Category: Canada

Sexism has been an evolving issue globally for decades. More specifically, women’s rights and inequality has been the topic of issue for hundreds of years. Sexism is something that has given women inconfidence and the ability to believe they are lesser than the men in this world. Before in Roman law, women couldn’t own a house without having to give it to their husbands immediate family if he passed away, they had no access to birth control or abortion, and in most cultures they could not go to school. It was not until the eighteenth and nineteenth century that people began to consider women’s rights. Around this time women began to fight for the rights to their own property, earn a wage, and most notably, vote and hold public office. Voting rights were given to women beginning in the 1800s and on through the 1920s. Giving women the right to vote was said to be the turning point in women’s rights (Gale, 2019). Women in our society today are still being affected by discrimination globally and in Canada. The extent of this is not as bad as it was centuries ago but there are still arising issues that women are faced with. Sexism is something that will always be evident in our Canadian society. With women being treated unfairly, that puts strains on self confidence and the ability to feel powerful. It also lacks them opportunity. In today’s society, sexism is greatly evident. It is evident through wage gaps, gender based violence, and the largest women’s march that happened in 2017.

Wage gap has been around in our society and around the world forever. In 1833, a wage survey found that women working in local textile factories received less for working seventy eights hours per week than men were getting for one ten hour day (Gale, 2010). Especially in our society now, women being paid less than men is something that has been vocally expressed in the media today especially by actors and athletes. Actors like Ellen Pompeo, Emma Roberts, and Gina Rodriquez have all spoken out about their thoughts on this very important global issue. Athletes like the women’s US soccer team have also spoken out about this. Specifically their captain Megan Rampineo who expressed her frustration before the team went on to win the world cup. She and twenty eight of her teammates sued the United States Soccer federation allenging gender discrimination. The wage gap between men and women is one of the broadest issues that need addressing. Women tend to be discriminating against for leaving their place of work to have children, which also contributes to having lower pay. Women are more likely to be in low-paying, entry level jobs with fewer hours. Having a significant wage gap can also impact a woman’s ability to enter into the housing market. Women who have significant others who can support them financially may not struggle as much with this. Someone who is in an abusive relationship and cannot afford to distance herself from her abuser will be greatly affected by this and this also contributes to gender based violence.

Secondly, sexism has been evident in our Canadian society through American society. America lives under Donald Trump, before Donald Trump was elected as president in 2016, he made comments in his campaign that criticized women. Following his election, women in the United States and throughout the world made a plan to demonstrate that they would fight for their rights under the new administration (Gale, 2019). This online rally led to women all over the world rallying for their rights publicly. Thousands of Canadians with signs and hats rallied around Canada in showing support and solidarity with the massive Women’s March in Washington. In Montreal, many carried signs with messages such as ‘our rights aren’t up for grabs,’. The goal of this march was to send a bold message to the new administration on their first day in office and to the world that women’s rights are human rights.

Lastly, sexism has also been evident in our Candian society through the increasing numbers of gender based violence. Women are prone to sexually based violence and abuse. This includes, rape, sexual assualt, prostitution, and slavery. Women face many unique challenges with reproduction. Some women have no or limited access to healthcare resources, birth control, or protection from sexually transmitted diseases. This distinction has led to much higher mortality rates to women. In Cambridge Ontario, an annual event is held called Walk In Her Shoes. The walk, beginning at Cambridge City Hall and then going through downtown Galt, is traditionally a men’s walk but is now open to all genders. It aims to raise awareness about the role everyone plays in ending gender-based violence. ‘According to the Canadian Women’s Foundation, approximately every six days, a woman in Canada is killed by her intimate partner, so yes, gender-based violence is still a very real problem and it’s part of our mandate to give voice to the realities of the lives of cis and trans women and girls and non-binary individuals in our community,’ said Kim Decker, executive director of YWCA Cambridge, in a media release (CNW group, 2019).

In conclusion, Sexism is an evolving issue in Canada and in our world. More specifically, women’s rights and inequality. Sexism is greatly evident in our society today with gender based violence, international wage gap, and also administration who have contributed to this act. Sexism is something that has given women inconfidence and the ability to believe they are lesser than the men in this world. Women have to feel as if they are lesser and that they deserve to be paid a different amount for the same work just because they are female. People began to consider women’s rights after they realized what this does to our society and to the women who are being discriminated against for their gender. Women have to fight for the rights to their own property, earn a wage, and most notably, vote and hold public office. Giving women the right to vote was said to be the turning point in women’s rights where people began to recognize the treatment and how it was unfair. Women in our society today are still being affected by discrimination globally and in Canada. The extent of this is not as bad as it was centuries ago but there are still arising issues that women are faced with. Sexism is something that will always be evident in our Canadian society. With women being treated unfairly, that puts strains on self confidence and the ability to feel powerful. It also lacks them opportunity. In today’s society, sexism is greatly evident. It is evident through wage gaps, gender based violence, and the largest women’s march that happened in 2017.

There is no arguing that there is and was discrimination towards Aboriginal people and their families in Canadian society. It is a serious social issue. There is no excuse Aboriginals should be treated this way in society. Factors such as: historical barriers, present barriers, racism, victimization and equality are all things that have affected Aboriginals in our society. Canada is one of the richest countries in the world, and yet the original people of this land experience disproportionate rates of poverty.

Canada, as a nation we are known to the world for being kind, polite, and generally very accepting of all ethnicities. However, the treatment of Canada’s Indigenous population seems to suggest otherwise. Throughout our history, we have shown undeniable amounts of racial discrimination towards Indigenous peoples. This, and more, has led to major negative cultural consequences, psychological and sociological effects. All these terrible consequences can be attributed to Canada’s imperialistic policies, such as the Indian Act, the British North America Act of 1867, and even the very structures of Canadian society, all of which can be seen to heavily disadvantage Indigenous peoples.

To begin, one must examine the use of residential schools – institutions created by the government of Canada to eradicate the Indigenous culture – these intuitions were used for over one hundred years. They effectively separated families while creating huge cultural barriers between children and their Native communities. Children were forcibly removed from their families and taken to residential schools; if the children did not comply their parents could be sent to prison or given fines. Since children grew up in environments so unlike that of the Indigenous peoples, children oftentimes felt isolated and became strangers to their own culture. I can’t even begin to image being put through that as a child and returning back into your community with such trauma and the negative impact of their experiences it can have on attachment and family dynamics.

It is noticeable from this week reading ‘Historical Primer’ by Shauna Johnson, that Aboriginals faced an extreme amount of injustice throughout Canadian history, and to some extent it still occurs today. It is disheartening and unfortunate that people can treat others in such a horrible way.

Personally, my family has instilled in me a set of values that revolves around equality, treating others as you would like to be treated and that everyone deserves respect. Consequently, I feel as though the conclusions I have drawn are based around the little that was taught to me in school, opinions of family members and those of the media. In primary school, I recall learning very little about Indigenous Canadians. The thoughts I formed at this age were that they would play around in their communities telling each other ‘fairy tale’ stories. I didn’t realize until later that storytelling was handed down through the generations to give each member a sense of identity, a feeling of belonging and a connection to their land. Moving forward, my early teen years are where my own views and opinions were most severely impacted by those around me. With all the stereotypes surrounding the Indigenous as ‘drunken and homeless Aborigines’ and all they do is get intoxicated. In high school, the only thing I was taught about the Indigenous people was the history of residential schools which involved viewing a movie about it and a quick reflection… no real learning. This goes to show that the education system and society has failed to bring the injustices Aboriginals face to the forefront. I believe becoming more educated on the history of the Indigenous would better instill knowledge about what they went through and result in less people discriminate them.

Aboriginal people have been treated poorly throughout Canadian history. From being discriminated against by the government and society. Being taken off their land and not being able to practice their religion and beliefs. Today, Aboriginals are still treated poorly. There are many issues like poverty, low education rate, social issues, poor housing and many more. To help Aboriginal people deal with racial discrimination, people can become familiar with legislatures like: the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian Human Rights Act, the Employment Equity Act, just to name a few. Also, to help Aboriginal people overcome racism and stereotyping they can: find a strong sense of community among other Aboriginal people and non-Aboriginal people, educate others about racism by getting rid of myths and false images, focus on facts and details, etc.

Finally, it can also be concluded that Canada’s treatment of Indigenous peoples has been horrid for far too long, from the residential schools and abuse lasted for over one hundred years to the systemic racial discrimination of the 21st century in which so many of the structures that hold our society together have been built to disadvantage those who need it the most. Although we as a nation have undoubtedly changed since the closing of the last residential school, it is evident there is still much more to be done.

Housing remains a prominent issue for immigrants when trying to settle in an area. Vulnerable immigrant groups such as low-income, visible minority groups rely heavily on government and non-government organizations that provide funding and resources for attaining housing. Another major aspect in the process of immigration is the integration into the host community. “Integration refers to the long-term process through which immigrants come to participate fully in their new society” (Hoernig and Zhuang, 2010, 156). Some aspects that hinder the immediate integration of immigrants in communities are culture, language, ethnicity, race, and religion. Although immigrants are expected to integrate into society, multiculturalism argues that minority groups can still fit into Canada’s society and still have separate social values and practices (Hoernig and Zhuang, 2010, 157).

