Category: The Conversation – Canada

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Federico Riva, Assistant Professor, Department of Biology, Carleton University

About 70 per cent of the species on Earth are insects. They are fundamental components of most ecosystems: they comprise half of the biomass on the planet, pollinate flowers, decompose dead organic matter and play multiple roles in food webs. They are quite literally everywhere, including in and around our homes, but they have also been declining at alarming rates in many places.

The societal implications of this potential “insectageddon” could be catastrophic, including losses in human food production. However, confirming suspicions of global declines is difficult because we lack reliable data on insect populations in many parts of the world.

We simply don’t have the infrastructure around the planet that would allow us to track insect populations altogether. That means we don’t know how insect populations are responding to different global changes, and we might be failing to design effective conservation policies and track whether current actions are working.

Efforts to rapidly generate global indicators of insect population trends are therefore crucial. In our recently published paper, colleagues and I explain how a global butterfly index could help track butterfly populations worldwide — and how we can reach this important objective.

Butterflies: The poster child of insects

One reason why insects have been neglected in conservation is that they are often ignored — if not feared — by many people. Many of us have been brought up to be cautious around insects, whether they’re bees, spiders or other critters.

There is, on the other hand, broad interest in vertebrate species. Bird-watching has been part of human societies for hundreds of years. The fact that larger animals capture public interest has arguably stimulated global efforts to calculate indicators of trends in their populations, like the Living Planet Index by the World Wildlife Fund and other organizations.

---

Read more:
What’s the difference between moths and butterflies? Look at their antennae

---

While insects have generally not benefited from the attention that other animals have received, butterflies are one exception to this rule. These insects, with their captivating patterns and colours, have long fascinated people and have been represented in many traditions across cultures.

Our love for butterflies is reflected in a substantial history of monitoring. In the 1970s, the British entomologist Ernest Pollard initiated the practice of recording butterfly populations on his butterfly walks in England. Fifty years later, hundreds of “Pollard walks” are done across Europe and in many other regions of the world.

Recording the presence of a species in an area is important work. However, equally fundamental are efforts that capture changes in insect populations over time. Nonetheless, a global synthesis of butterfly population monitoring programs has, to date, been missing.

A global butterfly index

Our recent paper fills that gap. We co-ordinated an international consortium with the goal of better understanding opportunities and challenges for calculating a global butterfly index that captures trends across butterfly populations worldwide.

Bringing together scientists from all continents except Antarctica, we were able to collate an incredible dataset including more than 45,000 population trends for over 1,000 butterfly species. We used this data set to:

1. Identify where current efforts stand in terms of taxonomic and spatial coverage of the global butterfly fauna.

2. Calculate the first version of a global butterfly index.

3. Evaluate gaps and limitations to address before moving forward.

Despite an unprecedented effort, we found that only populations of around five per cent of species worldwide have been monitored.

It’s important to note that the data set is mostly concentrated in Europe and North America and biased in favour of generalist species (those able to survive in diverse environments) as well as species easier to detect.

Nonetheless, we found that species are on average declining, and sensitive butterflies expected to suffer from global change tended to decline more steeply than the rest of our sample. Populations outside of Europe and North America were too sparse to support robust inferences.

---

Read more:
Butterflies declined by 22% in just 2 decades across the US – there are ways you can help save them

---

Global Butterfly Week

Developing this study left us with a few lessons learned. There is substantial work to do if we aim to calculate a truly global indicator of butterfly population trends.

For instance, many parts of the Global South will need support to swiftly develop national monitoring programs, and research in the tropics is needed to better understand what monitoring methods would work best in hyper-diverse regions.

The good news is that butterflies are already one of the most visible and monitored insect groups, which will ameliorate the challenges associated with developing indicators of insect populations. Existing monitoring schemes can provide a template upon which new initiatives can be developed.

Ultimately, developing a global butterfly index will be key to providing long-overdue tracking of insect population changes. Crucially, it could also act as a flagship for broader insect conservation.

Governments are expected to set measurable biodiversity targets in line with their commitments under international agreements such as the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. However, insects remain largely overlooked in these targets, and it’s impossible to set meaningful targets without robust indicators.

Developing a robust butterfly index is therefore fundamental to help guide conservation and to better understand the scale of the biodiversity crisis, as well as to communicate it to the public.

Butterflies carry a strong emotional value. That can help build support for conservation in a way that less appreciated insects cannot achieve.

Our consortium is helping to create such momentum: this year, members of our team are kick-starting a Global Butterfly Week and conversations around formalizing an international organization are under way.

We are hoping that colleagues interested will join us for the next iterations of these projects. Please reach out.

Federico Riva has received funding from the Horizon program.

– ref. A global butterfly index could advance insect conservation worldwide – https://theconversation.com/a-global-butterfly-index-could-advance-insect-conservation-worldwide-279408

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Sabrina Rondeau, Postdoctoral Researcher in Pollinator Ecology, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

In most bumblebee species, the queens spend their winters buried underground in a tiny cavity the size of a grape. For six to nine months, they enter a deep sleep-like state called diapause, waiting for spring.

As climate change brings more intense rainfall in many regions, these overwintering queens face increasing risks of unstable underground conditions, including flooding.

It’s a good thing, then, that these insects can survive days underwater without drowning. Remarkably, our new research reveals they achieve this through a process of continually breathing while submerged for up to eight days.

It began with a lab accident

We initially discovered that overwintering bumblebee queens can survive submersion due to an accident.

During an experiment at the University of Guelph, some of the tubes in which queens were overwintering in the lab refrigerator inadvertently filled with water.

Initially, we assumed the queens had died. But after emptying out the water, they began to move and soon recovered. This suggested that bumblebee queens might be able to survive submersion.

So, we designed a follow-up experiment involving 143 common eastern bumblebee queens (Bombus impatiens).

This confirmed it was no fluke: the queens withstood complete submersion for up to a week.

This raised an intriguing question: how can this terrestrial insect pollinator survive underwater? Answering it required a different approach — we needed to study their physiology.

The heart of the colony

The queen is the heart of a bumblebee colony and its only chance of producing the next generation. While we often hear the buzz of workers visiting flowers during the summer, queens are rarely seen. They spend much of the season inside the nest, laying eggs that will become workers and, later in the summer, males and new queens.

