The Athenaeum

Tag: feminism

  • The Pitfalls of Sex Positivity

    The Pitfalls of Sex Positivity

    I should start off by saying that I think sex-positivity is a great movement: when it is done right. For those who haven’t heard the term before, it was coined in the 1990’s but has really taken off on social media in the last few years. It’s generally accepted to be “an attitude towards human sexuality that regards all consensual sexual activities as fundamentally healthy and pleasurable, encouraging sexual pleasure and experimentation” as defined by sex educator Allena Gabosch in “A Sex Positive Renaissance”. 

    For our generation, this primarily looks like people (mainly women) sharing information from sex educators to their Instagram stories and social media pages, dropping judgmental attitudes surrounding sex, and talking about sex like the normal part of life it is. Sex-positive people and spaces have become a safe place for others to discuss and ask questions about the weirder parts of sex. There’s the private side to the movement as well, where people feel more liberated about discussing their sexual wants and needs with partners. All of this is hopefully leading to more fulfilling and healthier sexual relationships, along with ideas about sex for many people. 

    But the sex-positivity movement isn’t perfect, far from it in fact. The rise of sex positivity, especially in the progressive circles many Acadia students would be familiar with, has led to two major groups being excluded: those who choose to abstain from sex and those who choose to do sex work. These groups are often still looked down upon by the very people who claim to be sex-positive. 

    There are countless reasons people may choose to remain abstinent: asexuality,  past trauma, not feeling ready or prepared for the experience, religious grounds, queer people not feeling represented by the typical ideas of sex, lack of opportunity, or simply deciding they’d rather not. The list goes on and on. Yet, even though all of these are valid choices there is still a rampant culture of shaming people who don’t have sex. Some have even taken to using the term “prude-shaming” for the social stigma experienced. Oddly enough, this concept was best explained in an article published by the dating app Tinder. It’s normal to throw the word “virgin” at someone as an insult, a term which is nothing more than an outdated idea but can still carry a lot of weight and shame for those it applies to. Despite the fact that there are plenty of people who don’t have sex, they are often made to feel as if there is something abnormal about them. This can do a lot of damage to someone. The effects can feel isolating or even push people into sexual activity before they’re ready, just so they can lose the label of “virgin” that they’ve been made to feel is wrong.

    On the opposite end of the scale, there are those who choose to do sex work. Sex work can be anything from exchanging sex acts for money, to porn, to selling nudes through social media, and beyond. These services are not only common but often in high demand. Yet despite the high usage of services such as these, even sex-positive people have a tendency to demonize anyone who chooses to make money through sex work. Especially when it comes to women (who let’s face it – will likely always be criticized more than men) people are outraged to see anyone commodifying sex. Many misguided sex-positive and feminist folks make arguments against sex-work. However, you may notice there’s a problem with this logic. Sex positivity means accepting consensual activity between adults, and that has to include activity that looks more like a business transaction. Just as someone may use their cooking skills to sell cakes, sex workers use their sexuality to provide for their customers. 

    Ownership over your own sexuality will look different for everyone. If we want to be truly sex-positive, it’s time to admit this means including the choice not to have sex and the choice to profit from sexuality. Continuing to stigmatize these options is doing nothing but keeping up the “slut or prude” narrative that sex-positivity is trying to erase. Though not everyone’s sexual choices will look the same, there should be no shaming or making fun of anyone for theirs. Sex-positivity includes education, so maybe it’s time we get educated on these choices. If your sex-positivity doesn’t make room for celibacy and sex-work then frankly, I’m not interested.

    Note: This article is part of our Fall 2020 Print Edition that focuses on Women Health and Sexuality. Look across campus for a paper copy of this edition!

  • The Reality of Being a Women in the Workplace

    The Reality of Being a Women in the Workplace

    For the past few years, there has been a push for more women in the workplace, especially in fields that are predominately male. While more female representation is needed in spaces dominated by men, the reality of being a woman in these workplaces is often ignored or disregarded. There have been famous women in the media, such as Lena Dunham or Gabrielle Union, who have come forward with personal experiences of sexual assault and harassment that they have endured while at work; however, harassment and assault are not only experienced in the entertainment industry. Women in Canada experience these hardships every single day.

    In a 2017 study from the Government of Canada titled “Harassment and sexual violence in the workplace”, it was found that 60% of respondents have experienced harassment in some form or another in the workplace. Around 30% of respondents had experienced sexual harassment, 21% experienced violence and 3% experienced sexual violence. In regard to sexual harassment and violence, 94% of respondents were women.

    After reaching out to female students at Acadia University, the commonality of crimes at workplaces against women can be further supported. Violence against women is in our backyard and can no longer be ignored. Thank you to the brave women who shared their stories with The Athenaeum and Acadia Community:

    “One time when complaining about pain in my knees to a co-worker, my manager yelled out, ‘Don’t worry, we know you get down to give blowjobs to everyone!’. Not only was this degrading, but the comment was shouted for all of my co-workers and any customers in the building to hear.” – Olivia Knowles (Biology Student)

    “The dress code at one workplace was fairly relaxed and we were allowed clothing that was considered to be more casual. I wore shorts to work one day and they ended up being slightly shorter than my apron which went past my knee. From the front, it looked like I was naked. When my manager noticed, I apologized because I did not realize that the apron went past my knees and he responded: ‘That’s okay, we will get more tips if you look like this’.” – Harper T. 

    “We had to do this interview in one of my classes. I was working with a male student to interview an older man for the class. The individual we were interviewing refused to make eye contact or direct his responses towards me, even when I was the one asking questions. It was like I wasn’t in the room. He then followed by stating that all of Windsor’s problems (which we were discussing in the interview) began when women started driving.” – Claire Leffler (CODE Student)

    “A co-worker once cornered me in the break room and tried to force himself on me. I was lucky enough to escape the situation, thanks to someone who was in the bathroom at the right time. It was my second week there.” – Jada F. (Chemistry Student)

    “I have had colleagues who would rub my back and whisper things in my ear while we talked. I never allowed my colleagues to enter my personal space or touch me. They behaved unprofessionally and made me feel weak.” – Eva Munez (Biology Student)

    “I am hoping to go into sports law, specifically for hockey. There is this union called the NHL players association where all registered agents and lawyers are usually affiliated. In this union, there is only one woman. When looking at specific companies within the union, all female employees are only at the secretarial level. These women go towards the companies’ statistics when looking at whether women are properly represented, yet only one individual at one company has equal standing to the men in these companies. While this story isn’t about violence, it shows how even though it is 2020, there is still changes to be made.” – Hunter Murchison- Doggart (Politcs Student) 

    Acadia University is much smaller than most universities in Canada, but still has students who have been harassed, objectified and demeaned in the workplace. Even if the students in this article are Acadia’s only students who have faced workplace harassment, it still doesn’t make any of this okay or anomalous. Bigger universities have more students and may have more stories of this kind. As we move outward, think about how many women in our country or worldwide might share in these workplace experiences. Yet, as a society we often forget about the reality of harassment in the workplace.

    Just because women don’t talk about their own instances does not mean they don’t experience them, not everyone is okay with sharing. Society has always taught women to stay silent, so for the most part that is what women do. Those who do speak out are often criticized in the media or called liars because the individuals they are accusing are often well known or in a position of power. 

    The #METOO movement that first gained traction in 2016 was essential for women who had been silenced. They finally felt supported and safe enough to share their personal stories. #METOO swept across borders uniting women of all nationalities. Eventually, the movement died down, as all movements eventually do. While the message of the movement still remains, so does the stigma surrounding speaking out. I’m sure #METOO will be re-ignited again years from now, but if people revert back to silence during this lull in momentum, nothing will be different years from now. 

    If these students’ stories tell you anything, it is to be alert to the situations taking place in your community. I challenge anyone reading this to ask your friends and family if they have been treated similarly. Chances are that someone will have a story to share, small or big. No matter the level or harassment, it is important to listen to community members who confide in you. Women need to stick together.

