Social Justice Warrior

So the other day, whilst engaged in that most cerebral of pursuits (playing a mobile game on my iPad) I was drawn into an online discussion in the game’s “chat” room.  One of the members had noted that “Its nice to sea so many femail characters in the game.” [sic] That comment was followed by several more, all impeccably worded and clearly well thought out, suggesting that there was no place in comics for women, that no women read comics or played video games, and that certain comic companies’ decisions to “feminize” characters was just part of the larger feminist agenda.

I carefully considered this viewpoint and pondered the possibility that “a girls only place in comics was cosplaying to show her ####!!!” [sic] as one poster noted.  I inferred from the context of post that the chat filter had replaced “mind” for some odd reason, and decided, in a fit of madness, to join the conversation in support of this point.

“While it is refreshing that the comic and gaming studios are including more female characters, there is still a long way to go until we see gender equality in video games and comics in general.”  I wrote.  Then followed it up with “It is especially odd that they (the entertainment companies) haven’t caught on to the fact that a rising percentage (maybe as high as 50%) of gamers and geeks in general are women, with money to spend.”

A commenter, with a charming moniker suggesting a practice uncomfortable at the best of times and unlawful in twenty eight countries, replied “Great.  Just what we needed - a ####### SJW.”

I tried to sort through the words the chat filter could have had an issue with.  I ruled out “awesome” and “amazing” based on the poster’s grammar.  “Wonderful” was too long and both “dashing” and “sensual” implied a level of familiarity I didn’t think they had with me.  I gave up trying to determine what the adjective could have been and decided to just focus on their overall message, that they were happy to have a Social Justice Warrior present.  So I answered in the only way that Thumper’s father would approve of.  I said “Thanks!”

All kidding aside, I will never understand why detractors seem to feel that labelling someone as a SJW is in any way negative.  No one has ever called me a warrior before, outside of a D&D game anyway.  The idea that I could be a warrior, a champion or a gladiator for anything, let alone something as commendable as equality and fairness for all, fills me with pride.  I see myself standing on a grassy hilltop, surrounded by adoring citizens of all races/colours/genders/sexualities/species/beliefs/etc., waving a rainbow flag in one hand and holding balanced scales of justice in the other, the sun setting behind me over a field of flowers.  I want to get that as a poster for my office wall.  Maybe with my face on Matthew McConaughey’s body.  Because, you know, reasons.

I know that as a cis-gendered, white male I will never truly understand my level of privilege.  I also understand that, based on my decade and a half working in the field of Human Rights, I will never know what it is truly like to be in the shoes of ‘the minority.’  Neither of those however preclude me, or anyone else, from supporting those who need my support.  Nor will they ever.

What is in a Word?

We often hear people talking about how words have power.  How the way in which our thought processes, even our worldview, are shaped and molded by the words we use – the words we have available to us.

In my office we deal with word and word meanings all the time.  What one person calls another in the workplace, and the connotations that can be associated with the word or words used, can be the difference between a peaceful work environment and a poisoned one that drives people to do terrible things.  We all know the words I am talking about, though we never say them in polite company.  The “N-word”, the “F-word”, all manner of racial and ethnic hate rolled up into tiny little words.  And of course it isn’t always just races and ethnicities that are the targets of hateful words, classes, sexes, orientations, you name it, if there is a way to differentiate people based on some trivial or inane characteristic, someone, somewhere has invented a way to mock and ridicule those people.

It isn’t just linked to hateful words either.  We attach tremendous importance to words of our own.  My colleagues and I spent almost two years designing a new process for our office.  We created it, almost completely without managerial interference, and we’ve been using it to tremendous success for over a year now.  There is a great deal of pride in the halls of my office when we talk about it.  But… there’s always a but, isn’t there?  We were recently asked to change the name of the process.  Not how we administer it.  Not where, when, what or how we do it, just its name.  The level of defensiveness that has sprung up, over the name of it alone, took me quite by surprise.  After all, they are just words, right?

Right?