It is important to analyze whether housing segregation is the lack of social and economic integration or is an indication of people wanting to live close to others of the same ethnocultural backgrounds. Segregation amongst minority and majority groups within Canada can be looked at through the lens of propinquity. It is the physical or psychological proximity between people in a given area or location. Spatial assimilation in Canada is what we claim to be multiculturalism. This spatial assimilation is the process by which a group of people attain residential propinquity with members of the majority non-immigrant population. It is popular however to see clusters of ethnoburbs within our major cities in Canada. An ethnoburb is a group of a particular ethnic minority population residing within proximity to each other; they may not always be the majority in an area but there is a significant amount of people belonging to this minority (Urban Dictionary). Perhaps the minority in Canada prefer to live with people they can relate to, without having to fear discrimination and racialization within their community.

The Index of Dissimilarity

The index of dissimilarity “measures the minimum percentage of a group’s population that would have to move for each neighborhood to have the same percentage of that same group as the CMA areas as a whole” (Kobayashi et al., 2012, 87). The higher the number on the scale, the higher the residential segregation is between the two populations being measured. The lower the value on the scale, the lower the degree of residential segregation. In Canada Latin Americans are the most residentially segregated immigrant population, with a mean index of dissimilarity of 69.5; they also happen to rank the lowest for socio-economic status as well (Kobayashi et al., 2012, 81). The most integrated immigrant population in Canada is the Chinese; the Chinese have the highest socioeconomic status in Canada of immigrants (Kobayashi et al., 2012, 79-80). This could be because the Chinese have been immigrating into Canada for a very long time since the 19th century, and have found a way to integrate themselves into Canadian culture, customs, and practices. The index of dissimilarity cannot measure the level of potential interaction between groups based on spatial propinquity. The index also cannot measure the quality of these interactions that take place between the white majority and the colored minority. The index is merely only a measurement of relative location, it does not address the issues of why integration is not or does not always work.

Location within Canada

Canadian cities are receiving the highest amount of immigrants across the world. Statistics show that 94% of all recent immigrants are living in Canada’s cities, with 73% of these immigrants residing in our largest cities: Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver (Sandercook et al., 2009). Native-born Canadians are not always as receptive to immigrants as it is deemed to be by the general public. These native-born Canadians are not necessarily being racist towards immigrants but are certainly discriminatory because of their fear of competition. According to Schissel et al., the variable that is the most consistent to influence attitudes towards immigrants is population growth; adding people faster means immigrants will become less receptive (Schissel et al., 1989, 303). To solve this issue along with many others, Canada should offer economic immigrants’ opportunities to work in areas in Canada that are not heavily populated and where the job market is not as competitive. By providing immigrants with work opportunities in Alberta for example, we are lessening the effect immigration is having on the economy and the people residing in places such as Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal (Schissel et al., 1989). Instead of having people who are native-born and already living in the three largest cities in Canada move to other locations to find work, Canada should be providing incentive for immigrants to go to areas. It could potentially help solve housing segregation issues and job-related discrimination. However, it is important to acknowledge that people do have the right to migrate anywhere within Canada as they so choose to do, but with the opportunity for prosperity, it could be possible to see less migrating even within Canada.

Access to Health Care

Temporary immigrants to not have access to the health care amenities in Canada but are servicing and providing economically and socially for the country in as much as any other citizen. Canada is known for its exceptional health care system; however, many of our immigrants do not get the opportunity to utilize these services as they are faced with many barriers when attempting to access these services.

Why is the Health of Immigrants Important?

The health of immigrants is incredibly important to Canada, 1/5 of our population is foreign-born, and immigrants contribute to approximately 50 percent of the nation’s population growth and nearly 70 percent of Canada’s labor force (Kobayashi, 2012), therefore, these numbers accumulate to a huge part of our society. Immigrants contribute to enhance all aspects of Canadian society; unfortunately, it is observed that the health advantage that immigrants come to Canada with deteriorates after a few years of exposure to the country. This healthy immigrant effect is observed in immigrants in most developed countries around the world (Kobayashi, 2012).

Reason for Deteriorating Health Conditions

Two factors can be linked to the cause of deteriorating health conditions of immigrants. The first factor is social, Dr. Kobayashi claims that 28 percent of new immigrants do not know either of the two official languages, thus, immigrants face a linguistic barrier. They also lack the familiarity of the Canadian health care system, leading to them being afraid to reach out for the aid they need. There are also discriminatory reasons for the deteriorating health of immigrants; poor socio-economic status, inability to obtain a job, and earning low wages are all contributions. An immigrant can have stress associated with settlement in a new country, encompassing things such as finding a job, house, money, and education for their children or themselves.

Conclusion

In 2030, immigrants will be the sole contributions to Canada’s increasing growth in population; immigrants in 2030 are expected to match the death rates in Canada (Kobayashi, 2012). Although Canada has done much to provide a multicultural and diverse nation, there are still covert ways discrimination is occurring across the nation. It is necessary to acknowledge this discrimination to put a stop to it.

Canada should be providing job opportunities for the immigrants they are allowing into the country, instead of having them compete with native-born Canadians. Providing affordable housing in desirable areas will help with the spatial assimilation of ethnic groups, it will allow more integration between minority and majority populations. By recognizing the discrimination and racialization immigrants are still faced with today we will be able to continue to work toward John McCallum’s famous quote ‘a Canadian, is a Canadian, is a Canadian’.

Today, there are many developed countries in the world that still do not accept gay marriages and think it’s inappropriate. In those developed countries, gay/lesbian couples are denied their rights to marry even if they’re a citizen. A couple whom is gay/lesbian also pay their fair share of taxes, follows the law and serves their community well. In Canada, same-sex marriages were legalized in Canada in July of 2005. Accordingly, to census data from Statistics Canada same-sex married couples have tripled between 2006 and 2011 (Statistics Canada, 2015). The Canadian prime minister supports gay marriages with many other members in our society today that have grown to accept them. Though, there are still many that have a social stigma in accepting them. Today, 74% of Canadians say they know someone in their family or social group who is gay or lesbian and 28% saying someone in their family is gay/lesbian (Carlson, 2012). But 1 in 4 Canadians still oppose to same-sex marriage. Despite the same-sex marriage legalization in Canada, discrimination against same-sex couples continue to exist today across the country.

For more than three decades the gay and lesbian rights movement has been a political subject to fight against the social discrimination and to seek for equality. The legalization of same-sex marriage has come with many challenges but one of them is to continue to seek social justice even today. Most people today don’t favor same-sex marriage because it goes against their religious belief and affiliations with church. A research poll was done and found cultural divide amongst Canadian over same-sex marriage. 71 percent of respondents of European descent backing the right versus 44 percent support from respondents of East Asian backgrounds and 42 percent support from respondents of south Asian descent (Little, 2019).

It’s no secret that being gay or lesbian has influenced the person’s career because the society today is viewed at heteronormative and those views are carried over to workplaces/business. Even today there are people in Canada who choose not to disclose their sexuality at work in fear of losing their job. On July 22, 2019, London-based engraving company ‘Laser in Motion’ wrote on their Facebook wall: “Please do not come to us, we don’t have to deal with it. We are not the only business that does engraving… We fully support traditional, heterosexual marriage, and if this is wrong in your eyes, there’s nothing we can do about it” (Drolet, 2019). This is a classic example of why many homosexual people don’t prefer to disclose their sexuality. In 2014, the General Social Survey on the safety of Canadians was conducted and the results were impressive. 31% of gay and lesbian people reported experiencing some form of discrimination in the last five years at their workplace (Camilleri and Gogolishvilli, 2018). In a supportive workplace comes better health outcome, better job satisfaction, greater sense of their responsibility and commitment to the job. All which gay and lesbian workers do not feel because of discrimination.

Therefore, it’s clear that homophobia still exist in Canada. It is necessary that the Canadian government recognize that equal rights should be offered to a citizen regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation. To correct this, first step is to improve the social injustice. Many gay/lesbians couples still face discrimination in employment or workplace, housing market and having been victims of hate crimes and verbal harassment and continue to be because of the discriminatory laws. They are held at an unfair disadvantage because of these types of discrimination. The discrimination must stop because same-sex couples just like heterosexual couples are law abiding citizens and should be viewed/looked upon the same way.

The architectural techniques used to implement the Indian residential school system in Canada is a fundamental but frequently overlooked aspect of the overall system, which isolated “150,000 First Nations, Métis, and Inuit children from their communities and families over the duration of a century and a half” (Mortice, 2017). The residential structures were the sites of enforced assimilation, echoed throughout the lands in Canada, but their spaces were not merely a backdrop for the distressed story of the forfeiture of Indigenous culture. Their method of construction, the manners by which they function, and the symbolism they convey were all fundamental mechanisms of the structure of colonial power over Indigenous people. As architecture in the provision of colonialism, residential schools facilitated governments and Christian missionaries to detach Indigenous children from their families and communities to integrate them under the façade of education. With that being said, this essay will examine the construction and design of Indian residential schools to outline the architecture’s purpose in the solicitation of the supposed civilizing method and in the disruption of the social, cultural, and political life of Canada’s Indigenous identity.

