Winnipeg Free Press

Winnipeg Free Press (Newspaper) - January 29, 2015, Winnipeg, Manitoba C M Y K PAGE A13 IDEAS �o ISSUES �o INSIGHTS THINK- TANK A 13 Winnipeg Free Press Thursday, January 29, 2015 D ID you hear about the agnostic dyslexic insomniac? She lay awake all night wondering if there was a Dog. But she's a pretty rare bird. According to a large survey carried out in the United Kingdom by Prof. David Voas of the University of Essex, more than half of British men who are now in their early 40s ( 54 per cent) are agnostics or atheists, but only onethird of women of the same age ( 34 per cent) hold similar views. The gender difference was even more striking when the 9,000 respondents were asked about their belief in a life after death. Only 35 per cent of the men said they believed there was some kind of individual survival beyond the grave; 60 per cent of women said they did. That's a difference of almost two to one in the level of belief among people who otherwise have similar backgrounds. Hmm. Now, this is obviously a topic on which a wise commentator would be very wary of offering an opinion. Much safer to keep your mouth shut and write about something else. Which may explain why this whole question about gender differences in belief in God came as a surprise to me, because when I looked into the literature, it turns out the social scientists have known about it for ages. There is a thriving academic industry dedicated to proposing reasons for this huge belief gap. One theory holds men are just more likely to be risk- takers ( except Blaise Pascal, the 17th- century French philosopher whose famous " wager" stated we should live our lives as if God exists in order to escape an eternity of torture in hell. If He turns out not to exist, we haven't really lost all that much. It was a breakthrough in probability theory). Another theory is that men who score relatively high on the autism scale are also more likely to be atheists or agnostics. But that doesn't really get us very far, since the great majority of men are not autistic, and yet a majority of British men don't believe in God. You will note I am only quoting speculations on male character traits here. Some of the above- mentioned social scientists also speculate on aspects of " female" socialization and character in their search for reasons for the great disparity in belief, but that is a minefield I do not plan to enter today. Let us instead go beyond Voas's statistics for Britain and see whether the same difference persists across cultures and continents. Belief in God is much higher in the United States, although it is dropping rapidly. A Harris poll in 2009 found 82 per cent of Americans had never doubted the existence of God; the same poll in 2014 found the number had fallen to 74 per cent. This is due almost entirely to a fall in belief among younger Americans: a Pew poll of " millennials" in 2007 found 83 per cent were believers; the same poll in 2012 found only 68 per cent. But the gender gap in belief also exists in the U. S., although it is less dramatic: 77 per cent of American women say they have an absolutely certain belief in a God or universal spirit, but only 65 per cent of American men say the same. Indeed, the gap exists in every country of the developed world, although there are intriguing national differences in how wide it is. In former West Germany, where 48 per cent of the population believe in God, the gap between men and women is eight per cent. In former East Germany, the cradle of the Protestant Reformation, where four decades of Communist rule eroded the hold of Christianity on the population, only 16 per cent believe in God - but the gap between men and women is less than three per cent. 58 per cent of Russians believe in God, but the gender gap is as big as it is in Britain: 25 per cent. Whereas in Turkey, a relatively developed Muslim country where almost 95 per cent of the population believe in God, there is no difference at all between the beliefs of men and of women. What are we to make of all this? Start with the fact decisions of this sort are rarely made on an entirely rational basis. Just as the great majority of believers everywhere never chose their original religious beliefs - they were just born into them - so any later changes in their beliefs are probably driven more by their personal circumstances than by conscious choice. Consider the difference between the two Germanys, for example. So what are the differences between the personal circumstances of men and women that might lead to different outcomes in terms of belief? That will obviously vary from one country to another, but women still suffer from greater social and economic disadvantages than men almost everywhere. If you have less control over the course of your own life, then belief in an all- powerful God who is just, and will ultimately put all the injustices right, is a very attractive proposition. In that case, the gender gap in belief is neither intellectual nor emotional. It's simply pragmatic. Gwynne Dyer is an independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries. Men, women divided by faith GWYNNE DYER T HE image of the NDP as Manitoba's natural governing party seems hollow in light of the polls and the current infighting in the party. They suggest a party