Lately, I have noticed several of the scholarly articles we read throughout CAP generally convey similar messages. Messages pertaining to how we view the world we live in and the people within it, ultimately allowing us to do so with a more empathetic and open mind.

CAP Law & Society introduces us to historical and contemporary instances when ideas of legality and humanity come into conflict. Critically and thoroughly studying the topics we do then leads us to think about our own personal places in a much larger context.

This week we read Carrie Dawson’s “On Thinking Like a State and Reading (about) Refugees” I found this article to be quite similar to an article we covered in History 105 prior to this week. Danika Medak-Saltzman’s, “Transnational Indigenous Exchange: Rethinking Global Interactions…”(link to article) likewise discusses how scholarly portrayals of a minority group often lead to misconceptions of them that we believe to be true. Dawson confers about how literary works invite us to read refugees while Saltzman discusses how the historical archival materials we study are all from the colonial vantage point and generally go unchallenged. Both argue that because of this we do not allow such “minorities” to have agency. Saltzman states “we must read with the goal of revealing rather than obscuring Natives” and Dawson correspondingly states we must adopt the perspective of “We Refugees” rather than thinking like a state which allows for an “othering” of migrants.

Essentially, both articles suggest we must scrutinize our instrumentalized reading practices and their utter failure to account for the humanity of their subjects.  Saltzman particularly raising the possibility of exploring the minority consciousness, while Dawson additionally agrees stating “such forms of representation deny the very particulars that make people something other than anonymous bodies.”

What we study in CAP plays off one another in the scholarly community, which intrigues me. In high school I  loved when I learned similar concepts through the lens of different, and distinct subjects. I had no idea what CAP really was upon registering, so again being able to study major issues through a historical, anthropological, political and legal lens is something I genuinely enjoy.  8 months into studying in CAP and I feel as though I see and understand society with a new heightened awareness. I can’t wait to become more educated and see where that takes me.  One of my favorite concepts “sonder” is something I often see within the coordination of our classes.

Sonder – n. the realization that each random passerby is living a life as vivid and complex as your own—populated with their own ambitions, friends, routines, worries and inherited craziness—an epic story that continues invisibly around you like an anthill sprawling deep underground, with elaborate passageways to thousands of other lives that you’ll never know existed, in which you might appear only once, as an extra sipping coffee in the background, as a blur of traffic passing on the highway, as a lighted window at dusk.

Today while scrolling through my Twitter timeline I came across an article that both engrossed me and exasperated me simultaneously. While it has little to do with what we’re currently focusing on in What We All Long For,  I decided to use this blog post to rant about it.

The article is called “The Ugly Truth About Feminism” and rather than argue feminism vs anti – feminism I’d rather play devils advocate and play around with both sides of the argument. The author of the article, Nicholas Patrick, claims to have been “an absolute feminist” until he realized that “some feminists fight extremely unfair and sometimes even emasculating.” He claims to only have supported it to avoid being chauvinist, feeling obligated as  a white man to join the movement.  He continues to write about the very line between what is worth fighting for and what he considers offensive when it comes to the feminist agenda. However, I question how much offence men really take from feminism when we live in a clear patriarchal dominated society. I mean, what’s so offensive about wanting equal political, economic, social and overall human rights between the genders?

Patrick continues to discuss aspects of feminism that he finds to be unfair, including the demand of equal pay. He refutes the argument on the basis that pay should be  based solely on performance, and that just because “Serena Williams is a girl does not mean she is entitled to the same pay as Usain Bolt.”  Such a comparison makes me wonder if Patricks claims against feminism root from ignorance since a feminists’ demand for equal wages are in regards to men and women with the same position in the work force. Additionally, it sheds light on the fact that men receive more, and higher promotions much more often than women in the work force. My knowledge on the topic of feminism arising from my course Gender, Race, Sexuality & Social Justice – Women’s Studies. With that in mind how can Patrick compare Serena Williams and Usain Bolt given they compete in different sports entirely, thus the better performer cannot be accounted for given Usain Bolt is not a tennis player and vice versa. Furthermore Patrick does bring up a curious statement on the topic: “It doesn’t matter whether we are men or women, we are supposed to be paid based on our performance. If men and women can perform at the same level, then they are paid the same. If a man performs worse, he should be paid less. And that is what we should all be fighting for. There shouldn’t be any sense of entitlement here from either gender.” 

