poilieve tells Trudeau to "butt out" of New Brunswick's policy on lgbtq students
poilieve tells Trudeau to "butt out" of New Brunswick's policy on lgbtq students
And I - Bo7a - Tell Poilievre to go fuck his hat.
I've always found it interesting that these raging debates about gender & sexuality in students seem to completely ignore the actual students in question, as if they don't matter at all.
Conservatives appear to view their kids as property more than they do people, and anything they do outside of parental control is effectively "property damage". Children probably need some guiderails to account for their developing minds, but the limits there probably shouldn't be used to prop up hate speech and abuse.
Members of Higg's cabinet have resigned. In their resignation letters they say they reigned because he's an authoritarian.
This is liberals or leftists saying this. This is lifelong conservative saying he's an authoritarian.
All my life there have been trans people. Trans people have been around for a long time. They aren't anything new.
What is new is this panic over trans people. At least it's the first time I've seen it in my lifetime.
Where is this panic over trans people coming from? We see it in NB. We see it in Florida. We see it in Russia.
Wait why are they passing anti-trans laws in Russia? Don't they have bigger problems?
The problem they're trying to solve isn't the trans people. They need to tighten their control over people. What's the easiest way to control people? Make them hate.
Hateful people are easier to control. So focused on their perceived enemy they can't think about anything else.
But to make people hate you need a target for that hate. What is the most convenient target? Trans people. A groups so small, most people don't know any of them. So aren't as likely to stick up for them. Besides that, people changing gender is confusing. It makes people uncomfortable. Makes them feel icky. Makes them feel like they want it to go away somehow.
Trans people are the canary in the coal mine. Because the bastards always go after them first. Because they're the easiest target. But the monster down in that mine doesn't just eat canaries. It eats everyone.
So why is it for the first time in my life I'm seeing this panic over trans people? Because authoritarians are running a play out of a play book. And while it's the first time in my life I'm seeing this happen, it's not the first time it's happened in history. Trans people have been around a long time. They were around in Germany in the 1930s. Until they weren't. And the monster that killed the trans people didn't stop there. It just kept on killing.
We shouldn't have any illusions about what's happening.
"The cultural marxists are promoting deviancy to weaken Western Civilization"
"The Jews are promoting deviancy to weaken the Aryan Race"
Same shit different century. And a lot of these bastards aren't even bothering with code words like "cultural marxist" or "western civilization".
Blaine Higgs is an authoritarian running a play right out of the fascist play book. These bastards always go after the trans people first.
My Grandfather was a New Brunswicker. Fought in a brutal war against the axact kind of shit Blaine Higgs is about. Higgs is disgracing my grandfather. He's a disgrace to all of us.
One wonders if Poilievre thinks conversion therapy should have also been left to the provinces?
Look, you're being too hard on Pierre, asking what he actually believes in. I think he's been perfectly clear, he believes he'll say anything to cozy up to the regressives to fend off the People's Party.
Just wanted to remind people of this.
Stepping into the issue slightly, it becomes interesting. Ignoring the trans element, for now.
There's an interested debate here about parent's rights to choose how to parent. Now we as a civilization have decided that there are red lines that parents cannot cross. An extreme example: parents cannot beat their children as punishment. And there's a lot of not-quite-illegal things the government does a lot of education around, like drinking during pregnancy, in order to improve the quality of parenting and the quality of life for children. So government intervention in parenting is already, largely established -- at least when it comes to certain topics.
The government, however, does not intervene as parents take their kids to "Sunday School" and indoctrinate them (oops, my own experiences and biases are showing). And generally, parents are allowed full control over their children's lives unless they cross that red line. Few parents exhibit full control, micromanaging every aspect of their child's life, but they probably could and be in the clear, legally -- at least when the child is in their physical proximity.
Abstractly: schools, and specifically public schools, are not parents. They have to follow a set of rules set by society at large. And largely, aside from educating the students, they serve as a means to prepare students to become functioning members of that same society. This means that schools need to enforce some sort of public normalization on the students -- the exact form of which should reflect the society the students will enter, more or less. Optimally, they're preparing students for a society that will exist in the future, not the one that exists today, or one that existed in the past, but it's hard sometimes to know what that future will look like. You take some best guesses about this future society.