The truth is, they aren’t just words.  Words embody our sense of identity.  They give us the framework by which we communicate our sense of justice, our hopes and fears, our prayers and our condemnations.  They define who and what we are.  And when some of these words are used against us, or against those we stand with, they can hurt.

The other day, while walking with my youngest son (now aged four), I was moping my sweating and bald head with a handkerchief.  It happened to be a rainbow handkerchief, a holdover from proudly walking in Halifax’s Pride Parade last year.  I hadn’t given any thought it when I grabbed it from among the others in my drawer, to me it was just a way of keeping the sweat from running down by brow and into my eyes – shaving your head in the summer has a few unintended consequences!

As my son and I walked, sweating, down the path, a young man passing us looked at me with a great deal of disdain and snarled “Fucking faggot” as he passed us.  For a moment, I had no idea where it had even come from, until I realized he had been staring at the handkerchief.  When that realization hit, I was momentarily stunned – it certainly wasn’t the first time someone has assumed I am gay, likely won’t be the last – but what stunned me was the hate in his voice.  This was a complete stranger, someone I had never seen before, and likely will never see again.  And he hated me, for what he thought I was.

I was enraged. Not at what he had called me, because even if it were true I don’t attach any judgement to that and no doubt also because, as a mostly straight person, I don’t have a history with that word being used against me as a weapon.  I was enraged because he saw fit to let that hate show, in front of my four year old son.  My boys are being raised to understand and accept all difference – to acknowledge the truth that we are all human beings, and our differences, as much as our similarities, make us unique, cherished and worthy of basic dignity and respect.  It was fortunate for him that I did have my son with me though, as my first instinct (which I have not felt in a very long time) was to react in a physical manner.

Instead, I reigned in my anger, smiled at him and said “Thank you!” and kept walking.  But I am still fuming over it.

It is not the first time I have been the subject of stereotyping, and won’t be the last.  As a privileged, white (pink really), (over) educated, young(ish), straight (mostly) and able bodied male, it is very rare for me to be the target of an “ism” but it has happened, and no doubt will happen again.  But that hate, that level or disdain - that was new.  Even when I have been (in my misspent youth) beaten up for being the wrong [fill in the blank] - I never felt the level of hate in those actions that this young man held for me on the basis of a brightly colored handkerchief.

Ironically, when these things happen to me, all they do is strengthen my resolve to continue the work I do.  As long as there are bigots out there who hate for no real reason, as long as the insanity that is racism/classism/sexism/etc. exists, I will fight it.  In big ways (my career) and in more important ways (teaching my kids) I will continue to do what is right.

So I hear your hateful word good sir.  I hear your “faggot” and I counter you with “hope”.  Because that word, that idea, is more powerful than your hate will ever be.  It will sustain and nurture a generation raised to know that differences are powerful and that diversity is magnificent.  It will light the way forward, while you and your ideas will cower in dark places and wither. 

Old, White, Christian Men

Yesterday I took my boys out for the afternoon to visit the Nova Scotia Museum of Natural History, one of three “education-type” places that we hold memberships at.  Don’t tell my kids, but the places they love to visit are the same ones that I want them to go to – they’ll learn more if they think they are having fun!  But before we could begin our day of fun at the museum (snakes and lizards and scorpions oh my!) we had to fuel up.  So we stopped at McDonalds for a bite to eat. 

As we sat, munching our way through the communal pile of tasty french fries (we always just pile all our fries together and share them all), I could not help but overhear the conversation between two older gentlemen.  They started off their conversation talking about the “ladies auxiliary"  at their church, and went on at length about how things were going in the church.  They veered to hockey and football for a time, before one of them pushed the newspaper across the table to his friend, with a gruff “You seen this yet?”  What follows is their conversation, not quite verbatim, but close.

“Nah, what’s it about?”

“New premier of Ontario is a woman.  And she’s gay.”

“Damn.  Pretty soon, we’re going to be the minority around here.”

At this point, I was almost set to interject into their conversation.  That statement, coming from the mouths of able bodied, straight, educated, white males always gets my goat.  But I bit down on another fry and tried to mind my own business.  Partly because I was having a great time with my boys and didn't want to ruin it, but partly because I just did not have the energy to engage in that debate all over again. Either way,  I am damned glad I did keep my mouth chewing instead of talking...

