Why Occupy?

So I’ve been considering heading down to check out the Occupy Toronto demonstration.  So far, it’s been non-violent which is encouraging.  And the police have been getting along with the protesters.  To be honest though, I’ve been skeptical as to the point of the protest – Canada has not had the same economic downturn as the United States, and our banks did not get bailed out by the government.  Are people showing up in solidarity with those struggling south of the border?  Are they just hippies who want to camp out and play djembe’s in the park (not that there’s anything wrong with that, I am part-hippie myself) or folks who simply enjoy causing a ruckus?  But just when I start to give in to my doubts and feel negative about the whole thing, signs like this are encouraging: 

Maybe there is value in reminding Canadians that the income gap has been widening in recent years. In reminding our government that they must continue to work for improvement in our social systems, not rest on their laurels. In reminding the 1% that their gains are someone else’s losses. In encouraging citizens to become engaged.


Maybe some positive forces will come together and organize out of this for real change.  Yeah, I think I’ll go for at least a little bit.

Politics of Rape

I remember having a conversation with my University roommate once about rape. I don’t remember the details at this point, but somehow through the course of the conversation I know that I made the ridiculous statement that “you can’t be raped!” to my male roommate. He was taken aback, and only had to say “uh, yes I can” to make me realize my stupidity. Despite being a staunch feminist and growing up with a “No means NO” poster in my playroom at home (thanks mom) there were some serious gaps in my knowledge and understanding of rape and sexual assault.

I know I am not the only one who has had this type of misunderstanding. Unfortunately, not everyone is as quick to rethink their definition of rape as I was. Over at the Ms. Magazine blog, there is a campaign going on to change the FBI’s 82-year old definition rape which states that “forcible rape” is “The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will”. Such a narrow definition means that many victims and survivors are not included on the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report (UCR). The statistics of this report have a direct effect on funding and resources for sexual assault crime investigation.

Here in Canada the Criminal Code criminalizes sexual assault, and defines that as any sexual contact with another person without that person’s consent. While our system of course is not perfect, at least it offers victims a vehicle by which to press charges if they want to. And at least they know that they “count”.

I had my own experience of sexual assault, and it took me a long time to realize that’s what it was. For a long time I had bad feelings whenever I couldn’t push back the memory, was triggered all the time and didn’t know how to deal with it. Naming what happened to me was a huge help to coping and taking back power over my own situation. It helps when society doesn’t dismiss what happened to you either.

Even though it’s not my country, I’ve already signed the Ms. petition at Change.org and urge you to do the same.

Petitions by Change.org|Start a Petition »

Pause for Thought

Check this out --> Feminist Activists Find Peace in Thailand

I wanted to link to this article for a couple of reasons.  For one, feminism and VAW (violence against women) work are very important to me.  My training background is actually in assaulted women’s counselling, not mental health, although the two have obvious intersections.  I love learning about what feminist activism looks like around the world.

The other reason is that I found as I read this, I was contrasting the “retreat” experience they describe with the professional trainings and workshops I attend here in Canada.  The focus on “self-love and self-worth as an essential part of their work in the world” sounds really in line with my philosophy, but not my practice.  I certainly haven’t had many experiences in my professional life where there is such an emphasis on this sort of thing.  The perks offered to us at trainings usually max out at a free lunch, and possibly getting to go home a bit early. 

I don’t know much about Thai society or the culture of social service work there, so I can’t really comment on whether the needs of these workers would be different than where I am, and what they might make of their retreat experience.  But as the writer says, seeing “15 women grown napping together on the floor of a conference room after a lively plenary” would be “odd” to see in the U.S. (and I’m considering the U.S. and Canada to be more or less the same in this respect). 

It sounds nice.  But would it work?  Would anyone go for it?  I can imagine the mixed reactions of my co-workers – divided between feeling uncomfortable, and griping about how they could be making phone calls or getting assessments done instead.

Is this because we really don’t value self-care?  We talk a lot about avoiding compassion fatigue, but the general consensus seems to often be that we are responsible for this on our own time. 

On the other hand, is it because sleeping or meditating would be considered a private activity, and we would be asked to let our guard down to such a degree in a very public and shared space?  A lot of what they describe would be strikingly different from our typical professional activities and behaviours, and would (I think) demand a lot of openness to the experience.  Would this cross my boundaries?

I don’t know.  But I’m curious.

Has anyone experienced something like this?

G-20

So, needless to say, even though I’ve been looking for a job closer to downtown for the past two years, I’m glad to be nowhere near the inner city this week.
I haven’t seen the fence, but I hear it’s big.

As I was discussing with some friends the other day, I don’t really know how to feel about the whole thing.

Back in 2002 when the G7 met in Kananaskis, Alberta, and 2001 when the Summit of the Americas was held in Quebec City, I was involved in a lot of activism and many people I knew attended protests at those events (or as near as the “designated protest zone” was allowed). We were anti-globalization and opposed fair-trade. The issues seemed clear, and we wanted specific alternatives to what the summit members were proposing.

Now, I don’t really know what summit leaders will be talking about. The more I read the news, the more confused I get. If, as Harper says “the discussion should be less about new agreements than accountability for existing ones” couldn’t this have been done on the phone?

Initially, I was frustrated that the news media seemed to be focusing on logistics and risk of violence when talking about protestors and seemingly not paying any attention to the reason the protestors are actually there. But I wonder now if it’s because there is no one good reason the protestors are there.

I’m sure many are well intentioned. I’m sure their issues are important. But when everyone is there yelling hundreds of different and unrelated slogans, I fear the message will get lost.

Am I disillusioned and out of touch? I do still think that public protest and peaceful civil disobedience has its place and can be an effective tool for change. I just don’t see it happening this time.

Given all this, there are only two things I am sure of: 1) $1.2 billion is waaaay too much and so not worth it and 2) this weekend, I will be anywhere but downtown.