CampusIntel

The other night I was drifting off to sleep with my black lab, Bella, curled up under my arm. Bella had surgery on her cruciate ligament on Monday and like any sick child would do, was looking for a little TLC from her mom.

Combined with the reminder of a horrible incident of animal cruelty in my hometown recently, I was pushed to write this blog. Although I cannot discuss the incident as formal charges have not been laid and I want the individual to receive the worst punishment possible, I can say a small dog was killed in a disgusting way and left outside to rot as though it were trash. Things like this make me angry, upset, and frustrated that I cannot make a difference.

These situations made me think about how often times, people who do not support animal rights say that you cannot compare a dog to a person/child. This is an argument that I do not understand at all. Bella is like a child to me and I would do anything for her, hence the fact that I’ve spent about $7,000 on her since September so that she wouldn’t be in pain and can live a full life from here on out.

When I tell people that Bella is like my child, they don’t get it and often times reply with “it’s not like you gave birth to her!”. This is true, but what about children that are adopted? My little cousin was adopted from China when she was about 13 months old. The fact that my aunt didn’t physically give birth to her doesn’t mean we love her any less. She’s part of our family regardless and is treated the same way a biological child would be.

My point is, Bella and other dogs or animals are more like children than people often wish to believe. A child is able to feel physical pain and no one ever argues this point. Dogs are just as capable of feeling the same pain, which I have witnessed firsthand as Bella has gone through her surgeries. Her physical pain is obvious to me because she cried the first night I had her home.

It’s not okay to physically harm a child. If this were to happen, social services would step in and take the child away, with the parents/caregivers being punished in the highest degree possible.

Since animals are capable of feeling the same physical pain, shouldn’t their abusers face the same punishment? Animal, child, it doesn’t matter because pain is pain.

Another argument that is often heard when discussing animal rights is that animals don’t have emotional feelings. This is completely ridiculous to me. If you have ever looked in the eyes of an abandoned animal, or an animal that has been constantly yelled at and denied human love and attention, you can tell that their hearts and spirits are broken.

Dogs, cats, bunnies, etc. are all capable of loving their owners. At Christmas I had to send Bella to Alberta ahead of me and she stayed with my parents for about a week. Even though they care for her as much as I do, she still missed me. She spent her days (and much to my parents dismay, her nights) whining for me and looking out the window. When I called and they put me on speakerphone, she recognized me voice and would instantly become happy, wagging her tail and knocking things off nearby coffee tables.

A child is taken from their parents when they are emotionally abused, so shouldn’t animals if they are capable of the same suffering?

Children cannot protect themselves so it is the responsibility of the community to ensure that they are treated with dignity and respect. Animals, like children, are also not capable of protecting themselves. Shouldn’t we be responsible for looking after them too, then?

I’m not going to bombard you with photos of the atrocities of what happens to animals every day throughout the world. I can barely look at them without being sick to my stomach.

However, I want you to picture a photo of a child in your mind. The child is small, frail, and you can see every rib in their body. Does this photo make you angry? It should.

Now think about a dog in the same situation. Small, fragile, every rib visible through their patchy, dirty fur. It should make you angry the same way the photo of the child does.

While earning my sociology degree we were taught that a society is judged based on how well they look after the most vulnerable amongst them. If this were the case, our society would be shamefully failing.

Bare feet or furry feet, we need to protect those who cannot protect themselves.

Photo Source: Vatican.va

The Catholic Church is once again being publicly scrutinized with news surfacimg this week of paedophilic acts that are personally connected to Pope Benedict XVI. Der Spiegel, a German newspaper, reported this week that in 1980 a priest in Munich was secretly transferred within the Archdiocese after an 11 year old boy came forward with abuse allegations. In an interview with NPR.org, Der Spiegel reporter Peter Wensierski said that after the priest’s transfer, he continued to work with children, and it was recorded that he was accused numerous more times of child sexual abuse. The priest was sentenced to a prison term for the abusive acts after 1986, but upon his release the Catholic Church of Munich reassigned him roles that involved him working around children, and has maintained positions that require interaction with children until today, Wensierski says.

