------------------------
Sweet Jesus, Mother Mary and Joseph... do u think Canadians aren't watching and tired of this sheeeeet!!!!!!! York University, UBC, St. Maaaaary's University, Newfoundland University there dump cups.... COME ON.. ... and now this.... SO ENTITLED AND PRIVILEGED... yet u don't understand equality in Canada- WOMEN EQUAL MEN... and gender is no one's business.... in Canada since 1969 WTF???? ON BILLION RISING.... break the chains.... enough of this
... God am so weary of this creepy behaviour by rich, entitled and privileged..... youth and educators.... just so sick of it...
U of S suspends hockey coach Dave Adolph over homophobic slur
Remark made in private email to hockey players
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/u-of-s-suspends-hockey-coach-dave-adolph-over-homophobic-slur-1.2516704
------------------
|
--------------------
ONE BILLION RISING
ONE BILLION RISING
ONE BILLION RISING
CANADA- YORK UNIVERSITY'S SHAME- IN THE ONE COUNTRY WHERE WOMEN EQUAL MEN.... SHAME! SHAME! SHAME!
Laugh, scream or cry. Maybe all three as a religious student at York University gets the school to permit him to somehow carry on his instruction without being in contact with women because of his beliefs. From the story written by James Bradshaw it is clear the university is utterly conflicted by this unnatural request. We say unnatural but there are probably better words to describe it. The pertinent technical point here is that the person in question enrolled for an online course never thinking, presumably, that he would have to attend a meeting with other online classmates. We foolish Canadians might call it teamwork. In future, it may be possible for the university to skirt such requests by making it clear that there will be some mixed company required as part of the course. James Bradshaw
http://www.bayview-news.com/2014/01/york-u-online-student-cant-meet-with.html
---------------------------------
LETHBRIDGE: Let’s not let cultural mosaic overtake Canadian values
GAIL LETHBRIDGE
Last Updated January 24, 2014 - 5:24pm
Gail Lethbridge hasn’t let a preoccupation with inclusiveness prevent her from wishing people a Merry Christmas during the festive season. (TIM KROCHAK/Staff
Beware the cultural mosaic, Canada.
I never thought I’d hear myself say that, or even think it. Being a child of the Trudeau years, I grew up believing that multicultural society was something positive and enriching for our society.
That rich tapestry of food, colours, language and tradition? All good to my mind. Of course, that cultural tapestry wasn’t quite as evident here in Nova Scotia, but the theory was still very appealing.
And it still is.
In school, we learned that the Canadian cultural mosaic was an important thing that distinguished us from America.
Canada welcomed allowed newcomers to keep their language and culture, whereas the United States was the melting pot where immigrants shed their old ways and adopted a set of American cultural values that were preordained.
Well, we were all over that, weren’t we? Canadians love nothing better than a defining concept. After hockey and Hortons, the cultural mosaic was right up there in our national character. We were proud of it — and still are, for the most part.
You see this idea of the cultural mosaic expressed day-to-day in the very Canadian impulses to apologize even if someone else steps on our toe, or to be perpetually polite towards others.
There’s so much to like about the cultural mosaic, but I am troubled by some its expressions lately.
This began a few years ago when we started banning the word Christmas at Christmastime. It was no longer Merry Christmas. It was now Happy Holidays.
Holiday is a catch-all term that encompasses all religious and seasonal celebrations without excluding. This is an expression of the cultural mosaic.
My objection isn’t solely the deChristmasing of Christmas, but rather the removal of any named celebration from the vocabulary. Why does inclusion require the boiling down of cultural celebration into a tasteless pablum of dull umbrella terminology?
Ultimately that is exclusion of all, isn’t it?
My response to this minor seasonal annoyance has been a head-on act of rebellion: I make a point to wish people Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah or Happy Kwanza etc. And I haven’t found that this offends anyone.
Admittedly, Happy Holidays is the tip of the iceberg, but there are other instances in which the cultural mosaic ends up trampling on human rights.
I’m thinking here of the York University student who refused to work with a group of women because of religious beliefs.
The professor denied the request because he said it infringed upon the rights of women. The university overruled this and granted the student’s request because students taking the course from a distance were offered the same exception because they were not physically able to work in groups.
The university found a convenient exit strategy here, and avoided a dreaded cultural conflict.
But this raises the interesting question: would the university accommodate the student if he refused to work with black people or someone who is gay, for example? Why it is justifiable to discriminate against women?
This decision sets a troubling benchmark. It doesn’t serve the public interest of Canadian society because it creates inequality.
We see another example of this clash of rights with a private Christian university in British Columbia that is opening a new law school. It requires that students sign a covenant promising to abstain from “sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman.”
Those who breach the promise can be punished or expelled. This is an example of religious rights conflicting with the rights of those who are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transexual.
I’m glad to hear that a group of law students is asking the Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society to refuse recognition of this law school because it discriminates against gays.
This isn’t the first time such collisions of rights have arisen and it won’t be the last.
We need to find a way to respect the Canadian cultural mosaic without eroding the rights of others.
http://thechronicleherald.ca/opinion/1181981-lethbridge-let-s-not-let-cultural-mosaic-overtake-canadian-values
--------------------------
comment: brilliant... realistic... the touch of the common everyday people who just want life 2 be better and thought it would by working so hard on human rights and equality 4 each and all... when will United Nations consider women (64% of the planet) equal by laws and acceptance... One Billion Rising.
One Billion Rising (Short Film) - breaking the chains- no more abuses- no more excuses
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl2AO-7Vlzk
John Baird’s speech to the United Nations General Assembly
by macleans.ca on Monday, September 30, 2013 10:41am
Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird addressed the 68th Session of the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 30, 2013 in New York City. Here is a copy of his speech, for the record:
As we gather near Ground Zero, site of the World Trade Center mass murder, I wish first to honour the victims of terrorism:
I honour all victims, everywhere, including those killed and wounded at the Westgate Shopping Mall in Nairobi.
Tragically, we lost two Canadians, including a Canadian diplomat.
There is no more fitting venue to honour the life of Annemarie Desloges and her service than right here, in front of these United Nations.
The crime of terror is an assault on all people.
And, in its wake, the human family is one.
One in pain. One in mourning. One in our resolve that evil will never triumph.
At this moment of grief, the oneness of humankind is the theme of my remarks today.
Allow me to begin with an observation drawn from the Canadian experience.
The Province of Newfoundland and Labrador was the last province to join Canada, but it is the site of the earliest known European settlement in the New World. L’Anse aux Meadows is more than a thousand years old.
