Driving doesn’t have to be horrible

-

July 15, 2013

What Canadians seem to get are politicians who put their parties above their priorities via conditioned antics. Voters should not be interested in the mindless chest-beating politics of their ideology, because how can a politician who puts doctrine and “values” first be entrusted to make rational decisions?

With headlines of Toronto mayor Rob Ford’s alleged crack-cocaine addiction, the expenses of Senator Mike Duffy, and the institutional costs of the Senate and issues over 2011 election spending, stories of poor governance are compounded.

These aren’t even “scandals,” really; they have become ordinary problems for Ottawa and other political jurisdictions. At worst, they represent pressing issues that will go unresolved. In other cases, it’s the cover-up and subsequent lies told to society.

As such, genuine problems facing society get glossed over. When was the last time a prominent politician spoke with a reasoned attack against the issue of rising student debt or youth unemployment? The Financial Post has flagged $27,000 of debt for the average student entering the workforce. Financial burdens coupled with a lackluster economy show no promise for young Canadians, and this is being ignored.

Yet, it will be them who foot the bill in upcoming decades to pay for the social securities the generation of politicians and their supporters expect in their later years — the promises of a “just society.”

Looking at political history, “value politics” have been used both by icons of the political left and right. In Britain, Margaret Thatcher’s neoconservatism was responsible for creating unnecessary suffering. Her practice of conviction politics held the responsibility of more than doubling child poverty.

Politicians who believe ideologies can full-stop serve as a solution to the ills of society do not harm themselves. But when these ideas are thrust upon society, everyone loses, and necessary needs become neglected. Politicians should be expected to act within reason. Politicians should look at every issue in relation to its causes and effects.

There is no substitute for good governance. At the end of the day, it’s society that pays the price for the vicious role of ideology; it threatens the public’s trust of political institutions. Just look at the state of the Senate in our country!

To be fair, there are politicians in Canada doing commendable work, and they deserve to be supported. Liberal Senator Romeo Dallaire is a politician all Canadians should be proud of, because he worked to promote advocacy against the exploitation of child soldiers, and to promote genocide prevention. Dallaire exemplifies the silent heroes on Parliament Hill who work in the shadows of those politicians too busy grandstanding.

The expressive foundation of a politician to the ideological fundamentals of their party’s values, economic doctrine, or religious conviction will not help society progress. When dogmatic politicians who have already alienated a segment of the electorate go on to commit transgressions — as we have seen in the last year with the Senate and with the mayor of Toronto — everyone loses.

Poor governance weakens the social contract, withering away the just society. The relationship between the voter and politician should be sacrosanct, above political parties and above any strategic calculations.

Demonizing the entire political system won’t work, so support politicians who work for progress. Poor politics won’t erode a just society — it will decay because of society’s weak support of good governance when it is there.

Egypt: from Arab Spring to Arab Winter

By

-

July 15, 2013

The pro-democracy protests of the Arab Spring initially brought a huge wave of optimism to Egypt by bringing down the three-decade old regime of Hosni Mubarak. However, in the period of a little over two years, such hard-fought gains are no longer the reality in Egypt. From the hastily written constitution to the successful military coup conducted just this month, Egypt is on its way back to what its citizens desperately wished to leave behind: autocracy.

The fair and free elections held in 2012 saw the Muslim Brotherhood win power with the election of its presidential candidate Mohamed Morsi, and a plurality in the Parliament. While this provided hope that democracy would continue to progress in Egypt, such hopes faded not long after. Rather than attempting to strengthen the nation’s infant democracy, Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood hastily drafted a constitution and called for a popular referendum without sufficient consultation with other sectors of society.

While it was passed in a free and fair plebiscite, the process failed to live up to expectations that it would be inclusive and protective of human rights. Rather than guaranteeing the freedom of religious belief to anyone regardless of their background, the newly drafted and adopted Constitution limited this fundamental right solely to adherents of Abrahamic religions — Islam, Christianity, and Judaism.

As a result, Egyptians belonging to the long persecuted Bahá’í faith were clearly excluded from constitutional protection. More importantly, this signifies the continued widespread persecution of unrecognized religious minorities, which was the status quo under Mubarak.