in decline, doomed to lose the next election. Yet, whatever happens in that election, the NDP will have a better claim to the label of natural governing party than will the becalmed federal Liberals of recent years. The Liberals governed Canada for 72 per cent of the 110 years between 1896 and 2006, but the NDP in Manitoba has won a higher percentage of outright majorities since Ed Schreyer led his party into office in 1969 than have the Liberals since 1921, when more than two parties appeared in Parliament for the first time. Schreyer revolutionized provincial politics by bringing into the NDP fold former Liberals, Progressive Conservatives and even some Social Crediters, as well as many members of ethnic groups that had never voted for the party, such as Franco- Manitobans and Mennonites. As a result, the NDP leapfrogged over the Liberals. The Liberals have never recovered except for a brief period in the 1980s after NDP backbencher Jim Walding brought his government down on a budget vote and then- Liberal leader Sharon Carstairs became popular for opposing the Meech Lake accord. However, the Liberals quickly undid themselves, and Gary Doer's deft persistence resurrected the NDP, which has not looked back since it won office in the last century. The provincial NDP's status is more secure in the long term than the federal Liberals', no matter what the results of the next provincial election. This is because the NDP has succeeded in polarizing the provincial electorate by capturing the votes of most of Manitoba's federal Liberals. The two elections of 2011 provide evidence. Despite the so- called Orange Wave and Jack Layton's popularity in the federal election, the federal NDP lost two of its four Manitoba seats, the only province in which it suffered a setback. A few short months later, however, the party won more seats in the provincial election, 37, than any party had ever won. Just as the federal Liberals will benefit in the coming election by capturing the votes of many provincial NDP supporters, the provincial NDP will continue to retain the votes of many federal Liberals. The first- past- the- post electoral system encourages strategic voting and a polarized political landscape. The Manitoba NDP has won four consecutive majorities. To be sure, the next election may diminish and humble the NDP, but the party has ensconced itself as the default option for the moment Conservative governments discredit themselves, as did the Sterling Lyon and Gary Filmon administrations. No one but Schreyer could have led the NDP to victory in 1969; the party swept into office on his coattails, but it was the party's coattails that swept his successor, Howard Pawley, into the premier's office in 1981. The ideologically charged and polarized Manitoba party system is quite different from the multiparty context in which the federal Liberals had their historic success. The struggling provincial Liberals, preaching fiscal responsibility and compassionate social policy, have not been able to offer anything the NDP has not. The NDP has captured and successfully held much of Manitoba's ideological middle ground as a centre- left party. The NDP benefits, too, from the quirks of the electoral system and the party's efficient distribution of votes. In 2011, the party won Kewatinook, Flin Flon, and Thompson, for example, with combined pluralities of 3,262 votes while the Conservatives won Arthur- Virden, Midland and Morris with combined pluralities of 10,284. These numbers indicate many Conservative votes are wasted votes. Moreover, as Winnipeg, the NDP's base, continues to grow faster than the province, the party's advantage will increase. The NDP has also benefited from supporting the causes of social movements, environmentalists, unions, feminists, gays and lesbians, public- sector workers, the growing number of First Nations peoples, post- secondary students and the newer ethnic groups such as Filipinos. The party's relatively activist policies in areas such as social inclusion, child care, health care and poverty resonate with female voters, who disproportionately support the party. The ever- growing number of publicsector dependents and clients also brightens NDP prospects. Farmers, a group historically unsympathetic to the party - it has never won a seat in the agriculturally rich rural southwest - are constantly shrinking in numbers while post- secondary students, a group that disproportionately supports the NDP, have constantly increased in numbers. A generation of new voters in the next election, most likely to occur next year, will have known only an NDP government in their politically conscious lives. To them, the " natural" political order will be an NDP government. This does not mean the NDP will prevail in the next election. The odds it will do so are remarkably long. However, the NDP long ago left its position on the margins of provincial politics. It is now deeply embedded in the provincial political culture, worthy of being known as Manitoba's natural governing party for the foreseeable future. Nelson Wiseman is the director of the Canadian Studies Program and professor of political science at the University of Toronto. B RITISH tennis player Heather Watson, in a post- game interview at the Australian Open, blamed her loss last week on " girl things." She