We consider the province’s capital city, St. John’s, to be the oldest English settlement in North America, dating back to 1497.
The early Newfoundland settlements are the subject of significant archeological activity. Among the artifacts commonly found is a three-handled drinking mug, known as a “tyg.”
The three handles are designed for sharing. During the 17th century, it was common to share eating and drinking utensils.
Further research reveals the tyg mug is not unique to Canadian and English history. On the contrary, cups with three or more handles are common to many of the world’s cultures. Indeed, nearly three millennia ago, Homer wrote in the Iliad of a multi-handled mug.
The tyg and its many counterparts around the world are tangible reminders not just that eating and drinking are social activities but that, as long as human beings have inhabited this planet, sustenance and the necessaries of life have been community endeavours.
Human beings share from necessity. We cooperate to survive. We form communities because that is our natural state.
As Cicero observed, “We were born to unite with our fellow men, and to join in community with the human race.”
Animated by the same spirit of community, the Charter of the United Nations declares that our goals include “to live together,” to be “neighbours,” and “to unite.”
The very first words of the UN Charter make clear that this organization is a body of, by and for human beings.
It begins, “We the peoples of the United Nations.”
Not “We the countries.”
Or “We the governments.”
Not “We the political leaders.”
“We the peoples.”
An important reminder of why and on whose behalf we are here.
Here at the UN, Canada targets its efforts on securing tangible results for the human family. It is much more important to consider what the United Nations is achieving than how the UN arranges its affairs.
Canada’s government doesn’t seek to have our values or our principled foreign policy validated by elites who would rather “go along to get along.”
The billions who are hungry, or lack access to clean water, or are displaced or cannot read and write do not care how many members sit on the Security Council. But they do need to know that their brothers and sisters in humankind will walk with them through the darkness.
Peace, prosperity and freedom—these are indeed the conditions that have been sought by human communities from the beginning of recorded time: To live in peace. To live in prosperity. To live in freedom.
Of these priorities, peace is the foremost objective of the United Nations.
It is no surprise that the UN Charter mentions the word “peace” four dozen times.
Sadly, “peace” the word is easier to locate than “peace” the condition.
Since the moment this organization was created, not a day has passed without the human family being pained by war somewhere on this planet.
Almost always, the suffering is felt by the most vulnerable among us.
And, far too often, this involves women and violence.
In the context of war, rape and serious sexual violence are war crimes. I have met girls who were victims of this very war crime, and their stories are horrific. The war criminals involved must be identified, pursued, prosecuted and punished.
Earlier this year, Canada and other G-8 nations agreed to treat sexual violence in conflict as a violation of the Geneva Conventions. I applaud the United Kingdom and U.K. Foreign Secretary William Hague for their work in this area. But he would be the first to acknowledge that the fight to eradicate this crime has been led by women, including Special Representative [of the UN Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict] Zainab Hawa Bangura.
Every year, millions of girls, some as young as age nine, are forced into marriage.
Since I began these remarks, 100 children have been forced into marriage; 1,100 per hour; more than 26,000 per day.
The effects of early forced marriage are documented and beyond dispute. Early forced marriage harms health, halts education, destroys opportunity and enslaves young women in a life of poverty.
A young woman once recounted her wedding date. She remembered, “It was the day I left school.”
No country is immune from this scourge.
This is a global problem. A problem for humanity.
Forced marriage is rape; it is violence against women. Early forced marriage is child rape, violence against young girls. The practice is abhorrent and indefensible.
We condemn it.
Even though some might prefer that we kept quiet.
The discomfort of the audience is of small concern, particularly in the context of a crime that calls to heaven for justice.
If this body does not act to protect young girls, who will?
Another way to protect the vulnerable is to improve the health of mothers, newborns and children so that we can reduce the number of deaths.
I am proud that our Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, has led a global effort—the Muskoka Initiative—to reduce maternal and infant mortality and to improve the health of mothers and children in the world’s poorest countries. It’s about half of the world’s population; all of its potential.
While these efforts—to eradicate sexual violence in conflict, to eliminate early forced marriage and to improve maternal and newborn health—are essential, we must do more than react to crises.
We must invest in opportunities for women and girls.
We must ensure that women participate fully in all parts of our society and in all the countries of these United Nations. This will help us build a stronger, more secure, more prosperous and more peaceful world.
It is in every nation’s self-interest to ensure every young girl realizes her full potential.
And it is from the perspective of the human family, one family, that we must address other threats to peace and security.
Among the most urgent crises remains the violence in Syria.
Canada’s position is clear. We support the Syrian people, the innocent people caught up in this senseless violence, and those who work on their behalf. We will never support a brutal and illegitimate regime that has unleashed weapons of mass destruction on its own people. Nor will we tolerate extremism and terrorism as alternatives to Assad’s tyranny.
The people of Canada have been generous in helping those most in need.
When success is achieved, it is important to recognize it. The near-impossible work of the UN World Food Programme must be applauded, and Canada has responded by being the second-largest single-country donor in the world. Their work in Syria is paramount and has not gone unnoticed. I also commend the work of the UNHCR [United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees] in providing assistance to the refugees fleeing this terrible conflict, and the generosity of Syria’s neighbours in providing safe haven.
Canada joins the entire world in seeking a political resolution to the conflict. Canada supports a peaceful, democratic and pluralistic Syria that protects the rights of all communities.
But let us not confuse a peaceful, negotiated outcome with equivocation or moral uncertainty. There can be no moral ambiguity about the use of chemical weapons on civilians.
Today, September 30, is a dark reminder of the price of accommodation with evil.
It is the 75th anniversary of the Munich Agreement, by which Czechoslovakia’s freedom was sacrificed to appease the Nazi regime. The appeasers claimed they had won “peace for our time.” In fact, their abandoning of principle was a calamity for the world.
Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel, a Holocaust survivor who was imprisoned in Auschwitz, has been even more blunt:
“Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere. When human lives are endangered, when human dignity is in jeopardy, national borders and sensitivities become irrelevant.”
Just as we are not neutral or silent on the crimes being committed against the Syrian people, neither is Canada neutral on Israel’s right to exist and to defend itself.
There can be no bargaining over Israel’s existence. While dialogue is a virtue, there can be no virtuous discussion with anyone wedded to Israel’s destruction.
Today, the Jewish people are masters of their own fate, like other nations, in their own sovereign Jewish state. Like other nations, Israel has the right to defend itself, by itself.
Canada fundamentally believes peace is achievable. That Palestinians and Israelis and their neighbours can live side by side, in peace and security.
