Poll finds non-white Canadians reject Ottawa-approved 'BIPOC, racialized' label

[CdnFox]

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/poll-finds-non-white-canadians-reject-ottawa-approved-bipoc-racialized-label

Despite federal assertions that non-white Canadians prefer the term "racialized minority" or "people of colour," almost nobody does

The official term for non-white people used in most Government of Canada communications is “racialized” or “BIPOC” (black, Indigenous, people of colour). “Currently the terms ‘racialized minority’ or ‘racialized groups’ or ‘people of colour’ are preferred by people labelled as visible minorities,” reads one of several “anti-racism lexicons” now maintained by federal agencies.

 

But a mere 12 per cent of non-white Canadians polled used either term (six per cent for racialized, six per cent for BIPOC). Most used the term “visible minority” (38 per cent), a hyphenated descriptor such as Chinese-Canadian (16 per cent) or something else entirely.

[CdnFox]

The Left Wing nutbars come up with these terms that THEY think are cool and somehow more inclusive like "latinx" and such, but actual real people always hate them.

The reason the left comes up with them is to try to highlight the idea that "We" are seperate from "Them" And that anyone OTHER than white people has been equally oppressed by whitey and they should stand together.

Because a chinese person and a black person is basically the same thing.  Right? No difference? one label fits all?

[herbie]

Which means.....................???

nothing.

But I love your attempt at logic.

 

Whereas

 Someone in govt came up with some words nobody uses IRL
and whereas
the govt is Liberal
and whereas
liberals are left of my own political position

therefore
everyone who works for the govt must be a liberal supporter
and therefore
Leftist nutbars came up with these words.

Rightwing reasoning at its finest.

 

[CdnFox]

5 hours ago, herbie said:

Which means.....................???

 

exactly what i said it did. You'd have to be dumber than a rock not to get that or to think it was nothing.

Quote

nothing.

Ahhhhh... well ;... there you go i guess...

Quote

 

Whereas

 Someone in govt came up with some words nobody uses IRL
and whereas
the govt is Liberal
and whereas
liberals are left of my own political position

 

First, that's not logic, that's contract language. ROFLMAO - hilarious  you don't know the difference,  

Second,  talk about pointless - there you go.'  The left invents language to refer to people that the people themselves don't use. And the gov't chooses to use those words as well.

It shows how out of touch they are nicely.

And dude - that was a truly pathetic attempt at obfuscation.  I get your intent was to try to rewrite what i said so that it seemed like i was saying something else, but all you managed to do is make yourself look desperate and confused again

I hope the libs aren't PAYING you to stick up for them - i'm sure they'd want their money back with how bad you are at it, even tho it's obvious you're really putting in the effort to try ::)  

 

[Guest]

19 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Despite federal assertions that non-white Canadians prefer the term "racialized minority"

According to who? How many were polled to determine this?

Its an incredibly condescending term. It literally screams "elitist white people felt this would suit you best" all over it.

Reminds me of meeting some of my white friends parents for the first time. Some of which weren't told I was black, and they had only heard about me so assumed I was white (IE good grades, good kid, loves hockey).

"What do your people like to eat?" I love food, am not very picky.

"Do your people eat chicken?"

That term to me screams of that mentality of someone feeling they should use a term to describe you that makes them more comfortable using it.

Am Canadian and black. The latter isn't a term I will usually use. Am simply Canadian.

Having to "out" myself as racialized is almost indirectly reminding me that am inferior somehow and not equally Canadian as any other.

I have yet to see a racial minority not embrace their roots.

My friends would have preferred the world to know they were Canadian but born in (insert country).

Real talk. I have never heard a single non white minority use the term racialized. 

In my entire life..that should be hint enough that the term hasn't come from any of us, or likely is met with an internalized eye roll when its used on us.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, herbie said:

Which means.....................???

Coining terms to describe people by focusing on it being inoffensive vs embraced by these people, can result in the bulk of such people rejecting the term (which pulsates with levels of irony that would break any scale).

