Message for Ontario’s sex ed naysayers: Ignorance is far from bliss

Commentary by Aparita Bhandari  on the need for sex education and a reminder of some of the culture behind opposition to sex-ed:

I was around seven years old when I was told I was impure. It was at a family get-together in India that involved a religious ceremony. My mother had her period at the time, and had been segregated to a cold, dark room. I had no idea what was wrong with her, only that I never wanted to have what she had. I was impure by association. I was told I needed to take a purifying bath if I wanted to sit with my cousins. Eager to please, I splashed cold water on my shivering body. But I couldn’t wash away the sense of shame.

As a teenager in New Delhi, I hated taking public transit. Men would press their erections into my backside or try to cop a feel as I squeezed my way off the bus. But I did not know how to talk about it to my mother or anyone else. What words could I use? So I kept quiet, and avoided using public transit.

But it’s hard to stay quiet now when many parents in Ontario are removing their children from classrooms to protest the revised sex ed curriculum introduced by Kathleen Wynne’s Liberal government. They cite cultural concerns and family values but, as far as I’m concerned, a culture of shame and silence is more dangerous. And given the possibility that many of these parents aren’t going to talk to their kids about sex, it’s even more important that their children receive sex education that’s well researched and takes into account the access young people have to sexual information (and misinformation) today and includes topics such as sexual consent.

Since I attended a public school in Australia from Grades 5 to 8, I happened to learn about menstruation, puberty and my developing body through a mixture of books, sex ed classes and educational films that I caught on TV. But I never learned about sex from an authorized source. Back in New Delhi, there were exactly two pages devoted to reproduction in my Grade 9 biology class, which our Science teacher more or less skipped over. The main take-away was that we should know how to draw anatomical diagrams of male and female sex organs for our annual school examination. Any practical education came from romance novels and whispered conversations with friends.

I never had “the talk” with my parents, but I was repeatedly told by the women in my family that I had to watch what I wore, how I acted. I was warned, “Rape bhi ho sakta hai (You can get raped).” Nobody even told me what rape was, although Bollywood movies at the time had frequent scenes that suggested men sexually assaulting women.

Message for Ontario’s sex ed naysayers: Ignorance is far from bliss – The Globe and Mail.

Top federal bureaucrat targets hiring, policymaking and mental health in her first report

Twenty-Second_Annual_Report_-_Report_-_Clerk_of_the_Privy_CouncilClerk Janice Charette on her three priorities for the public service in her first report to the Prime Minister on the public service:

In her report, Charette said she is “unequivocally and personally” committed to the Blueprint 2020 vision, unveiled by her predecessor, Wayne Wouters, as the road map for the public service in the digital age.

The public service is in the throes of a major transition and Blueprint has a strong appeal to young, tech-savvy public servants, as it is built around new technology and cutting red tape. It’s aimed at making the public service more networked, innovative, efficient, productive, better managed and tech-enabled.

A big complaint about it, however, is that it dodges some of the politically sensitive issues dogging Canada’s largest employer. These include: the lack of trust between bureaucrats and their political bosses; the public service’s diminished policymaking role and relevance; and what many call a “toxic” workplace that has one of the highest incidences of mental health claims in the country.

Charette’s three priorities could go a long way to address those perceived gaps.

The public service has faced an exodus of retiring baby boomers whom Charette said have to be replaced with recruits who bring new skills and fresh ideas to “manage in the modern world” dominated by technology and big data.

Charette said she isn’t setting hiring targets at this point, but departments must keep their human resource plans updated so they know which skills are needed for the future. With downsizing, departments have been preoccupied with shedding jobs.

The number of people leaving or retiring from the public service had been relatively stable over the years, until the 2012 budget cuts kicked in. Nearly 13,000 public servants retired or left in 2013-14, followed by another 12,283 the following year.

Charette said she isn’t looking to “grow” the public service, but new hiring hasn’t come close to replacing the record number of departures. About 4,300 permanent employees were hired last year and about 2,870 the year before. Rather than recruiting, departments are filling gaps with casual, term and student employees.

The recruitment and retention patterns are reflected in the experience levels of public servants. Today, 13 per cent of public servants have less than four years of experience compared to more than 17 per cent the previous year. The proportion with between five and 14 years’ experience, however, increased from 45 per cent to nearly 49 per cent.

