The National Sexual Violence Resource Center (NSVRC)  says, “In the U.S., one in three women and one in six men experienced some form of contact sexual violence in their lifetime.”

SexAssault.ca reports, “Of every 100 incidents of sexual assault, only 6 are reported to the police and 1 in 4 North American women will be sexually assaulted during their lifetime.”

It seems to me with statistics as alarming as these, that men do not stop other men from assaulting.  Masculinity that harms the opposite sex is not something to be proud of.  Men, at least some men, do need moral instruction. Treating others with respect and dignity is a virtue. That includes women.

I found an interesting article titled, 160+ Examples of Male Privilege in All Areas of Life. This article listed examples of male privilege, more than 167 privileges to be exact. This list made me think. Here are some examples related to this topic.

Men:

  • are less likely to be the target of street harassment.
  • can have a casual, friendly interaction with a stranger, like exchanging a smile or responding to a greeting, without worrying about that stranger taking it as a sexual invitation and telling you to “lighten up” if you don’t.
  • can drink in a bar alone unbothered. In many other public spaces, including bookstores, coffee shops, festivals, and more. A woman alone is often assumed to be available for men to talk to and harass.
  • can travel alone without worrying about being targeted for violence because of your gender.
  • less likely to be stalked.
  • less likely to be the victim of revenge porn.
  • less likely to be killed by a partner. Researchers estimate that 40 to 70 percent of women who are murder victims were killed by a husband or boyfriend.
  • less likely to be blamed for your own sexual assault based on what you were wearing.
  • can stand in a crowded area, like on public transportation, without worrying about being groped.

A female once asked me (paraphrased) if I ever thought about my safety before going out alone. When I thought about that, I had to answer no. The female rebutted with, ‘as a women, I always do.’ Using the Internet, I did a comparison of safety tips for men verses women. What was interesting was there were countless web pages of safety tips for women. Most of those tips were to protect themselves from assault. (see Tips, as an example). When I googled ‘safety tips for men’, the pages I saw—and there weren’t many of them—were how to exercise safely.

I have to wonder if the men who oppose this ad are afraid their male privileges are in danger.

How Times Have Changed

A reflection on the changing world

An outhouse like my parents used

Heraclitus, a Greek philosopher, is credited for saying, “The Only Thing That Is Constant Is Change.” Now that I have had a lot of life experience, I realize how true that is. I remember my parents talking about how much the world had changed in their lifetime. They talked about how they grew up with outhouses. That usually happened when us kids were complaining about something. We only had one washroom between seven of us, so it was likely when someone was hogging the bathroom. For those that don’t know, an outhouse was an outbuilding containing a toilet with no plumbing. Essentially it had a wooden platform with a hole in it so the human waste would fall into a hole in the ground. Mom and Dad both expressed how much they hated having to go to an outhouse, especially at night in the winter.

Bucket and dipper, like the one I remember using at my grandparents

My parents also talked about having to haul water in from the well to fill the bucket that they drank out of using a dipper—a ladle or scoop. I remember visiting my grandparents and drinking water from a dipper. My grandparents eventually got plumbing and running water installed. My parents also spoke of oil lamps used for lighting which was replaced by electric lights. What a major change those were. I can only imagine how excited that must have been for my grandparents.

My parents also talked about riding on horse and buggies and walking to their school—usually uphill both ways—to a one room, multi-grade school. Now kids are picked up with school busses and taken to schools with multiple rooms, one room per grade. My mom is still alive so she saw travel with horse and buggy to nowadays where automobiles, planes and trains are used.

I could go on and on. Even in my lifetime, I’ve witnessed a lot of change. I remember phone numbers of two digits. I remember having to get the phone operator to connect me to whomever I was calling. In those days, they were party lines, so your neighbours could listen in on your conversations. Then we had dial phones with 7 digits. I remember how frustrating that was to get to the 6 or 7th digit and your finger slips. That meant you had to start all over. Then there was touch tone. Now you just press a button and the phone dials the number for you.

A Gestetner like I once used
A Spirit Duplicator like I used to use

When I started teaching, we used Gestetners. These machines used a stencil, a thin sheet of wax-coated paper which when written or typed upon creating a broken line in the stencil. Ink was forced through the stencil by an ink roller to make copies. I remember my hands and sometimes clothes getting ink on them. It was a messy job. We also used Spirit Duplicators where a master, either created or purchased, containing an alcohol soluble dye-carbon which was transferred to the paper. The alcohol had a distinct smell which is why they were called spirit—the alcohol—machines. Before photocopies, that is how us teachers cranked out our handouts and worksheets. In the very early 1980s, our school got its first photocopiers. We were so excited as a staff. When I left teaching, I used computers with smartboards. Many assignments I sent out electronically and most assignments that students handed in were handed in via email. When I think about it, I’ve seen a lot of change.

