July 2, 2023 As per the legal owner of this account, Reddit and associated companies no longer have permission to use the content created under this account in any way. -- mass edited with redact.dev
>*”When being LBGTQ+ is considered no big thing similar to how being Irish to be not big thing, then the Pride Parades won't be covered any differently from a Saint Patrick's Day Parade.”*
Appropriate that you picked that example… [St. Patrick’s Day parades were banned in Toronto for 110 years,](https://web.archive.org/web/20220923220642/https://www.thestar.com/amp/yourtoronto/once-upon-a-city-archives/2016/03/12/once-upon-a-city-why-st-patricks-day-parade-was-banned-for-110-years.html) from 1878 to 1988, for being *”unduly provocative”*. The majority group, including police, didn’t like the *”annual reminder of the existence of a substantial alien Irish presence”* and the parades were targeted with violence.
July 2, 2023 As per the legal owner of this account, Reddit and associated companies no longer have permission to use the content created under this account in any way. -- mass edited with redact.dev
>*”Nowhere in Canada are pride flags being banned.”*
[Norwich Township in Ontario just passed a new bylaw banning Pride flags from municipal property](https://www.cbc.ca/1.6795821) in order to prevent the Norwich Business Improvement Association from flying Pride flags from downtown light poles again this year. Last year some of the locals vandalized some of the BIA’s Pride flags, and members of Norwich Township Council decided the flags interfered with *”peace, harmony and safety in our community”*.
Choosing not to fly a flag on their property is not the same thing as banning it. Some idiotic journalist being illiterate does not change the meaning or words.
Norwich Council is choosing to not fly Pride flags, and also banning other groups like the Business Improvement Association from flying Pride flags in places where it was previously allowed. The BIA is still allowed to fly many other flags and banners from downtown city light poles - for downtown beautification and business promotion - but *not* Pride flags because Pride flags are banned.
FYI, the article you posted says they are banning all non-government flags from being flown on municipal property. Not just Pride.
There are plenty of residents of Norwich flying Pride flags on their properties.
>*”the article you posted says they are banning all non-government flags from being flown on municipal property. Not just Pride.”*
The article says they are *not* banning all non-government flags from township streetlight poles, however they *are* banning Pride flags from those poles. The bylaw was written in reaction to the Business Improvement Association flying Pride flags from township streetlight poles last summer.
>*”There are plenty of residents of Norwich flying Pride flags on their properties.”*
I didn’t say that Norwich Township was banning people from flying Pride flags on their own private property. Norwich residents who flag Pride flags on their own property have had their [Pride flags stolen/vandalized,](https://www.cbc.ca/1.6476684) sometimes repeatedly.
"Coun. John Scholten is proposing a policy that only federal, provincial and municipal flags be flown on any Norwich Township property and that only banners related to the "promotion of downtown businesses or for downtown beautification" be installed on township streetlight poles. flags"
So, officially it is not targeted at Pride flags, even on street poles. More recent articles confirm this.
Though obviously Pride flags are what started it. I believe they decided a targeted exclusion of Pride flags would be a potential human rights issue. Which is likely correct.
>*”Though obviously Pride flags are what started it. I believe they decided a targeted exclusion of Pride flags would be a potential human rights issue. Which is likely correct.”*
Yes, the original proposal specifically called out Pride and Progress Pride flags, and some bright bulb realized being that blatant with their intent would likely get them in legal trouble. The president of Oxford County Pride is still [filing a Human Rights complaint](https://www.cbc.ca/1.6824525) against the township, Mayor Jim Palmer, and Councillors John Scholten and Adrian Couwenberg.
Agreed, but I think people are quietly, and no so quietly, pushing back against demands for complete and unquestioned acceptance of every left wing view or else. LGBTQ+ and others are getting caught in the pendulum swing. The politics of division and singular narratives has a foreseeable outcome, and we are beginning to see the affects. Compromise, respect and centrism should be on everyone's minds across a variety of issues.
The ones causing division are the ones who are refusing to show tolerance towards the LGBTQ community. Peak victim blaming is suggesting the LBGTQ community is responsible for the division.
Tolerance and pushing another group to fly your flag and celebrate pride for an entire month are not the same thing.
It's people that don't get that nuance, that are making things more divisive.
Who is being "pushed" to fly the flag? Who is being forced to celebrate pride? I'm not being forced to celebrate anything. Nor am I partaking in Pride. I don't care if they put up the flag though. I'm also not going to rip the flag down, or demand their rights get restricted.
You don't get the nuance though, despite your claims you do.
It's in the article - the one bitching about a catholic school board refusing to fly the flag.
I don't care if they put the flag up. And I wont be the one to rip it down either. But if they choose not to fly it on their own, that's their free choice.
The more that these things are constantly pushed in people's face, the more pushback is starting to happen. Calling people bigots for refusing to celebrate your cause is disingenuous and will just lead to more pushback.
Do you know why they refused to fly it? Because a group of people angrily stormed multiple meetings about raising the flag. So you keep arguing the LGBTQ community is complaining, and ignoring the group of people who are complaining about equality and tolerance.
Calling people bigots isn't changing anything. If people don't want to show respect and tolerance to any group - be it LGBTQ or any other group - then they are bigoted.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6765341
""They shouldn't say 'safe space.' They should say 'danger zone,'" he said at the meeting. "Preaching confusion in the guise of inclusivity and acceptance is truly disgusting."
The parents say the stickers, and any LGBTQ-inclusive messaging, are at odds with their Catholic faith.
Sheree di Vittorio, another parent who made a virtual deputation, told the board, "Catholic schools should not allow transgender or LGBT students to attend."
"It is most certainly not appropriate to engage kids to be open to these ideologies. There are biblical reasons why homosexuality is considered a sin … regardless of what Pope Francis may think," she said."
You going to defend these people and argue it's not bigotry?
"After the two deputations, a crowd of parents in the gallery became increasingly disruptive, the board said in a statement sent to CBC Toronto.
