[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Jacob]

I may be misremebering,  but it wasn't heinous crime, it was Muslim crime. Puts a different spin on it.

"Barbaric cultural practices hotline" it was called, advertised with a sad looking light brownish woman wearing hijab. They didn't explicitly say "Muslim crime", but it was pretty clearly directed - and seen as such - by both supporters and opponents.

[Jacob]

Nonconsensual Outings are bad, whether it's an adult or child. You don't know how people in their lives will react to the news. And while I agree parents should be made aware of most information about their kids, i think this is a valid exception. Like Jake said, the accepting parents won't care when when they find out and bigoted parents... well, I don't care about them.

But the funny thing is it's not about outing/ not outing, this is about changing names on official records - which presumably includes report cards... which get sent home.

So it's not even about keeping the information from people. It's purely about power. Who - in case of disagreement -has the power to change the name on the official paper work, the child or the parent?

[viper37]

Funny.

When the Conservatives wanted an hotline for heinous crimes, you guys were against it on the reasoning that they just had to go the police, that there was no such thing as peer pressure that would put a person in a situation where they would not denounce the crime to the police.

But here, it is automatically assumed that the parents are monsters and the children must be protected.

The issue is whether a kid can get the name changed on their official records without parental consent.

There are a few main scenarios where it might apply:

• The kid comes from a loving home, the conversation has already been had at home, the parents would give consent anyways - not an issue
• The kid comes from a loving home, the conversation may not have been had (so parents will find out when the receive official communication from the school with the changed name) and/ or they won't give consent - obviously the loving family has some things to work through in terms of communication etc, but in the meantime the school will respect the child's decision
• The child comes from an abusive family, but they'd still give consent - obviously shitty, but this particular policy would not be a problem.
• The child comes from an abusive family and withholds consent - in this case the school supports the child, removing the ability of an abusive parent using gender identity as a bludgeon to further abuse the child

Now with parental consent changed, nothing changes in scenario 1. Scenario 2 is potentially more awkward for the kid, but with a loving family it'll still get worked through somehow. Scenario 3 is unchanged. Scenario 4 is much worse for the kid who is already experiencing abuse.

Seems to me the change - requiring parental consent - doesn't change much except make things much worse for a minority of kids with abusive families. This, in my eyes, argues for not requiring parental consent.

Don't you find this is some twisted logic?

No

My question was kinda rethorical, because it's obvious you don't see the twisted logic.  But it's still there.

1) No matter what, the parent should be kept informed of important change at school.
2) No matter what, the parent should be kept informed of important change at school.
3) This is not a simple matter of who the kid is hanging with or who the kid is dating. If the family is abusive, there are ways the school can act to protect the children, and the children has ways to protect itself from its parents.  By the same logic, if the child is pressured to wear a hijab or any kind of face covering, or threatened by the parents to dress with modesty or suffer the consequences (remember the Shaffia girls, honor crimes are a thing in Canada, despite the Liberals desire to drown the issue and stop the studies on the subject), there should be ways to call for help.  Apparently, there are sufficient protection in place right now in Canada.  So, it shouldn't be a problem to tell parents if their kids want to be called by another name.
4) Same as #3.  It wasn't a problem for other cultural issues with other communities.  It won't be here because the main target are white conservative parents.  Unless there is a double standard at play?

[Jacob]

Funny.

When the Conservatives wanted an hotline for heinous crimes, you guys were against it on the reasoning that they just had to go the police, that there was no such thing as peer pressure that would put a person in a situation where they would not denounce the crime to the police.

But here, it is automatically assumed that the parents are monsters and the children must be protected.

The issue is whether a kid can get the name changed on their official records without parental consent.

There are a few main scenarios where it might apply:

• The kid comes from a loving home, the conversation has already been had at home, the parents would give consent anyways - not an issue
• The kid comes from a loving home, the conversation may not have been had (so parents will find out when the receive official communication from the school with the changed name) and/ or they won't give consent - obviously the loving family has some things to work through in terms of communication etc, but in the meantime the school will respect the child's decision
• The child comes from an abusive family, but they'd still give consent - obviously shitty, but this particular policy would not be a problem.
• The child comes from an abusive family and withholds consent - in this case the school supports the child, removing the ability of an abusive parent using gender identity as a bludgeon to further abuse the child

Now with parental consent changed, nothing changes in scenario 1. Scenario 2 is potentially more awkward for the kid, but with a loving family it'll still get worked through somehow. Scenario 3 is unchanged. Scenario 4 is much worse for the kid who is already experiencing abuse.