I concur with the aforementioned excerpt from the article as feminism is fighting for equality, and does not dignify any “anti-men” concepts. Females, nor males should feel “entitled” over the other gender. If men must view women as equals,then women, including vehement feminists, must comply with the same.

Again, while Patrick makes some interesting and clever accusations on the “Ugly Truth About Feminism”, he also makes some very uneducated ones, including:

“…if I were to push further, and based on this argument on equality in spite of ability (or lack thereof), why should women and children be the first to be rescued? Aren’t we discriminating against the men? If women want the same advantages, they should be susceptible to the same disadvantages as well, right? If you don’t want men to dominate you, what makes you think we want you to dominate us?”

I believe Patrick is taking feminism, twisting its very goals, and playing it so that men are deemed the victims in modern society. This is absolutely and completely false. Today’s feminist movement is not working towards one gender dominating the other, it’s not man vs. woman, it’s simply working towards men and women being able to coexist wholeheartedly and equally.  Overall, the article spiked my interest and inner passion in regards to equality amongst the genders. I posted the article to Facebook informing my fellow friends that:

“Selective feminism is not a thing, educate ya selves. Don’t let a select group of unreasonable feminists ruin the image of a necessary cause. It is a giant brick wall standing in the way of progress, where we should be making a real change together”

I stick by my statement ^

When Heather had first suggested we start reading 3 day road a week or so before our first lecture on it, I hadn’t really prioritized it. I am a typically fast reader and when we were told it’s a novel based on a 3 day journey, I figured it wasn’t long and could easily finish it in a day or two. Little did I know how long of a story it was until I had purchased it. When I began reading I wondered how a story written in the span of 3 days could be so insanely long. 3 Day Road – more like 30 day road.

Only after reading about 2 or 3 chapters of reading did I recognize and understand the use of flashbacks in the novel. I had assumed the entirety of the novel would be based on Xavier’s journey with Niska back to their homeland of James Bay.  I had no clue that such a way of writing would be included – flashbacks emerging both Xavier’s story of war and how it transformed him as well as Niska’ s powerful and untold stories.  This style of writing is my favorite style, to me it makes a novel 10x better.

As with the Handmaids Tale both novels allow for an introspection of the protagonists, a great examination of their mental and emotional states. It is greatly intriguing. It is also effective in portraying both Niska and Xavier’s stories in vivid detail. When reading about Xavier’s war experiences especially, the detail used in the flashbacks allow for a reader to feel as if they are present in the world being written about.   It allows us to see how and why Xavier came to be, as such with Niska. Boyden makes great use of flashbacks to show how something that has happened before the story has a great deal to do with what characters are facing presently. Allowing the story to make much mores sense and allow the audience to see the great effects of war and living life as an Indian.  Ultimately the flashbacks present in Three Day Road  allow for a better illustration of the story as a whole.

For such a story I feel the use of flashbacks are vital as they enhance our connection with both the characters and the story line. We know what Xavier is thinking and feeling while at the fore front of the trenches,  we are able to thoroughly understand and empathize with Niska’s suffering through the residential school system. Which brings us back to Nussbaum’s argument of empathy and compassion through the use of literature.  We are able to gain and further our compassion for what life was like for Indians in 1919, which can be utilized today to redress such issues.

Additionally, the use of flashbacks allow for no constraint or limit on time in a novel. It’s primary purpose being to bridge time, in this case revealing an emotional past for both main characters. Flashback’s are insightful and insight is crucial for such a novel.

PS – heather: my roommate & I have been living off of our neighbours wifi for the past few months and just now did she find out and take it away 🙁 Hence why this post is mildly late as i’ve been installing a new router which is a lot more difficult than it may seem.  God bless.

