1000 replies to this topic

[Rob Randall]

^The first step is to simply acknowledge that it happened, and it was wrong and we should work to ensure things like that never happen again. 

 

We did this recently with the historic Armenian Genocide and the Tulsa Race Massacre. Regardless of whether there are survivors still alive it starts with an acknowledgement and then we work from there.

[Mike K.]

In fairness to FN, there are probably a half dozen different governance models. Although we tend to lump all FN together for policy purposes, they are in fact hundreds of distinct bands many with different needs and desires. If you have land that has economic value and can argue the validity of treaties then you may want autonomy. If you have land that has little economic value then you probably don't.

 

And all of those needs and desires can be exercised by individual nations. We're approaching reconciliation and treaty affairs piecemeal for this reason.

[spanky123]

^The first step is to simply acknowledge that it happened, and it was wrong and we should work to ensure things like that never happen again. 

 

We did this recently with the historic Armenian Genocide and the Tulsa Race Massacre. Regardless of whether there are survivors still alive it starts with an acknowledgement and then we work from there.

 

Wasn't that 15 years ago when we apologized and agreed to pay the settlement to FN or 6 years ago when we released the TRC findings and the Government apologized again?

[Rex Waverly]

So know that you know, what do you plan to do about it? How are you going to change?

 

That's a good question; i don't really know how i can best help. Right now, i'm just trying to educate myself on what happened and how it affected the victims and their families. (I guess i'm also trying to educate others via debating in an online forum, but not sure how effective it is....)

 

I like to think I've already accepted my privilege and acknowledged the existence of systemic racism, and I support progressive policies aimed towards adjusting the imbalances (mostly though voting for progressive candidates, i'm not much of a protest type). But i guess i also have to acknowledge that I'm an middle-aged white man, so i'm probably not as woke as I'd like to be, but I am trying.

[Rob Randall]

The government apologized. But the message didn't really trickle down to us. It wasn't as simple as putting out a statement saying the massacre in Armenia was a genocide and saying well, that issue's done. 

 

The problem of residential schools is challenging to wrap our heads around because it strikes at the very core of our shared values--our ideas regarding human rights, democracy, race and religious faith. Challenging these notions means confronting long-held beliefs about who we are as a people.

[Mike K.]

We are a melting pot of societies, cultures, faiths, ethnicities and values, though. Canadians as a whole will never agree on 'shared values' because they simply do not exist.

[Rex Waverly]

We are a melting pot of societies, cultures, faiths, ethnicities and values, though. Canadians as a whole will never agree on 'shared values' because they simply do not exist.

 

I disagree... i think there are many values that as a country we agree on, at least as much as any other nation agrees on their values. One that makes us unique is the respecting of other cultures / values, which is probably why it's so upsetting to us to see the residential school system which is essentially the opposite of respecting other cultures.  We also have a Charter of Rights and Freedoms that pretty explicitly spells out a lot of the values that we uphold.

 

And I always thought the 'melting pot' was the US ideal, whereas in Canada we strive towards a 'mosaic' of many separate and distinct cultures that contribute to the whole in their own way.

[sukika]

We are a melting pot of societies, cultures, faiths, ethnicities and values, though. Canadians as a whole will never agree on 'shared values' because they simply do not exist.

 

I like to think that we can all agree to be more empathetic and considerate to those around us.  Right now it seems like more and more people refuse to acknowledge anything outside of their own viewpoint and life experiences, which is disheartening.  

[Mike K.]

I disagree... i think there are many values that as a country we agree on, at least as much as any other nation agrees on their values.

Canadians are divided more today than they have ever been.

A simple case in point is how our “values” do not seem to align with those of the Pacheedaht First Nation.

[Mike K.]

I like to think that we can all agree to be more empathetic and considerate to those around us. Right now it seems like more and more people refuse to acknowledge anything outside of their own viewpoint and life experiences, which is disheartening.

And yet our society is safer, more accommodating and progressive today than it has arguably ever been.

Where we run into problems is when we believe what we personally believe is what others must believe because we think our beliefs are pure and just, ie the sentiment “First Nations are not supposed to want to cut down old growth timber!”

[spanky123]

That's a good question; i don't really know how i can best help. Right now, i'm just trying to educate myself on what happened and how it affected the victims and their families. (I guess i'm also trying to educate others via debating in an online forum, but not sure how effective it is....)

 

I like to think I've already accepted my privilege and acknowledged the existence of systemic racism, and I support progressive policies aimed towards adjusting the imbalances (mostly though voting for progressive candidates, i'm not much of a protest type). But i guess i also have to acknowledge that I'm an middle-aged white man, so i'm probably not as woke as I'd like to be, but I am trying.

 

Thank you for the thoughtful response Rex. The problem with many progressive policies (ie critical race theory) is they promote racism and division (ie it is ok to be racist towards non-blacks and non-FN to 'correct' injustices from 200 years ago). This doesn't and hasn't achieved anything and arguably has set groups back.

[Rex Waverly]

Thank you for the thoughtful response Rex. The problem with many progressive policies (ie critical race theory) is they promote racism and division (ie it is ok to be racist towards non-blacks and non-FN to 'correct' injustices from 200 years ago). This doesn't and hasn't achieved anything and arguably has set groups back.

 

I'll be honest and admit i'm not really familiar with the intracacies of critical race theory, but i do understand the resentment and pushback that policies like that can create, i've felt some of it myself. I'm an engineer by trade who not too long ago was hunting for work, and many of the job positions are explicit in their preference for women and visible minorities. 