For missionaries, the main purpose of residential schooling is to convert and transform indigenous people into Christianity far away from the influence of their parents, their community and the elders. The state, however, sought in several ways to ‘civilize’ and segregate the indigenous community, but the two parties, secular and religious were closely related and habitually went hand in hand (Milosz, 2015). As a spatial drive, architecture distorted the gap between practice and ideology, and through its materiality was used by both secular and religious groups in an effort to restructure the cognizance of Indigenous people. The Indian residential systems were meticulous spatial tools, physical articulations of the ‘impressive ideological formations’ (Milosz, 2015) of colonialism, which were utilized to encourage practices of power across Canada. Both the method in which the schools’ architecture was produced and the way the schools permitted the application of rules and strategies fit into a greater scaffold of administrative control of Indigenous people. The remnants left behind from the school systems, dispersed throughout the landscapes of the country, “quietly recount a now-failed revelation; abandoned, destroyed, or variously reused by both Indigenous and non-indigenous groups, the schools as physical places are on the periphery of a divided collective memory” (Carr, 2009, p.110).

To date there have been no perceptive scholarly analyses of the design, scale, and programmatic utilization of the constructed framework of the residential school system nor of the relations amid its infrastructure and the practices and policies directing their process. However, it is argued that these residential associations were not sheer containers in which the practices and policies of Indian education were ordained but, rather, that their designs facilitated to construct spatiality’s that unsettled Indigenous senses of place and identity. Referring to these carceral spaces as ‘schools’ compresses the scrupulous nature of these establishments by “applying a euphemism that somehow suggests self-reformation and improvement” (Glenn, 2011). These structures should not be considered schools per se but instead serve as factories or engines of modern colonialism, whose walls encircled an atopos, a non-place. As Geoffrey Carr says, it is in a sense “comprised places without place, places without memory, (non) places both outside yet implicated in the juridical order of the state and the sociocultural bounds of Indigenous communities” (2009, p.112). An example of such a place is described through the architectural analysis of St Eugene located in British Columbia, built in 1898. The building postulates a method to embody and epitomize general concerns of practices and policies that stripped Indigenous people of their identity. Additionally, the details of its design and construction propose an interpretation on the materiality of the institute and its precise role in the application of govern-mentality.

The perceived purpose of the residential school structures, which can be read in the architectural layouts of the building, offers a critical, supplemental method to spatially outline policies intended to relinquish the epistemic and ontological truthfulness of Indigenous societies (Miolsz, 2015). Firstly, the incongruous material used to create the structure of the building separated the residential school from the neighboring structures and topographies. Typically, brick was the material used to raise the interior and exterior walls of the structure (Carr, 2011). Particularly on the west coast of Canada, where brick was not used often, its resolute, alien and instrumental appearance manifested a peculiar institutional awe and, consequently, a sense of dislocation and unfamiliarity. Additionally, the precipitous scale of the structures seems to be designed in such a way to generate a sense of domination and fear in the attentions of the young Indigenous students, as regularly these institutions would be the most prevalent and largest buildings in the region. As a matter of fact, “St Eugene persisted to be the largest building in this area of British Columbia for numerous decades” (Glenn, 2011).

Remarkably, though, institutes such as St Eugene were often built in isolated areas or in locations that had little to no traditional associations to keep indigenous culture from affecting their growth. Hayter Reid, a senior official in the Department of Indian Affairs, claimed that “the more remote the institutions and the greater distance are the points from which pupils are collected, the better for success” (Carr, 2009, p.117). In this way the residential school can be seen as one of a number of architectural and land-use instruments meant to extend the civilizing process through isolation and individuation affecting Indigenous identity. The St Eugene. building was dull in appearance, employing a conspicuous entranceway surpassed by a spire, underscoring the religious curriculum taught within. The layout of the building was established through an H-shaped formation, “a central block flanked by two attached pavilions” (Carr, 2011) with a chapel located in the back. The floor plan of the St Eugene was highly standardized to those that were located all over Canada with classrooms, student dormitories, staff-sleeping quarters, bathrooms, kitchens, infirmaries, workshops, and sewing rooms.

This logic of isolation also functioned within the establishment of St Eugene through the segregation of students based on age and gender. Boys were restrained to one side of the H- shaped structure, and the girls to the opposite side—the oldest were housed in dorms on the top floors of the building while the youngest on the lower floor (Carr, 2011). The blocks in the center usually contained staff chambers as well as administrative offices, which persisted to stay off limits to students, secured by locked doors. This estranging arrangement was repeated with slight variations in Indian residential schools across Canada, creating a disruption between community and family ties, as estranged sisters, brothers, cousins, and friends would be punished for trying to communicate with one another.

With that being said however, the Intensive teaching of Christian principles was considered a key to the impartiality of Indigenous children from their ancestral life, and the omnipresent inclusion of a chapel in each school underlines the apparent significance of such religious training. Prime Minister John A. Macdonald stated that “secular education is a good thing among white men but among Indians the first object is to make them good Christian men by applying proper moral restraints” (Carr, 2009, p.119). Furthermore, at the dedication ceremony for St Eugene in 1911, a Reverend Beck said that “the true Christian made the best man” and then continued to say that Ktunaxa parents should “realize their responsibility to see that their children enjoyed the privilege of training at the fledgling institution” (Carr, 2009, p.120). The chapel additionally proved valuable for allotting discipline, as students gathered together, regardless of gender and age and communally witnessed humiliations visited on those who violated institutional instructions and guidelines. Essentially, the chapel was the main architectural space within the residential building that separated Indigenous people from their identity.

During the century and a half leading up to 1970, more than 130 Indian residential schools were dispersed all throughout Canada. The role of architecture in this genocidal system is an essential, but unnoticed characteristic of its realization. Aboriginal children were taken away from their families and placed in schools that were located far from parental influences and their communities. They were forbidden to speak their native language, express any spiritual or cultural beliefs, and practice any traditional customs. Aboriginal students were not being prepared for higher education but, instead, they were mostly taught religious teachings and occupational training for employment in manual or industrial work segments. All the worst, the depleted physical environments as well as the inhumane treatment the students received instigated them to feel a conflicted sense of place and identity.

Ecotourism is a dynamic and far-reaching sector in the economy of the countries, especially in Canada. Ecotourism in Canada is categorized into two segments, natural ecotourism and ecotourism emphasis on the arts and culture of the local people. It has a positive impact on social and economic aspects of Canada which is evident through its GDP and growth of other related areas. They adopted some principles to make the department run smoothly. However, it also has some disadvantages to the country.

Ecotourism can be defined as the responsibility of the tourists to natural areas to conserves the local atmosphere and maintains the culture and beliefs of the native people. Ecotourism is one of the world’s most remarkably growing industry and has a vast majority around the world. Canada is one of the largest countries in the world and its opportunities in ecotourism are blessed with specular geography, top-notch international centers as well as warm and friendly people. Canadian ecotourism is focused mainly on two areas: natural ecotourism and ecotourism focusing on the arts and cultures of local indigenous groups.

The purpose of the essay is to discuss ecotourism in Canada and areas it focuses on. It also draws attention to the achievements of this tourism in Canadian social and economic fields. Apart from that, this research scrutinizes the significance of Canadian ecotourism, principles that should be followed as well as the detrimental impact of this tourism.

Natural Ecotourism

Natural ecotourism takes in natural settings with an emphasis on understanding and conserving natural environment (Baender, p.3). Because of Canada’s incomparable beauty and profuse natural resources, it is not that tough for ecotourism to be a dominant part when it comes to vacationing. Canada’s unlimited landscapes are gifted with fascinating visitors from all corners of the world. Examples of such ecotourism in Canada are the followings:

• Quebec full-moon rafting eco-tourism adventure;
• Ocean Kayaking in Nova Scotia;
• Recreational Geology Rocks;
• Alberta’s Cowboy Trail;
• Riding Mountain National Parks and Churchill, Manitoba.

Ecotourism Focusing on the Arts and Culture of Local Peoples

Indigenous ecotourism can be described as an activity and enterprise mainly concentrates on upholding the natural and cultural integrity of the land and people where it is developed. It is also believed that through this tourism these people can achieve self-determination and self-reliance (Nepal, 2004). It’s thought that, showcasing inherent culture and value especially through the art of native storytelling and interpretations, whilst providing indigenous peoples with chances to emphasize their rights and autonomy through economic empowerment.

Economic and Social Impact of Ecotourism in Canada

The economic impact is the contribution to the financial system through improving and generating revenue. These include a contribution to sales, profits, jobs improvements and generation of revenues (Fakiyesi, 2008). Direct impacts are witnessed in the primary service sector such as lodgings, restaurants, transport divisions and retail trade.

The social impacts of ecotourism encourage the growth of pride, understanding and tolerance of one’s cultures and upgrading of satisfaction and communication. It is regarded as both a source of international amity and a promoter of peace (Holden, 2008).

