The Ugly Canada Thread

[vid]

There are people in Quebec who oppose Bill 62. I have an uncle who is a literal Nazi. Just because someone like me can rationalize a shitty idea doesn't mean I can rationalize it too.

Do any Muslim women have an opinion on this? I mean, they're the ones affected. It's their clothes.

[vid]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Another example of where giving a free pass for cultural or religious reasons can lead to Canada being, um, "ugly".

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5001452/Man-NOT-guilty-rape-did-not-know-illegal.html

And Rosie Di Manno's take on it:

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2017/10...cial-latitude-for-ignorance-dimanno.html

That's a different issue, and I agree with her here. Ignorance of the law is never an excuse for breaking it. There are people born in this country (often religious) who also believe they can rape their wives. They can't.

Similarly, forcing someone to wear something against their will is illegal here so any Muslim man who forces his wife to wear a niqab is breaking the law but any woman who chooses to wear it isn't. I know a couple women who choose to occasionally wear corsets even though those are similarly misogynistic, yet they're not illegal.

[someone123]

One interesting double standard among many progressives in North America is that there is a lot less support for the unusual practices of non-immigrant groups. One example I can think of is polygamist mormons. It is pretty common for somebody to argue that niqabs are fine because women can choose what to wear but polygamy is bad because women get stuck in abusive situations.

At the end of the day I think this is just a messy situation, like a lot of other social issues, that will be decided based on popular support. The outcome may not be logically consistent or ideal.

I am not sure I agree with the idea that limitless accommodation is widely accepted in Anglo Canada. I think we have a situation where the federal Liberals and NDP as well as many media outlets are a bit out of step with Canadians. There was polling on the citizenship niqab issue and over 80% of Canadians didn't think that niqabs should be permitted during the ceremony. But the federal Liberals decided despite that support not to pursue the ban. This disconnect doesn't surprise me given how in many settings people will say you're a terrible human being if you disagree with them on this issue. So a lot of people keep their opinions to themselves.

One way that I think about this is that I am willing to give zero special consideration for religious practices. If somebody can dress up in a niqab somewhere, somebody else should be allowed to dress up in a giant bunny suit or pirate or whatever else (trigger warning: spaghetti strainer!). Consequently it seems to me that niqabs should be OK in public but not necessarily in work settings, citizenship ceremonies, etc.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by vid

There are people in Quebec who oppose Bill 62. I have an uncle who is a literal Nazi. Just because someone like me can rationalize a shitty idea doesn't mean I can rationalize it too.

Do any Muslim women have an opinion on this? I mean, they're the ones affected. It's their clothes.

From what I gather the two main groups of women who are opposed to this in Quebec are orthodox Muslim women who wear face veils, and a small group of non-Muslim women who are leftist granola types. The latter being mostly of the anglophone persuasion from what I gather. I base this on reports in the news on recent protests in Montreal where groups of women have boarded buses with their faces covered.

Moderate Muslim women in Quebec (ie those that don't weir veils) that I know or have heard in the media hate the veil and for the most part are not unhappy to see it restricted.

The main women's organization in Quebec has been torn apart over this issue. When there was the PQ Charter of Values being debated they lost half their membership and executive or more. They've come out against Bill 62 and they may yet lose even more support as a result, according to what I've read. Many of the most high profile feminists in Quebec have left the boat.

Other than that splintering women's federation, and the veiled women and their small group of supporters I haven't heard any women rise to the defence of the veil.

They all think it sucks and don't disagree that it shouldn't welcomed with open arms into officialdom, although opinions vary on how far the restrictions should go.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by vid

That's a different issue, and I agree with her here. Ignorance of the law is never an excuse for breaking it. There are people born in this country (often religious) who also believe they can rape their wives. They can't.

Similarly, forcing someone to wear something against their will is illegal here so any Muslim man who forces his wife to wear a niqab is breaking the law but any woman who chooses to wear it isn't. I know a couple women who choose to occasionally wear corsets even though those are similarly misogynistic, yet they're not illegal.

I couldn't say whether the decision was correct or not (one assumes the Crown will appeal), but being ignorant of the law and not having been shown to have the necessary mens rea (criminal intent) are not the same thing. If this decision is upheld on appeal one would hope that its impact is limited to the very specific facts of this case.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by someone123

I am not sure I agree with the idea that limitless accommodation is widely accepted in Anglo Canada. I think we have a situation where the federal Liberals and NDP as well as many media outlets are a bit out of step with Canadians. There was polling on the citizenship niqab issue and over 80% of Canadians didn't think that niqabs should be permitted during the ceremony. But the federal Liberals decided despite that support not to pursue the ban. This disconnect doesn't surprise me given how in many settings people will say you're a terrible human being if you disagree with them on this issue. So a lot of people keep their opinions to themselves.

.

This is true. I should have been more specific. This does have impact on public opinion though.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

I couldn't say whether the decision was correct or not (one assumes the Crown will appeal), but being ignorant of the law and not having been shown to have the necessary mens rea (criminal intent) are not the same thing. If this decision is upheld on appeal one would hope that its impact is limited to the very specific facts of this case.

Yes, I thought about that too. Holy crap.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by someone123

One interesting double standard among many progressives in North America is that there is a lot less support for the unusual practices of non-immigrant groups. One example I can think of is polygamist mormons. It is pretty common for somebody to argue that niqabs are fine because women can choose what to wear but polygamy is bad because women get stuck in abusive situations.

.

Which is kinda racist in a way: forgive them because they know not what they do, but the other guys (who are more like us), well, they should know better!

It actually harkens back to the old imperialist colonialist mindset of not giving shit if the "natives" want to slaughter or molest each other. Just as long as the blood doesn't splatter on us superior folks.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by vid

Similarly, forcing someone to wear something against their will is illegal here so any Muslim man who forces his wife to wear a niqab is breaking the law but any woman who chooses to wear it isn't.