“Maybe that’s a good thing.  We had our chance, and we really screwed things up.”

“Yeah, you’re right.  Time to give the lesbians a chance.”

“Yup.  Don’t understand what everyone is so upset about – it’s just about giving everyone the same equality.”

“Exactly.  People get too worked up about stuff that shouldn’t matter to them.  Hey, you heard that Mike’s kid is going to school…”

I nearly hugged them.  It reminded me of my own prejudices; based on their chatting about their church, their patterns of speech and their age, I had already put them in the “old white Christian bigot” category – a form of discrimination all its own.  It reminded me that we all need to revisit our stereotyping constantly – we all do it, and it’s not a bad thing in and of itself, so long as it doesn’t lead to value judgements.

So to all you old white Christian males out there, I’m sorry for sticking you in a box.  I promise to try and remember that you aren’t all the same, and that many (most) of you are good and decent people, who care about people and their human rights just as much (and often more) as me and my young, atheist, “liberal” friends.  We have a lot more in common than we think, and we have to remember that from time to time.

Oh Gawd it Burns!

There comes a time in a man’s life when he has to take a stand.  He has to rise up, raise his voice and loudly proclaim “I am not going to take it anymore!”  Chest and jaw thrust out in a manly fashion, he must shake his fist and rail at the injustice of it all.  He must lobby friends and family, reach out to strangers, and find a way to have his message heard.

This is not that time.  That time is tomorrow, or maybe Thursday of next week… maybe I should hold off until summer, when I have had some time to really think it over.

But while I am thinking that over, I do have a favour to ask of you - please stop making me defend Stephen Harper!  People need to do some damned research before blindly following the lemmings off the cliff. If you are a member of the fifth estate, please check your frigging facts before you print / display them for people to see.

Whew.  I feel better all ready.

Twice in the last week I have had to explain to people that while Harper may be the physical incarnation of all that is wrong with Canadian society he isn’t actually saying or doing the things they are talking about. 

Avaaz.org recently began sending around a petition (you may have seen it on your Facebook page) to “Save Jasper National Park” and stated that they were rallying support to prevent the “Harper government” from “[privatizing] a section of the national park.”  The website ShitHarperDid.com picked up on it, and sent it around again.  As of this writing, the Avaaz petition has 136,804 signatures, just 13,196 shy of their goal.

What's the catch you say?  Why is this a problem for you SRD you ask?  Well, Harper isn’t privatizing anything.  He probably hadn’t even heard of this issue before he saw it on his morning briefing when Avaaz ran with it.  Here are the facts:

·         There are hundreds, maybe thousands of privatized businesses, facilities and locations within the Jasper National Park already.  Marmot Basin, the ski hill that over three million people a year visit and the primary reason that the town of Jasper doesn't dry up and blow away in the winter, is privately owned – all the ski resorts in the Rockies are.  Every bar, hotel, resort, sled dog company and tour company that operates there is privately owned.

·         The development in question is being forwarded by a company that, while not Canadian owned, has been doing business in Jasper for over 80 years, that has its headquarters in Jasper, and that employs Canadians every day of the year.

·         The Harper government, and federal politicians in general, have little to no influence in this area.  The proposal will be veted by Parks Canada staff and management.  Had this not become a media issue, federal politicians would never even know it existed.

I lost a lot of respect for Avaaz when they started that one, but not nearly as much respect as I’ve lost for the media (and the sheep who don’t ask questions) over the latest Harper-bash.

At a recent media conference in Halifax, where Harper was raking in the political credit for the recent twenty five billion dollar ship deal, he was asked a question by one of the reporters about a recent court case involving a same-sex couple.  It seems that this particular couple, who do not live in Canada, journeyed here to get married.  When they returned to their home, their marriage was not recognized – their nation (not to point any fingers) does not recognize the basic right to wed for same sex couples.  They didn’t care – they were married and happy and they knew they were married, even if the state didn’t.  Until that went south, and they became very unhappy.  So much so that they wanted to get a divorce. 