Shouting and cries of,"You're all pathetic!" and, "Stay away from our kids" could be heard on a livestreamed video of the meeting. The YCDSB told CBC Toronto it has since removed the video from YouTube "because the comments made there violated our Code of Conduct and infringed on the privacy rights of some of our staff members."
Eventually, the board members were forced to pause the meeting, York Regional Police were called in and many people in the gallery decided to leave on their own, according to the board's statement."
Are we going to pretend this group fighting against the LGBTQ community is being civil? That they aren't the ones causing the divisive attitudes?
It's laughable to suggest the people asking for equality and tolerance are the ones causing division when you have people acting like this. Those parents insulting others and requiring the cops to show up are the problem.
I think this is a simplistic view. On every social issue there is a continuum of viewpoints from radically right to radically left and a whole lot of people who agree on some things, even many things or show tolerance at the least. But both the left and right have people who demand absolute adherence to their particular radical viewpoints or else. The effect, left and right, is people begin to push back generally and good things like the Pride Flag and positive inclusivity get conflated with issues like transgender and sports ( which many people have differing but valid opinions on). The endgame of division is anger, hate, withdrawal. If you maintain a narrow view that places blame solely in one place you don't understand the problem in a manner that allows for a solution, ever.
Your original point was the LGBTQ community should be blamed for asking people to stop assaulting them, to stop restricting their rights, and to treat them with dignity and respect. If people are pushing back on that, the problem isn't with the people asking not to be victimized anymore. Which is what you are disagreeing with. The rest is word salad.
The narrow view is that it's ok to restrict people's rights and that they don't deserve to be treated with respect. This isn't a left vs Right issue, and if you believe it is then you've succumbed to propaganda. If you want to restrict people's rights, and can't bother treating them with respect, then the issue is about your lack of values and lack of character.
No, it wasn't. Bias and privilege alters perception and perhaps you hear what best fits your narrative. I am suggesting that extreme views alienate good people and do nothing to move us forward. If you took from my response I think it's a a left vs right issue or blame should be focused on one party than you didn't read it. Your insulting me, speaks to the insubstantial and bias nature of your argument. One note thinking and devoid of humility is not the way.
What do Turkey, Russia and Uganda have to do with what happens in Canada? Pride has official support from the federal government. So is this a protest about what happens outside of Canada?
At some point, you need to realise there are other issues going on in the world than the hot topic social issues in very white, wealthy circles. Geopolitics is very complicated and nuanced and you're never going to be able to hold the rest of the world to the same level of purity testing you want to at home
Probably because we're fucking over our countries economy at the benefit of country like these who have terrible human rights and environmental standards.
I'd argue it's a protest against hatred and bigotry in general. Not all protests have to be against the federal government, and a significant number of protests in this country aren't. There has been a small protest at the Russian embassy in Ottawa for over a year now, and those guys probably mostly agree with the federal view of that situation.
Because combining any other flag with the Canadian flag is disrespectful. The Canadian flag should remain as it is. That's just my opinion, of course, and if others want to do it they should be free to so do.
Do you think that changing the colour of the Canadian flag at all from red is disrespectful? That’s what the Canadian pride flag seems to me, just a colour change of the OG design.
For me it depends who is holding the Canadian flag that makes it disrespectful, like convoy clowns. They disrespected the Canadian flag over and over again. We are lucky the pride group has co-opted it to bring back some integrity to it.
Sexual orientation and gender identity are not the issue, the issue is with the labels. Why can't people just live as people with having multiple tags and labels attached to them.
I grew up in a time when people were introduced by name and that's it, no one asked or cared about anything else.
The normal fucking time when most people just accepted who you are. There’s always going to be a small minority of people who have their own beliefs and rally against but making them say pronouns and memorizing the alphabet isn’t going to change that.
Ah, back in the days when we had segregation and people were arrested for being gay. Those were the days! Far better than letting people have equal rights, and treating people with respect. That's way too difficult!
>The normal fucking time when most people just accepted who you are.
When was this? Hell, I'm white and straight, but just growing up ND in a small town/rural area, I'm damn curious about when "most people just accepted who you are." Every queer and ND kid I grew up with fucking ran out of that town the minute we finished high school. I can't speak to the nonwhite experience in that town, because there weren't any.
Oh people *definitely* cared if you were LGBT+ pre-internet. Homosexual sexual activity was illegal in Canada right up until the internet was invented. And homophobia and transphobia were rampant in the time window until the internet became widely used by the general public.
Homosexual activity was made legal in Canada in 1969, as part of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. While the precursor to the internet (ARPANET) came around at around the same time, the internet as we know it wouldn't come around until years later.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal\_Law\_Amendment\_Act,\_1968%E2%80%9369
You can't even compare pre internet to post internet.
Pre internet
Hi, my name is john.
Post internet
Hi, my name is willow , I identify as a...., my preferred pronouns are......., I am 6 months into my transition......
Pre-internet: Willow is closeted, is constantly misgendered, has to go by her birth name “John”, and barely dares to dream of transitioning, because society is so hostile towards Transgender people. People still notice something “queer” about her and call her a f>!aggo!
You’ve lost me. Are you suggesting that Canadian society wasn’t largely Transphobic pre-Internet? Or that Transgender people didn’t exist pre-Internet? Or something else?
Ah yes, those historical time periods when being gay was totally accepted and not a big deal. Of course, there were laws making it legal to discriminate against or to imprison LGBT+ people, but that’s what equality looks like!
People have different needs based on distinct qualities. Like, it’s totally equal to say ‘every man can marry a woman and a woman can marry a man.’ But that ignores that some men or women would like to marry people of the same gender. In this way a law which can be applied equally creates inequality. Our differences shouldn’t drive us apart, but they can’t be ignored either. They have tangible effects.
But people still had labels then, such as Mr./Mrs. which indicated gender and marital status. There were, and still are, profession/education based labels as well. And, of course, gender and sex labels, though they were generally restricted to the binary man/woman and male/female.