The right of self-expression was also placed in huge doubt under this newly adopted Constitution. Although Article 45 does ensure this right for Egyptians, it also signifies that it must be exercised within reasonable bounds by prohibiting individuals from insults. However, as the language contained is overly broad, there is cause for concern; the standard for defining what is “insulting” seems completely arbitrary.

Subsequently, there have been attempts to criticize Morsi’s criminal cases. According to the NGO Human Rights Watch, defendants charged with “defamation,” “insulting the judiciary,” or “insulting President Morsi” have become quite frequent. Prominent comedians have also been included as targets. These prevailing trends under Morsi seem to be a throwback to the non-existent right of free speech under Mubarak.

On July 3, 2013, the military staged a coup after giving Morsi 48 hours to resolve ongoing civil unrest. While the coup portrayed itself as the savior of the country and representative of the peoples’ will, the reality is that the military — with its secular outlook and its privileges — aimed to seize political power and weaken the Muslim Brotherhood. More importantly, it meant the full resumption of its active political role as was the case under the rule of Mubarak, who himself was a high-ranking officer.

Furthermore, the hope of having a civilian-led government with an apolitical military seemed to be dashed in one day. While elections have been pledged, the reality seems to be inching back towards autocratic rule.

Shortly after the coup, many senior Muslim Brotherhood members and Morsi’s political allies were detained by the military. This is a disturbing reminder of the unmerited arrests of political opponents by Mubarak under his rule. Not only have Muslim Brotherhood members been subject to legal troubles, but they have also been subject to deadly violence by the army.

These developments all indicate a recurring pattern with a common characteristic; since Mubarak’s departure, setbacks for democracy have continued under Morsi and the Egyptian military. As a result, many dreaded features of Mubarak’s rule have returned in this post-Mubarak era. Regrettably, the prospects of a thriving Egyptian democracy have continued to dim for the near future.

Point/Counterpoint

By

-

July 15, 2013

1

Society needs to get over its doll obsession

By: Tara Nykyforiak

Nickolay Lamm’s recent re-design of Mattel’s Barbie may help the doll better reflect the average American female body, but this action fails to support its cause. Yes, Lamm attempted to illustrate Barbie’s unrealistic looks, and the pressures young girls face to live up to society’s standard of “beauty.” However, Lamm and his supporters only further convey the stereotype that females are superficial, insecure, and emotionally unstable.

By drawing attention to Barbie in this way, the assumption made is that girls cannot think for themselves, and can’t help believing they are going to be measured against Barbie’s standards. Moreover, Lamm demeans females by drawing attention to their looks in the most plastic of ways — in the form of a doll.

Obsessing over how Barbie looks paints women as superficial, which does nothing to address the pressures they actually face in the “real world,” such as relationships, careers, and personal finances. Barbie may have Ken, an outstanding resume, and what appears to be a six-figure salary, but the majority real women could never dream of commanding this mode of living. We’re much too busy balancing school and shitty part-time jobs to be concerned with her 13.5 cm bust, and 12.5 cm hips.

Society has come a long way, with females now able to experience a higher level of freedom than they ever did in the past. This means that more women than ever before feel empowered to lead the kind of life they want for themselves. This also means focusing on personal interests and passions and not on whether they personally align with Barbie’s hip-to-waist ratio.

By re-designing a doll in an attempt to help subvert negative body image, the message being sent is that all females lack confidence, and are driven by the desire to look a certain way. This completely ignores the progress we’ve made in terms of society’s political, educational, and professional sectors, and supports the false stereotype that a woman cannot possess positive self-image on her merits alone.

When I held Barbie as a girl, I never once compared myself to her, and my feelings toward her were never a reflection of my supposed insecurities. The reason I would rip off her head and mash her feet and hands with a hammer is not because I was projecting my poor self-confidence onto her. It was simply a fun way to spend a rainy day, and my way of protesting sub-par birthday gifts.

Because really, I would much rather have been playing with Lego and constructing my pillow fortress. Barbie girl, my ass

Fighting stereotypes one change at a time

By: Estefania Duran

Nickolay Lamm’s idea of creating a more realistic look for Barbie has nothing to do with the assumption that girls are incapable of thinking for themselves. Quite the opposite: his idea to create a Barbie based on the average American woman was solely to portray exactly how wrong Mattel has been all these years.

