According to its mandate, the Body Confidence Canada Awards (BCCA) “advocate for equitable and inclusive images, messages, practices and policies supporting body diversity.” It’s pretty hard to argue with that mandate, unless you’re a jerk. And if the past few weeks are any indication, there a lot of jerks out there. On October 27, BCCA issued a statement of concern in regards to the TTC and National Ballet of Canada’s joint campaign “We Move You.” The campaign is meant to highlight a partnership between Toronto’s transit infrastructure and cultural organization. Campaign videos and posters showing ballet dancers on the TTC are displayed in transit stations and vehicles.

Media outlets have since cherry picked which parts of the statement to share. So, let’s break it down.

“In regards to the TTC and National Ballet of Canada joint campaign we have concerns about the body size, shape, and weight diversity, or should we say lack thereof, that this campaign unknowingly communicates. The body type of most ballet dancers do not adequately represent those of most Canadians and dare we say most TTC users.”

The argument here is, “Well they are dancers and train all day.” This is true, and yes, dancers work hard at what they do and it requires discipline a lot of us don’t have. In cases like that of former National Ballet of Canada company dancer Kathleen Rea these bodies are also suffering from eating disorders. In a Huffington Post article titled “How My National Ballet Career Led to Bulimia,” Rea writes about her experiences: “My required performance weight was 105 pounds, and at 5’6″ that was bone thin. My ballet mistress told me that I needed to be thinner than the other girls because of my ‘larger’ breasts (my cup size was B!)” Rea starved herself, and then began purging; she even considered cutting the fat from her thigh with a knife. After finding an eating disorder therapist she told the company she was in recovery. They told her she was “far too fat to appear on stage” and that she had “embarrassed the nation of Canada on the international stage.”

“While we completely agree with the intent of message: one of acknowledging and celebrating Toronto arts and culture, we believe initiatives like these, executed in this manner, continue to perpetuate unrealistic and highly regimented bodies as some sort of an ideal of ‘beauty’ and ironically more specific to this ad they become signifiers of some sort of higher ‘art’ and ‘culture.’ It is also well documented that ballet as both an art form and as a sport is not inclusive to differently shaped or weighted bodies traditionally. While we know some alternative ballet exists that feature differently sized bodies for instance, it does not receive the prominent attention nor the distinct ranking that institutions such as National Ballet of Canada would enjoy.

Our critique is not a dislike of ballet. We want to make that crystal clear. We have attended ballets and quite enjoyed them—though we did leave lingering to see more progressive shifts in body diversity. Our critique is a challenge to you to reflect on what version of “enhanced beauty and movement” is being privileged in this ad for public consumption by the public TTC. And what about those who will never embody this mould? Are they equally moving, beautiful symbols of Toronto’s thriving cultural fabric?

Many TTC users in their daily movements who identify as fat, racialized, disabled, elderly, and pregnant have experienced varying forms of body-based discrimination, sexual harassment, fat and body-shaming, or simply rude treatment where they are not given seats even in designated priority areas based on their mobility needs.

We do not believe this campaign reflects how users of the TTC “move” regularly. We have had many pleasant experiences on the TTC and in our city travels but sadly the negative experiences can have lasting consequences. ”

If thin, white, Eurocentric bodies were not the only ones we already see plastered everywhere on the sides of buses, magazine covers, and billboards, this initiative wouldn’t need to be called out. BCCA isn’t saying the bodies in this campaign are wrong or do not deserve to exist, as implied in this Toronto Star article. Instead, they are suggesting it would be great to see other bodies represented as well.

Jill Andrew, BCCA Co-Founder is not making this stuff up for fun. Maybe she wants to change the culture where it is socially acceptable for someone to call her a “fucking fat black bitch.” A horrible thing to say, right? Not the norm, right? I would love to think that too, but these words are continuing to be thrown her way as a response to the articulate, hospitable released based in valid concerns, experiences, and research.

Additionally, BCCA is not simply ‘complaining’ without offering suggestions to accommodate everyone:

“An ad like this could have been made more inclusive with the addition of non-professional or professional children and adult dancers of differing sizes, shapes, ages and abilities dancing with the National Ballet dancers in the video. THEN we would be seeing MORE of Toronto’s superb beauty, art and culture in motion in collaboration with National Ballet’s principal dancers.

At the end of the day if you want us—TTC users—to be ‘moved’ by a campaign like this while we are ‘on the move’ we MUST SEE OURSELVES.”

The backlash Andrew and the BCCA organization has received is appalling. In response to the suggestion that other bodies should be represented as well as the thin Eurocentric ones has been met with fat shaming and hate; in other words, BCCA’s message has been met with the reason their fight is so important.

