You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Canada’ category.
A Poisoned Environment The Ontario Human Rights Commission states that a poisoned environment is a form of discrimination.
An example given is a man who claims to possess invisible female essence being forced to use the men’s room at work. This can lead to a “hostile and oppressive atmosphere.”
But the truth is, gender identity ideology is the poison, a very potent one, and just one drop is enough to destroy entire families, workplaces, schools, and institutions.
When parents who are true believers in gender souls transition their young child, it becomes the job of the child’s whole school to validate the lie. Every child in the school must be detached from reality, forced to live in a fictional world where humans can change sex like clownfish.
The poisonous ideology then inevitably claims more young victims.
When a teen tumbles down a gender rabbit hole online, and emerges believing that all her pubertal woes are a sign she is transgender, her family is supposed to accept that her whole childhood was a lie.
They are forbidden from using her name, and they’re supposed to celebrate the medical demolition of her healthy body. Failure to do so makes them abusive parents.
When an employer hires one of those curious beings who claim to be sexless, everyone in the workplace has to walk on eggshells, taking pains to mangle the English language so as not to offend the perpetually offended.
When a man decides to move on from just masturbating wearing women’s clothes to wearing them all the time, everyone in his workplace has to deny the evidence of their own eyes and pretend he has magically transformed into a woman.
Women must quell their unease and gladly welcome him into their spaces.
When an institution like the YWCA becomes poisoned by gender identity ideology, it finds itself prioritising sex offenders’ rights over the comfort and safety of rape survivors.
Fortunately, there is a very effective antidote to this particular poison, and it’s called the truth. When everyone stops going along with the lie, out of kindness and a misguided sense of compassion, the poison will lose its strength, and we can start to edge back towards sanity.
Violence is violence. Calling terrorism ‘decolonizing’ does not change the terror event into a positive. Post colonial theory should not be the only lens that is used when viewing events in our world. From Jonah Davids on the Hub:
“So why do Canadian universities find the murdering of innocent Israelis less objectionable than innocent Ukrainians? Or for that matter, why do they find terrorism less condemnable than parents protesting the way many schools are teaching gender and sexuality to young students? Perhaps the answer lies in the fact that for years, universities have been teaching and promoting postcolonial theory, which views relationships between people, organizations, and countries through a simplistic oppressor/oppressed framework. It’s easy to view these theories as ivory tower pantomime, but this week’s events have made clear that their adherents take them very seriously, and believe that violence is acceptable if it’s an “oppressed” or “colonized” group rising up against an “oppressor” or “colonizer.” Pro-Palestinian protesters across Canada have employed this rhetoric, calling Israel and Canada colonialist states and justifying Hamas’ activity as part of decolonization.
Such an explanation, however, may overintellectualize what is simply a gross failure to educate the Canadian public on the atrocities committed against Jews historically and to dissuade them from antisemitism. In a 2019 survey, half of Canadians said they did not know that six million Jews had died during the Holocaust, and one in five young Canadians had never heard of the Holocaust. Canada is an increasingly diverse nation lacking a sense of identity or common values, and pro-Hamas protests demonstrate the limits of our pluralist approach to statecraft. Perhaps university administrators trying to size up the conflict, knowing little of Jewish history but much postcolonial theory, opted for a “both sides” approach. This is a charitable reading, but it is the one I would prefer to be true, rather than them actually believing that hundreds of Jews in Israel are less worthy of a public statement than the death of a single Black man in America.”
These principles seem to be formed on the objective material we all share. They are a step in the right direction.
Statement of Principles – The September Declaration
This document is intended to be a minimal set of principles that are commonly agreed to by all individuals and organizations participating in the Parents Rights Coalition of Canada.
While the interests of various participants may be broad, the coalition’s focus is on the rights and responsibilities of parents and legal guardians with respect to their children who are below the age of majority. We believe that parents and legal guardians have a responsibility to their children to be faithful stewards of their best interests, and “parental rights” are the basis for them to exercise this responsibility.