The famous “Barbie Syndrome” — the desire to look like and have the lifestyle of a Barbie doll — is most often associated with pre-teenagers and adolescents. With the equivalent of an 18-inch waist, Barbie is the representation of a body image that is both unhealthy and unattainable, and Lamm’s work draws precise attention to this problem. Moreover, after 54 years on the market, it looks like Barbie is here to stay, so why not challenge her image to become a more realistic portrayal of women?

In an interview with The Huffington Post, Lamm explains, “If there’s even a small chance of Barbie in its present form negatively influencing girls, and if Barbie looks good as an average-sized woman in America, what’s stopping Mattel from making one?” He is absolutely right — it is true that not every woman will be influenced by the doll’s famous looks; however, if there is even a possibility that the doll is reinforcing negative stereotypes about how a woman should look, action is not only necessary, but critical.

In addition, because society has come a long way in the past 50 years, we need to speak up against a doll representing a dissenting depiction of women, and begin to question the harmful effects it has. Regardless of whether it is the stereotype of a Barbie or any other form of gender-stereotype,negative body image is a problem affecting teenagers all over the world. Therefore, instead of expecting young girls to be immune to constant social pressures of the “ideal” body, we should do whatever we can to prevent them from having a plastic self-image.

Furthermore, dolls and toys that reinforce gender stereotypes go much farther than a Barbie doll; toys such as the G.I. Joe doll can have the same effect. Having a doll with an unrealistic looking body that possesses tough weapons and military-like looks, can have similar negative effects on boys. Gender and image expectations affect both women and men, and the Barbie doll is just one example among a plethora of toys that further perpetuate harmful clichés.

Toys that strengthen unrealistic gender expectations are the enemy here. An artist trying to represent a more realistic version of Barbie is not assuming women to be weak, it is assuming stereotypes to be wrong, and if proving that Barbie looks better with average measurements is his way of taking a stand in this long battle, we should join him in his fight to help change the world one stereotype at a time.

Glass house, meet stone

By

-

July 15, 2013

I am a staunch supporter of same-sex marriage because I believe in equal opportunity and freedom of expression and choice. My feelings on the subject are grounded in the interlocking confluence of reasons that compose my psyche.

The biggest reason I support same-sex unions is grounded in political philosophy: no one has the right to infringe on another’s bedroom. Many self-described social liberals may agree with this reasoning. Many may aggressively deride it. However, the chasm between these mindsets is often bridged by a universal and ironic derision of adulterers.

The pre-conception that superficial judgment is a valid and harmless form of vigilantism is thriving, especially in an environment that devours salacious celebrity gossip by which bottom feeder rags earn their dollars. But if we shift this discussion towards another public sphere, we arrive at the brutal dissection of those renowned piñatas — politicians.

For whatever reason, we feel as though the shortcomings of public figures award the freedom to pass along maliciousness. Some might say “it’s harmless” while others might say “it’s deserved.” But who are we to judge?

This is not to support cheating on the part of anyone. However, the rush to vilify politicians because of infidelity is baffling. In the Canada Day issue of The Peak, Estefania Duran argued that politicians who cheat on spouses are inherently compromised — their capacity for risk aversion now questionable. However, she casts no shadow on misbehaving, unelected officials such as CEOs or managers. Why not?

Apparently, Councilman X’s capacity to approve the building of a casino near my neighborhood is tainted because he betrayed his wife, while Hedge Fund Manager Y’s judgment is unimpeachable even as he manages my RRSPs. That’s an odd dichotomy.

Adultery, despite rendering the offenders social pariahs, is not a crime. The decisions or urges that drive one to adultery vary from person to person and, let’s face it, we as a species are pretty consistently given to messy actions irrespective of public standing. Issuing public apologies, the go-to response of politicians caught with their (metaphorical) pants down, is unnecessary. Yet we, as petty and indignant voters, demand placation.

In her article, Ms. Duran feted the Swedish PM for divorcing his wife because “their marriage was no longer working” instead of presumably running around on her. Who’s to say — and this is purely hypothetical — that politicians who cheat on their spouses are not caught in loveless, dysfunctional relationships sustained simply to present an appealing image?

