And still catching up...

Thoughts inspired by Michelle Obama's speech at the 2016 National Democratic Convention:

Cracking the glass ceiling takes time

There were lots of good speeches at the 2016 National Democratic Convention, but it was Michelle Obama’s speech that stayed with me. I took an important message from the First Lady’s speech that has little to do with the American Presidential election.

Obama told a story that was both personal and social.  As she talked about her history and that of Hillary Clinton’s, she was also telling the story of a nation.  She framed the nation’s story in terms of the contemporary metaphor of the glass ceiling.  When people persevere through adversity, through the “lash of bondage, the shame of servitude, the sting of segregation”, they change society for the better.  Because of the cumulative efforts of others, she, a black woman “wake(s) up every morning in a house built by slaves”, and today’s children  “now take for granted that a woman can be President of the United States”. 

Even as recently as a decade ago, not everyone assumed that a black man or a woman could become the president of the United States.  In his 2006 release “Lookin’ For a Leader”, Neil Young crooned, “Someone walks among us/ And I hope he hears the call/And maybe it’s a woman/Or a black man after all.”  Young expressed hope that a change in the status quo was not only possible but also imminent.

Changing the status quo takes time. Glass ceilings exist in all sorts of places. Unless you happen to be especially privileged or lucky, chances are that you or someone you know has bumped their head trying to break through. I do not have to think too long or hard to come up with examples from my experience.  

When we were advocating for equal access in sport for girls in our area, we frequently ran into barriers. It was tough sledding. Each successive barrier caused a bruise, but steeled our determination. One summer, we banged our heads harder than usual.

Organizers of a summer hockey camp refused to enrol our daughter simply because she was a girl; it was not a question of skill or ability. To say the least, it was frustrating, not to mention discriminatory.  But, it was also part of the process of making cracks.  Today, attitudes and practices have changed to the point that the successor school lists a female collegiate hockey player as an instructor on its website.

Changing the status quo takes honesty, decency, conviction and perseverance. It takes a united effort on the part of others. The First Lady spoke about the importance of modelling these principles for the next generation. When she shared her family’s motto, “when they go low, we go high”, she reminded me of my own up bringing.  

I can still hear my mother’s voice advising me ‘two wrongs don’t make a right’ when I wanted to get even with someone.  The high road is the best defense and the best offence against those who vainly try to stop the forward momentum of change. Some patches are not meant to hold.

Even though the purpose of Michelle Obama’s speech was to endorse Hillary Clinton, and was therefore political in nature, the First Lady’s remarks transcended the contemporary American political scene.  For me, the key message was this.  Like a nick in a windshield from a small piece of gravel, the tiniest crack has the potential to spread. So whether one is a politician or an ordinary Joe, our actions matter.  Our individual stories have a ripple effect. Together we write the story of our communities and our country.

Thoughts on the Rio 2016 Olympic Games:

I was tired of Rio 2016 even before the opening ceremonies.

There was way too much coverage of everything that was wrong and little of what was right.  The only good news story that I can recall prior to the opening ceremonies was the creation of Team Refugee, and once the Olympics began, Team Refugee virtually disappeared from view.  The “trending stories” about Rio 2016 focused on controversy, scandal, or bad news.  

John Steinbeck hit the nail on the head when he said,  “We value virtue but do not discuss it.  The honest bookkeeper, the faithful wife, the earnest scholar get little of our attention compared to the embezzler, the tramp and the cheat.”   This fits the media coverage and our taste when it came to Olympic news.

Here are a few examples of the bad news associated with the Rio 2016 Games.

Brazil spent vast amounts of money to host the games when a majority of its citizens live in poverty.  Bribery played a huge role in the awarding of contracts to construct Olympic venues.  Politicians and public servants lined their pockets. The rich got richer. 

The polluted waters of Guanabara Bay raised concerns. There were fears that athletes and visitors would contract water-borne diseases. There was less concern about the citizens who live with this reality daily.

Days before the games were set to begin, the Australians refused to stay in sub-standard, unfinished dormitories.  Accepting bribes apparently did not ensure that a good product would be delivered on time.