When winter comes, most members of the colony die and only the newly produced queens survive. After mating, these new queens disperse and burrow underground, each settling into a tiny cavity where they enter diapause.

When spring finally returns, the queens that survived their long underground sleep emerge from their burrows and begin the important task of founding a new colony.

---

Read more:
Worker honey bees can sense infections in their queen, leading to revolt

---

Breathing underwater

To understand how these queens can survive submersion, we studied their breathing and metabolism in our lab at the University of Ottawa.

During diapause, queens are already in extreme energy-saving mode. The energy they need to stay alive (known as their metabolic rate) drops by more than 99 per cent. When submerged, energy needs drop even further. With such tiny oxygen demands, underwater breathing becomes possible.

But how did we determine whether queens are actually breathing underwater? One way is by measuring the gases exchanged with the surrounding water. We did this and the results were striking: queens continuously consumed oxygen and released carbon dioxide underwater throughout an eight-day period of submersion.

Many aquatic insects use a simple trick to breathe underwater. A thin layer of air clings to their body, allowing them to use their normal air-breathing system — the tracheal system. Oxygen from the surrounding water slowly diffuses into this air layer. Bumblebee queens likely rely on the same mechanism.

Still, underwater respiration alone does not fully meet the queen’s energy needs. To bridge the gap, queens also produce some energy through anaerobic metabolism — a process that does not require oxygen. This pathway produces lactic acid, which we detected in queens during submersion.

These physiological tricks allow queens to survive underwater, but come at a cost. After resurfacing, queens spend several days recovering, using far more energy than they would have if they had never taken the plunge.

---

Read more:
Below freezing but still moving: How salamanders stay active in winter

---

An unexpected resilience

Bumblebee queens spend the winters alone, buried underground and relying on stored energy to survive until spring. Their ability to tolerate days of submersion — and even breathe underwater — reveals an unexpected resilience to one of the hazards of life below ground.

This matters because bumblebee colonies depend entirely on the survival of overwintering queens. If a queen dies during winter, the colony she would have founded the following spring will never exist.

This ability to survive submersion could play an important — and previously overlooked — role in the resilience of threatened bumblebee populations.

Even in terms of familiar and comparatively well-studied insects like bumblebees, there is still so much to learn about the surprising ways they cope with environmental challenges.

Sabrina Rondeau received funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the Fonds de recherche du Québec—Nature et technologies and the Weston Family Foundation.

Charles-Antoine Darveau receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council Discovery Grants program.

Nigel Raine receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, the Horizon Europe ProPollSoil project, the Canada Foundation for Innovation Innovation Fund, the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Agribusiness, the Canadian Wildlife Federation and the Weston Family Foundation.

– ref. Queen bumblebees can breathe underwater — for days. We discovered how – https://theconversation.com/queen-bumblebees-can-breathe-underwater-for-days-we-discovered-how-278175

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By John Duncan, Director of the Ethics, Society and Law Program; Academic Director of the Ideas for the World Program, University of Toronto

The Iranian regime is certainly brutal. But it’s also powerful as it continues to project its might after a month of illegal air strikes by the United States and Israel.

---

Read more:
Iran’s attacks drone on, with the U.S. at risk of losing the war

---

Iran is in the top 10 per cent of countries by size and population, has the third largest proven petroleum reserves and controls strategically crucial geography.

Furthermore, both the regime and many ordinary Iranians are prepared to defend the country. Since 1953, when the U.S. helped orchestrate a coup to overthrow Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh, Iranians have understood they’re in America’s crosshairs.

This was especially true after the 1979 Islamic Revolution that overthrew the shah and during the U.S.-backed Iraq war against Iran that killed a million Iranians in the 1980s. As a result, Iran has spent decades beefing up and decentralizing its military capability.

In contrast, Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warned U.S. President Donald Trump in February that the U.S. was short on both munitions and allied support for a war against Iran. Israel, America’s partner in war, is also short, especially in interceptor munitions. Trump and Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu dismissed the concerns, which suggests they planned a short war.

What are Trump’s options?

Critics have accused Trump of dragging the U.S. — or allowing it to be dragged — into a “forever war.” Those critics include those in his MAGA base, a problem for Trump as he anticipates November’s mid-term elections.

One unconventional option that might expedite victory, discussed during Trump’s first term, is to use nuclear weapons against Iran. Trump has said nukes won’t be used, but he’s well-known for erratic reversals.

A nuclear strike might expedite surrender, but it took two strikes on Japan in 1945 before the Japanese surrendered, and, failing an Iranian surrender, several strikes might be required to destroy the military capability distributed across Iran’s 31 provinces. Because many Americans would be appalled by a nuclear attack, putting the mid-terms at risk, the nuclear option is unlikely.

Much of the concern about Trump’s election machinations heading into the mid-terms is focused on the manipulation of procedures and officials. The legacy of the Jan. 6, 2021 attacks on the U.S. Capitol is one extreme possibility, as is manipulating the Iran war to achieve electoral gains.

Trump will probably lean into his rhetorical strengths and try to convince Americans the U.S. has won when it hasn’t. Claiming victory in the face of its absence is not new to him. Even in his second term, Trump continues to push the false claim that he won the 2020 election.

Consider the bizarre drama that started on March 21 when Trump and Iran exchanged dire threats. Then, out of the blue, Trump declared the existence of peace talks, which Iran denied. Perhaps they are imaginary talks on the way to an imaginary victory for Trump.

---

Read more:
Why Donald Trump is such a relentless bullshitter

---

Mission accomplished?

It seems clear Trump is planning to declare victory well ahead of the mid-terms — and in part because of them. Such a strategy would involve baiting opponents into “forever war” criticisms, only to ridicule them in stump speeches, generating the image of a president who finishes his wars.

A declared victory in Iran and a timely exit, in addition to the liberation of Venezuela and a possible Cuban coup, might all coalesce into potent election messaging for the Republicans.

Soon enough, Trump may announce something akin to former president George W. Bush’s premature proclamations about the Iraq War in 2003 by saying something like this:

“Major combat operations in Iran have ended. The United States and Israel have prevailed. We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide.”

