When Women Knew Their Place: Feminism, Equality, and The National Post

"Someone's sitting in the shade today because someone planted a tree a long time ago"

      - Warren Buffett

 

 

Remember?

Remember when men went to work and women stayed at home with their abandoned dreams and bottles of Valium and sherry?

Remember when women's hopes and dreams were fulfilled by simply getting married and having kids... and then, vicariously, through the lofty achievements of their husbands and sons?

Remember when a woman knew to keep quiet and to never speak back to her man?

Remember when a woman fancied herself lucky if her husband didn't beat her too often or too forcefully? Those glorious days when domestic violence was something that happened at home - and everyone truly believed the oft-repeated refrain: "A man's home is his castle"?

A time when divorce, not domestic violence, was the nastiest of offenses?

Back when couples stayed together no matter how much they despised one another, all for "the good of the children"?

But also a time when a man could simply up and leave his family, leaving his wife and children destitute, with no financial support and no legal avenues of address?

Remember back, as late as the early-1960s, when women, like my mom, were asked during admittance interviews for med school whether they planned to have children or not, and, on answering "yes", were told it would be a waste of time and valuable resources to educate a future mother to become a doctor?

In other words, remember the Good Ol' Days? The days when men dominated all walks of life and women knew their place?

Well, the National Post's Editorial Board sure does.

A Reactionary Backlash

You want a-holes, I mean real sexist a-holes? Better yet, you want some a-holes going off on a good ol' fashioned reactionary diatribe? Well, look no further than these guys.

In case you missed their editorial a few days ago - Women's Studies is still with us - it was a real doozie. Ostensibly about university Women's Studies programs, it was really all about how feminism has destroyed our once idyllic society.

The piece is a must-read for anyone who wants to know just what sort of world the editors at the National Post envision and idealize. It's a vision for the world that, at least when it comes to relations between the sexes, is not all that dissimilar from that of the Taliban.

Ok, perhaps that's a bit extreme, but so is their rabid anti-feminism.

Sounding not unlike a bunch of Good Ol' Boys down in Alabama or Mississippi venting at how racial integration has destroyed their once harmonious and perfect world, these bigots at the National Post remember a time before women wrecked everything with their unceasing demands for equality.

Now, that said, I don't doubt for a minute that there are at least a couple of women on the National Post's Editorial Board, for they never would have published a piece like this if that were not the case. Probably some ultra-right-wing, wealthy snobs who care nothing of regular women and the struggles they have faced, and often still face today, in the real world.

Whoever they are, they sure don't get the irony of writing such a piece. Because, obviously, they'd never have had the career they've had and they certainly wouldn't be sitting on any boards, editorial or otherwise, if it weren't for the feminism they so despise.

Young Non-Feminists

Sadly, many young women today - and not just right-wing ideologues - adamantly, and quite ludicrously, claim that they're anything but feminists, grossly ignorant that a) feminism simply means a belief in the equality of men and women, and b) their freedom to do anything and everything they want with their lives is something that was won for them through hard-fought struggle by generations of feminists, starting back in the 19th century with the Suffragette movement's simple demand for the right to vote.

And regardless of what one may think about the situation here in Canada, America, and the rest of the developed world, the fact remains that the majority of women around the globe continue to live in incredibly oppressive, discriminatory, sexist, sometimes outright misogynist, societies. And I'm not just talking about places like Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Women's Studies

As for the specific topic of Women's Studies programs, I took a couple of Women's Studies courses (in which I was one of only two or three men in the class) back in the 1980s when I was at the University of Victoria and, truth be told, they were the best courses I took during my four years there.

I thrived at History, Political Science, Sociology etc., but I always thought it was a bit silly when certain profs tried to pass-off what we were learning as "objective truth". There may be such a thing in the world of Math and Science, but not in the social sciences.

And Women Studies embraced that reality and openly encouraged the mixing of objective facts with subjective experiences and feelings to come up with something much closer to an honest educational approach.

