Poll of the Day > Canada is changing its anthem to be gender neutral

(+) Yeah! (+)

Fucking damn it. Making me ashamed of my heritage.
---

Lokarin posted...

What's with all the anti-Canada in this topic? It's just an anthem, it's not important

The anthem is more important in America than in Canada. Americans have trouble understanding why Canadians don't care about there anthem. It's a difference in culture

I hear Canada is changing it so young children don't prostate themselves and swear allegiance to a red and white cloth and deified canadian founders anymore smh
---

FYI, as a U.S. citizen, I get the impression from most of the trustworthy media that anything the U.S. does, Canada does better. The only downside I can see---and this could be just a stereotype---is that Canadians seem inordinately concerned about not offending people, beyond the usual not using words that ethnic groups regard as slurs against them. Is that accurate?

OmegaM posted...

FYI, as a U.S. citizen, I get the impression from most of the trustworthy media that anything the U.S. does, Canada does better. The only downside I can see---and this could be just a stereotype---is that Canadians seem inordinately concerned about not offending people, beyond the usual not using words that ethnic groups regard as slurs against them. Is that accurate?

Considering they have laws against free speech, I'd say that's a safe assumption

OmegaM posted...

FYI, as a U.S. citizen, I get the impression from most of the trustworthy media that anything the U.S. does, Canada does better. The only downside I can see---and this could be just a stereotype---is that Canadians seem inordinately concerned about not offending people, beyond the usual not using words that ethnic groups regard as slurs against them. Is that accurate?

No. Not everything. America actually treats it's natives better. First Nation tribes in Canada get horrible land to live on compared to in the US.

the us also gets the joy of covering defense budgets for half of the "developed world" while simultaneously catching flak for the fact that we have to overcompensate for having weak allies.
---

OmegaM posted...

FYI, as a U.S. citizen, I get the impression from most of the trustworthy media that anything the U.S. does, Canada does better. The only downside I can see---and this could be just a stereotype---is that Canadians seem inordinately concerned about not offending people, beyond the usual not using words that ethnic groups regard as slurs against them. Is that accurate?

Depends on your definition of "inordinate".

Personally, I don't think "people should get along" is a bad credo to live by, but that's me...
---

FatalAccident posted...

OhhhJa posted...

Canada is already the laughingstock of the developed world. They don't need to further cement that legacy

Assuming youre from the US the irony of this is that you dont realise that America is literally the laughing stock of the developed world rn frfr lol

On a related note, based on a poll of 18,000 people from 25 different countries, Canada is seen as having the most positive influence globally of any country in the world, with 81% of respondents listing them as having a positive influence. The US ranks in at 9th place (out of 12 options) with 40%, putting it just below China (of note: the US numbers apparently dropped 24% since Donald Trump's election, the largest drop of any country on the survey).

http://uk.businessinsider.com/countries-with-the-most-positive-influence-on-the-world-2017-8
---

OhhhJa posted...

they have laws against free speech

I'm almost certain this is either a fabrication or a manipulative interpretation of some hate-speech law we have, but I don't have the facts to back that up on hand
---

Nightengale posted...

OhhhJa posted...

they have laws against free speech

I'm almost certain this is either a fabrication or a manipulative interpretation of some hate-speech law we have, but I don't have the facts to back that up on hand

A number of americans have difficulty accepting the fact that certain instances of hate speech can easily qualify as being threatening and.or terroristic, and that legislating against them is quite reasonable if you already accept legislating against personal threats. They seem to put a little too much weight on their freedom to burn crosses on people's lawns.
---

They try to change the anthem all the time. I sing the one i grew up with, I'm too fucking old to learn a new one every few years.

"O Canada, our home on native land.... "
---

Zikten posted...

FYI, as a U.S. citizen, I get the impression from most of the trustworthy media that anything the U.S. does, Canada does better. The only downside I can see---and this could be just a stereotype---is that Canadians seem inordinately concerned about not offending people, beyond the usual not using words that ethnic groups regard as slurs against them. Is that accurate?