If successful, he will secure two more years “like nobody’s ever seen before” of Republican congressional dominance.

Major obstacles

The battle for November will feature a few competing narratives in the U.S. But there are four major hurdles for Trump in particular.

• Information: For voters to be convinced that Trump is a decisive crusader against evil rather than another “forever war” president, right-wing media must sell yet another big lie, mainstream media must continue to pull its punches and the Democrats must continue to flounder.
• Affordability crisis: Trump also has to ensure he doesn’t “win” in Iran while losing on affordability at home. Most American oil comes from the U.S., Canada and Mexico, so the U.S. is protected from global supply disruptions, but global markets push up prices everywhere. Trump’s mere declaration of talks recently brought oil prices down, but only temporarily.
• Allies needed: Because voters will want to see a significant military withdrawal, Trump needs other countries to manage the chaos he’s created. But after disrespecting allies for months, he is struggling to establish a “coalition of the willing” on which to offload the conflict.
• Iranians must co-operate: But because the U.S. and Israel have twice attacked Iran during diplomatic negotiations, Iran needs other stakeholders in the process. Without them, Iran will not be incentivized to stop fighting and nothing will belie an imaginary Trump victory more than ongoing Iranian attacks.

Democracy waning

Whichever scenario prevails, Americans will likely lose. Their complete war costs could include repercussions from the unprecedented illegal bombing of Iran, as well as from unnecessarily turning regional allies into targets.

All of this is tied to what many Americans regard as increasing Israeli aggression, including the killing of 70,000 people in Gaza, which the U.S. has facilitated with funding, political cover and its widely mocked Board of Peace.

America’s democracy, economy and credibility are waning as Trump shamelessly pursues self-aggrandizement and self-enrichment.

“That makes me smart,” he might say, but only a failed leader serves his own interests at the expense of his country.

John Duncan is affiliated with Science for Peace, a charitable organization dedicated to popular education and research on the intersections of demilitarization, decarbonization and social justice.

– ref. Why Donald Trump will try to declare victory in Iran well before November – https://theconversation.com/why-donald-trump-will-try-to-declare-victory-in-iran-well-before-november-279059

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Michael J. Armstrong, Associate Professor, Operations Research, Brock University

The United States and Israel have repeatedly boasted about airstrikes in their current war with Iran. In Week 1, they claimed the destruction of 75 per cent of Iran’s missile launchers. By Week 2, they had reduced Iranian missile fire by 90 per cent and said the war was “already won in many ways.”

And yet, Iran keeps damaging refineries and blocking tankers from crossing the Strait of Hormuz.

The country has certainly suffered many tactical losses. But its missiles and drones have been strategically successful.

Iran so far has launched at least 5,400 such projectiles. Surprisingly, less than a tenth of them have targeted Israel, its traditional rival.

Missiles over Israel

Israel faced about 450 Iranian missile attacks during the war’s first four weeks. The rate of fire fell rapidly after the first weekend but has never halted.

Some missiles carry several hundred kilograms of explosives, enough to destroy an entire building. The rest instead dispense dozens of cluster bombs over wide areas. Those are less powerful but still lethal.

Israel’s long-range Arrow interceptors engage the missiles first. Its mid-range David’s Sling and short-range Iron Dome interceptors provide backup. (The country’s Iron Beam lasers are not being used.) Together, they’ve reportedly intercepted 92 per cent of incoming missiles.

But interceptors sometimes miss. And their supply is limited. Consequently, at least nine large warheads and 150 cluster bombs have hit populated areas.

These numbers imply that almost all Iranian missiles are accurate enough to need interception. By contrast, during Israel’s earlier conflicts with Gaza in 2008, 2011 and 2014, less than a third of incoming rockets were so accurate.

Meanwhile, more than 90 per cent of Iran’s missiles and drones have targeted Arab countries in the Persian Gulf.

Drones across the Persian Gulf

Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) collectively reported around 4,900 Iranian attacks during the first four weeks. Only one fifth were missiles: the rest were drones.

These countries have stated they are neutral in the war. However, they do have defence agreements with the U.S., and some host American military facilities.

These countries defend themselves using weapons like the U.S.-made Patriot and Israeli-made SPYDER interceptors. Drone experts from Ukraine now advise the defenders too.

For example, the UAE reported attacks by 1,835 drones, 378 ballistic missiles and 15 cruise missiles. As of March 10, it claimed to have intercepted 94 per cent of the drones and 99 per cent of the missiles.

The deadliness of these attacks has varied.

Continuing lethality

In Israel, Iranian missiles have killed 20 people, implying roughly 4.1 deaths per hundred missiles arriving.

That’s less than the 5.1 the country saw during its 2025 war with Iran. But it’s four to 40 times higher than the rates it suffered from rockets in earlier Gaza and Lebanon conflicts.

In the Persian Gulf, Iranian projectiles have killed at least 15 civilians, 13 U.S. soldiers and seven merchant sailors.

There were about 0.6 deaths per hundred Iranian attacks in Kuwait, Bahrain and the UAE combined. That’s much lower than Israel’s rate, presumably because those countries were attacked by drones and short-range missiles carrying smaller warheads.

Interestingly, although the quantity of Iranian attacks fell after the first week, their lethality did not. Death rates per projectile in Arab countries showed little change week-to-week. In Israel, the rates were highest in Week 3.

In fact, Iranian missiles keep hitting precise targets, like U.S. military aircraft parked beside runways.

This implies Iran’s government has recovered from its initial surprise. It’s likely benefiting from Russian intelligence and Chinese technology too.

Tactical U.S. vs strategic Iran

So, U.S. and Israeli warplanes have bombed thousands of targets, killed thousands of civilians, and slowed Iran’s missile fire. But they haven’t stopped it.

That’s not surprising. Airstrikes alone didn’t stop rocket fire during Israel’s previous conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon. Ground invasions were needed for that.

U.S. President Donald Trump can post jingoistic mashup videos and “bullshit” about having “militarily won” the war in Iran. But he hasn’t achieved strategic outcomes like “unconditional surrender” from Iran or regime change there.

