"Shut up and fit in"

[Wilber]

So now the Sikh's are trying to change the English language word that WE use, that we had first.

That's news, I'd like to see a reference for that one.

[Wilber]

Link

[jennie]

Welcome to reality. It is a long uphill battle against the cadre.

Cripes, I find myself wondering how the heck someone with mikedavid's outspoken opinions could possibly get work, and how they tolerate him. 'Forced assimilation' of all immigrants? That is not what Canada is about. There is no need for people to feel so pressured to "fit in" and be 'the same' as previous immigrants to Canada. Canada simply does not require that, because that is the wy Canadians like it. Freedom of religion and culture, and our own combined culture too: People who are comfortable in two worlds. Nothing wrong with that. Also, people in touch with their culoture will be much more valuable to Canada in the future, as we turn our expertise to marketing research and technology worldwide.

There is no question though that this is a small minority of men who have such difficulty with today's world being different than the idealized 1950's, so much difficulty that they lash out at whole groups of innocent people.

I don't think I ever met a real racist until last year. It's ... illuminating ... I suppose ... and I guess it is important for them to air their views to see how much support there is for that extremism.

Only 25 people came out for the last Caledonian 'rally'. The popularity of those who use racial insults seems to be in decline, and so is the popularity of those who express their racism in more subtle ways, like complaining about 'two-tier' justice: This despite the fact that all of the available evidence shows that Six Nations people are the ONLY people to be charged with anything, despite frequent assaults on police by Caledonians trying to shove past them, etc.

"Shut up and fit in" ... how well that describes what has been demanded of Indigenous Peoples.

But it is not the reality for anyone in Canada, not required.

I am beginning to understand the feelings somewhat, but I still believe that the solution is to go forward, not backward.

[kengs333]

Reading this thread, I think I have had an 'AHA!' experience. Let me see if I can say this right:

Since women and minorities 'got liberated', some white men have felt discriminated against because they perceive that they are getting a smaller slice of the pie than previous generations of white men. Some seem to respond by feeling they have to defend to the death that which is white male 'privilege' (i.e., their traditional 'bigger slice'). Failing that, blame it on someone else - "immigrants" who are non-white, non-Christian, non-assimilative; Indigenous Peoples seeking justice and environmental control over the pie, I don't know about women as we haven't had that conversation.

I can see that, how it all seems like threats ... to some others. I can see that now. Must sometimes be hard to explain the challenges to the older generations who retired before the changes hit them. There have been big changes. No question. The 'good' nurses and secretaries of previous generations are doctors and managers now. The taxi drivers are often from very different cultures and have unused degrees.

So ... is it harder for a white man to 'make his way' than it was in previous generations?

If so, and since we cannot go backwards from here, what are the solutions?

There are a lot of non-white men who feel miffed by the radical feminist movement. Why do you always pin things on "whitey"? That sounds like racism to me.

Achieving equality means just that, but anyone who has done some reading on the feminist movement will soon realize that that it's leaders, while claiming to stand for equality, really want there to be a shift towards female dominance of power. As Michele Lansberg once said, the movement is about "deprivilaging men". In other words, reducing them to the status of oppressed.

The problem is, that in order for men to be truly great leaders and providers, they need to be accorded privilage and respect. Many of the problems we have now with lack of political leadership and the declining status of the husband/father is the result of the undermining of maleness by radical feminism.

[jennie]

There are a lot of non-white men who feel miffed by the radical feminist movement. Why do you always pin things on "whitey"? That sounds like racism to me.

Achieving equality means just that, but anyone who has done some reading on the feminist movement will soon realize that that it's leaders, while claiming to stand for equality, really want there to be a shift towards female dominance of power. As Michele Lansberg once said, the movement is about "deprivilaging men". In other words, reducing them to the status of oppressed.

The problem is, that in order for men to be truly great leaders and providers, they need to be accorded privilage and respect. Many of the problems we have now with lack of political leadership and the declining status of the husband/father is the result of the undermining of maleness by radical feminism.

I was commenting on the rise of women and minorities, so logically it is the white males left out of that movement.

She meant reducing their privileged opportunities to equal those of others. No need to be paranoid, for cripes sakes.

Are you saying that men require 'special treatment'? ... pampering with 'privilege and respect' (i.e., the EGO stroking of a dependent woman) in order to be successful? I haven't heard that argument before. I don't think it is a popular argument around here. Some people here are pretty down on 'special treatment for minorities'.

Hey wait a minute ... aren't you one of those people?