7 hours ago, herbie said:

But I love your attempt at logic.

Perfectly logical. Term was coined to describe people like me.

"Surprisingly", is rejected by most of us, because is more about being inoffensive than any levels of practicality. Racialized sounds like something was done to us. 

Like I could walk out a clinic, look down at my skin color, and start crying, with a passerby eventually asking what's wrong:

"I've been racialized! I was white walking into that clinic. It won't scrub off!"

Safety video tutorials coming out to prevent other cases:

"Walked in wanting a flu shot. Walked out racialized? Here at Lawyers R US, you are entitled to damages for gross negligence. Monica, became Monique due to her inattention. Derrick became DeAndre. He used to love sushi. He now enjoys chicken and watermelon. Don't let this be you. Call us, today!"

7 hours ago, herbie said:

therefore

You do appreciate your post citing a lack of logic made absolutely no sense, right?

I hope you appreciate irony as much as I do.

[OftenWrong]

2 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Coining terms to describe people by focusing on it being inoffensive vs embraced by these people, can result in the bulk of such people rejecting the term (which pulsates with levels of irony that would break any scale).

Perfectly logical. Term was coined to describe people like me.

"Surprisingly", is rejected by most of us, because is more about being inoffensive than any levels of practicality. Racialized sounds like something was done to us. 

Like I could walk out a clinic, look down at my skin color, and start crying, with a passerby eventually asking what's wrong:

"I've been racialized! I was white walking into that clinic. It won't scrub off!"

Safety video tutorials coming out to prevent other cases:

"Walked in wanting a flu shot. Walked out racialized? Here at Lawyers R US, you are entitled to damages for gross negligence. Monica, became Monique due to her inattention. Derrick became DeAndre. He used to love sushi. He now enjoys chicken and watermelon. Don't let this be you. Call us, today!"

You do appreciate your post citing a lack of logic made absolutely no sense, right?

I hope you appreciate irony as much as I do.

It is essentially saying you're a victim. By inventing this term, will keep the phrase 'racism' on our lips.

[myata]

It rubs me wrong way every time I hear it. It's only English (and some logic):

race: a noun. Physical differences between humans is a fact of reality. Racial phenotype is one of the many, many physical factors. Again: it's a fact of physical reality.

racial: adjective. As pertaining to the race (racial phenotype), a fact of physical reality.

racialized (by the way, spell checker here doesn't recognize it, politically correctness flaw): passive voice, requires a subject. Racialized means that there is or was "racializer".

Certainly, racial discrimination happened and was common, and not that long ago. It happens in some forms and cases now. But does it mean that it should have a permanent-lasting effect for like, eternity? Incorporated in the language and speech you're racialized so they have to be racializers?

Well, we can try to see how it would work in this reality not just feel-goodie-leftie talk. France defeated Germany in WWI (a fact of history) so it was among the victorizers. Germany, victorized, obviously. Then in 1940 - 1944 France was victorized, following by another stretch of victorizing. And now, in this 21st century what should it be? Victorized or victorizers? Can be both? Should it?

A saying goes, a fool can ask a question (easily and naturally, -m.) that a hundred of wise folk wouldn't answer. In Canada, it seems it has been adopted and raised to the level of public policy. And why wouldn't it - no this is not a rhetorical question, very practically and physically, what is there to prevent it, checks, controls, anything?

Edited October 1, 2023 by myata

[Guest]

2 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

It is essentially saying you're a victim.

I don't know. Maybe its just me. But my parents came here as lawful refugees, with nothing but the clothing on their backs.

When you're that poor, you don't have time to feel sorry for yourself.

They reminded me of this, constantly.

"As a black male, you will need to work 5 times as hard as your white counterpart for the same level of respect. You will be inferior to their eyes.."

I see it like that homeless person asking for money, and me handing them a toonie and telling them "God bless you", and getting stopped with them talking about: "Uh, I need 5 dollars".

"This is all I have on me"

I want to buy a snack. You sure you don't..

