Alberta: Get Rich or Die Trying

Touchy-feely good, sexual assault bad

LV is back after a prolonged absence with a new post, check it out:

Despite efforts by activists, feminists and women-loving people in general, the mainstream media is STILL minimizing and denying the effects and experiences of sexual assault.  And this article from today's Edmonton Journal is no different.  The article, entitled "Appeal rejected for touchy-feely doctor", details the case of an Edmonton physician who groped and assaulted several of his patients during routine examinations.  Here is what happened:

"A 2005 investigation by a college committee heard from one woman who said she felt violated after Litchfield pinched her nipples during a routine physical. Another woman, who went to hospital with a migraine, allowed Litchfield to loosen her bra to check her back for muscle spasms, but then felt him cupping her breasts with his hands and pulling her against his groin, court documents revealed at the time."

While this excerpt clearly demonstrates that the doctor completely violated the trust and body of his patient, the Edmonton Journal headline writers choose to refer to his actions as "touchy-feely".  Obviously, at some point they completely missed the boat. 

According to the University of Alberta Sexual Assault Centre, "sexual assault" is any form of sexual contact without voluntary consent (Adapted from the Criminal Code of Canada, Sec.270).

• kissing, fondling, sexual intercourse, anal intercourse, and oral sex are all examples of sexual assault if they are done without voluntary consent.
• consent obtained through pressure, coercion, force, or threats of force is not voluntary consent.

And consent is not given if,

• it is given by someone else
• the person is incapable of consenting (i.e. unconscious, drunk, stoned, or sleeping)
• it is an abuse of power, trust, or authority
• the person does not say yes, says no, or through words or behavior implies no
• the person changes her/his mind

Get that Journal editors?  Unwanted groping and fondling by a person who has authority, power and trust  is sexual assault. Period.  This "doctor" is not "touchy-feely", he is perpy. Ask the women, I'm sure they would agree. 

Not only is this a clear case of sexual assault, but it also is a flagrant example of the abuse of medical authority, and our tendency to brush it off.  We need to start asking ourselves why this doctor is called "touchy-feely," when if a pedophile enacted the exact same physical actions on the body of a young girl, the media would be up in arms. The news media holds special privileges and rights in our society, but with those comes the obligation and responsibility to not minimize and treat lightly sexual violence.  Let's hope the Edmonton Journal steps it up.

Take Back the Night, Takes Edmonton

Some of you who are up on the current events in Edmonton might be wondering why we here at AGRDT are writing about Take Back the Night (TBTN) a week too late. Well, it is because events like TBTN are NEVER too late to talk about. Although we would like to, we can't write about every single event that takes place in our province, but I would like to take this opportunity to highlight the importance of  TBTN and why it is still crucial for events like this to take place.  For those of you who are unfamiliar with TBTN it is a rally and march to create awareness for women and children, who have been, and continue to be violently abused. 

I was fortunate enough to attend the TBTN rally in Edmonton last Friday night, and am somewhat embarrassed to admit, as a self identifying feminist, this was my first time.  I went to the rally, very unsure of what to expect. However, any preconceived notions I had were completely shattered. First, I didn't expect that many people to attend, I have been to many community events with a sub-par turnout. Well, I was completely wrong about this one. TBTN Edmonton drew over 250 people who marched in solidarity to stop the abuse of women. Second, I thought that even though men are invited,  not many will show up. Also wrong, while there were more women, I was surprised and pleased with the diversity of genders present. Thirdly, not only did the march bring out individuals of all genders it brought out individuals of all ages and social backgrounds. It was also great to see many community leaders involved in such an important cause. Finally, I truly appreciated the opportunity this event gave to women to share their stories and console with other victims of violence and abuse.

While many of our enlightened readers are probably well aware of the harsh realities of violence against women and children, it is important to take time to think about what we can do to try and prevent this from occurring to someone we may know. While I was just an observer and participant at last weeks rally I want to say thanks to all of the people who attended.  The point of any peaceful protest is just to raise awareness so that even one more person might take notice, and might think twice about being abusive, or stopping an abusive situation. If you didn't attend, that's ok, there is always next year... 

This Just In: Feds DO care about women

...as long as they know how to wield a hammer. Or something like that.  On behalf of the federal government, Rona Ambrose announced friday that $1.39 million will be invested into Women Building Futures.  WBF is a not-for-profit training program that trains women in trade work.  Here is the mandate of this organization:

• Attract more women into the construction trades;
• Provide trades training that meets the needs of women and the industry;
• Provide mentorship and long-term support for women entering and in the trades;
• Examine and address systemic barriers to the recruitment, training and retention of women entering and in trades;
• Increase the number of tradeswomen instructors and mentors.

This sincere and commendable move by the feds come close on the heels of one heinous "we hate women" bill that recently passed second reading in the House.  On Wednesday, the "Unborn Victims of Crime Act" (Bill c-484) passed with flying colours when almost all Conservatives and a strong showing of Liberals stood in favour of it--including above mentioned 'pro-woman' Rona Ambrose.

Bill C-484 was introduced by local fan fave Ken Epp (and by local fan fave, I mean bland Tory backbencher from Edmonton-Sherwood Park), and is designed to double penalize people who assault pregnant women and in doing so, kill the fetus.  Essentially, if a fetus dies during the assault or murder of the pregnant woman, the assaulter is charged with two counts of assault.  Sounds okay, right? So what's the problem?

What pro-choice activists are arguing, is that this bill reintroduces fetal personhood thereby opening up the door for the anti-choicers to mount a legal challenge.  You see, once 'personhood' rights have been established, it becomes the first step in a legal and moral strategy which pits the rights of the 'fetus' against the rights of the 'woman'.  Since the fetus is inherently 'innocent' and the woman 'should have known better' it ultimately ends with the rights of the fetus trumping the rights of the women, thereby forcing her to continue through with her unwanted pregnancy and bear the child.  This is obviously a huge problem for the reproductive rights and bodily integrity of women in the country.  Now, Ken Epp and other defenders of this bill are arguing that it does not infringe on a women's right to access abortion, citing the fact that a person can only be charged for assaulting a fetus when the mother had been assaulted at the same time.  However, they are missing (zealously concealing) the point.  Bringing fetal rights into Canadian jurisprudence and law establishes a legal recognition of the fetus.  This interestingly brings it into conflict with the Criminal Code which expressly states that a person only becomes a person once it has left the birth canal.

Among the many ironies, 2008 is the 20th Anniversary for the Morgentaler Decision in Canada--the watershed court case that de-criminalized abortion, allowing it to become legal.  In another royal kick in the skirt, our fearless opposition leader, Stephane Dion, was missing from the vote that day because he was...wait for it... attending a party for International Women's Day.  The Bloc and the NDP all whipped their parties to vote against it.  And, on a twisted upnote, Josee Verner, the Minister for Women's Affairs, voted against the bill, too. Perhaps a silver lining? Who knows. We will keep you updated for the third and final reading.