As far as I am concerned, those whiners can just "shut up and fit in"! We all need pampering !

Edited September 26, 2007 by jennie

[jefferiah]

Cripes, I find myself wondering how the heck someone with mikedavid's outspoken opinions could possibly get work, and how they tolerate him. 'Forced assimilation' of all immigrants? That is not what Canada is about. There is no need for people to feel so pressured to "fit in" and be 'the same' as previous immigrants to Canada.

Asking people to wear the required uniform of the RCMP or to remove their dagger before attending school is not undue pressure to fit in. No one is saying that they have to watch Hockey Night In Canada and act Canadian or whatnot. Just respect our laws instead of demanding that we change things in their special case. That is pretty simple, and since they are lucky enough to come here, I dont think it is too much to ask that they be respectful and not whiney.

What does this have to do with feminism anyway? We arent talking about feminism. You have a way of getting really off base with things. Because we think that Sikhs should be required to wear the same uniform everyone else has to, you think we are afraid of equality. That is ridiculous Jennie.

[jennie]

Asking people to wear the required uniform of the RCMP or to remove their dagger before attending school is not undue pressure to fit in. No one is saying that they have to watch Hockey Night In Canada and act Canadian or whatnot. Just respect our laws instead of demanding that we change things in their special case. That is pretty simple, and since they are lucky enough to come here, I dont think it is too much to ask that they be respectful and not whiney.

jefferiah the debate about turbans in the RCMP ended YEARS ago. It is OVER!!! There are turbans in the RCMP.

Can you get over the loss and carry on, or are you going to remain stuck on that DEAD issue?

[mikedavid00]

Wearing a turban isn't unreasonable. Forcing people to cast off their religion in order to be good canadians is.

Hold on there chief.

No one is 'forcing' him to take off his turban. He can wear what he likes on his head. But when it comes to our PUBLIC STATE, there shall be no mixing of relgion and state services.

If he chooses to come to a country where wearing that kind of headgear is out of the ordinary, then he needs to suffer the consequences: racial slurs from morons, not getting a job in a factory becuase he can't wear a hardhat (funny no one has challenged that one.. yeah it actually involves LABOR and WORK!), and unfortunately he wont be able to be a mounty because by choice he chooses to wear that headgear.

Part of a secular society is to keep religion and sate appart. The mounties are paid an average of $80,000 a year I believe I consider them almost that of gov't workers in a CUPE union. They are ticket police in my eyes, nothing more. Go to the RCMP headquarters in Ottawa and you will view them as a political organization rather than some CIA type of service.

I suspect the stories of Sihk RCMP officers complaining about helmets is false.

http://www.rediff.com/news/1999/may/18us5.htm

[jennie]

Hold on there chief.

No one is 'forcing' him to take off his turban. He can wear what he likes on his head. But when it comes to our PUBLIC STATE, there shall be no mixing of relgion and state services.

If he chooses to come to a country where wearing that kind of headgear is out of the ordinary, then he needs to suffer the consequences: racial slurs from morons, not getting a job in a factory becuase he can't wear a hardhat (funny no one has challenged that one.. yeah it actually involves LABOR and WORK!), and unfortunately he wont be able to be a mounty because by choice he chooses to wear that headgear.

Part of a secular society is to keep religion and sate appart. The mounties are paid an average of $80,000 a year I believe I consider them almost that of gov't workers in a CUPE union. They are ticket police in my eyes, nothing more. Go to the RCMP headquarters in Ottawa and you will view them as a political organization rather than some CIA type of service.

http://www.rediff.com/news/1999/may/18us5.htm

mikedavid, I personally think people like you should have their citizenship revoked, only in my fantasies, of course. darn.

Just wanted to share that with you.

You don't have a friggen clue about Canada.

Your opinions do not represent Canada, not well at all, imo.

You shame us.

And in case you missed the post above, the Mounties and the turbans issue was settled long ago, perhaps before your memory starts.

http://archives.cbc.ca/IDC-1-73-614-3302-1...mounties_turban

When Baltej Singh Dhillon was accepted into the RCMP, he faced a choice — serving his country or wearing his turban. He chose to fight for his religious rights. In 1990, the federal government finally removes the ban preventing Sikhs in the RCMP from wearing turbans. The decision is not without its protestors, but as Dhillon says in this CBC Television clip, "I'm willing to look these people in the eye and tell them that I'm no different from them."

Edited September 27, 2007 by jennie

[mikedavid00]

I live in Toronto and I don't see any evidence of this. I see evidence of changes to make society more INCLUSIVE, but I don't see society fundamentally changing that much.

