You are visiting Liisbeth’s archives! 

Peruse this site for a history of profiles and insightful analysis on feminist entrepreneurship. 

And, be sure to sign up for’s newsletter where Liisbeth shares the latest news in feminist spaces.

Our Voices

U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe decision a broad attack on civil rights

Photo of a man attending a pro abortion rights rally holding a sign saying "I'm with her"
Photo by Aiden Frazier, Unsplash

As expected the U.S. Supreme Court has struck down Roe v. Wade thus opening the way for Republican states to ban abortion. Thirteen states have trigger laws that will come into effect immediately.  Many more will quickly pass restrictive legislation. The decision is catastrophic. It rolls back a constitutional right American women have had for 50 years.

The response has been strong. President Joe Biden, who has never been a pro-choice advocate, promises to do everything in his power to ensure that women in states that ban abortion will have access to medical abortion by mail and the right to travel to states where abortion is available. He promised that if the Democrats win a majority in both House and Senate in the coming mid-term elections, they will enshrine the principle of Roe v. Wave in federal law.

The sexual health movement in the U.S. has been spending their time since the leak from Politico that warned that this decision was coming to organize and ensure women in states where abortion is illegal will be able to access either medical abortion or travel to another country.  Even the Disney Corporation is offering assistance to their workers who need to travel to seek an abortion. Hopefully other corporations and perhaps universities and colleges will follow suit.

But to ensure that Biden keeps his promise, there must be the largest mass mobilization of people in American history.  A ban on abortion affects millions of people.  The Supreme Court argument basically says that there are no legal rights unless they are guaranteed in the Constitution other than those originally there unless a constitutional amendment is passed by elected representatives.  With that argument, same sex marriage, perhaps inter-racial marriage, birth control, gay rights, and trans rights could be eliminated.

President Biden and House Leader Nancy Pelosi both said in their statements about the Roe v. Wade ruling that this has to be a ballot box issue. At first, I was annoyed at them trying to turn a monumental defeat into a political talking point but there is a real point. A Democratic victory in November in both the House and the Senate could lead not only to enshrining abortion rights in federal law but also to real gun control.  But I don’t trust them. Only a massive movement in the streets as well as during the election can ensure that this will happen.

In Canada, we are in a much stronger position. So far the Conservative Party is not anti-abortion. Conservative Premiers in several provinces have promised they will not restrict abortion rights, but they don’t stop their members from putting forward laws to restrict access. All but one of the leadership candidates in the federal party say they are pro-choice. But Pierre Poilievre, who claimed to pro-choice in the French debate, has not yet made a statement on the US decision, despite being asked. No doubt he is testing the air. Anti-abortion activists have been building support inside the Conservative Party since abortion was legalized. Now they have the wind in their sails.

Twenty sexual and reproductive health groups put out a statement today about the Roe v. Wade decision saying in addition to solidarity with American sisters, they will fight to expand sexual and reproductive rights.

“Equity within Sexual Rights and Healthcare includes making contraception free, allowing abortion pills to be sold over the counter, strengthening access to abortion in rural and remote areas, implementing $10 a day childcare, enforcing the Canada Health Act against provinces that fail to provide adequate abortion, implementing comprehensive sexual health education in all Canadian schools, increasing healthcare funding to provinces to expand SRH, and more,” the statement reads. They see it as a moment to push for more rights.

Prime Minister Trudeau promised: “You can count on our government to protect women’s right to choose.” That’s great but in my experience you can’t count on governments to do anything for very long. Eighty per cent of Canadians support abortion rights and only 14 per cent oppose so while we can’t be sanguine, we don’t have to worry yet.

Publisher’s Note: This article was originally published by We thank them for the permission to share this with our readers. 

To learn more about Canada’s abortion rights history and about organizations working to preserve those rights and expand access, download our abortion rights zine here. 

Related Reading

Why We're Feminists

If women are coerced into believing that it’s unattractive to be a feminist, they are relinquishing their own power.
Think you’re not a feminist? Think again.

Read More »
Activism & Action

Prospects for a She-covery?

Are proposed platforms by leading political parties doing enough? Image by © Prazis |

What happened to the she-covery? Just a few months ago, everyone was talking about the she-cession and the she-covery, terms coined by feminist economist Armine Yalnizyan, but in the recent leaders’ debate not one word was uttered about the significantly greater job and income losses faced by women. Even childcare, the most substantive debate in the election—and I would argue the most important issue for women—barely got a mention in the debate. 

In economic terms, women and racialized people have been most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Women suffered 63 per cent of job losses as of March 2020 and even as the economy rebounds women lag behind by 15 per cent.  The three industries hardest hit by job loss in the pandemic are all female-dominated. Women account for 82.4 per cent of the workforce in health care, 69.3 per cent in the education sector and 58.5 per cent in the food

You may remember the excellent paper recently put out by Yalnizyan and other feminist intellectuals and activists on the Care Economy. It is a call to recognize the centrality of the care economy as not only essential to our health and well-being, but also as a social infrastructure “that delivers economic stability and growth,” and “is a shared responsibility, not just a personal one.”