*my offer is rescinded, and I quickly walk away offering the change to another who clearly needed it more*

I see that guy whenever I see entitlement behind victimhood. You want sympathy, check under S in the dictionary. Life is hard.

Real victims have a way of having their situations make them incredibly humble.

I come from extreme poverty. Its humbling. The level of social shame that you feel, you never forget it.

Its the same upbringing that makes me dress down when headed to a developing country. As if I would wear my designer watches. I wear my Timex. I blend right in and am one of the people.

[OftenWrong]

24 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

"As a black male, you will need to work 5 times as hard as your white counterpart for the same level of respect. You will be inferior to their eyes.."

Yeah it's really sad. There will always be racism in any society, as a natural consequence of our perception, associating skin colour with certain cultural stereotypes. It is those stereotypes that need to be looked at and honestly addressed.

When I see a young black man wearing certain clothes and a look, I get the stereotype. A product of ghetto mentality, that is, a place of crime and danger, despair with no hope for the future. But the underlying issue is poverty. It breeds the ignorance and everything else that follows, the need that brings crime, and gangs.

But if I see a young black man who's well dressed and clean-cut, I don't have that problem. They're just a person to me. If I interview them for a job, they get the same consideration as anyone else. Doesn't mean I need to be especially nice to them because they are black, either. They could still be an a-hole just like anyone. If you're an a-hole, you don't get the job no matter what. If you don't know you're stuff, same thing. No special exception because of skin colour. That's absurd, it perpetuates racism itself. Just as the word "racialized person" does.

 

[WestCanMan]

14 hours ago, herbie said:

Which means.....................???

nothing.

OMG, HEWBIE DOESN'T LIKE THIS TOPIC! 

SHUT IT DOWN!

SHUT IT DOWN!

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

OMG, HEWBIE DOESN'T LIKE THIS TOPIC! 

SHUT IT DOWN!

SHUT IT DOWN!

DANGER!!! DANGER WILL ROBINSON!!!! [engage arm flailing mode]

[WestCanMan]

On 9/30/2023 at 7:50 AM, CdnFox said:

The Left Wing nutbars come up with these terms that THEY think are cool and somehow more inclusive like "latinx" and such, but actual real people always hate them.

I think that there are a lot of non-racists around who just want to be called "Canadians" or "people" and don't want to be pigeon-holed into a racial category.

[herbie]

Not a matter of "liking".

Just pointing out (once again) that it is meaningless and solely posted only to disparage the govt in the minds of people who can only serve negativity.

Otherwise:

Oh.
next issue.......

[Guest]

2 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

When I see a young black man wearing certain clothes and a look, I get the stereotype.

I can understand the stereotype, though.

Just like if I see a woman with a micro mini skirt, wearing no panties and no bra wearing a nearly see through top. I'll assume it will only take a drink or two, to get some in the back of my car with you. If she turns out to be a doctor or something of the sort, I'll be completely speechless. A stripper, I'll snicker under my breath. Now, this is slut shaming. Why you calling her a slut? I just thought she was easy.

I dated a girl like this back in the day, and on our first date, she told me that she was a virgin. I didn't believe it. A few people I knew, knew of her, and so I asked for a "background check" on her. Turns out, she wasn't lying. She was a virgin. She only took pipe from the back, and had slept with damn near every guy I knew in the hood. She wanted to save her V for someone special. That's like getting a used car, with nothing but rust on it, but the front seats are immaculate, because they put seat covers on them.

We all thin slice, and its part of being human. If you have any form of intelligence and good instincts, you'll thin slice the living daylights out of a situation that doesn't seem right.

Why add to more things to divide and add to the judgment that you already likely receive?

 

4 minutes ago, herbie said:

who can only serve negativity.

How is this negativity? He posted stats to support his claim.

So, are you trying to say what he is saying is false, and that most minorities love being called racialized? I'm confused.