Significance of the Canadian Tourism Industry

In Canada tourism means business. It is not just merely considered as the provider to the economy of every Canadian province and territories, but because of its unique structure and expansive influence, the tourism system makes a meaningful contribution to the performance levels of many corelated sectors and industries (e.g. retail, arts, and culture). The total revenue earned by earned by Canada from international and native visitors reached 80 billion in 2008 where 20% was contributed by the ecotourism sector. This country implemented the Green Tourism program in 2009, where verifies ecotourism business as staying balanced with the help of specific assessments and guidance. It also aims at preserving Canada’s inherent culture and communities.

Principles of Ecotourism

Ecotourism is all about combining safeguarding communities and environmental travel. This denotes that those who implement, take part in and promote ecotourism activities should take up the following ideologies of ecotourism:

1. Curtails physical, social, behavioral and psychological effects;
2. Develop eco-friendly and cultural consciousness and esteem;
3. Provide positive experience to visitors as well as the host;
4. Provide monetary assistance for both inhabitants and private business;
5. Convey memorable incidents to guests to help them to build compassion to native communities politically, socially and environmentally;
6. Design, construct and operate minimal influence amenities;
7. Be aware of the rights and beliefs of the indigenous peoples and perform in connection with them to generate empowerment.

Demerits of Ecotourism in Canada

Comprising of Land

Converting an undeveloped plot into a commercial planetary for the holiday business is a disadvantage of ecotourism. As the growing number of tourists make way for the construction of hotels, ecotourism expansion, and excavations of natural resources for which the people who lived in that land can end up dislocated.

Relocation of Locals

As part of the development of the tourism industry the natives are forced to move from there. They either won’t have enough money to lodge on there because when that region becomes a tourist spot then eventually the cost of living in those areas will rise that may not be affordable to the native peoples. Or they may be compelled by developers to leave. Often, the government and other authorities force them to live their place for the development infrastructure of that area.

Threats to Aboriginal Cultural

Ecotourism also causes to cultural misuse and deterioration. The ecotourism industry attracts visitors who may not value culture and beliefs as the host community has. Also, they may isolate the locals. Likewise, when an area of land is conserved for such natural parks, the native groups got relocated and its Fallouts for the endangering of their cultural and traditional practices.

Lack of Income Prospects

Ecotourism employments for populaces often get enough payments. And the profits earned from that region will be spill out between so many hands and rest will be reached to their hands. When they have to move from their place for the advancement of the leisure industry, they also have to leave their means of livelihood in their homeland.

Ecosystem Degradation

Although the foremost purpose of ecotourism is to conserve the ecosystem, sometimes it has a detrimental effect on the earth. As the prosperous in the rate of vacationer, the resources and environmental fascinations become overused. Visitors can disrupt wildlife, leads to soil erosion, habitat loss and causes various types of pollutions like water, air, noise etc.

Conclusion

Ecotourism is a vital and growing part of the Canadian economy. Canadian ecotourism is combines with natural tourism and ecotourism engrossed on the arts and culture of the regional inhabitants. it is visible that this tourism has a constructive influence on the economic and social aspects of Canada. Admittedly, ecotourism has a crucial role in this country since it contributes significantly to GDP and also helps in the development of the related sectors. In 2009, Canada implemented the Green Tourism Program for the effective performance of this tourism. Apart from that, the principles of ecotourism also benefit for conservation of resources, culture, traditions and so on. nevertheless, the harmful effects of ecotourism are also increasing in this world.

References

1. Brunt, P., & Courtney, P. (1999). Host Perception of Social-Cultural Impacts. Annals of Tourism Research 20 (3): 493-515. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s011607399000031
2. Nepal, S., (2004) Indigenous Ecotourism in Central British Columbia: The Potential for Building Capacity in the Triazene Nations Territories. Journal of Ecotourism 3(3)174-22. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232874966_Indigenous_Ecotourism_in_Central_British_Columbia_The_Potential_for_Building_Capacity_in_the_Tl’azt’en_Nations_Territories
3. Smithsonian., (2007, November 6). Canada-Ecotourism Initiatives. Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved from https://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/canada-eco-tourism-initiatives-14830090/

Canada has had a long and contentious relationship with criminal law and its approach to punishment. The early Canadian societies of mostly French and English settlements evolved their notion of punishment through a predominantly religious lens. Christianity possessed a great deal of authority in the culture, and exemplary punishments were preferred. The Grand ordonnance criminelle (1670) enacted in New France codified this principle into colony law, authorizing the state’s obligation to prosecute crimes against society. The punishments contained within needed to be proportional enough to have the perpetrator pay for their crime as well as set a general example to the population in order to deter. Punishments handed out in the time period included execution, whipping, branding and much more, all of which were carried out in the public sphere. This particular view of the state emulated the retributive theory of punishment, which seeks to coercively correct offenders because they deserve to be punished.

With the advent of the Enlightenment, a number of legal and penal improvements were made, giving rise to new humanitarianism. Thus, the rise of imprisonment as the primary avenue of punishment was observed. Canada’s first penitentiary was built in Kingston in 1835 and the move to codify criminal laws was begun by the government, eventually resulting in the Dominion’s first codified criminal code in 1893. Kingston Penitentiary was built on the premise of mandatory labour to reform the inmates – the existence of work houses for vagrant’s and thieves in England largely contributed to this idea of social deviants becoming useful members of society by instilling in them a strong work ethic. As a result, rudimentary ideas of rehabilitation came into play around this time – people could be reformed and become productive citizens of society, but only through the coercive efforts of the penal system.

As the concepts of rights arose, so did an awareness for the criminogenic needs of offenders. The conversation shifted from an approach to reactionary form of justice – in which a person commits the crime and does the punishment in a linear fashion – to a humanitarian one, in which legal and penal systems are progressively designed to care for the needs of those who commit the crimes and those who are harmed. According to Woolford, criminal justice programs are increasingly aimed at rehabilitative goals, such as reintegrating offenders, healing victims and dealing with crimes in the community through a restorative lens. He touts this form of collective conflict resolution as a better functioning model of repairing the harm caused by a crime, and hopefully reducing the offender’s recidivism chances.

While it is difficult to present a clear-cut definition of restorative justice, there do exist a few key characteristics. These include, in summary: conflicts as knowable entities, communication as the means through which conflict is discovered and creative problem solving can occur in a non-coercive environment, human behaviour as a changeable entity, and his belief that a society built upon effective communication will be more peaceful and progressive.

Though there are many forms of restorative justice in current use, this paper will focus on the 3 most popular forms of mediation. These are as follows: Community Mediation, Victim Offender Reconciliation (VOR)/Victim Offender Mediation (VOM) and Healing Circles. For each, I will lay out the origins of the practice, as well as its goals and criticisms associated. There will a section of the paper focusing on the role and responsibilities of the mediator in restorative justice programs. The experiences of victims in restorative justice programs reveal that when the mediator comes across as supportive of the offender, the victim may feel vulnerable, insecure and re-victimized. I will explore the importance of mediators in receiving proper training, and how they can be made aware of the impact their behaviour can have on victims. Finally, I will explore the viability of transitioning/replacing the traditional criminal justice system with a restorative justice framework. Is justice best achieved through punitive measures, or should the law be obligated to focus on community counselling?

Restorative Justice Styles

Community Mediation

The 1970s was a time when many people experienced disenfranchisement with the legal system. Widely viewed as inaccessible due to the jargon-laden discourse and the propensity of legal decisions to be favourable to those with more resources, many scholars and community activists called for a new, more rudimentary form of conflict resolution. One in which communities and local actors were jointly empowered to solve said conflict in their midst, without the excessive adversarialness of the courtroom, in which all parties were quantified as either only winners or losers. This led to the development of community justice centres, as well as other locally-based health and safety initiatives. The former proved to be the most relevant in the rise of restorative justice, in which mediators volunteered to facilitate the resolution of neighbourhood-based disputes. Such mediators were expected to use their status to help persuade disputants to resolve their differences, all while not seeking to gain any personal advantages.

The San Francisco Community Boards (SFCB) is one of the premier examples of community justice. Their aim is to help build and repair community relations and harmony by addressing conflicts before they escalate, reduce fear of crime in the community and provide individuals with conflict resolution skills which they can apply in their daily lives moving forwards. During meetings, disputants present their conflict to members of a volunteer-based panel whose role is to facilitate a solution agreeable to both sides. The volunteers themselves are selected based on a unique criteria. Members ideally share characteristics with the disputants; presumably these shared characteristics allow the participants to better identity with and feel understood by the panel. An additional benefit to this has been the perception of shared equality amongst all participants in the process – the disputants therefore are able to trust their own authority within the mediation process rather than look towards the mediators for decisive interventions.

At its advent, community justice boards such as the SFCB were looked on as a viable way in which justice could be deinstitutionalized so as to be able to include everyone. However, this method soon came under criticism, most notably for seemingly upholding the very rigid and adversarial system it sought to de-professionalize. Rather than people being controlled through inflexible, systemized terms in the formal legal sphere, mediation achieved the same purpose, albeit through gentler means. Community volunteers and social workers took the place of state actors in making sure conflict did not become socially disruptive, extending and entrenching state power even further. Community justice boards were also seen as providing the formal justice system a means to preserve its legitimacy by allowing it to overcome the many crises it faced, such as case overload and broader alienation faced by individuals from the system. Other critics targeted capitalist interest in maintaining community mediation, as it resolved conflicts that would invariably threaten means of production. For example, property/marital disputes invariably effect an individual’s productivity at work. Therefore, the capitalist system benefited from upholding the gentler means of social control community mediation provided, as it often settled grievances faster and did not drain court resources.