This argument is actually somewhat limited when you think about it. Killing people is already illegal, yet Mohammad Shafia still chose to kill his three daughters and first wife 'cause that was the only right thing to do. It doesn't hurt to send a more precise, stronger message against such practices. You're a fool if you think full veils are always worn by free will, regardless of what's illegal.

It's kind of like saying we don't need any cops or speed radars because "it's already illegal to drive over the speed limit" and people should know that (and yeah, right, they'll all obey naturally).

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

But this new front that has opened up that this is a misogynist sexist measure just... boggles my mind. I really don't know what to say.

This is really nuts. The irony of having some pro-burka people believing they're the ones on the Women's Rights side of the argument!

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

This issue isn't about bus passes

I may have played a role in pushing a couple people (who were very ignorant to begin with, otherwise it would not have played out like that) towards that view on SSP (but I'd argue it's still mostly their fault for grabbing that argument and trying to run with it). Even though I've tried to explain that unreasonable accomodations is a multifaceted issue and some government action to add more framework and guidelines was guaranteed to happen someday (it's been years in the making).

I guess if they haven't been paying attention to the evolution of this question at all over the last decade, it's going to be impossible to distillate the whole thing for them in a mere few message posts on a discussion forum.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by lio45

It's kind of like saying we don't need any cops or speed radars because "it's already illegal to drive over the speed limit" and people should know that (and yeah, right, they'll all obey naturally).

If you prefer another analogy: vid's argument is that we don't need to lift a finger for missing/murdered aboriginal women because murder is already illegal in Canada, so there's no problem at all, nothing to see there. Everything's fine, carry on.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lio45

This is really nuts. The irony of having some pro-burka people believing they're the ones on the Women's Rights side of the argument!

We've got lots of proof on here that they don't really care what most women think about this - including most Muslim women themselves.

Proof positive that even the slightest dent in the multicultural shield is unacceptable, and that it is what is most important above all else.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lio45

If you prefer another analogy: vid's argument is that we don't need to lift a finger for missing/murdered aboriginal women because murder is already illegal in Canada, so there's no problem at all, nothing to see there. Everything's fine, carry on.

That was basically Stephen Harper's view.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Oh, I know you guys won't agree with her. But you might take her more seriously - not because she speaks English (Lise Ravary does too, BTW) but because she's from Toronto.

You know I’m from Calgary right?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

You know I’m from Calgary right?

Yup. But there isn't much of a difference in the "thinking" people's views on this issue in Calgary vs. Toronto vs. Vancouver vs. etc.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Yup. But there isn't much of a difference in the "thinking" people's views on this issue in Calgary vs. Toronto vs. Vancouver vs. etc.

Really? Albertans voted very differently from Ontarians and British Columbians in the last federal election. As previously mentioned the Conservative and Liberal governments have different policies when it comes to this issue (the Conservatives proposed the "barbaric practices hotline" for example).

In the last federal election Quebec was no more of an outlier than, say, Alberta or Newfoundland.

(Not that any of this could predict very accurately what O-tacular believes. Actually if all you know is that he's from Calgary or Alberta there's a somewhat higher likelihood he'll be a more conservative voter and would accept a niqab ban.)

[GlassCity]

The issue with the law is that while its spirit may be good - keep women from being oppressed - it won't work. I don't see oppressed wives all of a sudden standing up to their abusive husbands and taking off their niqabs because the government told them to. They'll just be further restricted in how they can behave.

The husbands are the issue, but how do you prove this abuse? And is it even considered abuse in mainstream Canadian thinking? Or is it just another quirk of multiculturalism?

I alluded to it too, but I think Lio's onto something; this has to be controlled for at the point of immigration. Even if the women want to wear it on their own accord, it's still not right. As Vid mentioned, gays can be homophobic and women can be misogynistic. Likewise, Muslim women can oppress themselves, because their culture tells them to.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columni...rgeting-muslims-over-the-niqab-is-absurd

From your quote:

In today’s Quebec (and the rest of Canada), Muslims are often suspected as being less than patriotic Canadians. Any outward refusal to accept “Canadian values,” whatever those might be, only increases suspicion. Like the Christians in Rome, Muslims often (though by no means always or usually) live in their own community within a community, and engage in religious and cultural activities poorly understood by non-Muslims. Like the early Christians, Muslims are often a convenient scapegoat: Think of the oft-repeated cry that Syrian refugees somehow deprive other Canadians of jobs or social services.

Fun times.

[vid]

Originally Posted by lio45

If you prefer another analogy: vid's argument is that we don't need to lift a finger for missing/murdered aboriginal women because murder is already illegal in Canada, so there's no problem at all, nothing to see there. Everything's fine, carry on.

But I'm not advocating for the equivalent of murdering indigenous women and girls more illegal. At no point have I or anyone I know said that penalties for murdering an indigenous woman or girl should be harsher or explicitly laid out as a separate law.

My position on missing and murdered indigenous people and on religious veils are actually quite similar: understand why it's happening and legislate the cause, not the end result. Figure out why indigenous people are being murdered or disappearing and develop a way to reduce them being kidnapped or murdered because of their race. It won't prevent every murder but the goal is to at least bring their rate in line with the national average as much as possible. But don't just say "Oh, murdering this group of people is *extra* bad, don't question it!"

The analogue to that, and my position, is to figure out why Muslim women are wearing the veils, and in cases where abuse is present, deal with the abuse, because it's the abuse that is the crime, not the wearing of a veil. Enforce the existing laws against the men who are oppressing them and make it clear that forcing someone to wear something against their will is contrary to our values as Canadians. But don't just come out and say "you can't wear this. Don't question our demands".