Equal Parenting or the Disbanding of Status of Women?

Equal Parenting or the Disbanding of Status of Women?

What is more important, attempts to promote equal parenting or to cut the budget of (or even to disband) Status of Women Canada?

Canadian women have an existence that is far more comfortable than, and in many other aspects far superior to, that of Canadian men.  That is born out by the sum-total of the effects of all-out discrimination against men: Canadian men live on average seven fewer years than Canadian women do (at the beginning of the previous century, men and women had equal life expectancies).  In view of the great advances made by women, what need do we have to promote concerns about increased spending on women’s issues?  It is men who need to be saved, far more so than women!

Yet, the CPC has done absolutely nothing to address the great and escalating need of men to be allowed to be equal to women.  However, things are even worse than that.  The following contains some of the pertinent details.

Equal parenting, or the lack of it, is the consequence of a more fundamental problem cause.  That problem cause is the government’s agenda for the planned destruction of the family.  In turn, that is largely but not exclusively a consequence of the dominance and control by the feminist ideology that is all-pervasive in the government bureaucracy.

The bureaucracy is our true government.  The bureaucracy always exists (link inserted 2018 04 28 —WHS).  It is a juggernaut that exhibits cancerous growth that the politicians are either unwilling or unable to bring under control.

Politicians are just window dressing.  They come and go.  The unelected bureaucracy has its own goals, and those goals are hardly ever influenced through changes in the direction of the political winds.

Does anyone labour under the illusion that the most powerful bureaucratic office in Canada (far more costly to run than is the whole Parliament), the Prime Minister’s Office, is controlled by any prime minister who ostensibly heads it?  (All engines, Full Stop! We’ve got a new prime minister.  Everyone, drop all you are doing!! Wait for new instructions, perhaps to take actions opposite to those you were involved in until now. Ha!)

In that context, it is absolutely and totally wrong to assert that, “As you know, the Conservatives are the only party that explicitly supports “Shared Parenting” in its party platform (para 65).”

The CPC’s efforts in that regard are comprised of nothing more than an insignificant Private Member’s Memorandum.  A PMM does not reflect a party’s platform.  That is its purpose, to permit a private member to promote at least attention to something that is not on a given party’s menu.  To do so absolves his party of any blame for the private member’s views and keeps the media’s attention away from his party.

As I stated at the beginning of this message, the lack of equal parenting is a consequence of the dominance and control by the feminist ideology.  That ideology dominates and controls not only many of our politicians but, far more importantly, our bureaucracy.  Our bureaucracy is autonomic, in essence totalitarian and not influenced by mere elections or changes in political parties.

If you take a Private Members Memorandum as evidence of the CPC’s platform, you commit a serious error and let the wool be pulled over your eyes.  Thereby you let yourself be blinded to the CPC’s inactivity and powerlessness as to doing anything about breaking the stranglehold of the feminist ideology on the Canadian bureaucracy.  It is extremely important to determine how the CPC feels about that feminist stranglehold.  Concern about, or ostensible action in regard to, equal parenting pales in comparison.  That doesn’t mean that the promotion of equitably-shared parenting should not be pursued, but it does mean that it is neither the only nor the most important issue that needs pursuing.

It is wrong to project from the actions of a single CPC MP to the rest of the CPC, but if you do so, then you must also project from the inactions or plain ignorance of other CPC MPs to the whole CPC.

Given that requirement, it becomes extremely important to consider not only the “CPC’s” efforts with respect to equal parenting but, far more importantly, the lack of its efforts with respect to the fundamental problem causes that make worrying about equal parenting or about the lack of it a necessity, such as the unwillingness to set up a government department for the “Status of Men,” or, failing that, the dismantling of Status of Women Canada.

I tried to discuss that issue with Leon Benoit (MP Vegreville-Wainwright) on September 19th, 2008, when he came to attend the monthly supper at the Bruderheim Seniors Club to do a bit of campaigning.  Unfortunately, he was unable (or perhaps unwilling) to engage in a discussion with respect to Status of Women Canada.  He asserted that, “We don’t have such a department.”  I could tell from the look on his face that he had no clue about anything regarding Status of Women Canada.  I spoke to him for quite a while, and neither that look on his face nor his stance on Status of Women changed.  He obviously had his mind made up and no facts could confuse him.

It is obvious, when it comes to the atrocity of the discriminatory and bureaucratic existence of Status of Women Canada, Leon Benoit is of no help.  However, at least the CPC pretended at one time that they were doing something about Status of Women Canada (while they never yet even pretended to do or to have done anything about equal parenting).

With great fanfare, the CPC announced in September of 2006 that $5 million had been cut from the budget of Status of Women Canada.  Subsequently, very quietly and without much or any media fanfare at all, that $5-million budget cut was undone and $5 million were added in March of 2007 to the budget allowances for Status of Women Canada.

Status of Women Canada

News Releases

March 7, 2007

Canada’s New Government Increases Funding to the Women’s Program
OTTAWA — On the eve of International Women’s Day, the Honourable Beverley J. Oda, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women, announced an additional $5 million in new funding for 2007-2008 for Status of Women Canada and a new funding mechanism for the Women’s Program”. (Full Story)

That seems to indicate that not only had the earlier-announced $5-million budget cut not come into effect, but that “an additional $5 million in new funding for 2007-2008 for Status of Women Canada” was put into effect.  Now, tell me, does the CPC control Status of Women Canada, or does Status of Women Canada have the CPC on a leash?

When I mentioned Status of Women Canada to Leon Benoit, he got a look on his face like a kid does who was caught with his hand in the cookie jar.  Why?  Is it perhaps because I forced him to realize that, in a totalitarian system that is run by a cancerously growing bureaucracy out of control, to elect politicians is little more than to appoint elected officials to a parasitic but lavishly comfortable existence?

Have a look at these articles with respect to the CPC’s and Leon Benoit’s stance on Status of Women Canada.

As of now there has been total silence from Leon Benoit on those issues, and the CPC has not only not cut the budget of Status of Women but increased it by at least another $5 million for the year 2007-2008.

That indicates that, all perceptions of Canadian men’s- and fathers’ rights activists who clutch at straws to the contrary, the CPC firmly pursues an agenda of feminist dominance in Canadian politics and society.

Walter Schneider

(Visited 10 times, 1 visit(s) today)
This entry was posted in Censorship, Civil Rights, Divorce, Family, Feminism, Feminist Jurisprudence, Health, Media Bias, Paternal Rights, The New World Order. Bookmark the permalink.