They came back to the land of Beaver Tails and curling and attempted to start divorce proceedings.  Where a Department of Justice lawyer informed the court that they may well not qualify for a divorce, not because their marriage wasn’t valid in Canada, but because international law (which the fantastic LGTBQ advocate and lawyer Kevin Kindred said all too well in a recent post) generally states that a “vacation wedding” is only really valid if the couple’s home nation / state recognizes it and it has been that way for over a hundred years. That would be the same answer whether the couple was a man and a woman, two women or two men and would have been the answer regardless which political party was in charge. Hell, it would be the answer in most, if not all, other countries of the world as well.

Now, very few states don’t recognize “straight” marriage, so this is really only an issue for gay couples, but it isn’t because of anything the Harper government said or did, and it can’t be taken as any indication that the dreaded Harper government is trying to reopen the gay marriage issue – it was a lawyer, doing their job and pointing out to the court that the law may not permit what the judge is being asked to do.  Furthermore, it wouldn’t have come up had the couple been resident in Canada for a year prior to the application – it only applies to people who get married in Canada, and then don’t live here.

There are also practical reasons to have a law like that – court proceedings cost a lot of taxpayer money.  Clerks and administrative staff have to accept and file the documents, judges will be involved, databases will have to be updated, etc. etc.  If you are not paying into that tax base (i.e. you are in a “vacation marriage”) then maybe it shouldn’t be so easy to get the divorce here… but that’s another argument.

Should the law change?  Probably – as I said, it really only does matter to gay people getting married, and thus it has a disproportionate effect on them – why not clean it up while we have the chance.

But does this have anything to do with Harper?  No.  Not one iota.  He may be evil incarnate, but he isn’t behind everything.

I know, the lefties (and I am on that side of the spectrum) love to have a target to vent their spleens at.  And Harper makes a very attractive target, I’ll admit. But blaming him for everything is going too far.  And the comparisons to Hitler and Stalin?  Come on folks, those have to stop if you want to retain any shred of credibility.

So the next time you hear that Stephen Harper is trying to pass a law making it illegal to adopt a child not of your ethnicity, or is suggesting that we eat old people instead of chicken, check your source, and then check your facts.  We live in a world of constant and immediately accessible information.  Use it.

Something Awesome

Tonight I witnessed something truly remarkable.  On the bus on the way home, I watched as a young black man (early twenties and fit) punched an old white man (60+ with a cane) and knocked him down.  He hit him hard enough to split his lip wide open and daze him.  I went up to the front of the bus to help the older man up and get him settled, but didn't know enough to really intervene, so didn't involve myself beyond that at first.  That's not the remarkable part.

Now, turns out the old guy hit the young guy first.  I didn't see that, but those at the front of the bus did, and in the aftermath, shared what they had all seen.  The younger man warned off the older one, clearly and loudly announcing (when the older man stood up and raised his fists) that if he came any closer, he would hit him.  The old man didn't listen, and started to lunge, so the kid threw a single punch.  Quite a doozy actually.   But that's not the remarkable part.

The driver intervened, in a calm and reasoned fashion, and got the parties separated while we all waited for the cops to arrive.  She did this despite the old man yelling racial slurs at her and the kid - did I mention she was black too?  Despite serious provocation from him, she stayed calm and kept the situation from getting any worse.  She also kept the rest of the passengers calm and followed procedure - getting the cops, paramedics and a new bus for the rest of us to get home.  Also, not the remarkable part.

Now, before I get to the remarkable part, I have to preface it with a caveat.  I didn't see the start of the altercation, I have no idea what happened to set either of them off, nor do I know either of their stories or what predicated their decisions.  Now that is out of the way, lets talk about remarkable.

When the old man started making racial slurs toward the young man and the driver, the response of the other passengers (twenty to thirty people from diverse backgrounds) was near universal - condemnation of the old man's comments.  When he started with his "He's fucking black and you're black..." yelling at the driver, he was shouted down by dozens of people.  For a moment it seemed that everyone on the bus, black, white and every shade in between, stood up for a moment against racism.

