What Have You Got Planned for May 3rd?

Hey Toronto, if you're up for a little free coffee and some good music to start your Sunday off this weekend, head over to the New Balance store at 1510 Yonge Street, near St. Clair. Be there from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and you can join the store staff in cheering for the 12,500 runners taking part in the 12th annual Sporting Life 10k run for kids with cancer. The run is in support of Camp Oochigeas, a summer camp that provides a little getaway fun each year to approximately 445 children living with cancer, at no cost to their families. You just can't get a better cause. The Starbucks Coffee right across the road from the New Balance will be serving up free cups of joe and music will be provided by the rock n' roll band "The Rivits". You don't have to work up a sweat, you can leave that to the 12,500. Gary Brum, über-cool store manager at New Balance, is hoping to have his corner of Yonge Street packed with the most vocal supporters of great causes that Toronto has to offer.
Of course, if this is sounding like something you'd like to be on the front lines of, you can check out the Sporting Life 10K website to learn more. If you do run this year, you'll be finishing up at Fort York with "a bang-up post-run celebration with red-coat soldiers, War of 1812 re-enactment, "live" band and more!" Not a bad way to end off "Canada's EASIEST and one of the fastest downhill 10k's"
Even if you don't actively participate this year, a trip to the party at 1510 Yonge St. on May 3rd might just be enough to have you marking the event for next year. It takes $3,500. to send a kid to Oochigeas for 2 weeks. Think of the fundraising you could do in 365 days! Start now for next year and you could singlehandedly fund the whole camp for one session!
Like I said, if you like supporting a great cause and enjoying a little free coffee while you do, you can't do better than to take yourself to 1510 Yonge Street at 8:00 a.m. this Sunday morning, May 3rd. It's going to be a great way to feel good.

Keepin' Out of Mischief!

I knit and crochet a lot - a whole lot! I indulge in my love of these activities while watching hockey games, spending some spare time over lunch, passing an hour or two listening to music, etc. etc. It keeps me out of mischief producing baby blankets, afghans, scarves, cotton dish clothes, doilies and hats.
One of my favourite items to make is a good old Canadian toque. I make them frequently, so they pile up and I need to find homes for them before they take over all available spare space in my domicile. A batch of two dozen noggin-warmers that I finished back in January were done in much more subdued tones - plain blacks, heather-tone browns, and so on. They found their way to a downtown Toronto shelter for homeless men. The two colourful toques you see off to the right are part of a collection that will be making their way down to an orphanage in Jamaica. They'll be taken there by a friend's church group, and I 'll be happy to know my toques will be getting the chance to perch atop some heads, as they were meant to do.

Totally Happy!

The reason for that total happiness presently plastering a big grin all across my face is the lady pictured below.
I am currently one of Kiva's lenders. They state their mission as being to connect people through lending for the sake of alleviating poverty, and describe themselves as an organization that "lets you lend to a specific entrepreneur in the developing world - empowering them to lift themselves out of poverty." Kiva is the first person-to-person micro-lending website, and all it will take for you to get involved is $25.00. Skip a week or so worth of lattés, and you're ready to go! When your loan is repaid, you can take the money back, and you will have helped to make the world a better place without any expenditure at all. For me, and an increasing number like me, the money goes in and stays in. The good folks at Kiva send you regular updates on the status of your loan. Once it reaches full repayment, you can select another entrepreneur to reach out to, and the whole cycle starts all over again.
I've been waiting for a few months now to get to that magic figure where I can re-loan, and today, the news came that it was time! If you make a loan and get to the point of reloaning yourself, don't be surprised if you find no-one listed at that moment as seeking a loan. As they explain the situation, "at times we have more lenders visiting Kiva than we have loans available to fund. At these times there may be only a small number of fundraising loans. However this is always a temporary situation, as our Field Partners post new loans in need of funding on an hourly basis." Actually, that's what happened to me today. I first tried to reloan this morning, and wasn't able to do so. I came back to it this afternoon, and everything was good to go.
When I made my second attempt today to reloan, I found Santusa, a single mother of four who needs the loan to help her with the business she runs from a stall in the Santa Barbara market in the city of Juliaca, Peru. Santusa sells all sorts of things, but her main source of income is from selling a variety of vegetables at her stall. My money will be added to that given by others and used to increase the quantity of merchandise available at Santusa's market stall.
When you look at Santusa's face, it is not hard to tell that her life has not been the very easiest. She looks older than her 46 years, older than most western women would want to look at the same age. My hope is that the loan I and others have put together for her will help her to have a better life, an easier time of it than she has had before. I hope it will bring an extra smile or two to her face, and help her to feel some of the happiness with which I have been gifted in reaching out to her.

Totally Pissed Off!

