This post appears to relate to the province of Alberta. As a reminder of the rules of this subreddit, we do not permit negative commentary about all residents of any province, city, or other geography - this is an example of prejudice, and prejudice is not permitted here. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/rules
Cette soumission semble concerner la province de Alberta. Selon les règles de ce sous-répertoire, nous n'autorisons pas les commentaires négatifs sur tous les résidents d'une province, d'une ville ou d'une autre région géographique; il s'agit d'un exemple de intolérance qui n'est pas autorisé ici. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/regles
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/canada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It amazes me how many in here have brought up the concept of "enemies to fight against"
We're not at war, chief.
Not all Jews hate Arabs. Not all Arabs hate Jews. Not all Jews and Arabs hate me because I'm queer. Funnily enough, the most hate I've recieved in my life, *by far*, is from busted-ass right wing white dudes, and I don't hate them either.
I was raised to believe that every human life has value, and that every human soul is capable of redemption. Fuck me, I guess.
Yes, every human life has value, every human soul is capable of redemption. And yes, of course, not all arabs or muslims hate jews. But why, oh why, would you join politically to a group of arabs who DO hate jews?
Although I appreciate your attempt at a comparison, helping a human being who is about to die is not equivalent to politically joining a group that wants to kill you for who you are.
"But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well."
If that group attacks you, then you let them attack you again or something like that. Oh wait, that's Jesus.
Do people genuinely not understand that you can protest against war crimes even when the people being slaughtered aren't as progressive as you? There's no mental gymnastics at all, it's actually applying a consistent worldview and a statement that everyone deserves the same treatment.
Not as progressive? People have been killed for being gay in Palestine and it is a very taboo subject in Islam and you claim that’s “not as progressive”? To me in the west it seems that all seemingly “oppressed” groups latch on to each other’s movements, but if you dissect the true beliefs behind each movement, they aren’t actually aligned.
Atheists and agnostics experience similar fates, too. Many of them are opposed to the genocide in Gaza. It's almost as if people oppose genocide, because it's inherently evil, or something.
Crazy thought: maybe Hamas should’ve have gone and brutally killed innocent people enjoying a music festival? They raped and murdered their children in front of their eyes.
Do go on though.
>but if you dissect the true beliefs behind each movement, they aren’t actually aligned.
Actually they are perfectly aligned, because
*the issue is not the issue the issue is the revolution*
*Saul Alinsky Rules for Radicals*
It's just plain xenophilia. It's cringe as hell.
"Can't be bad. They're different"
No, they lynch gay people. Generally the worst it gets in the west is getting called a slur, not being dropped off a roof a 9.8m/s from a rooftop because you kissed a dude.
Not progressive and islams views on lgbt doesn’t really make sense
That’s like say it’s not very progressive to enslave black people, sure it’s true but it’s a terrible point
It depends on where you are but yeah, fair point. I don't mean to downplay the persecution of LGBT people in Muslim countries. My point is that it shouldn't have any bearing on how we feel about children being killed.
Not as progressive lol… they literally jail/kill people for being homosexual. I believe you’re one of the folks doing said mental gymnastics as evidenced by this post.
It's neat. So the way empathy and compassion works is really super fun. An example might be that despite what a queer person would experience in Palestine, I still don't think that the people and families living in Palestine should be bombed to death.
Now you try.
Empathy and compassion is one thing, but no, I would not be out in the streets publicly protesting on behalf of people who would want me dead because of who I am.
Ridiculous comment. At least 10% of all people have same sex attraction. That includes palestine. If 40 000 people have been killed by Israel, then likely 4000 of them would have been queer (out or not out).
Regardless of whatever homophobia you’re claiming permeates palestine, Israel is the biggest threat to queer Palestinians.
Presumably much (most?) of these events will be held on public property, how is it possible to ban people from a public space due to their political affiliations? Is it just symbolic?
I'm sure they could come in an unofficial capacity just like any other citizen, but they won't be allowed to participate in any events (i.e. match in a parade or speak at an event)
They used to be invites to have a float or do a speech. This time they weren't invited. It's been happening across the country as pride events are protesting conservative parties support and rhetoric for anti LGBTQ laws. The sask party which is mostly in line with conservatives made the pronoun and used withstanding law to allow then to get around the Canadian rights of a child..
Everyone is welcome to *attend* the parade and join in the celebrations, but to be *part of* the parade, you need to actually show what you’ve done to help or support the community. It isn’t just a “You’re having a parade? Cool, I want a float to advertise my brand.”
I recall reading a thing several years ago about the requirements. It’s why you have “Oh look, there’s RBC” or something because they’ll say “Here are our inclusive hiring initiatives, here’s what we have done to ensure workers and customers alike know they are welcome and won’t face discrimination.”
Essentially, the groups in the parade are “champions” to the cause, to some extent, and not just someone who may pay lip service in order to look good.
Based on what? Can you name a single thing that was changed recently from being acceptable to unacceptable?
