The not so Great Racism in Canada Thread

[dleung]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Great job, everyone, wearing people down so there is nothing left to say. Great job. Well done. Congratulations on your filibuster-ing.

I particularly enjoy when Lio and Acajack bust out the algebra for the extreme hypotheticals



If a trump supporter told me I'm a cop-killing ANTIFA for acknowledging that systemic racism exists, I'll dismiss them as nutjobs, but it won't make me double down with supporting reparations and statue-vandalism, because I'm not five years old.

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Well, I for one am done with expressing any further opinions on this thread. The language used by some of the posters (accusations of being a fragile white snowflakes and the like) have actually succeeded in hardening my opinions even further, and I am the sort of person these activists should be trying to influence, since I am generally willing to listen to both sides of the argument, and occasionally changing my mind. Instead, the great chasm continues to widen.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I would like to say that I don't really care about *any* of this.

That said, some might say this is simply making excuses for being racist. Averages are just averages. I am sure many Asian people are above average and many black people are below average. There is an contemporary argument that says we shouldn't be judged based on assumed averages (of any nature) and their relationship to our race.

Yes, it's all about stereotypes really, but based on statistics. But what about car insurance?

[lio45]

Originally Posted by esquire

As an example of what I mean, since George Floyd, the local CBC constantly brings up incidents of alleged police brutality in Winnipeg. They have routinely referenced the teenage girl Eishia Hudson being shot by police. What they don't mention is the series of her terrible decisions that led up to that, including the theft of vehicles, robberies of liquor stores, driving on a car chase, ramming police cars, and refusing to stop before ultimately being shot.

Obviously the death of a young person is nothing to cheer about but I think it's fair to say there was a lot more to it than trigger-happy cops picking fights with Indigenous kids. Yet CBC doesn't really get into that... no real assessment of the impact on victims, it's just #justiceforeishia. And that approach costs them in terms of credibility.

OMG, that's got to be from The Onion, not CBC... Please tell me you're not serious?

#justiceforgabrielwortman The poor guy was SHOT by police! Can you believe the brutality?

Abolish "trigger-happy" Nova Scotia RCMP immediately!!!!!

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by p_xavier

Yes, it's all about stereotypes really, but based on statistics. But what about car insurance?

Yes, I am aware of that too.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by p_xavier

You opened a can of worms, human worms. The no Asian is usually because statistics show Asians have smaller penises, and the BBC is king on Grindr. So is it racism or being a size queen?

How many women profiles put I don't date short guys.

True, last I checked (though that's already many years ago) it wasn't rare to see women profiles say "no men shorter than me please".

[someone123]

Originally Posted by lio45

#justiceforgabrielwortman The poor guy was SHOT by police! Can you believe the brutality?

Abolish "trigger-happy" Nova Scotia RCMP immediately!!!!!

The shooting of Gabriel Wortman is a good example of a justified killing by police. He was in the middle of a mass murder rampage. The total statistics on police killings capture those scenarios as well as George Floyd type scenarios.

The way some media outlets like the CBC carefully curate stories rather than trying to get the facts out makes it hard to tell what really happened, although you can sometimes infer a lot from what's not said (if an outlet leans a certain way, they won't elide facts that heavily lead the reader in the desired direction). There is the "must be a slow news day" effect, e.g. when a story about an old lady being pushed over by a crackhead turns into headlines.

A pro-police newspaper for example might say that George Floyd was a convicted armed robber who got into an altercation with police after being apprehended for counterfeiting, and died after a struggle. The details about 4 officers having him handcuffed and one of them kneeling on his neck for 9 minutes makes all the difference.

I was curious about the Chantel Moore story and it's hard to figure out basic facts, e.g. how likely was it that the RCMP were primed to interact with her a certain, perhaps more violent, way because she was indigenous? I doubt any facts of this case would fully exonerate the police since they ended up killing the person who they were supposed to be helping.

The Wendy Mesley story was one where when you dig deeper and get all the facts, a lot of the coverage looks very biased, with almost all context being stripped out. Jessica Mulroney on the other hand doesn't look so great when you read more about that stupid story.

[ssiguy]

Well obviously some of you think I was engaging in hyperbole but if so I answer me this. Why do black women straighten their hair to look Caucasian? Why do almost ALL women wear high heel, use make-up, and wear bras to show off the "goods" yet are offended when men turn around and view them as 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 objects? Why do gays pigeon hole their own community into set categories due to their physical appearance or racial/ethnc background or assume all Asians are passive and 'bots"? Why do all our feminists and lesbians find sexism so offensive but cheer as the Drag Queens that represent every stereotype of a female bimbo go by on the Pride Parades? Why does {some} of the LGBT community demand to be be treated as equals and not weirdos but then demand to be called Queer? Why do ethnic/religious minorities still engage in colourism in their own communities where darker skinned members are discriminated against and was part of their culture well before the Caucasians arrived?