Victim Offender Reconciliation and Victim Offender Mediation Programs

While community mediation gradually settled on dealing solely with civil matters, the ideal itself did eventually find expression in the criminal justice field. VOR/VOM are interchangeable terms for programs which have voluntary offenders offer reconciliation to their victim(s). Strict guidelines surrounding meetings and outcomes ensure that the parties are able to come to a mutual understanding of the event and plan for its aftermath together. The core elements of VOR and VOM are: establishing a safe environment, preparation, voluntary participation, a face-to-face encounter and follow-up.

In 1974, the framework for an early VOR program was developed by Mark Yantzi in the small town of Elmira, Ontario. Yantzi was a probation officer tasked with working with two teenagers who had gone on a vandalism spree across the town. Due to the nature of the crimes and individuals involved, Yantzi felt it would be appropriate if the effort was made to reconcile the offenders with their community members. Thus, he proposed to the judge that part of their sentence include meeting with the victims, so that the teenagers could make offers of restitution. The judge agreed and Yantzi, along with David Worth (a prison support worker), accompanied the teenagers as they went around town visiting the homes of their victims, agreeing to make reparations with each for damages caused. Additionally, they gained a better sense of the harm caused. The success of the Elmira case led the two men to develop Canada’s first post-sentencing reconciliation program.

Today, the process has been better established and streamlined. Preparation is a crucial aspect of the program’s success. To begin, the mediator must ensure that all participants feel safe, and be ensured that they will not experience any further harm through the process. Strict guidelines on how meetings occur are intended to maintain trust and make sure everyone is there voluntarily. If parties feel coerced into participation, there is a possibility they may become re-victimized and resentful, which would results in a communication breakdown.

The practice is however not without its critics, especially in its dealings with youth crime. The majority of VOR/VOM programs take place with juveniles and as such, there is the concern that this form of restorative justice will lead to the phenomenon of “net-widening”. Diversion programs such as this which seek to remove individuals from the formal system have instead been accused of extending the reach of the state by processing harms which might otherwise not have been dealt with criminally. Such diversion may in fact result in a ramping up of a criminal justice response in response to petty crimes that were once otherwise just dealt by strict warnings and parents themselves. Thus, it is important to question whether the degree of harm caused by crimes such as petty shoplifting, graffiti scribblers etc is enough to warrant a state sanctioned response, despite the obvious harm caused. There is a worry that mobilizing such responses may in fact end up stigmatizing youth by meting out excessive punishment to minor forms of acting out, which many age out of anyway as they mature. In programs such as the VOR/VOM, strict rules of follow-up may increase the risk of youth becoming criminalized as they increase the likelihood of violating the terms of their sentence and getting caught again due to increased surveillance.

Circles

Circles are a form of traditional indigenous practice. Essentially, it is a multi-step process in which all members of the community where the crime occurred assemble to talk over possible resolutions and reparations. All members present are allowed a chance to speak and lay out their positions and/or grievances. It is imperative that the offender themselves feel completely safe and be accepting of both the process by which the circle operates and the outcome he/she will receive. Like VOR/VOM, there are formal stages to circles: suitability, preparation, a full circle gathering and follow-up.

Suitability speaks to the circumstances of the parties involved. Factors that must be considered include whether the offender has taken responsibility for their actions, whether the community is in a position to provide both the victim and offender the appropriate support, whether the circle itself provides a danger to the community in any way etc. Preparation encompasses many of the same traits as the VOR/VOM programs – the facilitator lays down the ground rules and guidelines of a respectful circle, as well as ensuring that all parties are sufficiently ready to undertake the task. It is important that a full circle be present at all sessions and it is important the mediator not rush or falsely expedite the process in any way. Circles are often time-consuming but it is important they run their course. Finally, follow-up in again an integral part of circles, whereby mediators ensure that whatever agreements were reached are lived up to. This may involve a community feast or other ceremonial activity to signify the offender’s re-integration into the community.

The broader goals of circles include: promoting healing for all affected parties; providing an opportunity for the offender to make amends; empowering victims, community members, families, and offenders by giving them a voice and a shared responsibility in finding constructive resolutions; addressing the underlying causes of criminal behavior, building a sense of community and its capacity for resolving conflict; and promoting shared community values.

Circles can also take on a more formal form. Sentencing circles for example follow many of the aforementioned principles, the key difference being the presence of state actors such as the judge, defense and Crown attorneys and probation/sentencing officers in addition to elders and the community. Their presence does not tilt the ceremony in favour of retribution – they are merely there to ensure that the sanction received through the circle’s deliberation meets the standards of Canadian law.

Circles, and sentencing circles especially, are often controversial due to their nature and the broader public perception surrounding them. A prominent example is that of R. v. Pauchey (2009), in which Christopher Pauchey, an Aboriginal man from the Yellow Quill Reserve in Saskatchewan left his two daughters out in -30°C weather while drunk. He was charged with criminal negligence causing death for which he pled guilty. Pauchey asked for a sentencing circle to determine his sentence, a request which would stir the debate about the indigenous practice throughout Canada. The National Post referred to sentencing circles as a “charitable approach” which bore “an uncomfortable similarity to a group hug for both victims and off enders.” Another report for the same publication proclaimed that “healing the guilty party is not supposed to be the primary purpose of a criminal sentencing anyway. There’s a reason we still call it ‘criminal justice.’”

Ultimately the judge granted Pauchey’s request for a sentencing circle, allowing his community’s elders to provide preliminary recommendations on his sentencing. It is interesting to note that in this particular case, the judge did not side with the circle’s recommendation to allow Pauchey to serve a conditional sentence in his community – rather, he gave him a 3 year prison sentence. Irregardless, the willingness to use the circle as a means of justice may be looked at the general public as circumventing the rule of law, a fundamental principle of justice. Additionally, it raises some basic philosophical questions about the primary objectives of sentencing itself that are hard to answer.

The Many Faces of Facilitators

In more traditional practices of restorative justice, the facilitator is often a role taken up by a community notable – someone with enough moral authority who the group feel comfortable in guiding their decision-making. For example, in many aboriginal communities, this role is entrusted to the elder(s). However, modernization to the process as well as the increased complexity of both the law and legal actors involved has meant that facilitators are now the product of official processes and qualifications. Rather than assuming any noteworthy community member is capable of facilitating negotiations, modern mediation requires specific education to deal with the many challenges they might face. For example, an untrained facilitator mediating a conflict between partners where family violence is a factor may not be able to pick up the intricacies of an abuser/abused dynamic and thus may not be able to do enough to advocate for the wronged party in the process. Additionally, untrained facilitators may not be fully aware of the programs and services available in the community that may help their clients, thus rendering this recommendations inadequate.

A significant portion of the trust placed in a facilitator also comes from their perceived contractual guarantee that they will facilitate the conflict in a fair and neutral manner. This is directly due to the increased professionalization of the field, as increased time and energy is spent building and developing codes of ethics that provide a set of behavioural expectations for facilitators to abide by. However, it can be argued that there are several possible issues with the increased professionalization of mediation. Traditionally, the idea of true community facilitators meant that the person mediating the conflict was someone who was reasonably, and sometimes even intimately, familiar with you and your family. While this dynamic is still present in aboriginal circles, the change of this “informal” facilitator into an individual well-versed in the art of conflict resolution has meant that conflict itself now appears more closely related to formal law, the very field it sought to differentiate itself from. Mediators then come to be perceived as a potential competitor to lawyers and judges, who had previously held monopoly over the field of law.

Thus, there is the concern that the increased willingness of construing facilitators as “professional” may cause restorative justice to lose the essence of what made it a desirable alternate solution to formal legal law. The fear that it will lose its local and informal roots and merely become an arm of the criminal justice system. By virtue of the state endorsing mediation as a legitimate form of conflict resolution, it caused the practice to become more profitable. Thus a market for mediation emerged where there was none before. Mediation quickly became a much-desired skill set for judges, lawyers and other legal actors. The field of mediation thus became saturated with professional actors charging high prices for their services, which effectively sidelined both the original community based mediation and the informal actors involved in it.

There is also the risk that overly formalizing the training received by mediators may reduce their ability to contextualize group conflicts with deeper social and historical connection. For example, while professional mediators may employ a variety of pragmatic tools and paradigms as taught through their professional training, they may not be adequately prepared to deal with conflicts involving Aboriginal offenders. The fact that an Aboriginal offender involved in substance abuse involves understanding and contextualizing forces of colonialism, legacies of family separation and residential schooling, their difficulty transitioning from reserve life to city life and every day experiences of racism goes far beyond any education a professional school can provide. Mediators must therefore be diligent in recognizing their own deficiencies and possible ineffectiveness when it comes to certain issues, as well as be willing to actively learn new conflict resolution strategies and adapt old ones.