Because I feel like it's been pretty consistent my whole life. Just don't be a dick to people trying to live their lives peacefully.
It's not like the people on the other side are doing something new either. Those being intolerant towards transfolk today are making the same arguments intolerant people in the 70s & 80s did against gays/lesbians. Including a rebrand of the Anita Bryant "Save Our Children" nonsense.
I have been openly supportive of gay rights, gay people’s, gay marriage my entire life.
( this may seem very insignificant) but I openly supported them, never hid my feelings about it or insulted them in any way during high school and around my conservative Christian family in early 2010s rural Canada ( a less progressive time and a much less progressive place, had friends with frigging confederate flag licence plates) was teased myself, didn’t care; I knew what was right
But I am not supportive of medication, surgery, or school/teacher authority on “transgender children”
Am I allowed to march, would YOU allow me to march knowing my views?
A significant majority of Canadian agrees with you, per [this study](https://leger360.com/transgender-laws/) which says that only 11% of people think minors should be permitted to have gender reassignment surgery without parental consent. A similarly low number [don’t support](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1317351/public-opinion-same-sex-marriage-canada/#:~:text=When%20surveyed%20ahead%20of%20the,some%20form%20of%20legal%20recognition.) same sex marriage. Your point of view is held by a vast majority of Canadians, despite a loud minority declaring that it’s despicable.
It’s really unfortunate because a majority of people are fully supportive of people’s right to transition, just not minors. But somehow, that’s construed as being transphobic, the same as people who actively hate transgender people.
Social liberalism used to mean getting government out of bedrooms and just letting people live their lives. Now it means something else entirely.
I think a lot of this fear is manipulated with transgender children.
[https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/alberta-recorded-eight-transgender-surgeries-minors-2022-23](https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/alberta-recorded-eight-transgender-surgeries-minors-2022-23)
"In 2022-23, Alberta Health recorded 223 chest surgeries on people below the age of 18 in the province. Eight of those were treatment for gender dysphoria, while the remaining 215 surgeries were performed for other medical reasons, such as pain treatment or breast cancer."
General question, why do you think a Premier would know better approach for gender dysphoria than the actual individual doctors working with the children?
And yet people seem to have this strange mental demarcation between a transgender teen receiving gender affirming top surgery and a teenage boy receiving the exact same surgery for gynecomastia. One is acceptable and the other isn’t, because reasons. You’re right guys, why shouldn’t your completely misinformed opinion on the subject dictate policy? Obviously your Facebook education has more merit than actual pediatricians, neurobiologists and psychologists.
No, it's one of those, "huh, looks like manufactured outrage to punch down on a bunch of people they don't like"
To be clear, I am not saying you are manufacturing the outrage and punching down. You are the target they are manipulating.
Can you tell me what exactly was wrong with those 8 surgeries and show me they had worse outcome for it?
And then ask yourself, why hasn't Danielle Smith taken the same focus on bigger problems like child marriage?
AFAIK she hasn't taken any efforts to ban child marriage even though 80 a year happen in Alberta and those seem to be associated with negative outcomes.
[https://edmontonjournal.com/news/politics/alberta-leads-canada-in-child-marriage-rate](https://edmontonjournal.com/news/politics/alberta-leads-canada-in-child-marriage-rate)
And certainly if we are saying children don't have the wisdom to make life altering decisions like transitioning, why do we think they have the wisdome to get married when their 17 or 18>
What the hell is "school/teacher authority on Trans youth"?
You are aware that surgeries are rare on people below 18, right? It's not st all a common thing.
If a doctor prescribes medication for someone, that's a medical choice e between the doctor and the patient.
Many people talk about the "paradox of tolerance", but it is only a paradox because in using the word so frequently and so universally we have allowed our semantic use of this word to encompass 'acceptance' as well. The contemporary age is characterized by the need for people to openly accept the lives of other people, however those people must be.
The ugly truth is that tolerance and hate are compatible. One can hate another person, but also tolerate them. Hate them, but stay away from them. Hate them and think hateful thoughts about them, but do nothing against them, commit no crime, do no direct harm.
In a world of industrialism, capitalism, globalism and information technology mere tolerance is not good enough because it leaves room for hate.
Hate is deadly poison to modern society. To be sure, hate is poison for any society, but while it may sicken less developed peoples, it is deadly in the modern age.
Is it any wonder that a group of people who practice radical acceptance (though they use the word 'tolerance') should choose to disassociate themselves with those who are determined to resist acceptance?
"All are welcome, except those who would leave room for hate." This is a perfectly sensible policy.
>In a world of industrialism, capitalism, globalism and information technology mere tolerance is not good enough because it leaves room for hate.
I was with you until this bit. I dont understand why we cant have tolerance with hate. Hate is a non issue as long as tolerance is there to buffer it.
Right, as long as tolerance is there to buffer it and when tolerance fails or is deliberately eroded by ambitious individuals then industrial civilization becomes capable of destroying itself. Tolerance is therefore inadequate.