As Zuker says, “Rape in the case of Maya Angelou is used to reflect the suffering of her race and to Maya Angelou a bird struggling to escape its cage trying to understand and respect both her body and her words.” Many of us like to think this title is also a nod to Gray’s tattoo, which she got last September after the rape. Zuker said he cannot accept Ururyar’s evidence and that the defence’s version of events—painting Ururyar as a clean cut nice guy whose cold would have made him too weak to rape—did not happen.

Not only did the judge—an old, white man, in a place of authority—use the term “rape,” a word that is dismissed in so many spaces for being too threatening, he called Gray’s experience a nightmare. The judge used terms that are so often dismissed as feminist jargon. He discredited rape myths surrounding what constitutes a “good” and “credible” rape victim, as well as saying there is no time limit on pain—a comment made in response to the defence’s argument that it took Gray too long to report the assault. (In fact, she went to the hospital to be tested 48 hours after the rape, and then reported it another 24 hours after that.)

“No other crime is looked upon with the degree of blameworthiness, suspicion, and doubt as a rape victim,” said Zuker. “Victim blaming is unfortunately common and is one of the most significant barriers to justice and offender accountability.”

After the verdict was read, supporters and reporters, gathered outside of the courtroom. Celebratory feelings were abundant and palpable. Gray did not attend court that day, but she did release a media statement 15 minutes before the 10 a.m. decision was read.  “I am tired of people talking to me like I won some sort of rape lottery because the legal system did what it is supposed to do,” she said in her statement. Gray acknowledges that both the judge and crown did their jobs well, but rightly adds: “However, I will not congratulate the legal system, or the various courtroom actors for doing what they are supposed to do.”

Gray knows that her intersecting privileges are significant factors—she is a white, heterosexual woman in her late 20s with an in-depth knowledge of the legal system and a graduate level education. “But what can be drawn from my experience is that if I am drowning in these systems, what does that mean for those who are not university-educated, white women who are sexually assaulted?”

In court the defence lawyer acted both appallingly and wrongly. Lisa Bristow ignored Canada’s rape shield law when asking Gray questions directly pertaining to her sexual history. Bristow also read Gray’s phone number out loud in court and compared sex with Gray to sex with a dead fish. I feel sick when remembering Bristow tell Gray, “You were satisfied that you got the hot sex that you wanted.”

In her statement, Gray spoke about how the court process dehumanized her and, as she has said from the start, no matter the verdict, she would not be un-raped.

“My experience has demonstrated that Toronto Police Services do not care about sexual assault. It has been thirty years since Jane Doe first challenged the TPS for their discriminatory treatment of sexual assault complainants. The TPS have had enough time to ‘reform’, ‘diversify’ and ‘train’ but it simply does not work. It is time to imagine alternatives outside of the institution of policing for sexual assault. TPS make it clear that they do not care about sexual assault, so why continue the public façade that they take issues of sexualized and gender based violence seriously?”

Ururyar was found guilty that early afternoon. As Zuker said, “Rape it surely was.” Ururyar was released on bail until Monday July 25 when it was revoked. Gray released a public statement via Facebook sharing her thoughts on the revocation and Ururyar’s application to appeal the verdict. She explains that for over a year she has not been able to feel safe and receives daily messages telling her that she deserves to be raped again, and even die. The same day as the verdict Gray received an anonymous Facebook message calling her a misbehaving whore for having tattoos, drinking, and having sex before marriage. The writer said she deserves to be raped. Messages like these are a sobering reality that there is still a lot of work to be done.

“This is an individual with no remorse for the pain he has caused me, or the others around him. No verdict or sentence will ever reverse the pain imposed upon me by this person. With that being said, jail is not capable of curing his hatred of women,” Gray wrote. “The only reason I am somewhat relieved he is in custody is that because at least I know his likelihood of sexually assaulting another individual is substantially reduced. I don’t think it is a solution. I will never feel joy or happiness about being responsible for putting someone in jail. This is an individual with no remorse for the pain he has caused me, or the others around him. No verdict or sentence will ever reverse the pain imposed upon me by this person. With that being said, jail is not capable of curing his hatred of women.”

Gray’s work is still not done: she is currently bringing forward an Ontario Human Rights Complaint against the university and has switched her Ph.D. focus from women in prison to sexual assault.

Initially, Zuker revoked Ururyar’s bail ahead of sentencing on September 14. However on Wednesday August 3 Ontario Superior Court Justice Michael Quigley overturned the decision and Ururyar has since been released on bail.

Since the verdict Men’s Rights Activist (MRA) groups have criticized the decision, targeting Gray, and she has also been the subject of hateful YouTube videos, as well as a pro-Ururyar documentary. Her article published in NOW Magazine received so many hateful comments that the thread had to be shut down.

