Re: “Trudeau shows little concern for public opinion,” letter, Oct. 9.
I have read with interest many letters complaining about the changes to the wording of our national anthem. I do not agree with those complaints.
I believe that all members of our society deserve to be treated with respect, regardless of gender, race, etc. That includes having a national anthem that recognizes all of us, rather than excluding half the population of our country.
Among the reasons for complaint are those relating to tradition and grammatical correctness. Neither provides a sound basis for excluding women from the anthem.
Tradition: This tradition has its roots in a male-dominated society, where women were not viewed as capable to contribute outside the home, and were considered the “property” of males. This is not a tradition of which we should be proud.
Grammar: Really? “In all of us command” somehow brutalizes the English language, whereas “in all thy sons command” is somehow inelegant? No one speaks that way any more. What is inelegant is clinging to the notion that we can have an inclusive society while retaining a national symbol that excludes half our population.
Respect for women is important. It is more important than notions that reflect male-dominated traditions. It is more important than grammar.
Our national anthem is a reflection of who we are. It should reflect the fact that about half of us are female. Anything less is a step back into outmoded ideas that have no place in modern society.
David Lyon
Saanich