If not scandalous enough, the story has another punchy side to it: Pope Benedict XVI was the Archbishop of Munich in 1980 when the accused priest was transferred. The Vatican is saying that one of the Pope’s subordinates at the time handled the secret transfer of the priest, but Wensierski says there is record of Pope Benedict’s direct reign over the situation. Not surprisingly, the Vatican is sticking to its story that the current head of the Roman Catholic Church is completely uninvolved with the sketchy personnel shuffle, or any involvement in covering up sexual abuse.

The news comes on the cusp of another sex abuse scandal within the German Catholic Church. Over the past 2 months, more than 600 students within Germany’s Catholic school board system have come forward with allegations of sex abuse committed on them by Catholic priests, Wensierski told the NPR.

The German Archdiocese allegations are the latest in a legacy of sexual abuse allegations on the Catholic Church worldwide. Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Ireland, Italy, Poland, The Netherlands, The United Kingdom, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Peru, Canada, The US, Australia, New Zealand, and the Philippines have all been met with scandalous allegations of sex abuse committed by priests.

In Canada alone, the Catholic Church has been under scrutiny since the 1950s. Thousands of Aboriginal people who were sent to Christian residential schools  have come forward with stories of sexual abuse being acted out in these institutions, with litigations continually being held regarding the issue. Other sites of abuse include the Mount Cashel Orphanage in Newfoundland, whose accused priests were found guilty by the Supreme Court of sexual abuse on children.

Photo Source: Time-CNN

Violence erupted in the streets of Athens this week by protestors opposed to Greece’s new budget plan for 2010. The riot squad and ample police support were relied on during the riot, which resulted in tear gas and violent measures on part of the police in order to calm rioters. Minimal arrests were made in comparison to the amount of protestors, which numbered in the thousands.

The protests, and ensuing riots, were sparked by the Greek government’s announcement of a 4.8 billion euro austerity measure. The plan includes a freeze in pensions, cuts to government salaries, heightened taxes on luxuries like alcohol and tobacco, and a sales tax hike from 19 to 21 per cent. The Greek government’s move comes in a strategic political framework attempting to show European Union partners that it can avoid bankruptcy.

The controversial budget is in response to the world economic crisis, that has left many European Union nations in bleak financial state. Instead of claiming bankruptcy and relying solely on international support from the World Bank and IMF, the government of Greece sees financial stability available through tax hikes, expenditure cuts, and limited IMF support. The government has not ruled out accepting loans from IMF, but for now is trying a sovereign approach. Analysts see this as a motivated political move: Leaving the IMF out of Greece’s problems, for now, shows the stability of the European Union, dissolving any thought that it is doomed financially.

Whether or not this tactic of the Greek government will be a positive move in the long run will have to be judged later. For now, the general working public of Greece is outraged at the decision. Outlandish tax hikes that target popular demographics, and cuts to pensions, means a reassessment of living conditions for the majority of citizens.

Peter Russel’s book Recognizing Aboriginal Title: The Mabo Case and Indigenous Resistance to English-Settler Colonialism provides a meticulously thorough overview of Aboriginal rights in Australia since the inception of British Colonialism in Australia in the sixteenth century. In a time when, in Canada, Aboriginal rights are still at odds with our legal system, Russell’s story of how one man, Eddie Koiki Mabo, managed to instil key Aboriginal rights in Australian law provides an uplifting ray of hope.

The first half of the near-400 page book provides a background of Indigenous history in Australia. Not too surprisingly, it is 200 pages of extensive research on how the Natives on the British occupied land mass come to be at the mid-point of the twentieth century. It is a wealth of information to take in, beginning with the onset of colonisation and the threat it created on non-British culture. Much like in Canada and the United States, the Native peoples of Australia intended to work together with colonisers during the first wave of colonisation.

But, also like in North America, there were many injustices done to the original inhabitants of Australia by colonisers over the past 500 years. More or less, the many unrecognized land claims and Aboriginal rights treaties were left to rot, and be forgotten, until the famous Mabo case.

Eddie Mabo was a descendent of original inhabitants of Mer Island, an offshore land mass north of Australia. Mabo’s life consisted of countless political endeavours in order to decolonize Native life in Australia. In other words, he wished to see Native culture persist despite the assimilation, and oppressive techniques, of the British Crown. 