My son is planning to backpack in Europe for several weeks this spring where he will spend some time with his “Irish” sister. My daughter is planning to visit her sister in the summer of 2019. These plans of travelling to Europe got me thinking about 21st century travel verses 20th century travel, comparing it to when I first backpacked in Europe in 1986, over 30 years ago.

When I backpacked in Europe, the only way to communicate with home was telephone. In those days, you bought a phone card which gave you so many minutes to call back to Canada. It was about a week after I left that I called home. I didn’t consider the time difference enough because my mom said it is 6 am in the morning when I called. She said she did not care, because she was so happy to hear my voice. My mother still remarks, even today, that for all she knew I was “dead in a ditch somewhere.”

Even when my wife and I backpacked in Europe in 1989, the only way to connect with home was phone. We each called our parents once and asked whichever parent we talked to, to call the other’s parents so that they would know we were fine. It seems archaic when you compare to nowadays.

In this 21st century, in my opinion, I think we are too connected with home. We can phone, text, WhatsApp, email, send a tweet, send an Instagram, Facetime or Skype, and numerous other modalities to connect with people back home. I must admit though, now that I have a daughter living in Ireland, I am very grateful to be able to see her face using Facetime or Skype. On the negative side, some people spend more time posting pictures of their trip, or connecting with people on social media, instead of enjoying a new culture. Like everything, there are pros and cons.

Navigating around a foreign country is another big change. In the 80s, we used maps and relied on kind foreigners to guide us. Maps were the only way we had available to find our way through cities. My wife and I had one of our worst arguments over which direction to get to the museum where the statue of David in Florence, Italy was. I humbly admit that it was I who couldn’t read a map properly. I sometimes have to wonder how I made my way through multiple countries and cities in Europe using maps when I travelled alone in 1986. My middle daughter often comments, “I don’t get how you navigated using just maps.”

My son, just the other day, was talking about travel phone plans and whether or not to get a SIM card in Europe as he depended on his phone for navigation. I must admit, an app that shows you where you are, what direction you are walking verses which direction you need to go is pretty handy. I likely would not have been lost as much had we had smartphones, apps and GPS back in the 80s.

In 1989, you didn’t book ahead of time for accommodations. There was no such thing as Vacation Rental by Owner (VRBOs) and Airbnbs. There were hotels and Bed & Breakfasts. In those days, you when you arrived in a foreign city, you went to the nearest information centre and they found you a room or hotel. Now the options are almost limitless—Airbnbs, VRBOs, Hostels, Couchsurfing, house sitting, homestays, Guesthouses, pet sitting, and who knows what else—and these are all arranged and booked months in advance using the Internet. This is the way my wife and I travelled the last two times we visited Europe.

Even travelling around a country or continent has changed drastically. In the 1980s, you could purchase a Eurorail pass which enabled you to travel in any participating European country by just showing the conductor your pass. I understand these passes are still available but they are not as handy or economically advantageous as they once were. Back then, you went to the train station, studied the schedule to determine when you needed to catch your train. Today, you can book a spot on the train—very advisable—as well as determine when your train arrives or leaves using an Internet site. Much easier these days. You can also purchase your tickets using the Internet instead of physically going to the train station.

You definitely have to be more prepared to travel nowadays. When I travelled Europe in 1986, I “flew by the seat of my pants.” In other words, I didn’t plan too much. I went to the train station, decided when and where I would go next, and when I arrived in a new destination, I  relied on the tourist information booths to find me a place to stay, which was usually a youth hostel. I would not advise anyone to do that today.

As I’ve already stated, Heraclitus is credited for saying, “The Only Thing That Is Constant Is Change.” Actually, I would say there are two things; taxes and change. I will admit, I don’t like change much especially when it is sprung on me. Having said that, we have no choice but to embrace changes as they happen because they’re going to happen, like it or not.

Do We Really Want to Erase History?

A commentary on how to handle controversial historical figures.

It seems there is a call for us North Americans to take another look at our history. That is a good thing. As a retired Social Studies and history teacher, I emphasized to my students that history is NOT fact since it is past events that have been interpreted by historians. In other words, historians analyze past events whereby they use diaries, archeological artifacts, and so on, to determine what happened. This is not without their biases and beliefs, or as Napoléon Bonaparte once allegedly said, “History is a set of lies agreed upon.” History is a historian’s interpretation of the past.