We, like many nations, wish to see a prosperous Palestinian state living in peace with its Jewish neighbour.
That’s why, although we sometimes have fundamental differences on how statehood is achieved, Canada is providing significant assistance to build the institutions that are vital to the establishment of a viable future state. In the West Bank, Canada is contributing greatly to economic, security and justice initiatives.
Recent developments in negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority are encouraging. I salute the leadership and courage of the Israeli Prime Minister [Benjamin Netanyahu] and the Palestinian Authority’s President [Mahmoud Abbas].
I commend U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry for his leadership in this area, and we must all commit ourselves to this cause, united by the prospect of peace.
I look forward to the day when Israeli and Palestinian children can live side by side in peace and security in a Jewish and a Palestinian state.
Ladies and gentlemen, dialogue is important, yes. But our dialogue must be a prelude to action. And action must mean achieving results and making a difference.
Take the recent statements coming from the regime in Iran.
Some observers see encouraging signs, but sound bites do not remove threats to global security. Kind words, a smile and a charm offensive are not a substitute for real action.
We will welcome and acknowledge reform, if and when it comes.
By this we will know when genuine reform has occurred: Has there been real, measurable, material improvement in the lives of the Iranian people and in the security of the world?
Not yet!
We will judge the regime on the basis of its action and results.
The P5+1 [the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany] has had five rounds of formal negotiations with Iran in the past two years. While everyone says the meetings have been “productive,” the fact remains we haven’t seen any change in Iran’s actions.
Next year, nothing would make Canada more pleased than to see a change in Iran’s nuclear ambitions. A change to its terrible human rights record. And an end to Iran’s material support for terrorism.
Now is the time for the global community to maintain tough sanctions against Iran in order that it take a different path on its nuclear program.
The Iranian people want peace. And the Iranian people are suffering great hardship because of their government.
Canada wants the Iranian people to be able to access a life of freedom and prosperity for themselves.
And how do we as a human family achieve and maintain prosperity?
Through free trade among open societies operating under transparent, consistent and fair rules.
Canada continues to diversify its markets because it is a trading nation.
We are aggressively pursuing free trade agreements with other nations.
Bounded by three oceans, with the second-largest land mass in the world, Canada literally is open to the world.
We are both deepening existing economic relationships and building new ones. Whether with China, now Canada’s second-largest trading partner, or the ASEAN [Association of Southeast Asian Nations] countries, where Canadian trade and investment ties are dramatically increasing, or the Pacific Alliance, which provides new and exciting opportunities, or the European Union, where we are negotiating a comprehensive free trade agreement, Canada and Canadians are supporting market liberalization. In the process, ordinary lives are becoming enriched, and entire societies are becoming stronger.
But the quest for prosperity must never come at the expense of our commitment to freedom.
Prosperity is also inextricably linked to peace. After all, those who lack security usually lack the means to provide for themselves and their families.
With economic opportunity, a fruit vendor in Tunisia may not have felt compelled to end his life seeking the dignity to provide for his family.
A young man in Afghanistan may never feel compelled to join terrorist elements simply to raise his children—to ensure their lives are better than the one he lived.
I will always remember the seven-year old girl I met at Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan. Her parents had made the difficult decision to leave their home and to seek refuge in another country—braving hardship because they were motivated, like all parents, by the desire to keep their family safe.
I asked how she was doing. With tears in her eyes, she said, simply, “I don’t like it here. I want to go home.”
Heart-wrenching.
And millions of people are in the same tragic position—millions of members of the human family who cannot even begin to contemplate prosperity until a more basic need, their need for security, is addressed.
The global family will never achieve the prosperity that is our full potential unless we address the peace and security concerns that shackle human opportunity.
Everyone has an interest in contributing to the solution, because peace and security ultimately ensure the freedom of the individual. That’s why we need the people of these United Nations gathered here to promote this freedom.
For the people of these United Nations, no minority is more sacred than the individual, and the freedom of the individual.
Freedom from oppression. Freedom from discrimination. Freedom to worship, to think, to speak, to love, to believe. Freedom to be.
Human freedom can be exercised, and sadly limited, in countless ways.
Religious persecution continues in too many places.
Since we gathered here last year, the world has witnessed:
•bombings of mosques in Iraq and Pakistan and a Catholic church in Tanzania;
•attacks against Hindu, Buddhist and Muslim places of worship in Burma and Bangladesh;
•the bloody persecution of Christians in Syria;
•attacks on Coptic Christian churches in Egypt;
•attacks on a mosque and on a Catholic church in Sri Lanka;
•the detention of Sri Lankan Muslim leader Azad Sally;
•the murders of Catholic worshippers in Nigeria; and
•the Iranian regime’s ongoing persecution of the Bahá’í.
Canada just this year opened an Office of Religious Freedom. Its mandate: to promote freedom of religion and belief as a foreign policy priority. To combat the enslavement into fear, by those who seek to intimidate and undermine the right to worship freely. In peace—and in harmony.
We reject the pernicious notion that human dignity can be sliced up, compartmentalized or compromised.
In a pluralistic society it is impossible to protect some human rights and freedoms while infringing others.
All freedoms are rooted in the inherent dignity of human beings.
Whether the issue is religious freedom, sexual freedom, political freedom or any other freedom, some people ask:
What business is it of ours? What interest do we have in events outside our borders?
Our business is a shared humanity. Our interest is the dignity of humankind.
Many assaults on human dignity have common roots. I refer to neo-fascist ideology, masquerading in different forms, and the threat that it poses to individual freedom.
I spoke earlier of the anniversary of the Munich Agreement.
What the signatories claimed as a triumph of practical politics was in fact a craven capitulation that betrayed human dignity and bankrupted the peace it purported to secure.
It was wrong then to underestimate and to appease fascism, just as it is now to underestimate its modern incarnation.
Extremism that subjugates human dignity and crushes individual freedom beneath rigid ideology must be opposed for what it is.
One year ago today, the world lost the great Somali poet known as Gaarriye. Though his pen has been silenced, the inspiring lyrics remain.
It was Gaarriye who wrote:
“And tell them this: our purpose is peace; our password ‘Freedom’;
Our aim, equality;
Our way the way of light.”
In other words: Peace. Prosperity. Freedom. Three universal human priorities.
Like three handles of a mug from which we all drink. Three values that all humanity shares.
As I close, I cannot help but reflect on three young girls, and my heart breaks for them:
The child bride: “It was the day I left school.”
The girl who was a victim of rape and sexual violence.
The refugee: “I want to go home.”
We are not here to achieve results for governments or political leaders.