The prime minister’s advisory committee on the public service sounded the alarm in a report last month, warning that departments averse to hiring could cause a “demographic hole” similar to the missing generation that dogged the public service for years when it stopped hiring in the 1990s. The report called for “top-down direction” from the clerk and deputy ministers.

“I think it is important for me to send a signal about where I see the priorities,” Charette told the Citizen. “Departments are making their own decisions right now about their HR priorities and I think it is important for me to signal that when I look at the public service as a whole, that this is one area where I think we have a public service-wide need.”

Here’s a quick look at what Charette said.

Recruitment:

Specialists in data analysis will be a key recruitment target.

The public service should also examine how it recruits. It typically relies on a major post-secondary campaign on campuses, as well as online recruitment  The public service also needs an infusion of mid-career and senior talent from the private sector.

Policy development:

The public service is no longer the only or even the primary source of policy advice for ministers. Politicians expect public servants to consult and collaborate with stakeholders and it’s up to public servants to quickly “synthesize” the various interests to come with advice in the public interest.

Public servants also have to strengthen the links between policy and service delivery.

“Who is responsible for integrating that information, synthesizing it and trying to weed through what is in the public interest as opposed to the interests of the person who may be advocating a position is the job of the public service. (That’s) evidence-based public policy,” she said.

Mental health:

Charette has “no tolerance” for the situation in which one in five public servants complained about harassment in the last public service survey.

She also worries about the rising incidence of mental health claims that approach half of all long-term disability claims. Public servants’ reliance on medications to combat mental illness is also on the rise.

Some good use of infographics to communicate range of activities and related data in contrast to the previous text-driven reports as well as tables on employment equity (still using the dated 2006 labour market availability, however, which paints an overly rosy view).

Top federal bureaucrat targets hiring, policymaking and mental health in her first report | Ottawa Citizen.

Harper government to make revoking of passports from suspected extremists quicker

Not surprising. Unlike revocation of citizenship, which applies different treatment to dual nationals compared to Canadian nationals only (the latter cannot have their citizenship revoked), applies equally to both:

As it struggles to stop Canadians from joining terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq, the government is introducing measures allowing officials to more quickly revoke passports from suspected extremists, the National Post has learned.

A senior government source said the policy expediting passport revocations on national security grounds would be announced Thursday by Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney and Citizenship and Immigration Minister Chris Alexander.

The change comes two weeks after Canadian Security Intelligence Service director Michel Coulombe told the Senate national security committee the number of Canadians who had left for Syria and Iraq had jumped 50% in the past few months.

To prevent them from leaving, police have been alerting officials to cancel the passports of “extremist travellers,” but the government source said the current procedure was too time-consuming and that authorities needed to be able to act more speedily.

“With the growing number of radicalized Canadians travelling abroad to fight with ISIL, this government will take action to ensure our national security agencies can swiftly and urgently revoke the passport of any threat to Canadians and our allies,” the source said.

Harper government to make revoking of passports from suspected extremists quicker

Charlie Hebdo Editor Seeks to Distance Newspaper From Anti-Islam Causes – NYTimes.com

The numbers tell the story (7 out of 500 or 1.4 percent):

“Out of 500 covers in the past 10 years, only seven were made about Islam,” he [Gérard Biard] said. “So it’s not our obsession. We’re dealing with politics, we’re dealing with other religions.”

Ms. Geller has called the attack in Garland, Tex., in which both assailants were killed, a defeat for “the enemies of freedom” that validated the art contest — which she said had been held in part to honor Charlie Hebdo.

Asked how the Charlie Hebdo attack may have influenced a right-wing surge in French politics, Mr. Biard criticized Ms. Le Pen for portraying herself and her supporters as defenders of free speech.

“Marine Le Pen has a political agenda,” he said. “Her goal is to be elected in two years, to become president. She’s doing what every political leader does. She’s used an event and tried to transform this event into something for her own purpose.”

“The thing is, Marine Le Pen is not credible on that issue, because she is an extreme-right politician,” Mr. Biard said. “She runs an extreme-right party, with religious extremists in there. So when she attacks Islam, she in fact attacks Arab people.”

By contrast, Mr. Biard said, “when we mock a religion, we don’t knock believers, we don’t mock people. We mock institutions. We mock ideas.”

Mr. Biard was in New York to receive an award on Tuesday for “freedom of expression courage” at a literary gala sponsored by PEN American Center, a prominent literary organization that defends writers around the world.