The Ghomeshi trial sparked a media circus. People mused on air, in print, on social media, and in coffee shops about where the blame should lay, if at all: institutional failures, failed morals, bad choices. Law degrees were replaced by snappy headlines and witty social media memes. While it’s since settled down, the verdict against Gray’s assaulter has initiated another circus. There are angry, misogynists who—no matter what a judge decides—will fight hard against women who have experienced violence. In the case of Ghomeshi, these groups preached the respect for the judge’s decision. In Ururyar’s case, it’s the opposite: we are told the judge is wrong, and I’ve heard many anti-Semitic slurs. These responses are hateful and scary, but they are not unexpected.

The people who may prove to shake the foundations of those whose lives have been affected by sexual violence are those who we see as friends, family, and peers. These are the people we seek comfort from, or whom we at least feel safe with.

Gender-based violence may seem like something that’s too scary to think about happening frequently, or it can appear like it is something that only happens to other people—bad people—on the news. It may seem like an issue that is safe to theorize about with anyone. However, for some of us these issues are part of our lives, lives that are policed by the threat of this violence. Some of us only have the privilege to say why we think these things happen because we can be pretty sure it won’t happen to us. Meanwhile, while he say whatever comes to mind without much thought, we may be telling someone we love what we think about the violence that happened to them. We may ask why some of the women in the Ghomeshi case kept in touch with the man, and unwittingly be telling our sister that she deserved what happened to her. We may say Gray made a bad choice to go to Ururyar’s apartment, and unknowingly be telling our daughter that she could have prevented her own rape, if only she were smarter.

For some of us the Ghomeshi verdict sparked water cooler conversation. For some of us the Ghomeshi verdicts lead to tears and being scared to leave our homes. It lead to women calling each other all day checking in asking if they were OK; it lead to cancelled plans, and missed work. It is progress seeing mainstream media report on these cases and it can be empowering seeing social movements tackling this issue. However, these events do not mean those of us safe from violence have full license to share whatever theory of the day they believe in—potentially at the cost of another’s well being.

Here’s our special This Magazine “Gender Block” take on all that fun advice:

No Selfies
Girls take up way too much space with their selfies. After all, this is space that could be used for yet another hilarious drawing of a dick. A clear headshot is OK, but selfies show a lack of self-confidence, but also narcissism (oohhhkay). So, whatever you do, make sure to show your confidence by listening to what guys, like Joseph, have to say: “It’s especially annoying when it’s the first photo. You have one photo to get my attention, and you failed.” Don’t be the girl to fail Joseph. (Yes, Joseph is real.) (Sadly.)

Use your Profile to Tell a Story
Most guys find this part of a Tinder profile underutilized. Why are women so worried to write about themselves? All they have to do is make sure they come off entirely perfect for the Leslies of the world who remind us, “It’s like a resume.” Like a resume for the potential love of a guy who is kind enough to dissect every part of your being. Remember, absolutely do not use a Marilyn Monroe quote—that comes off too aggressive. If you do this you will be failing Vincent, 30, like you already did Joseph with that selfie you took. You know, the one when you were digging how you looked but somehow also showcasing your lack of self-esteem.

Send the First Message
Adam doesn’t want to think of something witty to say; it’s hard. So do it for him. And for the love of God, don’t lose Vincent’s momentum by not responding quickly enough. Nothing else is as important as scoring a date with Vincent.

But, also, remember, don’t get too excited about scoring a date with Vincent …

I mean, that’s desperate.

Don’t Plan an Elaborate First Date
Men don’t want to feel pressured. Pressure is on you, lady.

Take a Tinder Break if the Date Goes Well
While he is using Tinder after your date, he doesn’t want to see you doing the same—stay classy, ladies.

All of this sounds like so much fun! Let the love games begin! Where do we sign up?!

Author of The Gaslight Effect Dr. Robin Stern says gaslighting happens in stages. These stages can overlap and repeat. The first stage, says Stern, is “disbelief.” Gregory is the typical abuser. He is likeable and his paternalistic attitude towards his new bride is not yet taken as the patriarchal bullshit that it really is, and is instead seen as charming. When he slaps her face and acts short, it is easy for Paula to shake off this behaviour as abnormal and out of character. She does not right away identify his abusive nature. While Gregory is a good abuser, Paula is his ideal victim. Paula was separated from her mother as a child and raised by her aunt, who was murdered. She is vulnerable and keen to find a nurturing figure that will stay in her life. Gregory takes advantage of her childhood and its consequent insecurities. Stage two is “defense.” Throughout the movie Gregory tells Paula how forgetful she is often enough that she believes it. He even convinces her that she is sick. Additionally he does things like hiding certain items and then telling her that she lost them. She later finds them and is understandably confused. “Suddenly,” she says, “I’m beginning not to trust my memory at all.”