    This conversation is not limited to women. There are lessons for men here as well. If you are a man who behaves like the men in these stories, it is not okay. If you are a man who witnesses behavior that targets women, do not be a silent bystander. If you are a man who faces harassment or sexual violence in the workplace, you are not alone. 

    You can always be part of the movement for change. Keep the conversation going on social media, with your family and at school. Strive for a better world where women are well-represented and feel safe going to their jobs. Most importantly, support the women in your lives.

    Note: This article is part of our Fall 2020 Print Edition that focuses on Women Health and Sexuality. Look across campus for a paper copy of this edition!

  • The Montreal Massacre and Why We’re Still Talking About It

    The Montreal Massacre and Why We’re Still Talking About It

    On December 6th, 1989, engineering students of École Polytechnique in Montreal were listening to a student presentation about heat transfer, when a man entered the room with a semi-automatic rifle in his hands. This man was Marc Lépine, an unsuccessful applicant to École Polytechnique, with a hatred for feminists so profound that it led him to blame them for his failings in life and sought to seek revenge.

    Lépine demanded that the men and women separate themselves by lining up on opposite sides of the room and proceeded to fire a warning shot from his gun. Once the nine women of the class were isolated from the rest of the students, he ordered the men to leave. Lépine announced the reason for his intrusion as “fighting feminism”. When one of these women, Natalie Provost, attempted to talk to him, saying they weren’t feminists but simply students trying to learn, Lépine insisted they were feminists and shot at these women, killing six of them and injuring the other three. Lépine then continued his rampage throughout the school, specifically targeting women. In total, Lépine shot 28 people, with a kill count of 14 women, until he eventually shot himself, taking his own life as well.

    While researching this shooting, my stomach turned, because despite the fact that we herald ourselves as a progressive, inclusive society, the accounts of this story read like the incident could have happened last week. When I walk into my biology classes and see that about 80% of my peers are also women, it can be difficult to imagine that in my mother’s biology class of 1987 was mostly men, and that the increase in female scientists is a very recent phenomenon.

    When we talk about gender equality in science, the response is often “women are already equal, why are we still talking about this?” The answer is that while we can acknowledge progress, we can’t ignore the cases of sexual harassment, sexual assault and gender discrimination within the scientific community that persists today simply because things are better than they used to be. There is still an “old boys club” culture amongst many scientific communities. This work environment can make women, particularly young women just entering the field, feel uncomfortable and/or unwelcome.

    The community tends to be the opposite of inviting towards young women, an example from earlier this year being the actions of Professor Alessandro Strumia, a senior researcher at the National Institute of Chemical Physics and Biophysics. Strumia made a presentation to an audience mostly comprised of young women claiming that men invented and built the field of physics, and that female physicists weren’t as well suited to the field as their male peers. He also asserted that men were being treated unfairly because women were receiving opportunities and research funding simply due to their gender, and not their merit as scientists. Strumia’s motivations for this talk had the same roots as Lépine’s actions: women were accepted into an engineering program Lépine had been denied acceptance to, and likewise a woman had been chosen over Strumia for a position with the National Institute of Nuclear Physics.

    The gender gap in science is influenced by many factors, but science needs all the great minds it can get a hold of, and everyone deserves to feel safe from discrimination in the scientific community, regardless of gender. Remembering the women who survived this attack and those that fell victim to a sexist act of violence is key to learning from the past, and not repeating it.

    All are invited to join the Acadia WGS in association with AUFA Women’s Committee and the President’s Office of Acadia University in Commemorating Canada’s National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women at a vigil to be held from 4:30-5:30 on December 6th at the Wolfville Farmer’s market.

    Laura Porter-Muntz is a fourth year Biology (Co-op) student and Science Editor of The Athenaeum

  • The Noodle Guy: A Living Wage, Feminism, and International Success

    The Noodle Guy: A Living Wage, Feminism, and International Success

    Steam covers the windows as the kitchen begins its daily cycle. The first pan of onions is caramelized and freshly baked bread puddings come out of the oven. Their fragrance is intoxicating, bringing a smile to Ross Patterson’s face as he helps prepare for opening.  

    The Noodle Guy is a staple of the Annapolis Valley. Whether it’s at the Wolfville Farmers’ Market or their restaurant in Port Williams, the name of the institution is a familiar one. Seven years since their establishment as a small stall at the Farmers’ Market, the restaurant has carved its niche in the Annapolis Valley.

    Ross and his wife Erin, who is the English, Music, and Theatre librarian at Acadia, moved here in 2001 so she could accept the position at the library. Ross began working at a restaurant where La Torta now is, but when it closed he decided to open a stall at the Wolfville Farmers’ Market.  

    “Right away you can’t produce certain kinds of food without being in a commercial kitchen,” he noted. The Noodle Guy began in a small shop next to the Tin Pan Bakery in Port Williams as a “boutique-level business” and has since grown.  

    Space is important to Ross and his business. “If you’re happy in your environment I believe that it’ll come through in your product.” The place beside the Tin Pan Bakery had lots of light, was not too big, and was close to Wolfville, the rent was cheaper. “All we did there was retail and the markets. We did have two tables of two in the front window, but very shortly we had to take that space to do prep.”  

    Ross began at the Farmers’ Market primarily selling noodles outside. “I just wanted to make and sell pasta,” he says. “If you want to talk to any of my employees here they’ll tell you I never want a restaurant again. I had one before and it’s a very tough business. If you do a little bit of research you’ll see that, other than the Library Pub, there isn’t a restaurant that has its same owners as it did 10 years ago.”  

    At the market, Ross wanted to see what they could do with their food. “We started making some dishes just so they could see it. Now at an average Wolfville Farmers Market we sell hundreds of orders of pasta every Saturday, which is a lot for a restaurant, let alone 56 square feet.”  

    The need for more space soon became apparent. Ross decided to move the business into their current space three years ago, which used to be the old Port Authority. Even the tables are made out of old apple boxes. 

    Earning a living wage is crucial to the success of The Noodle Guy. “Both Erin and I made a commitment that if we were going to employ people we were going to give them a living wage. The base has to be $15 an hour. It takes six months to get up to that and there’s a raise in between. Between that and their tips they’re easily making $20-25 an hour.”   

    It is the little things that allow him to pay his employees a living wage. “For example, you go up to the counter and place your order. It’s just like a regular restaurant after that when we bring you your food, but that little difference allows us to have one less person so the wages can be spread evenly amongst the people that are here.”  

    “If you take the attitude that when you pay people property they’ll find a solution to help us be profitable, it’s way better than saying ‘we can’t do it’. With that mindset we’ll never do it.”  

    The Noodle Guy is not a pyramid but a wagon wheel. “Everyone does everything here, even the dishwasher knows how to make the ravioli. It doesn’t matter if you’re a high school student or a single mother, that $15 an hour applies to everybody.”  

    Ross smiles as he discusses his employees. “They’re amazing,” he says. “We carry a staff of 12 people, at least 8 of which are full time. It’s because they’re great. They do great things. I went from not wanting a restaurant to watching these people excel and flourish.”  

    The Noodle Guy has taken a central role in the community of Port Williams. In the past two years, they have a variety of initiatives at their Port Williams location, including Christmas concerts that raised more than $2000 for the local food bank.  

    Burger nights have been the biggest success. “The burger night is a perfect case study on the success you attain when good people collaborate and solve your problems.” Between the cooks they came up with the homemade buns and specific recipes for burgers, which change every week, and another employee took control of social media. 

    “A funny thing happened,” Ross notes. “It became a community event. We see the same faces in here, and because we have family style seating we can seat people with people they don’t know and they can come together. It’s neighbours… Wolfville residents, even a gang of ladies that walked all the way over here from Wolfville to grab our burgers.”  

    Bounty from the County is another massively successful event. It is a 7-course meal that occurs only once a year for $75. “Apart from making sure that it’s costed properly, it’s entirely [the chefs that run it]” Ross says. Collaboration and ensuring that every member of The Noodle Guy community can be the best person they can be is crucial to creating the best possible business.   