All this came to a head in the Mabo vs. Queensland case, beginning in 1982 and ending in 1992. In the end, the High Court of Australia deemed that Native title to lands, cultural practices and lifestyles are a fundamental right of Native Australians. Not to sound too promising, the second half of Russell’s book looks at how the government of Australia, like in Canada and the US, found loopholes to further challenge Aboriginal title rights for its own economic and political agendas.

I cannot give it all away in one small blog, because the story of Aboriginal sovereignty in Australia is a long, and still unfinished tale. However, Russell has managed to tell the story in a captivatingly interesting way. A real page-turner that any history buff should find hard to put down.

A Vancouver Olympic Committee parking lot in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside is home to a sea of red tents. The public staging is the reaction of homeless activists in Vancouver who feel the Olympics are problematic for homeless people.

The idea is about catching the public eye. The red tents have bright white blurbs and slogans designed as a visual aid for the homeless movement. Quite simply: Red tents equal homeless movement. It seems the intention has succeeded. There have been stories about the tent activism throughout the media in the past weeks.

The homeless movement in Vancouver has chosen the Olympics as the backdrop for their activism because for Vancouver’s large homeless population, the recent preparation for the Games meant displacing them from the downtown core. The movement asks that instead of spending billions on international sporting events, that Vancouver and other major cities address homeless problems.

The tent city site is one of many major social protests meeting the Olympics. First Nations activists fighting for land rights, environmental activists educating about nature deprivation, domestic violence and women’s activists, them andmany more have all utilized the soapbox the Games provide.

Tent city is expected to remain assembled until the Olympics are over. Small groups of activists have also taken to the streets, handing out free tents to anyone in need. After the games, and gold medal reports, we will see if the tent campaign achieves any success for the homeless cause.

I’m going to assume most people have at least pondered the idea of working at the government at least once in their life. I mean, lets face it, it pays really awesome, they get a ton of vacation time and they have some great benefits and a wide range of places to work at within the departments and across Canada. I also am going to assume that a lot of students have had very few chances or none at all to work at a desk job or at the government. I say this because up until about 2 years ago, all my friends I would do every year was complain about our summer jobs and how we’d always get stuck in retail doing hard work for minimum pay at all hours of the day/week. We used to dream of the day we’d get to work in an office in front of a computer all day and get weekends off…yes, we actually wanted the 9-5 jobs…

            Of course, you may have read a blog I wrote a while back talking about how the student life and the ‘real world’ lifestyle are very different and how the student is so efficient that they have to slow down a lot when they start working outside of school. Well, my perspectives on that topic really came from working in the public service. Now, I’m not going to say that all jobs in the government are boring or demand very little attention/hard-work because honestly, some of them are very hard and stressful, and it really depends on where you work and what’s going on in the department at the time you’re there…Also, it helps if you have a higher status and are not just working at entry level positions with a lot of other people trying to work their way up. However, I have spoken to a lot of students and people around my age who have reiterated my concerns about working in the government. It can get boring and not really tap into your strengths or skills.

            This being said, I do not want to discourage anyone from perusing a carrier or job in the government as, like I said, not all jobs will be the same. I DO however, want to warn people as to what they may be getting into and also maybe give some insight as to how to avoid getting stuck in this position and also how to get your foot in the door in the government.

Advice for getting in:

-If your school provides you the opportunity to do a field placement and there is a placement available in the government, I would say take it. Do everything in your power to get into a placement position that has opportunity for advancement. This is how I got into the public service, and honestly the majority of entry level positions I see are filled with placement students.

-With this advice in mind however, there are other way I know of getting into the government, these are: applying though FSWEP (Federal Student Work Experience Program), by either going to jobs-emplois.gc.ca/fswep-pfete/index-eng.htm or Googling FSWEP and filling out the VERY long form (don’t worry there is an end to it and after filling it out once, it’s just a matter of updating it from year to year). You could also go on the government of Canada website at www.jobs.gc.ca and search for jobs in your area. Keep in mind however, that most job postings will be posted internally, so another way would be to try and find someone working in government already who can update you on any jobs and can take your resume around to those looking to hire.

