You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Canada’ tag.
Former teacher, Carolyn Burjoski, is taking legal action against the Waterloo Region District School Board after being censored in a public school board meeting because she raised concerns about the age-inappropriateness of library books for children.
Trouble started when she turned to a book called The Other Boy by M.G. Hennessey and a scene that depicts a meeting between Shane, a transgender boy (born a girl), and a doctor. He voices excitement about starting on testosterone and when the physician says it would mean he likely wouldn’t be able to have children, he says, “It’s cool.”
As Burjoski remarked that such books make it seem overly straightforward to take cross-sex hormones, Piatkowski interjected to warn she may be violating the code.
The teacher said the book was misleading “because it does not take into account how Shane might feel later in life about being infertile. This book makes very serious medical interventions seem like an easy cure for emotional and psychological distress.”
At that point, Piatkowski told her he was “ending the presentation.”
The human rights code bars discrimination based on gender identity and other grounds in the areas of housing, employment and providing services.
Article contentThe widely used “affirmation” approach to children who identify as transgender has raised some concerns in several countries, and not just among obvious critics. Two leading psychologists in the transgender medical community, one of them a trans woman, complained in a recent article about sloppy and dangerous assessment of young people presenting as trans, with overly hasty resort to hormones.
In a statement, Burjoski said was relieved by the ruling.
“It is a significant victory and vindication, not just for me, but for everyone who dares to voice their valid concerns publicly,” she said. ”I hope this decision sends a strong message to school boards that the weaponization of human rights codes against concerned citizens is an undemocratic abuse of the code.”
Canadians are guaranteed the freedom of expression by our Charter of Rights. The self appointed sacred caste of trans has issues with people critiquing and discussion their vacuous ideology. The TQ+ community, because it doesn’t have a rational argument to stand on, then must rely on defamation, coercion, and social shaming to freeze out any debate of transgenderism and what its effects are on society.
“An Ontario judge has declared that human rights legislation “does not prohibit public discussion of anything,” in a free-speech victory for a teacher who was shut down when she raised concerns at a school board meeting about transgender-themed books in elementary school libraries.
“What happened here should not happen in a democratic society,” Ontario Superior Court Justice James Ramsay said in the case of now-retired teacher Carolyn Burjoski
“The Human Rights Code does not prohibit public discussion of issues related to transgenderism or minors and transgenderism. It does not prohibit public discussion of anything.”
Finally, one institution in Canada that isn’t kowtowing to gender ideology.
“Piatkowski later told a local CTV station, however, that Burjoski’s comments were actually transphobic and “questioned the right to exist” of trans people. He said he had no choice but to expel the teacher from the meeting. He told 570 News radio that Burjoski was “disrespectful” towards transgender people and was “not promoting healthy debate” at the meeting. The organization took down its recording of the meeting — a regular, public session of elected officials — and had YouTube remove another copy of the video for alleged copyright infringement.”
Ah. The right to exist. This is one of the favourite motte and bailey rhetorical dodges of the transgender ideologues. The question at hand was should books that present a false narrative of ‘transition’ be available to elementary school children. Nothing to do with existence or ‘erasing’ trans people.
“She launched a defamation lawsuit, which the board sought to have thrown out. In a Nov. 23 ruling, Ramsay dismissed the bid and ordered the board to pay Burjoski $30,000 in costs. He said her claims have merit and should be allowed to proceed, adding the comments made against her were “defamatory.”
“They accused her of breaching the Human Rights Code, questioning the right of trans persons to exist and engaging in speech that included hate. She did not do any of those things,” the judge said in his ruling.
“The chairman of the board acted with malice or at least, with a reckless disregard for the truth. He had made an embarrassingly erroneous and arbitrary decision to silence a legitimate expression of opinion and he was widely criticized for it. It is not a stretch to infer that, realizing that, he tried to justify himself with the public by assassinating the plaintiff’s character.”
The judge said he saw no prospect Piatkowski will be able to prove his statements were based in fact, since he accused her of saying things she did not say.
Hopefully our Supreme Court won’t overrule this correct decision in favour of free speech in Canada.
The London Museum in London Ontario Canada has erased April Hutchinson from the exhibit that she was featured in and also helped to set up. What was this woman’s crime? She advocates on her own time that her sport should be segregated by sex. That is, she should not have to compete against men who happen to ‘identify’ as women. April is being punished and erased because she wants a fair playing field for those who participate in the sport of female power-lifting.
More stories are coming out everyday about women being excluded, erased, and shamed for want to protect and preserve their rights, spaces, and safety in Canadian society.
So, my fellow No Space for Hate’ people – it is way past time to dig past the hollow slogans you support and actually see the result of your, what I can only term as ‘low information’ stance. There is a serious conflict going on right now in society between females and a small vocal minority of men who identify as women. The males in dresses are erasing females from society and as a distinct class. This trend must be reversed and female rights and reality must be preserved.
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
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…