As is evident, all forms of restorative justice operate with a focus on the collective. Forging relationships and feelings of peace are considered of the utmost importance, both in peacefully reaching a conflict resolution as well as in measuring the success of said conflict resolutions. Mediators must be adequately trained in order to be successful in helping offenders restructure and reform their existing mental paradigms, which helps them learn how to communicate and resolve conflicts effectively. Through techniques of discipline, facilitators work to produce “normality” by creating “normal” individuals whose behaviour is controlled, rather than coerced, through multiple social techniques (following social norms and rules such as traffic signals or waiting patiently in line). Techniques of self are used well, which rely on the individuals own self-regulation as they work to internalize societal controls and start to play an active role in monitoring their own behaviour. This method of requiring the offender to first recognize and then actively work towards normalizing his behaviours through his own volition forms the basis of restorative justice.

Transitioning from a Retributivist System to a Restorative One?

In order for restorative justice to be recognized as a viable avenue of conflict resolution in its own right, it must break free of considerable socio-political considerations that are currently holding it back. Restorative justice is situated in a context in which political actors, as well as structural forces, either enable or obstruct its practice. Restorative justice agencies are reliant on government resources and so may be forced to put aside their more idealistic aspects for language that appeals to those in power. This includes the problem of restorative programs being forced to promote “accountability” as a sales-pitch in order to function in their communities. Accountability involves having agencies including an evaluative component in their program, by which it can quantifiably measure whether it has reached its intended goals. These goals are unfortunately often not free from political considerations. Actual restorative justice principles may be sidelined in favour of measuring statistics on recidivism, program costs, victim satisfaction and more. Much of what restorative justice aims to achieve is simply impossible to present numerically. For example, how do we measure “healing”? While facilitators may deal with core issues that lead to some modicum of immediate healing, it in itself is often an imperfect process. An individual may have “good days” or “bad days” even months after dealing with their trauma through professional mediation. Developing quantitative frameworks to gauge the effect of qualitative restorative justice goals is arguably an exercise in futility.

The increased professionalization and politicization of restorative justice has meant that its potential to mitigate the worst excesses of punitive punishments has been severely diminished. In fact, restorative justice as it is currently practiced, completely fails to establish itself as a separate system of conflict resolution and a viable avenue through which to achieve a measurable modicum of justice. As it stands, areas of laws where restorative justice practices are most relevant, such as those relating to youth, also makes room for punitive responses to violent and repeat young offenders which just confuses the process even further. Essentially, what is required is a broad communal shift in attitudes towards restorative justice. However, this is easier said than done, due to aforementioned difficulty in truly quantifying the success of restorative justice programs.

Consequently, restorative justice, which seeks to present itself at the same level of effectiveness as that of retributive justice, gets delegated to dealing with what are perceived as smaller, less serious crimes, often by first time offenders. By being content to play only a marginal role in the legal state, it serves the dual purpose of supporting the criminal justice system, as well as failing to reach its full potential by truly challenging its practices and theories in serious, real world scenarios. From this marginal position, restorative justice thus has little power to call into question the gendered, class-based or racialized dimensions of the criminal justice system. True “justice” can only be achieved when systems of power employ sentencing and reparative techniques through the aforementioned lenses.

Conclusion

Our reactions to conflict are often dependent on the type of conflict socializations ingrained in us through our upbringing. An individual who grew up experiencing violence will cognize and react much differently to difficulties than someone who grew up in a relatively stable environment. Adversarial law has been an entrenched part of our culture, so much so that we automatically think of conflict in legal terms. Restorative justice faces an uphill battle in challenging and disrupting this paradigm. As such, currently, restorative justice programs cannot replace the traditional criminal justice system, partly due its current inadequacies and partly because it requires a large cultural shift to do so. There will always be victims and offenders who choose to have their cases remain in the traditional criminal justice system. While the criminal justice system should offer victims many of the services that are offered in restorative justice programs, it is often only within the context of restorative justice programs that these services are provided.

Ideally, restorative justice should be a separate and proactive system, running parallel to the formal adversarial system, by which eligible offenders are able to rehabilitate. There are of course many issues with this course of thought, including the undermining of the traditional system, the question of true legitimacy and calling into question the true definition of justice. The issue arises of whether is justice something that is best achieved through punitive programs or through community counselling. Keeping in mind that restorative programs often fall prey to the political agenda of neo-liberal policies, is it still the most viable avenue through which to achieve true harm reduction between offenders and victims. Restorative justice, whether practiced alone or diluted as an agent of the formal system, has the potential to be a significant and pragmatic means of lowering the rate of recidivism and bringing about a more humane and equitable form of justice.

INTRODUCTION

Gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender have been subject to segregation in numerous social orders around the world. Unlikely LGBTQ in Canada enjoy a few of the most prominent legitimate rights and securities within the world. Homosexuality has been legitimate since the section of the Criminal Law Correction Act (too known asBill C-150) in June 1969.In Canada, same-sex sexual exercises between consenting grown-ups were considered violations culpable by detainment before 1969. That year, the Canadian government passed an omnibus bill decriminalizing private sexual acts between two individuals over the age of 21 – a breakthrough in treating gay men, lesbians and bisexuals similarly beneath the law. Canadian approaches on gay rights and sex issues, for example, are a few of the foremost tolerant and dynamic within the world. Whether it’s same-sex marriage, women’s uniformity or the assurance of non-binary sexes, Canadian laws and directions have continuously met the high

A Chronology of Advances in LGBT Rights in Canada since 1969 – 2007

Since 1969, there have been many changes in the state of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) equality rights across Canada.The changes in criminal code decriminalised “gross indecency” and “buggery”, if committed in private between two consenting adults over the age of 21. The Criminal Code was further amended in later years, including a drop in age-of-consent to 18 (for anal sex) and 14 for other forms of sexual activity. Parliament removed the prohibition on lesbians, gays and bisexuals serving in the military, as a result of a court challenge in Douglas v. Canada. Parliament amended the Criminal Code to provide increased penalties for crimes motivated by hatred on certain grounds, including sexual orientation.Parliament amended the Canadian Human Rights Act to explicitly prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.The Supreme Court of Canada ruled, in M v H, that it is unconstitutional to deny same-sex couples equality. Since that time, many governments across Canada have embarked on programs of wholesale legislative reform. Adoption rights, inheritance, spousal support – these and many other rights previously reserved for heterosexuals are gradually being extended to same-sex couples.

The Supreme Court reaffirmed lower Court rulings that Canada Customs discriminates against LGBT bookstores and materials, and held that while Customs is still permitted to seize material at the border, the burden of proving obscenity now rests with the Crown, as opposed to the bookstores or other importer.Similarly, the Immigration and Refugee Protection law now recognizes “common-law partners”, including same-sex couples, as members of the family class, so a same-sex partner of an LGBT Canadian is now eligible to immigrate to Canada.

Transgender Issues in Canada

As gays and same-sex couples have earned thorough protection and equality under Canadian law, the focus in recent years has turned to transgendered individuals. From public restrooms to passports, the issue has proved to be a thorny one. But as with gay rights and gender equality, Canada seems to be taking the lead.

Legal Protections

The Canadian Human Rights Act of 1977 and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms of 1982 did not originally specify sexual orientation and gender identity.And since 2017, federal law has prohibited discrimination against gender identity or expression. This means that transgender people now enjoy the same legal protections as any Canadian and every other racial or sexual minority.

The government has conceded that gender identity may not necessarily conform to a person’s given sex at birth. Furthermore, gender is such a deeply intrinsic aspect of someone’s character. Therefore, discrimination based on gender identity represents a serious violation of a person’s human rights.

Birth Certificates for Non-binary Genders

Among the greatest challenges in acknowledging the personhood of transgender people comes in issuing their birth certificates. From the day they are born, every person is assigned a gender. The birth certificate, and every other form of identification has a box for male and a box for female, and one of them must be checked. But new understandings and sensitivities about gender are rendering this binary category somewhat obsolete.

In the past decade, increasing numbers of people have been petitioning to alter the sex as recorded on their birth certificates. In Canada, each province has established its own requirements to alter their sex. Between 2014 and 2017, most provinces stopped requiring sex-change surgery. Now petitioners can usually declare a change of sex based on a sworn statement and a signed letter from a physician or a psychologist.

Promoting and protecting rights for LGBT people

Fondation Jasmine Roy, a Quebec-based anti-bullying, anti-discrimination and anti-violence group, commissioned polling firm CROP to conduct the study;

CROP surveyed and identified :

Measuring acceptance

In the study, the majority of respondents who were out to companions and family said their sexual introduction was at slightest well acknowledged by their quick family, friends, accomplices and co-workers, which they get an adequate amount of support from their close family members.

But three-quarters of the LGBT respondents said they had been victims of bullying, much higher than the 45 per cent of heterosexual cisgender individuals who reported such treatment.Of those who said they were discriminated against based on their sexual orientation, 40 per cent said the discrimination occurred at their workplace.