We cannot know, nor do we deserve this information. But given that we voted them in, we feel their personal business is our business, as though we have a rightful claim on their lives.

Private indiscretions that do not impact an individual’s capacity to do their job should not affect their ability to keep that job. Of course, there’s another side to that coin. Anthony Weiner tweeted revealing, unsolicited photos. Clinton had sex with an intern. Eliot Spitzer dropped thousands of dollars visiting high-end prostitutes.

These men clearly violated laws or explicit rules governing workplace decorum — offenses that warrant termination. But private instances of infidelity are purely that — private. The emotional turmoil of cuckolded spouses is not assuaged by public outrage. Adultery’s fallout is the domain of the two pertinent players in an intimate drama; it does not belong on a public canvas.

Your name may lose you that apartment: study

By

-

July 15, 2013

If your name is Kevin Li, you are more likely to land that rental property you wanted than if your name is Mark Anderson, Luis García, or Tyrone Johnson.

According to a recent study in the Journal of Applied Social Psychology, when it comes to potential male renters, those with Asian-sounding names are more likely to receive a response from a landlord to an email inquiry about an advertised rental apartment than those with Caucasian, Hispanic, or African-American-sounding names.

Besides names indicating ethnicity, the study also confirmed that gender-implying names affect responses from potential landlords; women experienced 40.8 per cent positive responses when inquiring about an advertised rental apartment, whereas men experienced a success of only 27.1 per cent.

Allyson Weseley, co-author of the study, told The Peak that the results show stereotypes of minority groups and gender can affect opportunities in the rental process. “Research has shown that people of Asian descent and white women are typically stereotyped as quiet, timid, and responsible,” Weseley stated, “[whereas] most men and Latino and African-American women are stereotyped as loud, aggressive, and other qualities less likely to be valued in a tenant.”

Weseley, a behavioural science teacher with degrees from Princeton, Harvard, and Columbia University, and fellow author Michelle Feldman, became interested in conducting this study back in 2010 when Feldman had read an article which suggested that African American males were disadvantaged in the housing market. “We became interested in extending the work to look at people with Asian, Latino, and female sounding names,” Weseley said.

The study was conducted from 2010-2012, where nearly 1,600 email inquiries were sent out to landlords with various names signed — based on US census’ record of the most common names by race.

Of the results, Feldman said: “The Asian-American prospective tenant received more positive responses with a 34 per cent response rate compared to the African-American prospective male tenant who barely received any positive responses, with only a 16 per cent response rate.”

The results were slightly different for women, with white females seeing more positive responses than Asian, followed by Hispanic and African-American females.

“This data shows that our society continues to rely on underlying stereotypes,” Feldman said. “This can prevent individuals that have racially/ethically sounding names from having equal opportunities.” Feldman concluded that these stereotypes contribute to the formation of segregated neighbourhoods.

Feldman, a current student at Cornell University studying Biology & Society, is interested in further exploring how segregated areas affect individual’s access to quality healthcare. “It would also be interesting to see if there is correlation between racial [or] ethnic names and health insurance costs,” Feldman stated.

“Stereotyping is present even without any face-to-face interaction,” Feldman concluded, “Although our country has made great strides when it comes to limiting the amount of racism present in our society, a person’s name can continue to be used as a means to discriminate when it indicates an individual’s race or ethnicity.”

“ASS” inducted into Arcade Hall of Fame

By

-

July 15, 2013

LAS VEGAS — The Arcade Hall of Fame held their annual induction ceremony of new members last Friday which honoured one of the greatest names in arcade game history.

Boasting an unprecedented amount of high scores on arcade video game machines across world, the legendary “ASS” was finally rewarded with an induction into the prestigious AHOF.

“ASS is one of the most prolific video game champions to ever come out of the arcade world,” spoke AHOF president Ron Davis. “It doesn’t seem to matter where you went, what you played — if you were at the arcade you’d always see “ASS” right up there at the top of every leaderboard . . . he was a legend.”

“ASS” was joined by fellow 2013 inductees “POO,” COQ”, “TIT” and “FUK” (in the ‘builders’ category), all of which continue to hold top 10 spots on the majority of Space Invaders and Street Fighter games in existence.

