Sexism still reigns in Canadian politics

Despite what we may say, or what we might think, sexism is still a rampant and reprehensible problem in our Canadian political system. For a test case in point, all one needs to do is look to the Guelph by-election, where there's already been several incidents of sexism against the only female candidate, Gloria Kovach.

Even before the campaign began, Guelph blogger Jerry Prager, had this to say about Gloria back in April... "we get to look at a thumbnail campaign picture of Gloria on the cover on the Guelph Tribune every issue, in which she smiles seductively for the camera, hoping to lure unsuspecting voters into bed with the right, of which she is clearly begging to become the local pin-up. I call the picture her "Come Hither & Huck Farper" pose.", and then again said that we shouldn't, "let ourselves be seduced by the smiles of Sirens". What a sexist pig, how many sexist remarks did he manage to pack into those two sentences?

Then we have a die-hard supporter of the previous Guelph CPC candidate, who's made statements like this on the Guelph Mercury blog..."Rona and Helena do have their 'assets'". In an era where everyone agrees that we need better female representation in the House of Commons, it's statements like this that reveal the ugly and undiscussed side of politics in this country... that deep down, we're still sexist pigs when it comes to women running for higher office. He even sent the following e-mail to a Gloria supporter on the launch of the Guelph by-election... "May the best man win". And yes, his use of the word "man" was intentional.

But perhaps most telling of all, and most disturbing for that matter, is a comment I came across just today. Though the person who made the statement does have some legitimate reason to be angry, I think his statement is reflective of how far we have yet to go in terms of women in politics. Guelph blogger BlueZone today posted a comment that was overheard from the previous Guelph CPC candidate, saying that he won't be "supporting or voting for that b***h Kovach". Granted, he's likely still bitter about what happened to him, and with good reason. But beyond that, I think his comment is rather telling of where we are as a nation when it comes to women in politics. In expressing his anger, he could have chosen a host of other names or phrases to use, but instead, he resorted to the politician's "standard" derogatory sexist remark, by calling her a "female dog".

Why is that word so common in political circles when it comes to talking about women? I know it's been used of Belinda Stronach, and I cringe every time I hear it. It's disgusting, reprehensible, and ought to have no place in Canadian politics. Instead, we ought to be treating women honourably, with the respect that they deserve, and judging their candidacy not on their gender, but solely on their qualifications and experience.

I'll actually give credit to Mr. Dion for his statement in the House of Commons, "We need more women in Parliament". I couldn't agree more!

(Of course, he could have taken his own advice in Guelph, where Marva Wisdom, an experienced and well qualified black woman sought, and eventually lost, the Liberal nomination. Marva was later quoted in the National Post, and 'said her nomination experience had taught her how much work needs to be done in terms of "opening up the party and moving away from the old boys' club."')

One thing I keep hearing is people who attack Mr. Harper for not having enough women in his caucus, or in his Cabinet. Well, the people of Guelph have a unique opportunity this coming September. Guelph can either send another man to the House, or they can choose to send Mr. Harper a well qualified woman, who even has the experience needed for consideration for Cabinet.

So Guelph, what's it going to be? A continuation of the rampant political sexism, or a concerted effort to change the male dominated status quo?

I'll be interested in watching their verdict come September.