By Esteban Morales, Jaigris Hodson, Yimin Chen, Chandell Gosse, Kaitlynn Mendes, George Veletsianos

Gender-based technology-facilitated violence and abuse (GBTFVA) is a common experience for those engaging with digital technologies in their everyday lives. To better understand why GBTFVA persists, it is necessary to understand the false beliefs and cultural narratives that enable and sustain them. Drawing on the literature on rape myths, this paper explores the prevalence of seven gender-based online violence myths among Canadian men. To achieve this, we adapted the Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance (IRMA) (Payne et al., in J Research in Personality 33:27–68, 1999) to assess GBTFVA, and surveyed 1,297 Canadian men between 18 and 30 years old on their GBTFVA beliefs. Our results show that GBTFVA myths and cultural narratives are prevalent across participants, though endorsement levels vary. Four myths were more strongly endorsed: It Wasn’t Really Gender-Based Online Abuse, He Didn’t Mean To, Gender-Based Online Abuse Is a Deviant Event, and She Lied. Overall, these findings help to name and thus begin to address the narratives that sustain and perpetuate gender-based online violence.

Sex Roles (2024) 90:1521–1533 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-024-01514-w

By Catherine Bates, Graham Huggan, Milena Marinko, and Jeffrey Orr

In the March 28, 2006 edition of The Guardian, two news items stand out on Canada. One, a short article by Duncan Campbell, concerns the growing number of US army deserters who have crossed recently into Canada and have sought political asylum there, claiming that they had been tricked by the US military into serving in a manifestly unfair war in Iraq (Campbell 2006, 17). "It’s really great here”, says one successful escapee: “Generally people have been very hospitable and understanding, although there have been a few who have been for the war” (Campbell 2006, 17). The other items, a protest letter signed by, among others, the Conservative MP Ann Widdecombe, decries the annual mass cull of seal pups off the shores of northwest Canada, “shot and skinned alive by hunters … [in] one of the largest and most brutal slaughters of marine mammals on the planet” (Banks et al 2006, 31). In response, Widdecombe et al call for a UK trade ban on Canadian products as a way of sending “Canada a signal that enough is enough - we can halt the vicious slaughter on the ice” (Banks et el 2006, 31). The Guardian offers no particular comment here, but a double-page spread in the same edition unambiguously features a black-clad hunter out on the ice in front of his vessel, cudgel poised above an inert seal, with the punning caption “Fate sealed” and the mock-dispassionate reading: “Sealers watch from the deck of their boat as a seal is clubbed off the coast of Newfoundland, on the second day of the annual seal hunt” (Cook 2006, 18-19).

The Central European Association for Canadian Studies, 1st edition, 2007

By: Steven Kohm and Michael Weinrath

This volume of essays was drawn from the conference “Practicing Justice: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Crime, Law and Justice” held over three days in May 2010. “Practicing Justice” was the second annual justice-themed event hosted by the Centre for Interdisciplinary Justice Studies (CIJS) at the University of Winnipeg Criminal Justice department. Our hope was to provide a forum for open and intellectual discus sion about justice in all its forms. To this end, we assembled a diverse group of participants including practitioners from the various justice agencies, Honours students from our own program, graduate students from a number of universities across Canada, local researchers, and academics from a variety of disciplinary backgrounds in Canada and the United States. What united all these participants was an interest in the elusive concept of ‘justice.’

The objective of the conference was to examine justice from a variety of standpoints. The practice of justice is all too often characterized by rigid dichotomies and entrenched rivalries: practitioners versus academics; applied researchers versus theoretical scholars; and community versus university. “Practicing Justice” was envisioned as an inclusive forum that might close the gap that separates often divergent perspectives on justice. We firmly believe that in order to understand justice and move toward the practice of justice – however defined – we must first be able to hear and understand others who bring different perspectives to the table.

We must acknowledge the hard work of Professor Richard Jochelson and Kelly Gorkof who a year earlier initiated a bold dialogue across the disciplines which culminated in our inaugural justice-themed conference “Theorizing Justice: Interdisciplining the Divide”. their goal was to “bridge the gap between disciplines, community agents, and institutional forces ... to identify the division between disciplines and to build an inclusive approach. hey cited the words of our keynote speaker Professor John P. Crank – who writes: “one must gather together liberals and conservatives, professionals and academicians, federal and local justice organizations, judges, defence counsel, prosecutors, sworn officers, managers... they all bring something to the table... they all bring a commitment to justice” (Crank, 2003).

The present volume of essays showcases a diversity of perspectives on justice. We are pleased to present submissions from practitioners of justice, Honours and graduate students, and academics of divergent disciplinary backgrounds. The essays that follow both critique conventional understandings of justice and suggest ways to better practice justice, however defined. Some works are highly theoretical and abstract, while others are more hands-on and applied. What unites all these submissions, however, is their commitment to and passion for justice.

Centre for Interdisciplinary Justice Studies (CIJS), Volume 1, Fall 2010