Andrea Gunraj on the Canadian Women’s Foundation

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2024/07/29

Andrea Gunraj is a recognized writer, speaker, and thought-leader. She is Vice President of Public Engagement at Canadian Women’s Foundation and holds over two decades of experience in nonprofit leadership, communication, and public education for social change.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Okay, we are here today with Andrea Gunraj from the Canadian Women’s Foundation. Could you give an overview of the foundation, its scope, and how it actualizes its mission to advance women’s rights and equality?

Andrea Gunraj: The Canadian Women’s Foundation is Canada’s public foundation for gender equality and justice. We are a leader and voice for feminist action and gender equality, focusing on growing support for grassroots feminist action in Canada. We partner with organizations and communities to address gender inequalities and push towards a gender-equal Canada through systemic change.

Our vision is clear: we want every woman, girl, and gender-diverse person to have the power, safety, support, and rights to thrive today and tomorrow. We engage in various elements of work to achieve this mission, with a strong focus on feminist philanthropy. We channel funds to organizations running gender equality programs across every province and territory in Canada and work on systemic change by influencing decision-makers and policymakers to make enduring changes that benefit everyone. Over the last 30 years, many changes have occurred, but these changes can be easily undermined by crises such as a pandemic or climate change. We aim to ensure that progress towards gender equality in Canada remains steadfast, regardless of external challenges.

Jacobsen: Over time, what have you noticed as the most significant areas of progress in gender equality? What areas remain challenging where progress has been slow?

Andrea Gunraj: We’ve seen a movement in gender-based violence, one of the critical pillars of action at the Canadian Women’s Foundation. Gender-based violence includes intimate partner abuse and sexual violence. Over the last 30 years, rates of this violence, although still at epidemic levels, have decreased in many ways. However, the pandemic caused a spike in these rates, leading to increased femicide and intimate partner violence, bringing us back to unacceptable levels where a woman or girl is killed by violence every 48 hours in Canada. Additionally, the rate of sexual assault has remained constant over the last 30 years, showing some improvements but also persistent challenges.

Another area of concern is the gender pay gap. In Canada, the gender pay gap has slowly decreased over the past 30 years, which is a positive development as it significantly impacts women and families. However, the pace of change has been glacial, and for racialized women, Black women, Indigenous women, and women with disabilities, the gender pay gap persists and is much worse. These issues highlight the need for continued efforts in both areas.

Jacobsen: It’s a subtle area that is not often discussed, but one of the most important is for the young people in our country. You focus on teen healthy relationships, but there is a wide range of subject matter for young people undergoing rapid developmental changes. What areas have shown more hopeful signs regarding reducing barriers and providing evidence-based education to help young people make informed decisions about their lives?

Gunraj: I like that example of healthy relationship education for teens in Canada. We have seen some positive movements there, which gives me much hope. About 20 years ago, I started my career in that area, working within schools, community centers, and youth detention centers, anywhere where young people gather. We discussed healthy relationships, education on consent, what it means to have a respectful and equal relationship, and the signs of an unhealthy relationship. This kind of pro-social education helps people be safe and have positive, healthy interactions with others, whether they are dating friends, family members, or community members. It also helps them to be a positive force within their community and to make change. Of course, that increases a sense of belonging and the feeling that they can do something in life, be cared for and loved, and extend that to others.

That was very rare when I started. Only the teachers and youth workers went above and beyond to get us to do this work with their students and the young people they worked with. Now, there is so much more understanding of how this is just as essential as anything else, such as STEM, English, and other subjects taught in school. There is a much more coherent understanding that we need to foster pro-social behaviour, break cycles of violence and unhealthy behaviour, address mental health issues and give people a positive sense of self and belonging so they can extend that to others.

