The first issue!

Municipal elections, red nails, and the changing of the seasons 🍂

We’re really doing it! Welcome to the first issue of Body Work, a newsletter about love, labour, and how we move through the world.

Though I’m sure this will evolve over time, right now my approach to putting together each issue is to let a theme naturally emerge based on whatever is going on around me. And right now, the theme that emerged is simply change. The changing of the seasons, the passage of time, the need to change even if it’s painful.

I hope you enjoy it, and if you do, please share with a friend.

In this issue:

• Breaking down the buzzwords in British Columbia’s municipal elections

• Poetry: Red

• Reflections on grieving my pre-pandemic self

• Plus, thinking twice about…Gilmore Girls?

  ---

halenalou

A post shared by Halena Lou (@halenalou)

Autumn always makes me feel more aware of the passage of time. Here’s a contemporary freestyle from a few years ago at this time of year, to one of my all-time favourite songs, Changing of the Seasons by Ane Brun.

Breaking down the buzzwords in British Columbia’s municipal elections

It’s that time again - election time! (I know, it feels like it’s always that time.)

Municipal elections are taking place right now in British Columbia, and election day is Saturday October 15th.

In this article I won’t get into the specifics of how and where to vote, as I want this to be applicable beyond the city I live in (Vancouver), but if you are in Vancouver, check out this link for all the basics.

Instead, this article will focus on breaking down the buzzwords and themes that I’ve seen coming up in this election, as well as providing some overall considerations that I use when reviewing candidate platforms and promises. Though I’m coming at this from looking at Vancouver candidates’ platforms and promises, I believe these thoughts will be applicable more broadly, certainly within the Lower Mainland of BC and perhaps beyond.

First, let’s start with the buzzwords and themes. There are two that I keep seeing everyone talking about: affordability and safety.

Affordability

Affordability is, unsurprisingly for those of us in the City of Vancouver, a big topic again this election. Affordability in this context usually refers to housing affordability. What I want to hone in on here is: what does each candidate and each party mean when they say affordability, and what solutions are they proposing? Everyone is talking about this, but they are not all proposing the same thing.

There are a few key questions I ask myself while I’m looking through platforms and promises. First, who is being included in the solutions being proposed? For example, is this person or party focusing on helping existing homeowners? Are they proposing ways for renters to buy property more affordably? Are they talking about supply and building more homes, and what type of homes? Are they talking about supports for renters? Are they talking about our unhoused neighbours and how to support them? So, I’m looking to answer: affordability for whom?

The next main question here is: what evidence do they have to suggest that their solutions will work? Are they referencing other cities or other places where a certain policy has worked? What is their professional background or experience that informs their proposed solution?

Finally, I’ll get into this more later in this piece, but it’s worth naming here specifically: how do they propose going about it? For a promise like building new housing, it takes a long time to build something new, so do they display an understanding of how that process works and how long it’ll take? How are they proposing to build housing more quickly, if that’s what they promise to do?

Safety

This is another word that it seems like every party and individual has in their platform. But, again, what are they actually talking about?

The critical thinking questions here are largely the same. First, safety for whom? Do they mean that everyone in the community is physically safe and has resources and protections – including our unhoused neighbours and marginalized folks – or, do they mean homeowners who feel unsafe if unhoused folks are on their street, for example?

Second, what is safety? There are different types of so-called ‘safety’ that are being discussed in the platforms I’m seeing. Some people are speaking about how the streets are ‘unsafe’ and we need more police officers or harsher enforcement of the laws, which takes more of a criminal justice approach; some people are talking about folks not feeling safe if they’re being surveilled and harassed by police, and their belongings and homes literally not being safe and protected if they’re being taken and dismantled by police; other folks might touch on safety as protection from marginalization, from oppression, or from violence. These are very different understandings of what ‘safety’ means, and you’ll notice that some of these definitions are about being safe whereas others are about feeling safe.

Another thing to look out for here is whether a platform will hint at some of these themes rather than outright naming them, as a way to evoke a certain value or position without actually saying it. This is called a dog whistle, and it happens a lot in politics.