-Finally, it’s a great idea to start looking for jobs well in advance. Actually, if you’re looking for summer employment, you really should have been looking back in Dec or Jan, however, it’s never too late…so get moving!

Advice once you’re in:

-You will have to do some dirty work once you start working in the government, and by this I mean, boring and tedious tasks…sometimes reading about your department or catching up on the latest developments in the area you work in. Other times, filing documents or photocopying things for your employers.

-Do all of these tasks in an efficient manner, and ask for work when you’re done, do not wait around for your supervisor to give you something to do. Doing this shows initiative and if they have nothing more for you to work on they can possibly hand you over to someone else in your department to help them, this provides you with more exposure to others and to different work.

-Keep close contact with all those you work with and get to know them and spend as much time with them as you can. Research people who work in your department so you know who the “big wigs” are and try to rub shoulders with them any opportunity you can get. There are often small events that are held from time to time and if you receive emails for these events, ask your supervisor about them and see if you can get the chance to go and mingle, or go with your supervisor and ask them to introduce you to some people.

-Those you get close with will often be more than happy to forward you any job opportunities they hear about or provide you with references and contacts for future employment. Also, if you’re on the inside, like I said you’ll likely be given more chances to apply internally to jobs.

-All of these strategies will hopefully lead you to a higher position or one that taps into your strengths more than the entry-level ones, and at the very least, all of this exposure should provide you with a wealth of knowledge on various tasks which can promote your capabilities to those you work with, which may lead them to providing you with more difficult, demanding, rewarding and meaningful tasks.  

 Good Luck!

From the 2:30 mark, “The International Olympic Committee has the honor of announcing that the 21^st Olympic games in 2010 are awarded to the city of….(dramatic pause)….Vancouver.”

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpSqv1jx-8M]

I still remember ducking out of my hated construction labor job for 20 minutes in July of 2003; strategically hiding from my boss, taking refuge in my car which I parked out of plain view, reclining the seat and turning up the radio to hear the announcement being broadcast on a local station.  My hair stood straight up and chills ran down my spine when IOC President Jacques Rogge finally said “Vancouver.”  Unfortunately I had to go back to hating my job and life prompty after that, but they were 20 minutes I’ll never forget.  I still get those same chills even when I remember back to it now.  For seven years, I’ve been excited for Vancouver, and Canada, to host these winter Olympics.  I know I’m not the only one either.

An event like the Olympics effects not only one entire nation, but the entire world.  Anytime things of that magnitude occur, opposition naturally follows.  And that’s part of the beauty of our democratic societies; that we allow free speech, and people have the right to balk at things they believe are worth standing against.  Are there bad things that will come out of Canada hosting the games?  Surely.  The $500 million+ dollars pumped into these games could’ve been spent a lot of other ways; especially amongst a recovering economic recession.  Would we have ended homelessness in our country with that money?  Tough to say.  Were we not careful enough with the environment when constructing facilities?  Did we not represent the Indigenous people of Canada, and our other cultural origins correctly?  Did we go overboard on security in an attempt to keep terrorism and other threats to peace out of the picture?  Are there another 100 things that were not done to the liking of our 30 million residents?  Probably.  Is anyone actually making the case that we did things perfect?  Not likely.  Sometimes athletes cheat, sometimes there’s corruption in the IOC.  Sometimes they get away with it, sometimes they don’t.  Some countries get more money to train, and some have to just make due.  Personally, I don’t like the fact that our politicans and corporate sponsors ALL managed to get prime tickets to ALL the events, and the public was subject to an inane online lottery system.  Oh, and that some of those tickets cost $1000 or more.  Athletes get hurt, and probably more unfortunate than anything else, sometimes athletes are fatally injured; as in the case of Georgian Luger, Nodar Kumaritashvili.  So yeah, there’s a lot of imperfect things that the Olympics bring. 

But can we think positively for at least 2 weeks?  If anyone who watched the opening ceremonies that saw the 60,000 Canadians packed into BC Place draped in red and white, waving the Maple Leaf, and resounding in excitement, thinks that Canadians aren’t pleased as punch to be hosting these games, well they couldn’t be more wrong.  For every stick in the mud, there’s an entire tree full of green, growing branches, reaching for the sky and enjoying their time in the sun.  And that’s exactly what Canada has before it; 2+ weeks to shine in international light. 