When Paula begins to suspect Gregory, he tells her she is going crazy. This happens in a lot in cases of abuse. Instead of owning up to their wrongdoings, abusers flip the accountability onto their victim. “If you don’t want that guy to look at you, why did you smile back?”, “You’re just angry with me because you are overly sensitive.” Additionally, since abusers tend to be so likeable, others, such as friends and family, may also question the victim: “Are you sure he really acted like that? Maybe you are overreacting, it doesn’t sound like him.” Paula inevitably becomes depressed, which is stage three. Thankfully it’s a movie so a handsome inspector tells her, “You’re not going out of your mind. You’re slowly and systematically being driven out of your mind.”

We find out Gregory has been going up to the attic looking for Paula’s jewels, and whenever he did the gas lights would dim. Of course whenever Paula commented on this dimming Gregory tells her she is going crazy and the lights aren’t doing anything at all. In real life we don’t get white knights and family jewels. In real life we may not realize we are being abused, and this is very scary. However, what we can do is believe victims when we hear their stories and this faith may break the cycle they’ve been enduring.

Feature image by Hana Shafi

A former This intern, Hillary Di Menna is in her second year of the gender and women’s studies program at York University. She also maintains an online feminist resource directory, FIRE- Feminist Internet Resource Exchange.

Growing up in a low-income household in a small Quebec town, Starchild Stela passed the time drawing. “It was one of the few things I felt I received validation for,” they say. As a teen they started to graffiti and moved to Montreal where they have been working since. Within the last five years the artist says they have become more dedicated to their art, a mix of soft and bright colours—with feminist messaging. The artist often refers to it as “radical cute culture” or “radical softness.” Feminist messaging is incorporated in their artwork with mottoes such as, “I believe you,” and “unapologetically feminist.”

The mix of art and feminism in their work is organic and can’t be disassociated, they say. “My work comes from my heart and guts,” they add. “I started to explore feminism and anti-oppression politics while I was processing traumatic gender experiences. It helped me understand trauma in a larger context.” As their understanding of feminism evolves, so does their work. Stela’s earlier work was a nod to how much they loved 1980s and ’90s manga as a teen. Now, they say their work—with its soft, luminous imagery—reflects their personality as an adult.

“I also want to dedicate myself a bit more to radical softness,” they say. “I would love to co-organize a radical softness art show, and maybe a pop-up gallery for a month.” They have a strong interest in community building and are excited to collaborate more with friends and other artists. Like with hosting art-making workshops as therapy for survivors of sexual violence: “I’m interested in focusing on my experiences with coping with trauma and art-making as survival.”

A former This intern, Hillary Di Menna is in her second year of the gender and women’s studies program at York University. She also maintains an online feminist resource directory, FIRE- Feminist Internet Resource Exchange.

UPDATE (SEPTEMBER 5, 2017): The subject of the story’s pronouns have been updated from the original point of publication.

I learned about Kats at the 2014 Beauty Confidence Canada Awards, where she had won an award but, due to health issues, could not attend the reception. I became interested in learning her story  and I soon found out she was a real life Archie character! I had to know more. Kats is a woman many of us can relate to in some way. She had been through a lot in her life, “People have found inspiration from my real life story,” she said in our 2014 interview. “I’ve personally triumphed over a childhood car accident, sexual abuse in my teens, anorexia, depression and divorce in my adult years. I’ve never let anything or anyone stop me. I refuse to give up.” This refusal to give up is what drove her.

English was her second language. Kats learned how to read by piecing stories together through illustrations in picture books. Seeing her as an adult—in her hot pink wheelchair and fancy headpieces—it wasn’t surprising to learn Dr. Seuss appealed to Kats. By the age of nine Kats was getting lost in books. It was on the way to a Scarborough bookstore that someone drove into her mother’s car. It was a bad accident. Kats was sent to SickKids Hospital, where she stayed for six weeks before being sent home in a body cast. She continued to be on and off bed rest for the rest of her life.

Rest may not be the appropriate word, though. Back to the Archie comic that first made me want to know more: As a kid, Kats liked to read Archie comics. Yet, while the stories were great, she had no character to truly relate to. As she got older, she developed a comic strip series called The DitzAbled Princess. This series brought her to the 2013 Toronto Fan Expo, where she met Dan Parent, her favourite writer and artist of the Archie series. Looking him in the eye, she asked how it was possible for Riverdale to have no characters with disabilities. And so came Harper Lodge, a columnist who uses the pen name Jewel. It seems only natural for such a vibrant woman, in spirit and style, to become a comic book character.

Kats continued to ensure characters with disabilities were represented in her own children’s books, like the popular Cinderella’s Magical Wheelchair and Hansel and Gretel: A Fairy Tale with a Down Syndrome Twist. In her book Reena’s Bollywood Dream, Kats writes about sexual abuse. Kats didn’t stop there. Just like she wanted a character to relate to in storybooks, she wanted a fashion-themed word search book to do for those days in bed. So, she went ahead and made one.

