Electing women on purpose? Works for me

Had this week’s historic election occurred prior to 2013, the five women elected to Medicine Hat city council would have been called aldermen.

So, for the weak-minded men who not only had the unfunny misogynistic thoughts but went online to make sure we all knew what zeros they are, yes, electing five female councillors and the city’s first female mayor, in and of itself, is a big deal. And it’s worth celebrating.

But to actually have the audacity to suggest any one of these women won their seat simply because of their gender shows exactly why this particular glass ceiling needed to be shattered.

First of all, the city elected its first mayor in 1899, and for the next 17 years women couldn’t even participate in the process. More than a century later, we are just now getting to a place where a woman doesn’t automatically lose because of gender, and yet, when one becomes the mayor, certain men immediately start crying the opposite.

If you’ve lived on earth at any stage in your life yet somehow uttered a version of “she only won because she’s a woman,” you’re a special kind of unintelligent. But, in your defence, you’re also sadly a product of the environment.

You know that patriarchy we keep hearing about these days? This is what they’re talking about.

Men have long controlled our world, while women have had to fight for equality every step of the way — not exactly a disputed revelation. And so, when aspects of equality are actually accomplished, they must be celebrated.

The funny thing is, the reaction of certain men toward this celebration is precisely the reason the celebration is required. When they say, “She won because she’s a woman,” what they’re really saying is, “A woman shouldn’t have won.”

Unfortunately for the women winning seats at present day — and this entire piece could apply to certain reactions to people of colour doing the same thing — this type of thinking doesn’t fizzle out as much as it has to die off.

You won’t find many men in 2021 who oppose a woman’s right to vote, but I guarantee that wasn’t the case when Alberta granted women suffrage in 1916. And until all men were born into a world where women voted, some went to their graves still opposed to it.

There isn’t a column that could be written, a speech that could be given, or even a policy that could be enacted that will change the minds of some of these men who clearly feel threatened by the presence of women in control.

And so they go online to suggest voters didn’t judge platforms or abilities because they were too focused on gender. They think this is clever because they’re coming from an angle of, “it’s the issues that matter, not the gender.”

Of course, those of us who understand the historic importance of elections like this, are perfectly capable of celebrating the gender significance and then turning our attention to the decisions this council makes. What will be interesting is if these men can do the same.

Because while they claim the “issues over gender” high road today, do you think when the rest of us turn our full attention to those issues, these men will join us? Or will the first property tax increase (yes, that will happen) be met with idiotic comments about the spending habits of women?

The fact is, this new council really does face some uphill battles, and the decisions they make as a group are going to split the room from time to time. Budget issues facing the last council remain, and one of the final moves of that group was to defer property taxes by way of COVID relief.

By now most of Medicine Hat assuredly knows we can no longer have everything we need paid for by energy revenues, and at some point, something will have to give. We can’t go forward exactly as we have in the past, and the “Medicine Hat Advantage” of ultra low taxes and utilities can’t continue as is without sacrificing services or operations to some degree.

But this new council would be loath not to notice that candidates who shaped campaigns entirely around Financially Fit, or bringing back that Advantage, lost. Having lived through the worst part of this deadly pandemic in the two months leading up to the election, maybe it shouldn’t be a shock if Hatters chose a group that exudes a little care and compassion, whether chosen that way consciously or not.

If anything regarding six of nine elected officials being female speaks to gender alone,

I’d venture to say it unveils more about the men who ran than anything. If you’re saying voters turned to candidates because they are women, you’re literally saying they wanted councillors to possess the exact qualities bestowed upon them by patriarchal stereotypes.

If that’s the point you’re trying to make, that’s fine, but you should know you’re still saying the right candidates won.

Mayor elect Linnsie Clark and councillors Ramona Robins, Allison Knodel, Alison Van Dyke, Cassi Hider and Shila Sharps made history this week. Doing so always comes with a level of hate, and for the next four years, they will all be judged through a gender-based lens — not by those who voted for them, but by those who didn’t.

But those who chose them, chose them for a reason. And no matter what that reasoning was, the result is worth celebrating.