In  the United States many people are calling for long-standing monuments that honour confederate generals to be removed. A similar debate is also developing in Canada involving the country’s first prime minister (PM), Sir. John A MacDonald. Canada’s first PM was one of our more colourful politicians as he was a notorious drinker. It is well documented that MacDonald was a regular binge drinker.

I first heard of the controversial issue of removing statues of U.S. Confederate generals in April of this year when I watched a news report of New Orleans removing a monument during the dark. Numerous statues in various U.S. cities have been removed since. So why are they being removed?

General Robert E. Lee located in Charlottesville, Virginia

The Currents, CBC Radio program, addressed the issue of U.S. Confederate statues represent ‘image of America as a white society’. The article quotes Eric Foner, the author of The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery. Foner argues what many Confederate statues actually represent is “this image of America as a white society. That’s why people object to them, not because of a lack of interest in heritage or legacy.” Foner says, He goes on to say, “These statues actually don’t have a lot to do with the Civil War …They were put up mostly to be part of the legitimacy of white supremacy, of the Jim Crow system in the South, long after slavery.” The Jim Crow system was a system of racial segregation in the southern U.S. Foner explains that many of the statues were erected in the 1890s when the rights of black people were severely reduced.

What is the debate in Canada about?  For those who don’t know Canadian history, Sir John A. Macdonald was one of the founders of the Dominion of Canada and during his terms as prime minister (1867-1873 and 1878-1891) he had a transcontinental railway built. The controversy regarding him comes from the fact that during that time, the federal government approved the first residential schools in Canada.

Sir John A. MacDonald, Canada’s first PM

The Global News’ article, The controversy over Sir John A. Macdonald, explains that the Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario (EFTO), one of the teacher’s unions, is lobbying to remove MacDonald’s name from schools across the province. The union claims using Macdonald’s name creates an unsafe environment for kids to learn and work in because of what it calls Macdonald’s role as the “architect of genocide against Indigenous Peoples.”

James Daschuk, an assistant professor of history at the University of Regina and author of Clearing the Plains says. “It wasn’t just with Indigenous people. In 1885, Macdonald told the House of Commons that Canada should take away the vote from people of Chinese origin on the grounds that they were a different race than Europeans.”

It isn’t just about Sir. John A MacDonald. In July, CBC reported in its article, Statue of Edward Cornwallis, that the city of Halifax in Nova Scotia will make a decision on the fate of the city’s controversial statue of Edward Cornwallis, a military officer who founded Halifax for the British in 1749. It was Cornwallis that issued the so-called scalping proclamation, offering a cash bounty to anyone who killed a Mi’kmaq person.

So where do we draw the line? Do we stop at prime ministers? Fathers of Confederation? The Ottawa Citizen’s article, Where will it stop? refers to Michel Prévost, president of la Société d’histoire de l’Outaouais and a University of Ottawa archivist.  He says some people have lobbied for the removal of Mackenzie King’s statue from Parliament Hill for Canada’s decision in June 1939 to deny entry to more than 900 Jewish refugees who had fled Germany. Already barred from docking in Cuba and the United States, their ship, the MS St. Louis, returned to Europe, where more than 250 of them subsequently died in the Holocaust.

Prévost also explains that a Father of Confederation, Hector-Louis Langevin, would have his name stripped from the Wellington Avenue building that both bears his name and houses the prime minister’s office. Langevin was one of the original designers of the residential school system.

Preston Manning, one of our conservative Canadian politician on CBC Radio’s, The Sunday Edition said,

“I think there are unsavory aspects to populism. And I think one need to deplore those, but I think one needs to focus more on the root causes of that alienation, rather that fixating on just the negative eccentricities of it.”

Most often I disagree with Manning’s views, but I agree with this one. We are fixating on the negative. It is shameful to remove those names and statues of important figures in Canadian and American history. This is not the answer. Having said that, it is important to recognize the atrocities that these people have done. We mustn’t forget that Sir John A MacDonald was the “architect of genocide against Indigenous Peoples.” or wanted to take away the vote from Chinese people. Or, that Confederate statues represent an image of America as strictly a white society. As a retired teacher, the teacher in me says these could be some teachable moments. Instead of removing the names of these historical figures from buildings and streets, or taking down statues; instead we should be using them to educate people about both their achievements and the horrific things those historical figures did.

Debate about our histories is healthy! We should re-evaluate our history. Some historians agree with me. Don Doyle, a professor of history at the University of South Carolina, (see Historians Warn) says.