An applicable example here might be if a candidate says something like: “Vancouverites no longer feel safe in their neighbourhoods.” This might sound innocuous, but let’s unpack it. “Vancouverites” subtly speaks to those who have lived in the city for a long time - perhaps they grew up here, or inherited family property here, or have owned their homes for some time - rather than including folks who have moved or immigrated here recently. Saying that they “no longer” feel safe suggests there was a time before when people did feel safe, so it’s cueing that something has changed to make people feel unsafe now; this is usually code for our communities becoming more inclusive and perhaps approaching mental health and addictions issues through a health and harm reduction approach rather than a criminal justice approach. And “in their neighbourhoods” reinforces that the “Vancouverites” being spoken of are the rightful owners of the neighbourhoods they’re in, rather than recognizing that we have many unhoused neighbours, many marginalized neighbours, and many students and other transient neighbours who are also part of our communities at any given moment.

Finally, as with affordability, we need to ask: what solutions are being proposed? Is the candidate or party calling for more policing and more surveillance? Or are they calling for more mental health and addictions supports and programs, reduced barriers to accessing vital services, universal transit or other social services, etc? There are important distinctions here.

With both affordability and safety, the reminder here is simply to think critically. Consider who is being included in the policies and promises, what is being proposed, and whether there is a logical, evidence-based, equitable plan to achieve that proposal.

Overall Considerations

In the second half of this piece, I’ll touch on some overarching considerations that I am taking into account as a voter when it comes to municipal politics.

1. Does this person/ party understand the municipal political and policy-making processes?

While arguably (literally, I myself argued for this in my Masters thesis) we need more people in elected positions who bring a diverse range of skillsets and past experiences to the role, I think we also need to look for candidates who have an understanding of what actually happens at the municipal level, how decisions get made, and - just as importantly - how decisions get implemented.

This applies in two ways: first, do they understand what is in the jurisdiction of a local government – rather than provincial or federal or Indigenous governments – and therefore what they can actually work on within this government setting, and second, do they understand the mechanics of how this local government actually works?

Some markers to help answer these questions might be: have they worked for the city? Have they been on a city advisory committee or board? Do they have relevant volunteer or community development experiences? Have they studied municipal policy making? What is their analysis on how the city’s operations work, and how does that inform the solutions they are proposing?

This last point is especially important to consider, I think, for the promises you might see folks make that sound really flashy, like “I’m going to make X 5 times faster in my first month in office.” My response to that would be: Okay, how? Do you know how X works, and is it reasonable to believe that you could make that thing five times faster in a month? Another example which is common in campaign promises is: “I’ll cut the Y department’s budget by 50%.” Okay, why 50%? What analysis did you do to arrive at 50% being the percentage that you need to cut it by? What do you anticipate being the impacts of that cut, and what will you do about it? And so forth.

Another example here that I’m seeing a lot of is: if someone is promising to cancel a certain project that is already underway, do they display an understanding of what the impacts of cancellation would be? Do they know how many folks currently working on that project would be impacted, how much it would cost to cancel that project, whether it’s feasible to cancel it or whether it’s too far along, and what they will do instead? This can be another marker of how well they understand that process.

A sometimes tricky aspect of analyzing campaign promises is regarding incumbents, which are those who are already elected and are seeking re-election. If someone is already in that position of power - whether they’ve been in office for one term (four years) or multiple terms - and they’re campaigning now on improving some aspect of the policy-making process, are they acknowledging and explaining why they have not made progress on that thing yet and why they think this term will be different if you vote for them now? There might be legitimate reasons why they tried and couldn’t make progress on that issue yet, but if so, as a voter I would want to know that.

I do want to add a big caveat, though, to this section. While I am arguing that it’s important to understand the parameters of local government jurisdiction and processes, I also want candidates who have innovative ideas to get beyond the limitations of these parameters. I think one needs to inform the other; there is a big difference between ignorantly promising ideas with no grounds in reality and cultivating a deep understanding of the laws and policies that inspires you to find work-arounds. The former is uninformed, but the latter is not only creative but also more in line with decolonizing these structures and processes by helping us get beyond such rigid colonial approaches.

I’ll point to an example of what I mean here, though this policy is not nearly enough to solve the problem it claims to address. This is the City of Vancouver’s work over the past few years to apply for and then receive a federal exemption that will allow folks to possess small amounts of drugs for personal use without being subject to criminal charges. While the amounts in the exemption are much too low, and it’s precarious because it’s only a temporary exemption, it shows a level of innovation that says: okay, criminal laws around drug possession are not within local government jurisdiction, but is there a way to get around that? It also recognizes Vancouver’s position as a large and influential city in Canada and tries to leverage that to other governments.

