File Photo (Image Credit: CFJC Today)

By Alix Dolson

Sound Off

SOUND OFF: The mayor’s misleading misogyny

Dec 17, 2024 | 2:03 PM

AT EVERY LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT, female politicians are disproportionately targeted by violence and harassment. This is true regardless of party affiliation. Given the nonpartisan nature of this targeting, it’s safe to assume it has little to do with policy. People say things about female politicians that they’d never dream of saying about their own wives or mothers. Why have we dehumanized public figures to the point that all we can see are harmful stereotypes? And why do we continue to tolerate abhorrent behaviour from men elected to public roles while holding their female counterparts to a wildly different standard?

Over the last two years, I have watched Mayor Hamer-Jackson repeatedly mislead and treat his colleagues and staff with disrespect. That behaviour is clearly outlined in the latest conduct report, which found that the mayor misled the public into believing that council’s statement from March 17, 2023, was responsible for accusations about his alleged sexual improprieties. The mayor’s rationale for his comments were that the words “violation of personal and professional boundaries” made people believe he was responsible for sexual harassment. The truth, however, is that council’s statement had absolutely nothing to do with sexual misconduct.

What’s most curious about this situation is the mayor’s odd and immediate leap to his “sexual impropriety” when it was on no one else’s mind. Even in his interviews after the March 2023 statement, he tried to convince journalists that it must be sexual in nature. Marty Hastings responded to the mayor’s insistence by saying, “Violated personal boundaries? I would never think that it’s a sexual inuendo at all…” while Christopher Foulds noted, “I didn’t read sexual into it. That’s all I’m saying and no one I know did either.” If there was a whiff of sexual impropriety, I am confident these seasoned journalists would have followed up on the rumors diligently. After all, local media wouldn’t leave a juicy story like that alone. But there was no story because only the mayor jumped to that conclusion. Curious indeed. One wonders about his motivations. If he is concerned about being falsely accused of sexual impropriety, perhaps he should stop shouting that he’s been called a “pervert” from the rooftops, especially because (at that time), he was the only one saying it publicly.

The mayor’s counsel at that time (he seems to burn through lawyers) further fanned the flames of misogyny stating that when a “young, attractive-looking councillor” claims personal boundaries were violated, people could infer sexual misconduct. Mr. McMillan’s comments and the mayor’s support of them are deeply offensive: to me, to Councillor Neustaeter, to men who aren’t Neanderthals, and to women everywhere. Councillor Neustaeter had every right to be council’s spokesperson regarding the actions of the mayor, and to suggest she shouldn’t have been based on her age, gender and physical appearance is openly discriminatory.

Furthermore, Mr. McMillan’s comments perpetuate harmful tropes about actual victims of sexual violence, which the anti-violence advocate in me can’t ignore. Unlike these men, sexual violence does not discriminate, and folks of all ages and genders are at risk — many of them much higher than Councillor Neustaeter. While her gender is a high risk factor, that’s about the end of the list. Her age, race, education level, marital status and socio-economic level are all low risk. We don’t have statistical data to determine the risk factor for “attractiveness”, but anecdotally, with my years in this sector, I can tell you it’s inconsequential. Mr. McMillan’s suggestion serves to reduce Councillor Neustaeter to nothing more than her gender. She deserves better than that, as do the hundreds of people in this city who experience sexual violence every year. If only “young, attractive” women were victimized, I wouldn’t be hearing the trauma stories of men and boys, senior women, and toddlers every single day.

Sound Off

SOUND OFF: The mayor's misleading misogyny

5h ago

Film Location Map

Thompson-Nicola Film Commission unveils interactive film location map

5h ago

1000 Ways to Heal

1000 Ways to Heal: Ribbon Skirts

Dec 16, 2024

When interviewed by the investigator for the conduct complaint, Mr. McMillan doubled down, saying, the “same words spoken by a different person of a different gender and age, the context is different.” So Councillor Neustaeter should have to limit her voice and work for the benefit of a sexist citizen who might misinterpret her words through their own bias? That’s certainly not the expectation I have for a female elected official, and I am fairly confident Councillor Neustaeter didn’t enter municipal politics just to be silenced by misogynists.

Mayor Hamer-Jackson may avoid direct accountability for the comments of his former lawyer, but they are still telling — telling of the kind of people our mayor has in his inner circle, telling of their conversations that lead to the statements, and telling of a wider issue of chauvinism in politics.

Councillor Neustaeter deserves to be judged by her merits, not her gender — whether you agree with her or not. The misogyny she has experienced in her public role as a result of the mayor’s behaviour is sickening and a grave disservice to our city. We need more women in politics, but when this is the treatment they are publicly subjected to, it’s hard to imagine why they would step forward.

Our city councillors don’t deserve the vitriol that a small group of citizens, emboldened by the mayor, are spewing. I don’t agree with every policy position held by each of them and I certainly didn’t vote for all of them, but that’s how democracy works. I didn’t vote for the mayor either, but here we are. I respect that all nine of them were duly elected, and I expect them to work for the betterment of our community. I see the councillors doing that while the mayor only causes endless strife for anyone unfortunate enough to enter his vortex; hurling unfounded accusations, misleading the public, and damaging the reputation of Kamloops. And that’s just on the days he actually shows up to work.

Those “concerned citizens” of Kamloops who repeatedly call for the resignation of all the councillors have been noticeably quiet about the findings of this report. We have confirmation that the mayor misled the public, that he engaged in behaviour unbecoming of his office, and that he did real harm to our city and a colleague’s reputation. Again. If citizens are concerned with honesty and integrity, I encourage them to hold every elected official to the same standard.

But then again, I can also see why Councillor Neustaeter is so easy for her critics to shamelessly target. It’s hard to watch a bright, dedicated, caring public official actually do the work and accomplish the goals, knowing that you could never muster the skills or competence to compete. That kind of jealousy is a bitter pill to swallow.

Alix Dolson is a Kamloops resident who served as Katie Neustaeter’s campaign manager in the 2022 municipal election.

——

Editor’s Note: This opinion piece reflects the views of its author, and does not necessarily represent the views of CFJC Today or Pattison Media.