The choice of Charlie Hebdo to receive the award has incited angry contention within the organization. More than 200 of its approximately 4,000 members have signed a letter protesting what they called Charlie Hebdo’s violation of acceptable expression, asserting that the newspaper’s cartoons have promoted anti-Muslim bigotry.

Mr. Biard, who has been the editor in chief of Charlie Hebdo for the past 10 years, said that the PEN protesters were entitled to their opinion but that he rejected their criticism.

“We have always been anti-racist, and we fight against all discrimination,” he said.

Mr. Biard also said that the newspaper, which derives its revenue exclusively from subscriptions, had gone from fewer than 10,000 before the January assault to more than 250,000 today.

Charlie Hebdo Editor Seeks to Distance Newspaper From Anti-Islam Causes – NYTimes.com.

The moral problem with a Muhammad cartoon contest

Noah Feldman on the moral responsibility of Pamela Geller for the Texas shootings:

One goal of the provokers in Texas seems to have been sending a message to Muslims that their faith may be criticized with impunity. Pamela Geller, the organizer, said she chose the venue because Muslims had previously organized an event there. Geller also said that Muslims generally cannot be criticized in the U.S. because of political correctness, and that she wanted to counteract what she perceives as a new social norm.

The desire to condemn Islam by intentionally offending Muslims is morally unpleasant in itself. Insulting the Prophet to make a point is a bit like showing Nazi propaganda to prove that Jews can be subject to criticism: effective, but repulsive.

Yet as moral wrongdoing goes, giving offense isn’t at the top of the list. You shouldn’t do it, but when you do, you’re offensive — nothing more. Compared with intimidation, for example, offense is less wrongful. If offense were all that Geller intended, she’d deserve a stern lecture about civility, not deep condemnation.

By willfully trying to provoke violence, Geller was trying to create a situation in which innocent people could have been harmed or killed.

Geller also had a plausible moral rationale: to strike a blow for free speech itself, after January’s attacks in Paris at the offices of Charlie Hebdo. Perhaps, it could be argued, some offense is justified in light of the need to stand up against terrorism that is intended to repress speech.

But there was almost certainly another goal at work in the provocation, too. Geller clearly wanted to get a reaction from Muslims offended by the event’s intentionally offensive speech. The point of the offense was, in part, to generate a response.

Perhaps all Geller wanted was to provoke a counter demonstration that would have drawn attention to her efforts. But assuming for a moment that she didn’t want to provoke a violent attack, Geller could still be held morally responsible for the foreseeable consequences of her provocation.

There’s a moral theory, called the ‘doctrine of double effect’, that says you shouldn’t be blamed for foreseeable consequences that you don’t want. We sometimes rely on it, as in justifying collateral damage as a result of an otherwise morally correct use of force.

This moral doctrine of double effect has no place in evaluating a conscious provocation. Geller was trying to provoke a reaction. If the reaction was reasonably likely to be violent, she can’t hide behind the notion that she didn’t want anyone to get hurt.

Was a violent reaction foreseeable? I’d like the answer to be no. Plenty of insults against Muslims go unremarked, and certainly unavenged. Violent attacks like the one on Charlie Hebdo are extremely rare.

Fairness toward American Muslims would seem to require us to say that the violent reaction wasn’t reasonably likely to occur. We’d then have to absolve Geller on a ground she probably wouldn’t much like.

But that still leaves the question of Geller’s own subjective beliefs and intentions. It’s hard to escape the suspicion that part of her hoped to provoke a violent response.

After all, it’s part of Geller’s worldview to believe that Islam is a violent religion. The bus and subway ads she’s paid for depict Islam in terms of violent jihad. She paid for an armed security guard outside the event, suggesting she considered violence at least possible. What’s more, the value of the free speech she is trumpeting is relevant mostly because cartoons perceived as insulting the Prophet have been met with violence.

If — and I say if — Geller intended to provoke violence, she did something much worse than giving offense. By willfully trying to provoke violence, Geller was trying to create a situation in which innocent people could have been harmed or killed. As it was, a security guard at the event was injured. (By the way, the guard who shot and killed the attackers counts as a hero who saved lives, regardless of Geller’s motives.)

If Geller wanted violence to happen, her actions were morally culpable — even though she obviously didn’t commit it.

And while we’re on the topic of fear

PM Tony Abbott Denies Australia Will Sell Citizenship, Reiterates Refusal Of Asylum

Not surprising as this goes so much against the grain of Australian immigration and citizenship policy, not to mention identity. Australia is not Malta which does sell citizenship (Malta Offers Citizenship and All Its Perks for a Price).