     

    Ensuring that employees at The Noodle Guy could shop at the Wolfville Farmers’ Market was important. “Local produce and vegetables sometimes cost a little more, but I happen to think that it’s worth it.”  

    One of the things Ross is proud of is that the dirt on his floor is from the farmers he buys his produce from. Longspell, Taproot, are two major suppliers along with many smaller farms. “They don’t just come in and drop off produce. They sit down and eat because they know we’re using their stuff.” The connection that is created between the farm and the table is one that is important.  

    For Ross it all goes back to the idea of a living wage. “You can have the best people in the world working at your business, but if they have to worry about paying a cable or electric bill they’re just not going to be the best people they can be.”  

    The prices at The Noodle Guy are value driven. High quality ingredients are used but the prices are still affordable for students. Ross envisions The Noodle Guy as a treat when times are tough. “I wanted people to say, ‘I know things are tough, but maybe I can treat myself to this amazing garlic cork ravioli’ when they come here. The beautiful thing is that the people that know that know it, and the people that don’t know know it’s good. Students in particular come because it’s a little treat.”  

    Students have been integral to the success of The Noodle Guy. Especially for students who are away from home for the first time, the opportunity to connect with a face behind the food is what matters. “I remember the first-year students came up to me, and some of them came up to me to say goodbye. I remember saying to Erin ‘There goes our business’”. That wasn’t the case. One family who came in for lunch recently had their daughter graduate from Acadia years ago, but it was her recommendation that brought The Noodle Guy four more customers.  

    Students are a renewable resource. The chain effect is crucial to the sustainability of the business as older students bring younger students to the booth or restaurant, whether it’s in person or by word of mouth. This year in particular has been far more successful for the restaurant in Port Williams amongst students.  

    “They’ve always supported me, particularly kinesiology students,” he laughs. “I really don’t know why.”  

    Feminism runs strong at The Noodle Guy. “It’s called The Noodle Guy because it used to just be a guy making noodles, but the funny thing is the foundation of this place is incredibly strong women.” 90% of the total staff is women, and the kitchen is 100% woman-run.  

    Ross emphasized how it is important for women to make their mark in an industry traditionally dominated by men. The Noodle Guy is only one small restaurant, but giving women the opportunity to maximize their creative potential is one that is important to him.  

    The success of the little restaurant in Port Williams has garnered national and international recognition. The Globe and Mail recently featured The Noodle Guy on their list of best places to dine in Nova Scotia, The Chronicle Herald gave their blessing from their top food critic, and the BBC came by to do a feature. However, Ross doesn’t let the recognition get to his head.  

    The long-term success of The Noodle Guy is something Ross has thought about. “I want to create an institution,” he says. “I want there to be a Noodle Guy here when those students who came to me send their grandkids to Acadia. For some reason, we’ve struck a chord and I hope we can allow that philosophy of paying people properly to persist.” 

    “I can’t change the world, but I can make a difference in ten to twelve people’s lives.”  

  • Things That Should Have Been Curbed in 2016

    Things That Should Have Been Curbed in 2016

     

    1) The notion that “White Privilege” is offensive and racist towards White People.

    Racism, cultural appropriation, and discrimination have been a hot-button issue throughout history. With the rise of social media platforms, along with the recent election of Donald Trump, there is a plethora of conversation online (and in print) about the hateful rhetoric that seems to be plaguing today’s society. Unfortunately, when people feel that their privilege is being threatened, they enter an automatic defense mode. It is often presented in such a manner where the defendant makes claims of innocence, justifying their feelings of discomfort by exclaiming that they are not guilty of racism, and that if their race is being questioned, that they are automatically being discriminated against. White privilege is not racist; it is not offensive in any way. It is a method of explaining the favorable treatment that white people often receive. There are no systems of oppression designed against white people. Thinking that reverse racism exists is what perpetuates the notion of white privilege further into the foundations of our society. It is a mechanism that is used to validate the comfortable position white people hold in society. Validating your own comfortable position by attacking a marginalized group (by saying white privilege is offensive, racist etc.) is a subtle way of invalidating and shutting down any group who’s LIVED EXPERIENCE has ever been one of systemic oppression. In extension, these feelings can often be described as “white fragility,” a state in which minimum amounts of racial stress becomes intolerable, triggering outward displays of emotion, such as anger, and behaviours such as argumentation. Yeah, this definitely could have been left behind in 2016.

    2) That any Indigenous culture should just “get over” colonization.

    Really? This one amazes me every time I hear it. Let us take a brief moment to recall Canadian History because we are not innocent in the ways or racism and cultural oppression. Residential schools were opened in conjunction with the Catholic and Protestant Churches and the government. Their aim was to remove any form of Indigenous culture from Indigenous children by forcefully removing them from their homes, placing them in schools where they would be taught Western values. As such, a cultural genocide was committed. Often, when hearing the word “genocide,” events such as the Holocaust, Bosnian, and Rwandan genocides. That is because Canada has attempted to repress its history. The horrors of the Residential schools did not end until 1996. Yes, most of us were living when the last school shut its doors. During their time in the Residential schools, Indigenous children were beaten, sexually assaulted, and mentally abused by their instructors. Often, these traumas were difficult to cope with. A stigma surrounds Indigenous peoples in Canada. Many people chose to believe that status cards, funding, government aid, and the Truth and Reconciliation Committee should all be abolished. They question why we should continue to apologize, and why we should continue to work towards mending our relationship with Indigenous peoples. What does it take to get over something like this? How could you possibly put a numerical value on an apology, how can you, a white person, get to dictate the appropriate measures for reconciliation after a cultural genocide has been committed? When you say these things, you act as though you assume the role of the oppressed, you may think you understand their oppression, but you simply do not. I know I do not understand, I never could. However, it is important to listen, to engage in conversation, and to be respectful of what you cannot understand. Please read the above statement about white privilege and then rethink your questions and sweeping generalizations about Indigenous peoples and Indigenous culture.

    3) “She was asking for it”- REALLY?

    For God sakes. How is this type of conversation STILL taking place? Did we not learn after Jian Ghomeshi and Brock Allen-Turner? I simply do not understand. The legal process further victimizes rape victims. Belittlement and slut-shaming occur in the courtroom in order to find loopholes in the victim’s statement. By asking her, “did you say no?” you are questioning her pain and her experience. By asking her, “how much did you drink?” you are assuming that all drunk women are ‘asking for it’, by asking her “what were you wearing” or “how many men have you slept with in the past”, you are slut-shaming her. Although there are false reports of rape, the treatment of victims in the courtroom is inexcusable. This is the reason that rape and sexual assault are so underreported. This process favours the accused, often bringing into play irrelevant aspects of his character, his achievements, and what he strives for in life. However, this does not take into account aspects of the victim’s character, her (or his) achievements in life, and how what she/he had strived for may feel as though it has become so out of reach. It’s simple, folks. If you can’t say no, you can’t say yes. There is no in-between; there is no grey area. There is yes, and there is no. Stop blaming the victim. Stop validating your need for supremacy. Stop questioning the pain of others, instead, start regarding it.

    4) Feelings of self-doubt, as brought on by Instagram and other forms of Social Media.

    I am guilty of this. Most people are guilty of this. It is so easy to feel self-doubt, and it is so easy to think that your value decreases based on the perceived notion of “perfection” in the others who you see on social media. In the last 10 years, we have “networking” apps explode. The original purpose of these apps was to stay in touch with your friends, to be able to connect with people you haven’t seen in a long time and to keep others updated on what is going on in your own life. However, it feels as though there has been a shift in the dynamic, a change in the way we behave on the Internet. Often, all we see is the picture. We believe that everybody’s lives are perfect and full of happiness based on how they display themselves on social media. Getting the “perfect picture” and pairing it with a “fire” caption that will get you over 300 likes is often a goal of most people. I know I am not innocent. There have been multiple occasions where I have found myself thinking, “if I went to the gym more maybe I would look like her and then I would be as happy as she appears.” I know this is wrong. After a conversation with one of my roommates, I found out that she was feeling the same way. She talked to me about how miserable looking at Instagram makes her. It caused her to question her own happiness by constantly comparing it to other girls’ social media pages. So, she slowly began to stop looking as much. As did I. I’ll leave this point here: everybody has their issues, but we have been conditioned to try and keep our problems to yourself. A picture is just that: a picture. You see what the poster wants you to see, just remember that your self-worth should not be determined by a like or how the world views your Instagram page.

