The not so Great Racism in Canada Thread

[someone123]

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

re: Aunt Jemima. Just change the brand name to White Trash: they love that HFCS.

I was going to say the taste of Aunt Jemima is offensive too.

Everyone should switch to Blacque Jacque Shellacque brand maple syrup.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Again, that's a strawman characterization of current opposition to BLM. Opposition to MLK in the 1960s was rooted in pure racism. I'm quite certain that some opposition to BLM in the 21st century is as well, but the two eras are not analogous.

I’ve been pretty clear. Strawman is a placeholder here for “things you don’t understand”.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by dreambrother808

Yes, some things have changed and some things have not. Most Americans disliked MLK and many cheered his death, for example. Now I’m pretty sure the vast majority of them alive then would not admit to that.

Ok, but that goes both ways. Many Western liberal elites in the mid-to-late 20th century supported pedophilia, for example. Now that stuff is buried under a hatchet and they won't admit to it.

Here's an example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_petition_against_age_of_consent_laws

In 1977, a petition was addressed to the French parliament calling for the abrogation of several articles of the age of consent law and the decriminalization of all consensual relations between adults and minors below the age of fifteen (the age of consent in France). A number of French intellectuals - including such prominent names as Louis Aragon, Michel Foucault, Jean-Paul Sartre, Jacques Derrida, Louis Althusser, Roland Barthes, Simone de Beauvoir, Gilles Deleuze, Félix Guattari, Michel Leiris, Alain Robbe-Grillet, Philippe Sollers, Jacques Rancière, Jean-François Lyotard, Francis Ponge, and various prominent doctors and psychologists - signed the petition.[1] In 1979 two open letters were published in French newspapers defending individuals arrested under charges of statutory 🞵🞵🞵🞵, in the context of abolition of age of consent laws.

Michel Foucault argued that children are able to give consent to 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 relations, saying that assuming “that a child is incapable of explaining what happened and was incapable of giving his consent are two abuses that are intolerable, quite unacceptable.”[2] Foucault, Sartre, and newspapers such as Libération and Le Monde each defended the idea of child-adult 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 relationships. [3]

[casper]

Originally Posted by someone123

I was going to say the taste of Aunt Jemima is offensive too.

Everyone should switch to Blacque Jacque Shellacque brand maple syrup.

I love Aunt Jemima pancake mix. Especially the instant-stuff that says you should just water. Best way to make it is with egg and milk.

I agree any thing in a liquid form with an Aunt Jemima brand is evil. Especially to a Canadian sensibility. Real maple syrup is the only thing that is acceptable.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

Ok, but that goes both ways. Many Western liberal elites in the mid-to-late 20th century supported pedophilia, for example. Now that stuff is buried under a hatchet and they won't admit to it.

Here's an example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_petition_against_age_of_consent_laws

Well that is definitely tangential and one of the weirdest examples of whataboutism I have ever seen. Thank you for sharing... I guess.

[vid]

But how can I enjoy breakfast if I'm not reminded of racist stereotypes? Removing Aunt Jemima is the worst crime committed against white people since the invention of flavours.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by someone123

Yeah, exactly. Also under this model black people cannot say they have been discriminated against more than French Canadians unless the black people are themselves French Canadian.

I question how much true communication can happen under a system where everybody talks about isolated personal experience or experience balkanized by identity group. There needs to be a way to reconcile different experiences, and an objective standard for deciding who gets what or how society operates. Usually facts and logic enter into the decision-making process somewhere.

This is truly one of the scariest aspects of this emerging cult.

Things like empathy, listening skills, reasoning abilities, and communication skills have traditionally been used by individuals to communicate with other individuals about topics with which they do not have direct experience.

Lived-in experiential information is useful and can add to the discourse, but I don't think it has exclusive rights over the discourse. In fact, lived-in experiences can sometimes be unreliable. People can be conditioned at an early age and their experiences can be biased by it.

It ruins discourse. Everyone has their own particular identities and can claim hegemony over some domain of discourse on that account. That is stupid and kills the discourse.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by rousseau

Again, that's a strawman characterization of current opposition to BLM. Opposition to MLK in the 1960s was rooted in pure racism. I'm quite certain that some opposition to BLM in the 21st century is as well, but the two eras are not analogous.

Opposition to BLM is also often rooted in reasoning skills, numeracy, and a sense of fairness.

[urbandreamer]

I haven't had Aunt Jemima syrup or pancake mix since I was a poor student in the late 90s: I probably bought Dominion's Equality brand cheaper knockoff. As a child I liked the buckwheat mix (long since discontinued in Canada) but remember asking my mom the meaning behind the label: racist stereotype I was told.

Anyhow these days I make a tasty gluten free buckwheat pancake: buckwheat flour, baking soda/powder, pinch of salt, egg, olive oil, almond milk. Elmira's Foodland, or Zehr's Country Market in Millbank has an excellent selection of local Mennonite made maple syrup. I also use https://www.steenssyrup.com/ - it's a Southern thing.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lio45

Just saw in the news that Jagmeet Singh got kicked out of Commons for being an Anti-Québécois Racist... Comments?