By contrast, Iran’s missiles have been strategically effective. They’ve damaged Persian Gulf refineries and halted tanker traffic. They’ve forced Trump to relax sanctions on Russian and Iranian oil, and on Belarusian fertilizer. And they’ve shown Arab monarchies that U.S. defence agreements have limited value.

Trump recently, and inadvertently, admitted this weakness. While discussing Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz, he said “it would be great if we could do something, but they have to open it.”

This strategic failure despite tactical success is reminiscent of the Vietnam War. U.S. units had overwhelming firepower as they killed enemy soldiers. But body counts by themselves indicated little about strategic progress.

Some historians rank that war as the second worst U.S. foreign policy decision ever. The 2003 invasion of Iraq was ranked the worst.

Trump talks about being the greatest U.S. president in history. So, perhaps his Iran war will make him the new leader on that policy failure list.

Michael J. Armstrong does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Iran’s attacks drone on, with the U.S. at risk of losing the war – https://theconversation.com/irans-attacks-drone-on-with-the-u-s-at-risk-of-losing-the-war-279295

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Kawser Ahmed, Adjunct Professor, Natural Resource Institute (NRI), University of Manitoba

The bombing in Iran and the broader Middle East will eventually cease. United States President Donald Trump keeps hinting about a possible end to hostilities and the U.S. has sent a 15-point peace proposal to Pakistan.

But that doesn’t mean the end of consequences. International relations experts are already discussing several scenarios for what comes next. Each could reshape geopolitics for decades.

Every war ends because no society can wage war indefinitely. But the nature of any forthcoming peace will determine whether the seeds of the next conflict are sown. In this charged moment, Canada’s often-touted identity as a “middle power” deserves honest scrutiny.

Five plausible outcomes could now unfold, each carrying ramifications not only for the geopolitics of the Middle East but for the trajectory of future conflicts in the region:

1. America’s ‘mission accomplished’ moment

The U.S. will likely end the war by declaring victory, much as it did in Iraq and Afghanistan. This outcome would add to a growing legacy of incomplete military interventions stretching back to the Vietnam War in 1963.

Domestically, there will be two major political costs: diminished support for Trump among his MAGA movement and eroding public enthusiasm for unconditional backing of Israel.

For American voters, the gap between declared victory and lived reality will be difficult to ignore when at least 13 U.S. service members have already lost their lives and 200 have been injured so far.

2. An emboldened Israel

Israel will emerge from this conflict in a stronger regional position.

With Iranian proxies decimated at both leadership and operational levels,
credible military threats to Israel will be diminished for at least a decade.

Yet the mass atrocities witnessed in Gaza and now in Iran will fuel new waves of resistance under new leadership. Israel will face the challenge of managing three fronts simultaneously: the Palestinians in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon and a reformed — or further radicalized — Iran.

That’s because dominance secured through force rarely translates into lasting security.

3. The Strait of Hormuz becomes Iran’s leverage

One unexpected lesson Iran may draw from this conflict is the strategic value of the Strait of Hormuz.

Approximately one-fifth of the world’s oil passes through this waterway daily. Iran could seek to turn the strait into a revenue-generating asset, modelling it loosely on the economic frameworks of the Panama or Suez canals.

---

Read more:
What is the Strait of Hormuz, and why does its closure matter so much to the global economy?

---

Although the strait remains an international waterway under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS-Part III), Iran may press to bypass or reinterpret existing conventions in order to recoup war expenses and rebuild its shattered economy.

This would set a dangerous precedent for international maritime law and have
adverse effect on global economy.

4. The Gulf states’ security reckoning

The Iran war has exposed just how vulnerable the Gulf states are. Iranian drones and missiles struck not only military installations, but also American diplomatic facilities hosted by Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries — the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar and Kuwait — all of which were treated by Iran as legitimate wartime targets.

The experience will force a fundamental reassessment. The relationships cultivated through the Abraham Accords, which aimed to strengthen peace in the Middle East and around the world based on mutual understanding and co-existence, have been severely strained and new patterns of inter-state alignment may emerge across the region.

The lesson for GCC countries is clear, if uncomfortable: in the Middle East, the U.S. consistently prioritizes Israel’s security over theirs. Saudi Arabia, in particular, may need to adjust its strategic posture accordingly.

5. The failure of the ‘Venezuela model’

To the frustration of American strategists, the anticipated
popular uprising in Iran did not materialize alongside the military invasion.

An estimated 20 per cent of Iranians supported the regime in the past and continue to do so in great numbers now. Despite the killing of key leaders, Iranians have steadily filled their ranks.

In Venezuela, the U.S. forcefully removed the regime’s leader with minimal resistance as the new government acquiesced to the terms and conditions laid out by the Americans. This model has not been replicated in Iran so far.

History offers a clear parallel: aerial bombing tends to strengthen civilian resolve rather than break it — consider the Nazi bombing of Britain during the Second World War. The post-conflict Iranian government will most likely be led by an even more conservative faction, one that will draw legitimacy from having withstood a joint U.S.–Israeli invasion.

---

Read more:
War in Iran: Why destroying cultural heritage is such a foolish strategic move in any conflict

---

Canada’s middle power moment

In his widely noted speech at Davos last year, Prime Minister Mark Carney championed the role of “middle powers” in stabilizing the international order.

---

Read more:
Mark Carney’s Davos speech marks a major departure from Canada’s usual approach to the U.S.

---

Yet Canada’s stance during the Iran war has undermined that aspiration. Ottawa flip-flopped at least three times: first offering unconditional moral support, then retracting it, condemning the war and asking belligerents “to respect the rules of international engagement,” and most recently backing the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

These inconsistencies have damaged Canada’s credibility at a moment when middle-power leadership is most needed.

Can Canada truly exert influence as a middle power when it’s publicly at odds with the U.S.? Yes, but only if Canada act rather than simply speaks.
Canada should take four concrete steps.

4 pathways for Canada

First, it could launch a formal middle power coalition for post-conflict accountability. Bringing together countries like Australia, South Korea, Norway and Japan would create a standing diplomatic forum to co-ordinate on reconstruction, civilian protection and legal accountability. Operating alongside — not against — the UN Security Council, such a coalition would give middle powers a collective voice when vetoes stall action.

