LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Updated sex-ed curriculum protects children
I appreciate Rosemary Ganley’s piece (Church must come clean on abuse, Aug. 23) regarding the Pennsylvania report of 70 years of child molestation and ecclesial cover-up. I agree with her on the necessary radical reform of the church along feminist lines. And I would like to discuss the relevance of education, specifically sex education, to this discussion.
It’s of course impossible; but it’s a useful exercise to imagine whether as much abuse would have occurred if these priests had studied the sex ed curriculum that has been part of the health and physical education curriculum in Ontario for the past three years.
If the priests, as boys, had studied that curriculum they might have learned not to manipulate, not to abuse power, and what rape is. This knowledge on their part, along with the other feminist reforms, would likely have spared some children from sexual abuse. After all, it’s not that these priests were wholly bad men. They were, however, used to exercising power and domination and they had a free rein because shame, the result of invisibility and censorship, breeds secrecy. The next thing that happens is that secrecy breeds abuse.
Then there’s the children themselves. If they’d studied the sex ed curriculum we have in Ontario, they could’ve learned how to detect manipulation, how to speak up in their own defense if they were in danger, and how to name their genitals to describe any inappropriate behaviour on the part of their elders or their peers.
I’m not saying that the sex ed curriculum would have totally fixed what happened in Pennsylvania; but I do believe that a) we must continue to use that 2015 sex ed curriculum in the Ontario schools in the fall, and that b) Premier Ford is enabling the perpetrators and bullies in this province by repealing it. Gay Bell, Hedonics Road
PDI sale went against public’s wishes
My uncle, Gordon Parker, died in the Second World War for democracy, and everybody knows what that means.
The problem is that six Peterborough politicians do not care. They voted to sell PDI and erase everything he died for. John Baker, Peterborough
Strangers found and returned lost wallet
On Aug. 19 I stopped for gas on Highway 45. I must have left my wallet on the trunk.
Checking my phone at the next stop, I returned a call from Larry Crook, a multimedia consultant with Northumberland News.
He and his wife had seen the wallet and contents of it along Highway 45, turned around and took the time and effort to walk quite a distance to try to find everything they could.
He found my name and called me. I picked up my wallet at Northumberland News the next day, with all important contents intact.
What a relief. Thanks, Larry.
A good turn done by folks like Larry and his wife sets a good example for all.
I’ll pay it forward. Chris Westcott, Lindsay
Focus of letter-writer’s concerns remains neoliberalism
I read with interest Don Evelyn’s response to my letter to the editor of Aug 30th wherein he criticized MY lack of balance when I criticized the media’s lack of balance. Unfortunately, as of the date Mr Evelyn’s letter was published, readers who no longer have the print version will be unable to judge for themselves the validity of Mr. Eveln’s comments about my “balance” because my letter has not been posted on the Examiner website but his has. There is irony for you.
He criticized my letter for being “just another rant.”
But he TOTALLY ignores and fails to mention the central theme of my letter. Neoliberalism. And how it gets very little play in the media from the left or right end of the spectrum. Maybe he does not understand the term? Or he supports neoliberalism? The premier organization in Canada for dispensing neoliberal propaganda is The Fraser Institute which gets lots of media play but also does not use the term.
He also criticizes me because I pointed out in my original letter that the media is happy to cite a Libertarian organization, the 44 year old Fraser Institute, but apparently I was bad because I failed to mention the five-year-old leftist Broadbent Institute which does get occasional play in the media. He would have been better to criticize me for leaving out the 38-year-old leftist CCPA — The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives — that gets some media play and is meant to provide a counterspin to the Fraser.
There are no millionaires making huge donations to the Broadbent Institute nor the CCPA. The Broadbent Institute does not have charitable status unlike the Fraser Institute and the CCPA. But the Fraser Institute has received donations from the U.S.-based, oil baron Koch brothers in order to influence public policy in Canada — Pipeline wars come to mind.
He revealed his right-wing bias when I pointed out that Mike Harris is a fellow on the board of the Fraser Institute but he termed him “the ‘progressive’s’ favourite whipping boy.” He missed the point in my letter that part of the neoliberal agenda is to use politicians like Harris and Ford to promote the libertarian ideology. For a detailed excellent read on the subject I encourage you to read Democracy in Chains by Nancy MacLean which outlines the history of the movement to the right in the U.S. and, in Canada, Bypassing Dystopia: Hope-filled challenges to coporate rule by Joyce Nelson.
And I thank him for complimenting me on my “...original premise,... which (he said) wasn’t a bad point at all.” But without the print version, readers will not be able to judge that either! Herb Wiseman, Peterborough