Vancouver Science World's 'Science of Sexuality' exhibit (and why it made me cry)

By Clay Nikiforuk

| August 23, 2013

(Below are excerpts, please read entire post at source)
Seeing that it was recommended for people as young as 12, I didn't have high hopes for Science World pushing the envelope in their Science of Sexuality exhibit this summer. How graphic, how detailed, how varied could it be?

Before I tear the whole endeavor to pieces, I want to be clear: I understand that its target audience was young people. I understand that it was supposed to be "science" and not some paradigm-shifting sociological analysis. In fact, this is why I want to tear the whole inaccurate, Freudian, phallocentric, heteronormative thing to pieces. Young people learn that crap from somewhere; dressing up tired values and calling them science gives them powerful, but false, legitimacy which should not be shielded from critique. Especially when that crap is being spoon-fed to eager-to-learn children.

Let's start in the first room. The first display shockingly establishes that sex and gender are the same thing, that there are only two gender/sexes, and those are determined by chromosomes. This is later followed up by the statement that as one matures, one realizes that one's gender "does not change." Huh. I guess right off the bat we're leaving out intersex folk, and that sex and gender are not the same thing -- this has been established for over twenty years.

Next room. "Just like the colour of my eyes, I have no control over my sexual orientation." It's really nice that tolerance of anything other than heterosexuality sometimes successfully follows the whole "they can't help it" argument. What about those who can "help it" but are so audacious as to make choices about their sexuality? And nothing like the colour of one's irises, what about when orientation changes, is explored, is fluid, is complex? This not on the table, apparently.


Read more: http://rabble.ca/news/2013/08/vancouver-science-worlds-science-sexuality-exhibit-and-why-it-made-me-cry

Is a 10 year deal with teachers' union good for B.C.? Laila Yuile weighs in

Columnists Laila Yuile and Brent Stafford battle over the issues of the day.
From: http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/2013/06/02/premiers-meddling-derailed-respectful-tone-of-current-negotiations

This week’s topic:

Is a 10-year deal with the teachers’ union good for B.C.?

This week, I'd like to welcome Brent Stafford to the Duel, and wish him the best of luck. This week we take on yet another one of Premier Christy Clark's Fantasy Island solutions for the province. This time, it's the proposed 10-year contract Clark wants for teachers, which has predictably surfaced again post-election.

Like many parents, I have experienced up close the impact of labour disputes between the teachers and employers. So have my children. I don't agree with some of the tactics that have been used by teachers and the union in past disputes — in particular not filling out report cards, which is the only indicator many parents have of how their child is performing in school. Many people agree with me on that point, whether they are parents or not. Clearly it is our children who suffer when job action escalates.

Read Brent Stafford's column

The B.C. Teachers’ Federation has historically been seen to work on an agenda that isn't always supported by its own members. Recognizing that there had to be a better way to conduct bargaining and negotiations, teachers and the BC Public School Employers’ Association sat down and agreed upon a respectful framework to continue talks.

It appeared to be going well — until Clark told the employers to toss out everything and push for a 10-year contract. It's Clark's way, or the highway, and it changes the current respectful tone of negotiations to one that's clearly confrontational.
A 10-year contract with teachers might be good for the government, but is it good for the province as a whole? Absolutely not. The teachers and the employers had been quietly and peacefully negotiating for several months prior to the election, and were about to resume this week. It's not even a case of good intentions with bad execution. This is nothing but public relations and bad politics.
The reason why contracts are generally negotiated for a period of three to four years is to allow both sides to re-assess factors such as inflation and the economy, which impact both an employer and workers. No one can predict what the situation is going to be like four years down the road. Is this really about education and children, or is this about setting a precedent and sending a message to other unions the province must negotiate with in the future? If so, I see anything but labour peace under Clark’s leadership.
Laila Yuile is an independent writer, blogger and political commentator. You can read her blog at lailayuile.com.

Original Post: http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/2013/06/02/premiers-meddling-derailed-respectful-tone-of-current-negotiations

VSB Draft policy around social media

Vancouver Sun blog - The BC Education Report
Janet Steffenhagen
May 26, 2013

Don’t post anything on social media that reflects poorly on you or your school district.

That’s the main message from the Vancouver school district in proposed guidelines for employees using Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, etc.

The guidelines, among the first to be developed in such detail by a B.C. school district, are on the agenda for discussion at a meeting Tuesday of the board’s education and student services committee.

To view the rest of the blog posting, click here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Vancouver School Board: Draft Policy and Regulations: - Acceptable Use of Technology - Social Media Policy for Employees