Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack
Is there a blind spot I am missing here? Assuming you are referring to non-francophones, what makes non-francophone women less likely to be bilingual than non-francophone men?
|
So here's my reasoning:
It's tough to be truly bilingual unless you're from one of a handful of regions where people grow up being fluent in both languages. The overwhelming majority of these people by numbers would come from Greater Montreal, but there are of course other areas. However, all these areas tend to be Liberal strongholds, and the Liberals have been a little behind in enabling women to become party leaders at the Federal level.
The Conservatives and, frankly, all other parties have done much better. Of course the Bloc will have female MPs from Montreal who are fluently bilingual, but the Bloc will never form government.
If you're from outside of those areas, you have to be really committed to learning French (or English, for that matter), which means that you have aspired to attain a senior role in Federal politics since you were young. Stephen Harper was one of those people, but there aren't many people who have that kind of, um, ambition.
Hence, to get a female prime minister who is fluently bilingual, the burden is on the LPC to get a woman into a leadership position who hails from one of their bilingual ridings.
Chrystia Freeland is probably the closest that comes to mind, although her French (from what I've heard) is kind of weak. I once listened to her speak in French and my conclusion was that, since she made the same word choices I would have made and spoke at about the same speed, her French was probably better - but not much better - than my own (which is to say poor). I feel that if Celine Galipeau or whoever is the Rosemary Barton of the SRC prodded her in a 20 minute interview, that she'd come up pretty short.