You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Canada’ category.
The bullshit going on right now in Canada is really off the charts. This from the C2C journal:
“The new Red Paper’s academic tone is an exception to standard aboriginal activist discourse, but it too resorts to emotional hooks. “The stakes of these struggles are immense,” the authors state on page 64. “Of course, while Indigenous land and life are the focus here, the life of our species and of the planet are at risk from the type of economic philosophy and practices of (sic) perpetuated by colonialism and settler colonialism…So the matter of land back is not merely a matter of justice, rights or ‘reconciliation’; Indigenous jurisdiction can indeed help mitigate the loss of biodiversity and climate crisis…Canada – and states generally must listen.”
Having used decolonization ideology as a springboard to investing Indigenous-led solutions with the capacity to save the world, the Red Paper portrays the nation-state as posing a barrier to such an Indigenous-led global salvation. It portrays the UN as “an organization of states that first and foremost defends the territorial integrity of sovereign states,” which “means that states are the primary vehicle to address climate change and loss of biodiversity.” And so, the paper laments on page 65, “Even while the UN recognizes the harms states perpetuate against Indigenous people (including denying consent), they cannot imagine non-state Indigenous-led solutions that may threaten the state system.”
*rolls eyes*
“The Red Paper authors appear to be suggesting that Indigenous organizations (to be determined) be given supra-jurisdictional authority. As grandiose and unrealistic as it sounds, it seems that they think aboriginal people should rule the world because they know what is best for the world and they know that because they are of the world in a way that non-Indigenous people are not; Mother Earth has given them her blessings as a birthright.
The continuing and in some ways worsening Indigenous/non-Indigenous dichotomy is a bane of humanity; it is antithetical to humanism because it presumes to determine who belongs here the most and who the least. If humanity matters most, it cannot matter who was here first. Some of the more sophisticated Indigenous exceptionalists are now staking their global campaign for jurisdiction on an issue of convenience: the fears of an existential peril – climate apocalypse – underpinned by the belief that they are somehow imbued with knowledge, skills and a force of origin that ordinary mortals do not possess. It is of course preposterous, and surely tempting to laugh off such presumption.”
Stuff like this is the end result of identity politics. Divisive and toxic for a society.
My choir is singing this at a late Remembrance Day Concert. I hope to get a recording of us performing, but until then the ASU concert choir does a masterful rendition for this most important of days.
We Remember Them
In the rising of the sun and in its going down,
we remember them.
In the blowing of the wind and in the chill of winter,
we remember them.
In the opening of buds and in the rebirth of spring,
we remember them.
In the blueness of the sky and in the warmth of summer,
we remember them.
In the rustling of leaves and in the beauty of autumn,
we remember them.
In the beginning of the year and when it ends,
we remember them.
When we are weary and in need of strength,
we remember them.
When we are lost and sick at heart,
we remember them.
When we have joys we yearn to share,
we remember them.
So long as we live, they too shall live, for they are now a part of us,
as we remember them.
This is such a good turn. Dissent against gender ideology is breaking into the mainstream. Reprinting here to boost awareness.
“As a kid, I was your classic tomboy. I wore short hair, boys’ clothes, and spent most of my time running around outside with my mostly male friends. But it went deeper than that. I fantasized about being the prince and not the princess in Disney stories, and as my body started developing, it didn’t match my expectations.
I would have easily fit the diagnostic criteria for childhood gender dysphoria — back when there actually were diagnostic criteria and before today’s “affirming” approach that does away with any veneer of caution.
Article contentWhen I hit puberty, I started to develop feelings for girls, reinforcing the sense that I was different. By that point, Canada had become a much more accepting place, and I am grateful for that. I just wanted to be left alone to figure things out for myself.
And I did figure things out. At 16, I met my girlfriend and we’ve been together ever since. I am 34 now, and we recently got married and am expecting a child. It has been something of a fairy tale, and we both got to be the princess.
At the same time, there was also an ideology growing around me that could have radically altered my course in life. The idea that some people are “born into the wrong body” was going mainstream. I initially bought into this idea. It was positioned as a natural extension of gay rights. How? I didn’t really know, but it seems like the good, progressive thing to believe.
I wondered into my late 20s whether transition was something I should have done and if I would one day wake up miserable because I was supposed to be a man. After all, so many of the women who were transitioning seemed to be so much like me.
But then I started to hear about “trans kids.” I instinctively knew that it was wrong for youth under 18. It is wrong to medicalize them, and it is wrong to confuse them about their sex at a vulnerable age.
That was more than five years ago, and I’ve been an advocate for preserving young people’s bodies and fertility ever since. For a long time, it didn’t feel like this topic would ever get the attention it deserved. Slowly but surely, the conversation started to reach a wider audience.
Last year, New Brunswick Premier Blaine Higgs and Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe both introduced policies on name and pronoun changes in schools. While these “social transition” steps seem harmless, they are psychological interventions that can encourage a child to lock in their identity and proceed to more permanent changes.
Early this year, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announced the most comprehensive set of policies in Canada focusing on the areas of schools, medicine and sports. Recently, she announced that legislation will be tabled this fall
I am grateful to Smith and I applaud her courage in the face of attacks. The premier is constantly accused of hatred and bigotry for seeking to preserve the bodily integrity of youth under 18 and their ability to make fully informed decisions when they reach adulthood.
Article contentSmith has helped move the needle. In a political climate that can get vitriolic, it was far from a safe bet to introduce these policies.
It’s time for the other perspective to be offered. I am a married lesbian and I support Smith. I am grateful for her willingness to take on this issue.
I got lucky. I was able to grow up without the influence of activists making me believe that I should change my body because of my gender nonconformity. My baby and my ability to carry her are the biggest blessings of my life.
For so many young girls, this opportunity has been taken from them. Smith’s proposed legislation will help prevent this from happening to others, and we all owe her a great debt for that.
-Eva Kurilova is a freelance writer who has been engaged with the province’s gender policies.”
The faux-feminists and men’s rights activists currently in power in British Columbia need to be voted out ASAP. Ms.Boyle decided that female only spaces AT A RAPE CRISIS centre were wrong in EXCLUDING MEN from their lodgings and services.
This half baked fuck-wittery needs to be very, very, far away from the levers of political power.
The Liberal government supports the corrosion of the basis of our society – a stable family structure is under siege as usual under the guise of “progressive” values.
On Aug. 7, Quebec researchers published an article on “Children’s views on the romantic partners of their polyamorous parents” in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships.
The research was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, a federal grant-giving body that distributes taxpayer funds to academic projects.
SSHRC communications advisor Nicole Swiaterk confirmed to True North taxpayers paid $70,662 between 2019 and 2021 for the study. Funds were awarded via the Insight Development Grants competition.
Researchers interviewed 18 children between the ages of 5 and 16 years old. Three of the children in the cohort lived in households with their parents’ multiple sexual partners. Nine of the ten households interviewed included adults who identified as LGBTQ+.
“We found that the participating children generally appreciate their parents’ romantic partners,” researchers concluded.”
–Hat tip to the The True North
Tweet #1 – NDP in full righteous name calling fury.
Tweet #2 – The pigeons coming home to roost.
This is your brain on “anti-racism” and “DEI”.
Just say no.
Imagine somehow thinking that displaying another nations flag – for Canadian political party – is a good thing. The NDP is lost.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…