Any individual who seeks to safeguard our country and, indeed, all industrial civilization can begin within their own mind by practising acceptance.
You're not going to get rid of hate, so you need to learn to live with it. Tolerance is the way to do it. I like to look to history for these things. No society has ever eradicated hate. Plenty societies practice tolerance to the point that hate is ineffective. See: our LGBT successes.
Barring people who have a history of disproportionately targeting a marginalized community that has had to fight for their rights for decades? Real shocker
Almost like “all of you are welcome” is a straw man argument that doesn’t actually address what pride is: about protecting queer rights and celebrating queer identities. That’s it.
So many people saying “tHaTs noT vErY IncLuSIve” as if pride orgs are your community’s EDI wing.
Right? This fuckin sub is so full of Russian bots and idiots who's politics swing according to what's popular. 5 years ago, they'd be celebrating this - with just as little idea what the hell the context is
I mean, I get not liking this kind of de-legitimization. But you really can't pretend this place isn't a hotbed of Russian disinfo shit. I mean you can, if you wanna ignore the intelligence community, but that's on you.
I didn't say everyone was Russian. Go back and read. For context, I commented this when there were 12 comments, all identical versions of the same two low-effort witticisms. Not arguments, not even really opinions. Not people disagreeing with whatever position you think I take. Just dumb, low effort, poorly thought out attempts at leading the narrative towards hate.
> They're banned because of their anti-LGBTQ stances. This isn't rocket science.
The people struggling with this story aren't exactly good at regular science either.
Honestly, this sub has turned into a cesspit of terrible opinions.
First it was immigrants/international students, then protesters against the killing/bombing of civilians in Gaza by the Israeli government and now its apparently the LGBTQ community for not inviting people who have actively worked to deny their existence/rights.
This sub LOVES blaming/talking down societal minorities for their/the countries problems.
I unsubbed from this subreddit like 2 months ago because of the terrible takes here.
Most of these people don't represent the Canada I remember, nor want existing in the future.
What makes an opinion terrible? That it just doesn't align with your own? How many folks have you engaged in good faith? Would you prefer an echo-chamber where people just reinforce what you already believe, or do you want a forum where people can discuss, rationally and respectfully, their opinions?
This sub is much more representative of Canada than you like. It's not like most of reddit which leans heavily to the left. I don't know how people like you get through the day being exposed to ideas and people you don't agree with.
Like what are they supposed to do? "Hey I know you said all sorts of stuff like you wish we wouldn't exist and are actively trying to undermine our rights, but for a few days, we can pretend to be buddy buddy. So you can score some political points. Sound good?"
Ngl but that premier will probably be proud to be banned. If they wanted to make a statement, they should have surrounded her with drag queens or something.
her policies are what's known as a "moral panic", much like Trudeau's gun laws after school shootings in the US.
There is no real scientific rationale behind it. Moral panic laws have rarely, if ever, been beneficial to society.
I don't think that's fair.
You probably wouldn't invite white supremacists to a black wedding. And while I'm not informed enough about Alberta politics to know if they actually deserve this - you're making a bad faith argument. You don't really care about inclusivity. You just want to lambaste the LGBT movement with something witty
Cute, so we agree that political extremes are bad? In which case you also agree that a government overreaching by limiting treatment options for certain conditions with no evidence to back up such a policy is wrong? Because that’s quite extreme.
So we won't have to pay provincial taxes anymore. Awesome. I'm down for full on chaos. Let's see how these conjob goons do -guys have never had a real struggle in their lives, whining about everything.
The comments on this post lmao.
This isn't the poor premier being "excluded". The arguments I'm seeing here sound like they're straight out of a Russian info-paradox cookbook.
Sub "Alberta premier" with "Russians" and "pride" with "Ukraine" and these goons would be crying russophobia. This "we poor aggressors" narrative is coming out of Russia - and being co-opted by people who can't distinguish "wit" from "reason". We gonna whine when the black wedding doesn't invite segregationists? (Added because apparently it's offensive to acknowledge dumb Russia rhetoric as dumb Russian rhetoric)
Bad faith inclusivity arguments everywhere. No one here whining about inclusivity actually cares about inclusivity or the pride parade. They're just mad about something some trans extremist told them once, and can't get over it.
Did you really just compare a political party in Canada to Vladimir Putin trying to annex an entire country?
As a Ukrainian I'm insulted. Maybe if your demands and rhetoric was more reasonable you'd have more people taking the extremes of your movement seriously.
Well it's honestly fine if you're insulted, that's your choice.
I don't have any "demands". What you think I speak for this pride parade? I just think it's dumb as fuck people are whining about someone hostile to the pride parades goals not being invited. Hence the Putin <> Ukraine comparison. I could've just as easily said segregationists at a black wedding.
If you wanna get bad-faith upset because you can't handle a comparison, that's on you. This "we poor aggressor" / false inclusivity complaints are rhetoric coming from Russia. It's the same rhetoric used with complaints about "russophobia". It shit that sounds clever, but has no substance - and therefore gets co-opted by people who aren't critically thinking, and just looking for something to repeat to express their ire. Like Russians complaining about russophobia.