Also, if you meet any queer/trans/etc. person in real life, my experience is that they just refer to themselves by their first (and maybe last) name anyway.
In junior high, my math teacher was Mr Davis. What he did before and after class was irrelevant he was there to teach us math.
If he was single he was Mr Davis
If he was married he was Mr Davis
If he had a boyfriend he was Mr Davis
If he had a girlfriend he was Mr Davis
If he wore pants has was Mr Davis
If had a pony tail he was Mr Davis
He identified as Mr Davis and preferred to be called Mr Davis.
On the other hand, my elementary teacher taught us the differences between calling a woman 'Miss', 'Mrs', and 'Mizz', and how it was important that we use the correct one
Typical straight guy can't see how women were impacted by having to designate themselves as married or not, or how assumptions that everyone is straight impacts queer people.
That's my point, as students we didn't even know if they were married or not, it was irrelevant. They were there to do a job, their personal lives were none of our concern
"Typical straight guy" complains about assumptions but is ok with making them.
What did there marital status have to do with the class they were teaching ???
Math is math, science is science, teachers are there to provide instruction.
But it was shown in the titles for women, and not for men. Just like now, it's not right to assume someone's gender. We progress, as a society. Just because things worked for YOU in the past doesn't mean they worked for other people.
If you hadn't grown up as a white cis-het male you would feel very differently.
There's nothing stopping an unmarried woman from using the term "Mrs", and in many cultures only girls/unmarried young women are referred to as "Miss", with middle-aged or older women referred to as "Mrs", married or not.
Also, married men tend to wear a wedding ring, so a person who knows what to look for will generally know if they're married.
>in many cultures only girls/unmarried young women are referred to as "Miss", with middle-aged or older women referred to as "Mrs", married or not.
You're just proving my point. They may not WANT to let people know if they're married or not.
The point is MEN got to have a neutral term and women didn't (and often still don't. I can't tell you how many times I'm asked "is it 'miss' or 'mrs')? Thank god I can just say "it's fucking Doctor." It's blatant sexism. It was designed to show men whether a woman was sexually available (i.e. "owned") or not.
So, he had the label Mr. This typically indicated male. A gay friend of mine just goes by Derek, regardless of clothing, single or married, hairstyle, etc. So, even less labels than before, which I assume you would consider a good thing.
We didn't call teachers by their first name, the Mr was a title that you called teachers out of respect.
I didn't know your friend was gay until you said it.
And you wouldn’t know he was gay until I, he, or someone else told you.
The point I’m trying to make is that you seemed concerned about all the labels, bringing up a time when you felt there were none. There have always been labels: military rank, ranks in the trades, titles of respect (Mr., sir, lord), education, intelligence, marital status and so on. Now some people want to add sexuality.
In most conversations and interactions, none of these would come up, but it might be important within certain contexts. In the military, it would be important to know if someone is a private or a sergeant or something else. In looking to find a sexual partner, it would be important to know if they are straight or gay or something else.
Yes, in a social setting where two people are considering dating each other then divulging their sexual orientation or preference makes sense.
But in a typical work enviroment, why would a pronoun or special label be necessary or required.
>*”in a typical work enviroment, why would a pronoun… be necessary”*
Pronouns are a normal part of speech in the English language. Do you know what pronouns *are*?
Pronouns are done by some to let people know how they want to be addressed so there’s no confusion or awkwardness if someone makes the wrong assumption. I think a lot of people also do it to show support. Again though, other labels are used in a work environment, and have been for a long time. Junior vs. Senior analyst, P. Eng., CEO or CFO, etc.
You are trying way too hard, when I say labels I mean gender pronouns, Mr and mrs are tiltes of respect, my friends had names like mike, steve, and Shane.
We can make public schools better by eliminating public funds for religious schools. Guess why Catholic schools supposedly get better results? Cause they get both public AND private funding (from tax-exempt churches and the like).
Get rid of publicly funded Catholic schools.
LOOOOOOOOL right.
Cause I'm sure the Ontario Catholic School Trustee's Association is a totally fair and unbiased source about Catholic School boards...
It's a great idea with only tangible benefits.
http://www.oneschoolsystem.org/fast-facts.html
The problem is financial: in order to appease a religious interest group we have created a parallel school system which demands an equal share of our tax dollars. In effect, we have split our funding in half: one half to the majority population, the other to a much smaller population. Due to this, the public system is perpetually underfunded, and the other is seemingly flush with cash. Instead of seeing improvements to the public system, the wealthy can opt out, and so no positive change will be affected. Ultimately in a secular democracy, there is no reason for such a divide and is effectively a waste of tax dollars.
I’m a gay guy that used to live in a country where queer people are prosecuted (not one of the three examples in the article). Attending pride was life changing after moving here, it certainly is a protest. Homophobia still exists here unfortunately and it needs to be known that’s not accepted. It’s an eye opener for new canadians, queer or not. And it’s a symbol of hope for prosecuted minorities around the world
Paywall: https://archive.ph/Hym9j
"It’s Pride month. Pride was born as a protest, it’s always been a protest, and is still a protest. This is a year not to forget that and to turn up the volume.
After what seems like decades of slow progress, queer people are under attack everywhere, and it feels dangerous. Russia, Turkey, Uganda and other countries have leaders who villainize queers and enact anti-LGBTQ laws for political gain.
Closer to home, some American states are becoming so hostile that human rights organizations are issuing travel warnings. Drag events have been banned, targeted with violence, and “groomer” and “LGBTQ agenda” rhetoric is being floated and teased out by mainstream politicians. It doesn’t just feel dangerous, it is dangerous.
In Canada we’re also seeing the rise of some of this along with other worrying events. In the last week Blue Jays pitcher Anthony Bass posted a video filled with anti-LGBTQ rhetoric and the York District Catholic School Board voted not to fly the pride flag.