Second, Canada should leverage its large Iranian diaspora by supporting what’s known as Track II diplomacy — informal dialogue among civil society leaders, academics and former officials. These channels can build trust and lay groundwork for negotiations when official diplomacy struggles.

Third, Canada could champion a Hormuz International Maritime Authority, modelled on the Suez and Panama canals. A multilateral framework governing transit through the strait would provide a rules-based counterweight if Iran seeks to restrict or monetize access — and Canada’s distance from the region strengthens its credibility as an honest broker.

Finally, Canada must clearly denounce illegal wars, including those involving allies. Defending the rules-based order requires consistency and political courage. Middle-power status is not inherited; it’s earned through decisions and actions.

The wars that define eras are remembered not just for how they are fought, but for what follows. For Canada, this is a moment to lead with clarity, consistency and purpose — not retreat into ambiguity.

Kawser Ahmed does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. After the Iran war: 5 possible outcomes and 4 ways Canada can flex its middle-power muscle – https://theconversation.com/after-the-iran-war-5-possible-outcomes-and-4-ways-canada-can-flex-its-middle-power-muscle-279060

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Tiara Sukhan, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Information & Media Studies, Western University

Age-gap relationships — romantic partnerships in which there is a significant age difference — are of enduring interest. They’re also often framed as a question of morality.

Society has strong feelings about things like the potential for power imbalances or evolutionary instincts, for example.

When I was 27, I dated a man who was nearly my father’s age. This didn’t reflect an established age preference pattern for either one of us, and I pursued him. We were together for eight months, but it didn’t end well. Was our 20-year age gap the problem? Not entirely, but it certainly didn’t help.

Rather than simply being about age, what actually shapes the success or failure of these relationships revolves around the advantages that shape how we move through the world, including youth, time, health, accumulated power, wealth or life experience.

When I saw Netflix launched its latest reality dating show based on age-gap relationships earlier this month, I knew the controversial premise would spark debate as a scholar of television and media representation.

Age gaps make us uncomfortable

The Age of Attraction purports to test whether love is “truly ageless,” following couples with large age gaps to see if their relationships can withstand the stigma and pressures of the real world.

Reality shows are constructed to reinforce (and sometimes challenge) particular social norms. Looking at age-gap relationships in this context offers important insight.

When older people perpetually date younger ones, for example, they may be trying to avoid confronting the reality of aging. And when younger people are consistently attracted to older ones, they may be drawn to the financial security that often comes with it.

But age isn’t the only variable to consider when unpacking age-gap dynamics in heterosexual relationships — gender matters too.

While studies suggest that these “May-December romances” are likely to be perceived negatively regardless of the “December,” or older, partner’s gender, there are a number of factors influencing the greater social acceptability of older men with younger women. These include fertility and gendered standards of beauty.

In The Age of Attraction, set in the intimate setting of a forest retreat near Whistler, B.C., 40 singles go on a series of face-to-face speed dates with one caveat. Until they are ready to officially commit to moving forward with a potential partner, they must not ask or answer the question: “How old are you?”

There are an equal number of men and women, and they range in age from 22 to 60. While participants did have to indicate how much younger or older they would be willing to date, they are expected to focus on finding a meaningful connection without age getting in the way.

Once that’s done, they then commit to the next stage of the experiment: living together for two weeks in a condo in Vancouver. Promise rings are then exchanged and ages are, finally, revealed.

Withholding age from viewers until this point allows us to consider how much of our own response to age gaps is perceptual rather than material.

We may root for particular pairings only to have to re-evaluate once age is known. And this is because we form judgments based on what we think people should want or be capable of at different stages of life, rather than what is true about a unique and specific situation.

What psychology says about age gaps

Though these dynamics can’t be examined in isolation, they are increasingly being staged and scrutinized in popular culture.

Psychology research suggests that we tend to perceive older partners as benefiting more from age-gap relationships than younger ones. This fuels a widespread paternalistic belief that younger partners are more vulnerable to manipulation, despite the contrary argument that women have evolved to seek an older mate.

Vanessa, who is 49 years old, and 29-year-old Logan are a clear generational mismatch in the Netflix show. She has been engaged (but never married) four times, while he says he wants kids but has never introduced a partner to his parents. They appear to be “trying on” a partnership that is fraught with conflict, as each one jockeys to control the other.

The gentle dynamic that 23-year-old Pfeiffer and 43-year-old Derrick have is built on quiet conversation and mutual respect. However, they have their own set of problems. He is established in his career with two children, and so for her to be in a relationship with him, she would need to move from Seattle to Texas — something she struggles with in principle as she believes “giving up everything for a relationship” fundamentally undermines her values.

When we imagine introducing a much older or younger partner to family, friends or even colleagues, we can’t help but anticipate negative judgment, and this becomes a barrier to discerning what or who actually makes us happy.

In addition to going from dating to living together in less than two weeks, surprise visits from friends and family are engineered.

Theresa, 54 years of age, struggles with this the most, as she had counted on being able to introduce 27-year-old John to her three children in their 20s on her own timeline. When forced into a meeting, she refuses to tell them his age. Having to acknowledge openly that she is dating a man younger than her oldest son, who is 29, provokes the realization that her children will also be vulnerable to social judgment if she continues the relationship.

These portrayals reflect broader psychological assumptions about age and power, illustrating how imbalances play out in practice.

The truth behind relationship failure

In the final commitment ceremony, all three couples say “yes” to continuing their relationships after the show ends.

But will their relationships survive once the cameras stop rolling? With reality TV, it’s always difficult to say. But what we can accept is that age gaps themselves are not inherently problematic.

As the depictions of these Age of Attraction couples suggest, what can make or break an age-gap relationship is the discrepancy in social power between partners — the greater it is, the more potential there is for conflict and incompatibility. Sometimes, even love isn’t enough.

