Trudeau talks "diveristy" at sexist mosque

[JayJayH 546]

Canadian PM Justin Trudeau speaks about "diversity" at a gender-segregated mosque. Salutes "the sisters upstairs."

http://www.torontosun.com/2016/09/12/trudeau-visits-mosque-with-terror-connections

As a lifelong liberal, I really struggle to understand the new left today.

Gender segregation = "Sexism!"

Calling out Islamist BS = "Xenophobia!"

Excluding women = "Misogyny!"

Calling out Islamist BS = "Islamophobia!"

Refusing to acknowledge skin color as relevant = "Racism!"

Holding people to different standards based on their imaginary "group identity' = 'Progressive.'

Reminds me of when "small government conservatives" were hellbent on making laws banning gay marriage and pot smoking. It was easier when being liberal meant holding everyone to the same standard, period.

Can't win nowadays.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edited September 13, 2016 by JayJayH

[lostinblue 1,989]

Canadian PM Justin Trudeau speaks about "diversity" at a gender-segregated mosque. Salutes "the sisters upstairs."

http://www.torontosun.com/2016/09/12/trudeau-visits-mosque-with-terror-connections

As a lifelong liberal, I really struggle to understand the new left today.

Gender segregation = "Sexism!"

Calling out Islamist BS = "Xenophobia!"

Excluding women = "Misogyny!"

Calling out Islamist BS = "Islamophobia!"

Refusing to acknowledge skin color as relevant = "Racism!"

Holding people to different standards based on their imaginary "group identity' = 'Progressive.'

Reminds me of when "small government conservatives" were hellbent on making laws banning gay marriage and pot smoking. It was easier when being liberal meant holding everyone to the same standard, period.

Can't win nowadays.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[smilesammich 10,727]

Canadian PM Justin Trudeau speaks about "diversity" at a gender-segregated mosque. Salutes "the sisters upstairs."

http://www.torontosun.com/2016/09/12/trudeau-visits-mosque-with-terror-connections

As a lifelong liberal, I really struggle to understand the new left today.

Gender segregation = "Sexism!"

Calling out Islamist BS = "Xenophobia!"

Excluding women = "Misogyny!"

Calling out Islamist BS = "Islamophobia!"

Refusing to acknowledge skin color as relevant = "Racism!"

Holding people to different standards based on their imaginary "group identity' = 'Progressive.'

Reminds me of when "small government conservatives" were hellbent on making laws banning gay marriage and pot smoking. It was easier when being liberal meant holding everyone to the same standard, period.

Can't win nowadays.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

i don't see any censoring. where's the censoring?

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Canadian PM Justin Trudeau speaks about "diversity" at a gender-segregated mosque. Salutes "the sisters upstairs."

http://www.torontosun.com/2016/09/12/trudeau-visits-mosque-with-terror-connections

As a lifelong liberal, I really struggle to understand the new left today.

Gender segregation = "Sexism!"

Calling out Islamist BS = "Xenophobia!"

Excluding women = "Misogyny!"

Calling out Islamist BS = "Islamophobia!"

Refusing to acknowledge skin color as relevant = "Racism!"

Holding people to different standards based on their imaginary "group identity' = 'Progressive.'

Reminds me of when "small government conservatives" were hellbent on making laws banning gay marriage and pot smoking. It was easier when being liberal meant holding everyone to the same standard, period.

Can't win nowadays.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It's not really hard to figure out. Diversity is a problem for some people, they just can't say it out loud.

And for the record, skin color is ALWAYS relevant. And that's the fault of the majority.

[JayJayH 546]

i don't see any censoring. where's the censoring?

I see none in this piece either. Censorship is a different topic.

It's not really hard to figure out. Diversity is a problem for some people, they just can't say it out loud.

And for the record, skin color is ALWAYS relevant. And that's the fault of the majority.

I do struggle to figure it out. Modern day leftism generally seems to be about taking the side of the victim. Victimhood is applied to groups instead of individuals, in which case you have to have a bigger victim, and you have to measure them up by group, rather than individual circumstance.

That's the only way in which a self-proclaimed feminist head of state would stand in a gender segregated religious congregation and celebrate its diversity. Islam is a bigger victim, so we can figure can ignore misogyny for a bit so to not be Islamophobic.