Introduction of Shariah law into our legal code.

Slave women wearing burka's over their head while voting which is not even allowed in arab countries.

And a completely seperate school system to cost billions unuallly in Ontario.

You don't get it. You *think* you are including, but you are really only creating special rules and DIVIDING.

We are equal when we all play by the same rules.

I respect your turban, but our laws will not change for you and our public institutions will not accomidate you. If you don't like it, simply leave or do not come to Canada. Chances are, if you are taking these issues to court, you have some time on your hands should not have even gotten into Canada in the first place.

[Argus]

That's probably because every time it is brought up, no one can come up with a rebuttal. Instead they just avoid having to come up with an actual argument against it by talking about how cliche it is.

I suppose it's the contempt we feel for idiots who use it. They heard it somewhere and it sounds like just the kind of all-loving, sing-song, we're all brothers under the skin kind of feel-good tripe they were taught by the CBC, so they never bother to consider what it means.

We're all immigrants? Why? Because two hundred years ago my mother moved here that makes me still an immigrant?

The idiotic belief that one remains an "immigrant" forever, regardless of how far back ones ancestors moved, is simply not something any sane person would bother to waste their time arguing against.

An immigrant is someone who was born in another nation and moved here. Anyone who thinks differently hasn't got the brains to pour piss out of his boot - much less keep it from getting in.

[Leafless]

Ha , what a lark that is.You answer what is culture by saying it is white culture.

Kind of like asking why is the sky blue? Oh thats easy son, because it is blue . Oh...ok....thanks. A+ at school huh?

Now answer the question. What is CDN culture? Not who defines it .

You can't even read.

The question was, "what is Canadianism" and I answered it.

Obviously you are one of the cultural rednecks who simply won't 'shut up and fit in'.

[Argus]

mikedavid, I personally think people like you should have their citizenship revoked, only in my fantasies, of course. darn.

Just wanted to share that with you.

You don't have a friggen clue about Canada.

Your opinions do not represent Canada, not well at all, imo

I often wish people like you with all your idiotic, child-like beliefs should be forcibly removed to Iran or Afghanistan for a while to let a little reality cloud over your rose-coloured glasses.

[mikedavid00]

Your opinions do not represent Canada, not well at all, imo

What are you talking about? A poll was released today where the majority of Canadians now do agree with me. Especially in Quebec.

I know Jennie you would gladly trade me in for a Pakistani grandmother as a citizen. And that's part of what makes you Canadian.

You are weak minded and brainwashed by our media and gov't. Hopefully the climate will change in Canada and we can take back our country and abolish the CBC hate machine. Then the types like you will change your tune around and realize that every store has 2 sides, and that we should discuss multicultralism openely and way the pros and cons.

So far, it's not working and never has. Let's stop it before it reallly gets out of hand and it might if Tory gets his way.

[Argus]

Cripes, I find myself wondering how the heck someone with mikedavid's outspoken opinions could possibly get work, and how they tolerate him.

Just curious here but you mention being at native blockades for quite some time. Do you have a job? Have you ever held a job?

[guyser]

Hold on there chief.

No one is 'forcing' him to take off his turban. He can wear what he likes on his head. But when it comes to our PUBLIC STATE, there shall be no mixing of relgion and state services.

There is no mixing there. Dont get confused with the right to practice any religion and not be prevented from doing so with denying a religious icon to be worn. Some RCMP wear a bindhi but I doubt that floats your boat. So keep on picking and choosing all you want because at the end of the day, or perhaps at the end of the 90's when all this was decided , you and yours lost. Too bad, the ROC has moved on , accepted it and the sky is still above you.

If he chooses to come to a country where wearing that kind of headgear is out of the ordinary, then he needs to suffer the consequences: racial slurs from morons, not getting a job in a factory becuase he can't wear a hardhat (funny no one has challenged that one.. yeah it actually involves LABOR and WORK!), and unfortunately he wont be able to be a mounty because by choice he chooses to wear that headgear.

He wont? Funny that there are Sikh's who have turbans and are RCMP. MikeD , this is 2007.

Part of a secular society is to keep religion and sate appart. The mounties are paid an average of $80,000 a year I believe I consider them almost that of gov't workers in a CUPE union. They are ticket police in my eyes, nothing more. Go to the RCMP headquarters in Ottawa and you will view them as a political organization rather than some CIA type of service.

http://www.rediff.com/news/1999/may/18us5.htm

Christ you get confused and caught up in your rhetoric dont you?