American roads are way better. So there's something to hold onto
---

adjl posted...

Nightengale posted...

OhhhJa posted...

they have laws against free speech

I'm almost certain this is either a fabrication or a manipulative interpretation of some hate-speech law we have, but I don't have the facts to back that up on hand

A number of americans have difficulty accepting the fact that certain instances of hate speech can easily qualify as being threatening and.or terroristic, and that legislating against them is quite reasonable if you already accept legislating against personal threats. They seem to put a little too much weight on their freedom to burn crosses on people's lawns.

It has a lot to do with the fact that a disturbingly large proportion of Americans hold their ignorance of the world in such high regard that they unironically enjoy wearing it publicly as a badge of honour. In the USA, anti-intellectualism is cool.

In Canada, we don't believe that spray painting a swastika and "go back to Israel" on a Jewish person's fence should be penalized the same as if it had just been a spray painted penis. If someone thinks Canada is anti-free speech because of this, they're a fucking moron. End of story.
---

I don't think it's so much that anti-intellectualism is cool, it's just that they're literally brainwashed by their media and (especially right now) their government
---

wonder what the British national anthem "God Save the Queen will change to once the queen's gone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tN9EC3Gy6Nk
---

Man, look at the spewing of rhetoric and propaganda going on. Defending speech even If it hurts someone's feelings equates to burning crosses on people's lawns... Give me a fucking break . Typical leftist identity politics garbage... anyone who disagrees with you is a murderous, racist, uneducated bigot. If anyone's brainwashed about what American people are like it's Canadians. What have the Canadian people contributed to the world... nothing compared to Americans. The only reason the rest of the world is obsessed with our culture and politics is because of our influence and importance globally.

Also, equating being legally obligated to use specific gender pronouns to threatening someone is absurd. Believe or not, hurting someone's feelings isn't the same thing as threatening them. You can do one without the other. Restricting speech does nothing but hamper discourse. There is always someone that will find almost anything you say offensive. Restricting any speech that isn't a threat is tyrannical. The government should have no place in telling people they can't hurt someone's feelings

That's a lot of text for not caring about Canada
---

RCtheWSBC posted...

That's a lot of text for not caring about Canada

It's not just canada. That's been enacted in NY now dear. Thanks for playing

OhhhJa posted...

Also, equating being legally obligated to use specific gender pronouns to threatening someone is absurd.

That's not a thing. Stop reading fake news. You're getting mad over an imaginary situation you've made up.
---

Well you didn't mention that in your rant at all, soooo
---

faramir77 posted...

OhhhJa posted...

Also, equating being legally obligated to use specific gender pronouns to threatening someone is absurd.

That's not a thing. Stop reading fake news. You're getting mad over an imaginary situation you've made up.

Don't even know your own laws... tsk tsk. So much for Canadian intellectual superiority

OhhhJa posted...

Don't even know your own laws... tsk tsk.

faramir77 posted...

That's not a thing.

---

OhhhJa posted...

faramir77 posted...

OhhhJa posted...

Also, equating being legally obligated to use specific gender pronouns to threatening someone is absurd.

That's not a thing. Stop reading fake news. You're getting mad over an imaginary situation you've made up.

Don't even know your own laws... tsk tsk. So much for Canadian intellectual superiority

Please cite an official government link of our Criminal Code that mandates use of specific pronouns.
---

Nightengale posted...

Please cite an official government link of our Criminal Code that mandates use of specific pronouns.

my understanding of this issue is:

Bill C-16 "adds 'gender identity or expression' to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Canadian Human Rights Act"

"gender identity" and "gender expression" are poorly defined terms. the ontario human rights policies have said that refusing to use someone's pronouns can be considered gender-based harassment and that it is "likely" discrimination. not knowing or not intending to harass is still harassment.

ontario has *human rights tribunals* which is already ridiculous by itself. they enforce ontario human rights policies, and you can hypothetically legally find yourself in front of a tribunal, and be found guilty of a hate crime, for not using someone's pronouns, even inadvertently.
---

Lokarin posted...