We regard “gender ideology” to be a set of highly controversial beliefs and values rooted in academic fields such as “queer theory”, “gender studies”, postmodernism, and neo-Marxism. The tenets of gender ideology are unscientific and antithetical to the beliefs and values of most Canadians. These include the ideas that children can be “born into the wrong body”, that there are more than two “genders”, that gender is “fluid”, that gender is a “social construct” unrelated to sex, that traditional values concerning sexual propriety are “oppressive”, and so forth. We reject all core tenets of “gender ideology”. These include the following:
We reject that “gender” is a set of socially constructed behaviours and is independent of sex.
Note: Our position is that stereotypical behavioural differences between men and women are simply the cultural manifestations of deeply rooted biological and neurological differences between the two sexes. These concepts are not independent of each other. Accordingly, we make no distinction between “gender” and “sex. We propose to eliminate the use of the word “gender” to avoid confusion.
We reject the assertion that there are more than two sexes, that “gender” is separate from sex, and related concepts such as “gender spectrum”, “non-binary genders”, “transgender”, etc. Note: Our position is that there are only two sexes defined as follows: Man/Male = Adult Human Male and Woman/Female = Adult Human Female.
Accordingly, we call for the removal of all references to “gender identity” and “gender expression” from all provincial and federal diversity, equity, and inclusion policies, and wherever it may be present, from the official K-12 educational curriculum as well.
Principle 1: “No government has ever proven itself a capable parent.”
Parents have the right to raise their children in accordance with their own traditional cultural, religious, or secular moral codes. Publicly funded schools have no authority to overrule parents’ rights in this regard. This means that parents must give permission for their children to participate in any contentious political, social, or cultural subject matter at any time. The default position for this type of participation for students must be “opt-in”.
Principle 2: “No secrets, parental consent is mandatory.”
We demand that schools adopt and vigorously enforce a “no secrets from parents” policy. Gender social affirmation at school is a serious psychotherapeutic intervention. It must never be conducted without parental approval. The provincial Ministries of Education must enforce this policy within the school system.
Principle 3: “We demand protection for girls’ sports.”
Boys must not be permitted to compete in competitive sports intended for females where male-specific physical advantages (strength, muscle mass, fast-twitch muscle fiber, bone density, etc.) result in an unfair competitive advantage and increased safety risks for female participants at the grade school and high school level.
Principle 4: “Affirmation cannot be dictated under penalty of law.”
We acknowledge that a small minority choose to present themselves as the opposite sex in terms of stereotypical dress and deportment. In a free country, they have the option to do so. This does not obligate the rest of society to affirm their choice. One’s self-proclaimed identity is a continuous negotiation with broader society which all Canadians must be free to accept or reject as they choose. Forced affirmation, including compelled or coerced speech, must not be dictated in our public schools. We likewise reject any attempt to force our children to use preferred pronouns or names they (or their parents) do not agree to.
Principle 5: “Public schools must be ideologically neutral.”
We call for an embrace of freedom of thought, respect for diversity of opinion, and principles of religious tolerance in public education. Schools must not promote, nor denounce, any religion(s) or secular ideological belief systems. We call for the removal of ideological symbols and forced celebration of days dedicated to various ideological social causes. On the matter of flags, we ask that only national flags and provincial or territorial flags be flown in our public schools anywhere on the school property.
Principle 6: “Sex-based rights must be respected.”
We demand that both sexes be prohibited from accessing spaces designated for the privacy and protection of the opposite sex regardless of how they self-identify. This includes all Canadian K-12 schools bathrooms/showers/changerooms, children’s camps, and overnight school trip accommodations, etc. Furthermore, we demand that all public schools and other public facilities have sex-based washroom options: girl’s washrooms, and separate boy’s washrooms. Sex-neutral washrooms as the only option, are not acceptable.
Principle 7: “There is no such thing as a transgender child.”
Teaching the idea that children are ever born in the wrong body (i.e.: one not matching their sex) is a blatant form of mental child abuse and a flagrant violation of the duty of fiduciary care schools have to all our children. We acknowledge that some children deal with gender dysphoria, and this must be addressed with compassion and the involvement of parents.