This area has grown, and I’m proud that the Canadian Women’s Foundation funds this work because it is one of the underfunded areas in the community sector. It’s an under-supported gem of change and impact, building positive cycles for young people and giving them what they need to survive and thrive. However, I would like to see more coherence across regions, communities, and school boards to ensure that this education is integrated into the curriculum and available to every young person at school and in community spaces. Not all young people will necessarily get it at school, and they might prefer to receive it in a community-based setting. We must prioritize and fund this education so that every young person receives it. We fund other types of education, as every young person must attend school in Canada, but this type of education needs to be more balanced across school boards. Some students have access to it, while others do not. From a governmental perspective, this should be a high-level priority to make it available for everyone.

Jacobsen: There’s another nuanced point related to healthy relationships, but it is distinct in its own right. When these relationships reach an extreme point, I learned about the signal for help as a tool for those experiencing gender-based violence. The signal involves showing the palm to the camera, tucking the thumb, and trapping the thumb. Two in five Canadians know about this signal. How could we increase that awareness to ensure five out of five Canadians know about it?

Gunraj: Oh, I love that question. We want everyone to know the signal for help because it has been a life-saving tool. We launched it at the beginning of the pandemic in 2021 because we knew that the increased risk of violence would be huge and people were using video calls much more. Many of our grantees told us they were concerned about women being trapped at home with abusers. That was what we heard from every province and territory. So promoting this was special because people in Canada and online shared it. We didn’t put any money into advertising. People just shared it around. I credit TikTok, especially the young creators who made it viral worldwide.

We need to do a couple of things to ensure that people know the signal for help and that everyone is equipped to respond. That’s important because the signal is only good if people know how to respond. We’ve heard of very scary situations, about five or six now, where women and girls in dangerous situations used the signal for help in a public space and received support, help, and rescue. But we have yet to hear about people who might use the signal or some other sign that they need support. Do we know how to recognize that?

The number one thing is education and broad-level awareness. At the pandemic’s beginning, we learned how to wash our hands and put masks on. We did those things to change our behaviour. We have to treat gender-based violence prevention and intervention in that same broad-based way, getting everyone to know the signs of violence and how to support a survivor in their life. Statistics show that survivors go to people they know and trust, not authorities because they sometimes don’t feel safe enough to report. So we, neighbours, friends, and families, must know about it.

At the Canadian Women’s Foundation, we’ve trained as many people as possible through easy online tools. If people go to https://canadianwomen.org/signal-for-help/, they can sign up and get free tools to understand the Signal for Help and how to respond non-judgmentally and refer someone to a service that might help them. So far, we’ve gotten over 70,000 people signed up to get those tools and training. That is amazing. But I want to see that number grow into the millions and tens of millions because, as you said, it should be five out of five, not just two or three.

Jacobsen: I’ve been interviewing with various movements for a while now. One critical observation I’ve noticed is that, at some point, they risk becoming personality-based rather than focusing on organizational networks, individual actions, and policy changes. This shift can detract from practical life changes and progress toward equality. How can we avoid going down that path where the leadership of an organization or a popular personality on some show who is advocating for change becomes the focus, rather than the practical elements of actions and policy change for actual, tangible progress towards equality?

Gunraj: That’s a very interesting observation. I might have a bit of a different view. Having key personalities supporting a cause attracts people, which can be positive. But if it only ends there, you’re right; it’s too thin. It doesn’t have enough steam to drive the changes that need to happen. The changes are systemic, policy and practice-related, and investment-related, determining where we put our money and where tax dollars go. You have to follow up on all that flash with the substance. Use the flash; it’s a great tool, but get the substance and speak directly to people so their lives can be implicated. They have to see themselves as the cause and the solution.

You have a very astute observation there. What has happened too often is that causes have just stopped with the star, stopped with the attention, and not moved to the next step, the action part, making it relevant and engaging for people long-term. Even when the going gets tough, it takes a lot because systemic changes take a lot of work. It requires a different way of thinking, investing, and calling leaders to account for what they’re doing or not doing. Much of the pivot comes from a small group of people making the necessary changes based on evidence. It’s a complicated problem and answer, but use the flash, follow it up with substance, and build a community for change.

