‘White nationalism’ a threat the Canadian Armed Forces aren’t equipped for: watchdog

[Eye In The Sky]

It's not as if there's no opportunity to see this play. While the "Black Out" performance is sold out, the seat availability for the performances on the evening before and the evening after look like this.

So if I open a business and say it’s only closed to black Canadians on the weekend, that’s ok “because I will allow them to shop there Mon-Fri”?

People would have no problem with that?

 

[Lumber]

So one could easily argue that there is zero requirement to have a segregated showing, apart from ideology...

It's not as simple as that. Events like these can encourage underprivileged groups to attend/participate in things that they otherwise wouldn't feel comfortable attending, regardless of physical availability. If anything, what those numbers/seating charts show is that white people don't need to be all butt-hurt; they aren't losing out on anything.

 

[Lumber]

So if I open a business and say it’s only closed to black Canadians on the weekend, that’s ok “because I will allow them to shop there Mon-Fri”?

People would have no problem with that?

Grocery stores near me open early some days for "seniors only" hours,.though like NAC they don't actually ID anyone who comes in. No one has a problem with this, so why would you have a problem with a black-only shopping?

The point is NEED. If you can logically demonstrate that a marginalized group actually benefits from some sort of "this group only service", and that that service doesn't significantly harm other groups. If a business is doing it it because they just don't like white people, then that's discrimination.

In your example, closing the business all weekend I think WOULD be harmful to other groups, so I wouldn't support that unless you could back it up by some hard data.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I don’t remember seeing the “need” clause in the Act. It does, however, state this:

 

[FSTO]

"seniors only"

Seniors are not an identifiable racial group.

My issue is that the staff at NAC didn't appear to take into account mixed race couples and their messaging was poorly thought out and delivered. I'm going to really stereotype here, but I'm assuming the good people at NAC were all nodding around the conference table at what progressives they are and not one of them brought up (or maybe one did think it was problematic but is cowed by the rest of the group) some problems with their initiative.

 

[Lumber]

Seniors are not an identifiable racial group.

My issue is that the staff at NAC didn't appear to take into account mixed race couples and their messaging was poorly thought out and delivered. I'm going to really stereotype here, but I'm assuming the good people at NAC were all nodding around the conference table at what progressives they are and not one of them brought up (or maybe one did think it was problematic but is cowed by the rest of the group) some problems with their initiative.

Why does it matter that it's not a racial group? It's discrimination based on age, which is one of the categories found in the charter.

Otherwise, I agree with your description of how the decision making meeting likely went. It's like when people fail to consider adopted children of marginalized groups where the child is not of the same race as the marginalized group.

 

[Lumber]

I don’t remember seeing the “need” clause in the Act. It does, however, state this:View attachment 76108

Yes, and like the NAC case, I believe most institutions get around this by not actually "banning white people" but simply by marketing the event as a "black/indigenous/lgtbq etc only" event. Legally they can't stop non-designated groups from attending, but the whole point of these "limited" events is to try and do some form of a "good", and you'd be nothing but an a$$hole to try and barge in on it. So, they are relying on social pressure and selflessness to keep non-designated people away, vice actually banning them.

 

[mariomike]

It's discrimination based on age, which is one of the categories found in the charter.

I always take advantage of my 20% Seniors discount at Shopper's Drug Mart.

Anybody thinks they've been discriminated against can complain to the Ontario Human Rights Commission.

Won't do any good on here.

As far as the financial cost of losing a discrimination complaint goes, saw this in the States yesterday,

Jury awards $1M to Oregon woman who was told ‘I don’t serve Black people’

Rose Wakefield stopped at Jacksons Food Store in Beaverton on March 12, 2020, and saw the attendant ignore her and instead pump gas for other drivers, her attorney said.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Jarnhamar]

What were the consequences and conclusions from the all female trial?

I'm not sure. I don't believe they're still doing it. I'm not certain but I recall it being a hush hush thing.

 

[brihard]

I don’t remember seeing the “need” clause in the Act. It does, however, state this:View attachment 76108

There’s section 16:



But in any case, it doesn’t appear that the NAC has actually excluded anyone by refusing them goods or services. They’re encouraging a specific clientele on a specific night, and are encouraging non-blacks to attend a different showing (and there are a number of them), but there’s no actual rule or teeth to that. They’d be legally fine, I believe.

 

[Jarnhamar]

It's not as simple as that. Events like these can encourage underprivileged groups to attend/participate in things that they otherwise wouldn't feel comfortable attending, regardless of physical availability.

I don't think your wrong here. I think it encourages attendance and involvement, which is great. It's not a two way street though and I think that's what some people take issue with. To some, equality doesn't have special caveats.

Would Toronto or Winnipeg get away with an identifies-as-white event because some white people are more comfortable with other white people? Absolutely not, people would launch outrage missiles like an MRLS.

