Now Boarding Flight to Vancouver (Again)

I flew to Vancouver on Friday after work. We had dinner at Tojo's again. I can’t get enough of that restaurant. The sushis are to die for. They literally melt in your mouth.

We left early Saturday morning to Kelowna. It was a beautiful, sunny day. We had lunch at Mission Hill Winery . The views were breathtaking and the food was delicious. After lunch, we went to Cedar Creek for more tasting. Their wine is nothing to write home about. We stayed at Lake Okanagan Resort. The views from the resort were spectacular. The resort itself was a little too “summer campish” to my taste. It was definitely a family friendly resort (gah). We had a fantastic dinner at Fresco downtown Kelowna. The food was great, especially their tuna tartar.

We hit the road early on Sunday morning. We drove to Penticton and stopped by Hillside Estate, Nichol Vineyard , and Elephant Island. Nichol is a tiny vineyard that was recommended to me. Their wine is fabulous. Elephant Island produces “fruit wine”. In other words, they make wine with any fruits but grapes! The pear and blackberry wines were lovely.

We got back to sunny (!) Vancouver around 6pm and met with friends for dinner at Cafe de Medici. Good food. I flew back at 11pm. Another quickie on the west coast.

Pictures

Delusional feminism

At the conference (see previous entry), I encountered an undiscovered form of feminism. Even though it was extreme, I hesitate to call it “radical” because even radical feminists occasionally have a point.

The hoopla was about the evolution of the term “women violence” into “family or domestic violence”. According to them, this is the result of a patriarchal conspiracy plotted by your one and only government of Canada to disfranchise women. My chuckles were rapidly followed by an enormous sigh.

I was recently involved in a study about violence that we named rather innocently “family violence”. Contrary to popular delusional feminist beliefs, we don’t sit in a secret room and think: “how are we gonna screw women today”. Our decision to use “family” as opposed to “women” violence was empirically driven. I hate to break it to them, but women are violent. The type of violence they perpetrate (mostly psychological as opposed to physical) and the reasons for it may be different (often self-defence, but not exclusively), but they are clearly not always victims.

Although there are several known forms of feminism, I was compelled to coin my own: Delusional feminism.

Sociology and Me

I spent the week at the Humanities and Social Sciences Congress at York University. I was registered with the Canadian Sociology and Anthropology Association (CSAA). The first two days were a revelation.

Two days of theory, radical feminism, and socialism…exactly what I vehemently avoided throughout university. If that’s what people think sociology is exclusively about, no wonder they are astonished when sociologists find jobs in the ‘real world’. I was vicariously searching through the program hoping to find sessions about real issues, real research, and real findings.

I was out of luck until I found the Canadian Population Society (CPS). I spent my last two days attending demography/quantitative sessions. That's SO my stuff! Love it, love it, love it!

This little adventure prompted me to reflect on what appears to be two completely different types of sociology. I knew they existed theoretically, but they were not practically so distinct in my mind until this week. Some relevant observations between the CSAA and the CPS:

• Demographics of Presenters/the Audience

CSAA: Almost exclusively academics, generally white females.

CPS: Some academics, but mostly from government organizations, males and females, several different ethnic backgrounds.

• Use of Technology

CSAA: Use overheads. I shit you not. They are still people out there who use overheads!

CPS: Power Point (duh!)

• Methodology

CSAA: Not much applied research presented and what was presented was a joke. A professor generalized data collected from FOUR individuals. Methodology was never well explained even for statistical procedures.

CPS: Rigorous methodology explained in details. Very cautious in their interpretation about generalizability and causation.

• Audience

CSAA: Back rubbing, ass-kissing audience. Never once did I hear opposition.

CPS: Challenged the presenter’s methods and findings ALL the time. I would be terrified to present to demographers while presenting to sociologists would be a walk in the park.

• Objectivity vs Subjectivity

CSAA: Presentations were based on opinion driven theory.

CPS: Presentations were based on empirical evidence.

• Relevance of findings

CSAA: Very little ‘real life’ application.

CPS: Concrete use for policy and population planning.

I know which sessions I am going to next year!