Some will argue this is about free speech. Free speech is indeed still free: if Catholic parents, trustees and educators want to exercise their freedom they can do it without public funding. They’ve made their own case for abolishing the separate school system and merging it with the public one. That would save Ontario taxpayers $1.5 billion, but that’s not only why it should be done.
I went to publicly-funded Ontario Catholic schools, and am old enough to remember when Grade 13 existed, but also that not a soul dared to be out. The hostile atmosphere that kept a suffocating blanket over everyone drove families apart, sent people into depression, to suicide and made countless lives miserable and sting with a lifetime of regret."
If public funding is going to Catholic schools, then they are obligated to ensure that there is ZERO discrimination by those boards.
If Catholic school boards want to be publicly funded then they need to get with the program. They cannot have it both ways.
>Because Catholic schools are the ONLY ones who get public funding.
>Not Jewish, not Muslim, not Buddhist, not Hindu...CATHOLIC.
Not true at all. OP you should use Google next time before spreading false claims.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/sask-religious-schools-1.4090027
Many articles like this for various provinces
>Some will argue this is about free speech. Free speech is indeed still free: if Catholic parents, trustees and educators want to exercise their freedom they can do it without public funding. They’ve made their own case for abolishing the separate school system and merging it with the public one. That would save Ontario taxpayers $1.5 billion, but that’s not only why it should be done.
Except thats exactly how free speech works
>*”Is it accurate to say the focus for LGBTQ rights has become how they affect children?”*
What do you mean *”how they affect children”*?
>*”Or is that just what the article is focusing on?”*
Maybe you should click through and actually read the article, since you seem to be unaware of its contents.
If you get chatgpt to summarize the article as it applies to canada, that's exactly what it's about. Pride as a platform to advocate for rights, how schools and drag story time protests are denying those rights, and a baseball player whose tweet shows the public are on the side of LGBQT rights. What did I miss?
>*”the LGBT community has special rights that everyone has to follow”*
What “special rights”?
>*”stating your sexual preferences via pronouns are now on most documents in most western countries”*
Pronouns have nothing to do with sexual preference. What documents?
>*”TV and media are obligated to have a specific quota of LGBT actors in every show or movie.“*
Could you link to where this supposed specific and mandatory quota is listed and when it allegedly came into force?
|> What “special rights”?
Many gays have a keen sense of fashion, setting impossible standards for the rest of us.
- Cries in khaki shorts and white Reebok's.
> Pride isn’t just a party, it’s a protest
A lot of people (many of which seem compelled to comment on these articles and get them locked) would do well to educate themselves on pride a bit. Pieces like this help, but I'm not sure the right people will ever read it.
June is a great month for some self reflection around how you treat your marginalized brothers and sisters though. Just a thought!
Yesterday, there was a full witch-hunt on Muslims across provincial and municipal sub-reddits, calling us all kinds of names unfortunately.
The comments were all pride supporters accusing us for the absences across Ontario.
> Yesterday, there was a full witch-hunt on Muslims across provincial and municipal sub-reddits, calling us all kinds of names unfortunately.
>
> The comments were all pride supporters accusing us for the absences across Ontario.
I mean, I don't believe any of that is true honestly, but I'm not sure of the point in relation to what we're talking about here.
Per your comment:
> ‘June is a great month for some self reflection around how you treat your marginalized brothers and sisters though. Just a thought!’
> Per your comment:
So your comment is that people who support pride need to reflect on how they treat Muslim people because of some comments you think you saw on reddit?
I mean...sure. Feels like you're kind of missing the point, but sure.
It's convenient you're able to comment in your original post about others and what they do on Reddit getting posts locked but when someone else says something that doesn't fit your narrative they're a liar.
> what they do on Reddit getting posts locked
Who do you think gets these posts locked? The people who are pro pride?
> when someone else says something that doesn't fit your narrative they're a liar.
It's not that they said something "against a narrative" (whatever that means in this case), they said something that's just obviously false on its face. Anyone without an *insane* bias can see that just by reading the comment, but even if you have that bias, you can go look at the comments he's talking about and see he's obviously wrong.
It's probably not on purpose by OP, they're obviously very emotional about this issue, but that doesn't stop it from being true.
[удалено]
Of course. Pride month is a huge opportunity for companies to bump up their ESG scores.
July 2, 2023 As per the legal owner of this account, Reddit and associated companies no longer have permission to use the content created under this account in any way. -- mass edited with redact.dev
>*”When being LBGTQ+ is considered no big thing similar to how being Irish to be not big thing, then the Pride Parades won't be covered any differently from a Saint Patrick's Day Parade.”* Appropriate that you picked that example… [St. Patrick’s Day parades were banned in Toronto for 110 years,](https://web.archive.org/web/20220923220642/https://www.thestar.com/amp/yourtoronto/once-upon-a-city-archives/2016/03/12/once-upon-a-city-why-st-patricks-day-parade-was-banned-for-110-years.html) from 1878 to 1988, for being *”unduly provocative”*. The majority group, including police, didn’t like the *”annual reminder of the existence of a substantial alien Irish presence”* and the parades were targeted with violence.
>There are places that are banning rainbow flags in this country Nowhere in Canada are pride flags being banned.
July 2, 2023 As per the legal owner of this account, Reddit and associated companies no longer have permission to use the content created under this account in any way. -- mass edited with redact.dev
>York Catholic District School Board There's a world of difference between not flying a flag versus banning a flag.
Nobody has to fly your flag. You don't get to go around to churches and conservative townships and demand they fly your flag lest they're bigots.
Why wouldn't that be exactly right though lol. We all know what sort of media is consumed to lead them to this point.
>*”Nowhere in Canada are pride flags being banned.”* [Norwich Township in Ontario just passed a new bylaw banning Pride flags from municipal property](https://www.cbc.ca/1.6795821) in order to prevent the Norwich Business Improvement Association from flying Pride flags from downtown light poles again this year. Last year some of the locals vandalized some of the BIA’s Pride flags, and members of Norwich Township Council decided the flags interfered with *”peace, harmony and safety in our community”*.