We are here to protect and defend these three girls and seven billion other members of the human family. Let us remember this as we embark on discussions to shape a new global agenda, focusing on those most in need.
I am confident that everyone here feels the overwhelming honour and privilege it is to serve our people. It is not without great challenge and responsibility. But we all must stand up and deliver on this unique mandate for the people, for it is the people who expect nothing less.
Thank you.
http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/09/30/john-bairds-speech-to-the-united-nations-general-assembly/
----------------------
hrreporter.com
Jan 10, 2014
York University’s shameful decision
When it comes to gender equality, there's no grey area for accommodation
By Todd Humber
Gutless. That’s the only word that comes to mind when one thinks of how York University handled an accommodation request from a sociology student who wanted to be excused from group work with women earlier this month, citing religious grounds.
The Toronto-based university’s human rights centre gave a thumbs-up to the request, which stunned Paul Grayson, the sociology professor, who wanted to deny the request but went through appropriate channels first. It also offended pretty much every Canadian in the process.
Grayson, to his tremendous credit, dug his heels in and ignored the university. He denied the request after talking with other professors, at which point the student completed the group work with the female students. It’s not often you’ll get applauded for insubordination, but hats off to Grayson — who probably won’t (and shouldn’t) face any official sanction for his action.
If we look at this through a strict human resources lens, the university’s decision to accommodate this request is troubling. Post-secondary institutions are supposed to prepare students for the working world — yes, there are plenty of other good things that happen in the ivory towers but, when you boil it all down, that is the main purpose of higher education.
If this type of thinking reigns, just what kind of workers are universities handing over to employers?
Individuals that think, yes, you can be excused from working with women? That, yes, you can trample on gender rights because working opposite a female somehow makes you feel uncomfortable?
And let’s not forget about the impact this has on female students, particularly ones pursuing careers in historically male-dominated industries. Let’s not fool ourselves — gender equality may seem like a given today, but you don’t have to turn the calendar back a single day to find examples of ongoing systemic discrimination.
Religion-based accommodation has been a huge issue for employers in recent years when it comes to human rights, and there are plenty of grey areas where organizations struggle to find the balancing point between respecting religious freedoms and the practicalities of running a profitable business.
Human rights tribunals across Canada have, for the most part, done a good job of trying to set definable boundaries of what is and isn’t worthy of accommodation. Observing holidays, respecting religious dress and allowing time and space for prayers are some areas where progress has been made — and that can only be applauded.
But there are some black-and-white issues when it comes to accommodation, and gender equity is right at the top of that list. The idea that someone can refuse to work with members of the opposite sex, and get a thumbs up for that behaviour, is disturbing if it happens anywhere. The idea that it almost happened — if not for a strong-minded, level-headed professor — at a publicly funded, secular university in Canada is a disgrace.
There are far too many parts of the world where women face discrimination, where education is forbidden or frowned upon, where they aren’t even allowed to drive a car.
That’s not Canada, and that type of thinking can’t be allowed anywhere where the Maple Leaf flies — not in schools and certainly not in organizations.
We all want to respect religious differences. There’s no debating that, and banning workers from wearing appropriate religious symbols — as Quebec is trying to do with its proposed values charter — is wrong.
But religious accommodation has its limits. To borrow some legal terminology, employers have a duty to accommodate a worker to the point of “undue hardship.” As soon as someone says, “I don’t want to work with women,” that undue hardship flag needs to go up quickly.
Any organization that hums and haws on that front can only be called one thing: Gutless.
Todd Humber is the managing editor of Canadian HR Reporter, the national journal of human resource management. He can be reached at todd.humber@thomsonreuters.com.
------------------
MACLEAN'S MAGAZINE- CANADA JANUARY 2014
CANADA'S DISGRACE- IN CANADA - WOMEN EQUAL MEN- THAT'S WHAT' OUR TROOPS FIGHT AND DIE FOR- INSIDIOUS STORY OF SHAME..... ON MEN AND WOMEN- IN CANADA
Why people of faith should be angry with York
By Emma Teitel | January 19th, 2014 | 2:54 pm
It's not just female students who should be concerned
A student at York University Pawel Dwulit/Getstock
In September, a sociology student at Toronto’s York University emailed his professor with an unusual request: He asked to be exempt, on religious grounds, from attending the online course’s only in-person, student-led study session. It wasn’t group work that he said his faith forbade (a prohibition I imagine many of us would wholeheartedly endorse) but the act of merely existing in mixed company. In the student’s own words: “One of the main reasons I have chosen Internet courses to complete my B.A. is due to my firm religious beliefs . . . It will not be possible for me to meet in public with a group of women (the majority of my group) to complete some of these tasks.” J. Paul Grayson, the course’s professor, denied the student’s religious accommodation request. Faith-based rights should not undermine women’s rights, he argued.
Grayson’s dean, however, with the backing of York’s administration, disagreed. Martin Singer, York’s dean of arts, insisted that Grayson grant the student’s request for a woman-less semester because his quiet abstention from the class’s group work wouldn’t openly discriminate against his female peers. In other words, what York’s women didn’t know wouldn’t hurt them, so why not make the accommodation? Today, everybody in the country knows, and we aren’t hurt. We’re mad. From campus feminists to the likes of Conservative Justice Minister Peter MacKay, there is hardly a soul left in Canada who has not thrown shade at York’s administration—ever willing, apparently, to tolerate intolerance in the name of political correctness.
More maddening than its sexist kowtowing is the school’s hearty appetite for fictitious religious dogma. What’s gone practically unnoticed in this spirited debate about accommodation is the very thing that renders it moot. The religious proscription on which Grayson’s student based his accommodation request (thou shalt not be seen in public with women) may boil your blood, or make you want to renounce God almighty, but chances are it doesn’t exist. The boring truth is that neither Orthodox Judaism nor Islam, nor any noteworthy religion on the planet, forbids its adherents from meeting members of the opposite sex in public.
A Muslim scholar wrote to the professor assuring him that physical encounters aside, “there is absolutely no justification for not interacting with females in public space.” Even those Orthodox Jews who observe the laws of shomer negiah, which forbid physical contact with the opposite sex, are not life-long agoraphobics. At the Community Hebrew Academy of Toronto—a coed private Jewish high school a few blocks from my childhood home—students who observe the no-touch edict study alongside Jews as scripturally inclined as I am. A former student says that in her time there she saw many a flustered pubescent Orthodox boy throw up his arms in defeat and proclaim “Shomer negiah!” upon accidentally bumping into a secular female classmate. Some accommodation.