I was gunna complain, but the change they're making is legitimately neutral... it's a fair change.

There's no such thing as legitimately changing something because people got butthurt for no reason.
---

Sahuagin posted...

Nightengale posted...

Please cite an official government link of our Criminal Code that mandates use of specific pronouns.

my understanding of this issue is:

Bill C-16 "adds 'gender identity or expression' to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Canadian Human Rights Act"

"gender identity" and "gender expression" are poorly defined terms. the ontario human rights policies have said that refusing to use someone's pronouns can be considered gender-based harassment and that it is "likely" discrimination. not knowing or not intending to harass is still harassment.

ontario has *human rights tribunals* which is already ridiculous by itself. they enforce ontario human rights policies, and you can hypothetically legally find yourself in front of a tribunal, and be found guilty of a hate crime, for not using someone's pronouns, even inadvertently.

Just saw this. Thanks for doing my research for me and them. Suddenly, they've got nothing to say of course

You can't get charged for not using someone's pronouns. You can get charged for refusing to hire someone solely because of their gender identity.

Morons heard "can't discriminate based on gender identity" and made up the pronouns garbage. You're literally believing fake news.
---

Alternatively, let me ask. Prior to this, there was no explicitly stated law forbidding discrimination based on gender identity. Do you think that it should have been legal to discriminate based on that? If not, how else would you have liked them to word it?
---

faramir77 posted...

You can't get charged for not using someone's pronouns. You can get charged for refusing to hire someone solely because of their gender identity.

Morons heard "can't discriminate based on gender identity" and made up the pronouns garbage. You're literally believing fake news.

You're seriously just closing your ears and eyes at this point

OhhhJa posted...

faramir77 posted...

You can't get charged for not using someone's pronouns. You can get charged for refusing to hire someone solely because of their gender identity.

Morons heard "can't discriminate based on gender identity" and made up the pronouns garbage. You're literally believing fake news.

You're seriously just closing your ears and eyes at this point

No, I'm not. You're making an issue out of absolutely nothing. You're a foreigner who knows nothing that they're talking about.

Saying that a law disallowing discrimination against people based on gender expression will lead to people being jailed for refusing to use pronouns is a textbook example of th slippery slope fallacy. By your same logic, laws disallowing threats of violence could lead to people being jailed for saying they are going to "destroy you" in a video game.
---

you know you're literally talking to people who take pride in not knowing what the fuck they're talking about
---

yeah its not like Im someone who actually does deal with being misgendered or anything

if only Id known I could make everyone whos done that stand at a human rights tribunal lol
---

Nightengale posted...

yeah its not like Im someone who actually does deal with being misgendered or anything

if only Id known I could make everyone whos done that stand at a human rights tribunal lol

it's possible you could if you made a big enough deal about it and talked to the right people, who knows, I'm just glad I don't live on ontario. just the fact that there *exists* a "human rights tribunal" should be alarming enough.

faramir77 posted...

Saying that a law disallowing discrimination against people based on gender expression will lead to people being jailed for refusing to use pronouns is a textbook example of th slippery slope fallacy.

it's not slippery slope, it's badly written law. slippery slope is like, "if we allow iffy thing X, then it's only a matter of time before we're allowing obviously-horrible thing Y!". this is nothing like that.

the law (ambiguous as it is) can be interpreted in such a way that saying "she" to someone you didn't know wanted to be called "he" is literally illegal. whether anyone will ultimately be charged or not is beside the point. the fact that a law like this is allowed to exist is an embarrassment.
---

I live in Ontario, and no, sorry, thats really not something I could do.
---

Nightengale posted...

I live in Ontario, and no, sorry, thats really not something I could do.