The care economy accounts for more than 21 per cent of all paid labour and 12 per cent of Canada’s GDP. That’s more than the oil and gas, auto, or manufacturing sectors. For all the talk from Justin Trudeau of a feminist government, Canada spends only 18 per cent of national income on social services—which is less than we did in the 1990s when we spent 20 per cent—and our population is aging more than before. Canada spends $46 billion a year on social spending, or 2 per cent less than other G7 countries. The NDP is the only party proposing a wealth tax to raise the money needed to improve wages and working conditions in the social services. 

But there has been very little debate on social spending, health care, education, long-term care or childcare so far in the election. These may be provincial responsibilities but the federal government has an important financing role and can impose national standards. The leaders’ debate was a lost opportunity for a thorough discussion of the difference between publicly funded universal non-profit childcare and tax credits for parents. It was more bickering than debate so let’s look at some of the key issues in this upcoming election as they affect women and gender-diverse people.

Both the Liberals and the NDP agree on a publicly funded, high quality, affordable, and mostly non-profit childcare system. Those who, like myself, think the Liberals never saw a promise they couldn’t break, know that $30 billion for childcare was included in the last budget and eight provinces have already signed on. This was more money than any childcare advocate had asked for. It was a huge victory for the women’s movement, who have been fighting for a childcare system like this for 50 years. 

The good news is that even the Conservatives and the corporate lobby industry support childcare today. Economists have shown without a doubt that an affordable childcare system is good for the economy and COVID-19 has made that even clearer. The question now is how to fund it. A Conservative victory would be a catastrophe for childcare because they are proposing tax credits. Economist Gordon Cleveland has crunched the numbers for Ontario and there is no doubt that the Conservative proposal saves little money for most parents. Even worse, it won’t create a single new childcare space.

Affordable childcare is essential for women, care givers, and children. One thing this pandemic has revealed is that women, including those who make more money their partners, still carry the primary responsibility for child rearing. In Ontario, where we have a patchwork system and tax credits, only half of pre-schoolers received care from someone other than their parents. In Quebec, which has a publicly funded system, that figure is 75 per cent.   

The Conservatives have said their proposal would encourage more flexibility in childcare because families would have the money but that is simply not true. Unless there are regulated childcare spaces, there is no flexibility in childcare options. Tax credits don’t create even one additional childcare space, and we already know that the market economy doesn’t deliver universal childcare. Flexibility is an especially important issue for self-employed people and shift workers, and this will be the next step in developing the childcare system we need and will get—if the Conservatives are defeated.

The other key issue dependent on a feminist defeat of the Conservatives is abortion. Erin O’Toole says he’s pro-choice but the majority of his caucus is anti-abortion. They won’t make abortion illegal but they will do everything within their power to restrict access to it. As we saw in Texas, you don’t need to criminalize abortion to restrict access to this healthcare. And while the Liberals and the NDP are willing to use the Canada Health Act to ensure abortion access, the Conservatives refuse to do so. In fact, the Conservatives are against any national standards, including in long-term care funding. The long-term care catastrophe in the first wave of COVID-19 was much worse in for-profit homes. Only the NDP will make sure federal money goes to non-profit homes. 

Article from Global news.
Article from the National Observer about the anti abortion debate in Canada after Texas.
The Campaign Life Coalition (CLC), a national group that works to nominate and elect candidates who oppose abortion at all levels of government, CLC vice-president Jeff Gunnarson told Maclean’s. in 2019 that sold more than 9,000 PC party memberships to support anti-abortion work.

The Liberal and NDP platforms talk about violence against women but don’t propose anything substantial to reduce it. In my view, the only way to reduce violence against women is to stop relying on the justice system to do this work. I have been involved in battles to strengthen the laws and to educate judges and cops, but the system remains deeply patriarchal and racist. Public attitudes towards gendered violence have changed, but the rate of violence has not gone down. I think we need an intersectional approach that joins the Black Lives Matter movement in calling to defund the police. Money reacquired by defunding the police can in turn be used to fund shelters and rape crisis centres; to create programs and develop resources to change social conditions that encourage violence and sexism among young men; and to educate all boys on gender equality. We need a systemic approach to violence against women that also recognizes and addresses the deep sexism and racism embedded in both our justice system and our culture. 

Despite the powerful rise of an anti-Black racism movement, only the NDP has a proposal in place to deal with systemic racism. They also have the best proposals regarding Indigenous rights, and are promising $3 billion in funding to move towards reconciliation. 

In the final days of the election campaign, the Liberals have told us that a vote for any other party is a vote for the Conservatives. This is utter bullshit. Studies have shown that strategic voting doesn’t work. Last election the Liberals promised to move toward proportional representation where votes are more accurately reflected in parliamentary seats. Another broken promise. History shows that the only way we get a more progressive agenda is if the Liberals face pressure as a minority government.

Vote for the candidate you support. Having strong local and progressive representation in government matters. 

Related Reading