Tiara Sukhan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Reality TV is testing age-gap relationships — but the real issue runs deeper – https://theconversation.com/reality-tv-is-testing-age-gap-relationships-but-the-real-issue-runs-deeper-278956

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Amina Yousaf, Associate Head, Early Childhood Studies, University of Guelph-Humber

The first time I understood that names could hold two worlds was not by changing mine, but by hearing it differently. As a Pakistani child growing up in Canada, I learned early that my name could sound different depending on who was saying it. My name is simple and deeply familiar in my family. Yet in school and, later, in professional spaces, I became accustomed to the anglicized pronunciation.

Over time, I introduced myself that way at work, and still do, because it became my new normal. At home, my name still sounds like me.

Many young children, especially newcomer and racialized children, face similar circumstances from the earliest grades and learn to make this same quiet adjustment long before they can explain what they are giving up.

It is the everyday morning greetings, language expectations and reactions to food or clothing that teach children who they can be at school.

Importance of names

Research shows name mispronunciations, alterations or avoidances are not trivial: Name-based microaggressions in early schooling disrupt identity and belonging and produce identity shame, and this is often initiated or normalized by educators themselves.

Microaggressions are the everyday, subtle, often unintentional comments or actions that communicate bias toward marginalized groups. Notably, as Kevin Nadal, a psychologist who has studied microaggression, notes, the “micro” does not mean the impact is small — and these moments, especially as they accumulate, can land hard on the people receiving them.

When an educator stumbles over a child’s name year after year, or when a child’s food or language is treated as strange, these messages build up.

The earliest cuts

When names are mispronounced or disrespected, what could be a ritual of recognition is one of erasure.

Even when unintended, name mispronunciation and other forms of marginalization that communicate children must leave parts of themselves at the door — like discouraging home language during circle or misreading cultural communication styles — chip away at safety and participation for young children.

The takeaway for educators: intent does not cancel impact, especially for children still learning who they are.

Belonging: Something children can feel

Canadian research shows that belonging is a protective factor across K–12 (including the primary years), while loneliness is widespread and felt most strongly by marginalized students.

In the early years sector, newcomer families often face barriers that shape young children’s social-emotional well-being, including one-way communication, limited linguistic responsiveness and monocultural expectations. It also shows that using developmentally appropriate, participatory methods (drawing, photos) helps pre-school newcomers express what belonging feels like and what they need.

Early childhood education programs that partner with settlement agencies work best when they have conditions highlighted in pan-Canadian research on newcomer-focused ECE programs: diverse educator teams, stable funding, licensing support and strong connections to licensed child-care programs.

In Ontario, belonging and identity are built into provincial guidance:

• The resource “How Does Learning Happen? Ontario’s Pedagogy for the Early Years” identifies belonging as one of the four foundations for children from birth through the primary grades. It outlines program expectations to cultivate authentic relationships and connections.

• School Mental Health Ontario, a provincial support team that helps school districts enhance student mental health through the use of evidence-informed strategies and services, suggests daily practices. These include greeting each child by name, as well as establishing predictable visual routines, multilingual signage and regular family connections that help newcomer and racialized children feel seen and supported.

Early years practices for belonging

So, how do we make equity, inclusion and belonging felt in the early years? Three practices to consider:

1) Learn, and use, each child’s real name (every day).

This is one of the simplest and most powerful ways educators communicate respect. Name mistakes, mispronouncing, shortening or anglicizing can make children feel less seen and signal whose identities are considered “easy” or “normal.”

To do for educators: Ask caregivers for pronunciation, practice until it’s fluent and use children’s full names in greetings and routines to reinforce that every identity belongs.

2) Celebrate the languages and cultures children bring.

Young children participate more confidently when their home languages and everyday cultural practices are reflected in the classroom. A Canadian review of research found that linguistic responsiveness and intercultural communication are key to newcomer children’s well-being.

To do for educators: Add multilingual labels and bilingual books, invite families’ words and songs into circle time and welcome trans-languaging — moving fluently between languages — during play.

3) Build small belonging-focused rituals or practices into the day.

Belonging in the early years is created through simple, predictable interactions that help children feel recognized. Canadian analyses show these routines support social-emotional development, particularly for marginalized learners.

To do for educators: Greet each child warmly by name, use brief check-ins where every voice is heard and display children’s names, photos and home languages at their eye level.

Small choices speak

As a Pakistani educator whose name is said one way at work and another at home, I know how easy it is to slip into the version that fits the room. Many young children learn to do the same long before they can explain what’s happening.

That is why this work matters.

When adults take the time to pronounce a child’s name correctly, welcome their home language and check in with them every day, these small choices signal that all parts of children belong.

If we want every child to carry their full self through the door, we have to show them, every day, that everything about them fits here.

Amina Yousaf does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Say my name: For newcomer and racialized children, belonging begins with classroom greetings – https://theconversation.com/say-my-name-for-newcomer-and-racialized-children-belonging-begins-with-classroom-greetings-276831

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Marcus Mazzucco, Adjunct Lecturer in Sports Law, University of Toronto

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has announced a new policy on the protection of the women’s category that will force thousands of elite women athletes from around the world to undergo genetic sex testing in order to compete.

Critics argue the policy is based on weak science and raises urgent and important questions about fairness and human rights. It requires athletes seeking to participate in the women’s category at IOC events, such as the Olympic Games and the Youth Olympic Games, to undergo screening for the sex-determining region Y (SRY) gene.

The IOC’s policy is an extension of the genetic sex testing practices recently adopted by international sport federations for athletics, swimming, boxing and skiing and snowboarding. It also encourages other international sport federations to implement similar exclusionary policies for competitions outside the Olympics.

The purpose of the test is to identify and exclude transgender women and women with sex variations due to the perception that they threaten the integrity of women’s sport. Athletes who test positive for the SRY gene are ineligible for the women’s category, unless they can demonstrate complete insensitivity to testosterone through clinical evaluations.

Global backlash raises red flags

While groups advocating to restrict eligibility in women’s sport are celebrating this return to genetic screening, the implications are deeply troubling. The use of genetic sex testing in sport was discredited and abandoned in the 1990s due to scientific, ethical and legal concerns — all of which remain relevant today.
The IOC moved ahead with its new policy despite stern warnings and petitions from United Nations experts, 140 human rights and sport advocacy organizations and more than 90 legal experts worldwide.