Principle 8: “Opt-out default for Comprehensive Sexuality Education programs.”
Some school boards and educators embed the core tenets of “gender ideology” into “anti bullying”, “DEI training”, and what is deemed “Comprehensive Sexuality Education” which differs from traditional sex education programs. This includes teaching “gender identity” and “gender expression” without presenting dissenting “gender critical” perspectives. As such, we demand that parental consent be required for all Comprehensive Sexuality Education and that it should be taught on an opt-in basis only where the opt-out option is the default choice.
Furthermore, no tenets of gender ideology should ever be shoehorned into classroom instruction, extracurricular activities, school posters/displays, or introduced by third-party trainers under any circumstance.
We demand that all school boards list all related training topics and provide electronic copies of all training materials pertaining to any “Comprehensive Sexuality Education” programs on their official websites so as to allow all these materials to be reviewed online by parents at any time.
Principle 9: “A moratorium on ‘gender-affirming medical care’ for minors.”
We call for an immediate moratorium on both “social gender transition” and so-called “gender-affirming medical care” for minors until such time as an impartial evidence-based review of gender medical practices (puberty blockers, hormones, surgery) similar to the UK “Cass Review” can be completed in Canada. Children do not have the brain development, maturity, wisdom, or life experience to fully appreciate the long-term consequences of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgical procedures designed to emulate the appearance of the opposite sex. Social gender transition is the first step on the path toward medical transition for children and must be treated as a form of child abuse. Accordingly, we also call for the removal of “gender expression” and “gender identity” from the definition of “conversion therapy” under the criminal code of Canada given the impact on children.
September 28, 2023 Revision
Canadians are beginning to find their voice and say no to the regressive gender ideology in society.
“The reason these parents were protesting is simple. They do not want their children to learn that ‘everyone has a gender identity’, to be asked for their ‘pronouns’, or to be told they may have been ‘born in the wrong body’. Parents do not want their kids learning that their families are ‘bigoted’ or ‘abusive’ because they believe their children’s bodies are perfect just the way they are. They do not agree that it is possible to ‘identify’ as the opposite sex.
Yet this is precisely what is being taught in Canadian classrooms as part of the so-called SOGI (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity) curriculum. Primary-school kids learn that ‘When babies are born, doctors and parents usually decide if the baby is a boy or girl’, but that ‘not everybody will grow up feeling like or identifying as a boy or a girl’. And they are told they should ‘look for clues’ that reveal a boy is really a girl.
Lesson plans for teachers suggest they ask pupils, ‘What does it mean to feel like a boy or to feel like a girl?’. A suggested activity in one lesson plan instructs teachers to ‘ask everybody to walk around the classroom and introduce themselves and ask each other what their names are and what pronouns they should use’.
These kinds of practices have been adopted in public schools across Canada, with zero input or consultation with parents or voters. Many have felt voiceless on these issues. Contacting our MPs and the media has proven fruitless. The One Million March offered the silent majority a chance to stand up and speak out.
While most of the rallies across Canada were enormously successful, the march I attended in Victoria, British Columbia was shut down prematurely.
I was informed, halfway through my speech, that the police had demanded my mic be cut. Counter-protesters had swarmed the area, aggressively pushing their way to the front of the rally, while screaming at and being physically aggressive towards the children, parents and grandparents in attendance. They then attempted to attack the stage. The police determined the situation was too dangerous and that they could no longer protect attendees, and so they shut down the rally, just 30 minutes in. Ironically, it is those claiming to advocate ‘love’ and ‘inclusivity’ who consistently use bullying, threats and violence to silence views they disapprove of.”
1/ The current controversy in Saskatchewan shows how the gender debate has become the perfect storm for loss of confidence in the Charter. The Charter has never commanded universal respect among Canadians but in recent years these doubts have increased.
2/ The Charter was introduced by Pierre Trudeau over opposition from the provinces. The notwithstanding clause was one of a series of compromises which won the grudging support of 9 provinces. Quebec did not agree and has used the notwithstanding clause regularly.