Jacobsen: There is representative equality, where you can have equal representation appointed within politics, organizations, and so on. That’s an important first step. I recall the Beijing Declaration, at least the 1995 version, which mentioned that it is a temporary transitional solution while institutional and pipeline changes are made so that you achieve the desired areas of equality. Then, you only need those applications with structural change. Where do you think we’re seeing good areas of pipeline and structural change in leadership for women in Canada that will have long-term effects for a better balance of gender representation?

Gunraj: Oh, that’s an interesting question. Are you talking about which sectors are doing it right or making progress?

Jacobsen: Correct. Whether it’s politics or business, there are areas where important decisions impact many Canadians, either in politics, business, or even non-profit sectors, in terms of leadership and representation.

Gunraj: Great question. There has been a lot of positive movement at the federal level in Canada. Still, it’s low—30% of Canada’s House of Commons is women representatives, which is a change from when it was lower. It has to reach at least 50% for me to get excited because over 50% of the population experiences some level of gender inequality, including women, two-spirit, trans, and non-binary individuals. There have been positive and exciting movements in this direction, and I’d like to see more. I hope it doesn’t revert.

In corporate Canada, more women are in leadership positions and on boards. However, I say that with hesitation because it’s still not where it needs to be. When you look at women, we’re halfway to parity, about 25%. Again, I won’t be too excited until we reach parity. For women with disabilities, racialized women, and Indigenous women, the number is so low—less than 2%. It depends on who you are. Often, we’re talking about white, heterosexual, cisgender women, and we don’t have the same level of representation for women and gender-diverse people with all their diversities.

It’s a glacial pace, but we need to see more and faster change. We need to ensure that the numbers keep rising regardless of which government is in place. We must support people in leadership consistently and address the barriers that prevent people from getting and staying in these positions. More women enter leadership positions, but there needs to be a better pipeline. They leak out for many reasons that need to be changed, and we need to pay more attention to making those changes.

Jacobsen: Just looking at time, last question. The changing technological landscape still needs to change the fundamental issues people face. It changes the forms and translations of it from regular life. So, thinking of the internet, digital technologies, and social media, any hate or harassment gets translated online. How does that look at this time? I still need to look into that topic in depth. So, it’s more of an open question.

Gunraj: It’s pretty visible in Canada. This digital hate, harassment, and violence that women and 2SLGBTQIA+ people experience is at a high level. Some of the data we’ve seen shows that one in five women experience online harassment in Canada, and 30% of Indigenous women experience unwanted behaviour online. Data indicates that 44% of women, especially young women and young gender-diverse people aged 16 to 30, are personally targeted online by hate speech. Those are just horrific numbers. You’re right; we’re living digital lives now. There’s no difference between “real life” and digital life—it’s all interconnected.

So, this is an experience of harm that more than 50% of our population faces daily. It’s pushing them out of digital spaces and opportunities they desperately need for work, school, participation in civic engagement, and democracy. We must address it by implementing guardrails on platforms like social media, gaming sites, and dating apps. We must build a safer digital environment and foster a sense of digital civic engagement and community participation.

What does that mean? What does that look like? What is good digital citizenship? What is non-sexist digital citizenship? We have a lot to do culturally. We need to approach it like public health interventions—changing behaviour, like teaching people to use seatbelts. We did these things, and they became societal norms. We need to do the same for digital spaces to make them safer. Otherwise, women and gender-diverse people will be silenced and unable to participate in community life. One of the fundamental issues that feminism has always questioned is the idea that public spaces are for men and private spaces are for women. We need to continue fighting this notion.

Jacobsen: Andrea, thank you very much for your time today.

Gunraj: Thank you so much.

License & Copyright

In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. ©Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use or duplication of material without express permission from Scott Douglas Jacobsen strictly prohibited, excerpts and links must use full credit to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with direction to the original content.