Back in the very early 1980's I was involved with a group of women who were sitting around discussing how the Canadian action group, SOW, Status of Women Canada did not speak for us. Status of Women Canada (SWC is their way of calling it, I guess they don't like being called a female cow) is the Canadian federal government agency which they say "promotes gender equality, and the full participation of women in the economic, social, cultural and political life of the country."
What have they ever done for me? They do not speak for me. They do not even support my choice to be a stay at home mother. They believe that a woman has a right to an abortion.
I am hoping that now that The Honourable Beverley J. Oda is in charge, she will dismantle SOW or get Gwen Landolt of REAL women in there to clean it up. I heard her speak recently at the Conservative Women's Group Luncheon at the Albany Club in Toronto and Bev may be the one who will do this.
Everyone should contact Bev at one of the following places and tell her if is time to slaughter the old fat SOW.
The Honourable Beverley J. Oda
Parliamentary Address
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
Telephone: (613) 992-2792
Fax: (613) 992-2794
E-Mail: Oda.B@parl.gc.ca
Constituency Address
68 King Street East, Unit 2
Bowmanville, Ontario
L1C 3X2
Telephone: (905) 697-1699
Fax: (905) 697-1678
Toll Free: 1-866-436-1141
Tuesday, August 22, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
As a member of Real Women and a great fan of Gwen Landolt I am so glad to see this all over the blogs! Let's keep it going...our taxes have been wasted for so many years on the feminists anti-family projects!!
You're aware that a sow is a female pig and that "female cow" is reduntant, cows being female by definition... right?
Thank you!
Definition of Sow as a noun:
1. An adult female hog.
The adult female of several other animals, such as the bear.
2. A channel that conducts molten iron to the molds in a pig bed.
The mass of metal solidified in such a channel or mold.
and as a verb:
1. To scatter (seed) over the ground for growing.
2. To impregnate (a growing medium) with seed.
3. To propagate; disseminate: sow rumors.
4. To strew or cover with something; spread thickly.
You do realize that by promoting equality, the council doesn't force women to do anything in particular, but gives them the *choice*. Is it so hard to understand that some women take no comfort from the traditional role that you are so happy with? Or that some men are perfectly willing to take on that role?
Are you against people choosing different paths?
No I am in favour of people following the path that is for them. Many of my friends have careers. Many balance careers and home successfully.
SOW promotes lifestyles that are not acceptable to me. I do not want my tax dollars to go to those lifestyles. It would be better if those who are for "untraditional" lifestyles joined the group that best supported them and through and I can support the group that best supports my ideas through membership fees and donations. It is not possible for one group to represent all women as the moral issues separate us.
Come on out and say. "those who live untraditional lifestyles"="big ol' dykes."
Stop with the prissy civility.
Why? We have to all treat each other with respect. Even though I do not agree with "untraditional" lifestyles, I do have many friends who live them. I am not trying to be politically correct, just trying to come up with a way of speaking so maybe we can all learn to listen with each other.
If you saw my day-to-day life you would think I was your ally - I am married, young (23), planning to have children soon and to stay home with them while they are young, and my husband fully supports me in this.
But I think that the SWC does represent me - if I want to move into the workforce when my children are older, I will need people who are willing and able to advocate with me and for me - for equal treatment for mothers (a big issue!), for a lack of discrimination against pregnant women, for a reasonable schedule for me and for my husband so we can spend time with our children and raise them properly.
I want the SWC to be funded, because I want them to continue to defend my interest. The power for women to chose what to do with their lives and their families is important - so that I can chose to stay home with my children, so that my husband can request a day off to stay home if I get sick and not be penalised, so that I can chose to go back to work if I want to or need to and still get a decent job with interesting opportunities.
We certainly need a group like that. That is exactly what REAL Women represents. I have seen no difference over the years I have been at home raising my children with Status of Women Canada standing up for mothers rights. I have been home for 25 years and Mr. Harper's $100. per month for child care is the first fair thing I have ever seen. Women are still penalized for staying home.
excuse me? do you actually believe that your brain power is not as advanced as a man's? are you content with staying at home and not making a difference in the world? Status of Women Canada advocates for what should be your basic rights yat so often we get taken advantege of because we simply are women. you seem to be lucky and have a husband that enabels you to stay home with your children and provide you and your children with ample support. if only all women were as lucky.however they are not. there are some that have no choice but to work and they do work just to put dinner on the table for their children. the problem is that the do not get the same pay as men do yet work the same jobs if not harder ones and get less pay.
as if that is not bad enough they cant even get child care for their children when they are forced into working low paying jobs. Steven Harper made sure of that when he cancled the programe that women have worked two decades to implement. now we have a lovey new system that works out to providing 80 dollars a month which is barely enough for two kids to go to daycare for one day let alone a month. so now we have mothers driving their kids to work and turning the car into the daycare.
you say that Canadians prefer parent care to daycare and you are absolutly right! yet some mothers do not have the luxury or choice. you see because they also prefer working to buy food and shelter to living with their children under a bridge and starving.
so i hope that you never find yourself in that postion yet if you do i also hope that you remeber that it is the Status of Women of Canada that will be advocating for you and all 8 for your children.