    5) Islamophobia.

    Islam is a religion of peace. Often, people do not believe this when it is brought up in conversation. The first time I heard this was in my 11th grade world religion class. Our teacher told us that Islam was the closest religion to Christianity. She was right. It is not Islam you are afraid of, it is the “otherness.” The sense that you see something different, and that you are uncomfortable within a realm of your own privilege is what sets you off. This rhetoric gained prominence after 9/11. We were scared of them. They were scared of us. Although I am not an expert in Islamic studies, I know many men and women from the Arab world who identify as Muslims, and I can honestly say that they are much nicer than many other people I know. If we remove the concept of the “other,” perhaps we will all be able to see each other as we are: human.

  • Girls and Sex: An Overview of how Peggy Orenstein Navigates a Complicated Landscape

    Girls and Sex: An Overview of how Peggy Orenstein Navigates a Complicated Landscape

    Some of us grew up in semi-liberal or liberal households. Some of us grew up in conservative households. At one point or another, our parents would openly discuss the harms of drug and substance abuse, the negative consequences of consuming alcohol before 19 (or 18, in some cases), and why it is important to always follow the rules. As I continued to get older, I became more aware of the generation gap between my parents and I. This gap between mothers and daughters, and mothers and fathers has become even more evident as I see my parents’ friends struggling to make their way through the adolescent years of their teenage daughters. Even in the age of the “helicopter parent” there is a continued stigma and discomfort around the notion that their daughters have the potential to have a sex life. The same notion is not met with the same level of discomfort when their son’s sex lives are the topic of discussion.

    At this point, it is safe to say that blaming girls’ clothing for boys’ sexual drive is counterproductive. However, we must first look inward at the ways in which girls’ clothing is marketed in comparison to boys. Orenstein writes about the methods that are used to market girls’ clothing. It is evident that boys’ clothing isn’t centered on the idea that they should bare their bellies and wear short-shorts when they dress, so why is this marketing tactic targeting girls from a young age? If we dig deeper by using Orenstein’s study as a framework, we may be able to see a correlation of self-objectification. Orenstein offers a strong definition of self-objectification: the pressure on young women to reduce their worth to their bodies and to see those bodies as a collection of parts that exist for others’ pleasure; to continuously monitor their appearance; to perform rather than to feel sensually. Could the marketing tactics of young girls’ clothing be subconsciously objectifying them? Could it be leading them towards a road of lower self-esteem and doubt? Perhaps it is the lack of conversation surrounding female sexuality on behalf of the parents, who often perpetuate the stigma from a young age that it is okay to follow media and gender norms by going along with fashion trends that sexualize the female body, but having conversations about how to engage in sexual activity safely is out of the question.

    However, the stigma around young women’s dress is more likely to have damaging effects. It begins with the media normalizing how young girls are supposed to dress, what toys they are supposed to play with, and what shows they are supposed to be watching. By submitting to these cultural norms, their experience is shaped to fit a particular model. Parent’s discomfort with the teenage sex drive is actually more harmful for young girls’ self esteem, further creating a more difficult landscape for these girls to navigate.

    Orenstein conducted an interview with 71 young women. In this series of interviews, she asked questions about the girls views on sexual conduct, what they hoped to get out of their sexual encounters, and how the level of discomfort they felt when talking about these experiences with family or their peers. The results were alarming. The general consensus was that their friends became an audience to be sought after and maintained, that their engagement in the sexual experience was not for their own pleasure, but more so for the purpose of fulfilling their partner’s “needs” before their own, and so that they would have stories to share with their friends to not come off as “prudish.” Not only is this behavior harmful to girls’ self-worth, but it can also be related to mental health issues. Orenstein describes this phenomenon as “using your experience to create an image of yourself.” Essentially, the more experience you gain sexually (even if it is not for your own enjoyment), your social status will be higher.

    Let’s shift into a discussion about the negative consequences of social media. It is a game, and one that you need to play correctly in order to be “accepted” by your peers. Orenstein uses Sarah* as an example. She talks about a girl in her high school who continuously posted selfies. It was the general consensus that she either had no friends or was completely self-absorbed. It was never thought that, perhaps, this girl just enjoyed posting pictures of herself. The impacts of social media use have severe impacts on girls (and boys) well-being. Are selfies empowering or oppressive? Are they used to control girls and constrict them within a particular social norm, or are they a useful tool for expression and exclusion? When we are faced with these discussions there is rarely a strait and narrow path to follow, it perpetuates the ideology that there is a difficult landscape to navigate when it comes to teenage girls and sex.

    Why is it called a blow “job”? The expectations for women’s bodies just continue to perpetuate a pre-existing notion of the misogynistic roles they are expected to fill in society: subordinate. Just before the Bill Clinton scandal in the White House, a 1994 survey in America revealed that just over 50% of women had never performed fellatio on a partner. In 2014, these numbers have alarmingly increased. A story in the New York Times declared that sixth-graders were now more inclined to treat fellatio “like a handshake with the mouth.” Has this practice been normalized because of the ever-growing presence of social media? Or is this stemming from the need to form an image of oneself, one that favors the female’s role in sex because it is increasingly being viewed as “normal.”

    Sexually active teenage girls are often referred to as “sluts.” Sexually active teenage males are often referred to as “players.” It is extremely evident that this is a problem. Normalizing and gendering sexual behavior in teenagers is not only dangerous for their physical well-being, but also their mental well-being. Stigmatizing a normal practice (don’t turn your noses up, we are all human and puberty is a confusing, hormone-ridden, emotional roller coaster) to favor one gender over the other is not only wrong, but goes deeper to perpetuate gender roles in society as a whole. It targets women to be submissive, to be ashamed of their bodies and their desires, and calls them to question their characters for having a sex drive as a teenager. The media has sensationalized the idea of casual sex, yet targets and shames women who engage in this practice. The sexualized nature of the media not only encourages young women to call their self-worth to question, but it also perpetuates particular ideals about virginity, their role in the sexual landscape, and how they should go about the complex terrain of the “hookup culture.”

    I am not a mother. I have no experience with parenting and I do not know how to care for someone who is entirely dependent on me. I write this article as an opinion piece, based off of my own experiences and the study conducted by Peggy Orenstein. If I may suggest one thing, it is that we call to question preexisting norms about teenage girls. I suggest that we become more open to discussion with these young women, who will someday be the future. I call all parents to step outside of their comfort zones and talk openly about sex with their children, which is a conversation I never had with my own parents (comfortably). This is a difficult landscape to navigate, with a variety of different factors influencing behaviors, interactions, and personal decisions. Opening up the floor to a more inclusive, non-gendered conversation about sex is what we may need in order to help maintain teenage girls self-esteem, let them know their worth, and ensure that any decision they make regarding their bodies is just that, their own.

    For reference, please pick up a copy of Peggy Orenstein’s work.

    Peggy Orenstein, “Girls and Sex: Navigating a Complicated Landscape”, (New York: Harper-Collins, 2016): 1-236.

  • Girl Trouble

    When asked about my interest in writing this opinion, the first thing I thought was “I am walking into a minefield.” I am, along with most men I know, afraid to talk about women’s issues. Part of that comes from the fact that I am a tall, privileged, white man but the other part is that I’m afraid of being attacked for either saying or doing the wrong thing. All my life I have been surrounded by strong women and have always believed that someone’s actions are what should define their success in life, not their gender. I felt compelled by their example to speak my mind on this topic, even though it might be uncomfortable at times.