Canadians love sport, and we love our athletes that compete for us as well.  The thing about athletics is it has the ability to transcend even the thickest cultural and international disagreements in the name of sportsmanlike competition.  If you need any proof of that, look at the nations of Iran and North Korea; absolutely scorned by the Western world as being on the brink of nuclear war with us.  But through all that justified tension, North Korea has sent a speed-skater, and Iran’s sent 2 skiers to compete in the Games; and to, if only briefly, join and be welcomed by the international community.  Even Israel and Lebanon will put aside differences to be a part of the Olympiad.  That’s powerful stuff. 

Look at Ghana, Ethiopia, Nepal, and other impoverished countries that may or may not even see a flake of snow in their countries, but come to the Games with the support of their governments and train between full-time jobs to earn spots on their national rosters to compete because they believe that the Olympics are worth the effort and sacrifice necessary to get to them.  And really, that’s exactly what the Olympics are all about in their purest form; the best amateur athletes in the world, putting aside barriers, competing cleanly, for their country, to showcase the best that their human abilities have to offer in terms of their unique sport. 

The thing is, there’s so much good to be harvested out of such a criticized event.  We ran a little flicker of a flame from Greece, around the entire planet, and through the streets and neighborhoods of nearly every city in our own country.  In Kelowna, we had a kid with cancer cut out a few days of his chemotherapy treatments so he could be a local torchbearer.  Many similarly touching stories laced our national torch relay as well. 

We’ve come together as 6 continents to show that there’s at least one thing we can all be civil and peaceful about, if only for a short time.  The world of sport blends together with art and culture to put on a show unlike any other.  Our troops fighting for our freedom overseas gather around a TV, dressed in Canada clothing and sipping Tim Hortons’ coffee to watch the proceedings of Canadian icons Rick Hansen, Nancy Green, Betty Fox, Wayne Gretzky, and others completing the Olympic opening ceremonies.  We bought pairs of red mittens, various apparel, grocery items, and pretty well anything we could get our hands on that we either knew would support Canadian athletes financially, or just emblazoned “Canada” on them to show our support. 

So, through all the things there are to protest against, there are plenty of others that Canadians are rightfully excited about.  How bananas are we going to all go when a Canadian wins our first gold medal that we’ve ever won on home soil?  Our when our hockey team(s) (hopefully) strike gold as well?  Between the Olympics and Paralympics, it’s going to be an exciting few weeks, and a historical moment for our country.  I hope you choose to enjoy them with the rest of us.  Go Canada go!

I have just finished a class about gender issues in the media. I firmly believe I have been oblivious to reality for too long, and so, have wondered if anyone else has been as well. For this reason, I have decided to share some of the knowledge I have recently learned about how the media uses images of men and women in stereotypical roles.

When it was first mentioned in class, I began thinking of the shows I watched and the movies I have enjoyed. And although cliché, I decided to analyze one of my favourite movies (please do not judge me), “Legally Blonde.”

In the movie, beautiful Elle Woods is portrayed as the typical female – she has a bubbly personality, is obsessed with shopping, make-up and shoes, and is known to be ditzy… To be clear, this is NOT my definition of a woman, but in fact, what I have learned society dictates the stereotypical woman is.

My professor discussed how today’s society continues to privilege males over females. Now, I don’t know why, but for some reason this surprised me. Perhaps it’s my many women’s studies classes or even the fact that my university is majority women, but I firmly believed that the division was becoming less and less apparent. But, supposedly, we are we are still living in a patriarchal world.

The movie tries to overcome this obstacle through having Elle attempt to break the barriers between the sexes. For instance, she starts attending a college dominated by males, Harvard Law School. Unfortunately, however, their distinction seems to do the opposite, as it appears to strengthen presupposing stereotypes and reinforce the divide between the sexes.

I further investigated other stereotypes present in the movie….and yes that required me watching parts of the movie again…..and yes I should have been studying for exams and not procrastinating….but to my defence, I was still learning! One of the most interesting lines comes from the saleswoman, who states:  “there’s nothing [she] loves better than a dumb blonde with Daddy’s plastic.” This reinforces not only that women are unintelligent but also that they are reliant on males as they hope to receive money from their fathers.