Recently all the CAP classes have had a sharp focus on Aboriginals and the loss of their culture through colonialism. Aboriginals were exploited, oppressed, marginalized, and through this lost their way of life. Colonists did everything to eradicate Aboriginal life, in turn putting their own advantageous agenda first. After doing this week’s readings for both Anthropology and ASTU I began thinking that not only did Aboriginal colonization have harmful effects for Aboriginals but it had equally harmful effects for the rest of Canadian society. Such consequences are still present today, yet in our society we fail to acknowledge them.

By pursuing tactics to assimilate Aboriginal culture, through the amalgamation of Indian children into residential schools, the sixties scoop, dominating owned land, etc. The government failed to recognize how detrimental such actions could be on both ends. Early colonists and even the Canadian government today never gave the Aboriginal culture, and ways of life a chance. They were immediately referred to as savages or barbarians, looked at as inferior, and are typically seen today as uneducated, victims, and alcoholics. But when did anyone really try to embrace the culture? Aboriginals pride themselves on the natural world. They live in accordance with sustainability, embrace human and non-human life, they recognize the worlds resources are in fact, finite. Even more so their culture emphasizes sharing, general welfare over personal wealth. Meanwhile, today we treat the environment as it if were numb to our presence, as if its infinite and nothing our culture does impacts it. We live in a capitalist society that exploits land, and an unequal distribution of wealth is evident almost world wide.  I had read in an assigned anthropology reading that it is predicted forests will be gone in 2050. Sea life will be depleted by 2043.  While it may seem like a lifetime away right now, it really isn’t, we’ll be in our 40s-50s. Our generation and our next generation will be living with the severe consequences of our government and the unsustainable ways of the white men up top. It really doesn’t seem fair that such a fate has been chosen for us. Especially considering the land initially taken, did not belong to them. It belonged to a group of people whose culture enhanced rather than eradicated the worlds resources.

It’s never too late to look to the lost culture of Aboriginals to help better our world today. Just because the culture suffered a genocide doesn’t mean Aboriginal culture is gone forever. Like Heather said, Aboriginal culture is still very much alive today. However it can be even more alive without constricting limits such as the Indian Act. Such an act may status Indians but confines them even more. We must educate ourselves and take action into our own hands, looking at Aboriginal culture for inspiration, if we want to live healthily and happily in the future.

Much criticism targeting Queen B,  Beyoncé Knowles, arose after the release of her new single Flawless. While the song is feminism based, with samples by acclaimed feminist writer Chimamanda Adichie, some critics argue it is in fact counter feminist as the bridge of the song states “bow down, bitches” repetitively.

Now, Beyoncé is an artist who is most definitely not afraid to express her sexuality through her music, however the sexuality that she conveys is one that she owns as a strong independent woman. She is able to both own and express herself, who she is, in a culture that works against such ideals. If Beyoncé claims she is a feminist, well then, who are we to say that she isn’t one? Feminism is not a one size fits all, unilateral movement with specific guidelines. Feminism is meant to be all inclusive, Beyoncé, in this specific song, in many other songs, and in her mannerisms, is pro-woman without being anti-man. The sexiness, the confidence, and the strength portrayed in her work is one that many females perceive as admirable, empowering, and liberating.  Beyoncé addresses the ambiguity of the line “bow down bitches” in the article Beyonce Explains Bow Down. She claims it was the side of her that she felt she needed to defend; it was motivation a burst of anger she wanted to express, for her “haters”. A lyricism of empowerment that made her feel as she says “gangsta.” “Bow down, bitches” is a lyrical explanation of what’s wrong with assuming that being feminist requires one to follow a script, and not your own heart. I personally, fully agree with what Beyoncé is trying to channel within this song, and many other songs of hers that may bring her feminism into question. She brings sexy female power. She allows girls world wide, including myself, to feel this power.