    For most of human history, women got sidelined in what rights and opportunities society afforded to them. Thanks to the feminist movement there has been real progress towards equality. Sadly, alongside these advances, there has been a swing away from the equal opportunity of women to “man bashing’, by a small but loud segment of the feminist movement. This group disallows men to claim any suffering or mistreatment as they believe their gender precludes them from understanding the experience of women. When these individuals are called out for their comments, they often fire back with accusations of sexism even if untrue. These unjustified assaults have made potential allies cautious and emboldened those who do wish to stop the spread of equality through society.

    I was the only boy in the school choir through most of middle school. In high school, I continued to be part of the vocal music groups including an all-male choir. The choir included straight, gay and transgendered young men. Throughout those years of school, the choir guys often were targeted as “the faggots.” When I have discussed this treatment with people, the most common reaction is that these actions were just “boys being boys.” I have often a time seen the surprised look on someone’s faced when I revealed that this bullying was predominantly lead by women in the schools I attended. I was treated as less of a human being because I enjoyed singing and dancing on stage because I embraced my so-called “feminine side” (a description I abhor). This kind of double standard continues beyond areas of life where men choose to express themselves in creative or sensitive ways.

    Like many people here at Acadia and across the world I was the target of bullying through the entirety of my time in school. My mother still talks about when I would come home with bruises on my back from when someone had shoved me into a wall or onto the ground. Not only did I have to deal with the physical injuries inflicted on me, but also the ones that left me questioning my worth a person. I am unashamed of the fact that I have and continue to see a counselor to deal with these issues. I have also never tried to hide the facts about what I have endured and I that have sought help to deal with many of the issues with which I have had to grapple. When we talk about feminism, it is often a topic of strength. The strength to fight back, the power to express yourself and to overcome the stupid notion that women are weaker than men. But sensitivity and creativity when displayed by men are still viewed as weakness by society. For a man to admit that he has suffered abused means, he will be perceived as weak if he seeks help to reclaim that basic sense of dignity and purpose of which he feels stripped.

    As I have worked my way through creating this article I have tried to think of ways I could suggest to help bridge the gap we face as I did not want just to critic but build. I am not an expert on gender equality issues, nor will I claim to be so I reached out to others so I could look past my point of view. While there were more than a few differing opinions and thoughtful suggestions on how we can all better ourselves as individuals what I always heard was it is important to have a dialogue. I am aware that many, if not most of you reading this will disagree with what I have had to say. I hope you find a way to express what is on your mind as every person can add something to this dialogue. I would consider myself to be an open-minded person, so I am sure I could learn a thing or two.

    Over the last century, there have many strides forward in gender equality. In our nation, women have moved from being treated as second class citizens in almost every situation and are now viewed as equals. While we certainly have much further to go, I do not believe any reasonable person can look at what has changed and say it is not getting better. As we continue to push forward, we must not allow ourselves to become blind and only shift our biases from gender-based to those of one’s character

  • Social Etiquette and the “Dating Dilemma”

     

    Here is an awkward social situation that I’ve personally encountered multiple times in the course of my adult dating career here at Acadia. I call this the ‘Dating Dilemma.’

     

    This is the scenario: A nice boy from class approaches me somewhere on campus, and asks me if I would like to “hang out sometime,” or maybe more specifically to “grab coffee,” and then requests a phone number exchange. This act seems innocent enough; even courageous if we consider the ease with which technology has virtually eliminated the inherent social pressure of such interactions – and yet this person has opted to kick it ‘old school’ and risk the possible face-to-face rejection: a bold move indeed, good sir. That is, assuming this is a dating proposition.

     

    Let’s say I am in fact a heterosexual female. Let’s say I’m currently committed to a monogamous relationship. Let’s also say that the year is 2017 and remarkably, despite being a cisgender female, I have somehow managed to amass an impressive array of platonic friendships with humans from every degree of the gender spectrum, cisgender males included.

     

    While I hesitate to admit that antiquated social convention would dictate that yes: this interaction is obviously a dating proposition, I also happen to be what my Victorian foremothers termed, a “New Woman.” I drink, I flirt, I wear blue jeans, I carve out my own career path through higher education in the hopes of one day becoming a financially independent adult, and most importantly, I keep company with multiple single adult men with whom I share absolutely no expectation of sex. It’s all very scandalous, I know.

     

    This is the dilemma: While I beg you pardon my sarcasm, the point that I’m trying to get across here is that I don’t want to assume he’s asking me out if all he implied is that we’re “grabbing coffee” or “hanging out.” I want to assume that if he had intended to proposition me for a potential relationship, he would have made that clear in his opening statement. So this is the awkward part; the ball is in now in my court, and I have two real life examples for the possible directions in which this conversation could go, based solely on assumption.

     

    Example #1: I assume his intentions are purely plutonic, and while the thought briefly crosses my mind that I should probably mention my boyfriend somewhere in this conversation, the New Woman in me says “No, I refuse to believe that the only possible scenario in which a man would ask me to hang out is because he finds me sexually appealing. To assume such a thing would be vain and also a little depressing, if I’m being honest here. Therefore I will proceed under the assumption that this male person simply wants to connect minds, not bodies, and establish a meaningful friendship.” With that, I fork over my number, and we make plans to “hang out.” Long story short, somewhere down the line, he sheepishly admits that these ‘hangouts’ have been ‘dates’ all along, and tries to advance the relationship into that territory. Suddenly, I’m the bad guy here for having failed in my obligation to announce my relationship status to every stranger I encounter in the run of a day. This person now believes that some dark magic has taken place in which I’ve purposely concealed such information for my own malicious purposes. They are hurt, they feel betrayed, and they may even resort to some ego-saving tactic such as calling me a slut for leading them on.

     

    Example #2: I begrudgingly follow that antiquated social convention I mentioned earlier, and immediately announce the existence of my boyfriend. I do this because nice boy from class is male, and I am female, and therefore it is my civic responsibility is to assume that by “hang out” he actually meant “make out,” and by “grab coffee” he actually meant “grab each other’s butts,” because that’s obviously the only context in which I could possibly spend time with a member of the opposite sex. This action on my part is guaranteed to yield a variety of awkward results depending on his initial intentions (which are still unbeknownst to me; I merely took a guess and went for it.) If he actually was asking me out, he may now feel embarrassed and attempt to save face by pretending he was just asking for friendship all along – making me feel presumptive and vain – and as part of this he may even still take my number but will likely never use it. On the flip side, perhaps he really was just asking for friendship, but now believes I’m enslaved to some control-freak “Jabba the Hutt” boyfriend who doesn’t allow me to hang out with other males, and decides to steer clear lest he be identified as competition and subsequently targeted. At best, he simply accepts this information with dignity and tells me to have a nice life.

     

    The solution to this ‘dating dilemma’ is simple, virtually pain-free, and guaranteed to save everyone involved from having to assume the position of ‘the bad guy’ at any point during the interaction. This applies to all gender and sexual orientations; and I’ll be the first to admit, I’ve been guilty of this myself on occasion. All it takes is a little social etiquette. Here it is: clarify your communication. When asking someone out on a date, don’t hide behind vague statements like “hang out” or “watch Netflix.” You’ve come this far, so dare to sprinkle a little honesty into your question to avoid confusion. For example, slip the term ‘date’ in there so they understand your intentions and can respond more accurately. This will not only aid you in achieving desired results (and/or avoiding disastrous ones,) but it’s also simply a polite thing to do – you’re not leaving any implications hanging in the air, and therefore you’re not putting the other party in an awkward situation in which they have to make a judgment call on how best to respond. To clarify my point, here’s how these two situations would play out in a perfect world, free of those dreaded antiquated (and frankly, sexist) social conventions:

     

    Example #1: A nice boy from class approaches me somewhere on campus and asks me if I would like to “hang out sometime,” and then requests a phone number exchange. Since “hanging out” is understood to be a platonic activity, I am free to agree or disagree regardless of my relationship status – or either of our gender identities – because both of those pieces of information are irrelevant in this social situation. We make plans to “hang out,” and have a great time in which nobody’s feelings get stepped on, because we’ve both understood the context of this relationship from the beginning. Hey, maybe I’ll even introduce him to my boyfriend and then we can all be friends.