“I find it very exciting and refreshing that Americans are revisiting their history and questioning just why we honor some people, some events, and not others. It is a healthy reminder that history, as the search for understanding of the past, must always challenge public history as monuments and hero worship in the public sphere.”

Perhaps people are over reacting. Instead of removing all of these controversial statues of historical figures, erasing history so to speak, let’s relocate them to museums where people can be educated on both the positive and negative aspects our history. Good or bad, these people are still a part of our histories. Perhaps a plaque could be associated with each historical figure explaining the good achieved by the figure, as well as explaining the atrocities they are associated with that historical character. These people were only following the belief system of their time period. They didn’t know any different. When I taught history, I emphasized the importance of practicing historical empathy.  Historical empathy is the understanding of why people in history did what they did, as opposed to simply knowing what they did.  Instead of attempting to erase the dark periods of our histories, we need to practice historical empathy and acknowledge them. We should attempt to understand why these horrific things happened in our past so that they might not happen again. Maybe then healing can occur.

When the Nest Empties

A commentary about dealing with Empty Nest Syndrome.

Robert Neelly Bellah, an American sociologist, once said, “However painful the process of leaving home, for parents and for children, the really frightening thing for both would be the prospect of the child never leaving home.” 

This quote really resonated with me because this week my wife and I, along with two of our adult children, said goodbye to one of our two daughters who flew to Dublin, Ireland to attend Trinity College. Mr. Bellah is right, it is a painful process for both the parents and the child leaving home. I’ve watched my wife cry a few dozen times before our daughter left. I have to be honest, I’ve shed the occasional tear myself thinking about her leaving and while watching her leave. I’ve watched my daughter get emotional talking about saying goodbye to her many friends. It is indeed a painful process.

Our instincts as parents is to keep our children nearby so we can protect them and rescue them when in need. I’ve watched many parents do this as a school teacher during my 35 years of teaching, especially in recent years. We teachers called them ‘helicopter parents’ because they hover and swoop in to rescue their children when the children whimper or if there is any chance their children might fail at something. These parents never want their children to fail or feel bad. As a teacher, I found these parents difficult and inflexible. Even more, I saw the damage they did to their children. What is even more disturbing to me is this is a phenomenon occurring with adult children.

In a blog called, Parenting Grown Children: What Dr. Spock Forgot to Tell Us, has a really interesting blog post called, Letting Go. This article describes what helicopter parents of adult children looks like. It says,

“What does this look like? Millennials’ parents joining their adult children at interviews; parents calling managers to lobby for better reviews or higher raises. Or parents actually doing the work for their adult children – which all unravels when the employee doesn’t have the luxury of time to participate or complete a task.”

If parents are rescuing their adult children when they go off to college or get a job, then in a way those children really haven’t left home, even though they may physically live in their own places. These young people are still being protected by their parents just as they would be when they were living in their parent’s dwelling.  Could this be what Robert Neelly Bellah meant when he said, “the really frightening thing for both would be the prospect of the child never leaving home.” I’m beginning to wonder if Mr. Bellah was referring to overprotective, meddlesome parents.

In the blog post I sited earlier, the author wrote,

“Many of us raised our children to be independent. Once they were adults, we wanted them to come to us for our advice, good counsel and, yes, the occasional handout. But in college, they would be on their own in dealing with professors and deans. In finding a job, we might prep them on how to put their best foot forward, but they would be on their own. Once on the job, they would figure out how to perform and to stand up for their rights and benefits.”

That is how we raised our children. I am so grateful to have a life partner who thought as I did. We wanted our children to be independent and be able to handle things on their own. We travelled with our children extensively so they would be able to confidently travel on their own. That is the reason our daughter was able to go half way around the world to attend graduate school. We gave her the confidence, knowledge and desire to do so. I am proud of that and I am even more proud of her. A friend recently reminded us of that. She told us that the reason our daughter is able to do this is because we raised her to be strong, brave and independent. She is a strong, brave woman and will be even a stronger woman because of this new adventure. Roy T. Bennett, author of The Light in the Heart, wrote, “It’s only after you’ve stepped outside your comfort zone that you begin to change, grow, and transform.” She is able to step outside her comfort zone because of my wife and I. She did this once before when she flew to South Africa alone to volunteer at the age of 21.

llustration by Andy Chase Cundiff

Having said that, seeing your daughter trek across the ocean to live far, far away is not easy. I have a whole array of emotions as does my wife and our other two children.  I was excited for my daughter, yet I was afraid because I would not be nearby to help her should she need help. I was a proud dad, because she was so strong, brave and independent, yet I had all the symptoms of Empty Nest Syndrome. Empty nest syndrome is when a parent has feelings of loneliness or sadness after children grow up and leave home. I was feeling sad. I was feeling lonely even though she just left. I felt so lonely, seeing her go through the airport security gates. I just wanted to give my little girl one more hug and tell her that I loved her one more time.