The focus of criticism in the song is all directed towards the very repetitive message of “bow down bitches” yet, this draws away from the pro-fem themes throughout the rest of the song, Flawless. “I took some time to live my life, but don’t just think i’m his little wife.” Here specifically, I believe Beyoncé is stating that she is so much more than merely Jay-Z’s wife. She has an extremely successful career of her own, she is a loving mother, and has a worldwide fan base in addition to being happily married. She is ambitious and establishes herself as an independent, aspiring, successful woman who lives a life far beyond the socially expected norm of being a wife. The hook of the song, including lyrics such as: “we flawless, ladies tell em, say ‘i look so goodnight tonight’ goddamn, goddamn.” This sentence alone displays the sexy confidence Beyoncé owns and the same confidence she wishes all women develop and portray. It is a slap in the face of what we are supposed to believe to be an appropriate display of a woman’s sexuality.

Overall, the song Flawless amongst endless other songs shows us how validated Beyoncé is in her feminism. It may not be academic feminism, or a type of feminism that society is used to seeing when thinking “feminist”, but Queen B is rocking sexual liberation, control and self-ownership which are all central to the ideologies of feminism.

Prior to being lectured on Obasan this Thursday, I had been feeling overwhelmed with work and completely exhausted. Exams, assignments, tests and excruciating readings had been taking over my entire life. Time management isn’t really my forte, and as a result I have truly been drowning in the workload of university. When I was initially reminded in class of the third blog posting, my stress level just skyrocketed. What would I blog about this time? What could I have to say amidst everything else I had going on at the time? I did not have the slightest clue.

However, when watching the two videos in class, especially the video clip in which we were able to see those interned in the 1940’s given honorary degrees from UBC, I swear I had a revelation. Probably just a reality check, but it felt like a damn epiphany. I was so touched by the videos; both resonated with me so much. I was reminded why I was in the CAP Law & Society program and why I decided to pursue this above other programs. The substantial workload all of a sudden became bearable because I knew I had to, and could, succeed in law – especially human rights law.

Ever since watching Hot Docs (a documentary film festival) in the eighth grade, I have wanted to be a lawyer. However, I was not seeking the mundane setting of some unknown law firm and dealing in small claims court. Instead,I had wanted to be a human rights lawyer established in and working on behalf of the United Nations. It is now four and a half years later, and that is still my ultimate goal despite how unachievable it may seem. Seeing justice being served and human rights being reconciled, fought for, and enabled around the world is what ignites a passion inside of me. This is exactly what happened when watching the videos in class. It struck an ambition within me to one day be able to work towards redressing historical wrongs, to allow those wronged to regain livelihood and a sense of self, and to prevent such occurrences from ever happening again.

In the context of the internment of the Japanese Canadians in the 1940’s, the largest mass exodus in Canadian history, corrective justice is better than no justice. To be able to witness affirmative action taking place, and development and progress happening in regards to human rights, brings about the certainty that things really are getting better. In my opinion, although our progress appears to be positive, we should always question whether all aspects of law today are just and in accordance with the most widespread concepts of morality.

How can we guarantee that the law is just and upheld so that no one will be subjected to such circumstances ever again? I intend on figuring that out.

After having analyzed 17 pages of Martha Nussbaum making a passionate case for the importance of arts in a democratic society, I feel as if I have come to thoroughly understand her argument and the position she takes.

Since childhood, I have been an extremely avid reader. I was also told in my youth that I possessed an imagination like no other.Only after reading Nussbaum’s article did I realize the correlation between these two traits. Everything that I have read throughout my life, from the simplest lullabies to Judy Blume to F.Scott Fitzgerald’s the Great Gatsby, has expanded my thoughts and imagination in one way or another. The more complex the literary works, the more insight I am able to gather on both the complexities of human society as well as the experiences of individuals. Perhaps the greatest power of literature is that it gives the reader the ability to slip into the skin of another person. Arts, more specifically literature, is able to do this by exposing different perspectives, making us question “what if”, exploring similarities and differences in various social situations, and allowing for audiences to look at the world through a different lens.

