Skip to main content
letters

Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Try to keep letters to fewer than 150 words. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com

......................................................................................................................................................................................

'Real diplomacy'

Re China, Russia Take Aim At North Korea Summit (front page, Jan. 16): Whatever the Vancouver summit is, it is certainly not "diplomacy" as the term is generally understood. Surely real diplomacy is dialogue among the concerned nations to find common ground and a modus vivendi. The co-hosts have not only excluded North Korea, China and Russia, but added insult to injury by inviting China and Russia to a post-summit briefing.

Happily, both Koreas, through their talks on de-escalation measures and participation in the Olympics, appear determined to create a new, more constructive dynamic, refusing to leave the fate of the Peninsula in the hands of the unpredictable occupant of the White House.

Scott Burbidge, Port Williams, N.S.

........................................................

#MeToo's effect

Re Am I A Bad Feminist? (Opinion Section, Jan. 13): Thanks to #MeToo, there is a renewed awareness of inappropriate sexual conduct and harassment.

Women and men are breaking the silence. But we need to be discerning in assessing who is culpable. As a harassment investigator, one of the things I consider is: Should the perpetrator reasonably ought to have known that his actions are offensive?

Some actions are evidently offensive, now and 30 years ago. But there are less egregious actions that need to be considered through the lens of time.

Some men have been condemned for what they considered "jokes" that happened 30 years ago. But should they have known then it was offensive?

Thirty years ago, we women acted differently. We went along; we laughed at the bad jokes, and sometimes told gross jokes ourselves to be accepted by "the boys." That was the way we survived, pretending it didn't bother us. We never would have said, "Stop it, you're being a jerk."

We need to consider if a man who did stupid things years ago later learned it was unacceptable and hurtful. Shouldn't we give him credit for opening his eyes? Perhaps he "got" it, probably with some woman close to him hitting him over the head with a verbal two-by-four, but he got it!

Let's not condemn all men who, years ago, did things they thought were acceptable. They were a product of their times.

With women and men willing to speak out about harassing behaviours, I am hopeful all that is changing. Let's keep it up, but let's be fair in the process.

Beverly Suek, Winnipeg

........................................................

Margaret Wente is right. The way they are going, the #MeToo movement should be named #MeOnly (Margaret Atwood Is A Blood-Drinking Monster, Jan. 16).

Sudhir Jain, Calgary

........................................................

Hungary's Ambassador to Canada replies

Re Why Are Iron Curtain Countries Electing Extremists? Blame 1945 (Opinion Section, Jan. 13): Doug Saunders tries to impose a non-existent narrative in an effort to explain Europe's political landscape. He says the post-Second World War countries in Central and Eastern Europe are ethnically homogeneous – they are not, they are far from it. And saying "the more multiethnic, ex-communist countries, notably the Baltic states and Bosnia, have escaped the ethno-nationalist tide" displays of a lack of knowledge of the past 20 years.

However, the sentence that prompted me to write you is this: "Prime Minister Viktor Orban has demanded border walls, presided over overt and veiled attacks on Jews, Roma and Muslims." Who attacked Jews and Roma and Muslims?

Nothing is further from the Hungarian Government and the Hungarian PM than attacking any minorities. Quite the contrary: This government proclaimed a zero-tolerance policy toward anti-Semitism. Jewish culture flourishes in Hungary and we are proud of it. One of the biggest Jewish communities in Europe is in Hungary and their safety, thanks to the steps of this government, is guaranteed.

Bálint Ódor, Ambassador of Hungary to Canada

........................................................

It's in the context

Re Why Trump Continues To Dodge Impeachment (Jan. 15): Clifford Orwin says he is puzzled by the expression "high crimes and misdemeanours." In 1755, Samuel Johnson defined "misdemeanour" as "something less than an atrocious crime." Some 10 years later, William Blackstone wrote that crimes and misdemeanours "properly speaking, are mere synonymous terms: though, in common usage, the word 'crimes,' is made to denote such offences as are of a deeper and more atrocious dye."

As a matter of construction, the adjective "high" should only be read to qualify both nouns which follow it, especially where the full expression, as it appears in the U.S. Constitution, is "treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanours." As the courts have long recognized, everything depends on the context.

John Weale, Beaconsfield, Ont.

........................................................

Motion isn't anti-Muslim

Re Islamophobia Exists In Canada – We Must Recognize It (Opinion Section, Jan. 13): I was surprised to read a column by the president of the Canadian Labour Congress describing my motion as anti-Muslim, in the following words: "Right before the holidays, Scott Reid … asked the House of Commons to support his motion to declare Jan. 29 as Canada's national day of solidarity with victims of anti-religious bigotry and violence. The Conservative Party actively and vociferously opposed the use of the term 'Islamophobia' as a way to describe anti-Muslim animus …This latest effort to co-opt the the discussion shows just how deeply entrenched anti-Muslim sentiment is."

Here's what my motion (M-153) says: "Resolved that the House recognize that acts of violence and bigotry directed against religious believers, such as the June 23, 1985, bombing of Air India Flights 182 and 301, the Sept. 15, 2001, firebombing of the Hindu Samaj Temple and the Hamilton Mountain Mosque, and the April 5, 2004, firebombing of Montreal's United Talmud Torah Jewish school, and the Jan. 29, 2017, murder of Muslims at the Quebec City Islamic Cultural Centre, are inimical to a free, peaceful, and plural society and declare Jan. 29 of every year as National Day of Solidarity with Victims of Anti-Religious Bigotry and Violence."

Surely it is evident that in seeking out solidarity among the believers of all faiths, I am being simultaneously pro-Muslim, pro-Hindu, pro-Jewish (and by implication, pro-Christian, pro-Sikh, pro-Buddhist, etc.)?

How can such solidarity hurt or denigrate any faith?

Scott Reid, MP for Lanark-Frontenac-Kingston

........................................................

Just wondering

Re Baby Bonus (First Person, Jan. 16): Reading the essay by Eve Nicholson-Smith (who herself did not adopt the name Nicholson-Smith-Craven, which she gave her daughter, Saoirse Fife Nicholson-Smith-Craven), I have a question. If there are laws against certain automobile vanity licence plates, should there not be laws against overly unusual names for children?

Andrew Chong, Toronto

Interact with The Globe