Justice Minister MacKay is being roasted over hearsay accounts of his words about female judicial appointments, already buried under snarky paraphrases.
He said: “Yes, there should be more but they simply aren’t applying,” “some women are discouraged from seeking to be judges because the old-boys network among the judges would make these new women judges go circuit” (i.e. have to travel to outlying courtrooms), which does happen.
This admission is rather candid from someone being painted as a Neanderthal sexist.
Could this onslaught really be about Bill C-36’s encroachment on men’s alleged right to buy and pimp women? And buy ads for prostitution?
The minister’s account of a dearth of female candidacies is either accurate or not. An inquiry process is in order.
But to speculate from the onset that MacKay is lying is just reaching.
Female lawyers have long denounced the near-impossibility of balancing a career-track workload with family responsibilities. Regrettably, these still mostly befall women in real life. By men’s choices ...
MacKay’s commitment to gender equality is obvious to anyone who has read Bill C-36’s preamble (http://defenddignity.ca/bill-c-36/).
Would a formal quotas system be more acceptable to his snarky critics?
I doubt it.