When Kats found out I was writing for Anokhi she told me how much she wanted to be involved with them. I sent her the editor’s way and immediately after she was at their 12^th Anniversary awards show, collecting another award—as Crusader of the Year for People with Disabilities—for her ever-growing collection. A week ago, on her site, Kats posted a picture of this past summer’s PanAm Games, where she carried the Pan American Sports Organization (PASO) flag during the opening ceremonies. She was very excited about that.

I’m heartbroken over the passing of Kats. After our initial interview we kept in touch and to hear encouraging words from someone so driven is invaluable. Judging by social media, many others feel the same way.

A former This intern, Hillary Di Menna is in her second year of the gender and women’s studies program at York University. She also maintains an online feminist resource directory, FIRE- Feminist Internet Resource Exchange.

Here’s a glimpse so far:

Up for Debate

Wouldn’t it be handy if there were a debate specifically about women’s issues? There hasn’t been one since 1984. That means there has not been a debate focused on women’s issues in my lifetime. Up for Debate, an alliance of over 175 national women’s organizations, invited Stephen Harper, Tom Mulcair, Justin Trudeau, and Elizabeth May to debate such issues. Mulcair was proud of the fact that he was the first to accept the invitation. Trudeau and May also accepted, and Harper did not. When the time came, Mulcair backed out. If Harper wasn’t doing it, neither would he. As a result, because two men didn’t want to play, organizers canceled the event. Up for Debate went ahead with Plan B, where one-on-one interviews with the politicians were arranged. Mulcair—the guy who backed out of the debate last second—took this opportunity to identify as a feminist. Trudeau also says that he is a proud feminist. Harper did not participate in the interviews.

I was looking forward to this debate. Very disappointed it had to be cancelled. https://t.co/q2Awq4iQcX

—    Justin Trudeau (@JustinTrudeau) August 24, 2015

Where did our debate go, @ThomasMulcair? And @pmharper? #women #GPC http://t.co/iSLL9pN4Ue pic.twitter.com/m1cQArPhnZ

— Green Party Canada (@CanadianGreens) August 24, 2015

Transcripts of full interviews:

Mulcair

Trudeau

May

Munk debate

The Munk debate is a charitable initiative of the Aurea Foundation, a right-wing organization founded by Peter and Melanie Munk of Barrick Gold. The September debate was on Canada’s foreign policy. Unlike the women’s issues debate, RSVPs to to the invitation of right-wing millionaires were quickly accepted, disheartening to say the least. May was not allowed to attend. The Munk Debates reasoning is the Green Party does not have party status. However, as a charity they are not legally allowed to support or oppose a political party. So the reason is official, not because of the boys-only nature of the Munk Debates. In the end, May used Twitter to participate in the debate. Trudeau said May should have been able to attend. Yet, he still attended, as did Mulcair and Harper.

Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women

Harper has said there really isn’t an issue around the fact that Indigenous women are over-represented among Canada’s missing and murdered women. For him, it is a non-issue that does not rank high on the Conservative radar. Not all candidates agree with him. “”Do you think that if 1,200 women who had been murdered or had gone missing in Ottawa, we’d need the United Nations to tell us to have an inquiry?” Mulcair asked at an August rally. “It would have happened a long time ago. This is about racism, that’s what this is about.” The NDP leader says he will launch a national inquiry into Canada’s missing and murdered indigenous women. May has said the same and Trudeau has committed to support indigenous advocacy groups.

Childcare

Women today can work! Just for less money. Oh, and often only within daycare hours—which usually do not reflect the precarious shift work so many women undertake. Currently, Harper maintains he will slash all benefits for low-income earners, including childcare. Trudeau says he will end this trend and help families with lower incomes. Mulcair promises affordable childcare, saying, like healthcare, childcare is worth the money. May agrees that childcare is kind of a big deal.

Sex Work and Bill C-36

Harper passed Bill C-36 into law, further endangering the lives of women in sex work. But actually, he is saving them, because these women need to be saved by the morals of rich white men, as do we all. (Sarcasm intended.) May says the Green Party will repeal C-36, and Trudeau said, last year, that his party would be looking at the Nordic Model. More information about parties’ positions on sex work can be found here.

Domestic Violence

Those who participated in the Up for Debate interviews touched on this subject. Prior to the debate, the only thing the Green Party addressed in terms of domestic violence, according to a Toronto Metro article published August 26, was that “false allegations” were common. OK. At least, by the time the interviews were done May, a self-described feminist changed her tune, saying Canada needs a national strategy to confront domestic violence against women. Both Mulcair and Trudeau spoke about Parliament being a boys’ club and that they will lead by example there to make it less so.And money for shelters is a good idea, says Trudeau, but it isn’t up to the federal government to create them because municipalities, he believes, should do it. So, someone is going to do something, don’t worry about it.