Unless Grayson’s assigned group activity was a dance number, his student’s request to abstain from meeting with female peers in public is about as divinely inspired as Jesus Christ Superstar. Yet York’s administration took it at face value. They didn’t bother requesting “that the student present evidence concerning the religious obligations involved,” as their accommodation policy allows them to do when instructor and student don’t meet eye to eye on an accommodation request. In fact, York’s religious accommodation policy is as outrageously flexible as my alma mater’s H1N1 prevention policy, which stipulated that if you so much as sneezed you could skip your scheduled exams sans sick note. (Telling a professor you were feeling under the weather was all it took to avoid campus responsibilities at Dalhousie University in 2010). I bet I could enrol at York tomorrow and request an exemption from all exams held in the cafeteria because its ham and cheese sandwiches offend my Semitic sensibilities.
There’s a big difference, though, between the schools’ overly flexible policies: Dalhousie’s H1N1 policy, albeit a godsend for opportunistic slackers, probably prevented a lot of people from getting sick; York’s timid policy of unreasonable accommodation makes people sick, not with an illness of the flesh but with paranoia. When institutions accommodate religious practices that don’t exist, when they equate ignorant compliance with cultural sensitivity, they spread poisonous untruths about the people they’re trying to protect. It’s not York’s female students who have greatest cause to be angry with the school for gladly accommodating a sexist request, but its people of faith. Clearly York doesn’t think very highly of them, not highly enough anyway, to check their deepest-held beliefs against those of an undergraduate smart-ass making up his religion as he goes along.
http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/author/emma-teitel/
----------------------------------------
BLOGGED:
'Girl power' crucial in push to achieve global development goals, says Ban in Davos-JAN 24- UN NEWS 2014-ONE BILLION RISING-no more abuses or excuses-Women Matter -October CANADA- John Baird addresses UN 4 Women's Rights and horrid abuses of girls -women/Cher nails it/Congo disgrace/USA-Canada Child Sex Trafficking- Canada women equal men...period- ?CAN'TRESTOF THEWORLD?
http://nova0000scotia.blogspot.ca/2013/10/one-billion-rising-breaking-chains-of.html
---------------------------------
'Girl power' crucial in push to achieve global development goals, says Ban in Davos-JAN 24- UN NEWS 2014
UN News Centre Translate This Article
23 January 2014
23 January 2014 - Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today, in one of several key meetings he is attending in Davos, Switzerland, where the World Economic Forum is underway, called on the world to invest more to release the potential of over half a billion adolescent girls in developing countries currently held back by poverty, discrimination and violence, calling them key to achieving a crucial raft of development goals.
'Investors tend to rate opportunities based on their potential for returns,' he told a group of eminent persons from the private sector, academia, Governments and civil society dedicated to achieving the eight United Nations anti-poverty Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
'The United Nations gives girls a gold rating. When you invest in their future, you are guaranteed results that multiply across society—on health, education, peace and the welfare of future generations,' he said, highlighting the returns on 'girl power.'
Addressing a lunch of his MDG Advocacy Group on the sidelines of the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum, he stressed that investing in girls was vital in the 'final push for success.' Later in the day, the UN chief is expected to speak at a climate change-focused press conference alongside the President of the European Commission and the World Bank President.
The MDGs, adopted by the UN Millennium Summit of 2000 aim to slash extreme hunger and poverty, boost access to health care and education, achieve gender equality and environmental stability, reduce maternal and child mortality and the incidence of HIV/AIDS, all by the end of 2015.
'We are in a race against time. The MDG deadline is just over 700 days away,' Mr. Ban warned. 'You understand that when we give a girl better health, education and well-being, we see results far beyond that individual. A girl is as valuable to our world as a tree is to a forest. When a tree grows up straight and strong, the whole environment benefits. When a girl grows up straight and strong, her family, her community and even her country can feel the positive effects.'
Mr. Ban noted that every year a girl stays in primary school boosts her eventual wages by up to 20 per cent, and women and girls reinvest the vast majority of their income—90 per cent—back into their families. When female education goes up, so does economic growth. 'Today I urge you to keep girls at the centre of all of your strategies,' he declared, stressing that this is more than a philanthropic issue. 'This is a challenge to do business better. It is a chance to change your institutions so they reflect more enlightened attitudes about girls and include strategies to improve their lives...
'When we support girls, they reward society with enormous contributions in creativity, compassion and—yes—girl power.'
Mr. Ban set up the Group in 2010 to help him build political will and mobilize global action to achieve the MDGs. It is currently co-chaired by Rwandan President Paul Kagame and Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg.
http://www.globalgoodnews.com/government-news-a.html?art=139050056356928157
--------------------
BLOGGED;
UN-'Girl power' crucial in push to achieve global development goals, says Ban in Davos-Jan2014 - BLOGGED OCTOBER- ONE BILLION RISING-no more abuses or excuses-Women Matter - CANADA- John Baird addresses UN 4 Women's Rights and horrid abuses of girls -women/Cher nails it/Congo disgrace/USA-Canada Child Sex Trafficking- Canada women equal men...period- ?CAN'TRESTOF THEWORLD?
http://nova0000scotia.blogspot.ca/2013/10/one-billion-rising-breaking-chains-of.html
----------------------
CANADA
News / GTA
York University’s religious accommodation decision the correct one, dean writes
The York University dean who approved a student’s request to be removed from a group project with women now has “sincere regret” over the controversy, but stands by his decision.
In a letter emailed to university colleagues on Jan. 10, 2014, dean of arts Martin Singer said he saw no other option but to approve a controversial request, made on religious grounds, by a student who wanted to avoid a group seminar with women.
By: Graham Slaughter Staff Reporter, Published on Mon Jan 13 2014
The York University dean who approved a student’s request to be removed from a group project with women now has “sincere regret” over the controversy, but stands by his decision.
In a letter emailed to university colleagues, dean of arts Martin Singer said he saw no other option but to approve the request, made on religious grounds.
“I want to assure each of you of my unwavering commitment to gender equity and of my sincere regret that, given the specific circumstances of this request for accommodation, I was obliged to conclude that the student’s request had to be accommodated,” Singer wrote in an email sent Friday.
“I wish I had had another choice, but neither I, nor those who advised me, believe that I did.”
Related:
· York cowardly, compliant and blind to common sense: DiManno
· ‘Religious accommodation’ likely to be a growing issue
· Stance insulting to women, readers say
The student at the centre of the controversy told a sociology professor in September that his religion barred him from meeting publicly with women for a group assignment, the sole in-person requirement in the online course.
