Letters, Dec. 31

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 31/12/2024 (458 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Reviewing the review

In his letter to the editor, “Bad Examples,” Dec. 28, Justin Jaron Lewis suggests that the movie Babygirl represents “twisted expectations and abusive behaviour.” He states that the movie is about “a powerful woman who discovers her true self by becoming the submissive to a dominant young man,” and that it therefore promotes the subjugation of women in our society.

However, the film is much more than that. It is apparent through interviews that director Halina Reijn openly shaped the film through her female perspective.

In the film, the main character, a female CEO of a large company, is faking it — explicitly in erotic encounters with her husband, and implicitly in her climb to the corporate elite. To explore this, the film’s focus is on the social expectation that women deny their “dark hidden fantasies.” More broadly, the movie is a response to earlier erotic thrillers that reinforced the male perspective. The film also includes a serious examination of consent and the power surrounding it.

In an interview with CBC, Reijn said, “If #MeToo wouldn’t have happened, I wouldn’t have sat here today. … So #MeToo is everything to me.” In his letter, Lewis states that the film exists despite decades of female activism, but to me it seems more like a product (and part) of that activism.

I don’t live the female experience, so such creative works are particularly important for me to reflect on.

Lewis makes no reference to having seen the movie, referring only to the existence of Free Press reviews of it. Not every project directed by women challenges male dominance, and it would be unfair to expect that. But I believe one thing is true: we can’t challenge gender inequality based on men’s simplistic condemnations of women’s creative work.

Curt Pankratz

Winnipeg

Understanding sepsis

Re: Mom sues health authority over teen’s death, Dec. 26

I read with alarm that a Manitoba mother is suing medical professionals after her daughter was diagnosed with an infection and died after being “assessed for sepsis and hypovolemic shock.”

As a sepsis survivor, I am all too aware that the typical tragic sepsis story is one of medical negligence and poor patient/family and physician communication. I am also aware that for good reason Sepsis Canada’s guiding vision is “suspect sepsis, save lives and support recovery.”

I am further aware of the responsibility that physicians have as per directives from the Manitoba College of Physicians and Surgeons to provide patients and their families with appropriate discharge instructions in a sepsis setting.

That sepsis kills 11 million people a year and continues to be misdiagnosed by medical professionals and misunderstood by the general public is extremely unfortunate.

Mac Horsburgh

Winnipeg

Listen to citizens

Re: It’s time to protect children — all children, Think Tank, Dec. 27

Kudos to John R. Wiens for again penning a succinctly crafted column offering insight and wisdom.

He deftly synthesizes various strands of social insanity to offer common sense to a world at war with itself — a world resistant to embracing logic that might be born of the elusive empathy he encourages by the end of his column.

And, thanks to the Free Press for publishing these thoughts. As I have seen past letter writers opine: hopefully our politicians are paying attention and taking heed of the contributions to public discourse being offered by common citizens.

Mick Friesen

Gretna

Building bridges

In response to the Troubled waters article on Dec. 27, I can only hope that fellow Wolseley residents ponder some positive aspects of the Omand’s Creek bridge plan.

As a resident on Dominion St. for some 45 years, I have walked, cycled and run along this small path, all the time thinking, “There must be a better vision for this wonderful little area.”

This area is not the domain of only the Wolseley residents — it is used by literally thousands of folks each year: couples, children, dog walkers, seniors, runners, fundraiser events, school cycle events, baseball players and commuters.

As Winnipegers, we have heard over and over: we can’t “change ” the Eatons building, the Hudson Bay building, the rail yards, the Provencher Bridge — (add your own story) — because they have “always been that way.”

I have faith that the designers, the city planners and my good neighbours in Wolseley can come together (without raised voices and chains) and agree on a vision that benefits all.

Neil Sander

Winnipeg

 

I am a resident of Wolseley for over 30 years and a very frequent user of Omand’s Creek Park. I am a pedestrian and a cyclist.

I am very concerned about the bridge replacement. As Coun. Janice Lukes expressed in a Free Press article in November, I, too, have great concern for the esthetics, as well as the ecosystem of this tiny green oasis.

It is my opinion, as well as many other Wolseley residents, that if the existing bridge is to be replaced, replace it with an accessible footbridge only. This bridge would serve wheelchair users and pedestrians only.

A smaller structure would probably cost less and would certainly be less intrusive to the esthetics and ecosystem of the park.

A bridge constructed to accommodate commuting cyclists as well as pedestrians would have to be much wider and, blatantly, redundant. There is a city-sanctioned bicycle route on the perimeter of the park. Going on this perimeter route adds only three minutes travel time for the average cyclist. This route is only about 100 metres north of the Wolseley entrance.

A big question is: when and why did the tiny footbridge in Omand’s Creek Park become a primary bicycle trail, when the flood-free, extra-wide, city-sanctioned cycling trail is deemed a secondary path?

An even bigger question: why is there consideration to spend $3 to $5 million on a redundant structure, when the Arlington Bridge, the Assiniboine Park Bridge and the bridge at the Forks all need structural attention?

Since there already exists a sanctioned route for cyclists to cross Omand’s Creek, perhaps a more valuable and urgently needed way to spend $3 to $5 million would be dedicated and protected bicycle lanes.

Keep Omand’s Creek Park as a much-needed oasis for those who pass through it slowly, and for those who take the time in it to appreciate all of the natural beauty it offers.

It does not deserve to become a cemented commuter route.

Carol Friesen

Winnipeg

Local candidates count

While I do not share Ron Menec’s distrust of Pierre Poilievre — “No support here,” Letters to the Editor, Dec. 26 — I think he makes an excellent suggestion in his final sentence: “everyone should be urged to focus instead on local candidates and support the best of them, regardless of who their party leader is.”

If you focus on your local candidates, you can go to rallies/meetings where you can ask questions. You get a chance to appraise intelligence in the flesh.

Justin Trudeau represents an urban Montreal riding, Poilievre a suburban Ottawa riding and Jagmeet Singh, Burnaby South in British Columbia. How much do they know or even care about Manitoba’s problems, given our limited political clout ?

Most MPs end up as foot soldiers in an army (party) focused on Ontario and Quebec.

There always will be disagreement as to the proper apportionment of power between the various levels of government. I congratulate Menec for pointing out that we serve our interests best when we focus on the quality of our local candidates.

Kurt Clyde

Winnipeg