We ALL have our biases and WILLINGLY employ them every single day but at least I have the balls to admit it.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Well obviously some of you think I was engaging in hyperbole but if so I answer me this. Why do black women straighten their hair to look Caucasian? Why do almost ALL women wear high heel, use make-up, and wear bras to show off the "goods" yet are offended when men turn around and view them as 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 objects? Why do gays pigeon hole their own community into set categories due to their physical appearance or racial/ethnc background or assume all Asians are passive and 'bots"? Why do all our feminists and lesbians find sexism so offensive but cheer as the Drag Queens that represent every stereotype of a female bimbo go by on the Pride Parades? Why does {some} of the LGBT community demand to be be treated as equals and not weirdos but then demand to be called Queer? Why do ethnic/religious minorities still engage in colourism in their own communities where darker skinned members are discriminated against and was part of their culture well before the Caucasians arrived?

We ALL have our biases and WILLINGLY employ them every single day but at least I have the balls to admit it.

You just admitted that you’re a confused person who has come up with odd personal explanations for many of these things. Congratulations. Speak for yourself.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Great job, everyone, wearing people down so there is nothing left to say. Great job. Well done. Congratulations on your filibuster-ing.

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Well, I for one am done with expressing any further opinions on this thread. The language used by some of the posters (accusations of being a fragile white snowflakes and the like) have actually succeeded in hardening my opinions even further, and I am the sort of person these activists should be trying to influence, since I am generally willing to listen to both sides of the argument, and occasionally changing my mind. Instead, the great chasm continues to widen.

Interesting that both sides side here feel discussion is impossible.

I'll say one thing though - if you want to push for some change in Canada but whatever it is that you're pushing is opposed by a relatively diverse sample of highly-educated Canadians like MonctonRad, Acajack, myself, rousseau, saffronleaf, someone123, then it's almost guaranteed that whatever it is you're pushing for isn't going to happen. Try a more palatable version or a different approach.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by lio45

Interesting that both sides side here feel discussion is impossible.

I'll say one thing though - if you want to push some change in Canada but whatever it is that you're pushing is opposed by a sample of highly-educated Canadians like MonctonRad, Acajack, myself, rousseau, saffronleaf, someone123, then it's almost guaranteed that whatever it is you're pushing for isn't going to happen. Try a more palatable version or a different approach.

6 people in a chat room is not a very reliable sample. Consider how many people don’t post here or gave up because of the nature of this particular forum.

Much more work needs to be done, that much is obvious. And those who are pushing will keep on doing so.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Why do all our feminists and lesbians find sexism so offensive but cheer as the Drag Queens that represent every stereotype of a female bimbo go by on the Pride Parades?

There are drag kings too. As far as I can tell the level of offence caused by drag kings is approximately zero except in setting where people demand conformity to gender norms or have a problem with lesbians.

I don't think drag queens are generally trying to make fun of women. Most of them seem to like feeling sterotypically feminine and commanding attention or entertaining spectators. Many of them are not stereotypically male-presenting in their day-to-day lives even outside of drag.

It's true that we all have biases but I am not sure that fact is interesting. Nor is it true that a person needs to attain perfection before observing flaws in the world.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by dreambrother808

6 people in a chat room is not a very reliable sample.

Actually, it's a decently reliable sample IMO.

If every single one of the SSPers I just listed was on record saying "my honest and informed opinion is that Trudeau now absolutely needs to be booted out, and I guarantee I'll be voting for MacKay/O'Toole next year" I would be willing to bet a lot on Trudeau losing the next election right there on the basis of that sample.

Name any "change" that ended up happening/prevailing in this country (legalizing weed, tightening 🞵🞵🞵 controls, not greenlighting Northern Gateway, getting rid of Harper, etc.), and I guarantee that there's at the very least a bunch of the SSPers I listed that were in favor of it. Not necessarily all, but at least some. Conversely, if they were unanimous against something, I'm sure that something never passed.

It's a pretty representative slice (of the people you need to convince in this country if you want your ideas to be implemented).

[Pavlov]

Originally Posted by lio45

Interesting that both sides side here feel discussion is impossible.

I don't recall either MolsonExport or MonctonRad being elected as spokespersons or representatives for any particular "side".

Originally Posted by lio45

I'll say one thing though - if you want to push for some change in Canada but whatever it is that you're pushing is opposed by a relatively diverse sample of highly-educated Canadians like MonctonRad, Acajack, myself, rousseau, saffronleaf, someone123, then it's almost guaranteed that whatever it is you're pushing for isn't going to happen. Try a more palatable version or a different approach.

I expect that you, MonctonRad, Acajack, rousseau, saffronleaf, someone123 all oppose, to some extent anyway, a number of recent legislative or cultural changes in Canada over the years. So I doubt that this group of posters acts as any kind of bellwether in this regard. (I don't think this is surprising in a democracy - reasonable people will disagree on any number of issues, proposals, etc.)

[savevp]

Originally Posted by someone123

I don't think drag queens are generally trying to make fun of women. Most of them seem to like feeling sterotypically feminine and commanding attention or entertaining spectators. Many of them are not stereotypically male-presenting in their day-to-day lives.