In Canada in 2016, about one‑eighth (12.0%) of all same‑sex couples had children living with them, compared with about half (51.4%) of opposite‑sex couples. This includes parents and children of all ages, although, on average, same‑sex couples were younger than opposite‑sex couples. Their children may be biological or adopted. There may also be a stepfamily relationship, meaning that the child or children came into the life of one of the partners before the current couple relationship.

The percentage of same‑sex couples, male and female couples combined, who had children living with them rose steadily over 15 years, from 8.6% in 2001 to 12.0% in 2016.One notable difference between male and female same‑sex couples is the proportion who were living with children

Female couples accounted for four‑fifths of the 8,770 same‑sex couples who were living with children in 2016. This ratio has stayed constant since the 2001 Census.At the time of the 2016 Census, 10,020 children aged 0 to 14 were living in a family with same‑sex parents. About half of these parents were married, although more male parent couples (59.8%) than female parent couples (49.7%) were married.

Conclusion

The laws and the history encompassing gay rights and transgender issues in Canada, it’s clear that this is one of the foremost LGBTQ2-friendly countries within the world. Canada has reliably been around a decade ahead of the bend in allowing and ensuring the rights of gays, and non-binary genders. In expansion, Amnesty asserts that all governments must proceed to sentence all human rights infringement based on sexual introduction and gender identity, and deliver such infringement the same thought and concern as all other sorts of human rights infringement based on other grounds .Governments ought to support worldwide endeavors to decriminalize homosexuality and work towards LGBTQ equality.

Has one ever thought about how proud and honorable Canadians are to their own land? Well, Canadians show their politeness, and generosity to others by welcoming, and accepting their ethics; therefore, Canada is a nation where one can contribute their beliefs without being segregated; this is why one should be proud because everyone is equal in our eyes. Canada is a nation where one can be free, proud, and loved for many reasons: the education system, the first nation to create hockey, and loyalty to the nation. Over the years, Canada had supported the community in ways that have never been seen before, such as providing equal rights to everyone in society. Therefore, Canada is a country where one can be satisfied and proud. Canadians are proud to accomplish all these tasks, but the following, are the reasons why we should be proud of Canada: having a diverse country and different ethnic backgrounds, everyone has human rights, and lastly anyone is allowed to immigrate to Canada.

Without immigration, our population would be demolished, which would decrease our economy, as well as growth and development; however, Canada’s policy allows new immigrants into Canada because they regulate the population growth, and settlement to grow our society, and provide major economic growth in the country. They help in the workforce by filling in jobs to make the force run quickly and efficiently, such as teachers, chemists, salespeople, managers, production workers, transportation workers, and many more. In 2008, a Leger Marketing poll of immigrants living in Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver found that 87 percent of people felt that they were included in Canada. The major federal government departments have been responsible for immigration policies since World War II and they are the Ministry of Mines and Resources, the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, the Department of Manpower and immigration, and the Canada Employment and Immigration Commission under the British American Act (this act created Canada as a self-governing country on July 1, 1867). From 1890 to 1920, the immigration system brought thousands of immigrants from all over the world, including Scotland, Ireland, and European homelands (Germany, Italy, and more), and 20% of the immigrants represent our country. Every year Canada welcomes 240,000-265,000 immigrants and refugees into Canada; during the 1990s Canada assisted 100,000 Hindus of Nepalese heritage who were forced out of their original country. Recently Canada has accepted about 50,000 Syrians because bombing and war have taken place in Syria. Canadians show their love by being the bigger country and accepting refugees without being discriminatory and treating them the same as every other race. “A broken immigration system means broken families and broken lives”, as Jose Antonio Vargas stated. If immigration systems were broken, families would not be able to communicate with relatives, so Canadians have this opportunity, which allows relatives in Canadian territory without an issue. Canada is guiding thousands of people to immigrate to Canada and offering them a friendly environment to settle in, which allows them to feel safe and welcomed. If immigrants are unable to come over this will devastate their lives because one is incapable to see their family, but one should recognize that Canada is a faithful country allowing immigrants and new faces into the country without discriminating or prejudicing. We should be thankful for such a country because most countries don’t have this immigration act; some countries have a dictatorship leader who will not satisfy citizens and make it a corrupted environment, like North Korea.

In one’s ordinary life, one sees many surrounding them from movement to color; this displays how diverse Canada as a nation can be, from jobs to traditions. Alain Giguère, president of CROP, stated, “I think society as a whole has to witness diversity”, and “We cannot expect everybody to be the same”, which tells all Canadians that everyone should be included, such as the difference between different races, religion, culture, gender, and disabilities are crucial to being recognized and valued, immigration, and the LGBT legalization in 2005. Conservative leader Stephen Harper started this case and was approved by the Senate, where they legalized LGBT in 2005, making Canada the fourth country in the world to recognize same-sex marriage after the Netherlands, Belgium, and Spain. There were 16.5 percent of same-sex couples in Canada in 2006, but it doubled to 30% in 2011, nearly twice the amount. Canada has 17.5% of the population who speaks at least 2 languages at home: in 2011, 80% of the population who spoke a language other than their native language lived in Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, Calgary, Edmonton, and Ottawa. “The diversity of Canada’s population is expected to increase significantly in the next two decades” (Gloria Suhasini). This nation is made up of people who share bonds, such as background, language, religious or spiritual practices, cultural heritage, geography, and political beliefs, and community teaching and sharing their traditions, languages, and values. Canada gives many job opportunities and education from hands-on jobs, acting, thinking, and many more. We should be proud to live in Canada, allowing people to share their values and accept their differences.

No matter how far you go, human rights will follow you. Canada is strict on these rules because we’re treated equally. Human rights include freedom from discrimination, they are to be treated fairly no matter their race, sex, language, and religion, freedom from slavery, respect, and harassment, and being treated fairly everywhere in Canada. Discrimination is an act where a person treats a group or person negatively under their race, disability, age, and more In Canada, you are able to file a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission if: you work for or from the federal government or a business that is regulated by the federal government; you believe you have been discriminated against and it’s in the 11 grounds of discrimination protected under the Canadian Human Rights Act, which includes physical or verbal abuse; harassment occurs when someone makes unwelcome comments or jokes about your background. However, we still have problems today where we strip indigenous’ rights away and take over their land. Aboriginals should not face violence because they deserve all the right to take over the land and control it. Canada believes the human suitability of all persons to be equal. The LGBT rights for Canadians are focused on situations of gays and lesbians outside who suffer from abuse; such cases have been focused on the pride event. This took place in 2014 when Toronto hosted the fourth WorldPride event, which included a week-long human rights conference. Gender identity is not specifically mentioned in the legislation, but the Human Rights Act of gender identity is currently experiencing the second reading in the Senate.

Canadians have the right to be treated fairly in workplaces free from discrimination, and our country has laws to protect this right. The Canadian Human Rights Act is a broad-reaching piece of legislation that prevents differentiation on the basis of gender, race, ethnicity, and other grounds. The labor rights and responsibilities of employers and employees within federally regulated areas fall under the Canada Labour Code. The rights of foreign workers in Canada are also protected under federal or provincial labor laws. This ensures a secure and safe community everywhere one goes, and that every human is treated fair and equally.

In conclusion, Canada is a country where everyone is equally treated, bringing new immigrants to a diverse country, and sharing traditions and cultural lifestyles. Our nation is united as one and none are to be segregated or prejudiced. Canada will remain distinct from other countries and will for, who knows, maybe decades; judging by the progress Canada has completed to become one of the most diverse countries, people from Europe to Asia.

According to Investopedia, poverty is defined as “a state or condition in which a person or community lacks the financial resources and essentials for a minimum standard of living. Poverty means that the income level from employment is so low that basic human needs can’t be met” (2019). Childhood poverty is then a situation in which children lack resources for living. In Canada, childhood poverty continues to be a growing concern as it directly affects health outcomes, educational attainment, and social communities across the population. With the government’s inability to incorporate initiatives that would benefit those that fall into this category, it goes unnoticed by the majority of the Canadian population. It is not only a minor economic inconvenience but a public health concern that affects not only the health and life outcomes of those directly affected but the community as a whole. Occurrences of infant mortality speak volumes on societal well-being, as of “1996, Canada’s infant mortality rate in the lowest-income urban neighborhoods was 66% higher (6.5 deaths per 1000 live births) than in the highest-income urban neighborhoods (3.9 deaths per 1000 live births)” (Gupta, R. P., de Wit, M. L., & McKeown, D, 2007 ). Children born into low-income families are at higher risk of death and chronic illnesses before the age of one compared to their counterparts in richer homes, this is a major point of concern to public health for Canada as this period in their lives consists of the critical periods of development for any child and exposure during this time can have major effects on health throughout life and in adulthood. The purpose of this critical reflection paper is to explore what constitutes childhood poverty and defend the idea that childhood poverty is a major concern to population development due to how it affects education, health, and community solidarity in Canada.