So many people, without really saying it, communicated to us with their body language and with words left unspoken, that they would not be able to let their child fly across the world to live. We could have expressed to our daughter our displeasure with the idea which would have influenced her decision, but we didn’t. You might be thinking, Why didn’t we? I think Terry Pratchett, an author from the United Kingdom answers that question best when he wrote, “Why do you go away? So that you can come back. So that you can see the place you came from with new eyes and extra colours. And the people there see you differently, too. Coming back to where you started is not the same as never leaving.”  How could any good parent prevent their child from having an experience of a lifetime? An experience where she will grow tenfold in her confidence and maturity. I know that this is part of our daughter’s journey and that she will return a better person.

I admire her. She inspires me. She inspired me when she bravely left for South Africa to volunteer. She inspires me even more now. She will make this world a better place because of what she will take from this experience. I’ll miss her, but love for a child should be unconditional. I love her no matter what, as does my wife, and that is why she is free to experience life. I can’t wait for her to share her experiences with us.

It is Time to do the Right Thing.

A commentary on fair pay and gender equality.


Two stories caught my attention this week; both stories about doing the right thing. The first was a story I saw on CTV News about a Bracebridge, Ontario.-based Muskoka Brewery that was paying its employees a living wage.  That is a wage that is high enough to maintain a normal standard of living. Muskoka Brewery is the first brewery in Canada to do so. The president of the brewery, Todd Lewin, said the decision “definitely had an impact on the budget,” but the benefits have so far outweighed the cost. Mr. Lewin said boosting the hourly wage to $15.85 has resulted in a better workforce.

The CEO of Cambridge, Ont.-based Grosche International, Helmi Ansari also pays his employees at least $16 per hour; a move he says paid off in better productivity, improved customer service and staff retention. Mr. Ansari believes paying their staff a minimum wage in his coffee and tea merchandise business would make the company less successful.

Mr. Ansari is also a co-founder of the Better Way Alliance, an organization that is calling on companies in Canada to embrace the living wage. The website says:

There is a myth that the “high turnover and low-pay” model is the secret to success in business. But many employers see things differently. We know from experience that a commitment to decent work makes good economic sense. By speaking out, we hope to open up the conversation about what makes the most sense today.

American author, Mark Twain, once said, “Always do right – this will gratify some and astonish the rest”. Hearing of businesses doing something altruistic astonished me.

Typically, what is reported in the news media is corporate greed. The Huffington Post reports, the middle class in the United States is on a 40-year decline. The article says millions of Americans are working longer hours for lower wages and average family income is almost $5,000 less than it was in 1999. I am sure Canada is no different.

The article reports that the 99% of all new income is going to the top 1%, while the top one-tenth of 1% own almost as much wealth as the bottom 40%. In the last two years, the wealthiest 14 people in the United States increased their wealth by $157 billion. That increase is more than is owned by the bottom 130 million Americans combined. It seems to me that businesses, and especially the corporations can easily afford to pay a living wage.

In my province, the provincial government has promised to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2018. That sparked much debate in the province. Really, the minimum wage debate has been going on for years.

Those in favour of raising the minimum wage say it would improve the overall standard of living for minimum wage workers by providing them with a more appropriate income level to handle cost of living increases. It is pretty difficult to refute that argument. Some also say it would boost economic growth as consumer spending typically increases with increases in wages. A higher minimum wage would put more dollars in consumer’s hands and that money would subsequently flow to retailers and other businesses.

Those arguing against increasing the minimum wage say it causes businesses to increase prices, thus fuelling inflation. Opponents argue that raising minimum wage increases operating expenses for companies thereby increasing the prices of products and services to cover their increased labor costs. Increased prices mean an increase in the cost of living consequently offsetting any advantage gained by workers having more dollars in their pockets. One of the biggest arguments in my province is an increased minimum wage causes the potential for job losses.

No matter how much I read in terms of research into the minimum wage debate, there seems to be research to support both sides of the issue. There seems to be no clear answers. I do know from experience that it is impossible to have a decent standard of living on a minimum wage. I used to have my students do a project in one of the courses I taught in high school. The project was to have my students plan a budget while living on minimum wage. They had to rent accommodations with or without a roommate. They had to plan expenses such as food, utilities and transportation. The bottom line is not one of my students could come up with a budget living on minimum wage that suited their desired standard of living. It was not possible. As of today, the minimum wages in Canada range from $10.72/hr. in Saskatchewan to $13.00/hr. in Nunavut.