What, pray tell, does the pay of an RCMP , or the ticket issue have to do with anything?

Great cite mikeD , May of 1999. Still stuck in the 90s huh? Oh and Dancer doubted he suspects Sikh RCMP complain about helmet use. Your cite mentioned nothing about him being a cop, and in fact if you had read it, you would see this guy has lost numerous jobs in the past few years, hardly RCMP material.

Now, I will say that your cite about a guy suing, should it have been upheld, is pretty sad commentary. But I suspect it was overturned.

[Higgly]

I often wish people like you with all your idiotic, child-like beliefs should be forcibly removed to Iran or Afghanistan for a while to let a little reality cloud over your rose-coloured glasses.

In other words, shut up and fit in, right Argus?

[jennie]

Just curious here but you mention being at native blockades for quite some time. Do you have a job? Have you ever held a job?

I mentioned being there one evening.

What has a job to do with what I do in the evening, and what's it to you?

[mikedavid00]

I could argue that if a certain Jew were to go to a certain person's house, and that person had a rule about yamakas, the Jew might choose not come in.

Is that the kind of Canada we want?

YES!

[guyser]

You can't even read.

The question was, "what is Canadianism" and I answered it.

Obviously you are one of the cultural rednecks who simply won't 'shut up and fit in'.

YOu didnt answer squat because you cant. You have repeatedly been asked to show us the culture you have such a passion for , yet nothing is forthcoming.

Just hit the "Charter of Rights and Freedoms" key on your personal keyboard.

Yes, I am a cultural redneck who wont shut up and fit in. How original.

Ok, so what is Canadianism, and no using that special key !

[Higgly]

I mentioned being there one evening.

What has a job to do with what I do in the evening, and what's it to you?

Don't let it get to you. It's the standard neocon strategy. Intimidate people by being as rude as possible in hopes that they'll shut up. You'll see lots of it here. It's a sign of frustration.

[jennie]

YES!

WHY?

so we can all be as grouchy as you?

[mikedavid00]

Well this is what might happen if you didn't have a core set of values so you put too much empasis on cosmetics. As far as your ball cap example goes, if you had helped pay for the house, then you would have a say in the ballcap business, would you not?

What if that person simply put in another nail after the house was already built and there was a crew of 200 that built the house inside and he wanted to start calling shots of how the house will be decorated and function.

They would tell him to get out and give him back his nail because it was crowding the other nails and if there was an open space for nail maybe they would call him. Until then, he aint getting in.

That is a more truthful, realistic example.

[guyser]

I suppose it's the contempt we feel for idiots who use it. They heard it somewhere and it sounds like just the kind of all-loving, sing-song, we're all brothers under the skin kind of feel-good tripe they were taught by the CBC, so they never bother to consider what it means.

IN fact we are all brothers under the skin so ....your counterpoint only bolsters what he said?

We're all immigrants? Why? Because two hundred years ago my mother moved here that makes me still an immigrant?

Um....yeah ? Well, to be exact you are the great great ,maybe even one more great ,grandson of an immigrant.

So now you want to quantify your "immigrant status?"

So how many of the immigrants you want to disparage were born here ? You know, the ones with the dirty robes? And the rest of the "immigrants" , you do of course ask them first if they were born here before going off on their stupid Canadian-XXXXX customs?

The idiotic belief that one remains an "immigrant" forever, regardless of how far back ones ancestors moved, is simply not something any sane person would bother to waste their time arguing against.

Well said! Not applicable for those who are sons and daughters of immigrants.

An immigrant is someone who was born in another nation and moved here. Anyone who thinks differently hasn't got the brains to pour piss out of his boot - much less keep it from getting in.

You know what an immigrant is. Good!

Now we will know you ascertained birth status on all the people you like to denigrate.

[Higgly]

What if that person simply put in another nail after the house was already built and there was a crew of 200 that built the house inside and he wanted to start calling shots of how the house will be decorated and function.

They would tell him to get out and give him back his nail because it was crowding the other nails and if there was an open space for nail maybe they would call him. Until then, he aint getting in.

That is a more truthful, realistic example.

If the house you are referring to is this country, then I would counter that it is constantly in the process of being built and all of its citizens who vote and who pay taxes are the people who are building the house. You do not have more rights because your linguistic, cultural, ethnic, what have you, group has been here longer. You have no more rights than anybody else. That's what democracy is all about.

You are carrying your anology beyond the point where it is workable.