I don't see how you can know that, but it doesn't matter if you can or not.
---

Call me ignorant but the law specifically states that you cannot "knowingly" call someone the wrong pronoun in any public space. This is coupled with the hate speech law in Canada. It falls under the same category as using a racial slur in any public space in Canada. I'm sure that most transgender people probably don't make a big deal when someone calls them the wrong pronoun by mistake but the law could be and probably has been used to bring somebody to trial. The accused would have to prove that they knowingly used the wrong pronoun to harass them but the point stands. In my opinion, it shouldn't be illegal in the first place if it isn't a threat to the person's physical well being but you guys do you

Sahuagin posted...

Nightengale posted...

I live in Ontario, and no, sorry, thats really not something I could do.

I don't see how you can know that, but it doesn't matter if you can or not.

Even if you are correct, its incredibly difficult to even prove for one thing. First I have to prove that it happened, then Id have to prove the person did it intentionally. Then youre assuming I have the means to lawyer up and go through those channels, which I super dont and I imagine a lot of trans people dont either.

You can argue that the law is written poorly all you want but the end result youre claiming is simply not realistic. I dont believe it has resulted in anyone being charged either, but I have no idea. I seriously doubt it.

It is true that gender identity and expression are protected classes. Race, national origin, disability, etc are as well. I dont think people are up in arms because the law broadly states disability and not what sorts of disabilities.
---

lots of info here:

http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/questions-and-answers-about-gender-identity-and-pronouns

they sure go out of their way *not* to say that it's ok to use the wrong term. note that all of the stuff in the "code" is what the "human rights tribunals" enforce.

Kana, it sounds like you *could* file a complaint if someone regularly mislabels you.

where are those guys that would die before having even a sliver of their free speech stepped on? they must hate this so much. maybe that is why they were being all anti-canada earlier in the thread.

@Troll_Police_
---

oh good lord dont tag him into this
---

Nightengale posted...

You can argue that the law is written poorly all you want

the "code" I linked literally says they don't define the terms "gender expression" and "gender identity" in the code, but that it could include various things.

Nightengale posted...

oh good lord dont tag him into this

I don't normally tag anyone, but I've had so many arguments with him and others where he wouldn't budge a nanometer on his free speech, and now there's all this stuff that just tramples free speech to death and no one cares.
---

Hes just not a good-faith arguer, its not worth anyones time to try to present anything to him
---

not 100% sure what you are trying to say, or why it was necessary to tag me.

nazi canadia infringing on free speech, and i am supposed to be shocked?

no fucking shit dude. there is a reason why i dont live there, and there is a reason why i shit all over it whenever possible as i already did in this topic. their backwards ass anti free speech laws are absurdly regressive, and there is literally nothing redeeming or interesting about them aside from their proximity to the 2 world superpowers.
---

just frustrated at always arguing against a brick wall in both directions. might as well agree with someone for once.
---

Like this dude actually thinks were the one with a nazi problem.
---

true, this is extreme-left-wing not right-wing
---

Holy crap people here are stupid. Free speech under attack? I know you can't help it, but please shut the fuck up.

SinisterSlay posted...

They try to change the anthem all the time. I sing the one i grew up with, I'm too fucking old to learn a new one every few years.

"O Canada, our home on native land.... "

---

Nightengale posted...

Like this dude actually thinks were the one with a nazi problem.

I mean... Neither country has an actual by definition nazi problem. If you think America does you've read to many CNN headlines

I don't read any CNN headlines but I don't think you're in any position to lecture me about your media, lol. Though I'm sure you'd be totally chill if it was Fox News, innit.
---

Nightengale posted...

I don't read any CNN headlines but I don't think you're in any position to lecture me about your media, lol. Though I'm sure you'd be totally chill if it was Fox News, innit.

I'm in no position to judge the media from my own country? Ok bud. But nice job on the fox news jab. Did you come up with that on your own or regurgitate it from the 500 million other people who have used that retort?