A report released in 2016 calculated the living wage for Metro Vancouver, British Columbia, as $20.64 an hour. This would be the amount needed for a family of four with both parents working full-time at $20:64 to pay their necessities.  The province of British Columbia’s minimum wage at the moment $10.85/hr. In my view, the right thing to do is for businesses to pay a living wage.  It is morally right! It is the altruistic thing to do! It is our duty to do what is best for our neighbour. It should be a no brainer.

The other story that caught my attention was that Iceland is the first country to propose equal pay legislation. Iceland’s parliament is considering a new law forcing most companies and institutions to prove that they are paying men and women equally. Any company with 25 or more employees will have to go through audits and receive certification that equal pay is provided, or they could face fines (see BBC). That is “ground breaking”. That is fantastic! Hopefully, more countries will follow suit.

I worked in a career where gender pay was equal. It didn’t matter whether you were male or female, you got paid the same. Your pay was determined by years of education and years of experience. It seems that is not the case in most working environments. The Globe and Mail 2015 article, Gender pay gap in Canada more than twice global average, study shows, says Canadian working women are making about $8,000 less a year than men doing an equivalent job. I once thought that gender inequality was becoming a thing of the past, but once again I was just naive.

So, I applaud the living wage movement. It is the right thing to do. I give a “thumbs up” to Iceland. Why? Because it is the right thing to do. To quote one of my heroes, Mohandas K. Gandhi, “You have to do the right thing… You may never know what results come from your action. But if you do nothing, there will be no result”.

Is There a Cure for Racism? You Bet There is.

A commentary on racism

Obviously, I must be naiver than I thought because I truly thought that my generation was less racist than my parents and grandparent’s generations. I believed that racism was disappearing more and more with each generation. It seems I was wrong. The racism, at least in Canada, was hidden; below the surface so to speak.  Racism in Canada was intangible until all the rhetoric from south of the border starting filtering into Canada’s news media.

From cbc.ca

CBC recently published a news article called, Ottawa church fi
ghts racism. A Baptist church in Westboro, an area in the west end of Ottawa, Canada, is trying to use lawn signs to build community, and combat the negativity and racism being directed towards refugees in both Canada and the United States.  The First United Church printed 200 signs that read “No matter where you are from, we’re glad you’re our neighbour,” in the languages of English, French and Arabic. The idea for the signs was inspired from similar campaigns in the United States and southern Ontario.

It was felt that the signs were a way to make a public statement without being political. One church volunteer said, “Make it clear that we’re happy, that diversity is a positive thing, that having neighbours from all over the world and from diverse places is great and that we’re happy to get to know our neighbours and welcome everyone to the community.”

There seems to be a perception in Canada, and seemingly more so in the United States, that diversity is a bad thing; that immigration needs to be slowed or even stopped. Well the truth is, diversity makes for a better society and scientific studies prove that.

In the Scientific American article, How Diversity Makes Us Smarter, studies show that being around people who are different from us makes us humans more creative, more diligent and harder-working. One study involving “more than 350 students from three universities participated in the study. Group members were asked to discuss a prevailing social issue (either child labor practices or the death penalty) for 15 minutes. The researchers wrote dissenting opinions and had both black and white members deliver them to their groups. When a black person presented a dissenting perspective to a group of whites, the perspective was perceived as more novel and led to broader thinking and consideration of alternatives than when a white person introduced that same dissenting perspective. The lesson: when we hear dissent from someone who is different from us, it provokes more thought than when it comes from someone who looks like us”.

This is just one of the numerous studies stated in the article. The fact of the matter is, the article clearly shows how diversity improves creativity, increases innovation, and increases open-mindedness. In other words, society is healthier with diverse environments.

A debate has gone on for some time over whether people are inherently racist; whether infants are born racist. Personally, I think it is a ridiculous argument. If you’ve ever held a child under six months old, you would clearly see that babies love everyone. They just want to be loved by everyone.

A US News’ article, Babies Not Racist, reports on a University of Massachusetts—Amherst study. The study found white 9-month-old babies were worse than white 5-month-old babies at telling apart African-American adults. The news media had a “field day” suggesting that the study is evidence for inherited racism. Time reported the study with the headline, Your Baby Is a Racist, and the Telegraph with the headline, Babies show racial bias. As the US News article points out, all the babies in the study had “little to no previous experience with African-American or other black individuals.” In fact, at that age, babies can’t tell apart something they’re not used to seeing. At least four previous studies suggested that infants who aren’t familiar with other races have difficulty identifying differences in facial structures.