2. Does this person/ party understand and speak to the broad range of issues facing folks in our city?

As you look at the platforms, you might see that some candidates are really passionate about one or two issues. Their voices are needed and their concerns are valid, because we live in a democracy.

However, when I’m thinking particularly about Mayor and City Council, I am looking for candidates who understand and are passionate about the whole, not just about one or two issues. I want folks in those positions who understand – or at least who are committed to learning about – all of the different parts of a city government and what it does and what issues it can affect, and who want to address the broad and diverse range of concerns that residents here have.

Here’s where I’ll lay my cards on the table a bit more, and note the full scope of issues I’m looking for candidates to have positions on:

• How are we working in genuine, decolonized partnership with the Indigenous nations whose land we’re on?

• What are we doing to both mitigate and adapt to the impacts of climate change, and how we are using our voice as one of Canada’s largest cities and regions to leverage change at a bigger level too?

• How we are making city spaces more inclusive and accessible to a broad range of folks’ needs?

• What are we doing to truly make housing options that fit for all of our neighbours – including our unhoused and marginalized neighbours, who are part of our community?

• How are we ensuring that folks who live here can actually afford to do so, whether they’re renting or owning?

• How are we expanding access to our local democratic process?

• What are we doing to celebrate and hold onto what is special about Vancouver – like our arts and culture, our outdoor experiences and spaces, etc – while also expanding that definition of what Vancouver is so that we’re not being NIMBYs?

As a voter, I am looking for candidates who can speak on all of these questions, and more, not just their one or two issues that they care about.

And by the way, if you can’t find this information from a particular person or party (if their campaign platform is not easily accessible), that is also a sign.

3. What skillsets are best for each position?

This is something that I don’t see discussed a lot but I think is quite important, though, as with all of this, this is just my opinion. I think we need to consider the different skillsets and experiences we want in each of these elected positions, rather than only looking at the party or the platform overall.

For Mayoral candidates, I look for a few different things.

The Mayor is of course an important leadership role, so their values and positions matter in terms of what issues or solutions they might champion. Their leadership style also matters as this is the person representing this government to other governments or stakeholders, so it’s important to consider how well they represent the city.

I want to be clear that ‘leadership’ doesn’t just mean things like their ability to give a good speech or make an executive decision; this also includes qualities like: are they a good listener? Are they a good facilitator? Can they bring together everyone’s perspectives and find a common ground among them? Though they are the leader, here in BC (for those in Toronto or Ottawa it’s a different story!) the Mayor is still just one vote on Council, along with the 10 City Councillors. Since there are so many people and parties running for Councillor positions, at least here in the City of Vancouver, it is unlikely that any one party will get a majority on Council, so it’ll be really important to be able to work with different people and different positions. For the Mayor, this is crucial.

For Councillors, the choice feels more freeing; there are 10 of them after all, so there are a lot more options!

As I mentioned, for Councillors I am looking for a holistic platform that addresses multiple policy areas, not just their one or two issues they’re passionate about. I’m also looking for people who can collaborate and work with others, similar to the Mayoral candidates. And when I’m putting together my slate of 10 for who I want to vote for, I’m also looking to include and and vote for diverse experiences and perspectives to be represented.

Moving on to Park Board Commissioners! Vancouver is one of two places in BC with an elected Park Board, so this section is definitely Vancouver-centric. Park Board does not get as much attention as Council, but this is an important group of people; all of us interact with public spaces in the city in some capacity, whether it’s a park or a pathway or a recreational facility or even just the trees on our streets. And given the scope of what the Park Board does, this group of people could be involved with things like land use planning, adapting to climate change, making public spaces more accessible, considering how we share land and what it means to do things on unceded land, and deciding how we manage folks living in parks or staying in parks if there is no appropriate housing. There is a lot of crucial work here.

When it comes to Park Board Commissioner candidates, I am looking at how the candidates speak about “safety” in public parks (and, again, safety for whom), as well as for relevant experience or interests, like experience working with parks, in community gardens, in fitness centres or in recreation, etc.

And finally, I’ll touch on School Board Trustees. I think School Board sometimes gets overlooked by those of us who don’t have kids, and I do understand the argument that we have less of a direct stake in the education system since we don’t have kids in it. However, I’ve heard others make a really good counter-argument which is that we all are impacted by how kids are educated and whether they’re learning critical thinking skills, because they will become adults in our society who vote and make decisions, too!