 

But i also have to be fair and realize that this is in response to a history of these jobs only being open to white men like me. And there are still many companies out there who seem to prefer white men; although obviously they won't explicitly say in their postings, it's pretty obvious by the current makeup of their staff and the 'boys club' conduct and attitude that they don't really try to hide. And i've seen how some female engineers are treated, especially at job sites, and it's pretty eye-opening how openly dismissive some are of women engineers. 

 

So long story short, i understand that these policies can be frustrating but there is clearly still a need for a levelling of the playing field, and honestly i can't think of any other way to accomplish that goal.  So i support these policies even if it directly impacts me, because i believe it's righting a wrong.   

[spanky123]

^ They are likely seeking women and minorities because they can get Government funding for those roles so you are double whammied! 

 

Flipping this around however, nearly 60% of family doctors under 40 are women and they would average a higher salary than an engineer. Should men then be given priority on open positions at medical schools or in hiring in hospitals? I doubt you would find too many people to agree with that.

[Rex Waverly]

^ They are likely seeking women and minorities because they can get Government funding for those roles so you are double whammied! 

 

Flipping this around however, nearly 60% of family doctors under 40 are women and they would average a higher salary than an engineer. Should men then be given priority on open positions at medical schools or in hiring in hospitals? I doubt you would find too many people to agree with that.

 

That's not a great example; while that 60% seems plausible (the article i'm referencing here had 54%, not 60 but close enough to make your point), women overall make up only 45% of doctors. Additionally, they are vastly under-represented in most disciplines, specifically the higher paying disciplines.  From https://healthydebat...e-gap-medicine/:

 

While women make up nearly half of Canada’s family doctors and psychiatrists—45.3 and 43.6 percent respectively in 2016, according to the Canadian Institute for Health Information—they are the majority in just two areas: pediatrics and obstetrics/gynecology. They take up about a third of the ranks in general surgery; according to CIHI’s data, there were 1,466 male general surgeons and 551 females. Nationally, there were 315 female and 958 male ophthalmologists in 2016; and 846 women compared with 1,835 men in diagnostic radiology.

 

So i'm not ready to call this problem solved yet.  But to your overall point, should women-dominated fields be subject to requirements to hire men?  My answer in most cases is no, since I don't think the gender discrepancies are related to prejudicial hiring practices.  Possibly, if there were jobs men couldn't do because of systemic bias, then yes, i might agree. But i don't think that is the case.

 

Remember, the goal isn't to achieve gender balance (i.e., all careers at 50/50 gender ratio)... the goal is to give everyone that wants to an equal shot. For instance, i don't think there will ever be 50/50 male to female ratio in engineering; it just seems like not as many women want to chose this path. But they should have the same opportunity as men, if they choose to do it.

[Victoria Watcher]

Vancouver Island First Nations declaration not enough for old-growth protesters

‘At the invitation of Elder Bill Jones, the Rainforest Flying Squad will continue to stand our ground’

https://www.vicnews....wth-protesters/

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 07 June 2021 - 02:35 PM.

[phx]

 the goal is to give everyone that wants to an equal shot. 

 

Times have changed, Rex.  Equality (equal opportunity) has been replaced with Equity (equal outcome).

[LJ]

anyway now that residential schools have been gone for a couple generations it’s good to see that everything has improved for on reserve natives.

It might have, but not many of them are on reserves, most indigenous children are in foster care.

 

There is a severe over representation of Aboriginal youth in Canada's foster care system. Of all children in care, the percentage of Aboriginal children reaches 62% to 85% in some provinces.^[8] First Nation children make up 82% of the Aboriginal children in foster care, while Metis children make up 13%, and Inuit children make up 4%.^[8]

[spanky123]

Times have changed, Rex.  Equality (equal opportunity) has been replaced with Equity (equal outcome).

 

Well bring on more equity as far as I am concerned. Most people I know have made more money in the past 12 months then they did in the past decade. Build back better certainly seems to be working out for the priviedged. 

[spanky123]

Update from CTV. Experts say communities, families critical to determining next steps at Kamloops residential school | CTV News

 

Last line is interesting. 

 

“And I don’t want them to think that they have to do that to prove there’s burials there.”

 

It is a valid point. If there are kids from 80 FN that attended the school and some bands don't want burials disturbed then what do you do?

[anon scientist]

Well if the goal is 50:50 they will soon have to have a quota system to let more men into medical schools. And you glossed over the fact that spanky123 said "under-40".

https://www.washingt...91a9_story.html

https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC2287266/

That's not a great example; while that 60% seems plausible (the article i'm referencing here had 54%, not 60 but close enough to make your point), women overall make up only 45% of doctors. Additionally, they are vastly under-represented in most disciplines, specifically the higher paying disciplines.  From https://healthydebat...e-gap-medicine/:

 

While women make up nearly half of Canada’s family doctors and psychiatrists—45.3 and 43.6 percent respectively in 2016, according to the Canadian Institute for Health Information—they are the majority in just two areas: pediatrics and obstetrics/gynecology. They take up about a third of the ranks in general surgery; according to CIHI’s data, there were 1,466 male general surgeons and 551 females. Nationally, there were 315 female and 958 male ophthalmologists in 2016; and 846 women compared with 1,835 men in diagnostic radiology.

 

So i'm not ready to call this problem solved yet.  But to your overall point, should women-dominated fields be subject to requirements to hire men?  My answer in most cases is no, since I don't think the gender discrepancies are related to prejudicial hiring practices.  Possibly, if there were jobs men couldn't do because of systemic bias, then yes, i might agree. But i don't think that is the case.

 

Remember, the goal isn't to achieve gender balance (i.e., all careers at 50/50 gender ratio)... the goal is to give everyone that wants to an equal shot. For instance, i don't think there will ever be 50/50 male to female ratio in engineering; it just seems like not as many women want to chose this path. But they should have the same opportunity as men, if they choose to do it.