Monday, May 28, 2012

The Catholic Church said Something

I was looking for something to write about and I found a three week old story from Australia. It may have already made the rounds in Canada, or maybe it's just getting here now. It's a a filler piece, brief and pointed and attention grabbing. It is portal story, designed to lead the reader deeper into the paper and the ads that support it. The Catholic Church offers up the necessary headline fodder.
"Catholic Church says would-be brides are being too fussy"
The Catholic Church or in this case a spokesman for the church has this to say.


Father Tony Kerin, episcopal vicar for justice and social service in the Archdiocese of Melbourne, said women wanted the best of both worlds.

"Are women getting too choosy? I'd say yes," said Father Kerin, speaking on behalf of the archdiocese.
"I think many are setting aside their aspirations for later, but by the time they get around to it, they've missed their chance.
"In trying to have it all, they end up missing out."
The reverend Father Kerin was asked if he thought Australian women were being too choosy and h said yes then added a tiny bit of nuance to that initial statement. 
Apparently there is a shortage of  quality men for Australian women to marry. We are presented with this bare fact.
"Statistics show there are just 86,000 eligible blokes for 1.3 million females aged between 25 and 34."
A shocking statistic, that becomes less shocking when it is fleshed out lower down the page. 
"Demographer Bernard Salt calculated there are 1.3 million women aged 25-34.
But of the 1.343 million men in the same age bracket, only 86,000 single, heterosexual, well-off, young men were available after excluding those who were already married (485,000), in a de facto relationship (185,000), gay (7000), a single parent (12,000) or earning less than $60,000 a year."
There are 43000 more men than women in that bracket, yet a shortage is declared. What the statistic says is that there are 86000 single men available that meet fit the  economic description of "well-off" The definition of "well-off" is never properly defined. For the purposes of this article it doesn't have to be. 
What we get is a "hmmm you don't say" fact, transformed into an eye grabbing headline furnished by a spokesman for the Catholic Church. It doesn't rise to the level of an attack on women, so much as a restatement of the Catholic Church's position on the place, duties and obligations owed by women to society at large. Offensive certainly, but nothing new.
What get is a story about the number of economically successful single men within a certain age bracket, heroically trying to morph into something altogether different. The suggestion that women must settle for what is available rather than what they want is not being said only inferred. Rather that if women want "it all"; "IT" being jobs , husbands, kids and economic security. They are out of luck. Marry now or forever miss out, inspiring.  I'll ignore completely the suggestion that all women want to marry money, because it is a shameless stereotype. I think most people would like that, not just women. Though a think few would trade love for security. 
Women do face unique challenges, both biological and societal, non are insurmountable. We have a society and economy that has yet to take fully into account the change in relationship between men and women. Women are free and equal and our institutions need to reflect that. Our society is a made thing, not a natural entity. As such it may be altered to reflect new realities. So a women can have a job, husband and kids, though of course don't expect perfection.
The Catholic Church is always handy for stoking outrage. Quite often because their positions are by today's standards quite outdated. They also seem to make themselves available to any reporter hoping for a headline quote. "No such thing as bad press" I think the adage says. I disagree. 
What we have learned is that the Catholic Church is handy for getting eyes on ads. You need to read the whole story. That stereotypes are integral to bad journalism, and just because something appears in a paper doesn't mean it's journalism. 
Note as always the comment section that follows the story


No comments:

Post a Comment