[herbie]

Perspective, you do realize it was some bureaucrats attempt to promote a term that was less offensive. We all know how good [/sarc] they can be at their jobs.

Which reminds me:

We need to come up with a derogatory name for the Belgians....

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, herbie said:

Not a matter of "liking".

 

Of course it is.   This is no different than misgendering people with their preferred pronouns - which you lefties consider to be a sin on par with rape 

Don't you believe people should have the right to choose how they identify? Careful - your hypocrisy is showing  

[Guest]

1 hour ago, herbie said:

you do realize it was some bureaucrats attempt to promote a term that was less offensive

And these are the people you want putting gender ideology into schools. Yikes.

[Canadian_Cavalier]

18 hours ago, herbie said:

Leftist nutbars came up with these words.

They literally did. I have never seen a conservative use "BIPOC" or "racialized".

[WestCanMan]

3 hours ago, herbie said:

Not a matter of "liking".

Just pointing out (once again) that it is meaningless and solely posted only to disparage the govt in the minds of people who can only serve negativity.

Otherwise:

Oh.
next issue.......

Oh gimme a break.

The whole topic of "Trudeau the covid savant and Trump the covid killer" was that exact negative thing and you revelled in it. You just don't like this because you consider your dear leader's arbitrary race categories to be beautiful and you don't think other people should have any say in it. 

FYI not wanting to be considered a '_______' first and foremost is a real thing: some people don't appreciate being lumped into a racial category because they're above that sort of thing.

How is "You're a BIPOC" all that different from "You're a negro" or "You're a whitey"?  

If you went to school for 11 years to become a surgeon do you wanna be called a BIPOC, a Phillipino, an Indo-Canadian, or do you just wanna be called Dr? F'n rights you wanna be called "Dr" because you earned it. 

Honestly, if people want to be small they will eventually turn any shiny, new, politically correct slogan into a pejorative.

Automatically separating people into arbitrary racial categories is inherently negative herbie. 

Some people consider themselves "Christian" or "Muslim" or "Atheist" or "male/female/bisexual/gay/trans" or something else more than they consider themselves Canadian or white or black or brown. Who the hell are you to say "Nah, you're actually this thing first and that thing second. Sorry to have to be the one to explain it to you, but the colour of your skin defines who you are, and it makes you quite different from other people."

There's a word for that, right? IIRC it's a pejorative. 

Edited October 1, 2023 by WestCanMan

[BeaverFever]

Government, academia and business often use formal terms that people don’t normally use in every day life. Nothing to see here. 
 

BTW, it was just a few decades ago that “visible minority” and “hyphenated Canadian” were also formal terms that “real people” didn’t use and that triggered the right. 

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Government, academia and business often use formal terms that people don’t normally use in every day life.

Not for people who don't want it, and if they do it's wrong.

But like all lefties whenever they can't defend their actions ...  pretend it's no big deal!!! Even if we pretended that kind of thing was huge before.

HOW DAAAAAARE YOU USE SOMETHING OTHER THAN THAT PERSON"S PREFERRED PRONOUN!!! IT"S DEHUMANIZING!!

Also you - "Hey - if they call people by a name or term they don't  like it's no big deal."

[eyeball]

5 hours ago, Canadian_Cavalier said:

They literally did. I have never seen a conservative use "BIPOC" or "racialized".

I have to agree it was a nut-bar that invented the stupid terms but I have to take issue with the idea it was a lefty. I know I've never used them.

The difference between Liberals and Conservatives, in my experience, as evidenced by decades of mismanagement and corruption at DFO no matter which party was in power, is nowhere near enough for me to take seriously - they're both quite right-wing from where I'm sitting.

Power wealth and influence is all these two have ever been about, all the partisan culture war nonsense they bicker over is just a wearying distraction.

No matter how much these two or their chuds fight over it the government still gets in.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

I have to agree it was a nut-bar that invented the stupid terms but I have to take issue with the idea it was a lefty. I know I've never used them.

 

It was absolutely the lefties. Sorry - that's just how it went.