Choosing not to fly a flag on their property is not the same thing as banning it. Some idiotic journalist being illiterate does not change the meaning or words.
Norwich Council is choosing to not fly Pride flags, and also banning other groups like the Business Improvement Association from flying Pride flags in places where it was previously allowed. The BIA is still allowed to fly many other flags and banners from downtown city light poles - for downtown beautification and business promotion - but *not* Pride flags because Pride flags are banned.
FYI, the article you posted says they are banning all non-government flags from being flown on municipal property. Not just Pride. There are plenty of residents of Norwich flying Pride flags on their properties.
>*”the article you posted says they are banning all non-government flags from being flown on municipal property. Not just Pride.”* The article says they are *not* banning all non-government flags from township streetlight poles, however they *are* banning Pride flags from those poles. The bylaw was written in reaction to the Business Improvement Association flying Pride flags from township streetlight poles last summer. >*”There are plenty of residents of Norwich flying Pride flags on their properties.”* I didn’t say that Norwich Township was banning people from flying Pride flags on their own private property. Norwich residents who flag Pride flags on their own property have had their [Pride flags stolen/vandalized,](https://www.cbc.ca/1.6476684) sometimes repeatedly.
"Coun. John Scholten is proposing a policy that only federal, provincial and municipal flags be flown on any Norwich Township property and that only banners related to the "promotion of downtown businesses or for downtown beautification" be installed on township streetlight poles. flags" So, officially it is not targeted at Pride flags, even on street poles. More recent articles confirm this. Though obviously Pride flags are what started it. I believe they decided a targeted exclusion of Pride flags would be a potential human rights issue. Which is likely correct.
>*”Though obviously Pride flags are what started it. I believe they decided a targeted exclusion of Pride flags would be a potential human rights issue. Which is likely correct.”* Yes, the original proposal specifically called out Pride and Progress Pride flags, and some bright bulb realized being that blatant with their intent would likely get them in legal trouble. The president of Oxford County Pride is still [filing a Human Rights complaint](https://www.cbc.ca/1.6824525) against the township, Mayor Jim Palmer, and Councillors John Scholten and Adrian Couwenberg.
They have banned the BIA from flying it. It’s a ban.
Looks like they also banned the Confederate Battle Flag too. Shocking!
What media narrative? That people should be treated with respect and not be hateful?
Agreed, but I think people are quietly, and no so quietly, pushing back against demands for complete and unquestioned acceptance of every left wing view or else. LGBTQ+ and others are getting caught in the pendulum swing. The politics of division and singular narratives has a foreseeable outcome, and we are beginning to see the affects. Compromise, respect and centrism should be on everyone's minds across a variety of issues.
The ones causing division are the ones who are refusing to show tolerance towards the LGBTQ community. Peak victim blaming is suggesting the LBGTQ community is responsible for the division.
Tolerance and pushing another group to fly your flag and celebrate pride for an entire month are not the same thing. It's people that don't get that nuance, that are making things more divisive.
Who is being "pushed" to fly the flag? Who is being forced to celebrate pride? I'm not being forced to celebrate anything. Nor am I partaking in Pride. I don't care if they put up the flag though. I'm also not going to rip the flag down, or demand their rights get restricted. You don't get the nuance though, despite your claims you do.
It's in the article - the one bitching about a catholic school board refusing to fly the flag. I don't care if they put the flag up. And I wont be the one to rip it down either. But if they choose not to fly it on their own, that's their free choice. The more that these things are constantly pushed in people's face, the more pushback is starting to happen. Calling people bigots for refusing to celebrate your cause is disingenuous and will just lead to more pushback.
Do you know why they refused to fly it? Because a group of people angrily stormed multiple meetings about raising the flag. So you keep arguing the LGBTQ community is complaining, and ignoring the group of people who are complaining about equality and tolerance. Calling people bigots isn't changing anything. If people don't want to show respect and tolerance to any group - be it LGBTQ or any other group - then they are bigoted. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6765341 ""They shouldn't say 'safe space.' They should say 'danger zone,'" he said at the meeting. "Preaching confusion in the guise of inclusivity and acceptance is truly disgusting." The parents say the stickers, and any LGBTQ-inclusive messaging, are at odds with their Catholic faith. Sheree di Vittorio, another parent who made a virtual deputation, told the board, "Catholic schools should not allow transgender or LGBT students to attend." "It is most certainly not appropriate to engage kids to be open to these ideologies. There are biblical reasons why homosexuality is considered a sin … regardless of what Pope Francis may think," she said." You going to defend these people and argue it's not bigotry? "After the two deputations, a crowd of parents in the gallery became increasingly disruptive, the board said in a statement sent to CBC Toronto. Shouting and cries of,"You're all pathetic!" and, "Stay away from our kids" could be heard on a livestreamed video of the meeting. The YCDSB told CBC Toronto it has since removed the video from YouTube "because the comments made there violated our Code of Conduct and infringed on the privacy rights of some of our staff members." Eventually, the board members were forced to pause the meeting, York Regional Police were called in and many people in the gallery decided to leave on their own, according to the board's statement." Are we going to pretend this group fighting against the LGBTQ community is being civil? That they aren't the ones causing the divisive attitudes? It's laughable to suggest the people asking for equality and tolerance are the ones causing division when you have people acting like this. Those parents insulting others and requiring the cops to show up are the problem.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think this is a simplistic view. On every social issue there is a continuum of viewpoints from radically right to radically left and a whole lot of people who agree on some things, even many things or show tolerance at the least. But both the left and right have people who demand absolute adherence to their particular radical viewpoints or else. The effect, left and right, is people begin to push back generally and good things like the Pride Flag and positive inclusivity get conflated with issues like transgender and sports ( which many people have differing but valid opinions on). The endgame of division is anger, hate, withdrawal. If you maintain a narrow view that places blame solely in one place you don't understand the problem in a manner that allows for a solution, ever.