Similarly to Park Board, when it comes to School Board I of course am honing in a bit more on education policy and am not looking for a comprehensive understanding of every municipal policy issue. I’m looking for candidates who support broad and inclusive education focusing on critical thinking skills, an evidence-based and precautionary approach to COVID-19 safety in schools, expanded child care before and after school, and keeping police officers out of schools.

A final point!

Alright, we made it through this long post! I hope this buzzword analysis and three considerations are helpful for you as you cast your vote this week.

The last point I’ll make here is that you do not have to vote for the maximum number of positions available in each category. If you don’t like 10 Councilor candidates, for example, don’t vote for 10 just because you feel you have to. You can simply cast votes for the people you truly believe will be the best in those roles.

Now go forth and VOTE!

Red

A poem about the small moments that make you remember.

The last time I painted my nails red was when I was falling in love with you. I painted them red again yesterday.

The dish soap at my office smells like the lotion you used to wear. It smells like a spa. It is so misleading. 

I watch my hands as they wash my dishes after lunch. Hand over hand, finger over finger, working in unison. Flashes of red appear between the creamy suds. This dance is so coordinated, so sensual, so natural. My hands know how to move and what to do. Then I turn on the faucet and wash it all away. 

I lift my hand and realize I have chipped a nail on my right thumb already. Darn, I should have used a top coat. I always skip that step, the sealing in, the confirmation. 

I’ve heard that the human body regenerates all its cells every three years. I guess these hands are not even the ones you knew, anyway. 

Reflections on grieving my pre-pandemic self

I shared these reflections on my Instagram account recently and it struck a chord with a lot of folks. I thought I’d share here for those who may not have seen it.

This fall, I'm realizing I need to mourn. I need to feel the sadness and the grief from losing who I was before all of this.

In fall and winter 2019, everything felt open and available to me. I was in a stage of exploring so many new facets of myself, meeting new people, having new experiences. I felt important and unique and able to go after whatever I wanted. BIG main character energy. I spoke up on things that felt important, I got a new job, I dove into burlesque. (I was probably spreading myself too thin, and it was not sustainable.) I wore lipstick and curled my hair and went to events and felt dazzling.

But in March 2020 it felt like the bottom fell out from under me. All the structures I had learned and perfected and climbed upon to get where I was fell apart. (I would later learn that much of this feeling was because, once my routines and my beliefs about how the world works were nullified, it revealed just how many coping mechanisms I had in place and just how lost I felt in a neurotypical world without them.)

Now, while in-person events have been slowly ramping up for awhile, this fall it feels like many of the same events and opportunities from fall 2019 are happening again, and I can feel the grief so deeply. Going to the same types of events - while feeling like such a different person - surfaces so many feelings of pain and disappointment and distance from my past self. She was imperfect and on the edge of burnout and made some mistakes, but she had such big dreams. She really thought they all could happen.

I want to hold her and tell her it won't all happen, but it'll be okay, in a different way. I want to tell her that she'll get an Autism diagnosis and she'll get better at establishing healthy boundaries and she'll still be frustrated a lot. I want to tell her that she'll get a sewing machine and start making costumes and feel complete euphoria while performing; that she'll produce her own shows, and create art that feels meaningful, and still feel sad often too. I want to tell her to stop and breathe and soak it in, and that there's so much more to come.

Thinking twice about…Gilmore Girls?

Ok, stay with me on this. With October being the anniversary of the first episode of Gilmore Girls, and November being the anniversary of the (*shudders*) A Year In The Life Netflix revival, Gilmore Girls comes up tends to come up at this time of year.

I’d like to end each newsletter with a fun or interesting recommendation of something to watch or listen to, so this time, it’s this video essay on what Gilmore Girls - and, more specifically, what Rory’s romantic partners throughout the series - say about class divisions and love.

When I watched the show growing up, I was always #TeamJess (obviously - he likes BOOKS you know), and hated Logan more than a fictional character should probably be hated. Not to sound dramatic, but this video singlehandedly convinced me that Logan was actually the best partner for Rory, given both of their class positions, values, and needs. I know, I was shocked too.

(PS - I wrote an article when the Netflix revival came out about how problematic Gilmore Girls’ pregnancy storylines were, but it never got published. Would you be interested in reading this now, six years later? Let me know!)