Skin color might be relevant when you think of people as part of a pre-determined group rather than as individuals. This is pretty normal on the far right and one the far left, though it is becoming mainstream on the left. I'm not sure if there is any good reason whatsoever why I should think of you as a black person, rather than a person. Likewise, I'm not sure there is any good reason anyone should refer to me as "white person Jayjay" instead of just "Jayjay."

Edited September 13, 2016 by JayJayH

[smilesammich 10,727]

I do struggle to figure it out. Modern day leftism generally seems to be about taking the side of the victim. In which case you have to have a bigger victim.

That's the only way in which a self-proclaimed feminist head of state would stand in a gender segregated religious congregation and celebrate its diversity.

i totally disagree with this in bold. it isn't about taking the side of the victim, it's about believing the victim has a right to be heard. that's it. i don't have to make myself out to be a victim of sexual assault if i respect and listen to victims of sexual assault POV. that's it, not taking sides.

now, i don't agree with gender segregated religious congregation, but i don't see much point in religious congregation at all. so i have a seat and allow others to decide what religious congregations they want to be a part of. any further action on my point is sort of, none of my business. tyrannical even. religion is a personal choice, and women are just as capable as men to decide what religion they want to submit to.

also, all feminists are self proclaimed - no need to call out trudeau like he didn't get properly beat in to the gang.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

I see none in this piece either. Censorship is a different topic.

I do struggle to figure it out. Modern day leftism generally seems to be about taking the side of the victim. Victimhood is applied to groups instead of individuals, in which case you have to have a bigger victim, and you have to measure them up by group, rather than individual circumstance.

That's the only way in which a self-proclaimed feminist head of state would stand in a gender segregated religious congregation and celebrate its diversity. Islam is a bigger victim, so we can figure can ignore misogyny for a bit so to not be Islamophobic.

Skin color might be relevant when you think of people as part of a pre-determined group rather than as individuals. This is pretty normal on the far right and one the far left, though it is becoming mainstream on the left. I'm not sure if there is any good reason whatsoever why I should think of you as a black person, rather than a person. Likewise, I'm not sure there is any good reason anyone should refer to me as "white person Jayjay" instead of just "Jayjay."

Man, I'm going to need some receipts on this one.

My TF is full of left leaning folks, and all of them are pretty much for equal rights and level headed. I got some folks that use a potty mouth, but only because I see what gets thrown at them. But those cats on the right? I got some questions for you.

What is it with the Alt Right, and just right leaning in general obsession with the GOP of old? It's getting irritating that every single one of them want to bring up that the GOP freed the slaves and fought for civil rights. Like it was yesterday. We can't blame 400 plus years of slavery, 60 years of segregation, and a system built to assist in suppression of rights that's still functioning to this day, but they want to claim this.

And we all know the Democrats started with the KKK, seriously. That doesn't seem to be as important as where the KKK currently resides right now.

[JayJayH 546]

i totally disagree with this in bold. it isn't about taking the side of the victim, it's about believing the victim has a right to be heard. that's it. i don't have to make myself out to be a victim of sexual assault if i respect and listen to victims of sexual assault POV. that's it, not taking sides.

now, i don't agree with gender segregated religious congregation, but i don't see much point in religious congregation at all. so i have a seat and allow others to decide what religious congregations they want to be a part of. any further action on my point is sort of, none of my business. tyrannical even. religion is a personal choice, and women are just as capable as men to decide what religion they want to submit to.

also, all feminists are self proclaimed - no need to call out trudeau like he didn't get properly beat in to the gang.

I agree with what you're saying, but I don't see how this is relevant to any leftist group currently in possession of a loud speaker.

The problem on the left today is that it is no longer guided by actual liberal ideals. It's guided by who the bigger victim is. That's why there is so little discussion on the left regarding the medieval nature of conservative Islam. That's why the "0.72 cents on the dollar wage gap" argument has become almost folkloric. That's why Milo Yiannopoulos was banned on Twitter, while Leslie Jones can continue to tweet "get the f**k outta here a white boy is best dj #######?" and "Lord have mercy…white people ####"

That's why you can end up with prominent liberals actually arguing that "only white people can be racist" and claiming the hijab to be symbol of feminism.