Hard to know what members of the Productivity Commission were thinking when they proposed this bone-headed scheme:

Prime Minister Tony Abbott denied allegation on Monday, May 4 that the government’s inquiry on immigration system would mean his administration is selling citizenship in a bid to cut down on budget deficit and close down its door to asylum seekers.

Mr Abbott said in a press conference that his government’s request was for Productivity Commission to review proposals in amending the immigration system. But in doing so, Mr Abbott insisted the commission should take into consideration different perspectives and the commission’s statement to make immigration a finance-focused system is unlikely because the coalition government would not allow migrants to earn their permanent residency visas simply by paying entry fees.

The prime minister argued that Australia’s immigration policy is unequivocally and justly based on the country’s best values and interests and as such, Mr Abbott assured the public the policy will remain as it is.

Productivity Commission announced on Friday, May 1 the Australian government is contemplating on adopting a radical system of immigration that centres on the applicant’s financial capacity. At the present, Australia looks at the applicants’ family connection and the nature and level of their skills in allowing access.

The commission contended that should Australia adopt a price-based immigration policy, it will earn several billions which can help curb the country’s budget deficit. In addition, the scheme will also slash down the number of employees involved in the immigration system.

PM Tony Abbott Denies Australia Will Sell Citizenship, Reiterates Refusal Of Asylum.

Shafia, Man who murdered family became jailhouse religious tyrant

Interesting account of the prison life and attitudes of Mohammed Shafia:

Canada’s only Muslim prison chaplain would occasionally lead Kingston’s Muslim inmates in Friday prayers. “There would be a general atmosphere of jovial camaraderie among themselves and the non-Muslim,” said Groves, who did psychological counselling at the prison.

But when the Muslim chaplain was frequently absent, it was Shafia who apparently appointed himself spiritual leader and led Friday prayers.

“The normally pleasant atmosphere associated with Muslims gathering for prayers was absent. Inmates on the same range who came to see me expressed fear of him. (About one-third) were not Muslims but believed they dare not refuse to attend Friday prayers. They had no choice. He was an angry little man.”

One, a Christian, “felt so intimated by Shafia and some of his lieutenants that he chose to give up his relative freedom of movement on the range and in the general population for a much more restricted life on a social isolation range. He advised me that confinement was worth it to avoid the hassle of dealing with ‘the Muslims.’

“This form of intimidation is something one finds routinely with zealot extremists. In other circumstances it’s called bullying.”

Man who murdered family became jailhouse religious tyrant | Ottawa Citizen.

Sex ed protest leaves 1 Toronto school almost empty

If memory serves me correctly (School prayer debate creates unlikely allies), this is the same school that allowed the Muslim Friday prayers at the school to combat Friday afternoon absenteeism among Muslim students, with gender-separate seating (girls at the back, not at the side):

A public elementary school in Toronto was left nearly empty on Monday as parents protested against the province’s new sex ed curriculum.

Between 200 and 300 protesters voiced their concerns with changes to the current sex ed system outside Thorncliffe Park Public School, said the CBC’s James Murray. Toronto District School Board spokesman Ryan Bird said 1,220 of the 1,350 Grade 1 to Grade 5 students are not currently in class.

Meanwhile, across the city, the Toronto District School Board recorded 34,762 elementary school absences.

That’s an increase of 144 percent compared to last Monday when there were 14,191 absences reported.

The board did not provide a breakdown of reasons for the absences, such as illness, etc.

In total, there are approximately 171,800 active elementary students at the TDSB.

A Thorncliffe parents’ group is currently running a Facebook campaign called Parents & Students on strike: one week no school is encouraging parents who oppose the 2015 sex ed curriculum to keep their kids at home.

“We are sending them to have their science, math and English and whatever … we are not sending them for sex education,” said parent Fatima Haqdad.

Sex ed protest leaves 1 Toronto school almost empty – Toronto – CBC News.

China orders Muslim shopkeepers to sell alcohol, cigarettes, to “weaken” Islam

Not exactly a positive engagement approach and another signal of the tension between the Chinese government and its Muslim minority:

Chinese authorities have ordered Muslim shopkeepers and restaurant owners in a village in its troubled Xinjiang region to sell alcohol and cigarettes, and promote them in “eye-catching displays,” in an attempt to undermine Islam’s hold on local residents, Radio Free Asia (RFA) reported. Establishments that failed to comply were threatened with closure and their owners with prosecution.

