What difference do women’s voices make?

You know that old saying, “If you’re the smartest person in the room, you’re probably in the wrong room”? I looked up its origins today, and couldn’t find an attribution (which, as Virginia Woolf pointed out years ago, likely means the observation was first articulated by a woman!)

Although I’m pretty clear about the value of my skill set, in the work I do with Informed Opinions, I am NEVER the smartest person in the room. And that’s a source of enormous satisfaction for me. Because it means I’m getting to play a small role in exposing the world to the talents and insights of women whose comprehensive familiarity with vast arenas of knowledge can benefit us all.

The Right Honourable Kim Campbell, Canada’s first and, regrettably, only female Prime Minster, has been advocating for the increased representation of women for decades.

That’s why no arm-twisting was necessary to get her to agree to become one of the project’s honorary patrons. And on Friday of this week, she’ll be sitting down with me for an armchair discussion on the difference women’s voices make at a public event co-hosted by SFU and UBC in Vancouver. She’ll expand on her advocacy efforts to increase women’s participation in politics and talk about her own experiences with the media.

Having heard Ms. Campbell speak many times, I suspect she often IS the smartest person in the room. But her insights are invariably delivered with the kind of grace, humour and respect that reduce the intimidation factor. She’s entertaining and inspirational company.

In the meantime, Informed Opinions continues to precipitate and/or support the dissemination of hundreds of expert commentaries on diverse issues of critical importance not just to women, but to Canada as a whole. Each participant’s approach to engaging with media differs, depending on her field and circumstances.

You’ll apply the training when it makes most sense for you…

Joanne Cave, a Rhodes Scholar studying social policy at Oxford University, is a case in point. She says,

“After I attended the Informed Opinions workshop, the ideas and tools shared took a year to percolate. But in August my first op-ed was published in four newspapers across Canada, generating interest from politicians, non-profits and community members. I never imagined that commentary writing would be a way to make my voice matter, and I’m so grateful.”

In fact, six weeks after her first piece on the funding environment for charities was published, she submitted a second one on dementia policy and informal caregiving, the focus of her research. It also got picked up.

Where’s the line between professional discretion and a responsibility to advocate?

Three years ago, a significantly pregnant Martha Paynter organized and attended an Informed Opinions workshop in Halifax, recruiting more than a dozen other smart, educated, articulate activists and professors to invest a day and some professional development dollars into expanding their advocacy tool kits. Her employment context is very different from Joanne’s and as a result, she says, “I’ve struggled to balance professional discretion with my responsibility to advocate for health and reproductive justice. I both work for the Nova Scotia Department of Health and Wellness, and am an activist for equitable health access.”

How does she decide when it’s okay to speak up?

“I’m comfortable and feel safe commenting on the actions of other provincial governments and the federal government. Two recent examples included the New Brunswick government’s refusal to repeal a section of the Medical Act, which restricts public funding of abortion (limiting it to procedures authorized by two physicians and performed by an OBGYN, in hospital); and the federal government’s unwillingness to support refugee health care.”

Martha has also used her networks and the Informed Opinions training to encourage other friends and colleagues to take up media opportunities on which she’s unable to comment publicly, such as changes to Nova Scotia Public Health perinatal services.

“Since attending a workshop in 2011, I have become attuned to the exclusion of women’s voices in the media, and conscious of how infrequently I participate – and in particular, write – despite my ceaseless opining in my own head. I do hope to improve on this!”

Canada’s anthem back in the hot seat

Jian Ghomeshi calls it common sense. But will the government listen?

Last week, some of Canada’s most notable women (including Informed Opinions Honorary Patrons, Senator Nancy Ruth and the Rt. Hon. Kim Campbell) launched a formidable campaign advocating that gender-neutral lyrics be restored to Canada’s national anthem. Since then, all sorts of media heavyweights — including the host of CBC’s Q — have championed the cause. And no wonder.

Restore Our Anthem uses a powerful two-minute video to remind Canadians that the original lyrics to O Canada didn’t exclude women, and there’s no reason the ones we sing in 2013 should either. The site includes a comprehensive list of FAQs and timeline of the anthem’s history, and brilliantly showcases the absurdity of hanging on to the outdated words. It even features a user-friendly politician-locator that makes it easy for supporters to write to their elected representatives.

The call for restoring our anthem likely sounds familiar. In July, Informed Opinions launched its own campaign demanding the same change be made to O Canada’s lyrics. Our short, emotionally charged video and accompanying written pieces received overwhelmingly positive support from women and men across the country. But we’re still waiting.

As the momentum behind Restore Our Anthem continues to build, we hope the small change necessary to re-establish a gender inclusive national anthem will follow. Let’s commemorate the 100th anniversary of the initial revisions to O Canada with another change — one that reflects our country’s reality.

To learn more about the campaign, or to add your voice to the growing chorus of Canadians demanding equality, click here.

Media exposure creates ripples of influence

There’s no predicting what impact your media intervention might have, but here are a couple of recent examples of the ripples created by published op eds…

******

Two days after Kathleen Wynn was elected leader of the Ontario Liberal party, becoming the sixth female premier in the country, The Globe and Mail published a thoughtful commentary by former Prime Minister Kim Campbell.

Her uniquely informed perspective about women’s political leadership referenced the great work of Equal Voice, a multi-partisan organization dedicated to electing more women in Canada. This profile helped to reinforce Equal Voice’s position as the go-to source on the issue, and gave Executive Director Nancy Peckford broadcast exposure on two CBC Radio programs later the same week.

******

My own recent op ed in The Globe about the regrettable use of sexist stereotypes in ad campaigns (the ignorance and ineffectiveness of which was illustrated by the Canadian Wheat Board in February) didn’t generate any broadcast requests. But a week or so after it was published, Sarah Barker at the Canadian Women’s Foundation told me that more than a dozen people in her network had emailed her the link asking,

“Do you know this woman? You should be working with her!”

(We’d already found each other, but it was nice for both of us to have the value of our collaboration re-affirmed!)