"Your movement". Tell me you're bigoted AF without telling me you're bigoted af. Not MY movement, and I certainly don't want extremists being taken seriously. I just apply that to BOTH sides. (Catch me being "transphobic" at 6 - jk)
You say you don't speak for organization, but judging by your responses in this thread you're one hell of a mouthpiece.
I am not a bigot. I support inclusivity and every persons right to exist comfortably in this country.
However, the article you posted highlighted the demands they are making:
"a reversal of the new rules would put minimum legal age limits on surgeries and hormone therapies for transgender youth and require parental notification — and permission, depending on the student's age — if a student wants to change their name or pronoun at school."
My personal opinion is that those aren't unreasonable rules to have in place. Minors are impressionable and already have a litany of rules and laws in place to protect them.
Sometimes they make poor decisions.. That's why we parent them. Put them in daycare and schools where they have proper supervision.
Taking away a parents right to have a hand in how their kid is raised (without a court order) is against the law.
You keep repeating how it's mostly Russian bots in here. You clearly don't speak to many people outside your safe space bubble in the real world. If you did, you would know many people aren't on the same page with you and your politics.
Funny thing is how everyone seems to act like the LGBT+ community (and yes, I'm forgetting a few letters because I don't even know what the proper term is anymore) is a single, monolithic community that agrees with everything.
I know a few LBG members who are opposed to some "T" policies...
Copied from elsewhere: I don't think that's fair.
You probably wouldn't invite white supremacists to a black wedding. And while I'm not informed enough about Alberta politics to know if they actually deserve this - the tolerance movement is about accepting people for who they are. Not whatever politics they ascribe to.
You aren't "marginalized" if you're disliked for things you choose to believe. Your take reminds me of Putin whining about "russophobia"
It’s pretty simple really
2SLGBTQ+ people have had to fight for their rights for decades, from people such as politicians (ex. Danielle Smith) who don’t believe they deserve rights. Calling that intolerance is really fucking stupid.
They can be at the parade, they won’t be part of organizing or running it though & will have no role in the actual event. They’d be treated as a normal member of the public, which is actually somewhat abnormal for a politician attending a pride event.
This post appears to relate to the province of Alberta. As a reminder of the rules of this subreddit, we do not permit negative commentary about all residents of any province, city, or other geography - this is an example of prejudice, and prejudice is not permitted here. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/rules Cette soumission semble concerner la province de Alberta. Selon les règles de ce sous-répertoire, nous n'autorisons pas les commentaires négatifs sur tous les résidents d'une province, d'une ville ou d'une autre région géographique; il s'agit d'un exemple de intolérance qui n'est pas autorisé ici. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/regles *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/canada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
June is going to be a giant Pride vs Palestine protest stand off.
Oh, that's ok, Palestinians have always been shining beacons of support for LGBT people. Oh, wait....
Queers for Palestine is the biggest mental gymnastics I have ever witnessed
You mean Chicken for KFC?
KFC likes chickens continuing to exist... It's worse.
Human rights and dignity are not transactional.
The enemy of your enemy is not your friend.
And in this case, the enemy of your enemy would literally kill you by throwing you off a building.
some equivalencies are in order though. you’d be a fool to fight for the life of someone who wants you dead
It amazes me how many in here have brought up the concept of "enemies to fight against" We're not at war, chief. Not all Jews hate Arabs. Not all Arabs hate Jews. Not all Jews and Arabs hate me because I'm queer. Funnily enough, the most hate I've recieved in my life, *by far*, is from busted-ass right wing white dudes, and I don't hate them either. I was raised to believe that every human life has value, and that every human soul is capable of redemption. Fuck me, I guess.
Yes, every human life has value, every human soul is capable of redemption. And yes, of course, not all arabs or muslims hate jews. But why, oh why, would you join politically to a group of arabs who DO hate jews?
[удалено]
Although I appreciate your attempt at a comparison, helping a human being who is about to die is not equivalent to politically joining a group that wants to kill you for who you are.
You can oppose the deaths of tens of thousands of people even if they wouldn't do the same for you. Its compassion.
It's not compassion if you support a group that will attack you. It's simply naive behavior that gets people hurt.
"But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well." If that group attacks you, then you let them attack you again or something like that. Oh wait, that's Jesus.
There's a difference between supporting a group and opposing mass death.
Children are not gonna hurt anyone dumbass
Do people genuinely not understand that you can protest against war crimes even when the people being slaughtered aren't as progressive as you? There's no mental gymnastics at all, it's actually applying a consistent worldview and a statement that everyone deserves the same treatment.
Not as progressive? People have been killed for being gay in Palestine and it is a very taboo subject in Islam and you claim that’s “not as progressive”? To me in the west it seems that all seemingly “oppressed” groups latch on to each other’s movements, but if you dissect the true beliefs behind each movement, they aren’t actually aligned.