“It will not be possible for me to meet in public with a group of women (the majority of my group) to complete some of these tasks,” the student wrote to professor Paul Grayson, who forwarded the request to York administration.
One week after the student made his request, a vice-dean told Grayson to allow it.
The human rights debate has exploded off campus, with public outcry from NDP leader Thomas Mulcair and Justice Minister Peter MacKay, who told reporters: “This is what we’ve tried to combat in places like Afghanistan.”
York’s president Mamdouh Shoukri also weighed in on the issue on Monday, with a statement noting that “it is important to note that the student in question was never granted the accommodation he requested . . . Religious accommodation cannot be implemented at the expense of the infringement of the rights of others. We must always safeguard rights such as gender equality, academic freedom and freedom of expression, which form the foundation of any secular post-secondary institution.”
The student’s religion has not been identified as human rights rules bar the university from asking his faith.
In his letter, the dean wrote that the online nature of the course was a key factor in the university’s decision.
Since the professor previously exempted students studying outside Canada from the project, and because granting the request “would have no substantial impact on the experience of other students,” it was approved, Singer wrote.
Grayson, who drafted a 12-page paper on the issue titled “Erosion of the Rights of Female Students in York’s Classrooms,” said that reasoning isn’t sound.
“The situations are not at all parallel,” Grayson wrote in a response. “One accommodation does not set a precedent for another based on different circumstances.”
Approving the request would, in fact, affect the experience of female students offended by the university’s approval of the request, Grayson argued. Looking to get empirical data, the professor conducted a survey on his class, asking them how they would feel had they been in a similar situation.
“I would feel very angry just because I would feel that I am not ‘good enough’ to work with and I would feel discriminated,” one student responded.
“I would be outraged,” wrote another.
The dean wrote that the case was considered with “care, consideration, and concern” by a number of university offices before a decision was made. Discussion passed through the dean’s office, the York centre for human rights, the office of the university counsel, and the office of faculty relations.
The dean added that Grayson’s own logic in the case fit the definition of discrimination.
“The sole grounds for different treatment was the professor’s disapproval of the student’s beliefs,” Singer wrote. “But that disapproval of belief is precisely the way that discrimination on grounds of creed is defined.”
Grayson said he wanted to deny the request based on the core societal value that women should be treated equal to men.
“The grounds for my denying the accommodation were my beliefs that the rights of female students should not be compromised and that they should be treated with respect by male students,” Grayson wrote.
The case was settled when the professor took the issue to his department, which approved a new policy that prohibited accommodations that simultaneously discriminate against another student, staff member or teaching assistant.
Grayson then rejected the student’s request. The student accepted.
“I cannot expect that everything will perfectly suit what I would consider an ideal situation,” the student wrote.
“I will respect the final decision, and do my best to accommodate it. I thank you for the way you have handled this request, and I look forward to continuing in this course.”
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/01/13/york_universitys_religious_accommodation_decision_the_correct_one_dean_writes.html
BEST COMMENT OF THE DAY: TORONTO STAR- WOMEN EQUAL MEN IN CANADA
COMMENT:
We are in Canada. Our laws - 1 Law for all - MUST trump 4,200 different religions. No question.
COMMENT:
Apparently the new face of Canada is where one religion is allowed to negate and ignore the very freedoms that this great country has been founded upon, and that Canadians value. Canada is a democratic country that tolerates many religions, but we should be on guard when one religion thinks they are above the law and our Charter.
Here is another example that just happened to occur during a Saudi Arabia party in the middle of downtown Toronto... Maybe that was also a coincidence. Since when is a man not allowed to take a photo in Toronto!?! Shame on the Toronto Police and shame on Singer for not upholding the principles of our nation - he should be fired immediately to set an example.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2022620/Jo...
My freedom as a woman, as a person and as a Canadian matters more than being sweet and polite to one religion. Political Correctness is over.
-----------------------------
BLOGGED:
CANADA MEN AND BOYS MAN UP against Sexual Assault, Bullying and Abuse of Girls and Women- ONE BILLION RISING- breaking the chains -WHITE RIBBONS
http://nova0000scotia.blogspot.ca/2013/07/canada-men-and-boys-man-up-against.html
--------------
BLOGGED;
'Girl power' crucial in push to achieve global development goals, says Ban in Davos-JAN 24- UN NEWS 2014-ONE BILLION RISING-no more abuses or excuses-Women Matter -October CANADA- John Baird addresses UN 4 Women's Rights and horrid abuses of girls -women/Cher nails it/Congo disgrace/USA-Canada Child Sex Trafficking- Canada women equal men...period- ?CAN'TRESTOF THEWORLD?
http://nova0000scotia.blogspot.ca/2013/10/one-billion-rising-breaking-chains-of.html
------------------------
ONE BILLION RISING-SHANIA TWAIN- breaking the chains of abuse...
IDLE NO MORE CANADA- Shania Twain was adopted by her stepfather Ojibway Jerry Twain and grew up on the reserve as non-status indian.... Shania always said Jerry Twain (and she adored Grandpa Twain) treated respectfully and loved Shania's mother Sharon so much..
..... but Shania said the enormous abuse among the Reservations should shame all of Canada.... and men need counselling and respect as much as women...
Shania Twain - Black Eyes, Blue Tears - Live!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26Fd5Q2-VC0
---------------------
Intimate Partner Violence and Abuse - It can be stopped
Download the PDF version
What is intimate partner violence and abuse?
Intimate partner violence and abuse is an abuse of power that includes a wide range of threats and acts:
•Physical violence that may involve a threat with a fist or object; being pushed or shoved in a way that could result in injury; being slapped, hit or beaten; being hit or attacked with an object. There may be no obvious physical injuries, or there may be bruises, cuts, broken bones, internal injuries, disfigurement, disablement and even death.
•Sexual assault may be part of a physical attack. Sexual acts within a relationship must take place with consent. There is no "right" to sexual relations.
•Emotional abuse that can include threats and intimidation, demeaning and degrading verbal and/or body language, control and isolation, subordination and humiliation. Victims may suffer serious loss of self-esteem and experience feelings of shame, anxiety, hopelessness, depression and terror.
Intimate partner violence and abuse
Violence and/or abuse by an intimate partner is not a crime of passion and it is not a private matter.
Intimate partner violence and abuse can be committed by a spouse, ex-spouse, a current or former common-law partner, a current or former girlfriend or boyfriend or a person in a dating relationship. The victim may think that she or he somehow provoked the abuse but the abuser is responsible for his or her own behaviour.