Abortion

Pro-choice, anti-choice, reproductive rights. Light stuff, right? Harper doesn’t actually come out and say he is anti-abortion rights. Instead he says that abortion should not be discussed within politics because it is a matter of faith and morals. And although his own faith condemns these rights, he isn’t in the good books of anti-abortion group Campaign Life Coalition (CPL). The Conservative party is, though. At least there is someone out there ready to police women’s bodies. Phew. The CPL hates Trudeau, so that’s a good sign for the Liberals. Mulcair’s NDP is also pro-abortion rights: “A New Democrat government will increase funding for women’s organizations, particularly women’s rights organizations. Family planning, reproductive and sexual health, including access to abortion services, must be included in Canada’s approach to maternal and child health.” May is also on Team Abortion Rights.

The Niqab

Conservatives were getting attention for doing things like peeing in people’s mugs, and that was weird. So, a distraction—I mean, very important issue—was created by the Harper government. The niqab is a veil that covers part of the face and a sign of faith worn by some Muslim women. It is also being attacked for being anti-Canadian—as decided after settler colonialism. The argument goes something like this: “My white grandparents knew what it was to be Canadian (after white folk made what it is to be Canadian tailored to said grandparents) why can’t everyone else?!”

While fostering xenophobia the Conservative party is saving women by oppressing women. Anti-Muslim propaganda is being circulated on social media and women are being attacked because of this federally accepted hatred of the “Other.”

Mulcair says this is wrong. Like, no one likes the niqab, he says, but we need to trust the authority of tribunal decisions. Trudeau is also opposed to Harper’s stance. At a Maclean’s sponsored debate the Liberal leader said:  “You can dislike the niqab. You can hold it up it is a symbol of oppression. You can try to convince your fellow citizens that it is a choice they ought not to make. This is a free country. Those are your rights. But those who would use the state’s power to restrict women’s religious freedom and freedom of expression indulge the very same repressive impulse that they profess to condemn. It is a cruel joke to claim you are liberating people from oppression by dictating in law what they can and cannot wear.” As for May, at a televised French debate she said, “It’s a false debate . . . What is the impact of the niqab on the economy, what is the impact of the niqab on climate change, what is the impact of the niqab on the unemployed?”

Fun Facts

• Trudeau addresses misogyny, in certain communities.
• May re-started a women’s caucus in Parliament.

A former This intern, Hillary Di Menna is in her second year of the gender and women’s studies program at York University. She also maintains an online feminist resource directory, FIRE- Feminist Internet Resource Exchange.

As of Sept. 11, Toronto police decided an online poster’s request that feminists be shot at the nearest UofT women’s studies classroom wasn’t a credible threat. Still, campus security was increased and the police investigation is ongoing. For those who aren’t familiar with the story: A user going by “Kill Feminists” posted this threat, and others, in BlogTO comment sections. CUPE 3902 with University of Toronto Education Workers called the threats beyond abhorrent, “As many of you will know from the Provost’s earlier message, public threats have been received at the University of Toronto. We can add the detail that these were gendered threats made specifically toward women and feminists.”

In further response, CUPE 3902 Women’s Caucus also held a demonstration against gendered violence—and in support of feminism. The event gathered over a thousand supporters on Facebook, and the physical turnout was impressive. After the demonstration the women’s caucus posted to the event page, Some of our favourite moments came from seeing folks who were nervous to come to the rally really get into chanting, dancing and shutting down the roads.” To the organizers, it was a chance to expand the conversation about gendered violence on campus, yet others have criticized the action, saying the threats was blown out of proportion.

Marcus Gee wrote an article for The Globe and Mail, published last Wednesday, headlined “Why U of T’s reaction to online threats was excessive—and unavoidable.” “It is sad to see a proud public institution devoted to the pursuit of reason let itself get so rattled by such a puny thing as an online posting, however vile,” Gee wrote, referencing  the increase in security, the demonstration held on September 14th, and the cancellation of some gender studies classes.

But is it really absurd that people were scared? That women and girls reported feeling unsafe? As Gee himself pointed out, this threat reminded people of the 1989  Montreal Massacre, in which Marc Lépine walked into a classroom at L’École Polytechnique and separated students into two groups: men and women. He declared his hated of women and began shooting the women. He then shot and stabbed women before shooting himself. A note he left behind listed the names of prominent Canadian feminists he intended to kill.

There is still the lingering idea in our society that online comments and discussion are entirely divorced from “real life.” Now that everyone and their grandmother is online in some way, online socializing is indeed real life. Maybe this specific poster did not mean to shoot anyone, but with the wide audience reached through the internet, it’s entirely plausible such comments could be the encouragement and validation for another Marc Lépine. The “big deal” made by police and campus security can send the message that women and girls are, in fact, people whose lives are worth something.