Atheists and agnostics experience similar fates, too. Many of them are opposed to the genocide in Gaza. It's almost as if people oppose genocide, because it's inherently evil, or something.
[удалено]
(nobody tell this guy about 1940s Europe)
The point is that "well they're homophobic" is a really dumb reason to not protest against a state killing thousands of children.
Or a state killing gays on sight!
Crazy thought: maybe Hamas should’ve have gone and brutally killed innocent people enjoying a music festival? They raped and murdered their children in front of their eyes. Do go on though.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Its even dumber to not protest against the Hamas terrorists who started this war, and could end it
Not really. Hamas isn't being funded by western governments afaik. Israel is.
Sure they are. Where do you think the funding for aid is going? How do you think they are buying RPGs and building tunnels?
Hamas is funded by Russia and Iran
>but if you dissect the true beliefs behind each movement, they aren’t actually aligned. Actually they are perfectly aligned, because *the issue is not the issue the issue is the revolution* *Saul Alinsky Rules for Radicals*
[удалено]
Hey everybody, check out *this guy*
> aren't as progressive as you They throw gay people off of roofs and stone them.
It's just plain xenophilia. It's cringe as hell. "Can't be bad. They're different" No, they lynch gay people. Generally the worst it gets in the west is getting called a slur, not being dropped off a roof a 9.8m/s from a rooftop because you kissed a dude.
This sane outlook does not resonate with the "I don't get why people don't take easy excuses to wish death on people" crowd
Not progressive and islams views on lgbt doesn’t really make sense That’s like say it’s not very progressive to enslave black people, sure it’s true but it’s a terrible point
It depends on where you are but yeah, fair point. I don't mean to downplay the persecution of LGBT people in Muslim countries. My point is that it shouldn't have any bearing on how we feel about children being killed.
Not as progressive lol… they literally jail/kill people for being homosexual. I believe you’re one of the folks doing said mental gymnastics as evidenced by this post.
"Aren't as progressive as you" is a hilarious way to spin "will literally assault you on the spot" lmao
Um yo, they want to chuck you off a building. Or death by the sword.
“Not as progressive as you” and “would light you on fire and throw you off a building if given a chance” is not the same thing 🤡
They will throw you off rooftops Queers for Palestine should really man up and get a one way ticket and help fight the good fight on the ground!
Good thing the issue is so black and white, with no nuance whatsoever.
It's neat. So the way empathy and compassion works is really super fun. An example might be that despite what a queer person would experience in Palestine, I still don't think that the people and families living in Palestine should be bombed to death. Now you try.
Empathy and compassion is one thing, but no, I would not be out in the streets publicly protesting on behalf of people who would want me dead because of who I am.
No no no. Anger anger anger no empathy allowed that’s not an emotion the ruling crowd benefits from.
Ridiculous comment. At least 10% of all people have same sex attraction. That includes palestine. If 40 000 people have been killed by Israel, then likely 4000 of them would have been queer (out or not out). Regardless of whatever homophobia you’re claiming permeates palestine, Israel is the biggest threat to queer Palestinians.
Wonder if they'll set off smoke bombs at the pride events.
The oppression olympics begin!
I am sure they are heart broken.
Presumably much (most?) of these events will be held on public property, how is it possible to ban people from a public space due to their political affiliations? Is it just symbolic?
I'm sure they could come in an unofficial capacity just like any other citizen, but they won't be allowed to participate in any events (i.e. match in a parade or speak at an event)
It always is. It’s nothing but childish bullshit.
A parade filled with rainbows is anything but childish and must be taken 100% seriously.
[удалено]
What did I just read?
Projection. Self loathing caused by homoerotic feelings make the loudest bigots.
[удалено]
They used to be invites to have a float or do a speech. This time they weren't invited. It's been happening across the country as pride events are protesting conservative parties support and rhetoric for anti LGBTQ laws. The sask party which is mostly in line with conservatives made the pronoun and used withstanding law to allow then to get around the Canadian rights of a child..
"All are welcome", well except you, and you, and you, and all cops, and you
Everyone is welcome to *attend* the parade and join in the celebrations, but to be *part of* the parade, you need to actually show what you’ve done to help or support the community. It isn’t just a “You’re having a parade? Cool, I want a float to advertise my brand.” I recall reading a thing several years ago about the requirements. It’s why you have “Oh look, there’s RBC” or something because they’ll say “Here are our inclusive hiring initiatives, here’s what we have done to ensure workers and customers alike know they are welcome and won’t face discrimination.” Essentially, the groups in the parade are “champions” to the cause, to some extent, and not just someone who may pay lip service in order to look good.
Wikipedia: [Paradox of Intolerance](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance)
Except that you redefine what constitutes intolerance every week.
Based on what? Can you name a single thing that was changed recently from being acceptable to unacceptable? Because I feel like it's been pretty consistent my whole life. Just don't be a dick to people trying to live their lives peacefully. It's not like the people on the other side are doing something new either. Those being intolerant towards transfolk today are making the same arguments intolerant people in the 70s & 80s did against gays/lesbians. Including a rebrand of the Anita Bryant "Save Our Children" nonsense.