I was out driving recently, meandering through southern Ontario a little to the north of Toronto. I was about a kilometer from Highway 400 when I passed a sign that proclaimed, "Laskay: Settled 1832". That sign was like the proverbial straw loaded on the poor ruminant quadruped's back. I snapped when I saw it.
I am so sick of the ongoing, systemic euro-centrism of Ontario; hell, of all Canada, for that matter. The sign is all wrong. It should be immediately removed and the sign post left unused until a new sign that is accurate can be put up there. The area was not "settled" in 1832. It may have been moved into at that time by whites of European origin and/or descent, but they did not settle it. It was well and truly settled thousands of years before Joseph Baldwin and David Reesor arrived in the area and began constructing a dam, a sawmill, a grist mill - in fact, all the trappings of the arrogant whites who felt themselves to be the only people of any worth in the area.
In order to reflect the reality of this particular area, the sign needs to be much larger than the current falsehood-bearing plaque. It needs to be written in at least two languages - that of the area's indigenous people first, and then the English of the squatters who moved in on them, displacing them with little to no thought of their well-being; little to no acknowledgment of the fact that they were building on stolen property.
Prattle to me not of any land treaties that may have been signed. Half the time, they were nothing more than empty pretenses, if they were even signed at all. The date on the sign needs to be changed too. The first date listed would need to be phrased with the native equivalent of the word "circa" and the number following would have to be in the thousands B.C.E. The second date could be the 1832 that is currently the only one displayed. This is the case with every signpost anywhere in Canada that makes such announcements as though there were no people here until white people arrived.
When is Canada ever going to truly acknowledge the fact that her history began many long lifetimes before the first white foot ever trod her soil?

Wasn't This Child Abuse?

There was a Saturday afternoon crash here in Toronto that raises an interesting question. Should parents who drive without securing their children in proper seats be charged with child abuse?
During this crash, which occurred at 3:34 p.m. at Yonge St. and Lake Shore Blvd., two children sustained serious injuries. Neither of them were restrained in child seats. The three-month-old, who was sitting in his mother's arms in the rear seat of the van, was thrown from her arms and into a side window of the family van. He also broke his leg. His three-year-old sister suffered head injuries when she was thrown from her car seat. Two other children in the van were in proper seats and suffered only minor injuries. That's almost like the parents playing favourites and deciding with whom they would take the chance of serious injury being sustained. Shouldn't that alone warrant a charge of abuse?
Toronto Police Sgt. Tim Burrows said there were only two child seats in the van, although there were four children in the van at the time of the collision. "It's unacceptable.", said Burrows."If you've got four children there has to be four seats that are available." Burrows also said investigators are holding off on laying charges until they see what happens to the two severely injured children and complete a reconstruction of the accident.
According to the police, the van carrying the children went through a red light at the intersection, and was then broadsided. Unless the driver was in the middle of cardiac arrest at the time, it is to be hoped that the book will be thrown at him or her for that alone. The fact that they police are awaiting news on the children's conditions would seem to suggest that direct fault for their injuries will be laid at the feet of the parents, and that is exactly where it should be. How unbelievably stupid does one have to be to actually carry an infant in your arms in a moving vehicle? To do so risks the child's death or life-altering injuries. Why would any parent do that? Is it to save some money on the purchase of proper car seats? You would think they might feel saving lives to be more important. If they literally can not afford the proper seats, then the answer to the problem would seem to be simple. They are not driving anywhere as a family. Period. That easy. Well, it should be that easy but it seems we are talking about parents who do not really care about their kids. Don't tell me about tear-streaked faces as the parents wait for news, either. Unless we are talking such severe mental impairment that the parents really should not be given the care of those kids anyway, they knew the risks they were taking with their children's lives, and they took them regardless.
Is that not child abuse?