A former This intern, Hillary Di Menna is in her second year of the gender and women’s studies program at York University. She also maintains an online feminist resource directory, FIRE- Feminist Internet Resource Exchange.

“The list exists as way to warn women that these are men to watch out for,” writes Toronto comedian Nick Flanagan. “Men living in Toronto, eating nice food, partying and enjoying life with their friends (maybe with you), living it up while having created awful feelings and memories in others with their actions. The only reason this became more than hearsay is because a photo of it was taken and shared on Facebook. You can say ‘where is the evidence?’ or ‘innocent until proven guilty’, but a community is different than a court. People can be acquitted from crimes for a variety of reasons, even if they committed the act in question. If bad behavior goes unchecked, it continues. And this goes way beyond ‘bad behavior’. Don’t excuse predators because they’re your friends. You have no need for a code of silence. You are not in the mafia. You are a barista.”

I think it is safe to say most people agree rape and other forms of sexual assault are wrong. Yet, this socially accepted fact seems to go out the window when the offender is someone we like.

June’s North by Northeast (NXNE) lineup for the Yonge-Dundas Square performance in Toronto did not include misogynistic rapper Action Bronson as originally planned.  NXNE was less than graceful in their statement, “We are not moving the Action show because we believe in censoring him or any other artists. In fact, we find the limiting of artistic expression distasteful.” The Change.org petition describes some of this expression in one of Bronson’s videos: “The artist cooks a meal over a woman’s dead body, rolls her up in a carpet, throws her in his trunk, and proceeds to violently stab her when he discovers she’s still alive.” Too bad for NXNE’s good time, community members were not OK with hearing rapey messaging.

The Casualties

We’re now approaching the end of summer and punk band The Casualties had an unsuccessful Canadian tour. Many in the punk community know the lead singer, and only member of the band’s original line up, Jorge Herrera, as someone who’s been accused of sexually assaulting teenage girls. After one woman, Beth, came forward publicly via blog post, many others have shared their stories. “Incidents like this involving this dude have been sadly talked about since the late ’90s,” wrote one person.

Many venues cancelled their scheduled shows with The Casualties after communities stepped forward in protest. At least two venues continued with the show, but took The Casualties off the bill and donated proceeds to women’s charities. Such moves have prompted complaints from fans who believe they have a right to see the band play. See, for instance: “That’s your opinion, let me see my favourite band play”—as if human rights and rape being wrong is a matter of opinion.

In her post “I Won’t Apologize For Being Assaulted,” Beth writes:

“I totally bum people out because I happened to have been sexually assaulted by the singer of a band they like .. I know, I know. I should have tried harder for a band just begging to be rejected and ridiculed so it wouldn’t ruin your iPod rotation but hey, then again, it really wasn’t my choice. But man, what a total inconvenience to poor you to know something bad about a band you love. Just ignore the facts, I mean it WAS a long time ago. It’s not like I can still remember I was wearing cargo camo shorts and a v-neck white Hanes t-shirt… an outfit TOTALLY putting off do-me vibes with my freshly shaved head and not shaved legs.”

This story has also sadly resurrected the “But why didn’t she go to the police?” narrative. Yet, let’s remember that, asa YWCA fact sheet about violence against women reminds us, cases of sexual assault are among the most under-reported crimes—in fact, the majority of such cases go unreported. One of the reasons for this is because of the type of victim blaming that is currently happening. Another is the trauma victims are forced to relive throughout the court process. And while not every venue welcomed The Casualties, some continue to firmly support the band, like Toronto’s Virgin Mobile Mod Club. The show’s promoter, Inertia Entertainment, cancelled the show, but only after continued public pressure. The Facebook cover photo for the cancelled event was changed to a picture of a witch hunt. Inertia’s response on the matter continues to blame Beth, the victim, and calls her supporters illogical.

Sexual assault—rape—is still a disgusting and violent act even if someone popular and “cool” does it.

Beth, is celebrating her birthday by raising money for the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network. You can donate here.

A former This intern, Hillary Di Menna is in her second year of the gender and women’s studies program at York University. She also maintains an online feminist resource directory, FIRE- Feminist Internet Resource Exchange.