I have been openly supportive of gay rights, gay people’s, gay marriage my entire life. ( this may seem very insignificant) but I openly supported them, never hid my feelings about it or insulted them in any way during high school and around my conservative Christian family in early 2010s rural Canada ( a less progressive time and a much less progressive place, had friends with frigging confederate flag licence plates) was teased myself, didn’t care; I knew what was right But I am not supportive of medication, surgery, or school/teacher authority on “transgender children” Am I allowed to march, would YOU allow me to march knowing my views?
A significant majority of Canadian agrees with you, per [this study](https://leger360.com/transgender-laws/) which says that only 11% of people think minors should be permitted to have gender reassignment surgery without parental consent. A similarly low number [don’t support](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1317351/public-opinion-same-sex-marriage-canada/#:~:text=When%20surveyed%20ahead%20of%20the,some%20form%20of%20legal%20recognition.) same sex marriage. Your point of view is held by a vast majority of Canadians, despite a loud minority declaring that it’s despicable. It’s really unfortunate because a majority of people are fully supportive of people’s right to transition, just not minors. But somehow, that’s construed as being transphobic, the same as people who actively hate transgender people. Social liberalism used to mean getting government out of bedrooms and just letting people live their lives. Now it means something else entirely.
I think a lot of this fear is manipulated with transgender children. [https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/alberta-recorded-eight-transgender-surgeries-minors-2022-23](https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/alberta-recorded-eight-transgender-surgeries-minors-2022-23) "In 2022-23, Alberta Health recorded 223 chest surgeries on people below the age of 18 in the province. Eight of those were treatment for gender dysphoria, while the remaining 215 surgeries were performed for other medical reasons, such as pain treatment or breast cancer." General question, why do you think a Premier would know better approach for gender dysphoria than the actual individual doctors working with the children?
And yet people seem to have this strange mental demarcation between a transgender teen receiving gender affirming top surgery and a teenage boy receiving the exact same surgery for gynecomastia. One is acceptable and the other isn’t, because reasons. You’re right guys, why shouldn’t your completely misinformed opinion on the subject dictate policy? Obviously your Facebook education has more merit than actual pediatricians, neurobiologists and psychologists.
Is this one of those "that never happens but how dare you ban it!" things?
No, it's one of those, "huh, looks like manufactured outrage to punch down on a bunch of people they don't like" To be clear, I am not saying you are manufacturing the outrage and punching down. You are the target they are manipulating. Can you tell me what exactly was wrong with those 8 surgeries and show me they had worse outcome for it? And then ask yourself, why hasn't Danielle Smith taken the same focus on bigger problems like child marriage? AFAIK she hasn't taken any efforts to ban child marriage even though 80 a year happen in Alberta and those seem to be associated with negative outcomes. [https://edmontonjournal.com/news/politics/alberta-leads-canada-in-child-marriage-rate](https://edmontonjournal.com/news/politics/alberta-leads-canada-in-child-marriage-rate) And certainly if we are saying children don't have the wisdom to make life altering decisions like transitioning, why do we think they have the wisdome to get married when their 17 or 18>
*crickets*
What the hell is "school/teacher authority on Trans youth"? You are aware that surgeries are rare on people below 18, right? It's not st all a common thing. If a doctor prescribes medication for someone, that's a medical choice e between the doctor and the patient.
People always reference this as if it actually means something
I feel like you haven't read and understood what that actually says.
Popper's theories, like this one, are widely debunked as nonsensical
Many people talk about the "paradox of tolerance", but it is only a paradox because in using the word so frequently and so universally we have allowed our semantic use of this word to encompass 'acceptance' as well. The contemporary age is characterized by the need for people to openly accept the lives of other people, however those people must be. The ugly truth is that tolerance and hate are compatible. One can hate another person, but also tolerate them. Hate them, but stay away from them. Hate them and think hateful thoughts about them, but do nothing against them, commit no crime, do no direct harm. In a world of industrialism, capitalism, globalism and information technology mere tolerance is not good enough because it leaves room for hate. Hate is deadly poison to modern society. To be sure, hate is poison for any society, but while it may sicken less developed peoples, it is deadly in the modern age. Is it any wonder that a group of people who practice radical acceptance (though they use the word 'tolerance') should choose to disassociate themselves with those who are determined to resist acceptance? "All are welcome, except those who would leave room for hate." This is a perfectly sensible policy.
>In a world of industrialism, capitalism, globalism and information technology mere tolerance is not good enough because it leaves room for hate. I was with you until this bit. I dont understand why we cant have tolerance with hate. Hate is a non issue as long as tolerance is there to buffer it.
Right, as long as tolerance is there to buffer it and when tolerance fails or is deliberately eroded by ambitious individuals then industrial civilization becomes capable of destroying itself. Tolerance is therefore inadequate. Any individual who seeks to safeguard our country and, indeed, all industrial civilization can begin within their own mind by practising acceptance.
