Women Challenging the Constitution: New Evidence
Keywords:Canadian women's movement, Canadian constitutional history, Charter of Rights and Freedoms
This article is more political than legal. Using the approaches identified by feminist institutionalism, it focuses on the interactions between the Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women (CACSW) and the Canadian government during the constitutional crisis of 1980-1981. How did the gendered institutions of the federal government facilitate a narrative that, finally, was harmful to the women’s movement in Canada?
Cet article est plus politique que juridique. En utilisant les approches identifiées par les institutions féministes, il se penche sur les interactions entre le Conseil consultatif canadien sur la situation de la femme (CCCSF) et le gouvernement du Canada durant la crise constitutionnelle de 1980-1981. Comment les institutions marquées par la différenciation des sexes du gouvernement fédéral ont-elles facilité un récit qui était, en fin de compte, nuisible au mouvement féministe au Canada?
Anderson, Doris. 1991. The Unfinished Revolution: The Status of Women in Twelve Countries. Toronto, ON: Doubleday Canada.
_______. 1996. Rebel Daughter. Toronto, ON: Key Porter Books.
Aschaiek, Sharon. 2014. “Feminist in the Footlights.” U of T Mississauga Magazine (Spring): 8.
Bennett, Carolyn. 2007. “Which Way to Ottawa?” Canadian Woman Studies 26 (2): 42-54.
Bird, Florence. 1981. “Notes for the meeting to take place February 16/81.” Typescript.
Burt, Sandra. 1998. “The Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women: Possibilities and Limitations.” In Women and Political Representation in Canada, edited by Manon Tremblay and Caroline Andrew, 115-144. Ottawa, ON: University of Ottawa Press.
Canada. Parliament. 1981. Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence of the Special Joint Committee of the Senate and of the House of Commons on the Constitution of Canada. 32nd Parliament, 1st session, issue no. 36. Ottawa, ON: Government of Canada.
Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women (CACSW). 1978. Sharing the Power. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women.
_______. 1979. 10 Years Later: An Assessment of the Federal Government’s Implementation of the Recommendations made by the Royal Commission on the Status of Women. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women.
_______. 1980. Women, Human Rights, and the Constitution. Revised Edition. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women.
_______. 1981. Annual Report 1980-81. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women.
Champagne, Lyse. 1980. Not How Many But How Few: Women Appointed to Boards, Commissions, Councils, Committees and Crown Corporations within the Power of the Federal Government. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women.
Collins, Anne. 1981. “Which Way to Ottawa: A Special Report on the Women’s Conference on the Constitution.” City Woman (Holiday): 11-32.
Cooke, Katie. 2001. A Civil Tongue. Victoria, BC: Bridges for Women Society.
Cuthbert Brandt, Gail, Naomi Black, Paula Bourne, and Magda Fahrni. 2011. Canadian Women: A History. 3rd edition. Toronto, ON: Nelson.
Dobrowolsky, Alexandra. 2000. The Politics of Pragmatism: Women, Representation, and Constitutionalism in Canada. Toronto, ON: Oxford University Press.
Eberts, Mary A. 1980. Women & Constitutional Renewal. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women.
Findlay, Sue. 1988. “Feminist Struggles with the Canadian State: 1966-1988.” Resources for Feminist Research 17 (3): 5-9.
Findlay, Suzanne. 1987. “Facing the State: The Politics of the Women’s Movement Reconsidered.” In Feminism and Political Economy: Women’s Work, Women’s Struggles, edited by Heather Jon Maroney and Meg Luxton, 31-50. Toronto, ON: Methuen Publications.
Freeman, Barbara. 2001. The Satellite Sex: The Media and Women’s Issues in English Canada, 1966-1971. Kitchener-Waterloo, ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
Froc, Kerri. 2014. “Is Originalism Bad for Women? The Curious Case of Canada’s ‘Equal Rights Amendment.’” Review of Constitutional Studies 19 (2): 237-279.
