Tories shutting down Status of Women offices

[Curiosity]

BitWhys


Quote:
Originally Posted by Curiosity
Good - stop separating the genders in advancement of all concerns.

Women do wonderfully in volunteerism as well as making things happen - and work best in community effort where they can act on a one-to-one basis, seeing the results of their labor...


Perhaps I should clarify my intent. Women who work in regional volunteerism do best when it is located within their own community to easily see the results of their work - rather than sending off fund raised checks to a distant entity who oversees the spending, keeping a more than adequate amount back to put into their coffers.

I was trying to point out that women working together even without pay are earnest in their dedication but do better when the results are best seen in their communities.

The same holds true for women in the workplace - that they are doing the same work as their male counterparts and are being paid the same amount - the variant being the time on the job perhaps. Fewer women have long term employment than their male counterparts.

I cannot understand why a bureaucracy - an expensive one at that - would be funded for a group to put out reports or god help us "oversee women's rights" in the workplace - when women are completely capable of doing that themselves as individuals especially when the laws of the nation are behind them.

I hope your day gets better....:wave:

 

[Jay]

ok

that's three for "women in their place" and one for "bourgois complacency".

anyone else?

There it is right there. I've been waiting for it. The artificial alliance of libertarian economics and reactionary fundamentalist christianity that expects the heavy lifting when it comes to dealing with social inequities to be carried by individuals on a voluntary basis; pining for the return of the feudal welfare system, such as it was.

You forgot your own vote for communism.

 

[Sassylassie]

Good post Curio, and very accurate. The only females that will be upset about this issue are those with an agenda, yep the same women who have been feeding out of the slop bucket will wail and moan. I find it offensive to give millions to an organization devoted to my status as a "Women". I don't need nor what their voice speaking for me, I'm quite capable of speaking for myself on "Womens" issue. There are already many social saftey nets to protect my rights as a female, starting with the Canadian Charter, the Labour Relations Board, Human Rights Commission how more organizations do females need to protect their status? In my opinion none. It's time for society to stop forcing the govenment to do what tradionally we as a society took care. If a neighbour's house burns down and they don't have insurance we as a community in Cowville join hands and organize to rebuild said home. Many Canadians have become addicted to the Feds solving their problems instead asking their community for help. I miss the good old days when the Feds ran the country and society ran their own lives with out all the handouts and interferance from Big Daddy.

 

[Curiosity]

Claire's Dad....

It's a bit of a case of "straw man salad"....

 

[BitWhys]

You forgot your own vote for communism.

wrong again

well defined Socialism

 

[Toro]

Its called CANSIM. I try to rely on primary sources.

Geography=Canada
Earnings=Female-to-male earnings ratio (percent)
Work activity2=All earners
2000 61.7
2001 62.1
2002 62.8
200362.9
200463.5A
Source: Statistics Canada

notice a trend?

anyone else care to nitpick?

Yes, the trend is rising.

But maybe Canada should emulate the US, which has no silly Status of Babes department.

 

[TenPenny]

Typically, these Status of Whatever offices and the like have a great staff of people with qualifications like a Masters in Random Social Policy Analysis; they'll have an Executive Director, 4 or 5 Assistants, lots of staff, lots of clerical workers.

They will generate reams upon reams of paper, will write position papers, and white papers, and policy analysis, as well as great commentaries on their issues.

Do they actually accomplish anything? Other than generating lots of paperwork, and leasing office space, no, not really. It would be no great loss to lose a whole lot of this foolishness.

 

[Toro]

There's little doubt in my mind the imbalance in economic independence this represents will be willingly attributed to women being in their place by some if not many. Not I.

Adjust it for work experience and its higher.

Many, many more women take time off to have kids. Thus, you'd expect women's wages to be lower.

 

[BitWhys]

Adjust it for work experience and its higher.

Many, many more women take time off to have kids. Thus, you'd expect women's wages to be lower.

ok. there's at least one more for "in their place"

Geography=Canada
Earnings=Female-to-male earnings ratio (percent)
Work activity2=Full-year full-time workers
1994 68.5
1995 72.4
1996 72.3
1997 68.3
1998 71.9
1999 68.4
2000 70.6
2001 69.9
2002 70.2
2003 70.2
2004 69.9B
Source: Statistics Canada

 

[BitWhys]

http://www.swc-cfc.gc.ca/funding/wp/wpguide_e.html#whatfund

The Women's Program provides funding and technical assistance for projects that have a direct impact on women in their communities. To be eligible for funding, applicants must demonstrate how their projects contribute to the achievement of the full participation of women in the economic, social and cultural life of Canada. Priority will be given to projects addressing issues pertaining to the following:

Aboriginal women
Immigrant women and visible minority women
Senior women

The following are examples of issues that may be addressed through Women's Program funded projects:
Entrepreneurship (self-employment, small business, micro-credit businesses, women's representation in corporate, trade and other boards, etc.)

Increasing the representation of women in key or non-traditional professions
Supporting the economic security of senior women
Violence, such as elder or domestic abuse, human trafficking, etc.