Seems to me the change - requiring parental consent - doesn't change much except make things much worse for a minority of kids with abusive families. This, in my eyes, argues for not requiring parental consent.

Don't you find this is some twisted logic?

No

My question was kinda rethorical, because it's obvious you don't see the twisted logic.  But it's still there.

1) No matter what, the parent should be kept informed of important change at school.
2) No matter what, the parent should be kept informed of important change at school.
3) This is not a simple matter of who the kid is hanging with or who the kid is dating. If the family is abusive, there are ways the school can act to protect the children, and the children has ways to protect itself from its parents.  By the same logic, if the child is pressured to wear a hijab or any kind of face covering, or threatened by the parents to dress with modesty or suffer the consequences (remember the Shaffia girls, honor crimes are a thing in Canada, despite the Liberals desire to drown the issue and stop the studies on the subject), there should be ways to call for help.  Apparently, there are sufficient protection in place right now in Canada.  So, it shouldn't be a problem to tell parents if their kids want to be called by another name.
4) Same as #3.  It wasn't a problem for other cultural issues with other communities.  It won't be here because the main target are white conservative parents.  Unless there is a double standard at play?

I'm pretty sure that if there's a conflict between a Muslim girl and her family about whether she should wear hijab or other such garments at school - including on school photos and so on - the school will respect the girl's decision, not the parents'. The school is not going to enforce her wearing hijab while at school, or make her wear it in her class photos if she takes it off. Nor are they going to tell the parent "oh by the way, I have to inform you that Jasmina did not wear her headscarf in P.E. class today."

So - by analogy and to have a consistent standard - the school should also support the child's decision vs their parents when it comes to naming/ gender identity.

As for #4, it's not about targeting parents or specific demographics (in spite of movement conservatives  picking trans/gender questioning people as the next target and bully victims in their culture war). It's about protecting kids. Shitty, abusive parents exist - independently of demographics and political affiliation - and we should give schools the tools to support their children the best they can.

[HVC]

I may be misremebering,  but it wasn't heinous crime, it was Muslim crime. Puts a different spin on it.

"Barbaric cultural practices hotline" it was called, advertised with a sad looking light brownish woman wearing hijab. They didn't explicitly say "Muslim crime", but it was pretty clearly directed - and seen as such - by both supporters and opponents.

Right, I remember that add now. Harper lost my vote because of the whole thing, and I went back to voting liberal. Not just the the hotline, but the whole swing the conservatives were starting to take at the time. Look, we'll be hard on muslims and minorities, vote for us.

[Sheilbh]

Knowing the teacher at a state girls' school in London, at least here, teachers don't tell parents if a kid takes off their headscarf when they get into school (or vice-versa).

I'm not sure how I feel about this to be honest - I'm not entirely sure I'd legally mandate anythhing one way or the other as a fixed rule. In the UK the safeguarding duty to children is to act in the best interests of the child and I imagine there's something similar in Canada. I think it would perhaps be more suitable for guidance from relevant bodies basically that it's unlikely there'll be a single right answer that can apply to every case, but instead provide some considerations/guidance on how teachers/schools should consider the best interests of the child in this case.

Off the top of my head for example, in the case of a kid who is getting bullied because of their gender identity, I can well imagine them not wanting to tell their parents (in the same way bullied kids generally don't want to tell their parents what's going on). I think there could very easily be different appropaches there that are right in different circumstances.

[Barrister]

If one of my kids started identifying as a girl and wanted to be called female pronouns I would want to know about it immediately.  Why, on this one issue, do we just assume that all parents are anti-gay/anti-trans monsters who are going to abuse their children?

Presumably if you're not an anti-gay/anti-trans monster your child will consent to tell you?

So let me tell you about my nephew.  Growing up everybody just kind of "knew" he was gay.  He was huge into theatre, he had tons of girls as friends but never any girlfriends.  But he never said anything to his family for years and years.  He finally came out in his early 20s.

