limeyangler

you would need to unpack what you mean or at least give a definition of what “Canadian Culture” is before an answer to this question can be arrived at.

Amazing Bunk, what great pictures! You have to come to Dryden and teach me how to fish for Muskies, free room and board!

Well I will say it again, some portions of society have always been and will always rightly be offended by RACISM. Talking about RACISM and calling it the 'R' word, seems pointless when everyone knows what we are talking about. The word RACISM or RACIST is not offensive in and of itself, but it is very interesting when I think about why somebody would find it offensive, so offensive it starts getting the "C" word treatment. Why are people so sensitive when the word arises? Why do they become defensive? I think sometimes it is because people don't think of themselves as racist because racism is now seen as something 'BAD' which is consciously enacted by individuals, and therefore if a person does not see themselves as RACIST (good) you are attacking a person's identity and moral character. But racism is not just about good and bad individuals and agency, it is also about a system of RACISM, that acts below the surface of the 'common sense' you mentioned, a system that necessarily embodies, reproduces and protects RACISM and the resultant the inequality, but because it is hidden a lot of the time with coded language (Substituting terms describing racial identity with seemingly race-neutral terms that disguise explicit and/or implicit racial animus), think 'real Canadians' , New Canadians', think Dog Whistle politics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics. Sociologists and Psychologists talk about 'Aversive' RACISM https://psychology.iresearchnet.com/social-psychology/prejudice/aversive-racism/ or to quote "A critical aspect of the aversive racism framework is the conflict between positive aspects of people’s conscious attitudes, involving the denial of personal prejudice, and underlying unconscious negative feelings toward, and beliefs about, particular minority groups." Another reason why talking about RACISM for some people is so touchy is because they actually are RACISTS, and any discussion or critical analysis about it threatens the status quo from which they benefit. When I went to University for my History/Sociology degree I remember at first feeling like it was all a bunch of bull, and while it sounded good, it had no practical use for me other than occupying my time and helping me to not relapse into drug/alcohol abuse ( I was pretty much fresh out of rehab at that point back in 1998). I remember going to my Sociology lecturer's office and having a tantrum, I was struggling with all these new concepts, and as it was new, it was frightening, confusing and I just wanted it to go away...lol. I put it to him that while he got a good salary out of it, what was in it for me? I'll never forget his answer as long as I live, he said that if it did nothing else for me, it would at least help me to 'challenge common sense assumptions about the world we live in". I was still pissed at him and unconvinced when I left the office but his words stuck to me like glue. Fast forward 20 years and I can say that despite a shaky start the lecturer and me are friends to this day and his words proved very true and useful. Why do I question common sense assumptions, including my own? Because they are anything but 'common' or 'universal' truths. A couple of examples. We arrived in Canada in the winter, so I had never experienced forest fire's before. My first trip fishing to Lac Seul that summer in a boat and i'm smelling woodsmoke, I turn to my buddy and say that there must be a lot of people on shore having BBQs that day, I was so embarrassed and felt so dumb, but from my experience my common sense informed me it was that and not forest fires. Another happened when I was responding to one of the replies in this post last night, I found myself about to refer to a lawyer that someone mentioned as 'He' when I did not know the gender of that person, my common sense telling me one thing, the reality possibly different. Those were personal experiences and now a hypothetical one, imagine how common sense would manifest differently for a person of colour and a white person if they were walking down the road by themselves turned a corner and were confronted by a group of white nationalists on the march, if it was me I would be inclined to run, for a white person far less a threat, common sense telling one to get the hell out of there and another common sense reaction being 'i'm probably safe'. Chris you said that if your house was on fire you would want an army of 6'6" young musclemen to come to your family's rescue and that they not be gay or female and that your preference is based on and informed by 'common sense'. This seems reasonable, on the surface. In fact discrimination often hides itself by claims of reasonableness, I mean who wouldn't want their family to be rescued by 'the best', that's reasonable right? But there is a gulf between that reasonable common sense and reality. Last time I looked at our local firefighting team not one measured in at 6'6", and there is one woman in that group and she aint the shortest. So the idea that you are getting to get what is a cross between a homoerotic fantasy and a Bridgette jones daydream climbing the ladder to rescue just isn't the case. To say that even if you could get what you wanted but somehow if one of those strapping 6 footers preferred sex with men would mean they were less intelligent or physically able is also just not based in fact, and if as you claim RACE would not mean someone was inferior to someone else how do you come to the conclusion that sexual preference does make you inferior to others? I'm also disappointed that someone who considers me a friend would be so flippant about offending someone else, you obviously know what you said was sexist and offensive as you draw our attention to the fact, I was brought up to respect people's differences and avoid making judgements about them based on those differences precisely because it is offensive.

I did not insult the lawyer, I said their logic was ridiculous and gave crystal clear reasons as to how I came to that conclusion, I did not call them any names, but you then call me names by saying I’m a hater, hater of what? Hater of a lawyer I would not want to represent me because I find their logic flawed? As consumers we all make similar choices, has nothing to do with ‘hating’ anything. You are also making up the story of what happened. You have invented and then introduced the idea, with only your say so to validate any of the statistics you provide, that Don's remarks were not targeted at immigrants because immigrants don't watch the show or if they do they cant understand English, that is so ridiculous I literaly laughed out loud in disbelief, even though I do not find it amusing at. Don was stating an opinion about immigrants ( “you people, that come here”) and who was watching at the time has no bearing on what he said. He could have been talking to a tree and his statement would still be racist. As for the Human Rights Code statement, please show me where it says your Human Right is that nobody in your presence should speak in a language you don’t understand, I suggest to you the HRC would protect the other person’s right to speak in whatever language they like! And as for telling me what the facts are , once again “ you people , that come here” does not equal “ everyone”.