“I can’t believe these legends weren’t already in the hall,” explained Todd O’Neal, an excited video game enthusiast who was on hand for the event. “I grew up idolizing ‘ASS’ and ‘COQ” . . . it’s who we all wanted to be growing up.”

The AHOF, which runs out of a garage just outside of Las Vegas, Nevada, was formed in 2010 with an original class that included the great “AAA,” “NOB,” and “GAY.” Every year, three to five new members are inducted at a ceremony held at a local arcade which is routinely attended by dozens of esteemed and non-esteemed guests.

Many popular fan favourite arcade legends such as “XXX” and “VAG,” among others, continue to wait for their call to the hall, although “GOD” has been rumoured to be a lock for 2014 due to his dominating Galaga scores.

Although “ASS”, who did not attend the ceremony in person, might be happy about the induction, not everyone believes that the hall is actually fitting of the label ‘the highest honour in arcade gaming’.

“It’s got a total West Coast bias and focuses way too much on high score rankings,” complained one of many angry, aging arcade video game enthusiasts blogging about the announcement. “I mean, my friend Tony in Baltimore was one of the best Pac-Man, Ms. Pac-Man and Professor Pac-Man players the world has ever seen but does TONY get recognized? No. Meanwhile players I’ve never even heard of like “DIC” and “JAY” and “TON” are all in there.”

While AHOF president Davis does admit that there are some problems with the voting system, he believes that all the greats will find their way into the hall eventually, but to induct too many in one year wouldn’t allow the event to be held yearly since “there aren’t really a lot of new players in arcade gaming.”

Despite these criticism, the hall has no plans to cease operations and will continue to honour the best and brightest arcade players to ever play the games and can still make a claim that most other hall of fames cannot. According to Davis, the AHOF are still free of any players with allegations of steroids or illegal performance enhancing substances, due to the fact that all arcade gamers know that “winners don’t use drugs.”

Staying together for the kids

By

-

July 15, 2013

1

I’m not a child of divorce. At least, not yet. I never thought I would be, until last Saturday when my father called me at work — while I prepped for a 250-person event later that day. Thanks for the inconvenience, dad.

“Hey Pa,” I answered, affectionately. “What’s up?” I asked, naively.

***

My parents have been married for 32 years. I won’t say its been a strong marriage, because on many occasions it hasn’t been. They separated briefly many years ago, when I was five or six — it hardly matters. I remember very little of that month-long split, intentionally or otherwise. There was even a coffee mug thrown as their marriage teetered on the edge for a second time, though I was away at boarding school at the time and only heard that story from my sister Kathryn years after the fact. I was either too young or too far away to comprehend what was happening between my parents when they were at their worst.

But for the 10 or so years since that mug was thrown, there has been bliss, and I’ve been there for that. That’s what I know of my parents’ marriage.

Or knew. I’m not really sure yet.

***

They fought this Easter. Louder, and with more tears than I can ever remember. But my parents have never been good at getting through holidays anyways without a few verbal blows. Being children of divorce themselves, the holiday season always weighs on them pretty hard. But this was an explosion of vicious anger, hate, and frustration that had been bottled up for far too long. There was a reason the fight started, but I see now that the water had been simmering for some time, finally boiled over.

Alarm bells were ringing loudly in my head, but perhaps this was just another holiday outburst, I thought. I hoped. The times I had seen my parents in the few months since, they had been civil. More than, in fact. They took myself and my girlfriend, Alison, treasure hunting at Value Village, had us over for dinner on many occasions, and were joking and bantering as happy couples do. They had the odd squabble, as all married couples are known to, but nothing to cause concern. They seemed, well, in love.

***

“What’s up?” I asked, naively.

“Well,” my father said, with noticeable hesitation, “things aren’t so good right now.”

Oh no, I thought to myself. What did I do now? Did I forget to call my grandma back? Did my mom sneak a peek at my VISA bill? Did I . . .

He cut off my train of thought: “Your mom’s moved out.”

