[PHOTO] Pedestrians and Pepsi

Pedestrians and Pepsi
Originally uploaded by rfmcdpei

I like the pairing of these signs just outside of the cheese shop Chabichou (196 Borden Street, southwestern corner of Harbord and Borden)>

[LINK] "France's PACS, 10 years later"

Over at France's Cité Gay, a writer asks ("Le Pacte Civil de Solidarité (Pacs) fête ses 10 ans," ""The PACS celebrates its 10th birthday) what the PACS, a " form of civil union between two adults (same-sex or opposite-sex) for organising their joint life [that] brings rights and responsibilities, but less so than marriage," is like now. Right-wingers worst-case claims, are, of course, decidedly counterfactual.

The PACS at its adoption was assailed by opponents on the grounds that it would lower the birth rate of France and it would devalue marriage. With a fertility rate that exceeds two children per woman, France ranks alongside Ireland as the champion of the birth rate in Europe. INSEE in its Demographic Balance in 2008 report was the beginning of the observation that France was the top European countries in terms of births and the number of marriages remained relatively stable.

But is the success of the PACS that does not contradict this. 146,084 PACS were registered in 2008 by the Statistical Office of the Ministry of Justice, an increase of 43% compared to 2007 (against 32% between 2006 and 2007). With these figures, France had passed since the millionth PACS mark. PACS' endings are also stable: 23,354 civil partnerships were broken in 2008, against 22,783 in 2007. Finally, same-sex couples constitute a stable rate percetnage of about 6% of registered partnerships in total, but their number continues to grow in absolute numbers although less so than for same-sex couples.

This, as the author notes, compares nicely to the stability of relationships in general.

The critics of Pacs suggest that PACS are unstable despite the facts without commenting on specific statistics of divorce, which continues to grow in number and has risen percentage-wise (over 72 000 divorces in 2007) and to a lesser extent the acceptance of divorce has almost doubled in ten years (28 000 divorces in 2007), only twenty years after it became possible. the fault is now 20 years into a minority when it was the rule.In 2007, the number of divorces totaled 134,477, after a period of stability around 120,000 divorces a year from 1996 to 2002.

It is society as a whole that wants more flexibility in organizing our families, as is reflected in the success of PACS and the modes of termination of marriage; births and unions are increasingly disconnected with number of births outside marriage in the majority.

Survivor rights and binational PACS remain major problems.

[LINK] "Virtual Emigration"

Walrus Magazine's Eliza Reid reports on how some Icelanders are dealing with their post-crash economy through unusual forms of emigration.

In October 2008, Iceland became the first country to succumb to the global financial crisis. In a few short months, its banks collapsed, its government fell, and unemployment more than tripled. More or less flat broke, the tiny nation of 320,000 had to go begging to the International Monetary Fund for an emergency loan of US$2.1 billion, and it remains in an economic shamble. As the country licks its wounds, some Icelanders, especially those crushed by mortgage payments that skyrocketed when the currency crumbled, are once again seeking the relative economic stability of Canada as the key to rebuilding their lives. But unlike the nineteenth-century wave of emigration, when more than 16,000 islanders —roughly 20 percent of the population at the time — climbed into ships for the hellish voyage that would take so many of them off to Manitoba, these new Viking emigrants, generally highly educated and fluent in English, do not go steerage. They go online.

Jón Ólafur Ólafsson is an architect. His firm, Batteríid, is tucked away in a nondescript building in the gentrified former fishing village of Hafnarfjördur, where rent is cheaper than in central Reykjavik, eight kilometres away. Over a lethal macchiato, Ólafsson explained that since projects ranging from luxury high-rises to glam corporate headquarters have dried up, the architecture sector has become one of the hardest hit since the crisis began last autumn. Batteríid laid off a third of its employees, and of the twenty still left only half are working full time.

Yet Ólafsson is optimistic. Like his ancestors, he has looked to Canada. This spring, along with Winnipeg partners Cibinel Architects, Batteríid won a contract, its first outside Iceland, to design and construct a $40-million aquatic, wellness, and performing arts centre in Gimli, Manitoba (population 6,000). Gimli remains the unofficial capital of “New Iceland,” as the immigrants called it, and Manitoba is home to the world’s largest population of Icelanders outside of Iceland. Gimli’s mayor, Tammy Axelsson, is fluent in Icelandic, and the people retain strong ties to their ancestral land.

Hafnarfjördur is famous for having one of Iceland’s largest settlements of elves, dwarves and other mystical beings, which (translating from the Icelandic) are collectively called “Hidden Folk.” Centuries-old folklore has it that whole clans of such beings reside in the rocks that make up part of the town’s centre. We do not doubt this at all … Hidden Folk enjoy a certain regard, and nowhere more so than in Hafnarfjördur. There is even a Hidden Worlds tour that takes you to their home sites, stopping at places like Hellisgerdi park and the base of the cliff Hamarinn, which is said to be home to the Royal Family of the Hidden Folk.But Ólafsson and his colleagues are not moving house — just ideas. Instead of queuing up for visas and plowing through masses of immigration forms, they breeze in on Skype. Call it virtual immigration: Batteríid can visit Canada on a regular basis but complete its major work remotely from Iceland, thereby ensuring its survival.

[LINK] "Addressing racism in the War of 1812"

Spacing Toronto's Liam Lacey reports on a speech given by former Ontario Lieutenant-Governor James Bartleman about what is and isn't remembered about the war of 1812, the North America phase of the Napoleonic Wars.

Prior to the Canadian Thanksgiving weekend, I attended the final day of a three-day history symposium at Fort York on Oct. 9 to hear Ontario’s former Lt.-Governor James Bartleman speak on the subject of how best to celebrate the forthcoming 2012 bicentennial of the War of 1812. I got more than I bargained for.

