Apr 272010
This is just… sad.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2951040
The claim stems from a 2006 incident in which Luc, now 11, said he was reprimanded by a school hall monitor for eating his lunch by breaking up the food with a fork and pushing it onto a spoon, a traditional Philippine way of eating.
The hall monitor is alleged to have told Ms. Gallardo that her son “ate like a pig,” while the principal is alleged to have told her Luc should eat “like a Canadian.”
If Canadians want their country to survive, they need to take these bullcrap “human rights tribunals” and shove them off on an arctic ice floe.
10 Responses to “Canada is DOOMED”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
“The hall monitor is alleged to have told Ms. Gallardo that her son “ate like a pig,” while the principal is alleged to have told her Luc should eat “like a Canadian.””
Are you seriously arguing that that kind of bullying from school officials is acceptable in any kind of just society ? Anyone who acts at all different must be forced back into line ? Do you draw the line at verbal abuse or would a slap or kick also be acceptable ?
Are you seriously arguing that rudeness (at worst, according to the article)is a HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION?!?!?!!?!?!
Will it soon also be a HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION for a Canadian school to fly a Canadian flag, or expect their students to wear clothes or learn to friggen’ *count?* Not every culture does, you know, and apparently informing people that they should make some effort to adopt the culture of the land they willingly moved into is a HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION.
> bullying
No bullying was described, except that by the “human rights tribunal.”
> forced back into line
Nobody was forced into anything… except the school which was forced to pay a large sum.
> Do you draw the line at verbal abuse or would a slap or kick also be acceptable ?
Do you draw the line at extorting vast sums of money out of the politically incorrect, or will executions be acceptable?
Actually, I think both sides in this are wrong. The sum for compensation is way out of line, for sure. But it could have been better dealt with by reprimanding the hall monitor and principal, and making them apologise to the kid’s mother. After all, eating with a fork and spoon isn’t all that gross; show me a pig that can eat with a fork and spoon and I’ll show you one of the late Dr Moreau’s masterpieces! Monitor and principal should have been firmly told to get a life and stop worrying about such trivia as the way other people eat – too many teachers have no other way of feeling good about themselves than by throwing their weight around with kids.! The tragedy is that this money could have been better spent on textbooks! All this being said, there are some ways that immigrants should be made to realise that they now have to adjust to another society, such as the police canteen cook who suddenly announced that, as a Muslim, he couldn’t cook bacon or sausages, a problem he should surely have known about – the Metropolitan Police (that’s London, not Superman’s town!) are well known for their love of fry-ups! Or the village fete committee told that having a beer tent might offend Muslims, despite there being none in that village (the imam of the nearest mosque was somewhat baffled, and said that although they themselves did not drink alchohol, they realised that others did, and had no problem with it!)
Grif
Two uses for “absurd” in one day….
Griff has the right approach: apologies by the school is all that’s needed. Anything beyond that is trying too hard to suck up to those who are different.
I agree that immigrants have to learn to cope. One of the weaknesses of the United States is that the country is pandering the needs of the least-competent in society. No organized body will survive if it is responsive first to its marginal members. It has been demonstrated that immigrants can cope, adapt, and excel; by refusing to go through the process of assimilation, they are acknowledging their personal shortcomings.
> The sum for compensation is way out of line
The fact that there was any “sum” at all was out of line. The fact that there’s an unelected governmental body with the force of law that undertook this “case” was out of line.
> reprimanding the hall monitor and principal, and making them apologise to the kid’s mother
What for? There seem to be two complaints:
1) “Ate like a pig.” The kid was, what, 9 at the time. Regardless of spoon-use… kids that age often eat in massively messy ways. I know that *I* was certainly accused of “eating like a pig” when I was that age. so without further information, how do we know that *that* wasn’t a major part of it?
FTFA: “The school had argued that the boy was punished for clowning around during lunch.”
Sounds like “eating like a pig” i.e. making a mess is possibly a reasonable description.
2) “Eat like a Canadian.” Unless I miss my guess, this occured in Canada. If “eat like a Canadian” is now an actionable statement… how about “drive like a Canadian?” “Don’t behead your enemies like a Canadian?” “Be proud of Canada’s history and culture, like a Canadian?”
The moment you’ve determined that it is legally inappropriate for someone to suggest that a Canadian should obey commonly accepted Canadian standards, you have sounded the deaht knell to Canada. Can the person makign the suggestion be *wrong?* Sure. “Vote for Candidate X, like a Canadian,” would be plain silly. But “learn English and/or French like a Canadian” is hardly inappropriate IMO.
The languages part, I agree on – here in Britain, town councils have to produce all leaflets in umpteen different languages, to spare immigrants the bother of learning English before applying for benefits! I think they should have to make the effort to learn our language before tucking into “The goodies” of living in Britain. I’d make an exception for “It’s OK to walk out if your husband beats you” or “Your daughter doesn’t have to leave school and marry who your husband says” leaflets, because of the b@$*@**s who deliberately keep their women ignorant of English! But hey – at least we can all disagree here; if the PC crowd get their way, we won’t be able to! BTW: I’m reading your MUSTARD article tonight – looks good!
Grif
When I was 4 and in a private pre-school I remember showing my buddies at lunch how I could shoot milk through a gap in my front teeth back into my drinking cup. Did I get called a pig? Nope. *WHAP!!!* upside the head when one of the ladies patrolling the lunch room came up behind me. FOUR years old, *BAM!*. One of the few memories I have from pre-school so the lesson must of stuck. 🙂 Seventeen grand, Judas.
Key word: Quebec.
Jim
This is fairly mild for the human rights commissions.
Take a gander at this:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/guilty-of-unconscious-racism/article1232881/
“The decision makes for scary reading, because it says someone can be found guilty just for making someone else feel bad. “There is no need to establish an intention or motivation to discriminate,” it says. “[T]he focus of the enquiry is on the effect of the respondent’s action on the complainant.”
According to the tribunal, “unconscious” discrimination is no different from “conscious” discrimination. And the onus is on the accused to prove he’s innocent. “Once a prima facie case of discrimination has been established, the burden shifts to the respondent to provide a rational explanation which is not discriminatory. … The respondent must offer an explanation which is credible on all the evidence.”
Similar case here:
“In November 2009, Sharon Abbott, a black female newspaper carrier, was awarded $5,000 by the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) on the basis that she had been arrested by police in early 2007 only because of her skin colour.
Although the HRTO found no evidence that the arresting officer “consciously subscribes to any such (racist) attitudes or belief systems” and that there was “no direct evidence that the complainant’s race or colour was a factor in the incident,” the HRTO claimed that the officer’s actions were motivated by a deep-seated prejudice because, as the Tribunal claimed, white people in authority have “an expectation of docility and compliance” from black people they encounter.”
One name: Ezra Levant
Anyone who doesn’t think these Canadian “Human Rights” Comissions are a serious, serious problem must look up the name Ezra Levant on Youtube and watch the video. To refer to the Canadian HRC’s by their full name is to give the commissions a legitimacy they do not deserve, degrade the concept of human rights, and make a mockery of fairness and justice.