Well, I am happy someone else noticed no men have ever been subjected to this charade.
"Former CabMin Maxime Bernier was allowed to remain in caucus, however — a privilege not extended Friday to Guergis, which prompted speculation about what could be worse than a potential national-security breach. Or is it simply a case of different discipline for different genders?" asked Toronto Star columnist Susan Delacourt.
It is also curious that the two "accused" are visible minorities -- treated like violent criminals. Even convincted pedophiles get a softer treatment. Makes you wonder....
Recommend this post
9 comments:
I think Schrieber and Mulroney might disagree. They were scorched far more severely than Geurgis, Glemaud or Jaffer in committee.
Jymn,
Thanks for your comment. True, S and M got it worse, but their crime was also much much worse than....wait... J+G's have not been convicted of any crime!
As far as Jaffer is concerned I think he brought his problems upon himself. He can't blame anyone but himself.
Firing of Guergis and kicking her out of caucus is perplexing especially when there are no known allegations. It is unacceptable that Harper would take such drastic actions and give no specific reasons. If people are saying that he is sexist then it is justified especially because of the silence on the specificity of allegations.
Geurgis is a visible minority?
The subject line refers to sexism. Guergis and the other women mentioned in the linked article are "visible minotiries" in Parliament : it's called being a female MP.
Dr.Dawg, in a way she is as she is married to one. In US many white women get mistreated because they are married to a black man. As a matter of fact in Nova Scotia a black man’s house was put on fire because he is married to a white woman and then their car was torched.
Neo-cons are neo-cons whether in Canada or US. However issue raised here is about sexism.
Jymn, it is interesting that in case of Schrieber and Mulroney it is Schrieber who is rotting in a jail in Germany. Mulroney is a free man as ever. He was deported nowhere. I wonder why? Is it possible that they look after their own kind well?
LeDaro: you are on point!
The sexism charge may have some validity. Who knows? After all, we've still not been told why Guergis lost her portfolio and was removed from caucus.
But the veiled charge of racism - both in writing "Jaffer-Guergis affair sexist and racist: op ed" (when the op ed makes no mention of racism, or even race) and the presentation of an American book on the topic - is unfounded. Look, Jaffer and Glemaud were clearly ill-prepared. What's more, Jaffer was caught out, while Glemaud went so far as to challenge parliamentary authority.
I challenge you to provide examples of Jaffer and Glemaud having been treated like "violent criminals" and were treated more harshly than "convicted pedophiles".
Post a Comment