The “Sense of Place and Heritage Trails: Realizing the War of 1812 Bicentennial” conference at the Cultural and Heritage Tourism Symposium 2009 was organized by Centennial College and presented in association with the City of Toronto at the historic site, Oct. 7-9. Kudos to the College’s organizers for holding the event at Fort York and not way the hell out at its campus in Scarborough.

Bartleman served as an ambassador in Canada’s Foreign Service for 35 years prior to serving as Ontario’s Lt.-Gov. Simply put, the retired diplomat gave the audience a two-pronged history lesson on the War of 1812 and the subsequent racism this country’s aboriginal population has endured since the European powers-that-be decided the natives were no longer useful militarily.

“The popular view of this war is that . . . we preserved Canada from the worst of all possible fates: becoming part of the United States. I guess there’s some truth to that but as we’re looking at the forthcoming bicentennial of the War of 1812, I imagine you’d want to avoid the fate of the 250th anniversary of Quebec City,” he said, referring to the holding of a reenactment during that city’s celebrations of what was effectively the defeat of the French on one of the most historic sites in French Canada. Needless to say, the event offended many French Canadians across Quebec.

He explained the main participants in the War of 1812 were British Americans and native peoples. As he told the heritage and tourism professionals in attendance, when we look at the commemoration of the War of 1812, we must look at it carefully because “it’s their histories specifically which is going to be examined and put under the microscope,” he said. “If we’re careful, this can be a fantastic commemoration of the War of 1812 but we have to recognize the reality of history in Canada.”

[LINK] "Why I'm Optimistic About Maine"

Continuing the theme on yesterday's post about GLBT rights and family values, I thought I'd like to Paul Hogarth's article in San Francisco's Beyond Chronicle, which, well, is as hopeful as the subject line suggests. There's material reasons for this hopefulness.

I truly believe that – with our help – Maine will become the first state in the nation to successfully defend marriage equality at the ballot box, providing a roadmap for California to repeal Proposition 8. Maine activists have been working hard for five years to pass gay marriage, but events in the last few days now point to what should be an historic victory on November 3rd. With only 19 days left, what I’m seeing from the “Yes on 1” campaign reminds me of where “No on 8” was at this point last year – outgunned by the opposition, unable to control the message and at a loss about what to do. If Question 1 passes, it will be our fault for not having done more. But if Question 1 fails, those of us who get involved will have made history – which is why I hope to go back for the last four days. Here are the reasons for my optimism ...

One reason why I got involved in this effort was that “No on 1” said they only needed $3 million dollars for the entire campaign – a pittance compared with California efforts. “We’re a cheap date,” said campaign manager Jesse Connolly at this year’s Netroots Nation Convention. New fundraising totals that came out this week show that “No on 1” has already raised $2.7 million (with most of the money coming from Maine residents) – and bloggers are planning a big fundraising push for today that should keep them on track with their goal.

The bigger news, however, is that “Yes on 1” reported only raising $1.1 million – with a campaign debt of $400,000 (our side has no debt.) This provoked their spokesman Marc Mutty (who is on loan from the Portland Archdiocese) to send out an urgent message on October 13th that their cause was under “financial assault.” In the mass e-mail, which can be reviewed in full here, Mutty says they had known from the opposition’s superior ground game that our side had been raising more money. But they had “never dreamed the situation was as dire as it is,” and are now urging their supporters to make a “sacrificial contribution” to pass Question 1.

Religion has also been defused.

A group called Catholics for Marriage Equality has staged walk-outs on Sunday services when the Church took up second collection plates on behalf of the “Yes on 1” campaign, and “No on 1” has organized several press conferences with religious leaders. As a result, media coverage in Maine newspapers has talked about how communities of faith are on “both sides” of the issue.

Now, the question has taken center stage. The “No on 1” campaign’s latest ad features Yolande Dumont, a French Catholic grandmother from Lewiston – a conservative city in Maine – who speaks about her gay son, his partner and their child. Yolande mentions that she’s a devout Catholic, her faith is important to her, and that she supports marriage equality. In an election where “No on 1” has had to respond to many of the opposition’s attacks, it is a positive TV ad with a general “feel-good” message about the value of strong families.

[. . . There] a distinction between rank-and-file Catholic voters (many who, like Dumont, support marriage equality) and the Church hierarchy. Maine is a very Catholic state, but it also has one of the lowest levels in church attendance – which suggests that many Catholics are already a bit disillusioned with their Church leadership. The reason they cite for pulling the ad will only infuriate Maine Catholics, because it says they cannot have a different opinion from the hierarchy.

And finally, the ads appeal to the fact that Mainers know same-sex couples already and Mainers are fundamentally fair people who really do care about children.

In every state where marriage equality has been on the ballot, opponents have used “the children” as a means of scaring swing voters – preying on their worst fears about what gays and lesbians will do to kids in the classroom. From the start, “No on 1” has pre-empted this attack by bringing up the fact that many gay couples raise children. When opponents brought up the tired line that gay marriage will be “taught” in public schools, our side has countered that what schools teach is that no child should feel ashamed of what kind of family they may come from.

On my last morning in Maine, the Portland Press Herald had a front-page “human interest” profile of two couples on each side of Question 1. The ones supporting it were a Christian couple concerned about the “sanctity” of marriage. The opponents were a lesbian couple who are raising two daughters. For them, said the Press Herald, it was “all about the kids” – i.e., they want a safe and secure future for their children that comes from being raised by a legally married couple.

Go, read the article in full.