To put it in simple terms: I lost faith in the GOP to rein in its crazies a long time ago. I wouldn't be surprised if Ted Cruz visited some strange congregation in rural Kansas where women sat in the basement.

Yet, I see liberals (supposedly my side) now doing the same thing, but being excused. Why? Because Islam is a "bigger victim" than the crazy congregation in Kansas, so we can overlook the complete illiberal nature of much of the religion.

If you still believe religion is purely a personal choice, I suggest you read and listen to some prominent ex-Muslims like Sarah Haider, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Faisal Saeed al-Muttar, Ali Rizvi or even secular Muslims like Maajid Nawaz and the Quilliam Foundation. It's not a coincidence that the term "regressive left" was coined by a secular Muslim.

Man, I'm going to need some receipts on this one.

My TF is full of left leaning folks, and all of them are pretty much for equal rights and level headed. I got some folks that use a potty mouth, but only because I see what gets thrown at them. But those cats on the right? I got some questions for you.

What is it with the Alt Right, and just right leaning in general obsession with the GOP of old? It's getting irritating that every single one of them want to bring up that the GOP freed the slaves and fought for civil rights. Like it was yesterday. We can't blame 400 plus years of slavery, 60 years of segregation, and a system built to assist in suppression of rights that's still functioning to this day, but they want to claim this.

And we all know the Democrats started with the KKK, seriously. That doesn't seem to be as important as where the KKK currently resides right now.

Frankly, it was Republican ideals of limited government and strict adherence to the constitution that abolished slavery. Similarly, much of the civil rights movement was driven by Republican ideals of small government and equal rights. Sadly for the GOP, it was the same adherence to small government that led Barry Goldwater to drown the Republican brand in a bizarre argument for states rights over desegregation. It was Eisenhower that sent the military to Arkansas to enforce Brown vs. Board of Education.

I'll tell you why you hear this a lot. The Democratic Party and much of the American left in recent decades has tried to paint conservatism as somehow "racist." Though I don't agree with much of the GOP platform, there is nothing "racist" about opposing big government or same-sex marriage. I remember in 2012, when Mitt Romney was going to put "black people back in chains," and I remember the "racist, fascist George W. Bush" - Never mind that he did more than perhaps any other person in history to combat HIV and AIDS. Meanwhile today, prominent Republicans like Tim Scott, Ben Carson, Larry Elder, Allen West, Michael Steele still have oreo cookies thrown at them, "porch monkey" and other racial slurs thrown at them while "anti-racists" on the left scratch their heads at how black people can be free thinkers and not in line with the opinions their skin color should determine them to have.

The Alt Right, contrary to your belief is not a white supremacy movement. I'd argue perhaps that it's a western supremacy movement, as it focuses heavily on western ideals like free speech and traditional western values. There is nothing exclusively "white" in the term western however. Unless of course you believe that black, Asian and Hispanic Americans somehow aren't American.

As far as the KKK - They reside far outside the bounds of any current American party platform. They've been, rightfully, ostracized and shamed out of public life.

Edited September 14, 2016 by JayJayH

[OriZ 3,157]

I agree with what you're saying, but I don't see how this is relevant to any leftist group currently in possession of a loud speaker.

The problem on the left today is that it is no longer guided by actual liberal ideals. It's guided by who the bigger victim is. That's why there is so little discussion on the left regarding the medieval nature of conservative Islam. That's why the "0.72 cents on the dollar wage gap" argument has become almost folkloric. That's why Milo Yiannopoulos was banned on Twitter, while Leslie Jones can continue to tweet "get the f**k outta here a white boy is best dj #######?" and "Lord have mercy…white people ####"

That's why you can end up with prominent liberals actually arguing that "only white people can be racist" and claiming the hijab to be symbol of feminism.

To put it in simple terms: I lost faith in the GOP to rein in its crazies a long time ago. I wouldn't be surprised if Ted Cruz visited some strange congregation in rural Kansas where women sat in the basement.

Yet, I see liberals (supposedly my side) now doing the same thing, but being excused. Why? Because Islam is a "bigger victim" than the crazy congregation in Kansas, so we can overlook the complete illiberal nature of much of the religion.