There is convincing proof that racism is learned. In Jane Elliot’s infamous “Blue eyes–Brown eyes” exercise, she clearly demonstrates how racism is learned. Ms. Elliot was a third-grade schoolteacher in the 1960s and 1970s. She decided to base the exercise on eye colour rather than skin colour in order to show the children what racial segregation would be like. If you are not familiar with the exercise, here is part of a documentary explaining her exercise.

The results from the exercise are startling. As a result of the exercise,  Jane Elliot declared,

 “You are not born racist. You are born into a racist society. And like anything else, if you can learn it, you can unlearn it. But some people choose not to unlearn it, because they’re afraid they’ll lose power if they share with other people. We are afraid of sharing power. That’s what it’s all about.”

The Atlantic’s article, New Evidence That Racism Isn’t ‘Natural’, reports on a 2013 paper in the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, of four researchers who performed amygdala studies, previously done on adults but now was being done on children. The amygdala is mass of grey matter inside each cerebral hemisphere involved with the experiencing of emotions. The researchers found that the racial sensitivity of the amygdala doesn’t kick in until around age 14 and once it kicks in, it doesn’t kick in equally for everybody. The more racially diverse the peer group, the less strong the amygdala effect. At really high levels of diversity, the effect disappeared entirely. The authors of the study write that ”these findings suggest that neural biases to race are not innate and that race is a social construction, learned over time.”

Martin Luther King, Jr., an American civil rights leader in the 1960s said, “I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality… I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word.” This is what I believe as well. Pierre Berton, a noted Canadian author of non-fiction, once said, “Racism is a refuge for the ignorant. It seeks to divide and to destroy. It is the enemy of freedom, and deserves to be met head-on and stamped out.” There is no doubt in my mind that racism is learned and evolves from fear and ignorance.

I’ll finish with another one of Jane Elliot’s quotes.

“White people’s number one freedom, in the United States of America, is the freedom to be totally ignorant of those who are other than white. We don’t have to learn about those who are other than white. And our number two freedom is the freedom to deny that we’re ignorant.”

The same holds true for Canadians. We too have the freedom to be totally ignorant of those who are other than white and we too have the freedom to deny that we’re ignorant. “Ignorance is bliss” they say. It is time to speak up against the stupidity of racism!

Do Europeans Really do Things Better?

My wife and I recently watched Michael Moore’s latest movie called, “Where to Invade Next”. I have a great deal of admiration and respect for Michael Moore as he is not afraid to question the status quo in his homeland, the United States of America. In the movie, Moore leaves North America and heads to Europe with a stop-over in North Africa, ready to claim any policies that would make the U.S.A a better country. If you’ve never seen it, I would encourage you to do so. Here is the trailer.

According to National Observer, Americans kill 51 times more people with guns than Canadians do. That is but one reason why I’m thankful to be living in Canada; a country with strict gun controls (for which I am grateful), a country that has pretty good social programs, free health care, and is a very safe country to live in. Having said that, my wife and I were still blown away by some of the European polices and attitudes. Canada, like the United States, could learn a thing or two from the Europeans.

flag_of_europe-svgHere are some of the things Europeans do that Mr. Moore claimed as ideal policies for his country.

ITALY is a country that knows how to have balance when it comes to work life. Italy has one of the highest rates of paid vacation, maternity leave, and honeymoon allowance in the world. That is not even mentioning the two-hour workday lunches.  Italians seem to know how to take the stress out of a working life. Being a bit of a cynic, I did some research. Time reports that the American Psychological Association found that average stress levels in the U.S. rose since 2014, from 4.9 to 5.1 on a 10-point stress scale. Statistics Canada reports that in 2015 Canadian workers ages 15 to 75 that 28.4% reported high work-related stress. That is not to say that there is no stress among Italian workers. Eurofound, a European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, reports (2010), 33.6% of respondents consider their work as a source of excessive stress. These figures were higher amongst respondents selling and/or promoting financial products.

FRANCE is a country that feeds its school children with amazing, almost gourmet style healthy food. In the movie, school children shun Moore’s offer of a coke and feast upon a four-course healthy lunch. Lunch hour in France is considered a course where students are taught proper etiquette.  In the French school system, adolescents also learn about the realities of sex and respectful relationships.

FINLAND is a country whose school system went from being one of the worst in the world to one of the best.  What is their philosophy? Children spend less time in school (about three hours a day), no time doing homework, write no standardized tests, and lots of time playing.  As a retired teacher, I wondered how this could be and if indeed it is true. In 2015, Finland was ranked 5th in the world. (see The Best Education Systems in The World in 2015). Canada was ranked tenth (not to shabby) and the U.S. was ranked 29 out of 76 countries.