The state sanctioned Russian doping scandal broke.  The International Olympic Committee made a controversial decision regarding the participation of Russian athletes and passed the buck to the various sports federations. Russian officials denied and scorned the McLaren report.  Fans booed some of the Russian athletes who did get to compete.

Part way through the two-week games, Brazilian police arrested Patrick Hickey of the International Olympic Committee on allegations of illegal ticket selling.  

American swimmer Ryan Lochte, who has won twelve Olympic medals, embellished an incident, saying he was robbed while a gun was pointed at his head.  The fallout from his dissembling lasted for days.  Lochte may have apologized, but the affair demonstrated the arrogance of privilege. 

The Brazilian women’s synchronized dive team made headlines for a so called “sex scandal”.  The night before their competition, one of the divers banished her teammate from their room to clear the way for a tryst. 

It is all so human.  In every instance we see the imperfection of our common human nature. But for some reason, we expect better from those involved with running, hosting and competing in the Olympics Games.  We naively expect that the athletic excellence on display at an Olympics will automatically translate into virtuous and exemplary behavior from everyone involved.  We are disappointed and disillusioned when the flaws of humanity overshadow the lofty ideals of the Olympic movement. 

I had to look hard to find good news stories that were not focused solely on athletic performance. One story in particular caught my eye because it showed the more admirable side of human nature.  New Zealand runner Nikki Hamblin and American runner Abby D’Agostino exemplified the Olympic spirit of selflessness and sportsmanship during a 5000-meter race.  Hamblin fell, causing D’Agostino to fall and sustain an injury. The women helped each other up. Both completed the race. They received the International Fair Play Award, a prestigious honour that has only been awarded 17 times in Olympic history.

One of the goals of the Olympic movement is to put sport at the service of society.  Sometimes, the goal gets twisted. Instead of sport at the service of society, we see examples of sport at the service of self.  

We should not be surprised that the best and worst of human behaviour made an appearance at the Rio 2016 Games.  At the end of day, the Olympic games are a microcosm of human nature with its mixture of the good, the bad and the ugly.

Has York University turned back the clock on gender equality?

There has been a furor over York University's decision to grant a male student an exemption from an assignment that would have required him to work with female students. When the news broke, public reaction was swift and negative.  The incident points out the intense emotion that we bring to discussions when fundamental rights (in this case, the religious rights and the rights of women) come into conflict. Below is my recent newspaper column, also published online at Troy Media, on the topic.

Has York University turned back the clock on gender equality?

Has York University turned back the clock on gender equality?  Is the university’s decision to grant a male student an exemption from a group assignment that required him to work with female students a threat to the rights of women?   While I personally consider the student’s request offensive, I am not convinced that the level of criticism aimed at York University is entirely fair.

The background

Sometime in September, a male student who was enrolled in an on-line class requested an exemption from an on-campus group assignment on the basis that his religious beliefs prevented him from intermingling with women. The course professor, Paul Grayson, denied the request and forwarded it to the Dean and the university’s Center for Human Rights, expecting to receive a “principled statement” in support of his decision. Instead, the university instructed him to accommodate the student.  Grayson stuck to his guns, refused the exemption, and the student completed the assignment without any further fuss or bother. When the student’s request to the public’s attention in January, public opinion quickly came down against the university; there is a consensus that with this exemption the university is condoning sexism.

York's explanation

The university argues that it approved the request for an exemption not for religious reasons, but rather on the nature of an on-line course. In an interview with CBC radio’s Metro Morning, Rhonda Lenton, Provost at York University, explained the determining factor in making the decision: the course was advertised as an on-line course, and there was not an expectation that students would attend on-campus sessions. Had the course been an on-campus course, Lenton believes the university would have denied the student’s request.

A customer service problem

It seems to me that the university was trying to correct a customer service problem: the course was not delivered in the manner in which it was marketed, and the university wanted to remedy the problem.  One wonders, though, why the university did not make a straightforward refusal of the request for religious accommodation, and then deal with the requirements for an on-line course as a separate matter. Combining the two things has only confounded the issue.

The university’s explanation of its decision has had little effect, if any, on the debate which has pitted religious accommodation against women’s rights. How far should a public institution go to accommodate an individual’s religious beliefs when those beliefs conflict with a societal value?  There is no easy answer, although it seems reasonable to me that a public institution would opt to resolve this type of conflict between rights on the side of inclusivity. 