And with those four words, my life changed in one swollen heartbeat. And that may sound like hyperbole, especially coming from someone who doesn’t even know if his parents are divorced or not, but it’s not. I can’t even begin to count the number of things in my life that I can relate back to the strength of my parents’ marriage, especially as so many others crumbled down around them. They were a proverbial symbol of perseverance, so much so that after their 25th wedding anniversary, my mother — a former freelance writer — wrote a story for Canadian Living about sticking it out through the worst of times (something that, if my parents end up reading this, I hope they revisit).

In the article, she mentions that despite both my mom and dad’s parents divorcing when my folks were already well into their twenties, the emotional baggage from both separations has lingered with them their whole lives (again, I see it every holiday season). There’s no age when children will be okay with their parents separating. There’s no point in time when divorce won’t affect your children, nor is there a time when it stops being selfish.

Too many of my friends are children of divorce, and though they seem well-adjusted, you can tell there are times when it weighs on them. Most of us now live on our own, and those that have separated parents aren’t forced to go back-and-forth between houses the way they did in high school. But now, as then, they have to choices to make: who to see first when they come home for the holiday? Who to spend Christmas Day with? There’s no right choice; someone will always feel jilted.

These are the questions that immediately entered my mind when my dad said those four words. Despite my parents’ anxiety around the holiday season, it has always been my favourite time of the year. “Oh God, don’t make me hate Christmas,” was the first thought that entered my mind. “Don’t make me choose.”

At the moment, my parents are not divorced yet, and who knows, by the time this is in your hands, divorce papers could be filed or the two of them could be back in the same bed. But more ways than one, they’ve already made me choose.

My dad broke the news to me. Three days later, I have yet to hear from my mom. Do I call her? Do I wait? If I call my dad back before I call her, am I taking sides? Do I even want to talk to either of them? (The answer to all of these is a resounding I have no fucking idea).

I’m stuck in limbo: unable to reach out to either parent for fear of setting the other one off, or having them grow angry at me. Two of my favourite things, gossiping with my mom and talking hockey with my dad, are gone. Even if they end up together again, how long will it be before the volatility is gone, before I can go out with one without the other being upset? It’s not only their relationship hanging in the balance; the one I share with them is, too.

I still have both my sister and my girlfriend, both of whom I love dearly, but Kathryn is in Ottawa and Alison’s life is as much in the air as my own — or any university student’s for that matter. There’s little for me to lean on. My parents have always been that rock.

As a child, divorce is terrifying conceptually in part because you depend upon your parents for everything: food, shelter, emotional support. While I no longer rely on them for the former two, they’re still a huge part of my support network regarding the latter. I feel no more equipped to deal with this now than I did when I was a child. My relative independence hasn’t made this any less terrifying.

I am now the same age my parents were when they got married. I’m staring in the face of a series of big first-steps. I’m not there yet, but eventually, I’d like to get married and start a family of my own. I have decisions to make about my degree, and my career path. I want to be able to bring my petty fears and insecurities about all of this to my parents; I don’t want to have to hold back for fear of bringing up a painful memory for them; I don’t want to second guess the advice they give me. I want to trust their judgement fully and know that their advice, like their marriage, will stand the test of time.

I’m cautiously optimistic it can be done, if only because they’ve been through this before. But my trust in them is gone, at least temporarily. If I can’t believe them when they tell me things are fine between them, as they had been doing, I can’t believe them when they tell me something as basic as how their day was. All it took was four simple words. Fortunately, neither of them has told me, “It will all be okay,” so at least I don’t have to pretend to believe that.

My paternal grandfather passed away two Novembers ago, and that was the first time in my life I had to parent my parents. Now I find myself trying my best not to do just that: not to counsel them, not to hear them out, not to smack each of them upside the head. I can’t, because I can’t choose sides, because I can’t be a lightning rod in this storm, and because my mother has told me ceaselessly, “It should never be a child’s job to manage their parents.”

And she’s right. Too many times I’ve had to tell people I care about to stop focusing on their family’s issues and worry about themselves. It’s strange having to tell yourself the same thing, especially because now I understand how badly people want to help repair those burned (or burning) bridges. But it’s stranger when adults stop acting like adults and let their stubbornness and pride get in the way of — and potentially ruin — a family.