SLOVENIA is an eastern European country where school is considered a basic human right for all. As a result, students can get a complete college education costing them nothing. Not only is it for Slovenian students, but a college education is afforded to anyone no matter what passport a student may hold. This is not unique to Solvenia as  schools and universities are free in many European countries.

In GERMANY employees are given an equal say in business matters as company boards are composed of at least 50% workers.  If workers get stressed, a doctor can authorize a stay at a government funded spa since Germany prioritizes health before productivity. It is also noteworthy that Germany does not ignore its dark past regarding Hitler and the Holocaust. This country has a policy of acknowledgment and understanding of the past to affect a positive future.

PORTUGAL’S answer to the war on drugs is to decriminalize its usage and offer free treatment and comprehensive healthcare. In the words of a Lisbon police officer, “Human dignity is the backbone of our society.”

NORWAY’s penal system is one of rehabilitation and not revenge.  Prisons in Norway offer a chance for prisoners to rehabilitate and regain self-worth. There are no guard towers, no fences and no beatings in Norway’s prisons; even in their maximum-security prisons. Instead, prisons have a fair amount of freedom with four prison guards carrying no weapons responsible for over 100 inmates. It is also amazing to learn that of those coming out of the penal system, only 20% reoffend in Norway. Compare that to the United States.   A Bureau of Justice Statistic study reported that of inmates released from state prisons, 76.6% have a five-year reconviction rate. Canada’s reconviction rate is in the range of 41% to 44%, according to Public Safety Canada.

TUNISIA is a majority Muslim country, yet it provides government funded abortions and free women’s health clinics to ensure women are in control of their reproduction and in turn their basic rights.

ICELAND is a country that during the 2008 economic crisis had three of its major privately owned commercial banks default, all of which were run by men. The only bank that did not fail had female executives. It is also a country that had the first female president. Iceland empowers its women. The Economist named Iceland the world’s best place for working women in 2016. In comparison, Canada was ranked 11th and the U.S. was ranked 20th.

One thing that struck me was that in every country visited by Mr. Moore, the interviewees always stressed the importance of human dignity. What is human dignity? Oxford dictionary defines dignity as the state or quality of being worthy of honour or respect. Merriam-Webster dictionary defines dignity as the quality or state of being worthy, honored, or esteemed. All humans deserve to be treated respectfully. Really, it boils down to the Golden Rule which the Christian scriptures state as, “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you…” (Matthew 7:12).

So, do Europeans really do things better? According to the article, 16 Ways Europeans Are Just Better At Life, Switzerland came in second to Japan for the world’s longest life expectancy, according to a 2015 World Health Organization study. In fact, eight European nations have a life expectancy of 82 years. Canada is also at 82 years. In fact, 24 European nations rank ahead of the U.S. on the list, which comes in at number 33, just one spot ahead of Cuba at 79.3 years.

As the new Trump administration repeals Obamacare, Europe offers a number of examples of far more efficient health care systems. According to a Bloomberg study, America is number 50 out of 55 countries that were assessed for their health care systems. All European countries ranked higher than the U.S. Canada ranked 16th which is pretty good but still five European countries ranked ahead of Canada.

Who are the top nations in the world, in terms of time off? According to USA Today, all are European. Austrians get 35 paid days off per year. Meanwhile, the U.S. is the sole developed nation that requires no paid vacation time or holidays by law. As for Canada, the law is employees must receive at least 2 weeks of vacation per year for the first four years of employment, and a minimum of 3 weeks of vacation after the fifth consecutive year.

It seems to me that Europeans do know how to live life better. We Canadians do a pretty good job, but we could still learn a thing or two from the Europeans. According to Business Insider, every European nation has a higher standard of living than the United States which is ranked number 19. I’m proud to say, Canada is ranked second. Michael Moore is on the right track looking at the Europeans.

Now I’ve heard Americans refer to Canada and the European nations as socialist countries. Peerform, an American financial institution, lists Canada (along with 7 European countries) as socialist countries. One definition of socialism from yourdictionary.com is a system based “on principles of community decision making, social equality and the avoidance of economic and social exclusion, with economic policy should giving first preference to community goals over individual ones”. The way I see it is, I would rather live in a socialist country where we take care of each other as opposed to a strictly capitalist country where individualism is the focus, where individuals fend for themselves, and the sole goal is to get wealthy. It seems obvious to me that countries who adopt “socialist” ideals do better. The statistics speak for themselves.