If you still believe religion is purely a personal choice, I suggest you read and listen to some prominent ex-Muslims like Sarah Haider, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Faisal Saeed al-Muttar, Ali Rizvi or even secular Muslims like Maajid Nawaz and the Quilliam Foundation. It's not a coincidence that the term "regressive left" was coined by a secular Muslim.

Frankly, it was Republican ideals of limited government and strict adherence to the constitution that abolished slavery. Similarly, much of the civil rights movement was driven by Republican ideals of small government and equal rights. Sadly for the GOP, it was the same adherence to small government that led Barry Goldwater to drown the Republican brand in a bizarre argument for states rights over desegregation. It was Eisenhower that sent the military to Arkansas to enforce Brown vs. Board of Education.

I'll tell you why you hear this a lot. The Democratic Party and much of the American left in recent decades has tried to paint conservatism as somehow "racist." Though I don't agree with much of the GOP platform, there is nothing "racist" about opposing big government or same-sex marriage. I remember in 2012, when Mitt Romney was going to put "black people back in chains," and I remember the "racist, fascist George W. Bush" - Never mind that he did more than perhaps any other person in history to combat HIV and AIDS. Meanwhile today, prominent Republicans like Tim Scott, Ben Carson, Larry Elder, Allen West, Michael Steele still have oreo cookies thrown at them, "porch monkey" and other racial slurs thrown at them while "anti-racists" on the left scratch their heads at how black people can be free thinkers and not in line with the opinions their skin color should determine them to have.

The Alt Right, contrary to your belief is not a white supremacy movement. I'd argue perhaps that it's a western supremacy movement, as it focuses heavily on western ideals like free speech and traditional western values. There is nothing exclusively "white" in the term western however. Unless of course you believe that black, Asian and Hispanic Americans somehow aren't American.

As far as the KKK - They reside far outside the bounds of any current American party platform. They've been, rightfully, ostracized and shamed out of public life.

I couldn't have said it better myself. And I will add to it, that there is nothing "white" or racist in western ideals, unless the black, Asian and hispanic(or muslims or other minorities) that you mentioned don't want to share these ideals. If they don't want to do that how is that white people's fault?

Also, to add to what was just said in a different thread, even assuming one is misguided, how does that make them racist?

[JayJayH 546]

I couldn't have said it better myself. And I will add to it, that there is nothing "white" or racist in western ideals, unless the black, Asian and hispanic(or muslims or other minorities) that you mentioned don't want to share these ideals. If they don't want to do that how is that white people's fault?

Also, to add to what was just said in a different thread, even assuming one is misguided, how does that make them racist?

Agreed.

I don't understand what in "free speech", "American", "freedom of religion", "western values" or even "the right to bear arms" that by definition exludes minorities. Some people will throw a tantrum if you mention "western values." I'm always left wondering why they insist black people or whoever else can't be part of western values..?

The only conclusion I can make is that they believe America to be, by definition, a white country and that minorities, by definition, don't belong here. Far right and far left typically have a lot in common in their underlying world views.

The terms "racism" and "bigotry" have been so abused that sadly, they bear little meaning to anyone outside of social justice echo chambers anymore. The left has gone over to abusing the term "white supremacy" instead to give it the punch they want.

I can use my favorite social justice article as a prime example.

http://qz.com/775492/what-minority-students-hear-when-white-teachers-mispronounce-their-names/

"The lasting impact of white teachers who mispronounce minority student names"

If I have a daughter and name her the traditional Norwegian name Kjellbjørg, or a son, going full viking and naming him Aðalbrandur. Who is to blame if they come home crying because the teacher got their name wrong at roll call? The far left would blame "racism" and "white people" according to this article. I'm realistic enough that I would probably suck it up and blame myself.

That being said, I'm sure there exists solid empirical research to determine why it won't leave a lasting impression if it's a non-white teaching mispronouncing it

Edited September 14, 2016 by JayJayH

[JayJayH 546]

Man, I'm going to need some receipts on this one.

Haha. I do hear you keep receipts.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

I agree with what you're saying, but I don't see how this is relevant to any leftist group currently in possession of a loud speaker.