An abusive relationship is often a confusing mix of love, fear, dependency, intimidation, guilt and hope. There is a shared life involving family, finances and a home. Victims of violence and abuse usually return to the relationship many times before leaving it.
To harm, or threaten to harm, another person is against the law under the Criminal Code of Canada regardless of the relationship between the two parties.
An effective legal response to intimate partner violence and abuse requires coordination by all parts of the criminal justice system. The Criminal Code and the Canada Evidence Act provide protection for victims as well as sanctions for offenders. Prosecution policies and guidelines ensure that charges proceed in court, however, the police are usually the first step in the legal process and the major point of contact in intimate partner assault cases.
When called to an incident of intimate partner violence and abuse, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) are responsible for restoring order, protecting victims, investigating and gathering evidence. This may involve arresting or taking into custody the perpetrator of the violence or abuse. If the investigation finds reasonable and probable grounds that a crime has been committed, appropriate criminal charges can be laid.
Relationship abuse is tragically common. It is also very complex. How can you bring her flowers one day and hit her the next? Why does she stay? How can she leave? What happens when that safe place called home becomes a prison or war zone? What about the children? How does society step into these private, personal spaces and help make a difference? Let’s find the answers — because spousal and partner abuse can be stopped.
Even if criminal charges are not laid, an individual can apply for a peace bond or restraining order to prohibit their partner from threatening or harassing them further.
The roots of intimate partner violence and abuse
Intimate partner violence and abuse is rooted in a power imbalance between individuals, within families and in society. Basically, when one person is controlled and/or considered less worthy than another one -- because they are a vulnerable person or part of a vulnerable population -- there is the potential for abuse.
What makes intimate partner violence and abuse occur in one relationship and not another? According to the National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, we know that partners in violent and abusive relationships have often experienced family violence themselves as children. There are also known factors that increase the risk of partner abuse, especially the risk of serious abuse:
•Men who have witnessed violence by their fathers toward their mothers inflict more severe and repeated violence in their own relationships than men whose fathers were not violent.
•Alcohol is a prominent but not a causal factor in relationship abuse. In just over half of all violent incidents, the violent partner was drinking.
•Women are at greater risk of severe violence
•The risk of being killed by a spouse or partner is eight times higher for women in common-law relationships than in registered marriages.
Top of page
Who experiences relationship abuse?
Intimate partner violence and abuse is pervasive: no one is immune. It affects people of all ages, rich and poor, rural and urban, from every cultural and educational background. The majority of abusers are men and the majority of victims are women. Serious abuse is most often committed by men against women and children.
However, men are also victims of intimate partner violence and abuse. The rate is significantly lower than among women and the severity of abuse, especially homicide, often less. We are just beginning to learn more about the abuse of adult men.
There are other groups, such as same sex intimate partners, for which the violence and abuse needs more recognition and remedies. Since these groups may already be stigmatized in society, it can be difficult for either partner to reach out for appropriate help and support. Disabled and dependent persons are also particularly vulnerable in abusive situations. Aboriginal women and men experience higher rates of spousal violence than the general population.
New Canadians should know that landed immigrants will not be deported if they leave a partner because of abuse, even if that partner is their sponsor. (Immigrants without legal status should get legal advice.)
Children are often victims of intimate partner abuse. Estimates are that in 30 to 40% of reported cases where the partner is abused, so are the children. However, there is a growing understanding that simply witnessing intimate partner violence in their home can affect children the same way as abuse directed at them. (Ask for the RCMP’s booklet Where Does It Hurt? The Effects of Family Violence on Children.) What every person involved in an abusive relationship should know is that the RCMP will investigate all incidents of violence and abuse, regardless of sex, ethnicity, background or lifestyle.
Do you have a safety plan?
Safety plans help you reduce or eliminate the risks that you and your children face by an abuser. Creating a safety plan will help you and your children get away from potential risks safely.
Safety planning should include:
•letting someone you trust know about the abuse even if you do not report it to the police;
•creating a code word with friends or family that lets them know to call for help when leaving is not an option;
•having one safe location to keep your identification, important documents (passport, Social Insurance Number), bank cards, credit cards, keys and cell phone that you can grab quickly in an emergency;
•having a physical plan to get out of your house in an emergency and a place to go, including the nearest shelter if necessary, once you have left the abusive situation; and
•practicing your safety plan with your children to keep them safe as well.
If you have left the abuser and the situation is still volatile, make sure that the school, day care, and police have a copy of all court orders, including restraining orders, custody and access orders, as well as a picture of the abusive partner.
Getting help
The facts show that partner assault has declined in recent years. That is proof that relationship abuse can be stopped; it can be prevented. Changing attitudes, services for victims, treatment programs for violent men, stronger laws and pro-arrest policies are all making a difference. The first step for anyone in, or close to, an abusive relationship is to get help.
Help for the Abused
In an emergency, call the police. Seek medical attention (injuries may be internal as well as external). In a crisis, call a women’s shelter, crisis line, or counseling agency. Talk to your family doctor or community health center. Tell someone you trust, such as a friend or relative. Believe in yourself. You are not to blame.
Help for the Abuser
If you abuse your partner, get help now. In most cases, abusive behaviour is learned as a child. It is also often accompanied by low self-esteem, frustration and guilt. You can change. You can take responsibility for your actions and seek counseling. The best way to start is through a family doctor or social service agency. Abusive behaviour often goes hand in hand with alcohol or drug abuse and you may need to address these problems as well.
Top of Page
Help for the Witness
If you believe someone you know is being abused, do not turn a blind eye. Call the police in an emergency; do not attempt to intervene at risk to yourself. Listen to the affected person, whether abused or abuser. They may be asking for help. Offer support and refrain from judgment. Ask how you can be of help. Do not take over. Help the person explore their options. Tell him/her it is dangerous to do nothing about the abuse.
Community involvement and responsibility
All forms of violence and abuse are serious criminal matters with a huge impact on society. As the National Clearinghouse on Family Violence states, "Health costs for injuries and chronic health problems caused by abuse amount to about a billion dollars every year. We also pay a social cost in the form of children too traumatized to learn or develop normally, adult victims unable to function to their full potential, and diminished quality of family and community life".
Intimate partner violence and abuse flourishes in an environment where the misuse of power against the vulnerable or less powerful is tolerated. That environment may be behind closed doors or in the larger community. That is why we all need to work to prevent violence and to build a society where abuse of power is not tolerated. By seeing intimate partner violence and abuse for what it is -- a crime -- we can all take responsibility and work together as a community to stop the violence.