If anything, what those numbers/seating charts show is that white people don't need to be all butt-hurt; they aren't losing out on anything.

I'm not sure suggesting white people are just butt-hurt is helpful language. Some people's understanding of equality is to work towards the same standard (for lack of a better word) for everyone.

Looking at the seating it does look like it's a success. It's a double standard though. If the identifying-as-white night was a hit and the room packed the attendees would be called racist without a doubt.

 

[ArmyRick]

Man, thats a whole lotta religious stuff.

I dumb it down to
(a) Can you eat pig, yes or no?
(b) Can you eat a cow, yes or no?
(c) Can you eat animals period?

 

[dimsum]

Would Toronto or Winnipeg get away with an identifies-as-white event because some white people are more comfortable with other white people? Absolutely not, people would launch outrage missiles like an MRLS.

Maybe, if Caucasians (writ large) weren't the majority in Canada.

This also touches on something that some minorities rankle at: The "[insert ethnicity]-Canadian" title.

Someone of Chinese ethnicity could have had ancestors here since the 1800s after the end of the US gold rush, but more often than not their descendants will be still called Chinese-Canadian. Same with Black people who came up here via the Underground Railroad.

Meanwhile, for example, someone with Irish ancestry coming after WWI wouldn't be called "Irish-Canadian".

 

[Remius]

Maybe, if Caucasians (writ large) weren't the majority in Canada.

This also touches on something that some minorities rankle at: The "[insert ethnicity]-Canadian" title.

Someone of Chinese ethnicity could have had ancestors here since the 1800s after the end of the US gold rush, but more often than not their descendants will be still called Chinese-Canadian. Same with Black people who came up here via the Underground Railroad.

Meanwhile, for example, someone with Irish ancestry coming after WWI wouldn't be called "Irish-Canadian".

French Canadian is still used.

 

[Furniture]

Maybe, if Caucasians (writ large) weren't the majority in Canada.

This also touches on something that some minorities rankle at: The "[insert ethnicity]-Canadian" title.

Someone of Chinese ethnicity could have had ancestors here since the 1800s after the end of the US gold rush, but more often than not their descendants will be still called Chinese-Canadian. Same with Black people who came up here via the Underground Railroad.

Meanwhile, for example, someone with Irish ancestry coming after WWI wouldn't be called "Irish-Canadian".

No, but they'd be called "settlers" and lumped in with Cornwallis... Same for a person of Polish descent who moved to Canada after WWI.

Edit: You also wouldn't have to look too hard to find white Canadians who identify as Irish, Scottish, Italian, etc...

 

[rmc_wannabe]

My parents weren't considered "Italian-Canadians" when they arrived in the 1950s; they were WOPs or Guidos to the majority of the WASPs and Canadiens who viewed them as an invasive species. Our diaspora becoming "white" is a recent development, mainly because of the arrival of other "less white" groups coming to Canada.

The hyphenated Canadians either use that as a sort of "pride" as breaking away from the norm, or have been labeled as such in the past by another majority.

As much as we preach multiculturalism as a strength in Canada, I have to wonder how much of that "strength" is keeping folks in their boxes, so as to not upset the apple cart.

 

[dimsum]

French Canadian is still used.

Yup, because they aren't part of the majority.

No, but they'd be called "settlers" and lumped in with Cornwallis... Same for a person of Polish descent who moved to Canada after WWI.

Edit: You also wouldn't have to look too hard to find white Canadians who identify as Irish, Scottish, Italian, etc...

I think we're talking about different things.

I'm not talking about said groups call themselves. I'm talking about how international (or even the majority of Canadians) would term them.

Example: If someone was Irish, would the G&M say "Irish-Canadian Joe McDonald..."?

 

[Jarnhamar]

Maybe, if Caucasians (writ large) weren't the majority in Canada.

But even then I've read Caucasians will always have majority status even when they're physically the minority (Toronto, Vancouver) because of their white privilege.

This also touches on something that some minorities rankle at: The "[insert ethnicity]-Canadian" title.

Someone of Chinese ethnicity could have had ancestors here since the 1800s after the end of the US gold rush, but more often than not their descendants will be still called Chinese-Canadian. Same with Black people who came up here via the Underground Railroad.

That has to be really frustrating for people who don't want to identify that way. What probably works against it is how many people seemingly choose to identify that way.

Maybe soon we'll be asking what someone's preferred ethnicity is along with their preferred pronouns. As long as we don't ask them where they're really from

 

[Remius]

Yup, because they aren't part of the majority.

Your premise was based on Caucasians and race. French Canadians are predominantly Caucasian (in the majority) yet the hyphen is till used.

Unless I misunderstood what your were saying.

 

[Good2Golf]

As long as we don't ask them where they're really from

Ah, no one can top the Brit’s for the NIMWAYRF-factor of racial minoritization…




*No, I mean, where are you really from?