so, I was reading the paper this morning, and happened upon this article, about a heated exchange live on talk radio between long-time NDP leader Alexa McDonough and deputy leader of the Conservative party, Peter MacKay (there's a link on that page where you can actually listen to the clip in question). MacKay actually told McDonough she should "stick to her knitting"! Can you imagine, telling the former leader of the federal NDP party, and the current leaer of the provincial NDPs, a woman who is so well-respected and formidable, that she should stay at home and knit rather than talk about the big issues of this election? He denied it was a sexist remark, but COME ON. Of course it was a sexist remark – you wouldn't tell a man to stay at home and knit, would you? The implicit suggestion to this comment is that women should stay at home where they belong and mind their manners, while leaving the hard decisions to the men.Yesterday, driving home I was listening to Freestyle on CBC radio. The two hosts seem to get along quite well, and have a good rapport. The woman was talking about Reese Witherspoon's Golden Globe dress, and how it was worn by Kirsten Dunst a couple years back to the same awards show. (In my opinion, it looked way better on Reese! Then again, I can't stand Kirsten Dunst!) She went on to say that "people have been talking" about the gaffe, and the male host interrupted to say, "No, people haven't been talking. Women and gay men have been talking." !!! So, I guess only straight men are people. Another example of the heteromasculine machine at work.
These things are subtle in a lot of cases, but I've really been noticing how much of our language is sexist, racist, and heterosexist – common turns of phrase denote how our society assumes white straight wealthy able-bodied christian men are the norm, the standard by which all others are measured. I've been trying to keep my language neutral, and sometimes it's hard not to slip into common patterns of speech that serve to reduce and demean other people – and even at times, the group to which you belong yourself.
You can be such a bitch sometimes!
you too!
Wow, that is pretty telling. I don’t know much about Canadian politics, but from what I hear, nobody votes for the Conservatives anyways (you lucky Canucks!) – maybe he was just sore?
i was thinking about this just this minute. some of these people will claim to be the most open-minded people but….
yeah, apparently MacKay has some tough competition from the NDP candidate – a woman – in his riding.
I guess sexism/heterosexism (I hate the word homophobic, it really isn’t properly descriptive of most people who are anti-gay… they are actually pro-heterosexual, so I like this term better) is really ubiquitous in our language, among other things of course. I think in some terms it’s really quite obvious, like the knitting comment, and in others it’s so subtle it could be chalked up to a slip of the tongue or poor grammar. But, since words are an important part of the way we communicate, I think it’s important to be clear about how you speak, to avoid misunderstandings etc.
Karenology, our election is tomorrow! We’ve had 12 years of Liberal government (similar platform to Democrats in USA), and they are just full of corruption. People are sick of them. The party who would likely be the most obvious alternative for those who normally vote Liberal is the NDP party, but the trouble is, they have never been in power, except provincially in Ontario once which was completely disastrous economically, so I think voters are a bit wary of such an inexperienced government. Also, the leader comes across as a guy you’d like to sit down and have a beer with, which might hurt him in the end. So, the other alternative for those wanting to damage the Liberal party’s power is the Conservative party (unless you live in Quebec, and there they have the Bloc Quebecois, a party all about the issues that affect Quebec and not caring anything about the rest of the country). So it could very well be a Conservative victory tomorrow!!! I’m nervous about that prospect, b/c it seems the leader is quite keen to follow in Bush’s footsteps and implement all sorts of really conservative ideas that will restrict the civil liberties of our citizens. YIKES! stay tuned to find out what happens…..
Eek. I hope the best for Canada, and that it turns out way better than my country’s last national election did.
I agree that their is a strong sexist strain in politics; for example, the “analysis” of Stronach’s change of allegiance would have been different had she been a man.
I don’t think the “not people” thing is an instance of sexism as such. The comeback might well have been “not people, men.” It is a question of not the whole but a subset. But, yes, “common turns of phrase denote how our society assumes white straight wealthy able-bodied Christian men are the norm, the standard by which all others are measured.” It’s even more obvious in French.
As for today’s elections “we’re doomed, doomed I tells ya!” The best we could look for is a minority government. As for the Liberals being corrupt, so were the Conservatives before them, but nobody seems to remember that. (BTW, hasn’t the NDP also been in power in B.C.?)
yep, I think you’re right… I tend to forget about BC, they are so damn far away!
I agree. I mean, what government isn’t corrupt? what government hasn’t had charges of mis-managing funds, wasting tax dollars, making poor choices? The last time the conservatives were in power, our country was run into the ground economically (thanks, Brian “the chin” Mulroney!). of course the liberals made mistakes – they were in power for 13 years! they were bound to make mistakes. I don’t hold the sponsorship thing against them as much as other Canadians do, I guess. Of course it’s bad, perhaps the worst in our country’s history. Those millions of dollars could have been used to fund better health care, a national pharmacare program, improved education, money for post-secondary education, increased police forces, a national day care program… the list goes on. The money was spent poorly, under the guise of bringing Quebec closer to the rest of the country – which is an admirable thing! We want Quebec to stay – I think the majority of Canadians value the diversity and unique culture that Quebec brings to our national identity. It would be terrible to lose that, and the economic damage would be hard to remedy. It’s a shame it turned out the way it did. It’s also a shame that voters who are pissed off at the Martin government about it might turn blue in retaliation, since many Quebecois see the Bloc as having a separatist agenda only. YIKES! I guess we’ll wait and see….
upcoming post: transsexual politics! stay tuned!