Emotions influence our reaction and opinion

The public reaction to the university’s handling of the student’s request for religious accommodation illustrates the tension that arises when fundamental rights are in competition.  It is not surprising that the university finds itself at the center of an emotionally charged controversy given the high degree of importance that Canadian society places on gender equality and that individuals place on religion. Surely, the university foresaw the public reaction, and could have handled the request differently.

While I think that the university made a misstep and ‘got it wrong’, I also think that some of the criticism leveled at York has been overblown.  Emotional rhetoric, such as evidenced in Federal Justice Minister Peter Mackay’s comment, “…we did not send soldiers to Afghanistan to protect the rights of women to only see those same rights eroded here at home”, serves no useful purpose in helping Canadian society sort out the thorny issue of religious accommodation; an issue that we can expect to encounter more frequently as Canadian society becomes more diverse.

I was initially appalled that a public university would countenance this student’s request to be excused from working with women.  And while I have modified my reaction somewhat based on the university’s explanation, I still find the request unpalatable. I shudder when anyone uses religion to marginalize women, or any group of people, for that matter, and I feel very strongly about gender equality. But, I disagree that given the reasons for this exemption, York University is eroding women’s rights in Canada and promoting sexism.

Pope Francis, Time Magazine's Person of 2013

After a mere nine months on the job, Time magazine has named Pope Francis its Person of the Year for 2013.  The editors at Time award the annual distinction to the individual whom they consider the most influential global newsmaker of the year.  What is it about Francis that makes him such a sensation?

Francis became pope at a time when all the news streaming out from the Vatican was negative. The clerical sexual abuse scandal, Vatileaks, the Vatican’s paternalistic attitude towards women religious in the United States, the refusal to discuss the ordination of women, and the endless focus on sexual morality had disheartened many faithful Catholics. While many were wondering how much longer they could remain part of the church, others had already left.

Into this milieu, a relatively unknown cardinal, José Bergoglio, burst onto the world stage and captured the hearts of Catholics and non-Catholics alike with lightning speed.  Choosing the name Francis, after the saint known for the renunciation of his wealth, his embrace of poverty and his radical commitment to the gospel, Pope Francis signaled that change was afoot. 

Initiating change

At the institutional level, Pope Francis is initiating change.  He has set up committees to address the church’s dismal record on child sex abuse and to restructure the Vatican Bank. On a pastoral level, he has called a synod to discuss the issues facing families. While there is nothing unusual about a pope calling a synod, Francis is asking ordinary Catholics for input in advance of the synod through the circulation of a questionnaire that is available online in most dioceses.

Spontaneity and humility

Since his election as pope, Francis has surprised the world with his spontaneity and humility. He is a man who eschews both the trappings and protocols of the highest clerical office in the church. He drives around the Vatican in a 1984 Renault, a gift from a priest who served the poor, instead of the papal Mercedes.  He acknowledges the institutional sinfulness of the church, as well as his personal failure to perfectly follow Christ and receives the sacrament of reconciliation bi-weekly.  He reaches out to the disadvantaged and wounded, not only caressing a man disfigured with neurofibromatosis, but also by walking among the poor at night in order to feed them.  He meets the temporal and spiritual needs of those with whom he comes into contact.

Authentic, not about photo-ops

This man, who is the subject of so many photos, is not about the photo-op. This man, whom some call “Francis, the Frugal”, and who promotes a “culture of encounter” between the church and the world, is about following Christ. Francis brings the Gospel message of hope into lives that are broken, and into a world where the news is generally negative.

An extraordinary ability to make God present

In my view, Pope Francis has an extraordinary ability to make God present to people. He reminds the world that the message of Christmas is a message for everyday: God is with us. He shows the church and the world that God is not an abstract theological concept wrapped up in dogma and doctrine, nor a far off deity unconcerned with the affairs of humans.  Francis carries the healing mission of the church into the world.

This global newsmaker is about much more than headlines, good public relations and snappy photos. He is about the compassionate mercy of God, and that attracts attention.