Author Topic: Why isn’t there a Ministry of Men? We have everything else  (Read 810 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 265,570
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,526
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Why isn’t there a Ministry of Men? We have everything else
« on: December 08, 2019, 12:41:34 »
Lawrie McFarlane: Why isn’t there a Ministry of Men? We have everything else

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s recently announced new cabinet is an insult to men. He has appointed a minister of women and gender equality, a minister of diversity and youth, a minister of immigration and refugees, and a minister of seniors.

Two ministers are needed to deal with Aboriginal issues — a minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations, and a minister of Indigenous Services, though how they differ is anyone’s guess.

For heaven’s sake, there’s a minister of middle class prosperity, a minister of disability inclusion. Even the inanimate finds its place in this council of deadwood — we now have a minister of digital government.

So why is there no ministry of men? Every other demographic, gender and race-related group gets its place in the sun. Don’t us guys count?

But of course we know the answer to that. No.

Yet the past three decades have been brutal on working-class males. Most of the job loss in areas such as forestry, fisheries and oil extraction has fallen on men.

That’s one reason the male suicide rate is three times that of women. It also explains, in part, why 76 per cent of Canadians who die of a drug overdose are men.

Meanwhile, the B.C. government is spending $12.4 million to help women and other “under-represented” groups get jobs in the trades — one of the few remaining bastions of male employment. How about assisting men to find work in female-dominated careers, such as nursing?

But we can carry this analysis much further. Men are more likely to die of cancer, heart disease and diabetes at younger ages than women.

Perhaps I can be forgiven a personal note. In the late 1970s, when I joined the Budget Bureau in Saskatchewan, there were 14 male staffers, most in their 20s.

At least half this group are dead, few of whom, I believe, lived to be 60. Almost all of the fatalities were due to cardiovascular disease. I’m aware of no deaths among my female colleagues.

Males account for nearly 94 per cent of occupational fatalities in B.C. as well as the vast majority of hospitalizations caused by workplace accidents.

Looking at our education system, boys face more hurdles than girls, and generally perform less well in standardized testing. Fewer boys than girls gain a high school diploma, and fewer young men go on to university than young women.
And there are deeper issues to confront. The idea of what is socially acceptable, in terms of behaviour and attitudes, has swung decisively against young boys.

Girls and young women are being taught to spread their wings. Boys and young men are having their wings clipped, as if female liberation can only be achieved at the cost of, or through the means of, male repression.

As a result, boys often find themselves confused and isolated, as the long-standing concept of manliness is assailed from all sides as a form of toxic machismo.

I have no intention of disputing the often harmful aspects of traditional masculinity. A thoughtful re-examination of the roles both men and women should aspire to was long overdue.

But as is often the case with mass movements, the war on men has over-reached. The historical notion of what it means to be a man has been condemned, but nothing constructive put in its place.

We’re still at the blaming and shaming stage, long after such attitudes are neither helpful or required.
This is why we need a ministry of boys and men every bit as much as we need a ministry of women. The latter have made their point, a point that needed making.

But the former stand ignored and silent, and so they will remain, as long as the powers that be avert their gaze.

https://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/op-ed/lawrie-mcfarlane-why-isn-t-there-a-ministry-of-men-we-have-everything-else-1.24030069
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 225,740
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,679
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Why isn’t there a Ministry of Men? We have everything else
« Reply #1 on: December 08, 2019, 13:02:22 »
Now that's a really good question.

Anywhere else, statistics such as these, would be a concern that ought to be addressed. At the very least by gathering statistics to validate the issue and an investigation into the root causes.

 :stirpot:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Online Blackadder1916

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 200,795
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,092
Re: Why isn’t there a Ministry of Men? We have everything else
« Reply #2 on: December 08, 2019, 14:22:12 »
Now that's a really good question.

Anywhere else, statistics such as these, would be a concern that ought to be addressed. At the very least by gathering statistics to validate the issue and an investigation into the root causes.

 :stirpot:

And a search would reveal numerous statistics, theses, studies, investigations and some out and out bullshit about the root causes.  As I read the OP, I kept waiting for the punchline or at least some wit.  I suppose I'm somewhat jaded in my preference for columnists who can make a point as well as entertain.  I guess that comes from my early devouring of the output of political satirists such as Ray Guy.

The simple answer to why no "Ministry of Men" - because they are not a group on the fringe that requires a visible programme or department to maintain or potentially sway their support (or next vote).
Whisky for the gentlemen that like it. And for the gentlemen that don't like it - Whisky.