Supportive Evidence

When looking into the issue of childhood poverty, society is often divided into two different extremes: those that say it is a big concern to the smooth functioning of society, and those that believe that small-scale poverty rates have some advantages to the wider society. According to Herbert J. Gans (2012), those more fortunate can gain from systematic poverty when politics are involved. Hebert stated that the poor are less likely to vote compared to the rich, they lack any power that would be able to advocate for better working conditions, and therefore that would be a huge burden on the more financially stable due to tax implements to provide infrastructure. Those that believe poverty has no advantage on society often at times discuss how lack of opportunity for some in a certain population affects the population as a whole, they believe that poverty encourages negative behaviors and leads to increased crime by those that have to rely on unlawful tactics to produce basic needs. Although poverty in society has some positive effects on the one percent, I believe that it is an issue that constitutes worse than good in society. It affects the development of that community over time, leading to economic drawbacks and public concerns.

Childhood Poverty and Education

Poverty has a direct negative effect on education and the ability of children to focus in a school setting. Students that grow up in low-income families are already behind their peers in more prosperous households. Readiness for academic institutions is a key reflector of a child’s ability to excel when it comes to social and scholarly environments. Research carried out by Hertzman C., McLean S.A., Kohen D.E., Dunn J., and Evans T. (2007) found that 38% of kindergarten children living in the lowest income communities compared to the 6% in the highest income are vulnerable to some dimensions of learning difficulty. This can lead to more profound burdens on society as people with inadequate education tend to have trouble asserting their position in society, which then has major effects on their health outcomes, mental health, and chances of being exploited. With a growing population of uneducated individuals, economies would suffer as society would lack services needed to run smoothly, and there would be increased burdens on societies and governments to make an alternative to account for the lack therefore. The root causes of poor education in families of low income can be linked to many factors. For example, in the case that public education is free in Canada and it would not constitute much of a burden due to no payment. However, many children lack support systems to propagate and encourage continuous learning and development of learned skills from class. According to H.B. Ferguson, S. Bovaird, and M.P. Mueller (2007), parents in poorer families face day-to-day stress from work to nutrition and much more, and many of them lack the time and resources to help their kids when it comes to education aspect, which leads to kids falling behind and not putting much effort into their education. To improve the outcomes for children growing up in low-income environments, the government can allocate more funding to institutions and initiatives like after-school programs that encourage parents that are busy to leave children under the care of professionals that can provide the guidance that they need after school thus fostering a healthy learning environment outside of school. In addition to this, Montessori programs can be included in the schooling systems to help children who may be slower or find it harder to attain knowledge in a conventional teaching environment. Lack of positive experiences in an educative institution can often leave kids needing to socialize with community networks and burn off steam from school. However, in many low-income neighborhoods, there is a lack of infrastructure such as parks and recreational activities. This leaves kids needing to take off steam in negative ways, which may then add to their vulnerability.

Childhood Poverty and Community Networks

Community networks and experiences are impacted and severed in high-poverty communities. Lack of resources and public services often leaves the community isolated. The combination of social ills and the social isolation experienced by those in extremely poor neighborhoods has given rise to a particular lifestyle and subculture, consisting of high violence and increased crime rates. To compensate for a lack of positive infrastructure that encourages growth and development such as public libraries and recreational centers, children brought up in low-income families often turn to a life of crime consisting of drugs and gangs to provide some sort of haven or community that they believe they can rely on. The effects further propagate across society as higher crime rates lead to an increase in government spending to be able to maintain prisons following the high crime. This inevitably leads to increased government spending and policy implementation in sectors that don’t improve opportunity for the population as a whole and money being drawn out of important sectors like health and social services and a possible increase in taxes to make up for money distribution. With decreasing budgets for welfare and health, many children already growing up in low-income households would be unable to have access to optimal healthcare and recreational activities, leaving a high burden on parents. The psychosocial model of health discusses how one’s social position affects a person’s ability to cope with stress. The behavioral pathway argues that socially disadvantaged individuals have little opportunity to control their life and therefore turn to alcohol and bad behaviors to aid with stress. So, it is parents of disadvantaged children, they pick up negative behaviors like smoking that not only directly affect their health but the general health of the community around them. “Breathing in second-hand smoke—whether it’s from a neighbor’s burning cigarette or a cigarette outside your window—has been shown to have instant effects on the cardiovascular system of nearby individuals” (Quitters Circle, 2017), by increasing these negative behaviors, individual childhood poverty is creating a loop of adverse effect for the community as a whole. In conclusion, the lack of infrastructure like parks and chronic negative behaviors such as smoking have further negated positive health outcomes and played a bigger role in promoting poor health in low-income communities that desperately need better conditions due to compromised fitness arising from birth and critical periods.

Childhood Poverty and Health

The mean economic status of a community plays a big role in determining the health outcomes of that society. It affects both those that are directly disadvantaged and those that fall under the one percent. The early stages of a child’s development are the most important periods of that child’s overall growth as it determines their long-term health and even the health of the generations that come follow. Children that are born into poverty are more likely to experience poor nutrition and health problems while growing up than those in more financially secure environments. Governments promote the idea of a fit and disease resistance economy, yet they fail to authorize policy and infrastructure that would provide a satiable wage that encourages a sound mind and adequate resources. For example, low socioeconomic status neighborhoods were more likely to lack safe playgrounds and parks, and to have fewer children participating in organized sports due to a lack of facilities and/or personal resources, all of which represent barriers to maintaining a healthy body weight (Oliver and Hayes, 2005). The early stages of life are some of the most important times of development for a child, they consist of the critical periods which is when exposure leads to unalterable effects on health and development. Children growing up in poverty-stricken environments during this period of their lives are at higher risk of health complications in adulthood and old age as early life experiences are what shape and determine health across the life course. Childhood poverty affects the population as a whole, if not treated as a health risk, it leads to an increasingly unhealthy and troubled older population, which then passes it on across generations, therefore, promoting a chain of declining health outcomes over time. In addition to this, low-income children are more likely to be overweight and obese, this can be associated with bad nutrition and poor exercise because of infrastructure. According to Oliver L.N. and Hayes M.V. (1998-1999), 25% of children two to 11 years of age who were living in low-income families were obese compared with 16% of children who were not living in low-income families. This carries a lot of negative effects on the population, such as a loss of productivity. To eliminate childhood poverty, the government must continue to implement policies that address the socio-economic conditions that contribute to poverty, such as lack of satiable income, and should try to reduce the cost of essential goods and services that foster good health. Also, implementing advocacy groups that work hand in hand with low-income families to create awareness of the greater social issue.

Conclusion

In conclusion, childhood poverty is a cause of concern for the larger society. Children in poor households lack the education that they need to be positive citizens in society and at most times turn to crime and negative behaviors to make up for the lack of resources, resulting in society paying the price. In addition to this poverty encourages poor health within a population, those in low-income homes are more prone to having compromised health from birth, which then affects their health along their life course, leading to poor overall health for everyone, as the disease can be more easily spread. By relating the health issue to social determinants of health, it is easier to see how the issue discussed affects the wider society and why the Canadian system and those in power need to do what will aid the decrease in childhood poverty and a rise in overall socio-economic prosperity.

References

1. Agnew, R. (1999) ‘A General Strain Theory of Community Differences in Crime Rates’, Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency 36: 123–155.
2. Chen, J. (2020, February 5). Poverty. Retrieved from http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/poverty.asp
3. Ferguson, H., Bovaird, S., & Mueller, M. (2007). The Impact of Poverty on Educational Outcomes for Children. Paediatrics & Child Health, 12(8), 701–706. https://doi.org/10.1093/pch/12.8.701
4. Gans, H. J. (2012). The Benefits of Poverty. Challenge, 55(1), 114–125. doi:10.2753/0577-5132550106.
5. Gupta, R. P., de Wit, M. L., & McKeown, D. (2007). The Impact of Poverty on the Current and Future Health Status of Children. Paediatrics & Child Health, 12(8), 667–672. https://doi.org/10.1093/pch/12.8.667
6. Hertzman C., McLean S.A., Kohen D.E., Dunn J., Evans T. (2007) Human Early Learning Partnership. Early Development in Vancouver: Report of the Community Asset Mapping Project (CAMP). http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/products/ecd_van_e.pdf
7. How Does Smoking Affect Those Around You? (2017, July 26). Retrieved from https://www.quitterscircle.com/how-to-quit/how-does-smoking-affect-those-around-you
8. Lewis, O. (1971). The Culture of Poverty. In J. Harp & J. Hofley (Eds.), Poverty in Canada (pp. 221–230). Scarborough, ON: Prentice-Hall.
9. Lipman, E. L., Offord, D. R., & Boyle, M. H. (1994). Relation between Economic Disadvantage and Psychosocial Morbidity in Children. CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal, 151(4), 431–437.
10. Merton, R.K. (1938), ‘Social Structure and Anomie’, American Sociological Review 3: 672–682.
11. Oliver L.N., Hayes M.V. (2005) Neighbourhood Socio-Economic Status and the Prevalence of Overweight Canadian Children and Youth. The Canadian Journal of Public Health.; 96:415–20.
12. Purves D., Augustine G.J., Fitzpatrick D., et al. (2001). Neuroscience. 2nd edition. Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates; Critical Periods.
13. Statistics Canada. (2007) The Daily: National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth: Childhood obesity. http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/021018/d021018b.htm