These groups noted that the intrusive and exclusionary practices now codified in the IOC’s policy are rooted in stereotypes and generalized assumptions of performance advantage rather than robust, sport-specific evidence. They also noted that the practices risk violating the human rights principles of non-discrimination, bodily and psychological integrity, dignity and privacy for all women athletes.

Ethics, flawed evidence and cost

According to the IOC, the new policy is informed by consultations with experts, reviews of scientific evidence and input from the IOC’s “Protection of the Female Category Working Group.” Yet, the identities of these experts and members of the working group have not been revealed, and the alleged scientific evidence relied upon by the IOC has not been cited.

Determining eligibility in women’s sport based on the presence of a single biological marker, such as the SRY gene, ignores the complexity of biological sex and the many other factors that influence sport performance but are not regulated.

The truth is that there is no independent, high-quality evidence showing that women with the SRY gene and sex variations have an athletic advantage.

Similarly, for transgender women, the scientific research is inconclusive and recently led a Belgian court to conclude that a ban on transgender women in international cycling was unlawful.

Contrary to the IOC’s assertions, genetic sex testing is highly invasive, which is why it is strictly regulated under various laws.

In many jurisdictions, it can only be conducted for clear medical purposes, after an individual has provided free and informed consent, and where the processing of genetic data is subject to adequate safeguards.

Yet, genetic sex testing in sport violates these requirements.

The IOC’s response to this illegality is that athletes can simply travel to other countries without such laws to take the test.

Pragmatic questions about the costs of genetic sex testing have not been addressed in the IOC policy and cannot be ignored. It is estimated that the cost to test an athlete could exceed US$10,000 in some cases, and it is not clear who will finance these costs.

Two days earlier, the Future of Sport in Canada Commission released its final report. The report recognizes the precarity of Canada’s sport system and the need for a massive infusion of funding to maintain safe sport standards for all athletes.

Given this national focus, the genetic screening of women athletes seems far from a priority.

What’s at stake for the future

While the IOC has said its new policy only applies at the international level, there are concerns that this narrowing of the women’s category will filter down to lower levels of sport.

Without a change in course, genetic sex testing could become commonplace, and many women and girls may choose to leave sport to avoid having their bodies policed and their identity questioned.

To truly protect women’s sport, we believe that governments, athletes and other members of civil society must strongly oppose the exclusionary and rights-infringing policies of the IOC and international sport federations.

The outcome of a recent privacy complaint in Canada that will limit the use of certain sensitive personal data for sex testing provides a glimpse of the resistance that is possible.

Silvia Camporesi is a member of WADA’s Ethics External Advisory Group (EEAG).

Marcus Mazzucco and Sarah Teetzel do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The return of sex testing in sport risks harming women athletes rather than protecting them – https://theconversation.com/the-return-of-sex-testing-in-sport-risks-harming-women-athletes-rather-than-protecting-them-279074

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Michael J. Armstrong, Associate Professor, Operations Research, Brock University

The United States and Israel have repeatedly boasted about airstrikes in their current war with Iran. In Week 1, they claimed the destruction of 75 per cent of Iran’s missile launchers. By Week 2, they had reduced Iranian missile fire by 90 per cent and said the war was “already won in many ways.”

And yet, Iran keeps damaging refineries and blocking tankers across from crossing the Strait of Hormuz.

The country has certainly suffered many tactical losses. But its missiles and drones have been strategically successful.

Iran so far has launched at least 5,400 such projectiles. Surprisingly, less than a tenth of them have targeted Israel, its traditional rival.

Missiles over Israel

Israel faced about 450 Iranian missile attacks during the war’s first four weeks. The rate of fire fell rapidly after the first weekend but has never halted.

Some missiles carry several hundred kilograms of explosives, enough to destroy an entire building. The rest instead dispense dozens of cluster bombs over wide areas. Those are less powerful but still lethal.

Israel’s long-range Arrow interceptors engage the missiles first. Its mid-range David’s Sling and short-range Iron Dome interceptors provide backup. (The country’s Iron Beam lasers are not being used.) Together, they’ve reportedly intercepted 92 per cent of incoming missiles.

But interceptors sometimes miss. And their supply is limited. Consequently, at least nine large warheads and 150 cluster bombs have hit populated areas.

These numbers imply that almost all Iranian missiles are accurate enough to need interception. By contrast, during Israel’s earlier conflicts with Gaza in 2008, 2011 and 2014, less than a third of incoming rockets were so accurate.

Meanwhile, more than 90 per cent of Iran’s missiles and drones have targeted Arab countries in the Persian Gulf.

Drones across the Persian Gulf

Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) collectively reported around 4,900 Iranian attacks during the first four weeks. Only one fifth were missiles: the rest were drones.

These countries have stated they are neutral in the war. However, they do have defence agreements with the U.S., and some host American military facilities.

These countries defend themselves using weapons like the U.S.-made Patriot and Israeli-made SPYDER interceptors. Drone experts from Ukraine now advise the defenders too.

For example, the UAE reported attacks by 1,835 drones, 378 ballistic missiles and 15 cruise missiles. As of March 10, it claimed to have intercepted 94 per cent of the drones and 99 per cent of the missiles.

The deadliness of these attacks has varied.

Continuing lethality

In Israel, Iranian missiles have killed 20 people, implying roughly 4.1 deaths per hundred missiles arriving.

That’s less than the 5.1 the country saw during its 2025 war with Iran. But it’s four to 40 times higher than the rates it suffered from rockets in earlier Gaza and Lebanon conflicts.

In the Persian Gulf, Iranian projectiles have killed at least 15 civilians, 13 U.S. soldiers and seven merchant sailors.

There were about 0.6 deaths per hundred Iranian attacks in Kuwait, Bahrain and the UAE combined. That’s much lower than Israel’s rate, presumably because those countries were attacked by drones and short-range missiles carrying smaller warheads.

Interestingly, although the quantity of Iranian attacks fell after the first week, their lethality did not. Death rates per projectile in Arab countries showed little change week-to-week. In Israel, the rates were highest in Week 3.

In fact, Iranian missiles keep hitting precise targets, like U.S. military aircraft parked beside runways.

