rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

Do Harper Conservatives hate women?

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support rabble.ca for as little as $5 per month!

The alarm being expressed around the world about Canada's stunning decision to exclude abortion from its global maternal health commitment is totally appropriate. It represents a return -- however symbolic in Canada -- to barbarism. The whole notion that women, who fought for basic human rights for decades and then moved on to focus on other goals, could suddenly find themselves time-traveling over thirty years into the past is appalling.

But while it may seem barbaric to other civilized countries and to those in Canada who think human rights protection meant human progress, it has no such meaning for the religious right and large chunks of the Conservative Party. It's hard to know how many Conservative Party members are old Reform Party stalwarts but my guess is that it's a clear majority and getting stronger. There are no qualms here about reversing human rights -- they never supported the concept in the first place.

We can trace it back to many aspects of the Reform Party but one event in particular stuck in my mind from researching my book on the Party back in 1991. It revealed a deep fear and even hatred of women in that party whose early conventions were characterized by a huge predominance of old, white men. The 1991 convention in Saskatoon was probably 85 per cent men or more.

One of the resolutions that made it to the floor was one dealing with violence against women. After a long debate (Manning intervened to ensure it passed) the convention passed a resolution stating that the party was opposed to violence against women. But before it was passed someone put forward an amendment to the effect that men engaging in such violence required punishment according to the law. It was overwhelmingly defeated. It was one thing to be against violence against women, it was quite something else to actually hold men accountable for their actions. After all, they might have had a good reason.

This is the sick and backward sentiment that Stephen Harper is playing to on the abortion issue. It is not just the protection of the fetus -- it is the determination by Reform Conservatives to put women in their place -- to deny them rights, to punish then for even thinking that they can exercise them. It is the politics of revenge -- punishing women for the rights they have exercised over the past 30 to 40 years. It reveals a visceral reaction to modernity, secularism and humanism.

Liberal ineptness has allowed Harper to successfully frame the abortion issue as one blaming the Liberals for re-introducing the debate -- an amazing accomplishment when you consider the deliberateness of the calculations Harper and his Christian lieutenants went through when deciding to unleash the issue on the country.

He continues to try to reintroduce the topic whenever he can. When he was doing a Q&A with 120 members of the G8/G20 National Youth Caucus he replied to a question re: excluding abortion from the maternal health initiative with this re-writing of history: "There are things that can be done, not controversial things, things that are not expensive. They can make a real significant difference in the lives of people around the world."

First, he was unable to name any of the "things" he referred to and his off-the-cuff announcement of a maternal health initiative is as vague the day it was revealed: no program, no budget, no plan. But the statement also reveals a deliberate attempt to get the abortion debate going again. By referring to the right to choose as "controversial" Harper was deliberately stating that as far as he is concerned the issue has not been settled.

But it has been settled -- long ago, by the government deciding to remove any mention of abortion in any legislation. It is simply a matter between a woman and her doctor.

And I have to wonder whether or not there was co-ordination between the PMO and Preston Manning's recent intervention on the issue. Manning, you may recall, got Conservative pollster Allan Greg to do a little manipulating to make it look as though Canadians actually opposed a woman's right to decide if she wants to give birth.

The poll "discovered" that 60 per cent of Canadians strongly agreed that abortion is morally wrong. But it did not ask whether people thought women should still have the right to decide. That question was posed a couple of weeks later by Ekos and that polling form revealed that nothing had changed regarding Canadians support of women's rights: 52 per cent of Canadians describe themselves as "pro-choice;" 27 per cent say they are "pro-life" -- numbers unchanged in ten years

As for excluding abortion in the government's initiative a Canadian Press-Harris Decima poll conducted in May found that 58 per cent of respondents oppose Mr. Harper's exclusion of abortion -- up from about 46 per cent in March.

What's the motivation here when Harper clearly knows these numbers and has no intention of introducing legislation to turn back the law? My guess is that he simply wants to energize his base -- get them agitated, more satisfied about the state of politics in the country, and writing more checks to the party that speaks for them. Another way of looking at it is through Harper's well-known strategy of identifying niche voting "markets" and going after them. In this case Harper, with Manning's help, wants to get the women-hating vote locked up. The 70,000 deaths caused each year in the world due to botched abortions is clearly not too high a price to pay for that voting block.

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.