I have no idea who knows that my parents have separated, and there may have been some other family secrets I’ve spilled in these words. Even though I know a lot of people close to my family will read this, I think that’s okay, because I don’t want to lie when someone asks me, “Ho w are you doing?” or “I haven’t seen your folks in a while, how are they?” I shouldn’t have to — no one should. It’s damned unfair what divorced parents ask of their kids, even if they never explicitly ask.

This story is me venting; it’s my soapbox, and I’ll get down in a second. It’s a plea for my parents to sort their issues out, and figure themselves out. But more than anything, I hope it’s an illustration of how much divorce sucks and how badly it can mess someone up, even before it happens, and no matter their age. Maybe some can identify with my fears based on their past experiences. If it’s any sort of backwards consolation to them, know it doesn’t get any easier, regardless of whether you reach your parents knees’ or if you dwarf them in family photos. My hope is that that some parent considering divorce somewhere reads this and, even if just for a second, reflects. That they realize it’s not just a marriage that divorce ruins.

***

On November 8, 1980, my mother and father got married, at ages 20 and 21, respectively. Twenty-five years later, they celebrated their silver anniversary — the one my mom wrote about in Canadian Living. That day, a 17-year-old Kathryn, ever the wiser of the two of us, wrote a surprisingly tender and youthful message in a card that I know my parents still have tucked away somewhere. It said, in part, “As long as mom and dad are OK, everything is OK.”

After 25 years of marriage, my parents — walking proof that young love can last — were still OK. My sister’s card brought tears to my parents’ eyes, as so many of her notes have (who knows what I’ve been doing wrong this whole time) — no doubt tears of joy knowing that they’d made it through the worst that their marriage would see.

On July 7, 2013, I said to myself “I’m not a child of divorce, yet.”

Until last week, “yet” is a qualifier I’ve never had to use before at the end of that sentence, but it’s still better than the alternative, because everything’s OK when mom and dad are. Guys, if you’re reading this, try to keep it that way.

Peak Week July 15 – 20

By

-

July 15, 2013

Eats

Cuchillo, a new Latin-American restaurant, has recently opened its doors on Powell St. Where “Gastown meets Railtown meets Japantown,” Cuchillo offers up modern Pan-Latin tapas and unique cocktails. Dishes include a Baja style battered Rockfish with jicama slaw and chipotle aioli, wild Mexican sea prawns with butter browned corn arepas, and Ecuadorian quinoa and wild greens. If you have trouble finding it, just look for the big neon purple skull.

Beats

Karaoke? Hip hop? Yes, you can have both! Monday, July 15 at Chinatown’s Fortune Sound Club, you’ll find a beautiful fusion of hip hop and karaoke. DJ Flipout if the resident host for the evening, and DJs Seko and K-Rec will also be bringing their skills. The big difference between hip hop karaoke and regular karaoke (besides the hip hop) is that there is no teleprompter. Those who are brave enough take the stage to a full house of people, freestyle. Even if you’re not able to channel Wu Tang, come out for a good time and check out the other performers. It’s only $3 before 10:30 p.m. and then $7 after.

Theats

Switcheroo is a photography exhibition making its home in the Black and Yellow experimental gallery space until July 19. The work is done by local photographer Hana Pesut, of Sincerely Hana fame, and features dual portraits of two people photographed twice, once in their own clothing, and again in their partner’s clothing, both against the same background. Photos depict men and women swapping plaid shirts and dresses or hiking boots and yellow sunnies.

Elites

Check out the last Illuminares Lantern Festival before it’s gone! Hosted by Public Dreams, the festival has been running for the last 25 years at Trout Lake, but this is its last. There will be no speakers or performers this year as there has been in the past (due to financial difficulties), but everyone is encouraged to bring a picnic and instruments and enjoy the park beforehand. There will also be lantern-making workshops on site. The lantern-lit procession will begin at 9:30 p.m. and will culminate in a fire show finale.

Treats

The Vancouver Lookout presents Summer Yoga Series, an opportunity for Vancouverites to “elevate your mind, body and spirit while taking in the view from 550 ft above sea level.” The event will take place at the Vancouver Lookout, located at 555 West Hastings St, on July 16. Beginning at 6:00 p.m. and running until 7:00 p.m., Franceska will lead guests through various yoga poses for the first summer sunset yoga series.

BC reels after alleged attempted terrorist plot

By

-

July 15, 2013