CANADIEN

No doubt about it. I should have added that, in addition to credentials, all foreign doctors should have to go through an examination of their medical knowledge. If they at least have knowledge equivalent to that of a student starting his/her internship, they're in for an internship period followed by the same tests that Canadian-trained doctors have to pass before obtaining their diploma. If they don't have that leevel of knowledge, the only way they'll see an operating room is as a janitor or a patient. I am just waery of knee-jerk reactions based

Apart from spies, Taipeh revolutionaries, Chinese who miss the motherland and Maoists frozen in time, when someone defects to CHINA things have to be real real bad where they came from. That it happens is an indictment of the North Korean regime.

I tend to find that theory to be a bit simplistic. Not to say there are not many people who lash out at gays out of insecurity. Happened to me. When one of my best friends told me she was gay, my knee-jerk response was "and?"

At the risk of being called a racist, I find his mocking of stereotypes funny.

What are we talking about exactly here? quotas and "minority" hiring are indeed a form of systemic racism, not made less so by its aim of correcting past injustice. But a government action with a purpose not related to racial or ethnic identity, or that brings different groups together is not to blame if people react in a bigoted or racist manner. I will not tell people what they should find offensive or not. But I feel we are stepping on what could be a slippery slope towards PC run amock. I would argue, and I am sure you will disagree, that the relevant connotion behind the use of certain expression is the one linked to the intent of the person using it. That being said, there are cases where the expression and its usual use are so specific there can hardly be any misinterpretation as to why and how it's used. The term of the word "Japped" to describe the Pearl harbour attack is one key example.

Fallacy. HOMOSEXUALITY is not promoted. RESPECT OF THE RIGHTS OF HOMOSEXUALS is promoted. Not the same thing, not at all. If anything, it is hetorosexuality that is promoted, and in some cases forced upon people.

I misread who was quoting whom, and I apologize. And yes, stereotyping still exist to these in advertising. Lakota health products anyone?

Now doing that is something I would find insulting... as a canned pea soup purist.

I doubt that your example of Uncle Ben's and Aunt Jemima's fit the notion, then. Sure, the choice of those names appealed to stereotypes. But I doubt very much that's the basis for brand recognition nowadays.

The racism then, is in the attitude of the people, not in the intent of government institution to facilitate contacts. Racism would be the deliberate intent to separate groups in order to confer an advantage to one of them. I would argue there is a difference here. People reacting to someone mocking an accent know the intent is to mock a person or a group. Positive reaction to that is approval, at one level or another, of a stereotype. I don't find those things funny (almost all the time), because of how stereotypical it is. When I buy rice, any coonotation association to the name plays no role in my decision. Once again, I will admit that's because of my background and eperience. That being said, there is a Canada a brand of pea soup called "Habitant", a term historically used (often derogatively in English-speaking press of old) to described French-Canadians. As one of them, I rarely think of that when I buy it.

I, personnally, do not see the concept of the use of the word as dehuminazing, but that's from my own enocunter with the word. And I am sure aware of the negative use some make of the word. If you have a better term to propose, what it is?

I wonder if the term instituionalized is the best discriber here, and if the examples provided here all fit neatly into that description. Not that I would have a better term to suggest.

I would tend to agree with that statement of yours... to some extent. The concept of race is a categorization, and a fuzzy one at that. But it is very much part of how many of us identify ourselves and others. In that contect, while the notion of interracial rape is, to the surface of it, simple-minded, it still has its utility, if only to debunk myths.

On that, I would tend to agree... to some extend. I think prejudice is still there, but more people are now able and willing to see past that.

Fair enough the perp. Since rape is often a crime of hatred, it is logical to conclude that in some cases racial hatred is the perp's motivation. Wrote the wrong word, and corrected it already. Apologies to all for the mistake.

Are there, proportionally, more Black than White rapists in North America? Yes Are there cases when racial hatred is a motivation for a rape? Absolutely. Are most interracial rapes committed by Black men against white women? Because of methodology problems. I can't rely on any number provided here, regardless of whether they confirm or infirm that hypothesis. Does the Black community have a predilection for rape? No.

Sure it happens from activists. The same way some will take any instance of rape of a White woman by a Black man as a "proof" that Black males are all savage animals roaming the streets looking for white women to rape. But the press? The police? The press is doing what will sell copies. Rape is more often than not a crime of hate. Hate against a woman in particular, or all women in general. Nice try. YOU only care about rape and sexual violence as long as it serves your prejudice.

All of them. Without any exception. i certainly will not claim to have met as many Somalians as you, but the few my employer has hired over the years as summer students or temps were good workers, and good learners.

You chose to use the word predilection. Not me. And the choice was intentional. But thank you for the good laugh.

Nice try. what I want is for the creditentials of people who come saying "I'm a doctor" to be evaluated. What is the school they graduated from? How good is it? Can they actually do the job? I know it is much more simplistic err I mean simplier to assume any doctor trained outside of the countries you decided are good enough cannot make a good doctor, but I know it is more logical to actually find out if they actually are good enough or not. I could ask you if you to have our kids deal with a shortage of doctor, but I will let you have the monopoly on stupid questions. Interesting, isn't it, considering that one quarter of immigrants to Quebec comes from North Africa. Number one, two and three countries are usually (and not necessarily in theat order all the time), Algeria, France, and Morocco. And you know of course that the second largest Haitian community outside of Haiti itself is in Montreal? (after New York) BTW, they check language twice? I will admit, I just LOVE the way you pick and choose the values you can twist to fit your prejudice. Talking to yourself again? Better trained immigration personel. More resources. Longer residency requirement before becoming citizens. End to the family reunification (you come in, your spouse comes in, your minor children come in, your parents can visit with a visa or better still you can go visit them). More emphasis on skills needed to the work place, and knowledge of one or both of our official languages. references and strict check on them. Criminal record check. Faster refugee determination system. Faster, more efficient immigration system. Immediate deportation of non-citizens who commit crimes (after they served their full sentence). Making would-be immigrants fully aware of who we are as a country, and what our values are. This is what I want, and I have made it clear. The only reason why you believe this is lwoering our standards is because I "fail" to include "and don't even bother asking for an application form if you are a Muslim or Black".

You talk to yourself like that very often?

Wake me up when it's over.

What a load of bull