said she felt dizzy and nauseous and consulted a doctor as an explanation for her poor performance. And one more taboo got busted. Half of the population does it at some point in their lives. We menstruate. Or have a girl thing, a lady's day, a visit from our aunt, the red- dot special, that time of the month or as my mom would whisper, " your periods." For years, women's periods have been used against them as an excuse to keep women from rising to positions of power. As researchers Chrisler et al write, a menstruating woman " is portrayed in popular culture as a frenzied, raging beast, a menstrual monster, prone to rapid mood swings and crying spells, bloated and swollen from water retention, out of control, craving chocolate and likely at any moment to turn violent." Let's face it, you wouldn't want some irrational, hysterical woman in charge, pushing the big button and propelling the free world into a nuclear exchange with North Korea, would you? So, was Vladamir Putin having his period when he invaded Ukraine? Just saying. It's fascinating women's biological destinies are viewed so negatively and so stereotypically. As Gloria Steinham gleefully wrote in 1978, what would happen if men menstruated? " Generals, right- wing politicians and religious fundamentalists would cite menstruation (' menstruation') as proof only men could serve God and country in combat (' You have to give blood to take blood'), occupy high political office (' Can women be properly fierce without a monthly cycle governed by the planet Mars?'), be priests, ministers, God himself (' He gave this blood for our sins'), or rabbis (' Without a monthly purge of impurities, women are unclean')." When Watson made her remarks, many women felt conflicted. On one hand, we applauded her for being so frank about the topic, but we also worried about the backlash her frankness could cause. Karen Houppert, who wrote The Curse: Confronting the Last Unmentionable Taboo, said Watson's comment " is a double- edged sword. It's good that she spoke frankly about what was going on - though I wish she'd been truly frank and referred to it more forthrightly as her ' period' or ' menstruation' rather than euphemistically as ' girl things.' On the other hand, women's periods have been used against them for centuries. As long ago as the 1880s, when folks were debating higher education for women, there was a rash of studies ' proving' menstruation made them unfit for the rigours of college. Fast- forward to the present, and women's periods are still used to dismiss the validity of what they're saying: ' Oh, don't mind her, she's on the rag.' " It's interesting men's biological imperative can be spun in a way that is positive. Men's infidelity, for example, has been deemed a man's biological destiny to ensure his seed is spread as a continuation of his genetic lineage. In other words, you can't help yourself, you poor thing; you have to cheat to make sure your DNA survives the apocalypse. And a man's mid- life crisis? Gets him a red sports car and a 25- year old blond. For women? Well, in popular culture, our biological functions make us irrational and unworthy, suspect and alien; our mid- life crisis leads to depictions of chin hair and comfortable shoes. It hardly seems fair. But it doesn't have to be like this. Female athletes shouldn't have to worry their performance will be viewed in terms of where they are in the menstrual cycle. Let this sink in: Paula Radcliffe in 2002 busted the Chicago marathon record while suffering period cramps in the last third of the race. Female leaders shouldn't have to worry about responding in a way that makes someone wonder if it's their time of the month. They can act decisively without having it marginalized as dysmenorrhea hysteria. We're starting to see an evolution in the topic of menstruation. In small- town Alberta when I was growing up, store owners would cover the Kotex boxes in brown paper, supposedly so no man would have to face the unpleasant realization women everywhere are randomly bleeding. Now tampons and pads are advertised on primetime television - often ridiculously - replete with somersaults, riding ponies and blue dye. But the premise it's still a dirty secret remains, underscored by the move by tampon manufacturers to market silent tampon wrappers, useful in public bathrooms. Because as one cheeky website put it " it sounds like I'm opening a bag of Sun Chips in here." And one day, both Houppert and I hope periods will come out of the closet completely and take the stage like every other normal bodily function. For Houppert, it will all " be as ordinary and casual and boring to talk about menstrual products with our colleagues as it is to listen to them yammer on about what cold medicine they find most effective." There will be a tampon ad in the middle of the Super Bowl. And no one will care. Shannon Sampert is the perspectives and politics editor. shannon. sampert@ freepress. mb. ca Twitter: @ PaulySigh By Nelson Wiseman Is NDP Manitoba's natural governing party? SHANNON SAMPERT Time to take menstruation out of the closet Period taboo busted British tennis player Heather Watson explained her loss at the Australian Open was because of her period. CARLOS BARRIA / REUTERS FILES A_ 13_ Jan- 29- 15_ FP_ 01. indd A13 1/ 28/ 15 6: 13: 27 PM ;