He grew up on a farm so maybe not a lot of gay people around, but his parents aren't religious, I've never heard anyone say anything negative about gays.  When he did come out it was a complete nothingburger.  And if you ask him now he says he always knew he was gay.

But still - he didn't tell his parents.

[Barrister]

I'm pretty sure that if there's a conflict between a Muslim girl and her family about whether she should wear hijab or other such garments at school - including on school photos and so on - the school will respect the girl's decision, not the parents'. The school is not going to enforce her wearing hijab while at school, or make her wear it in her class photos if she takes it off. Nor are they going to tell the parent "oh by the way, I have to inform you that Jasmina did not wear her headscarf in P.E. class today."

See, I don't think it's a school's job to enforce the kid wearing a headscarf - but I would be opposed to the school trying to actively hide that they take the headscarf off.  Again this just seems to assume that a muslim family will do something inappropriate to their daughter as a result.

I mean - if I'm a devote jew and I find out my child is eating bacon sandwiches at school.  It's not up to the school to enforce kosher on my kid, but that's a legitimate issue for me and my son to have to work out.

[Jacob]

So let me tell you about my nephew.  Growing up everybody just kind of "knew" he was gay.  He was huge into theatre, he had tons of girls as friends but never any girlfriends.  But he never said anything to his family for years and years.  He finally came out in his early 20s.

He grew up on a farm so maybe not a lot of gay people around, but his parents aren't religious, I've never heard anyone say anything negative about gays.  When he did come out it was a complete nothingburger.  And if you ask him now he says he always knew he was gay.

But still - he didn't tell his parents.

... but if he'd told a teacher, you think that teacher should be obligated to tell the parents? Because it seemed to me that things worked out pretty well in this situation, all things considered?

[Barrister]

So let me tell you about my nephew.  Growing up everybody just kind of "knew" he was gay.  He was huge into theatre, he had tons of girls as friends but never any girlfriends.  But he never said anything to his family for years and years.  He finally came out in his early 20s.

He grew up on a farm so maybe not a lot of gay people around, but his parents aren't religious, I've never heard anyone say anything negative about gays.  When he did come out it was a complete nothingburger.  And if you ask him now he says he always knew he was gay.

But still - he didn't tell his parents.

... but if he'd told a teacher, you think that teacher should be obligated to tell the parents?

I think they have an obligation not to actively hide it from the parents.

[Jacob]

See, I don't think it's a school's job to enforce the kid wearing a headscarf - but I would be opposed to the school trying to actively hide that they take the headscarf off.  Again this just seems to assume that a muslim family will do something inappropriate to their daughter as a result.

Sure.

But the thing is, the (now cancelled) item in question doesn't hide anything. It allows the school to change official paperwork without parental consent - but by its very nature, the parents will see that official paperwork (report cards etc). So unless I've misunderstood something, the "hiding things from parents" thing is a red herring - it's about whether the parents or the child gets to decide what name/gender is used, if there is a disagreement.

I don't think there's any implication that all parents are monsters or whatever (except to make a rhetorical point). The point is that the only real reason the legislation is necessary is in case of abusive parents or edge cases with vulnerable children (say divorced parents who are fighting via the child). In the majority of cases families will work through it together independently of the parental consent requirement or its absence. But there will be cases where vulnerable children will absolutely benefit from being able to make that decision without parental consent, and those are the people being sacrificed to score some culture-war points.

I mean - if I'm a devote jew and I find out my child is eating bacon sandwiches at school.  It's not up to the school to enforce kosher on my kid, but that's a legitimate issue for me and my son to have to work out.

Absolutely.

If you have a hot-dog day, do you require the parents of Jewish kids to give consent before they can choose the bacon-dog instead of vegetarian or beef options? My experience is that the kid makes their choice (typically in line with their parental values, but not always) and that over time they work through any issues at home.

[Jacob]

I think they have an obligation not to actively hide it from the parents.

I'm not sure I understand the distinction between "obligation to tell" and "obligation not to actively hide"?

[crazy canuck]

I don't think either Trudeau or PP come out of this looking particularly good.