This implies Iran’s government has recovered from its initial surprise. It’s likely benefiting from Russian intelligence and Chinese technology too.

Tactical U.S. vs strategic Iran

So, U.S. and Israeli warplanes have bombed thousands of targets, killed thousands of civilians, and slowed Iran’s missile fire. But they haven’t stopped it.

That’s not surprising. Airstrikes alone didn’t stop rocket fire during Israel’s previous conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon. Ground invasions were needed for that.

U.S. President Donald Trump can post jingoistic mashup videos and “bullshit” about having “militarily won” the war in Iran. But he hasn’t achieved strategic outcomes like “unconditional surrender” from Iran or regime change“ there.

By contrast, Iran’s missiles have been strategically effective. They’ve damaged Persian Gulf refineries and halted tanker traffic. They’ve forced Trump to relax sanctions on Russian and Iranian oil, and on Belarusian fertilizer. And they’ve shown Arab monarchies that U.S. defence agreements have limited value.

Trump recently, and inadvertently, admitted this weakness. While discussing Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz, he said “it would be great if we could do something, but they have to open it.”

This strategic failure despite tactical success is reminiscent of the Vietnam War. U.S. units had overwhelming firepower as they killed enemy soldiers. But body counts by themselves indicated little about strategic progress.

Some historians rank that war as the second worst U.S. foreign policy decision ever. The 2003 invasion of Iraq was ranked the worst.

Trump talks about being the greatest U.S. president in history. So, perhaps his Iran war will make him the new leader on that policy failure list.

Michael J. Armstrong does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Iran’s attacks drone on as the U.S. is at risk of losing the war – https://theconversation.com/irans-attacks-drone-on-as-the-u-s-is-at-risk-of-losing-the-war-279295

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Brynn Colledge, PhD Student in Sociology, Teaching Assistant, University of Waterloo

Meta has been leading the way with smart glasses technology since launching its Ray-Ban model in 2021. Now the company may have plans to introduce facial recognition to its AI-enabled glasses, according to an internal memo leaked to The New York Times.

Meanwhile other industry players like Google, Apple, Samsung and Chinese tech giants Alibaba and Xiaomi are also investing in a global market that is projected to reach USD$8.2 billion by 2030.

As a member of sex worker communities, and a researcher studying the intersection of sex work, law and technological surveillance, I am concerned about the integration of AI-enabled smart glasses with facial recognition technologies.

I am especially worried about the impact on sex workers and other vulnerable members of our population.

Photos and video without consent

Meta sold more than seven million pairs of smart glasses during 2025 and research analysts predict up to 20 million pairs of smart glasses will be sold globally this year.

---

Read more:
Is someone watching you? Facial recognition tech is here and Canada offers little privacy protection

---

These glasses already enable wearers to take photos and videos in public and private spaces without consent. In 2025, a number of Instagram accounts uploaded videos of men entering massage parlours and soliciting women for sexual services. The videos, uploaded without the women’s knowledge or consent, garnered millions of views.

There have also been several more recent media reports of women around the world being filmed by wearers of these glasses, without consent.

Theoretically, smart glasses have a warning light in the frame, which indicates when the wearer is filming. But research shows the privacy mechanism of a single flashing LED light is insufficient to alert bystanders about filming. This LED safety measure is also easily hacked by the use of covers or device alterations that disable the light altogether.

Elevated risks for sex workers

Sex workers are particularly at risk of non-consensual filming while at work. The consequences of this can include being outed to friends and family as a sex worker, blackmail and job loss. This can lead to loss of health, financial and housing services. Covert filming can also lead to stalking, abuse and violence.

Migrant sex workers are likely at the greatest risk because they could face deportation for violating the terms of their immigration.

What difference does facial recognition make?

These risks are amplified by the possibility of facial recognition being integrated into Meta smart glasses. Facial recognition could theoretically allow Meta Glasses wearers to access information about people who enter their line of vision using a potential feature called Name Tag.

Many sex workers use social media, just like everyone else. Some use it for work, while others only use it to connect with friends and family. Some use it for both. The issue with facial recognition is that sex workers’ efforts to remain anonymous could be easily trampled, especially if Meta explores options to identify people via Facebook and Instagram accounts.

While Meta will likely include safety features if it does pursue the integration of facial recognition into smart glasses, the trend in technological advances in recent months has shown that AI often works outside the scope of what it is programmed to do.

Safety mechanisms do not always protect the community from becoming victims to sexualized deepfakes including pornographic images of children.

AI and facial recognition technologies have also been found to exhibit racial biases and allow increased racism, misidentification and wrongful arrest of people of colour. The racial biases exhibited through AI and facial recognition technologies are a result of AI learning from deeply flawed data rooted in systemic racism.

---

Read more:
Grok fallout: Tech giants must be held accountable for technology-assisted gender-based violence

---

Tools of resistance

Sex workers’ rights are intimately tied with women’s and children’s rights. When a system or technology threatens the safety and well-being of sex workers, it also threatens women and children. Predatory technologies that allow vulnerable people to be secretly recorded and have their identities revealed without consent will lead to inevitable harms.

One way we can protect ourselves is through an app called Nearby Glasses. This allows users to scan their vicinity for Bluetooth signals from smart glasses with camera functionality. It alerts users about possible recording and also notes the manufacturer name of smart glasses detected. The developer designed this app as a form of resistance to expanding surveillance technology.

Is mass surveillance inevitable?

Legal scholar Woodrow Hartzog and his colleagues have characterized facial recognition technology as “the most dangerous surveillance tool ever invented,” posing unique threats to “privacy, civil liberties, human flourishing and democracy.” They speak of a slippery slope towards inevitable mass surveillance.

Meanwhile, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently declared: “It’s hard to imagine a world in several years where most glasses that people wear aren’t AI glasses.”

To protect the anonymity of sex workers and other vulnerable persons, it is imperative that we speak up and raise awareness of the consequences of such a world.

Brynn Colledge does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Smart glasses with facial recognition could be devastating to sex workers and other vulnerable people – https://theconversation.com/smart-glasses-with-facial-recognition-could-be-devastating-to-sex-workers-and-other-vulnerable-people-276853