Simply put, real world experiences are relevant to academic study. Marx, Weber and Durkheim are all fine and dandy, but nineteenth century theories can only carry one so far. Sometimes it's good to mix in a little personal, real-life experience.

And that - the National Post Editorial Board's ridiculous exaggerations, oversimplifications and nostalgic pining for the days of outright inequality aside - is why I'd say every university student should take at least one Women Studies class at some point in their academic career. Particularly those young women out there who are planning to be doctors and lawyers and engineers, but who claim to want nothing to do with feminism.

Though those pining for the glory days of the nineteenth century, and/or 1990's Afghanistan, should probably take a pass.

How Offensive Was It?

Finally, I should point out that this piece was so offensive that even Anne Marie Owens, the National Post’s managing editor for news, felt compelled to write her own response in today's paper.

However, this response by Penni Stewart - president, Canadian Association of University Teachers - and Katherine Giroux-Bougard - national chairperson, Canadian Federation of Students - is a much better rebuttal.

Mike Cowie (Oredakedo)
Friday, February 5th, 2010



Now check this out: Freakin' Fundamentalists: Stonings Here, Lashings There, Misogyny Everywhere

 

And check out these other recent rants and raves:

 

Biggest Dicks of The Decade: 2000-2009

 

My Picks For The Top 100 Films of The Decade

 

The Top Albums, Songs and Artists of the Decade

 

The Canadian Justice System Rant: A System So Broken It's Criminal

 

We're #1: A More Positive Take On Canada's Dismal Environmental Record

 

Bitter and Bewildered: The Sad Plight of The Disillusioned Left-Wing Canadian Voter

 

Canada: Top Ten Things To Love and Hate

 

For more Society, Justice & Law rants click here

 

For more on Canadian politics visit the Politics: Canada page

 

For more on American politics visit the Politics: America page

 

And for lots more on politics of all types visit the Politics Homepage

 

MikesAndDislikes Home

I clicked on the link to the

I clicked on the link to the article mentioned and it appears to have been taken down.

Thanks

Thanks. They changed the address. The link works again now. Mike

Many more comments on Straight.com

You can read many more comments in response to this piece on the Georgia Straight's site here.

Extremism

Good one Mike, as usual. Thanks to the courageous actions of women's advocates over the last century, we in Canada are lucky to enjoy relative equality by gender - though of course there is a long way to go in some areas. But comparatively, I can't think of a country that's made more progress.

 

I never took a Women's Studies course (I think you and Mike Wilkins got the last two spots!), but I consider myself pretty evolved. The big problem remaining - as I see it - is the same as in many political arguments: extremism, on both sides. You could argue that extremism was permissable and even necessary to make the gains that women have made - and I would agree. However, in 2010 what we need is dialogue and respect. Entrenched, polarized positions on both sides only take us further away from our goal of ensuring equal rights for all. We have to be vigilant to retain the rights for which generations of women - and reasonable men - have fought. What we must not do is resort to framing this as a "men vs. women" issue - that only serves those who love the fight more than the ostensible goal. We need to reframe the debate as "reasonable, compassionate people vs. extremists". I refuse to pick a side in the "men vs. women" debate because I think that paradigm is part of the problem. Just my $.02.

 

Jim Martell

From A Grandmother

Thank you for this excellent response from a feminist man's perspective! The hard won freedoms by my generation have contributed to the sense of equality and opportunity for young Canadian women today, but there is still much to be done. The U.N.'s Platform of Action, arising from the Beijing Women's Conference of 1995, still is only beginning to be implemented in many parts of the world. The goal is full partnership between men and women.

How refreshing

How refreshing to read such a strong and informed male voice on this subject. Thank you! Liz Marshall

Cranky old white men

The National Post fills its opinion-writing stable with anti-feminist, anti-humanist, anti-culture climate-change deniers who don't even write very well. Does anyone really wonder why the NP has always lost money, when the only people it appeals to are cranky old white men? Cassandra