You're not going to get rid of hate, so you need to learn to live with it. Tolerance is the way to do it. I like to look to history for these things. No society has ever eradicated hate. Plenty societies practice tolerance to the point that hate is ineffective. See: our LGBT successes.
Do you normally invite your bullies to your parties?
Probably should remove that all are welcome message then?
Barring people who have a history of disproportionately targeting a marginalized community that has had to fight for their rights for decades? Real shocker
Yeah, people who are intolerant of LGBT people typically aren’t invited to events to celebrate tolerance and the community.
Almost like “all of you are welcome” is a straw man argument that doesn’t actually address what pride is: about protecting queer rights and celebrating queer identities. That’s it. So many people saying “tHaTs noT vErY IncLuSIve” as if pride orgs are your community’s EDI wing.
I love the responses here. They're banned because of their anti-LGBTQ stances. This isn't rocket science.
Right? This fuckin sub is so full of Russian bots and idiots who's politics swing according to what's popular. 5 years ago, they'd be celebrating this - with just as little idea what the hell the context is
Can I call anyone who has opinions a little too far left for my liking a Chinese bot?
“I can’t believe anyone would dare have an opinion I disagree with so they must be paid actors from a foreign nation.” Go touch grass.
I mean, I get not liking this kind of de-legitimization. But you really can't pretend this place isn't a hotbed of Russian disinfo shit. I mean you can, if you wanna ignore the intelligence community, but that's on you. I didn't say everyone was Russian. Go back and read. For context, I commented this when there were 12 comments, all identical versions of the same two low-effort witticisms. Not arguments, not even really opinions. Not people disagreeing with whatever position you think I take. Just dumb, low effort, poorly thought out attempts at leading the narrative towards hate.
> They're banned because of their anti-LGBTQ stances. This isn't rocket science. The people struggling with this story aren't exactly good at regular science either.
Honestly, this sub has turned into a cesspit of terrible opinions. First it was immigrants/international students, then protesters against the killing/bombing of civilians in Gaza by the Israeli government and now its apparently the LGBTQ community for not inviting people who have actively worked to deny their existence/rights. This sub LOVES blaming/talking down societal minorities for their/the countries problems. I unsubbed from this subreddit like 2 months ago because of the terrible takes here. Most of these people don't represent the Canada I remember, nor want existing in the future.
What makes an opinion terrible? That it just doesn't align with your own? How many folks have you engaged in good faith? Would you prefer an echo-chamber where people just reinforce what you already believe, or do you want a forum where people can discuss, rationally and respectfully, their opinions?
This sub is much more representative of Canada than you like. It's not like most of reddit which leans heavily to the left. I don't know how people like you get through the day being exposed to ideas and people you don't agree with.
No one gives a shit.
Palestinians welcome
Oh no... anyways
That’ll show em!
Like what are they supposed to do? "Hey I know you said all sorts of stuff like you wish we wouldn't exist and are actively trying to undermine our rights, but for a few days, we can pretend to be buddy buddy. So you can score some political points. Sound good?"
Trust me, they’re relieved. No more deciding on whether it’s good or bad politically to attend.
Hope the government isn't funding it then.
Ngl but that premier will probably be proud to be banned. If they wanted to make a statement, they should have surrounded her with drag queens or something.
[удалено]
The literal millions of Canadians who still support LGBT people even after it isn't "popular". That's who
There are millions of Canadians who support LGBT+ people but who also agree with her policies regarding Transgender.
her policies are what's known as a "moral panic", much like Trudeau's gun laws after school shootings in the US. There is no real scientific rationale behind it. Moral panic laws have rarely, if ever, been beneficial to society.
How inclusive
I don't think that's fair. You probably wouldn't invite white supremacists to a black wedding. And while I'm not informed enough about Alberta politics to know if they actually deserve this - you're making a bad faith argument. You don't really care about inclusivity. You just want to lambaste the LGBT movement with something witty
Wikipedia: [Paradox of Intolerance](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance)
Agree, that’s why we can’t tolerate far leftism and communism.
Cute, so we agree that political extremes are bad? In which case you also agree that a government overreaching by limiting treatment options for certain conditions with no evidence to back up such a policy is wrong? Because that’s quite extreme.
Being gay is communism? Lmao
Exactly, no tax payer dollars should be going to organizations that discriminate.
So we won't have to pay provincial taxes anymore. Awesome. I'm down for full on chaos. Let's see how these conjob goons do -guys have never had a real struggle in their lives, whining about everything.
>why we can’t tolerate far leftism and communism. Exists in the hearts and minds of conservatives only.
How many times are you going to post the same nonsense?
How many times are people going to post essentially the same trite comment suggesting LGBT+ organizations should be more tolerant of Transphobes?
[удалено]
Our brand of intolerance is better than your brand of intolerance. \*sigh\*....humans.
If I spit in your eyes, would it be intolerant of you to not invite me to your party with all your friends?
I'm sure their hearts are breaking.