The more I watched, (and the more I procrastinated), the more I saw the presence of stereotypes. And in fact, stereotypes were present for both men and women, creating a further divide between the sexes with each one.

One of the most noteworthy examples involves shoes. For instance, when Elle is talking with Enrique, the cabana boy, he states: “don’t stomp your little last season Prada shoes at me, honey.” His knowledge of shoes, forces her to gasp and proclaim: “He’s gay!” Through this, we see that when males hold similar interests as women, their association with their sex is diminished, much like how Enrique is viewed as being unmasculine. Conversely, through observing Warner, the macho and intelligent male, we can see that the opposite can be stated. When Elle asks him what kind of shoes she’s wearing, he responds: “ummm… black ones,” reinforcing society’s expectations and thus his masculinity as well.

Through observing these facts I now wonder what other television shows and movies focus on stereotypes and highlight the distinctions between the sexes. Are there any other movies that anyone has watched that have presented similar stereotypes?

Many sitcoms are focused upon the average looking, hard-working, money-making male, with the gorgeous woman who stays home and spends all of his money. What I find unusual is that it is these shows that we have become accustomed to enjoy. I now wonder if there is any way to overcome these labels once society has etched them in our minds. For instance, do you think that if a show presents the opposite, which would be in this case, a hard-working woman, with the stay-at-home father, would the show be just as popular?

A poll last week by EKOS shows the Liberals have regained some support among voters and are now in a virtual tie with the Conservatives despite the government’s Haiti recovery efforts. Around Christmas, Harper polled around 40 percent compared to Michael Ignatieff trailing at the 23 percent mark. Ignatieff, whose nosedive in the polls reflected levels of Stephane Dion’s disastrous reign the year before, has made a comeback in vote-rich Ontario and Atlantic Canada, as well as gaining popularity with younger voters.

The poll suggests that if an election were held tomorrow, 30.9 per cent of those polled chose the Liberals and 31.5 per cent would back the Conservatives. 14.9 per cent of respondents supportedthe NDP, 11.5 per cent the Green Party and 9.1 per cent the Bloc Québécois.

The poll also highlights the mixed feelings among voters when it comes to the performance of their government. Forty-five per cent feel the government is moving in the right direction while  42 per cent believe they are moving in the wrong direction.

It seems as if Harper’s strategy to prorogue parliament until the federal budget is revealed has hurt him in the short term among voters, but as quickly as polls change, I suspect by March Harper will make a comeback as the storm dies off and parliament gets back to business.

Note to readers: if this is my last blog posting and you do not hear back from me, then Chuck Norris got me and more than likely subjected me to endless roundhouse kicks.

Dear Chuck Norris,

It has been a long time since I last wrote you. As I can recall, the last time I wrote you I was a 12 year old schoolboy who ran home everyday after classes ended to catch the daily reruns of your epic programme, Walker Texas Ranger. I’m not sure what it was; the unrealistic plot lines, the B-grade acting or the downright comedic undertones of many of the episodes, but I sure was hooked.

It was sheer magic. You, aging ever so gracefully, jumping out of helicopters and beating the hell out of mobsters, drug dealers, satanists, pedophiles, gang-bangers, bullies, assassins, and even a bear once. Now, I know recently you’ve been getting a bad rap for your ultra right-wing stance on religion and support of failed presidential candidate Mike Huckabee. Chuck, I myself come from the right (yet not the religious right) and I can respect your personal ideals and beliefs, but please stick to making movies and not embarassing yourself on CNN with rambing Bible-thumping jargon. People are starting to wonder about you old boy.

Please make at least one more Walker Texas Ranger movie before you retire. Your 2005 movie Trial of Fire was brilliant and you are still kicking butt at 70. In the movie, your wife Alex was shot at the very end, so it looked for sure like there would be a sequel, but instead your fans have been hanging off the edge of a cliff for five years wondering her fate. End your career with a bang and make a concluding Walker Texas Ranger movie, and bring back Judson Mills and that smokin’ hot Janine Turner.

Regards,

Viewsfromtheright