Helena Guergis

EKOS Federal Voting Intent Poll-Decided Voters, 22 April 2010

Notes from North of 49ºN

In the wake of the bizarre Helena Guergis scandal centred around Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper and a MP from Ontario who he kicked out of caucus, the Conservatives held their ground and the Liberals lost a few points. Additionally, EKOS reported that this was the 16th. consecutive poll where no party received more than 33%. The direction of the government poll has 46.6% saying the government is going in the wrong direction and 41.4% saying the government is going in the right direction, with 12% saying don’t know/no response.

The gap in favour of the Liberals in bellwether Ontario is well within the margin of error with the Conservatives polling at 33.1%  and the Liberals at 34.6% +/- 4%.

Disillusionment anyone?

One possibly interesting pattern is the stability of support for the minor parties {NDP, Greens, and Bloc} since last October.

Twitterversion:: Post-Guergismania EKOS poll shows Liberals slipping. NDP, Greens, & Bloc with fairly steady %s since Oct’09 #ThickCulture @Prof_K

Song:: Portishead-‘Numb’

Notes from north of 49ºN
This blog is crossposted on rhizomicon.

Helena Guergis is awash in controversy and is currently an independent MP from Simcoe-Grey in rural Ontario. I saw a Globe & Mail article that rubbed me the wrong way, but I initially couldn’t quite put my finger on why. Sarah Hampson’s snarky article, using “bonfire of the tiaras” in the title, makes some interesting points. Are “beauty pageants” incompatible with feminism? Sarah quips::
“But how could she mince around in high heels and then, in the next breath, work as a crisis volunteer for rape victims and march in Barrie’s Take Back the Night rally? Isn’t that a conflict of character?”
This paints a black and white picture, but Sarah’s last few paragraphs muddy the waters::

“The fact of the matter is that beauty pageants are an opportunity to get noticed; to be somebody at a young age; to get ahead. If you’re beautiful, what’s wrong with using it? Athletes use their physical prowess. Scholars flaunt their talents. Ambitious men (and women) boast about their accomplishments, easing them into every conversation.

That Ms. Palin and Ms. Guergis were both beauty contestants says three very simple things.

They’re ambitious; they’re opportunistic; and they’re vain. Which is why politics was so perfect for them, despite how their careers ended.”

First off, I’m not sure Palin or Guergis’ careers in politics have ended, so that bit may be premature. What struct me was the part about getting noticed and capitalizing on it.

Last year, on Bitchmagazine, there was a post about a heptathalon competitor who was the first black Miss England. The poster, Mandy Van Deven, offered these thoughts about the winner, Rachel Christie::

“It seems to me that she’s pushing the boundaries of several stereotypes about what makes a woman attractive. In fact, according to The Independent, “she entered the contest in the hope of launching a modeling career that might fund her athletics training.” So the lady was just using the contest to meet her “real” desire: to be an Olympian. Nothing wrong with hustling the system, right?”

While it may be easy to brush aside pageant winners as less-than-credible women, do these attitudes do violence to the feminist project? What should one make out of women who aren’t the historical stereotype of pageant contestants, but are athletes or well-rounded individuals seeking to use the system to their advantage. On the one hand, when I saw that some Canadian women athletes were in a swimsuit calendar, I thought the objectification took something away from their “brand”, but in a market-based reality, does this “selling-out” afford them the chance to compete or pay expenses?

Is there a point where a woman goes from being exploited to being savvy, if she’s in on the “game”? So, if she’s know’s it’s all a game to get attention and to capitalize on it, is she engaging in a subversion of the hegemony? Or, is it always exploitation?

I must say I’m a bit uncomfortable with marginalization of people because of their past and I think a more nuanced discussion about what women “do” is in order. While I get the idea of a normative feminism with ideals, at the end of the day, for many it’s about creating opportunities in a market-based world.

As for judging a book by its past covers, remember that Kristin Scott Thomas was the female lead in Prince’s Under the Cherry Moon {1986}.

Twitterversion:: Globe&Mail article discusses Guergis, Palin, beauty pageants, & politics. What does all of this say re: feminism in 2010? @Prof_K

Song:: Seal-‘It’s a Man’s Man’s Man’s World’




Helena Guergis, Member of Parliament {Independent} for Simcoe-Grey in Ontario
Notes from north of 49ºN
My last post on the Toronto Sun featured a photo of Helena Guergis, who was the cover story for a brewing scandal in Parliament that caused her to resign her cabinet position and get turfed from the Conservative caucus. I’ll hold off from commenting on that story, as it’s evolving and includes an RCMP probe.
It hasn’t been a good year for Guergis. Earlier in the year, she had a meltdown on her birthday where she yelled at airport staff in Charlottetown, PEI. A few weeks ago, there was another incident which I found to be interesting. Apparently, one of her staffers used a pseudonym and posted a pro-Guergis comment in a local paper, after someone posted a negative comment about Guergis.YouTube Preview Image
Guergis tried to smooth things over, but in the CBC report, some residents of her riding {Simcoe-Grey} were put off by this. A while back, one of my students had a corporate internship where their job was to scan Internet discussion groups and plant positive “word-of-mouth”. I’ve always wondered the degree to which paid or volunteer shills were doing similar work in social media, particularly on comments on news articles. I have no idea how prevalent, if at all, this practice is, but I would hazard to guess that there is a great temptation to use social media to generate as much advantage as possible.
I don’t think it’s too much to ask for that politicians and their staff follow a policy of transparency when it comes to communications. It’s fine to advocate for a position or a candidate, but if you’re somehow affiliated with a politician’s office, full disclosure would be the best policy and there should be rules that enforce this. In this day and age of tracking IP addresses and websleuthery, I’m convinced that 95%+ of users have no idea of how trackable they are and pseudonyms only go so far.
Twitterversion:: MP staffer caught posting comments on newspaper’s website w/a pseudonym & causes backlash. How improper is such shillery? @Prof_K
Song:: Matchbox 20-‘Bed of Lies’