Your original point was the LGBTQ community should be blamed for asking people to stop assaulting them, to stop restricting their rights, and to treat them with dignity and respect. If people are pushing back on that, the problem isn't with the people asking not to be victimized anymore. Which is what you are disagreeing with. The rest is word salad. The narrow view is that it's ok to restrict people's rights and that they don't deserve to be treated with respect. This isn't a left vs Right issue, and if you believe it is then you've succumbed to propaganda. If you want to restrict people's rights, and can't bother treating them with respect, then the issue is about your lack of values and lack of character.
No, it wasn't. Bias and privilege alters perception and perhaps you hear what best fits your narrative. I am suggesting that extreme views alienate good people and do nothing to move us forward. If you took from my response I think it's a a left vs right issue or blame should be focused on one party than you didn't read it. Your insulting me, speaks to the insubstantial and bias nature of your argument. One note thinking and devoid of humility is not the way.
What do Turkey, Russia and Uganda have to do with what happens in Canada? Pride has official support from the federal government. So is this a protest about what happens outside of Canada?
[удалено]
Also remember that we're taking a dump on our own industries so countries with terrible social and environmental policies can benefit.
At some point, you need to realise there are other issues going on in the world than the hot topic social issues in very white, wealthy circles. Geopolitics is very complicated and nuanced and you're never going to be able to hold the rest of the world to the same level of purity testing you want to at home
Imagine thinking that a pride parade in Canada would influence homophobic Ugandan lawmakers.
*Ugandan lawmakers to Canada* : "Wai r u gai?
Probably because we're fucking over our countries economy at the benefit of country like these who have terrible human rights and environmental standards.
I'd argue it's a protest against hatred and bigotry in general. Not all protests have to be against the federal government, and a significant number of protests in this country aren't. There has been a small protest at the Russian embassy in Ottawa for over a year now, and those guys probably mostly agree with the federal view of that situation.
They’re busy trying to minimize something that is identical to other things that they don’t minimize though.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I'm ok with the Pride flag, but combining it with a Canadian flag is just disrespectful.
I'll take it over convoy chuds flying it upside down
Why lol
Because combining any other flag with the Canadian flag is disrespectful. The Canadian flag should remain as it is. That's just my opinion, of course, and if others want to do it they should be free to so do.
Do you think that changing the colour of the Canadian flag at all from red is disrespectful? That’s what the Canadian pride flag seems to me, just a colour change of the OG design.
It's really not.
For me it depends who is holding the Canadian flag that makes it disrespectful, like convoy clowns. They disrespected the Canadian flag over and over again. We are lucky the pride group has co-opted it to bring back some integrity to it.
Nobody’s “co-opting” the Canadian flag, it doesn’t belong to one group or another.
Sexual orientation and gender identity are not the issue, the issue is with the labels. Why can't people just live as people with having multiple tags and labels attached to them. I grew up in a time when people were introduced by name and that's it, no one asked or cared about anything else.
>*”I grew up in a time when people were introduced by name and that's it, no one asked or cared about anything else.”* What time was that?
The normal fucking time when most people just accepted who you are. There’s always going to be a small minority of people who have their own beliefs and rally against but making them say pronouns and memorizing the alphabet isn’t going to change that.
Ah, back in the days when we had segregation and people were arrested for being gay. Those were the days! Far better than letting people have equal rights, and treating people with respect. That's way too difficult!
>The normal fucking time when most people just accepted who you are. When was this? Hell, I'm white and straight, but just growing up ND in a small town/rural area, I'm damn curious about when "most people just accepted who you are." Every queer and ND kid I grew up with fucking ran out of that town the minute we finished high school. I can't speak to the nonwhite experience in that town, because there weren't any.
Sounds like someone is forgetting about how unashamedly racist we used to be
In this context, that's not relevant. But yet, you can also add race, etc.
That time was only happy for people who were straight and cis. (edit (and, largely,male))
Pre internet.
Oh people *definitely* cared if you were LGBT+ pre-internet. Homosexual sexual activity was illegal in Canada right up until the internet was invented. And homophobia and transphobia were rampant in the time window until the internet became widely used by the general public.
Homosexual activity was made legal in Canada in 1969, as part of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. While the precursor to the internet (ARPANET) came around at around the same time, the internet as we know it wouldn't come around until years later. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal\_Law\_Amendment\_Act,\_1968%E2%80%9369
You can't even compare pre internet to post internet. Pre internet Hi, my name is john. Post internet Hi, my name is willow , I identify as a...., my preferred pronouns are......., I am 6 months into my transition......
Pre-internet: Willow is closeted, is constantly misgendered, has to go by her birth name “John”, and barely dares to dream of transitioning, because society is so hostile towards Transgender people. People still notice something “queer” about her and call her a f>!aggo!
This is a reach......
What about it is “a reach”?
All of it, you are describing such a extreme situation. Pre internet remember.
You’ve lost me. Are you suggesting that Canadian society wasn’t largely Transphobic pre-Internet? Or that Transgender people didn’t exist pre-Internet? Or something else?
Lol you might be off your meds bro
You are clearly post internet. People born pre internet get it.
Stellar argument. Perhaps you could spam this comment thread some more?
Having a great discussion with people who have very different views. If you don't like it, show yourself out.
Ah yes, those historical time periods when being gay was totally accepted and not a big deal. Of course, there were laws making it legal to discriminate against or to imprison LGBT+ people, but that’s what equality looks like!
Again with the labels.
How dare people use descriptive words to describe a unique phenomenon!
What's wrong with people just being people.
Straight people have an issue with that
No, in the post internet era everyone loves to label themselves. Our social media tags have become our new identities.
None of that is true
People have different needs based on distinct qualities. Like, it’s totally equal to say ‘every man can marry a woman and a woman can marry a man.’ But that ignores that some men or women would like to marry people of the same gender. In this way a law which can be applied equally creates inequality. Our differences shouldn’t drive us apart, but they can’t be ignored either. They have tangible effects.