     

    Example #2: A nice boy from class approaches me somewhere on campus and asks me if I would like to “go on a date sometime,” and then requests a phone number exchange. I am either single, in which case I am free to agree or disagree at my leisure, or I’m not single, but I understand the context of this proposition and am therefore free to disagree with or without explanation. At no point during the conversation am I obligated to awkwardly insert my relationship status ‘incase it’s relevant,’ because it’s not.

     

    In summary, the awkward ‘Dating Dilemma’ is easily avoided with a little social etiquette in which intentions are clear, nobody is put on the spot, romances blossom (once you find someone who agrees to go on that hot date with you, that is) and the magic of friendship prevails without any unforeseen expectations based on age-old assumptions about gender roles. Hallelujah!

  • The Feminist Killjoy: Misconceptions

    My journey with feminism has been long and complicated and has most definitely evolved over the years. Looking back, it is abundantly clear that my parents raised me and my two sisters to be little feminists pretty much straight out of the womb. However, it took me quite some time to accept the label myself and to begin to engage with feminism as a political movement. That being said, self-identifying as a feminist is tricky. By this, I mean that along with accepting and embracing this label of feminist, or being a feminist, you are faced with the plethora of negative connotations that come with that label. I learned about the negative connotations behind the feminist label even before I truly began to understand the purpose and importance of feminism. The first time I was called a feminist was in a class discussion in high school when it was used as some kind of insult

    Somewhere, somehow along the way, being a feminist in people’s minds became synonymous with being a “man-hater”. This, I am telling you right now, is absolute complete and total bullshit. Now, I will gladly accept the label of an angry feminist because honestly, I am angry. A lot of the issues that the feminist movement is fighting against make me really fucking angry. Such issues range from my person (and ongoing) experience of being cat-called when I’m walking outside at night, to the fact that the current President of the United States was elected even though it was blatantly clear he has no concept of what sexual consent is and bragged openly about sexually assaulting women. Now, because those things make me really fucking angry, does that mean I hate men? No! Absolutely not.

    Here’s the thing, yeah those things make me angry but I also am educated enough on feminism to recognize that to direct my anger at individuals (read: individual men) for those actions is misguided. So, while I may in the moment yell obscenities at the guy cat-calling me from his car, I know that my anger is really with the systemic socialization of our society that teaches people that yelling at people while they’re walking alone at night is okay.

    The point of feminism is not to hate on men. Feminist scholar bell hooks said it best when she articulated the aim of feminism when she wrote that “feminism is a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression”. All of us in society have been socialized to accept sexist oppression, including men. Feminism is not an us vs. them battle, it is not women vs. men. It took me years to unlearn all the harmful sexist behaviors I had been taught my whole life, and I am still not there yet. There are ways I’m sure I myself still reproduce sexist oppression. Yet, through my understanding of feminism I have been able to grow as a human being and have learned how to treat other human beings better, both women and men. When you call feminism “man-hating”, you’re completely missing the point of feminism. You are reducing the sexist oppression that negatively affects everyone, regardless of gender identity – and the anger that comes with living under such a system – down to an individual level. To suggest that feminism is man-hating, it suggests that feminists are just angry, or that feminists simply do not like men. This ignores everything feminism is actually fighting against and instead just perpetuates the system of sexist oppression.

    At the end of the day, feminism is a movement that is working towards making the lives of others (and ourselves) better. Yes negative connotations and stereotypes of feminism unfortunately continue to exist. And yes, I will admit that these stereotypes initially made me hesitant to claim the label myself. However, once I realized that anybody who thinks me labelling myself as someone who cares about equality and the well-being of others makes me crazy is not somebody I want in my life, I got over it. So yes, hello, here I am, an angry (not man-hating) feminist. To anybody who knows me well, you’re already aware of this. To anybody who doesn’t – now you know.

     

     

  • The Feminist Killjoy and a Narrative so Crucial to Today’s Culture

    Recently, I have become uncomfortable with my comfortable existence. After reflecting on the discourse of my life, I have realized that I had become content with the social norms that have been engrained in me as core values since I was a small child. I was taught to be feminine, but not too feminine. I was always told how important education was, but would always feel slightly overlooked when attempting to express my intelligence. I was told that it was important to have male friends, but not too many or else people may get the wrong idea about what kind of person I am. I was continually told to smile if my face was resting, and I would oblige. Why? Who was I trying to impress? Why did I feel as though I had to smile for no reason, especially if I did not feel like it? Why did it bother me so much to feel as though I had to keep my opinions to myself, especially if I did not agree with someone when they were talking? Unfortunately, we have normalized a culture where women need to fit into a tidy definition of what is acceptable. We have constructed ideas that are specifically designed to leave a large majority of us on the sidelines. In 2016, Erin Wunker published Notes from a Feminist Killjoy: Essays on Everyday Life. This text explores the concept of the feminist killjoy, patriarchal culture, and what it means to be discontent with how normalized our everyday experiences have become. If you are a feminist, this article is for you. If you are not a feminist, perhaps you should read this twice.

     

    First and foremost, let me begin by stating that I am not a bra-burning, man-hating woman. I wear a bra, I love men. I identify as a white, cisgender female who comes from a middle class family, attends university, and has good friends, a nice boyfriend, and more privilege than many other people in the world. By means of the Westernized definition of what it means to be normal, I fit neatly into this category. However, it is important to acknowledge and understand the struggles that others are faced with, further exploring how normalized western behaviors have had such a negative impact on those, including myself, who have felt a burning discontent about the status quo and the ways in which we live our everyday lives.

    As a starting point, Wunker’s definition of patriarchy is necessary. She defines patriarchal culture as a culture in which masculinity- in people and in things- is privileged as inherently foundational to other states of being. In a patriarchal culture, systems, institutions, and social interactions reinforce this hierarchy. When you live in a patriarchal culture, as in any culture, you begin learning its rules and regulations, as well as the way you fit into them, almost immediately. It’s important to note that patriarchal culture is not an equitable culture (19). The definition of a patriarchal culture is not aimed at attacking all men, as many men do not fit neatly into this definition either. Patriarchal culture was a bi-product of upper class, white males. It was a means to an end; a way to ensure the status quo favored their way of life. However, its affects are extremely damaging. We are all born different, but end up inherently the same. We have continued to perpetuate this normalized cycle, further suppressing the majority of the population to favor a few. We have become comfortable within the means of our controlled existences. Thus, the birth of the feminist killjoy.

    Wunker: The feminist killjoy takes pleasure in the works of interrupting the patriarchal norms that pass as joys. She is someone whose existence makes sense when we situate her within the context of an intersectional feminist critique of happiness (44). The feminist killjoy is not content with the current status quo; she pushes for equality and ignores the norms that are continually thrust upon her. When I was younger, I would often find myself remaining quiet in conversations that would bash feminist motives, often portraying them as violent and man-hating. I was scared to speak out about my burning need for equality. I wanted the unequivocal respect that is felt between two men when they meet, I wanted to be viewed as human, as an equal. I still want these things. I am not sure when I became more open and comfortable with being a feminist killjoy, but I want to try and make a difference, I want to try and change the conversations we are having today.

     

    Many women are content with claiming that they are not feminists in order to avoid uncomfortable conversations and exchanges in their daily lives. However, how can these claims be made when we continue to reap the benefits of the women who came before us? When we step into the voting booth, when we wear skirts that are cut above the knee, when we are given equal opportunity to enter the workforce and the education system we often forget that these opportunities were granted to us through the hard work and suffering of the women who came before us. In today’s society, it is crucial to remember that, although we are all in some ways different, our struggle is the same. As Chimamanda Ngozi Adichi said, men and women, all of us, need to work together to change the conversations we are having with children today. We need to ensure that they are valued, and that they know how important individual expression outside of social constructs are. To be a feminist is to believe in equality for everyone, it is to strive for a world of equal opportunity, of acceptance, of love for everyone. Perhaps this is overwhelming to some, but to many, it is an opportunity to fight for social justice and equality for every individual.