 Claire Dearing

Right away the audience is told that Claire is a bad, bad girl for having a career and no kids. But it isn’t that she doesn’t want kids, she just hasn’t met the right man … yet! I think she was supposed to appear progressive: she has a career, controls the park, has a no-nonsense attitude and doesn’t take the male hero’s arm for help. And yet, early on in the movie, she is vilified for having a career. She is bossed around by men who appear to actually control the park, and her no-nonsense attitude is meant to read as bitchy and stupidly cocky. As for not taking Owen’s arm when running, great. Maybe she should have ditched the heels though. No one can do all the stuff she did in heels without getting seriously injured, but this is an example of her cockiness getting in the way of good decisions. Who wears all white and heels in a jungle? We know Claire toughens up throughout the movie because her iron straight hair do turns into tousled waves, and she ties her shirt up in a way reminiscent of Jurassic Park’s Dr. Ellie Sattler. In the end, Claire has a man to make a baby with and they walk off together. The predictability of this is as gross and boring as the fact that all the dinosaur parts are over at this point.

 Owen Grady

Owen is the movie’s alpha male hero. He is big, strong, handsome, and savvy. He is the alpha of an all-female velociraptor pack. He knows everything; he’s super great. He has heart, he has brawn, and Claire gets super blush when her nephews (who proclaim they want to stick with this man and not their aunt) call him her boyfriend. Oh gosh, he is just great and will make a wonderful father to the children Claire is finally going to have- blah blah blah.

 Simon Masrani

Simon is supposed to be that cool, fun business man we all wish existed. Except, any good boss (good by capitalism’s standards) acts this way. He’s the, “C’mon, we’re a family. Don’t disappoint your family. I’m not just any boss, I’m a cool boss,” kind of boss that actually endangers everyone for the sake of profit.

 Vic Hoskins

Vic wants to be the alpha male. He wants to turn the super cute raptors into weapons in the US army. He isn’t as handsome as Owen, so we know not to like him.

 Barry

I don’t think Barry has a last name. Some other characters don’t either, but unlike Barry they are on screen for just a few minutes. The only black character, he is there to “help” the white characters by trying to talk sense to them in regards to using the raptors, and by being Owen’s right hand. He has an animalistic demeanour, which is sadly pretty common for characters of colour. This move lacks originality, weird for a movie about bringing dinosaurs back to life.

 Lowery Cruthers

What a loveable dork. Lowery makes jokes and wears glasses. His work station is surrounded by toy dinosaurs and his manliness is called to question a few times: Vic steals his fountain pop, his female co-worker won’t kiss him, and he is ordered to “be a man for once.” When he leaves his station at the end, Lowery keeps only one dinosaur, perhaps to show he has become more of a man after all this excitement.

 Vivian Krill

I think a feminist joke was attempted with Vivian’s character. When she leaves and Lowery tries to kiss her she says no, because she already has a boyfriend. She’s already owned by another dude, Lowery, go be a man!

 Zara Young

Zara is tasked with watching Claire’s visiting nephews. She isn’t good with kids and she is heard on the phone saying she doesn’t want her fiancé to have a bachelor party, so we know we don’t like her. And because she is not to be liked, she is killed in a pretty unnecessarily violent and drawn out way.

 Nick

The purpose of Nick is to remind us all that fat people are stupid and lazy. He is shown eating at his desk—something no good, thin folk ever  do—and making poor decisions. Unlike Owen, he runs from danger. And when he hides he does so in the open, crying. His tears show he can not perform his gender properly, so he must die.

 Leon

Leon is on screen long enough to fall into the raptor’s home and scurry away. As he and his skinny body get to safety, he watches big, strong Owen save the say. He is definitely not an alpha male. He is more like the Simpsons‘ squeaky voiced teen.

 Zach and Gray

Zach is tough and looks at girls all day, even though he has a girlfriend who loves him at home but he doesn’t love her back because he’s cool. Gray is the smart geeky kid. Gray cries, Zach protects. They don’t do much except put others in danger. Gray does tell Owen not to say the word “bitch.” So, that was cool. The boys link their fear of human eating giants with their parents impending divorce throughout the film. Coming from a broken home, I personally, wouldn’t be so reflective of issues outside of aforementioned giants, but hey.

 Indominus Rex                                                Rebel girl rebel girl
Rebel girl you are the queen of my world
Rebel girl rebel girl
I know I want to take you home
I want to try on your clothes oh

(If you don’t get this, check out Bikini Kill)

The movie ends with people using the dinosaurs to fight each other, much like how the rich manipulate the working class.

As for the Bechdel Test, this movie should not pass. The criteria for the test is pretty easy to pass, but movies rarely do. The three parts are:

1. At least two named women need to be in the movie.

2. They must talk to each other.

3. About something besides a man.

When Claire talks to her sister, or to her assistant, it is about her nephews. Even when the two female dinosaurs have a chat it is about the men around them.

Forever Team Dinosaur, this feminist suggests we all watch the original movie, or better yet, read the book.

All character photos are from TV Tropes.

A former This intern, Hillary Di Menna is in her second year of the gender and women’s studies program at York University. She also maintains an online feminist resource directory, FIRE- Feminist Internet Resource Exchange.