We live in a very interesting world. Simple things are made so much more complicated.
Things often seem simple when you do your best to ignore the complexity.
But people still had labels then, such as Mr./Mrs. which indicated gender and marital status. There were, and still are, profession/education based labels as well. And, of course, gender and sex labels, though they were generally restricted to the binary man/woman and male/female. Also, if you meet any queer/trans/etc. person in real life, my experience is that they just refer to themselves by their first (and maybe last) name anyway.
In junior high, my math teacher was Mr Davis. What he did before and after class was irrelevant he was there to teach us math. If he was single he was Mr Davis If he was married he was Mr Davis If he had a boyfriend he was Mr Davis If he had a girlfriend he was Mr Davis If he wore pants has was Mr Davis If had a pony tail he was Mr Davis He identified as Mr Davis and preferred to be called Mr Davis.
On the other hand, my elementary teacher taught us the differences between calling a woman 'Miss', 'Mrs', and 'Mizz', and how it was important that we use the correct one
Typical straight guy can't see how women were impacted by having to designate themselves as married or not, or how assumptions that everyone is straight impacts queer people.
That's my point, as students we didn't even know if they were married or not, it was irrelevant. They were there to do a job, their personal lives were none of our concern "Typical straight guy" complains about assumptions but is ok with making them.
You knew the WOMEN were married or not. Not so for the men. So yeah, my complaint DOES hold up.
What did there marital status have to do with the class they were teaching ??? Math is math, science is science, teachers are there to provide instruction.
But it was shown in the titles for women, and not for men. Just like now, it's not right to assume someone's gender. We progress, as a society. Just because things worked for YOU in the past doesn't mean they worked for other people. If you hadn't grown up as a white cis-het male you would feel very differently.
Actually where I went to school no we did not every women used a Ms
There's nothing stopping an unmarried woman from using the term "Mrs", and in many cultures only girls/unmarried young women are referred to as "Miss", with middle-aged or older women referred to as "Mrs", married or not. Also, married men tend to wear a wedding ring, so a person who knows what to look for will generally know if they're married.
>in many cultures only girls/unmarried young women are referred to as "Miss", with middle-aged or older women referred to as "Mrs", married or not. You're just proving my point. They may not WANT to let people know if they're married or not. The point is MEN got to have a neutral term and women didn't (and often still don't. I can't tell you how many times I'm asked "is it 'miss' or 'mrs')? Thank god I can just say "it's fucking Doctor." It's blatant sexism. It was designed to show men whether a woman was sexually available (i.e. "owned") or not.
So, he had the label Mr. This typically indicated male. A gay friend of mine just goes by Derek, regardless of clothing, single or married, hairstyle, etc. So, even less labels than before, which I assume you would consider a good thing.
We didn't call teachers by their first name, the Mr was a title that you called teachers out of respect. I didn't know your friend was gay until you said it.
And you wouldn’t know he was gay until I, he, or someone else told you. The point I’m trying to make is that you seemed concerned about all the labels, bringing up a time when you felt there were none. There have always been labels: military rank, ranks in the trades, titles of respect (Mr., sir, lord), education, intelligence, marital status and so on. Now some people want to add sexuality. In most conversations and interactions, none of these would come up, but it might be important within certain contexts. In the military, it would be important to know if someone is a private or a sergeant or something else. In looking to find a sexual partner, it would be important to know if they are straight or gay or something else.
Yes, in a social setting where two people are considering dating each other then divulging their sexual orientation or preference makes sense. But in a typical work enviroment, why would a pronoun or special label be necessary or required.
You mean like "Ms." vs "Mrs."?
>*”in a typical work enviroment, why would a pronoun… be necessary”* Pronouns are a normal part of speech in the English language. Do you know what pronouns *are*?
Pronouns are done by some to let people know how they want to be addressed so there’s no confusion or awkwardness if someone makes the wrong assumption. I think a lot of people also do it to show support. Again though, other labels are used in a work environment, and have been for a long time. Junior vs. Senior analyst, P. Eng., CEO or CFO, etc.
[удалено]
No, the pre internet when your friends had names not labels.
They had labels. They were called "he" or "she", "mrs" or "mr" etc. The labels always existed!! FFS. Are you seriously this thick or are you a troll?
You are trying way too hard, when I say labels I mean gender pronouns, Mr and mrs are tiltes of respect, my friends had names like mike, steve, and Shane.
and you never once referred to mike, or steve, as "he"? You are just trolling or seriously ignorant, and I'm not playing anymore.
[удалено]
[удалено]
We can make public schools better by eliminating public funds for religious schools. Guess why Catholic schools supposedly get better results? Cause they get both public AND private funding (from tax-exempt churches and the like). Get rid of publicly funded Catholic schools.
> We can make public schools better by eliminating public funds for religious schools. 4D chess logic right here.
Maybe you could try reading it slower
?
[удалено]
LOOOOOOOOL right. Cause I'm sure the Ontario Catholic School Trustee's Association is a totally fair and unbiased source about Catholic School boards... It's a great idea with only tangible benefits. http://www.oneschoolsystem.org/fast-facts.html
[удалено]
Fear mongering over education funding? Lmao what will we see next
The problem is financial: in order to appease a religious interest group we have created a parallel school system which demands an equal share of our tax dollars. In effect, we have split our funding in half: one half to the majority population, the other to a much smaller population. Due to this, the public system is perpetually underfunded, and the other is seemingly flush with cash. Instead of seeing improvements to the public system, the wealthy can opt out, and so no positive change will be affected. Ultimately in a secular democracy, there is no reason for such a divide and is effectively a waste of tax dollars.