Its hilarious so many people think it will be more effective to air drop these sorts of initiatives from Ottawa.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Aggregate statistics like those really don't say very much that's useful. In every place I've ever worked, men and women were paid the same for doing the same job, the stats reflect the fact that women tend to cluster in the lower paying jobs. Go into any office anywhere and you'll find that by far the majority of the clerical, administrative, and secretarial jobs are held by women, and the higher up the organizational structure you go, the more men come to dominate. Why that's so I don't know, though I've seen a lot of specious attempts to explain it. It's not on the face of it a justification for claiming discrimination against women, though a lot of people have tried. It's a truism that when you're hiring, you can choose only from the pool of people who come forward, so there's a certain amount of self-selection going on. One of the deeper questions obviously has to be, why do women make those choices? I don't know the answer to that either, but it's certainly one of the things an outfit like Status of Women Canada should have been researching.

 

[#juan]

One thing about statistics is that you can make them say anything. Your statistics BitWhys, don't tell us anything. What were the stats based on?. Who did they include? Are these stats just an indicator that the high earning professions are still populated mainly by men. Women are allowed in any profession but they are still a minority in some. This is not unfair wages, but merely the yet unequal distribution of women in the professions.

 

[BitWhys]

...This is not unfair wages, but merely the yet unequal distribution of women in the professions.

...

duh

 

[#juan]

...

duh

Marvelous intellectual contribution there. Seriously, you have yet to make your case with anything but bare numbers that mean nothing.

 

[BitWhys]

...Seriously, you have yet to make your case with anything but bare numbers that mean nothing.

Why should I bother when I know the naysayers will, at least on a superficial level, make it for me?

and thanks for that. unequal distribution's a good place to start.

 

[#juan]

Why should I bother when I know the naysayers will, at least on a superficial level, make it for me?

and thanks for that. unequal distribution's a good place to start.

Nonsense. The unequal distribution is by choice. Women are allowed in every profession just as the men are. We haven't kept women barefoot and pregnant for some years now.

 

[BitWhys]

...The unequal distribution is by choice...

do tell

 

[CDNBear]

This is rather a silly arguement, somewhere between your two positions is the truth.

These Status of Women offices were a waste of money, period.

Is there an office for the Status of Men somewhere. Maybe I can get a grant I could use to promote men instead of women, even though ALL the women welders I have seen, including the one I have on staff now, have always been better welders then most men.

So with the inane logic of these Staus offices, it is my contention that woman will take over the welding work force if I do not do something quick to make it easier for men to do.

 

[Jay]

http://www.proudtobecanadian.ca/ind...oan_closure_of_12_12_status_of_women_offices/

Twelve out of sixteen! Wait: there were 16 Status of Women’s offices in Canada! I’m aghast. How did women get as far as they did with this paltry amount of benevolent government aid? We all know women, like Indians, can’t make it on their own—am I right, liberals? So this is troubling. Sixteen isn’t even as many as the number of provinces and territories and “nations” in this country. I’ll bet the offices were all located in the urban centers too. How did the women in Red Deer (no offence—I was talking about the town, not about lovely chicks dears in red!) make out? Why I’ll bet they’re oppressed, “as we speak”.


Canada’s state-run politically-correct liberal media reports it including these sage words from an expert—a woman!:

Liberal MP Maria Minna called the move “reprehensible.”​

“Canadian women are still only earning 71 cents to every dollar earned by their male counterparts, more and more women are living in poverty, and we are still waiting for the government to create child-care spaces,” she said.​

“With the closure of these regional offices, the government is taking away one of the very few remaining resources for women.”​

Minna said the closures are a clear sign that Stephen Harper’s Conservatives plan to completely dismantle Status of Women Canada.​

She says it like it’s a bad thing.


​

But I’ll tell you what, here’s my deal for you liberals: When you Liberal Party liberals hold your leadership convention this weekend and artificially lift up your dead-last last place contender (a successful woman lawyer named Martha Hall Findlay) into the position of leader of the party, using some o’ that famous liberal-left “equality” and pro-active “affirmative action” and all your training in and advocacy of “diversity” and “inclusion” and “empowerment”, so that she can then potentially join at the helm of this country the person who was appointed to be Canada’s supreme leader of all the land, Governor-General Michaëlle Jean, then I’ll press for the closure of the other four remaining offices and the complete dismantling of the “Status of Women” division of your Liberal Party. Then also some of the other offices of official state reliance and oppression you created. That office space could be better used as “conservatives and their ideas aren’t actually all that bad” debriefing centers.

:laughing7:

 

[Colpy]

NAC-SOW has been a joke for a very long time. Personally, I think they should have cut ALL their funding.

As for women making more than men................

My wife has a high school education. I have two university degrees. She makes 70% MORE than I do, and always has. Damn, I should have a gov't support group! (Party my choice, I love my work!)

My office employs about 30 men, and 4 women. One of the women works on the street with us, so makes exactly the same money. Two others are in supervisory positions in the office (safe, warm day work) and make considerably more than the boys. The fourth is a part-time office worker, and poorly paid.

University student populations are now almost 70% women. Where IS the outrage?

Even 20 years ago (when I went to university), a huge number of scholarships were available ONLY to women. Where IS the outrage?

The wage gap is simple.

More women work part-time, at low paying jobs as they are usually the primary care giver for children. SO WHAT?

There are, after all, lies, damned lies, and statistics.