Repatriating Cultural History

I watched a movie a couple of weeks ago that spoke directly to this issue. Called "The Stone of Destiny", it portrayed the effort made by dedicated nationalist Ian Hamilton to reignite Scottish national pride. To achieve this end, in 1950 he made a daring raid on Westminster Abbey in order to steal back the Stone of Scone and return it to Scotland. Although the British police did retrieve the Stone and return it to England, the British Government decided to send it back whence it came in 1996. This symbol of their cultural history obviously meant enough to the Scots for them to continue demanding the return of the artifact until their demands were met. Why then do they seem unable to comprehend the fact that keeping the two Beothuk skulls in the Royal Museum in Edinburgh is just as wrong as they felt it was for the Brits to keep the Stone of Scone? The skulls of Beothuk chief Nonosabasut and his wife, Demasduit, were looted from their graves by William Cormack, a Newfoundland-born and Scottish-educated adventurer and transported to Scotland in 1827. It is more than time for them to be returned whence they came.
The case is the same for the Grandfather Canoe. One of the oldest birch bark canoes known to exist, this artifact of a people's cultural history was one of three crafted by the native American Maliseet community for British lieutenant-governor Sir Howard Douglas who arrived in New Brunswick, Canada, in 1824. Lieut Stepney St George, who was then serving with the British imperial forces in Canada supposedly bought the canoe (although First Nations people here say there is question as to whether or not the sale actually took place), and transported it to Headford Castle, Galway, Ireland. In 1852, it was donated to the National University of Ireland, Galway’s James Mitchell Museum, its "permanent home", where it was relegated to hanging from the rafters. Chief Candice Paul of the St Mary’s First Nation Wolastoqiyik (Maliseet) community of New Brunswick says the canoe suffered more than 150 years of “isolation and neglect” and “served primarily as a home for pigeons in an institution dedicated to geological collections” at the university.
Similarly, the Beothuk skulls were originally kept in an area of the Edinburgh museum for bird and animal remains. Neither "permanent home" treated the skulls or the canoe with the respect due them as human remains and an icon of a people's cultural history.
Loaned two years ago to the Canadian Museum of Civilization in Saint John, New Brunswick, the canoe has been scheduled to return to Ireland after the loan expires in June. Paul has been appealing for the return of the canoe since it was put on display in Canada two years ago.
Chief Paul's appeals to the National University of Ireland in Galway, the Irish president and the Irish prime minister may be producing results, since it has been announced that NUIG agrees in principle that the canoe should be repatriated to the Maliseet. In a statement released to the Galway City Tribune last week, the powers-that-be at the university said, "In light of interest generated in Canada, the university is assessing the steps which it should now take." The university has, however, added that any decision in favour of permanent repatriation of the canoe "would require further approval at both national and EU level."
What I don't understand is why it should require any further discussion and dilly-dallying. Why can't they stop playing their games with this icon of Maliseet culture and simply say, "Keep it. After all, it is yours"?
I can give you one reason for all the game playing, and you tell me if I'm that far off the mark. True ownership of the canoe in question is being claimed by First Nations people. Repatriation is being sought by First Nations people. Chief Candice Paul and her band members are still not really given respect as full citizens of Canada. They are not yet far enough removed from the years of the government's assimilation policy and its legacy of neglect and prejudice. They are barely listened to as it is when they ask for the right to safe drinking water on reserves. Why should their voices be heard when they ask for the return of part of their cultural heritage and pride? It speaks volumes when you read the coverage given to the situation in the Globe and Mail and see reference made to Chief Paul more than once using a masculine pronoun.
It's damn near impossible not to think that nobody cares about Chief Paul or her people, let alone the repatriation of the Grandfather Canoe.

First-Year Students Lazy

The results of a province-wide survey of university profs have just been released, and the news is that more than 55% of faculty surveyed feel that first-year students are a bunch of poorly prepared slackers who want maximum marks for minimum effort.
James Côté is a sociology professor at the University of Western Ontario who says that the survey confirms recent research. Says Côté, "It's a wider societal issue, where leisure is very much valued and work habits are not necessarily reinforced in the way that they were in the past. The work ethic is not what it used to be ... no pain, no gain doesn't seem to be prevalent any more."
This all comes as no surprise to me at all. As a teacher in the intermediate grades, I banged my head against this brick wall so often, I finally walked away from it all. I had principals who gave me a hard time for wanting to mark students accurately. More than one who had done dick-all in some subject and should by rights have ended up owing marks, never mind simply failing, was given a pass because I wasn't allowed to tell the truth on their report cards. The principal would admonish me for "discouraging" the up-and-coming idiot and insist I give them a pass because they knew how to spell their name correctly, or some other lame excuse for falsifying marks. Côté is right to say that it is all a wider societal issue. Parents expect their kids to be given an unending stream of A-plus results simply for handing in plagiarized, not necessarily relevant blather from Wikipedia when they "do a project". Unfortunately, there are too many teachers who are right there on the same page with them. I remember years ago sitting in a school staff room, marking some papers. Another teacher sitting there was watching me and after a few moments, felt obliged to show me the error of my ways. She told me I was making unnecessary work for myself by actually reading every word each student wrote, and by marking the papers for details like spelling and grammar. Her advice was to read the first paragraph and see if it was "sort of on topic". If it was, said she, I should then give it an A, and go on to the next. That way, according to her, I would be done in a fraction of the time I was making my self spend needlessly on the marking. Neither was that the only time I listened to such comments from colleagues.
I'm not quite sure how we're supposed to fix this problem of students poorly prepared for university, but I do know we can expect it to worsen before it improves.