     

    For reference, please pick up a copy of Erin Wunker’s work.

     

    Erin Wunker, Notes from a Feminist Killjoy: Essays on Everyday Life (Toronto: Book Thug, 2016), 7-204.

  • WISE Acadia Celebrates Diversity in Computer Science

    On Tuesday, October 18th, WISE (Women in Science and Engineering) Acadia presented a collection of poster presentations bringing together a variety of researchers from across campus. Each poster represented a unique way to look at how technology can be applied to different fields. In addition, the event included a talk by Dr. Anne Condon titled, “It All Computes: Celebrating Diversity in Computing”.  The event took place in Fountain Commons, and brought together women from all scientific disciplines to address women in Computer Science. Each poster brought a good topic to the conversation, and the event overall encouraged female scientists to continue pursuing their degree of choice.

    Some of the projects featured in the event include:

    Girls and Gaming: Influencing Young Women to Join Computer Science (Hayly Thackeray)

    The purpose of this thesis was to create a curriculum for girls in Grades 7 and 8 that teaches them the basics of Computer Science through creativity in video game design. The creative and fun game aspect will spark an interest in this age group, influencing their decision on participating in the Computer Science field. The Girls Get WISE Techxpedition was held on August 18th, 2016 with the help of WISE Acadia, WISE Atlantic, the Anita Borg Institute, Open Acadia, and the Jodrey School of Computer Science. The girls learned to create their own video game in Scratch and try out some Lego robotics. 25% of the girls that attended the program said they wouldn’t have considered becoming a Computer Scientist before the event, but are now. In addition, 75% of the girls said they would continue to program after the event, 20% said they weren’t sure if they would continue to program, and 92% of the girls said they enjoyed the event overall.

    New Radial (Jon Saklofske, Marc Muschler, Ian Brunton and the INKE Research Team)

    New Radial is a data visualization environment that offers an alternative digital workspace for visualizing images and text. It encourages users to contribute to ongoing academic dialogue via connections and operates as a middle ground between large datasets and a close reading environment. Radials are circular arrangements of related nodes that play a central role in a user’s exploration, collection, curation and connection of database objects for humanities-based scholarship. They allow users to work within a middle ground between large datasets and a close reading environment, providing an alternative scale of interpretation within a digitized framework.

    Monitoring Mammal Movement Through Terrestrial and Aquatic Passageways in Antigonish, Nova Scotia Using Remote Camera Sensing (Stephanie White, Randy Milton, Trevor Avery)

    Nova Scotia is gradually expanding its major 100-series highways in response to safety concerns. Highway twinning along a stretch of the Trans-Canada Highway intersects with an ecologically sensitive watershed, disconnecting wildlife movement in the area. To mitigate highway impact, wildlife terrestrial and aquatic passageways were installed along with 4 km of fencing and four one-way control gates. Passageways are >50 m long, and the terrestrial passageway has a central atrium. These passageways are the first to be studied in Nova Scotia, as well as the only to integrate both fencing and an atrium into the design. The highway is set to open late fall 2016, providing an opportunity to study wildlife movements before construction, during construction, and after installation. The scope of this 4-year project covers monitoring the movement of mammals through the passageways using remote camera sensing with a focus on medium-sized mammals (i.e. smaller than deer). Quantifying activity through images will be used to identify drivers of wildlife movement within the passageways. Factors under consideration include fencing, light intensity, moon phase, temperature and weather conditions. Select factors are manipulated to identify which may have a greater effect, including altering light levels by covering the atrium for extended periods connected to moon phases. Findings will be used as a baseline for future passageway design in Nova Scotia.

    Escaping Local Minima with Symbols (Ahmed Galila)

    This concept was inspired by how the brain processes sensory input. Inputs are propagated through the network one layer at a time. Each layer learns a certain representation of the input data. Each representation is more abstract than the layer below. This allows deep architectures to provide better generalization. The goal behind training deep architectures is to reduce the error in the model’s output as much as feasibly possible. Deep architectures have complex error functions with many local minima. Deep models tend to be trapped in these local minima.

    In addition, the event included topics such as: Rethinking Time Course Data: Growth Curve Analysis in Spoken Word Recognition Research (Alexander Sproul, Randy Lyn Newman), Data Mining and Machine Learning at the Acadia Institute for Data Analytics (Danny Silver), and Unsupervised Multi-modal Learning (Mohammed Shameer Iqbal)

    “I really liked the poster session because it gave people the chance to talk to people and ask questions, instead of going to a lecture.” – Acadia Computer Science major

    The poster session was followed by a talk given by Dr. Anne Condon (a professor of Computer Science at U British Colombia). Her enlightening portion of the event discussed the difference between male and female enrollment in the area of Computer Science, and suggested some ways to combat this problem. Her discussion pulled together the importance of having programs such as WISE, and made the event even more exciting.

    “If you get the chance, she’s [Dr. Condon] really nice to talk to, and she’s really smart. She really loves what she does, which I think is amazing because I’m struggling myself to figure out what I actually want to do with my Computer Science Degree… She has found her niche and she loves it. I went to her talk earlier, and it’s incredible how much she loves what she does. She’s really amazing, and I like that a lot.” – Hayly Thackeray

     

  • Mysogynist Judge To Be a Judge No More?

    Hot topics in today’s society, perhaps the hottest topics, are feminism and rape culture. Traces of these subjects can be found almost anywhere we look. From controversy over frosh week chants, to alleged double standards in the Trump vs. Clinton election, to potentially overly-lenient sentencing in sexual assault cases. It can be stated with certainty that debates revolving around the above subjects seem to be taking over our population.

     

    Evidently, each debate or discussion must be viewed on a case-by-case basis. Whether you believe rape culture is a prevalent problem, you don’t believe it exists, or you lie somewhere in between, there are always two sides to an argument. For this reason, I will refrain from classifying this current event as a “victory” for feminism, although that’s how it is being viewed by many.

     

    Controversial Judge Robin Camp of the Federal Court may be removed from the bench after his mistreatment of a sexual assault case in 2014. For those unfamiliar with the story, Camp made headlines when he asked the 19-year-old alleged rape victim why she “couldn’t just keep [her] knees together” during the sexual assault trial. He went even further to ask “Why didn’t you just sink your bottom down into the basin so he couldn’t penetrate you?” (as the alleged rape occurred over a bathroom sink).

     

    Camp was a provincial court judge at the time, but was promoted to the Federal Court in June of 2015.

     

    He also referred to the complainant as “the accused” several times during the 2014 trial, a mistake he made again during the 2016 Canadian Judicial Council inquiry. The inquiry ran from Sept. 6 to 14, and we are now awaiting a recommendation from the Council’s three Superior Court judges and two senior lawyers.

     

    The complainant testified during the inquiry that Justice Camp “made me hate myself,” also adding that “he made me feel like I should have done something… That I was some kind of slut.” A new trial as been ordered for the sexual assault case in light of Camp’s apparent bias in acquitting the accused, Alexander Wagar.

     

    According to Karen Busby, a law professor at the University of Manitoba, inquiries like this one are “fairly rare.”

     

    The Canadian Judicial Council was founded in 1971, with the mandate to “promote efficiency, uniformity, and accountability, and to improve the quality of judicial service in the superior courts of Canada.” This includes reviewing all complaints and allegations against federal court judges.

     

    Busby said that although upwards of 200 complaints are made to the Council each year, only 11 public inquiries have been held since it’s formation, and only two of those inquiries have resulted in judges being recommended for removal. In both cases, the judges resigned from the bench before Parliament was asked to decide their fates.