Sincerely,
waterbaby's baby
excuse me? do you actually believe that your brain power is not as advanced as a man's? are you content with staying at home and not making a difference in the world? Status of Women Canada advocates for what should be your basic rights yat so often we get taken advantege of because we simply are women. you seem to be lucky and have a husband that enabels you to stay home with your children and provide you and your children with ample support. if only all women were as lucky.however they are not. there are some that have no choice but to work and they do work just to put dinner on the table for their children. the problem is that the do not get the same pay as men do yet work the same jobs if not harder ones and get less pay.
as if that is not bad enough they cant even get child care for their children when they are forced into working low paying jobs. Steven Harper made sure of that when he cancled the programe that women have worked two decades to implement. now we have a lovey new system that works out to providing 80 dollars a month which is barely enough for two kids to go to daycare for one day let alone a month. so now we have mothers driving their kids to work and turning the car into the daycare.
you say that Canadians prefer parent care to daycare and you are absolutly right! yet some mothers do not have the luxury or choice. you see because they also prefer working to buy food and shelter to living with their children under a bridge and starving.
so i hope that you never find yourself in that postion yet if you do i also hope that you remeber that it is the Status of Women of Canada that will be advocating for you and all 8 for your children.
Sincerely,
waterbaby's baby
Dear Waterbaby:
While I have been working in the home for 25 years, I have been very busy. I have a degree in Mathematics and Computer Science from the University of Waterloo. So while I have been home with the children I also tutor Mathematics, write for a few journals and babysit other peoples children. So I do have an income. My firends that stay at home also have a career from the home. One runs a book selling business, some do the Tupperware, Avon, Pamperchef thing, many do bookkeeping. I have also done bookkeeping in the past. Some are into big businesses.
I pay my own way, I am not financially dependeant on anyone. But for the children, I believe it is extremely important that one parent is in the home to supervises the education of the children. I have to be here to see who they are with, hear what they are hearing, control TV viewing, make sure homework is being done and watch the MSN and many other things, to ensure that my children are on the right track to learning about our society in the right way.
I agree that Mr. Harper's amount is not enough to stay home on, and my children are over 6 so I do not even benefit from it, but it is a start. Each woman should have the choice to stay at home and raise her children if she wants. But staying at home is not "doing your own thing" while the kids are in school.
I think we are at an important time where REAL Women have to be heard. I do not think anyone out there really knows what they are about. We have all been scared off by the hate statements that they are neo/soc/con fundamental christians, which is not the case.
They are very pro-woman, in the truest sense, for they bring in her role as mother as being most important.
Well I am happy for you that you have an income yet i also have trouble beliveing that your income alone is enough to support 8 children and a home in one of the most expensive suburbs in Canada, let alone a home with childern anywere. and what happens if the husband of the mother of 8 leaves? then the mother is left with a huge morgage and 8 children now depending on her. let me just tell you that it will be hard for that mother to get a substantial job with Avon on her resume. Even a woman with a degree in mathematics and computer science will find it hard with no work experience. statistcs show that the standard of living for the father or husband will go up and the standard of living for the mother and children will drop dramaticaly. especially if that mother had spent 25 years acitvely working to undermine and eliminate programs that are in place to help her should she find her self in the postion of the women that she had been so unsympathetic and unsupportive toward.
at any rate, what about the women that believe in making a difference in the world and yet they have children. it will be hard for them to get a meaningful job with sufficiant income if she cannot put her children in daycare.
And Steven Harpers program is anthing but a start. personally i would call this a finish. a finish to daycare program that would have provided MUCH more that this promgrame could. all it does is give money to the people that need it least. the women that need it the most now have the daycare program that provided them with what they needed taken away and a uninfluential amout of money given to them.
you say the REAL women bring about the fact the the role for women as a mother is most inmportant and yet you support the man that make it impossible for women to support their children and be there for their children. in short be a real mother. and you fight against the program that does nothing but support single and poor working mothers doing the best they can.
your aguments seem a little contradictory to me.
P.S
im waterbaby's baby. not waterbaby. thats my mom.
You make some very valid points Waterbaby's baby. Daycare should be for those who truly need it. Those who can afford it should not get any daycare money. Just those who are poor.
Nice one Dianne,
I'm a stay at home childcare activist and its funny but today I blogged this issue again. The news is really picking up on it. I wouldn't say fully pull them down but make something new all humans can be proud of, children, men and women alike...
Post a Comment