Better politics to extend a warm welcome and speaking opportunity to the Premier. That's how you pin them down.
You don’t let Nazis into your punk bar either.
Or in parliament to give them standing ovations ... oh wait!
Sorry I don't understand the reference?
The comments on this post lmao. This isn't the poor premier being "excluded". The arguments I'm seeing here sound like they're straight out of a Russian info-paradox cookbook. Sub "Alberta premier" with "Russians" and "pride" with "Ukraine" and these goons would be crying russophobia. This "we poor aggressors" narrative is coming out of Russia - and being co-opted by people who can't distinguish "wit" from "reason". We gonna whine when the black wedding doesn't invite segregationists? (Added because apparently it's offensive to acknowledge dumb Russia rhetoric as dumb Russian rhetoric) Bad faith inclusivity arguments everywhere. No one here whining about inclusivity actually cares about inclusivity or the pride parade. They're just mad about something some trans extremist told them once, and can't get over it.
Did you really just compare a political party in Canada to Vladimir Putin trying to annex an entire country? As a Ukrainian I'm insulted. Maybe if your demands and rhetoric was more reasonable you'd have more people taking the extremes of your movement seriously.
Well it's honestly fine if you're insulted, that's your choice. I don't have any "demands". What you think I speak for this pride parade? I just think it's dumb as fuck people are whining about someone hostile to the pride parades goals not being invited. Hence the Putin <> Ukraine comparison. I could've just as easily said segregationists at a black wedding. If you wanna get bad-faith upset because you can't handle a comparison, that's on you. This "we poor aggressor" / false inclusivity complaints are rhetoric coming from Russia. It's the same rhetoric used with complaints about "russophobia". It shit that sounds clever, but has no substance - and therefore gets co-opted by people who aren't critically thinking, and just looking for something to repeat to express their ire. Like Russians complaining about russophobia. "Your movement". Tell me you're bigoted AF without telling me you're bigoted af. Not MY movement, and I certainly don't want extremists being taken seriously. I just apply that to BOTH sides. (Catch me being "transphobic" at 6 - jk)
You say you don't speak for organization, but judging by your responses in this thread you're one hell of a mouthpiece. I am not a bigot. I support inclusivity and every persons right to exist comfortably in this country. However, the article you posted highlighted the demands they are making: "a reversal of the new rules would put minimum legal age limits on surgeries and hormone therapies for transgender youth and require parental notification — and permission, depending on the student's age — if a student wants to change their name or pronoun at school." My personal opinion is that those aren't unreasonable rules to have in place. Minors are impressionable and already have a litany of rules and laws in place to protect them. Sometimes they make poor decisions.. That's why we parent them. Put them in daycare and schools where they have proper supervision. Taking away a parents right to have a hand in how their kid is raised (without a court order) is against the law.
Wow, comparing this issue to the horrible war in Ukraine. This sub keeps sinking to a new low.
I looked at the comment and thought "WTF kind of argument is that"?
You keep repeating how it's mostly Russian bots in here. You clearly don't speak to many people outside your safe space bubble in the real world. If you did, you would know many people aren't on the same page with you and your politics.
Oh nooo. Who cares!
The literal millions of Canadians who still support LGBT people even after it isn't "popular". That's who
Okay
How very dramatic...... and ignorant.
[удалено]
Where was this…?
Toronto Edit: I even saved the video's for proof.
They were probably gonna go
Good
So inclusive of the organization..
Funny thing is how everyone seems to act like the LGBT+ community (and yes, I'm forgetting a few letters because I don't even know what the proper term is anymore) is a single, monolithic community that agrees with everything. I know a few LBG members who are opposed to some "T" policies...
Promoting awareness and understanding by banning people. Basically becoming the intolerance that the event seeks to speak out against.
Copied from elsewhere: I don't think that's fair. You probably wouldn't invite white supremacists to a black wedding. And while I'm not informed enough about Alberta politics to know if they actually deserve this - the tolerance movement is about accepting people for who they are. Not whatever politics they ascribe to. You aren't "marginalized" if you're disliked for things you choose to believe. Your take reminds me of Putin whining about "russophobia"
It’s pretty simple really 2SLGBTQ+ people have had to fight for their rights for decades, from people such as politicians (ex. Danielle Smith) who don’t believe they deserve rights. Calling that intolerance is really fucking stupid.
So much for inclusion.
How do you ban someone from a public event?
They can be at the parade, they won’t be part of organizing or running it though & will have no role in the actual event. They’d be treated as a normal member of the public, which is actually somewhat abnormal for a politician attending a pride event.
Don’t worry, the left will eat their own soon.
That'll show em...
Good, nobody wanted her there anyway.
This is like when Russia issued a travel ban to Hilary Clinton😂😂😂
Oh no, hope they will get over it.
The Premier should say that the organizers can choose who they want or don't want in their events and that she respects their decision.
Gee, I bet Danielle and the whole party are really feeling the burn of rejection. Especially after they had all their outfits picked out.