Help is available
Contacts and Resources
•crisis line
•abuse counseling
•women’s groups
•immigrant and ethno-cultural groups
•Aboriginal groups
•women’s shelters
•women’s resource centres
•community health centres
•family doctor
•police
•RCMP victim services
•legal aid
For more information and resources on family and relationship violence, please view our other brochures:
•Dating Violence - Say NO!
•Effects of Family Violence on Children - Where does it Hurt?
•Criminal Harassment – Stalking: It’s not love
These brochures can also be ordered at a cost from St. Joseph Corporation. For ordering information, contact them at their toll free number: 1-888-562-5561.
© 2012 HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA
as represented by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Cat. no.: PS64-20/2012
ISBN: 978-1-100-54297-3
CCAP-SPCCA-014 2012
http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cp-pc/spouse-epouse-abu-eng.htm
----------------------
MacKay announces funding to end violence
Justice Minister Peter MacKay announced support on July 26 for a new project in western Nova Scotia that will engage men and boys in ending violence against women and girls. Shown listening to him are Shannon Young, who chairs the Chrysalis House board, and project co-ordinator Bruce Dienes. - Wendy Elliott, www.kingscountynews.ca
Published on July 29, 2013
By Wendy Elliott welliott@kingscountynews.ca KingsCountyNews.ca
Peter MacKay, the new Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, was in Kentville July 26 to announce support for a new project that will engage men and boys in ending violence against women and girls.
Chrysalis House Association is receiving $185,000 in funding for a 24-month project that will engage the population in the rural counties of West Hants, Kings and Annapolis in the western region of Nova Scotia.
"We are working with organizations across the country to end violence against women and girls and to offset its destructive impact on our communities,"said MacKay. "This project will engage local men and boys to play an important leadership role in ending the violence."
MacKay said that his department hopes to introduce a Victims Bill of Rights this fall so that the innocent are not re-victimized by the system.
He thanked "Chrysalis House staff and all transition houses across the province for a true labour of love. It makes a difference."
Rhonda Fraser, executive director of Chrysalis House Association, said she’s excited about the project.
"It is important to do all we can to prevent violence against women and girls," said Fraser. "We are pleased to partner with the government of Canada on this project to engage local men and boys in understanding the roots of gender-based violence and leading the way to safer communities for everyone."
Sociologist Bruce Dienes, who will co-ordinate the project, said he was very excited to be involved in this worldwide movement.
He indicated the aim is to educate males at a young age through to adults about how to intervene to prevent violence.
Dienes spoke about the Steubenville High School rape in Ohio, where two male students were sent to jail, and stated that the perpetrators had the power to do damage while still children.
A needs assessment in each county will be the first priority. The project runs until March 2015.
An advisory committee made up of 20 community partners and stakeholders will help guide the project. They include members from the RCMP, NSCC, First Nations, African Nova Scotians and Acadian communities.
This project to end gender-based violence is being supported under Status of Women Canada’s call for proposals, Working Together: Engaging Communities to End Violence against Women and Girls.
WEBLINK http://cjproject.engagingmenandboys.ca/
----------------------------------
THANK U... THANK U CANADA
Federal anti-cyberbullying campaign launched at Halifax school
Take time to think before pressing send, Rehtaeh’s father urges
FRANCES WILLICK Education Reporter
Published January 9, 2014 - 1:42pm
Last Updated January 9, 2014 - 1:45pm
Justice Minister Peter MacKay, left, and Glen Canning, father of the late Rehtaeh Parsons, attend a news conference at Fairview Junior High School in Halifax on Thursday. MacKay announced a national campaign to stop cyberbullying. (ANDREW VAUGHAN / The Canadian Press)
One BlackBerry. One boy.
Glen Canning had sobering words for a room full of junior high students as he helped launch the federal government’s new anti-cyberbullying campaign on Thursday.
The father of bullied Cole Harbour teen, Rehtaeh Parsons, told students at Fairview Junior High how his daughter never recovered from the taunting and harassment that began after one “upsetting” photo of her was shared among students by one boy at her school.
“It destroyed her life so much she felt in the end that she would never have the semblance of happiness again,” he said. “And so she ended her life.”
His tale was a cautionary one directed to would-be bullies.
“Just remember, a lot of that happened because one BlackBerry had a picture on it and it was in the hands of one boy. That’s an awful powerful thing to do to somebody,” he said.
“So, if you ever are in a situation to do that to somebody, please stop and just think about it. Think about how hurtful and harmful that could be. You could really end somebody’s life.
“Because you don’t know, once you hit send, what’s going to happen. And you have no control over it after it’s left your cellphone or your Facebook page or your email. ... But you are the one person police will come back to and say, ‘You’re under arrest.’ You don’t want to be that person.”
The new national campaign emphasizes the potential legal consequences of cyberbullying.
Called Stop Hating Online, the campaign also outlines what constitutes cyberbullying and what to do if you’re a victim or a victim’s parent. It includes a TV ad, online ads and the website Canada.ca/StopHatingOnline.
The TV ad shows young people sharing a photo on their cellphones and computers before being hauled into what appears to be a principal’s office and being confronted by a police officer.
The voiceover says, “Let your kids know, in some cases, what they do with their phones could be more than just wrong. It could be illegal.”
Federal Justice Minister Peter MacKay urged the students to take personal responsibility to fight cyberbullying as he launched the campaign at their school.
“Everybody has a role to play. Everybody can get involved,” he told the students. “The campaign has the potential to make it go away, to make people’s lives better, to bring people together ... and in fact to stop the pain, to stop hatred and save lives. It’s that important.”
MacKay said as a new father, the campaign is personal.
“I understand instinctively now what it means to have a child that could be bullied, what it means to have a young person who feels so devastated and so ignored and so absolutely destitute that they could take their own lives,” he said.
The campaign follows on the heels of a new bill, introduced in November, that would criminalize the distribution of “intimate images” without consent and give judges the power to seize computers and data used in a crime.
A second phase of the anti-cyberbullying campaign will be launched in February.
MacKay said he hopes the bill will pass in the spring and become part of the Criminal Code before summer.
http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/1178556-federal-anti-cyberbullying-campaign-launched-at-halifax-school
--------------------
BLOGGED:
ONE BILLION RISING CANADA- Women and the right 2 vote- country by country- Please honour those women who sacrificed so much 4 ur privilege 2 vote - pls honour us
ONE BILLION RISING- breaking the chains- global women winning their rights 2 vote
http://nova0000scotia.blogspot.ca/2013/07/one-billion-rising-canada-women-and.html
--------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.