What's most surprising is that some people are surprised that this is happening right now.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

Opposition to BLM is also often rooted in reasoning skills, numeracy, and a sense of fairness.

That is a highly unpopular opinion.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

This is truly one of the scariest aspects of this emerging cult.

Things like empathy, listening skills, reasoning abilities, and communication skills have traditionally been used by individuals to communicate with other individuals about topics with which they do not have direct experience.

Lived-in experiential information is useful and can add to the discourse, but I don't think it has exclusive rights over the discourse. In fact, lived-in experiences can sometimes be unreliable. People can be conditioned at an early age and their experiences can be biased by it.

It ruins discourse. Everyone has their own particular identities and can claim hegemony over some domain of discourse on that account. That is stupid and kills the discourse.

Also, to keep it real, we haven't seen a lot of lived experience posts in this thread from the pro-lived-experience crowd. It is mostly people talking in the abstract about the importance of lived experiences of others under the implicit assumption that this invalidates opinions they don't agree with.

Hipster Duck posted his experience of NOT suffering racism in Vancouver and that was largely ignored.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by someone123

Hipster Duck posted his experience of NOT suffering racism in Vancouver and that was largely ignored.

Pretty sure saffronleaf would generally say the same thing (in the GTA and a couple places in the U.S.)

[urbandreamer]

There's a lot of racism in Toronto, often from one newish Canadian group to another.

[Pavlov]

Originally Posted by lio45

You're essentially saying that the clear and tangible discrimination we're suffering because of who we are and the language that happens to be ours... is even more serious, since it's more justifiable.

Maybe an example will explain what I mean better.

Example:

An English-language daily newspaper in Vancouver has a vacant position for an editor. The employer develops a list of minimum requirements to screen candidates against. Those requirements include, unsurprisingly, fluency in (indeed, expert skill in) English. A unilingual francophone applies but is screened out because she does not speak any English at all. Provided that the employer in this case can prove that English fluency is truly necessary to perform the duties of the position (which it clearly could), the law says that this isn't discrimination).

[lio45]

Yeah, but my point was that, in the Great Race of Life from cradle-to-Vancouver-newspaper-editor, there are some Canadians who are starting from a way more disadvantaged position than others. Namely,

1) the one who's born in a remote place such as a northern reserve;
(where education isn't too valued)
2) the one who's born in a single-parent family in TO's black community;
(where education isn't too valued)
3) the one who's born in an unilingual francophone family;
etc.

versus, say, the stereotypical privileged WASP kid born with a golden spoon in his mouth...

All of the ones I listed above have to work a lot harder to hope to achieve the same thing... they don't have the same starting point.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Pavlov

An English-language daily newspaper in Vancouver has a vacant position for an editor. The employer develops a list of minimum requirements to screen candidates against. Those requirements include, unsurprisingly, fluency in (indeed, expert skill in) English. A unilingual francophone applies but is screened out because she does not speak any English at all. Provided that the employer in this case can prove that English fluency is truly necessary to perform the duties of the position (which it clearly could), the law says that this isn't discrimination).

It depends on if you're talking about legal discrimination in hiring or some other concept like systemic racism. For the most part people in this thread aren't making legal arguments.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by someone123

It depends on if you're talking about legal discrimination in hiring or some other concept like systemic racism. For the most part people in this thread aren't making legal arguments.

I was merely pointing out that the glass ceiling in this country is actually lower for what I am (French Canadian) than it is for what you are (gay) or for what saffronleaf is (brown).

I had to "work harder", i.e. master another language, just to have my prospects become equal to the prospects that many others had simply thanks to birth lottery.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by lio45

The fact that they're greatly discriminated against...?

Try being an unilingual French Canadian in Vancouver. Your career prospects are even worse than if you're a black who's fluent in English!

Yep. I reckon a unilingual English Canadian in Chicoutimi would have worse career prospects than compared to a black who's fluent in French!

I don't really see how this point applies here.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by lio45

I was merely pointing out that the glass ceiling in this country is actually lower for what I am (French Canadian) than it is for what you are (gay) or for what saffronleaf is (brown).

I had to "work harder", i.e. master another language, just to have my prospects become equal to the prospects that many others had simply thanks to birth lottery.

I agree. I am actually "privileged" in that I had one English speaking and one French speaking parent so I learned both as a little kid (unilingual Anglophones suffer from a level of oppression that I cannot relate to.. or maybe I'm the oppressed one? I have no idea).

Although I think it is impossible to form some kind of hierarchy out of these advantages and disadvantages because there are so many more variables. Maybe somebody was poor or rich, had only one parent, abusive parents, health problems, learning disabilities. What about tall vs. short? Ugly vs. attractive? Who knows?