Through such devices, literature allows for informed rather than ignorant judgement’s on society and the individual. This understanding can formulate into positive action in a democratic society. Perception and recognition, both of which stem from literature and the arts, are vital in having a conscious understanding of future political aspects in life. All of this: perception, the complexities we gain from literature and the arts, and the expansion of the imagination lead us towards the central idea of Nussbaum’s article: compassion and empathy. Having compassion is key, especially in a country that prides itself on multiculturalism and diversity. Democratically, this is necessary in bringing about the most fair and just government possible. Literature leads to a significant understanding of compassion, empathy and sympathy which, put to use in societal life, is imperative in being a democratic citizen.

In Plato’s literary dialogue Republic, the rulers of his perfect city are required to undergo years of rigorous musical training before they are deemed worthy to govern. Plato obviously understood the importance and necessity of arts in human society. Nussbaum definitely agrees with this viewpoint, emphasizing the political relevance of art throughout her article. I too agree that when being called upon to vote, compassion and empathy are vital in making a correct selection of the candidate, their policies, their viewpoints, etc. Between a politician who cares strictly for numbers and policy versus one who genuinely cares about the people he governs, the latter should win ten times out of ten.

Although the concepts discussed above and in Nussbaum’s article may seem abstract and unrelated to some, they work together and complement one another allowing for them to be applied politically and democratically in real life situations. Nussbaum argues that we must defend ideals against a common humanity as it is what we need to thrive democratically. Do you agree?

Coming from Aboriginal ancestry myself, it particularly intrigues me to be exposed to different viewpoints regarding the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and opinions on Aboriginal identification and culture in Canada in general.

The occurrence of residential schools in Canada from 1875-1996 is an obvious and objectionable violation of human rights, several articles from the UDHR were violated without question. Because of this it surprised me to hear from various classes “why so much importance was put on TRC?”  Cruelty, punishment and death took place. Aboriginal culture was ultimately assimilated into Western culture through inhumane tactics. Residential schools have had lasting effects on Aboriginal culture and communities, the result being systematic cultural genocide. Having said that it does in fact frustrate me to hear comments undermining the historic event, especially when such comments often derive from ignorance.

More often than not I find it difficult to put my thoughts into words on the spot, as they do not do my thoughts and opinions justice. For that reason I find it preferable to blog as I am in no rush to put what I am thinking, out into the world.

Genocide and inhumane events that have taken place throughout history are often recognized and remembered. Guaranteed everyone knows about the Holocaust, or the genocide in Rwanda. However many people lack knowledge or awareness in general when it comes to the 150,000 First Nations children that were forcibly taken from there homes and placed in homes where significant abuse and death took place. The residential school system is a crucial and significant part of Canadian history, even in understanding the way Canada works today. For example, affirmative action and reconciliation. Being a status Indian, having relatives close to me who have suffered because of how Canadian institutions once were, I do receive benefits within Canada, as an attempt to reconcile history. One being financial university coverage. Many of my friends jokingly call me a “free loader” or say “the tribe is paying for you” but realistically there is an impartial reason behind the compensation I receive. My ancestors were subjected to much unfairness, brutality and misery upon European settlers arriving in Canada. It is positive reinforcement. My point being that many people simply lack the knowledge of the very foundation of Canada – the native Indians.

Having said that, I just wish to stress the true importance of TRC and having classes suspended on the 18th in honor of the events. While Aboriginal culture is often striving to be recognized it is these events and commemorations that educate both Canadian and international students and the rest of the populace. They are necessary in recreating the Aboriginal culture that has suffered for generations and promoting awareness for one of the most cruel and exploitative, yet “hushed” events to take place in Canada. Understanding what has once happened allows us to significantly understand future relations, what to do and what not to do. Aboriginal culture is one of the most intriguing, spiritual and genuine cultures out there, yet stereotypes of today’s aboriginal communities prevent them from being fully enriched and recognized.

What do you think about TRC, present day aboriginals and their culture and the residential school system? I’m interested in hearing other perspectives and opinions 🙂

My name is Tori Clark, I am 18,  from Toronto, Ontario, born & raised. I’m super excited for my first year at UBC and all the new opportunities that come along with it. My mind is ripe with curiosity and I am looking forward to expand it and fill it with everything that intrigues me. Looking forward to making the best of the upcoming year 🙂