Just to play devil's advocate, wouldn't it be hypocritical for someone to accept the above (particularly what I bolded) on basis of gender, but not on race? Seems somewhat arbitrary that a man who likes feeling stereotypically feminine, or vice-versa, can act and dress in that manner, but to do so on racial lines is a great evil.

Perhaps some (many?) drag queens feel greatly more effeminate in daily life than is common, but what about a hypothetical J-Roc type character who is White but identifies with the Black community? Does his skin colour still preclude him from dressing or acting in certain ways, or using certain words?

Just seems to me to be quite arbitrary to embrace drag culture but then vilify the same thing when it's race instead of 🞵🞵🞵. Of course there are other hypocrisies as you move further to the extreme side of the social justice 'movement' but this dichotomy is pretty much universally agreed upon in polite society

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Pavlov

I expect that you, MonctonRad, Acajack, rousseau, saffronleaf, someone123 all oppose, to some extent anyway, a number of recent legislative or cultural changes in Canada over the years.

In the post just above yours I challenged anyone to find concrete examples of such changes. I'd be curious to hear yours...

(Thinking about it a tiny bit more, I wouldn't allow examples that would require reopening the Constitution or any other unrealistically high barrier to entry - it's very possible that the entirety of the sample I listed would all want an elected Senate that actually does something, but that's not a fair example.)

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Pavlov

(I don't think this is surprising in a democracy - reasonable people will disagree on any number of issues, proposals, etc.)

Sure, but still, if that kind of sample (all educated people who are interested in politics and society) are unanimous against your idea, it does not augur well at all for it.

I guarantee that if you had polled these six SSPers in 2014 about the idea of legalizing weed eventually, you would not have heard six "absolutely no way!" answers.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Pavlov

I don't recall either MolsonExport or MonctonRad being elected as spokespersons or representatives for any particular "side".



I expect that you, MonctonRad, Acajack, rousseau, saffronleaf, someone123 all oppose, to some extent anyway, a number of recent legislative or cultural changes in Canada over the years. So I doubt that this group of posters acts as any kind of bellwether in this regard. (I don't think this is surprising in a democracy - reasonable people will disagree on any number of issues, proposals, etc.)

With all due respect I think you might be getting caught up in "the moment".

Not sure how you came to this conclusion about me or even why you would, but I tend to have a very high degree of agreement with or at least acceptance for stuff that was decided by our duly elected bodies.

The mob? Not so much.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by savevp

Just seems to me to be quite arbitrary to embrace drag culture but then vilify the same thing when it's race instead of 🞵🞵🞵. Of course there are other hypocrisies as you move further to the extreme side of the social justice 'movement' but this dichotomy is pretty much universally agreed upon in polite society

That is true although a lot of our social rules or even laws are arbitrary. You might end up as a 🞵🞵🞵 offender if you sleep with a 17.9 year old but not if you sleep with an 18.0 year old for example, yet people mature at different rates. We just picked something that seems reasonable. And actually there is some logic to this. Children clearly need some legal protection and people need an objective, comprehensible rule to follow.

It seems obvious to me that we're talking about a political phenomenon that depends on social capital on both sides and the perception of intent.

I think what we will eventually get is people caring less about gender and race norms. So being transracial will be de facto okay, but the notion of being black or white won't be as salient as it is right now. 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 dimorphism is of course an objective biological phenomenon and feeds into some gender norms that I think will prove to be more stable than racial norms.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Not sure how you came to this conclusion about me or even why you would, but I tend to have a very high degree of agreement with or at least acceptance for stuff that was decided by our duly elected bodies.

There's a lot of jumping to conclusions in this thread. Say the wrong thing and you end up Othered.

For the record I'm 100% for police and criminal justice reform and basically just cancelling the whole war on drugs. Yet I don't agree with all of the BLM demands here in Vancouver, or in Seattle, or in Toronto (the 3 that I have read so far). I had specific complaints like "maybe this random guy with an AR-15 operating a DIY checkpoint in Capitol Hill, Seattle is not a good thing" and they turned out to be controversial. I am not even sure the pro-BLM people on here agree with all of those points. So to some degree which "camp" you're in seems to come down merely to whether you're a stickler for clarity in your social movements or not, or what you're willing to overlook to go along with the crowd, not even necessarily disagreement about how things ought to be!

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by someone123

There's a lot of jumping to conclusions in this thread. Say the wrong thing and you end up Othered.

For the record I'm 100% for police and criminal justice reform and basically just cancelling the whole war on drugs. Yet I don't agree with all of the BLM demands here in Vancouver, or in Seattle, or in Toronto (the 3 that I have read so far). I am not even sure the pro-BLM people on here agree with all of those points. So to some degree which "camp" you're in seems to come down merely to whether you're a stickler for clarity in your social movements or not, or what you're willing to overlook to go along with the crowd, not even necessarily disagreement about how things ought to be!

How I feel!