Claiming a rise in marriage fraud, the Harper government launched its antimarriage fraud campaign in 2011, aiming to both prevent and stigmatize the formation of relationships in order to immigrate to Canada. In this article, I examine the implications this crackdown has for family class immigration and question the government’s empirical justification for initiating this campaign. I contend that while the language of the campaign appears to be neutral, the campaign’s framing allows for the continued targeting of specific relationships. This allows the government to reinforce a narrative of family class immigration based on a normalized conception of the conjugal family unit.

In light of theCanadian Journal of Political Science(CJPS) self-reflexive “50thAnniversary” issue on the state of Canadian political science (CPS), this article maps the discipline's engagement with intersectional anti-oppression scholarship. Analyzing abstracts inCJPSand theCanadian Political Science Review,we argue while these journals—and mainstream CPS more generally—tackle questions of diversity, there remains a gap between conversations recognized in these particular forums and the incorporation of what we term an intersectional anti-oppression lens. In its deconstruction of systems of power and privilege, we explore analytic and pedagogical possibilities this lens presents for mainstream CPS.

The Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act (2015) targets immigrants suspected of engaging in polygamy. While polygamy is already illegal in Canada and non-immigrant polygamous arrangements exist within Canadian borders, the framing of polygamy as a foreign practice portrays this familial arrangement as a threat to Canadian national values. Effects on women and children have traditionally provided a convincing argument for state regulation of polygamy; however, the combination of state under—and over—enforcement suggests that relying solely on a harm framework inadequately captures the complexities of state treatment. In this paper, I argue that the state's primary motivations for defending monogamy are not necessarily rooted in the avoidance of harm but in the preservation of a particular type of citizenship.

No abstract

OBJECTIVES: Household food insecurity (HFI) affects approximately 13% of Canadian households and is especially prevalent among low-income households. Actions to address HFI have been occurring primarily at the local level, despite calls for greater income supports from senior governments to reduce poverty. News media may be reinforcing this trend, by emphasizing food-based solutions to HFI and the municipal level as the site where action needs to take place. The objective of this study was to examine the level and framing of print news media coverage of HFI action in Canada.METHODS: Using a quantitative newspaper content analysis approach, we analyzed 547 articles gathered from 2 national and 16 local/regional Englishlanguage newspapers published between January 2007 and December 2012.RESULTS: News coverage increased over time, and over half was produced from Ontario (33%) and British Columbia (22%) combined. Of the 374 articles that profiled a specific action, community gardens/urban agriculture was most commonly profiled (17%), followed by food banks/meal programs (13%); 70% of articles implicated governments to take action on HFI, and of these, 43% implicated municipal governments. Article tone was notably more negative when senior governments were profiled and more neutral and positive when municipal governments were profiled.CONCLUSION: News media reporting of this issue in Canada may be placing pressure on municipalities to engage in food-based actions to address HFI. A more systematic approach to HFI action in Canada will require more balanced media reporting that acknowledges the limitations of food-based solutions to the income-based problem of HFI.KEY WORDS: Food insecurity; poverty; municipalities; newspapers; media analysis; Canada La traduction du résumé se trouve à la fin de l'article.Can J Public Health 2016;107(1):e68-e74 doi: 10.17269/CJPH.107.5231 H ousehold food insecurity (HFI) is defined as "the inability to acquire or consume an adequate diet quality or sufficient quantity of food in socially acceptable ways, or the uncertainty that one will be able to do so".1 HFI is a persistent problem in Canada, affecting 8%-10% of households since the late 1990s, 1 with a rise to 13% of Canadian households in 2012. 2 In the most recent Canadian analysis of food insecurity nationally, roughly one third (34%) of households identified as food insecure suffer from marginal food insecurity (i.e., worry about being able to afford to buy food), 46% suffer from moderate food insecurity (i.e., make compromises in quality or quantity of food intake) and 20% experience severe food insecurity (i.e., reduced intake of food and skipped meals). 2Adults in food-insecure households have a higher risk of inadequate nutrient intake, 3 as well as poorer self-rated health and an increased chance of developing diabetes, heart disease, hypertension and depression.