The problem on the left today is that it is no longer guided by actual liberal ideals. It's guided by who the bigger victim is. That's why there is so little discussion on the left regarding the medieval nature of conservative Islam. That's why the "0.72 cents on the dollar wage gap" argument has become almost folkloric. That's why Milo Yiannopoulos was banned on Twitter, while Leslie Jones can continue to tweet "get the f**k outta here a white boy is best dj #######?" and "Lord have mercy…white people ####"

That's why you can end up with prominent liberals actually arguing that "only white people can be racist" and claiming the hijab to be symbol of feminism.

To put it in simple terms: I lost faith in the GOP to rein in its crazies a long time ago. I wouldn't be surprised if Ted Cruz visited some strange congregation in rural Kansas where women sat in the basement.

Yet, I see liberals (supposedly my side) now doing the same thing, but being excused. Why? Because Islam is a "bigger victim" than the crazy congregation in Kansas, so we can overlook the complete illiberal nature of much of the religion.

If you still believe religion is purely a personal choice, I suggest you read and listen to some prominent ex-Muslims like Sarah Haider, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Faisal Saeed al-Muttar, Ali Rizvi or even secular Muslims like Maajid Nawaz and the Quilliam Foundation. It's not a coincidence that the term "regressive left" was coined by a secular Muslim.

Frankly, it was Republican ideals of limited government and strict adherence to the constitution that abolished slavery. Similarly, much of the civil rights movement was driven by Republican ideals of small government and equal rights. Sadly for the GOP, it was the same adherence to small government that led Barry Goldwater to drown the Republican brand in a bizarre argument for states rights over desegregation. It was Eisenhower that sent the military to Arkansas to enforce Brown vs. Board of Education.

I'll tell you why you hear this a lot. The Democratic Party and much of the American left in recent decades has tried to paint conservatism as somehow "racist." Though I don't agree with much of the GOP platform, there is nothing "racist" about opposing big government or same-sex marriage. I remember in 2012, when Mitt Romney was going to put "black people back in chains," and I remember the "racist, fascist George W. Bush" - Never mind that he did more than perhaps any other person in history to combat HIV and AIDS. Meanwhile today, prominent Republicans like Tim Scott, Ben Carson, Larry Elder, Allen West, Michael Steele still have oreo cookies thrown at them, "porch monkey" and other racial slurs thrown at them while "anti-racists" on the left scratch their heads at how black people can be free thinkers and not in line with the opinions their skin color should determine them to have.

The Alt Right, contrary to your belief is not a white supremacy movement. I'd argue perhaps that it's a western supremacy movement, as it focuses heavily on western ideals like free speech and traditional western values. There is nothing exclusively "white" in the term western however. Unless of course you believe that black, Asian and Hispanic Americans somehow aren't American.

As far as the KKK - They reside far outside the bounds of any current American party platform. They've been, rightfully, ostracized and shamed out of public life.

Actually, conservative is more in line with black people than anything else. A strong religious background, smaller government(since black people know better than anyone outside of the Native Americans and the Japanese Americans what can go sideways), these things would be music to our ears if the GOP wasn't so damn intent on letting us know how much they can't stand us.

Tim Scott, Michael Steele I can roll with. Even Colin Powell can get some love. The rest of those dudes, can go sit down somewhere. It's so strange to see black people who become GOP darlings by being straight hateful towards their own people. Which for some reason seems to be a requirement.

http://all-len-all.com/dear-gop-dont-ever-send-black-republicans-to-recruit-black-people/

First, black people REGULARLY vote for white people – we have little choice. In my almost 45 years on this earth, I have voted for a black person for President exactly twice. Once in 2008 and once in 2012. In prior elections, I didn’t stay home, I voted for the white man. In 2016, I may be voting for a white woman. In local elections, too, I have mostly voted for white people and have often voted for them over black people.

Second, black Republicans – at least the vocal ones, the public ones, the kind that you see on Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly, the ones trying to be spokesmen for the Republican party are, for the most part, terrible people. They have to be, or else, they wouldn’t be black republicans.

Allen West and Larry Elders are repeat offenders. And even though I didn't like Bush, I don't hate him. And I think the racist language Biden used wasn't right, since he played off the racial fears. But I know hating on Carson and the rest of them comes from it feeling like a sign of betrayal when they are spouting the same ####### white people who burn crosses in their yards do.