So now we have the conflict between the individual and the society. A parent yields some control when sending their kid to a public school, in the hopes that they will become a productive member of society. And this debate is about exactly how much control is yielded. And this debate is in many ways a core debate for our whole country - one of which can encompass residential schools, multiculturalism, religion, and more. Sometimes the guesses made about future society are off the mark, and what is intended to be a policy for good turns into a policy that was retrospectively harmful. We won't know until the future arrives.
But then the discussion gets completely overwhelmed by transphobic dogwhistling, and the resulting backlash, hiding the core of it.
You're missing the point by focusing on function of the players involved. Policies that protect trans students are ultimately rooted in risk assessment. There are risks to personal safety if someone is outed facing an unsafe environment at home. And to wellbeing and, ultimately, personal safety again if someone is forced to live as a gender they don't identify with. These risks, on both sides, are drastically reduced by offering a safe space and support in being who you are. The delineation of responsibility between parents and schools in preparing kids for their lives is separate from how to best offer support for the safety and well being of queer kids.
Why would a kid come out to a teacher when they didn't tell their parent?
Only reason I can think of is because the kid is afraid of their parents. Why would that be?
So this is all about parents wanting to beat the trans out of their kids. This is about enabling child abuse.
Of course kids aren't that stupid. They'll know that they now have to keep these kinds of things from their teachers the same as they're keeping it from their parents.
It'll just make kids not trust school staff anymore. Child abuse will be under reported. Child molestation will be under reported. Kids will be less willing to talk to guidance counsellors. Teenage suicide rates will increase.
Blaine Higgs is the biggest enabler of child abuse, child molestation, child suicide in all of Canada right now.
Why would a kid come out to a teacher when they didn’t tell their parent?
Only reason I can think of is because the kid is afraid of their parents
Seen this second hand via my partner who's a teacher. The parents eventually found out and suddenly the kid wasn't trans anymore. Can't imagine why that would be.
Great post. I would add that it's also a debate on the nature of what it means to be a parent, of the relationship of a child to their parent, and minors' status as a legal person. The conservative view sees children as the property of their parents whose will overrides any preferences of the child, whereas the left is increasingly moving towards the idea that children are an autonomous person with agency and rights that supersede the wishes of the parent. It seems that a lot of parents take issue with that fact, as I'm sure many do with the fact that they are no longer "allowed" to beat their children.
Yes, there's definitely a core of this element here. At one point in time, women were legally the chattel property of their husbands. Do you own a child like you own a pet? Is sending your kid to school like sending your dog to doggie daycare?
Quoting one of my favourite sci fi writers, Becky Chambers (in: A Closed and Common Orbit) -- an alien reflecting on humanity:
“At the core, you’ve got to get university certification for parenting, just as you do for, say, being a doctor or an engineer. No offence to you or your species, but going into the business of creating life without any sort of formal prep is . . .’ He laughed. ‘It’s baffling. But then, I’m biased.”
Wow this thread devolved into hate speech pretty fast
These bastards always go after the trans people first.
It's not entirely accurate to say that 'fascists always come for the trans people first.' The Nazis, for instance, developed a deeply horrifying eugenics program that didn't single out any one group initially, but targeted any population they deemed 'undesirable.' (Google 'T4 Project' for more info.) Among the first victims were people with conditions we now understand as autism. In fact, the term 'Asperger's syndrome' came from Hans Asperger, a clinician working in Nazi-occupied Vienna who labeled some autistic children as his 'little professors.' These were children he deemed could contribute to society and were thus worth saving. This is one reason why many in the autistic community prefer not to use the term 'Asperger's' anymore—it's just ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder) now. If you read the book 'Neurotribes,' it provides an in-depth exploration of how the Nazis manipulated narratives of 'mercy' and 'alleviation of suffering' to justify their genocidal acts, starting with what they euphemistically referred to as 'euthanasia' of disabled children. LGBTQ+ individuals, including those we would now identify as trans, were also heavily persecuted, often being wrongfully categorized as 'mentally ill.' But these atrocities were widespread and multifaceted, targeting numerous groups concurrently, not sequentially.
I mean, if we're bringing up specific examples of targeted groups, it's a demonstrable fact that yes, the queer community in Germany was targeted in the very very early years of Nazi rule. Yes, Aktion T4 was horrifying, but as you mention there are so many groups they targeted, saying "what about these people?" only serves to distract from specific echos of history people should be calling out today.