Frum, Barbara. 1971. “Why There Are so Few Women in Ottawa.” Chatelaine 44: 33, 110.
Gray, Elizabeth. 1981. “The Exit of an Iron Will.” Maclean’s, February 2: 28-29.
Greschner, Donna. 2005. “Praise and Promises.” Supreme Court Law Review 29: 63-83.
Kenny, Meryl. 2014. “A Feminist Institutionalist Approach.” Gender & Politics 10 (4): 679-684.
Kome, Penney. 1983. The Taking of Twenty-Eight: Women Challenge the Constitution. Toronto, ON: Women’s Press.
_______. 2007. “Face-Off. Doris Anderson at the Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women.” Canadian Woman Studies 26 (2): 61-69.
Korinek, Valerie. 2000. Roughing It in the Suburbs: Reading Chatelaine Magazine in the Fifties and Sixties. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
Landsberg, Michele. 2011. Writing the Revolution. Toronto, ON: Second Story Press.
Linzey, Joanne. 1981. “ACSW members tells the other side of the Doris Anderson story.” Kinesis, April: 17-18. Originally published in the Yukon’s OptiMSt.
Lowndes, Vivien. 2014. “How are Things Done Around Here: Uncovering Institutional Rules and Their Gendered Effects.” Politics & Gender 10 (4): 685-690.
Mackay, Fiona. 2014. “Nested Newness, Institutional Innovation, and the Gendered Limits of Change.” Politics & Gender 10 (4): 549-571.
Macpherson, Kay. 1994. When in Doubt, Do Both: The Times of My Life. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
Malloy, Jonathan. 2003. Between Colliding Worlds: The Ambiguous Existence of Government Agencies for Aboriginal and Women’s Policy. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
Manfredi, Christopher. 2004. Legal Mobilization and the Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia Press.
Martin, Sandra. 2007. “Women’s Rights Champion Doris Anderson Dies at 85.” Globe and Mail (Toronto), March 3.
McPhedran, Marilou. 2007. “The Fight for the Charter.” Canadian Woman Studies 26 (2): 80-83.
O’Neil, Huguette. 2004. Yvette Rousseau: la réussite d’une vie. Montréal, QC: Remue-ménage.
O’Neil, Maureen, and Sharon Sutherland. 1997. “The Machinery of Women’s Policy: Implementing the RCSW.” In Women and the Canadian State, edited by Caroline Andrew and Sandra Rodgers, 197-219. Montréal & Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Pal, Leslie. 1995. Interests of State: The Politics of Language, Multiculturalism, and Feminism in Canada. Montréal & Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Peckford, Brian. 2012. Someday the Sun Will Shine and Have Not Will Be No More. Saint John’s, NL: Flanker Press.
Rebick, Judy. 2005. Ten Thousand Roses: The Making of a Feminist Revolution. Toronto, ON: Penguin.
Reid, Julyan, with Linda Markowsky. 2007. “A National Presence.” Canadian Woman Studies 26 (2): 56-60.
Riley, Susan. 1981. “The Party or the Principle.” Maclean’s, January 12: 18-19.
Royal Commission on the Status of Women in Canada (RCSW). 1970. Report. Ottawa, ON: Government of Canada.
Sisler, Berenice. 1997. The Perpetuation of a Myth: The Anderson-Axworthy Affair. Typescript. Winnipeg, MB: University of Manitoba Archives.
Stein, Michael. 1989. Canadian Constitutional Renewal, 1968-81: A Case Study in Integrative Bargaining. Research Paper 27. Kingston, ON: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations, Queen’s University.
Vickers, Jill, Pauline Rankin, and Christine Appelle. 1993. Politics as if Women Mattered: A Political Analysis of the National Action Committee on the Status of Women. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
Young. Lisa. 2000. Feminists and Party Politics. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia Press.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors are aware that articles published in Atlantis are indexed and made available through various scholarly and professional search tools, including but not limited to Erudit.
3. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
4. Authors are permitted and encouraged to preprint their work, that is, post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process. This can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Read more on preprints here.