As for the Alt Right, I can't agree with you on that. I've gone toe to toe with about 8 of them at once, and it's straight about white pride. Matter of fact, the conversation was going good until I mentioned I was black and that Muslims are not an issue here. F******* chimp was my name from then on, then his boys jumped in. Told me black people and Muslims are what's wrong with this country. How anyone who isn't white needs to get out of their country. Janelle came in and she was drug as well. So this Alt right nonsense about them having love for country is half right, it's good if you're white. And if it's wrong, they have an image problem.

I couldn't have said it better myself. And I will add to it, that there is nothing "white" or racist in western ideals, unless the black, Asian and hispanic(or muslims or other minorities) that you mentioned don't want to share these ideals. If they don't want to do that how is that white people's fault?

Also, to add to what was just said in a different thread, even assuming one is misguided, how does that make them racist?

If you're calling me an animal that's long been associated with racism, or telling me to get out of a country I was born in, at what point does it become racist?

[yuna628 9,526]

Jay: the topic of this thread was regarding confusion over why there is no outcry on gender segregated mosques? Well, how do you feel about gender segregation in religion in general? Because it's not just in some of the Muslim faith... but you can find it all over Judaism and Christianity too. If there is freedom of religion in this country, and in Canada too - then this practice is not something we can complain about under the domain of the law. I could certainly explain to you why this practice and others are towards women, and they come from the same shared root in all three religions. It's not some unique thing. Are these 'medieval' instead of modern in nature? Sure, you could make that argument. But so are many aspects we have in all religions, things many simply take for granted and accepted practices even.

[smilesammich 10,727]

I agree with what you're saying, but I don't see how this is relevant to any leftist group currently in possession of a loud speaker.

The problem on the left today is that it is no longer guided by actual liberal ideals. It's guided by who the bigger victim is. That's why there is so little discussion on the left regarding the medieval nature of conservative Islam. That's why the "0.72 cents on the dollar wage gap" argument has become almost folkloric. That's why Milo Yiannopoulos was banned on Twitter, while Leslie Jones can continue to tweet "get the f**k outta here a white boy is best dj #######?" and "Lord have mercy…white people ####"

That's why you can end up with prominent liberals actually arguing that "only white people can be racist" and claiming the hijab to be symbol of feminism.

To put it in simple terms: I lost faith in the GOP to rein in its crazies a long time ago. I wouldn't be surprised if Ted Cruz visited some strange congregation in rural Kansas where women sat in the basement.

Yet, I see liberals (supposedly my side) now doing the same thing, but being excused. Why? Because Islam is a "bigger victim" than the crazy congregation in Kansas, so we can overlook the complete illiberal nature of much of the religion.

If you still believe religion is purely a personal choice, I suggest you read and listen to some prominent ex-Muslims like Sarah Haider, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Faisal Saeed al-Muttar, Ali Rizvi or even secular Muslims like Maajid Nawaz and the Quilliam Foundation. It's not a coincidence that the term "regressive left" was coined by a secular Muslim.

sticking strictly to the op here (honestly, because i don't agree with the big picture you're trying to paint and you're sort of all over the place):

“That PM Trudeau went to an IUMS-associated mosque is typical of left-leaning politicians, who apply a crude violence filter: if the person has not personally advocated or engaged in violence, then no problem,” Pipes noted. “To put it mildly, that misses the point.”

1. this is what politicians do, they reach out to all sorts. trudeau is popular with muslims, seems to make sense that he would make such an appearance for eid.

2. speaking of a crude violence filter, should we be applying this to ourselves? our own terror connections and funding and oops did we leave all these weapons and humvees lying about err uh, thanks for the cash?

[smilesammich 10,727]

I couldn't have said it better myself. And I will add to it, that there is nothing "white" or racist in western ideals, unless the black, Asian and hispanic(or muslims or other minorities) that you mentioned don't want to share these ideals. If they don't want to do that how is that white people's fault?

Also, to add to what was just said in a different thread, even assuming one is misguided, how does that make them racist?

are you saying that western ideals are white ideals? minorities should get on board or else those ideals are racist? there's so much spinning going on in this thread. specifically what ideals are you speaking of and how exactly are those ideals white to begin with?