Offline Hamish Seggie

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 234,572
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,518
  • This is my son Michael, KIA Afghanistan 3 Sep 08
Re: Why isn’t there a Ministry of Men? We have everything else
« Reply #3 on: December 08, 2019, 14:37:07 »
Because men - check your privelege- are needed to pay for all the other ministries and their dunderhead politicians.
Freedom Isn't Free   "Never Shall I Fail My Brothers"

“Do everything that is necessary and nothing that is not".

Online Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 151,215
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,800
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Why isn’t there a Ministry of Men? We have everything else
« Reply #4 on: December 08, 2019, 15:08:28 »
And a search would reveal numerous statistics, theses, studies, investigations and some out and out bullshit about the root causes.  As I read the OP, I kept waiting for the punchline or at least some wit.  I suppose I'm somewhat jaded in my preference for columnists who can make a point as well as entertain.  I guess that comes from my early devouring of the output of political satirists such as Ray Guy.

The simple answer to why no "Ministry of Men" - because they are not a group on the fringe that requires a visible programme or department to maintain or potentially sway their support (or next vote).

Ministry for the support of gun owners, since we are about 6% of the population, putting higher than gays or hockey players?

Online Blackadder1916

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 200,795
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,092
Re: Why isn’t there a Ministry of Men? We have everything else
« Reply #5 on: December 08, 2019, 15:23:00 »
Ministry for the support of gun owners, since we are about 6% of the population, putting higher than gays or hockey players?

But gun owners aren't on the fringe.  Ideologically, they (those who base their political action on this single issue) are firmly entrenched in the middle of the Conservative camp.  Since the current Liberal platform has a more restrictive view of gun ownership nothing they do will sway that group of voters so such a ministry makes no sense, even in the nonsensical world of these fringe issue ministries.
Whisky for the gentlemen that like it. And for the gentlemen that don't like it - Whisky.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 314,326
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,349
Re: Why isn’t there a Ministry of Men? We have everything else
« Reply #6 on: December 08, 2019, 16:28:50 »
We need a minister of offended peoples.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline MSmith

  • Guest
  • *
  • 230
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9
Re: Why isn’t there a Ministry of Men? We have everything else
« Reply #7 on: December 08, 2019, 19:27:03 »
Two ministers are needed to deal with Aboriginal issues — a minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations, and a minister of Indigenous Services, though how they differ is anyone’s guess.

The nuance was actually pretty central to why Jody-Wilson Raybould rejected the position because the minister of Indigenous Services is known as the "Indian Agent" or something like the hand that feeds, and is typically viewed as something demeaning to indigenous people while Crown-Indigenous Relations is much friendlier... The two positions were split in 2017 on the reccomendation of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples in 1996. It might not be obvious from first glance but the position of Indian Agent in the Indian Act is indeed quite demeaning, and makes sense that the two roles would be split. The other option is amending the Indian Act itself, which is a whole other can of worms. Seperating the positions mitigates complaints in the easiest way possible.

In a similar fashion the entire SNC Lavalin crisis could have been avoided if the offices of Attorney General and Minister of Justice were split, but as it currently stands one minister occupies both official posts. The justice minister sits in cabinet and must answer to the prime minister, while the Attorney General must be given prosecutorial independence as the supreme court ruled that "The independence of the Attorney General is so fundamental to the integrity and efficiency of the criminal justice system that it is constitutionally entrenched. The principle of independence requires that the Attorney General act independently of political pressures from the government." Now do you see the problem? It's pretty painfully obvious that the two roles should be split, and the entire scandal would have been avoided.

Anyways, not really much of an answer to why there isn't a ministry of men, but just a perspective on why so many ministerial offices exist when from the outside it seems like they are created on a whim. Consolidating or getting rid of many of those posts would anger a lot of people, and perhaps rightfully so.

Online Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 151,215
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,800
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Why isn’t there a Ministry of Men? We have everything else
« Reply #8 on: December 08, 2019, 20:35:41 »
But gun owners aren't on the fringe.  Ideologically, they (those who base their political action on this single issue) are firmly entrenched in the middle of the Conservative camp.  Since the current Liberal platform has a more restrictive view of gun ownership nothing they do will sway that group of voters so such a ministry makes no sense, even in the nonsensical world of these fringe issue ministries.

The only reason gun owners are in the CPC camp is because they are attacked by all other parties for political gain.