One thing PP got right is the matter falls squarely into provincial jurisdiction.  Trudeau is doing nothing but virtue signaling.  But perhaps worse, he is a hypocrite.  He won't comment on legislation passed in Quebec which is clearly contrary to the Charter and only survives because of the Notwithstanding Clause.  But he takes a shot at a provincial government here.  Both actions are entirely dictated by the calculus of vote getting.  Not the principle in issue.

The NB legislation is odd.  Normally a school cannot disclose information about a student without the student's consent (with some exceptions).  But there has been an odd carve out here just to deal with pronouns.

BB, do you think pronouns are so important as to create that kind of legislative exception?

[viper37]

Funny.

When the Conservatives wanted an hotline for heinous crimes, you guys were against it on the reasoning that they just had to go the police, that there was no such thing as peer pressure that would put a person in a situation where they would not denounce the crime to the police.

But here, it is automatically assumed that the parents are monsters and the children must be protected.

The issue is whether a kid can get the name changed on their official records without parental consent.

There are a few main scenarios where it might apply:

• The kid comes from a loving home, the conversation has already been had at home, the parents would give consent anyways - not an issue
• The kid comes from a loving home, the conversation may not have been had (so parents will find out when the receive official communication from the school with the changed name) and/ or they won't give consent - obviously the loving family has some things to work through in terms of communication etc, but in the meantime the school will respect the child's decision
• The child comes from an abusive family, but they'd still give consent - obviously shitty, but this particular policy would not be a problem.
• The child comes from an abusive family and withholds consent - in this case the school supports the child, removing the ability of an abusive parent using gender identity as a bludgeon to further abuse the child

Now with parental consent changed, nothing changes in scenario 1. Scenario 2 is potentially more awkward for the kid, but with a loving family it'll still get worked through somehow. Scenario 3 is unchanged. Scenario 4 is much worse for the kid who is already experiencing abuse.

Seems to me the change - requiring parental consent - doesn't change much except make things much worse for a minority of kids with abusive families. This, in my eyes, argues for not requiring parental consent.

Don't you find this is some twisted logic?

No

My question was kinda rethorical, because it's obvious you don't see the twisted logic.  But it's still there.

1) No matter what, the parent should be kept informed of important change at school.
2) No matter what, the parent should be kept informed of important change at school.
3) This is not a simple matter of who the kid is hanging with or who the kid is dating. If the family is abusive, there are ways the school can act to protect the children, and the children has ways to protect itself from its parents.  By the same logic, if the child is pressured to wear a hijab or any kind of face covering, or threatened by the parents to dress with modesty or suffer the consequences (remember the Shaffia girls, honor crimes are a thing in Canada, despite the Liberals desire to drown the issue and stop the studies on the subject), there should be ways to call for help.  Apparently, there are sufficient protection in place right now in Canada.  So, it shouldn't be a problem to tell parents if their kids want to be called by another name.
4) Same as #3.  It wasn't a problem for other cultural issues with other communities.  It won't be here because the main target are white conservative parents.  Unless there is a double standard at play?

I'm pretty sure that if there's a conflict between a Muslim girl and her family about whether she should wear hijab or other such garments at school - including on school photos and so on - the school will respect the girl's decision, not the parents'. The school is not going to enforce her wearing hijab while at school, or make her wear it in her class photos if she takes it off. Nor are they going to tell the parent "oh by the way, I have to inform you that Jasmina did not wear her headscarf in P.E. class today."

So - by analogy and to have a consistent standard - the school should also support the child's decision vs their parents when it comes to naming/ gender identity.

As for #4, it's not about targeting parents or specific demographics (in spite of movement conservatives  picking trans/gender questioning people as the next target and bully victims in their culture war). It's about protecting kids. Shitty, abusive parents exist - independently of demographics and political affiliation - and we should give schools the tools to support their children the best they can.

If she does not wear a headscarf on a school picture, I think the parents will know, somehow...

[viper37]

In other news, the Toronto Star owner, Nordstar, is in talks to merge with Postmedia, owner of the National Post:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/toronto-star-nordstar-talks-merger-postmedia-1.6890659

So, Globe & Mail and National Post for English Canada, that's it?