     

    Camp has not heard a case since November of 2015, and since that time has undergone gender-sensitivity training, which he arranged and paid for himself. This training involved working with a Superior Court judge, an expert in the law of sexual assault, and a psychologist. He feels that as a result of his training, he is now “better equipped to judge cases with the empathy, wisdom, and sensitivity to social context to which all judges aspire.”

     

    Having been educated in South Africa and focusing his experience as a lawyer in Canada on bankruptcy and trust law as well as oil and gas litigation, Camp’s knowledge of Canadian criminal law was minimal prior to becoming a provincial judge in 2012. One of his mentors, Justice Deborah McCawley, feels that Camp is not a misogynist. Testifying at the inquiry, she stated that he was unfamiliar with the history of Canadian sex assault laws and did not understand how rape myths are detrimental to complainants.

     

    Camp’s lawyer, Frank Addario, told the inquiry in his closing submission that Camp should be allowed to remain on the bench because his misconduct was limited to one case, and that it was “the result of a knowledge deficit and a failure of education, not animus or bad character.”

     

    Addario further stated that “[Camp’s] counselling has given him insight into the impropriety of these statements and the connotation they carry in the light of the discriminatory history of sexual assault law.”

     

    Will this judge be a judge no more?

     

  • WGST Program Cuts “Not a Minor Issue”

    The Women’s and Gender Studies (WGST) program at Mount Allison University is in jeopardy due to alleged budgetary reasons. The absence of a budget would do away with the WGST program, a prospect that has many students outraged, voicing the misogyny and gender-bias that such cuts indicate on the part of administration.

    On Monday February 1st, students currently enrolled in the program received an email from the acting head of the program, Lisa Dawn Hamilton, stating that the university will be cutting funding to the WGST program in the 2016-2017 year, as communicated to her by the Dean of Arts. Quoting the email from Dr. Hamilton: “I am writing tonight with disappointing news. The Dean of Arts informed me today that due to decisions made in the budget process the university has cut the budget for the WGST program next year”.

    The convoluted response from university administration did little to ease the concerns of students. An email from the Dean of Arts stated “The University has not announced any intention to cut this or any program… Mount Allison has not initiated any type of formal review of this program or any other.” Such a response is vastly different from that communicated in the email sent out Monday evening. Such statements do little to address the issue at hand, instead only mentioning that the university has not announced it plans, but does not refute the possibility of the aforementioned cuts.

    The student response to the issue was immediate and extensive. Tuesday morning, a change.org petition was created, hoping to “Stop Mount Allison University from cutting the funding to Women’s and Gender Studies.” The petition has garnered signatures from over 6000 supporters. Students organized silent protests before the Board of Regents meeting, as well as letter writing sessions. They refuse to go down without a fight and continue to organize against the proposed cuts.

    The issues raised with the potential cut has led to gross student dissatisfaction, as well as many concerns with the lack of transparency between administration and students in regards to budgetary decision-making and allocation of student funds. A statement on a student-led forum speaks to this frustration: “Rather than directly addressing the funding decision and its consequences for the university, they have misled and misdirected, resorting to the corrupt techniques of doublespeak to disguise the truth of the situation and to evade responsibility for it.”

    An update on Friday indicated that the administration has committed two stipends totalling $12,000, which is enough to hire a part time staff member to teach two courses for one year. This may be enough to allow current WGST minors to finish their degree. However, the future of the program is still unclear, as the program is not sustainable with such minimal funding.

    The Acadia #kNOwMORE campaign released a statement voicing the importance of WGST studies and showing their solidarity for Mount Allison students:

    For too long women have been systematically excluded from society. Women and Gender Studies programs were established to address this exclusion by critically analyzing gender historically, politically, economically, and sociologically. WGST students, alumni, staff, and faculty past and present have been involved in research, activism, and policy work that has been pivotal to the gender equality movement. Cutting the funding to their Women and Gender Studies Program is an entirely misogynistic act, which will further silence and oppress an already marginalized group. Although we are not Mount Allison students we stand by them and their WGST department in solidarity.

    To show your solidarity and support for Mount Allison, please consider signing the change.org petition by visiting: https://www.change.org/p/cbc-news-ctv-news-fox-news-robert-campbell-mount-allison-university-stop-mount-allison-university-from-cutting-the-funding-to-women-s-and-gender-studies

    If you wish to further discuss this important issue, please join the conversation at Commit Sociology Friday February 12th at 12 PM, location TBA.

  • The Vagina Dialogues: Conversations Around Female Bodies

    The Vagina Dialogues: Conversations Around Female Bodies

    As my 4th year at Acadia comes to a close, the one thing that stands between my degree and myself is my honours thesis. I have been lucky and still enjoy my topic as much as I did when I started last spring, and despite grumbling and groaning over different aspects of the process, it has been very rewarding and generally enjoyable. I chose to focus my research on female genitalia and the stigmatization and mystification of the female body through language and education. My research is situated in relation to the historical patriarchal dominance of the field of medicine, and the construction of genital taboos in the Victorian era. Further, the changes that occurred in the Sexual Revolution in the 1970s were examined (particularly the women’s self-help movement) as a period of enlightenment and a historical marker to compare current understandings of female genitalia. In the fall of 2015, I implemented a survey and received over 300 responses from Acadia students regarding their early childhood education about female genitalia, the terms they were taught, their comfort discussing female genitalia, and use of slang or anatomical language when discussing female genitalia.

    The phenomenon that academics call the “conflation of the vagina and vulva,” in which the term vagina comes to stand for all of the female genital organs, was reflected in my results, particularly when participants were asked to label a diagram of external female genitalia. Only 30% of respondents correctly identified the vulva, and a higher proportion of male respondents got it correct compared to females. The most common incorrect response was vagina, supporting previous research. The conflation of vagina and vulva was evident within the first terms that participants were taught for female genitalia. Over 60% of respondents were taught that the female genitalia were solely the vagina, and only three respondents were initially taught that there were various female genital organs (vulva, vagina, labia, etc.). Some of the factors that impacted respondents’ ability to correctly label female genital organs were place of residence, comfort and major of study. There was a statistically significant relationship between place of residence and correct identification of the vulva; Atlantic Canadian residents were 60% less likely to label vulva correctly, and those from rural areas of Canada were 49% less likely to label it correctly. Those who were more comfortable talking about female genitalia were more likely to label the vulva correctly. Though there was not a statistically significant relationship between major and ability to label vulva correctly, it was found that Biology and Psychology students were more likely to be able to identify the vulva and Sociology majors had more difficulty. In terms of comfort, it was found that respondents were more comfortable talking about female genitalia with people who identified as the same gender as they did, and that university had made people comfortable talking about female genitalia overall.

    The importance of talking about the vulva and female genitalia may not be obvious at first, but I argue that without a concise and clear language to describe the female body, there is a lack of communication, and understanding of the female body. This can lead to challenges communicating with doctors, partners, and even having a full awareness of one’s own body. I critique the current education system and sexual education curriculums, highlighting that clear education early in childhood is of the utmost importance. Claims that genital terminology is too complex for young children is absurd when they can name 40 kinds of dinosaurs.

    Thanks are due to the Sociology department and Dr. Zelda Abramson for supporting this research and getting me through this process.

Betzillo positions itself as a versatile gaming hub where structured bonuses and adaptive gameplay mechanics support both short sessions and extended play.

Built with a focus on innovation, Spinbit integrates modern casino architecture with rapid transactions, appealing to players who value speed and digital efficiency.

Ripper Casino emphasizes bold entertainment through high-impact slot titles and competitive promotions crafted for risk-oriented players.

A friendly interface and stable performance define Ricky Casino, offering a casual yet reliable environment for a wide spectrum of gaming preferences.

King Billy Casino channels classic casino spirit into a modern platform, delivering recognizable themes supported by contemporary reward systems.

Immersive visuals and layered slot mechanics are at the core of Dragonslots, creating a narrative-driven casino experience.

Lukki Casino appeals to players seeking direct access and minimal friction, focusing on fast loading times and intuitive controls.

Casinonic provides a structured and dependable gaming framework, blending modern slots with transparent operational standards.