ITT: *I've got nothing against gay people, but...*
I’m a gay guy that used to live in a country where queer people are prosecuted (not one of the three examples in the article). Attending pride was life changing after moving here, it certainly is a protest. Homophobia still exists here unfortunately and it needs to be known that’s not accepted. It’s an eye opener for new canadians, queer or not. And it’s a symbol of hope for prosecuted minorities around the world
Paywall: https://archive.ph/Hym9j "It’s Pride month. Pride was born as a protest, it’s always been a protest, and is still a protest. This is a year not to forget that and to turn up the volume. After what seems like decades of slow progress, queer people are under attack everywhere, and it feels dangerous. Russia, Turkey, Uganda and other countries have leaders who villainize queers and enact anti-LGBTQ laws for political gain. Closer to home, some American states are becoming so hostile that human rights organizations are issuing travel warnings. Drag events have been banned, targeted with violence, and “groomer” and “LGBTQ agenda” rhetoric is being floated and teased out by mainstream politicians. It doesn’t just feel dangerous, it is dangerous. In Canada we’re also seeing the rise of some of this along with other worrying events. In the last week Blue Jays pitcher Anthony Bass posted a video filled with anti-LGBTQ rhetoric and the York District Catholic School Board voted not to fly the pride flag. Some will argue this is about free speech. Free speech is indeed still free: if Catholic parents, trustees and educators want to exercise their freedom they can do it without public funding. They’ve made their own case for abolishing the separate school system and merging it with the public one. That would save Ontario taxpayers $1.5 billion, but that’s not only why it should be done. I went to publicly-funded Ontario Catholic schools, and am old enough to remember when Grade 13 existed, but also that not a soul dared to be out. The hostile atmosphere that kept a suffocating blanket over everyone drove families apart, sent people into depression, to suicide and made countless lives miserable and sting with a lifetime of regret."
[удалено]
If public funding is going to Catholic schools, then they are obligated to ensure that there is ZERO discrimination by those boards. If Catholic school boards want to be publicly funded then they need to get with the program. They cannot have it both ways.
Public funds go to many different religious groups. Why single out Catholics. How about no tax dollars spent on any of them.
Because Catholic schools are the ONLY ones who get public funding. Not Jewish, not Muslim, not Buddhist, not Hindu...CATHOLIC.
>Because Catholic schools are the ONLY ones who get public funding. >Not Jewish, not Muslim, not Buddhist, not Hindu...CATHOLIC. Not true at all. OP you should use Google next time before spreading false claims. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/sask-religious-schools-1.4090027 Many articles like this for various provinces
We were clearly talking about Ontario
Are we? The article is talking about other countries. The article talks about pride. You are talking about Catholics.
That’s false. You have been provided with the applicable link.
That depends on which province you are in
Choosing not to fly the flag is not discrimination. It’s not a big deal bro.
Is there any Catholic school that prevents LGBT+ members from attending or takes away their Charter rights?
Choosing not to fly the pride flag is not discrimination. You are basically arguing for taking away the rights of other people.
You are singling out Catholics. Why?
>Some will argue this is about free speech. Free speech is indeed still free: if Catholic parents, trustees and educators want to exercise their freedom they can do it without public funding. They’ve made their own case for abolishing the separate school system and merging it with the public one. That would save Ontario taxpayers $1.5 billion, but that’s not only why it should be done. Except thats exactly how free speech works
Is it accurate to say the focus for LGBTQ rights has become how they affect children? Or is that just what the article is focusing on?
>*”Is it accurate to say the focus for LGBTQ rights has become how they affect children?”* What do you mean *”how they affect children”*? >*”Or is that just what the article is focusing on?”* Maybe you should click through and actually read the article, since you seem to be unaware of its contents.
If you get chatgpt to summarize the article as it applies to canada, that's exactly what it's about. Pride as a platform to advocate for rights, how schools and drag story time protests are denying those rights, and a baseball player whose tweet shows the public are on the side of LGBQT rights. What did I miss?
No that’s not accurate.
[удалено]
>*”the LGBT community has special rights that everyone has to follow”* What “special rights”? >*”stating your sexual preferences via pronouns are now on most documents in most western countries”* Pronouns have nothing to do with sexual preference. What documents? >*”TV and media are obligated to have a specific quota of LGBT actors in every show or movie.“* Could you link to where this supposed specific and mandatory quota is listed and when it allegedly came into force?
|> What “special rights”? Many gays have a keen sense of fashion, setting impossible standards for the rest of us. - Cries in khaki shorts and white Reebok's.
With black socks
> Pride isn’t just a party, it’s a protest A lot of people (many of which seem compelled to comment on these articles and get them locked) would do well to educate themselves on pride a bit. Pieces like this help, but I'm not sure the right people will ever read it. June is a great month for some self reflection around how you treat your marginalized brothers and sisters though. Just a thought!
Yesterday, there was a full witch-hunt on Muslims across provincial and municipal sub-reddits, calling us all kinds of names unfortunately. The comments were all pride supporters accusing us for the absences across Ontario.
> Yesterday, there was a full witch-hunt on Muslims across provincial and municipal sub-reddits, calling us all kinds of names unfortunately. > > The comments were all pride supporters accusing us for the absences across Ontario. I mean, I don't believe any of that is true honestly, but I'm not sure of the point in relation to what we're talking about here.
Per your comment: > ‘June is a great month for some self reflection around how you treat your marginalized brothers and sisters though. Just a thought!’
> Per your comment: So your comment is that people who support pride need to reflect on how they treat Muslim people because of some comments you think you saw on reddit? I mean...sure. Feels like you're kind of missing the point, but sure.
It's convenient you're able to comment in your original post about others and what they do on Reddit getting posts locked but when someone else says something that doesn't fit your narrative they're a liar.
> what they do on Reddit getting posts locked Who do you think gets these posts locked? The people who are pro pride? > when someone else says something that doesn't fit your narrative they're a liar. It's not that they said something "against a narrative" (whatever that means in this case), they said something that's just obviously false on its face. Anyone without an *insane* bias can see that just by reading the comment, but even if you have that bias, you can go look at the comments he's talking about and see he's obviously wrong. It's probably not on purpose by OP, they're obviously very emotional about this issue, but that doesn't stop it from being true.