Cherry aimed his comments at immigrants. Fact. What Cherry thinks about other people? who knows except Don, ridiculous logic, I’d be very worried to have this lawyer friend of yours representing me for even a parking ticket.

LOL, depends what i'm hunting.

WOW! Thank you guys, i feel a whole lot more part of this community again after that. And Chris I appreciate your input, I was going to reply to your comments about "political correctness" but I cannot spend my whole day on here, lol. But now i'm here......You talked about how 'society' these days is too easily offended, i'd have to ask which portions of society you are referring to as I know many members of society that have always been and always will be offended by what Don said. My feelings about political correctness is that it has become weaponized with the end to discredit arguments against change, not just change that needs to happen, but the changes that have already happened in so much as the voices that were not heard before are being heard, and while in the '70s it was more acceptable to be overtly racist it no longer is and the weaponization of 'being politically correct' is another attempt to silence. I hear it all the time, "you are too easily offended", "you snowflake" etc...etc....I am far from a snowflake, in so much as I don't melt away when the heat is on, I think this thread shows I don't do that, and its not that i'm easily offended, I just am offended when someone is being offensive.

LOL, people of colour think about racism daily, I'm 52, i've had a long time to think and now i'm shooting....lol.

Not really, and I didn't have to look hard, I have a keen eye. I could reverse that and say some choose not to look at all, ingnorance is bliss as they say.

LOL, and now I know why its called a 'MUFFler'.

Absolutely, good points. I think the privacy issue is interesting. So many of the complaints I hear from people about their privacy being invaded by a drone make me scratch my head though (no, I don't have fleas). Personally I don't have any interest in filming people, they are boring....lol.....but understand that others could and would you a drone for that purpose. Having said that, we are voluntarily giving away our private/personal info daily (Facebook, web browsing, loyalty cards, credit cards, algorithms that now what i'm thinking before I do and post ads accordingly on this platform) cctv is everywhere, everyone has a phone with a camera and can take pictures and video of anyone and anything in an instant, a drone flying across my bay is the last of my worries....lol.

Cowardly? Really? To stand against racism is cowardly? Rosa Parkes was a coward? Martin Luther King a coward? Shutting down the debate? How can calling out racism be shutting down a debate about racism? That is just absurd but i'm glad you brought that up because it is definitely an indication of the political climate you speak of, in terms of how people try to silence voices that cannot be heard in order for things to stay the way they are, I won't be silenced by that kind of perverse reasoning .

Yup, I have not used my Mavic Pro since they decided to practically crimiNalize drones over 250g. I intend to jump through all the hoops to fly legally, but what a load of Bull for someone living in the wilderness, I agree with the restrictions around airports etc, but holy man, way to kill the fun out of using your drone!

Cherry could challenge in court, just not through the avenues you mentioned. Omar Khadr won his case because the Supreme Court seemed the Government to be in breach of laws that protect the freedoms of every Canadian, the very freedoms that people continue to sacrifice their lives for.

It’s not even a long stretch, it’s not even applicable as the legislation pertains to protection from actions of a government. And what actions of government did Omar challenge in the Supreme Court? In summarizing the wrongs committed against Khadr, the Supreme Court said “the interrogation of a youth detained without access to counsel, to elicit statements about serious criminal charges while knowing that the youth had been subjected to sleep deprivation... offends the most basic Canadian standards about the treatment of detained youth suspects.”

"The silent majority is always going to be a state of mind," he said. "It's a feeling. It's a feeling of dispossession. And that feeling of dispossession can come about most dramatically in times when things seem to be changing, when all that's solid melts into air."

WOW, talk about the 'white' elephant in the room. Two white guys on the opposite side of the spectrum. And as for nobody getting their nose outta whack? Black people's noses back then were just "outa wack" in response to racism as it is to this day.

Rolodex is 8 years old this month.

Sorry Sterling.

Really? Yeah and maybe Elvis is still alive and driving Taxi in Quebec.

How did he recognise those people in Mississauga and Toronto as “you people that come here” then? Were they wearing a badge with ‘New Canadian” on it where the poppy should have been? Of course not, he recognised them by the colour of their skin. It’s interesting how people are racist these days. If I don’t say Black but use other ways of saying it I then have plausible deniability. I can say it’s not about race, or race is not an issue and claim the universality of human experience and then turn things upside down and say because the accuser of racism talked about skin colour they are in fact the racist. What is the purpose of this? To shut down the conversation and neutralise any argument that racism exists and maintain the status quo, a status quo in which there is a huge power imbalance that benefits one group and denies others purely on the basis of skin color. I remember as a kid I was stopped by the police and asked for my immigration documents! I had a broad English accent then as now, why did the cop assume I was not from England? This still happens today, coded language is key. I get asked all the time, where are you from? You tell the person and the reply is, “ no, I mean where are you really/ originally from?” These are just examples of frequent reoccurring microaggressions experienced by people of color, we are well aware of the ways in which racism manifests without saying black, brown etc.. etc. Being reminded daily of one’s ‘otherness’ is the commonly shared experience of people of colour, of course if you don’t experience this it might be hard to see or believe it is the reality for some, to be told that my actual experience and my actual identity don’t exist and I only believe it because I’m a “ snowflake” is just insult to injury.

I think a good analogy for the 3 dots you mention is the 'blue pill' from the film The Matrix, "The red pill, together with its opposite, the blue pill, is a popular cultural meme, a metaphor representing a choice between the "red pill", representing a life of harsh knowledge, desperate freedom, and the brutal truths of reality, and the "blue pill", representing a life of luxurious security, tranquil happiness, and the blissful ignorance of the harsh realities of life, basking in an (essentially dishonest) illusion."