Below is part of my speech about misogyny in politics, the legislature, and in the budget:
I want to be clear about what we’re talking about when we talk about misogyny. [3:30 p.m.] Misogyny, in and of itself, the word, Speaker, is not unparliamentary. It is a word. It is a thing. It’s defined as this: It is a form of sexism that can keep women at a lower social status than men, thus maintaining the social roles of patriarchy. Misogyny has been widely practised for thousands of years. It is reflected in art, literature, human societal structure, historical events, mythology, philosophy, and religion worldwide. I didn’t just make it up. I didn’t just pretend that I knew way more than everyone else in this Chamber and decide to slap a word onto what I experienced yesterday in the Chamber. It’s a real thing. Misogyny and sexism are sometimes hard to see because they’re insidious. They’re omnipresent. It’s everywhere. We’re so used to it that we don’t even notice when it’s happening. That’s because of misogyny. It’s because of patriarchy, and because of all the reasons. It’s colonization. It’s the things that have created our society and the way it is, and this budget suffers from it. There is not a woman on this planet who hasn’t in some way experienced it -even women who have great partners. Even women who have had great lives, who are powerful women, and who have never experienced overt sexism have experienced misogyny or internalized misogyny. It’s hard to see sometimes, but there’s no denying the effects. It’s why women earn less than men. It’s why women are judged on their clothing. It’s why women are judged for their career choices or for even choosing to have a career, and not stay home and take care of the kids, or to stay home and take care of the kids and not have a career. Basically, women can’t get any of that right, ever, according to someone. It’s why women are disproportionately the victims of assault and harassment. It’s why I could not leave the hospital when I had my baby -because I had to call my ex-husband and get him to tell me the date of our divorce so I could prove that I was divorced from him before I left the hospital with my baby. Come on. It’s why we constantly second guess our instincts and ask, “Was that okay?” after I speak or say something that I really believe in. “Do I look okay?” “Was that okay?” “I feel a little fat today.” It’s why we’re told to smile more. It’s why when we question the merits of a powerful man’s policy decision, that powerful man will call us negative and question our reputations rather than engage in the merits of the arguments. We see this all over in politics. Women and particularly women leaders -leaders of parties, leaders of countries, leaders of provinces -are characterized as negative, and that characterization is misogyny. When I attend these Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians meetings -I would love to be able to go to Australia next year, although I don’t know that my leader is going to let me go on that trip, but that’s another story -I would love to be able to say that Nova Scotia is all set for women to join this Legislature, all set for women to open businesses, all set for women to do everything they can to live their best lives. But I can’t do that. I would love to be able to say that whether you’re in the government or in the Opposition, or whether you hold important, powerful positions in non-partisan offices like the Auditor General, being at the helm of Elections Nova Scotia, or being the Information and Privacy Commissioner -no matter what part of politics you want to engage in -I would love to be able to say that your voice will be valued and that you can count on the fact that Nova Scotia makes policies and laws that are created using a gender-sensitive lens. Unfortunately, when I go to those meetings -when I represent our Province and our country on the international stage -I will not be able to say that. I would love for this government -whether it be the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board or someone else in the government -to table the documents and the lens throughwhich this budget has been examined according to gender. Show us the metrics. Show us the documents. If ministers are asked in Estimates, “Has your budget gone through a gender-sensitive lens?” and they say “Yes,” then show us where. Show us how. Show us the questions. Show us how we examined every line of this budget to make sure that it honours, protects, and uplifts women. There should be nothing less in this Chamber, and we should stop being misogynists.