Parliament is still Mad Men territory for women

(The following op ed was published in the Globe and Mail‘s online edition yesterday to help launch #respectHER, a joint campaign of Equal Voice and Informed Opinions.)

At least some of the audience’s weeping was laughter-induced. But it was hard to tell how much.

When she was first elected, Vancouver Magazine called Darlene Marzari, “the first civic politician hereabouts to make a full-time career out of trying to do things right rather than just getting them done.”

At the front of the conference room, former B.C. cabinet minister, Darlene Marzari was wearing a red business dress she had regularly sported during her time in office. Astonishingly, she had climbed into the dress AFTER donning her teenage son’s hockey pads. Zipping up the garment without effort, and reinforcing her point with too many disturbing anecdotes to recount, she explained that the weight she had packed on as a politician was necessary armor that allowed her to survive the legislative chamber as a woman.

Ms. Marzari’s illuminating skit – at once wildly hilarious and deeply depressing – took place almost 20 years ago. But the hostility she endured is unpromisingly contemporary. And it’s costing us all.

In the past year alone, Conservative MP Michelle Rempel was labelled a prostitute for perching on her parliamentary desk; Liberal MP Chrystia Freeland was heckled into silence for having a “little girl” voice; and NDP MP Megan Leslie called out the appearance comments and physical touching that she and her female colleagues still frequently experience in their place of work. (Yes, it’s 2014 everywhere else, but pockets of Parliament Hill appear to be stuck back in 1963.)

To be sure, many male MPs are equally appalled by such bad behaviour, and political life has always required a thick skin. But it remains Mad Men territory for women. And at a time of increasingly complex social, economic and environmental challenges, this is bad news for democracy.

Other sectors are bending over backward to increase their appeal to the best, brightest and most diverse work force possible. Banks, law firms and universities are responding to a raft of research documenting the competitive edge accorded organizations that incorporate skilled women. They recognize the importance of creating workplace atmospheres that will attract top female talent.

But in an age of anonymous online trolls and twitter-amplified personal attacks, entering a political world that remains elbows-up and tolerant of troglodytes is becoming even less attractive to anyone – female OR male – who is more driven by a desire to do good than fight dirty.

And it’s not like the disrepute of politics isn’t deterrent enough. Indefensible patronage, unaccountable spending, inexcusable election practices – they’ve all taken a toll.

It’s time to aim higher.

That’s why Equal Voice and Informed Opinions saluted The Hill Times last week. The Ottawa weekly paper responded to calls requesting that it abandon its annual tradition of polling MPs on the “sexiest” elected officials of the year. This is a small but symbolic act, worth emulating and expanding. And its timing coincides with our joint #respecther campaign – a bid to mobilize Canadians, who overwhelmingly support gender equality and expect genuine democratic debate from their representatives. We’re encouraging all politicians, partisan staff and journalists to embrace the spirit of the newspaper’s decision and promote a culture of respect.

Dissing women for failing to conform to outmoded stereotypes of how a mother or a “lady” is expected to behave is juvenile schoolyard chatter, not political discourse. And those who engage in below-the-belt insults designed to denigrate a rival on the basis of his or her appearance or sexuality isn’t worthy of the label “public servant.”

It’s beyond time to abandon personal attacks and sexist slurs, and to focus energy instead on ideas and policies. Exit interviews conducted with retiring MPs and catalogued in the recently published book by Samara co-founders Alison Loat and Michael McMillan make clear the damage being done. The title alone – Tragedy in the Commons – speaks volumes.

Politicians and their supporters need to aim higher. And citizens? We need to reward them for doing so at the ballot box.

“Get me rewrite!” – a truly inclusive O Canada

The positive responses to our video campaign in pursuit of a more inclusive O Canada are still outpacing the cranky ignorant ones, and among the most inspiring was an email I received from Toronto poet and physician, Ron Charach. He turned his attention to not only eliminating the sexism of our anthem’s lyrics, but also paying tribute to Canada’s first peoples and immigrants.

I think the merits of his rewrite are worth considering:

“O Canada, our home on sacred land,
True patriot love, in all of us command,
With glowing hearts we see thee rise
The true north strong and free,
From far and wide thy children come
To stand on guard for thee!
Come, build a land,
Glorious and free,
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee,
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee!”

In the meantime, a version of the op ed that the Montreal Gazette commissioned from me last week has now been published by papers in Vancouver and Saskatoon, and the video we posted a week ago is continuing to attract viewers.

Appreciating that the current government isn’t likely to revisit this issue, having rescinded its promise in the 2010 throne speech to do so within 24 hours of making it, we still think the debate is an important one. And it helps to build a broad vocal constituency for such a change in advance of political action, rather than cave to the close-minded minority afterwards.

Women’s voices — on women’s issues — missing in action

The infographic below is depressingly self-explanatory — on one level. It makes clear how entrenched the gender skew is when it comes to who gets quoted in North American media. And — as MediaWatch discovered 20 years ago when we conducted a comprehensive analysis of newsmakers (those quoted or reported on) in Canadian dailies — women’s voices are chronically under-represented as experts.

Some of the reasons for this are predictable — then and now: as long as male politicians and CEOs outnumber women, their voices will likely dominate on many issues. BUT how is it that even on issues that disproportionately affect women, such as abortion, birth control and women’s rights, the overwhelming majority of those whose opinions are quoted are male?

As Liz Sheehy, law professor at the University of Ottawa and a member of Informed Opinions’ advisory committee said in an email to me this morning, “More proof of the need for this important work!”