3/ Public support for the Charter has grown because it was believed to secure broadly shared values of equality between individuals and limitations on state authority. It was seen as reinforcing democratic government by protecting the fundamental conditions for democracy.
4/ More recently academic and now judicial thinking has adopted a new concept of human rights based on ameliorating the condition of oppressed groups, even at the expense of traditional values of liberty and equality.
5/ This new concept of rights has pushed the courts further into the realm of policy making for which the judicial process is not designed. Bad decisions will happen and as they become more frequent the need for a political safety valve has increased.
6/ A basic problem is that court procedures are intended to resolve a clear conflict between two parties. There are often many different perspectives to a Charter issue and all of these perspectives are seldom adequately represented in court.
7/ The rules of evidence make it difficult to present a full picture of the complexity of an issue like pediatric gender transition. The scientific background has to be presented through expert witnesses who submit written reports. This is a costly process.
8/ The high costs of bringing a Charter case mean that many cases are brought by groups receiving government funding. The government is using the Charter litigation to advance the interests of favoured groups in a way that bypasses the legislative and public debate.
9/ Judges of course follow the media and in most cases they can rely on their own general knowledge to aid in understanding the evidence presented in court. However, on the issue of gender medicine Canadian media coverage has been hopelessly biased.
10/ A judge who reads the Globe and Mail and listens to the CBC will have heard nothing about the international controversy over gender medicine. There has been no coverage of the closure of the Tavistock gender clinic of the policy changes in Sweden, Finland and Norway.
11/ Strict rules of evidence exist because court cases are intended to provide a final resolution to a dispute. There are provisions to re-open a criminal conviction where new evidence is discovered after trial in other types of cases the decision is final after the final appeal.
12/ Public policy, on the other hand, should be constantly revised as new and better evidence emerges. New evidence on pediatric gender transition is emerging rapidly but it is being ignored by Canadian media and policy makers.
13/ There is a risk that when Canada finally realizes how harmful the current approach to pediatric transition has become, the ability to change course will be hindered by Charter judgments made on the basis of faulty and limited evidence.
14/ In these circumstances, use of the notwithstanding clause may be a necessity but it is worth considering that we would not be in this mess if our major institutions did not show such disregard for the Charter’s protection of freedom of expression.
You don’t get to do that.
You don’t get to tell girls with mental health issues that they will be freed from those struggles if they live life as a boy. You don’t get to tell boys that all the suffering and pain they feel will melt away if they live life as a girl.
That’s not how it works.
You don’t get to abuse children with mental health issues and/or past traumas just so you can push a harmful narrative which you likely know nothing about. Because again, that’s not how it works.
So you don’t get to do that.
And you don’t get to sit back and pretend like this isn’t happening. You don’t get to hide child abuse or ignore it because it’s wrapped it in a rainbow.
You don’t get to tell gay kids that they don’t belong and would be happier if they were someone else because they don’t fit into ridiculously restrictive pre-determined gender roles.
You don’t get to erase gay kids. And you don’t get to address any of these issues with manipulation and scalpels. You don’t get to teach children that any amount of discomfort needs to be avoided at all cost.
Because sometimes life is hard.
And sometimes that’s ok.
Furthermore, you don’t get to scream about trans rights being human rights when really they’re a list of demands that abuse kids and demean the actual LGB&T communities, while simultaneously trample over women and everything they fought for.
That’s not how it works either. So you don’t get to do that.
You don’t get to leave women out of this conversation or invade their spaces.
You don’t get to leave the LGB&T communities out of this conversation or group us together with the alphabet mafia. And let’s not forget about parents. Parents have every right to know what is being taught in their child’s school. And they, more than anyone, should be aware of the struggles their child might be facing. You don’t get to leave parents out of the conversation either.
You don’t get to do that.”
People are waking up and appraising the damage being done by gender ideology. This from D.C.L. on twitter.
bleatmop
Mystro
The Arbourist
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…