Facing widespread discontent over its repressive rule in the mainly Muslim province of Xinjiang, and mounting violence in the past two years, China has launched a series of “strike hard” campaigns to weaken the hold of Islam in the western region. Government employees and children have been barred from attending mosques or observing the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan. In many places, women have been barred from wearing face-covering veils, and men discouraged from growing long beards.

In the village of Aktash in southern Xinjiang, Communist Party official Adil Sulayman, told RFA that many local shopkeepers had stopped selling alcohol and cigarettes from 2012 “because they fear public scorn,” while many locals had decided to abstain from drinking and smoking.

The Koran calls the use of “intoxicants” sinful, while some Muslim religious leaders have also forbidden smoking.

Sulayman said authorities in Xinjiang viewed ethnic Uighurs who did not smoke as adhering to “a form of religious extremism,” and had issued the order to counter growing religious sentiment that he said was “affecting stability.”

“We have a campaign to weaken religion here, and this is part of that campaign,” he told the Washington-based news service.

The notice, obtained by RFA and also posted on Twitter, ordered all restaurants and supermarkets in Aktash to sell five different brands of alcohol and cigarettes and display them prominently. “Anybody who neglects this notice and fails to act will see their shops sealed off, their businesses suspended, and legal action pursued against them,” the notice said.

Radio Free Asia, which provides some of the only coverage of events in Xinjiang to escape strict Chinese government controls, said Hotan prefecture, where Aktash is located, had become “a hotbed of violent stabbing and shooting incidents between ethnic Uighurs and Chinese security forces.”

China orders Muslim shopkeepers to sell alcohol, cigarettes, to “weaken” Islam – The Washington Post.

Citing Religious Beliefs, Muslim Gitmo Inmates Object To Female Guards : NPR

I am with General Kelly on this, apart from his comment on whether the prisoners beliefs reflect Islamic teachings (Supreme Court of Canada approach of assessing whether beliefs are sincere, and whether they infringe on rights of others is preferred, rather than commenting on theology).

The right of prisoners has to be balanced between the right of the guards, and I suspect the prisoners are making more of a political point than a religious one.

Of course, in the overall context of due process and respect for human rights at Gitmo, this is minor:

Ruiz says his client refuses to leave his cell if women are on the escort team because Muslim men can only touch women they’re related to.

“It means that we are not able to meet, we are not able to speak with each other on legal issues, and therefore I’m not able to provide the legal services that I am required to provide and the advocacy that I’m required to provide on his behalf,” Ruiz says. “It’s an access to counsel issue.”

Today, no female guards are allowed to handle the defendants in the Sept. 11 case. The judge presiding in that trial, Col. James Pohl, has refused to lift his restraining order.

At a recent Senate hearing, New Hampshire Republican Kelly Ayotte criticized the judge’s decision.

“When the 9-11 attackers don’t want women guarding them, it’s absurd, and I don’t think we should be accommodating that,” she said.

Ayotte directed her remark to Gen. John Kelly, the head of the U.S. Southern Command, who’s in charge of Guantanamo. Kelly told Ayotte he disagreed with the judge’s order, but there was nothing he could do about it. He suggested the judge had been misled.

“Because the high-value detainees felt it was against their religion, which anyone that knows anything about the Muslim religion knows that it’s not against their religion,” Kelly said.

The general said the five Sept. 11 defendants and their lawyers were manipulating the court trying their case.

“And as soon as this is over, it’ll be, ‘We don’t want to be touched by Jews, or we don’t want to be touched by, you know, black soldiers, or we don’t want to be touched by Roman Catholics,” Kelly said. “It’s beyond me why we even consider some of these requests.”

Ruiz, the lawyer for one of the defendants, finds that comment telling.

“When General Kelly makes that kind of statement, it’s very clear that he doesn’t really understand what is happening in the detention center that they’re supposed to be supervising,” Ruiz says.

And that’s not the only issue, says David Nevin, who represents alleged Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Nevin says it’s also a matter of showing respect for a well-established tenet of Islam.

“There’s a problem, a religious problem, protected under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, with having women touch men,” Nevin says. “It’s just something that’s not done.”

Citing Religious Beliefs, Muslim Gitmo Inmates Object To Female Guards : NPR.