Comments of disbelief were heard throughout the bus once he was removed, predominantly from the younger riders, "What year does he think this is?" and "I can't believe this is still happening."

One woman in her sixties reached out to touch the young man's arm when he got back on the bus (the police interviewed him and then he was free to leave, it was pretty clearly self defense with dozens of witnesses and a camera running) and asked him if he was OK.  When he shrugged it off with the bravado of youth and said the old man hadn't hit him that hard, she said "No, I saw what happened, I just want to make sure you're all right."  They both knew that she wasn't talking about anything physical, and she connected, for an instant, with him.

It reminded me why the work I do is important, maybe even necessary.  And it gave me hope.  It was one small incident on one bus.  But it reminded me that people are good at heart.  That they care about one another, and that the pain and despair of complete strangers can still move them.  They can stand up for one another and they do come to the aid of those who need them.  Maybe, just maybe, we can keep moving forward.

I'm no Scientist... 7 / 30

but I play one on television.  When I read this story in the Chronicle Herald I was at first happy to see some forward thinking.  And I can see that this is a step in the right direction, but the article kind of glosses over one important factor - gay men, under the proposed change, would be able to give blood again, assuming they are celibate.  Pardon me???

Let me see if I understand the rationale here - thirty years ago, the initial outbreak of AIDS was largely in the gay community.  Therefore, if you are a man who has had sex with a man (note it does not define what sex is here... handjob?  oral?  anal?  footjob?) since 1977, you are currently precluded from giving blood.  So if you have been in a monogamous gay relationship for the last forty years, you can’t give blood.  This change would have no impact upon men like this. 

I am no expert on the gay community, but I am willing to wager that there are a lot of gay men who are practicing safe sex and/or are in monogamous relationships and are at far less risk of contracting or passing on HIV than many of the young, straight college kids these days.  Now, to be fair to the reporting, according to the CDC, men having sex with men (gay or not) do still represent a significant percentage of the new HIV transmission statistics.  However, and this is important to remember, they are not the largest group with HIV/AIDS.  Yes, they may be more likely to be carrying the virus, but they are a much smaller percentage of the population.  In fact, according to Health Canada, the groups that are at the most increasing risk these days are aboriginal persons and straight women.  So why are gay men being refused the opportunity to give blood?

Hell, some of my friends and colleagues (who are gay) are at far less risk than I am to be carriers.  They have been in monogamous relationships for over fifteen years, have no piercings or tattoos, and have had HIV tests.  I have never had an HIV specific blood test (though I have had so many tests I would be surprised to learn they didn’t test for HIV on at least one occasion), have a piercing and a tattoo, and for a year in my late twenties, was rampantly non-monogamous, to the point of dangerous behaviour.  And when you factor in that HIV and AIDS can take over ten years to become symptomatic (WHO information)... I am far more risky than they are.  But I can happily give blood, while they are denied the opportunity.

One of the reasons that gay men are more susceptible to HIV transmission is the act of anal sex.  Newsflash to Health Canada - not all gay men engage in anal sex, and anal sex is by no means limited to the gay male community.  Plenty of straight people do it too! 

Now, if the question was “Have you engaged in unprotected sex, and in particular anal intercourse, with someone who’s sexual history you are unaware of in the last year?” that would be a fair question to ask.  That is sexual behaviour that increases your chance of HIV contact.   And it is gender / orientation neutral - we all have anuses.

But like I said, I am no scientist.  And that is the scary part... if its obvious to the rest of us, that the test is discriminatory, hateful and unnecessary while also failing to accurately capture the information that we really ought to be examining, they why is the government, and Canadian Blood Services, holding on to this ‘scientific’ information so tightly?  What are they afraid of? 

Is it possible that a gay man giving blood could taint the supply with HIV?  Yes.  Unlikely, but possible.  Is it possible that a straight woman could taint the supply with HIV?  Yes.  Unlikely, but possible.  So why does she get to give, to help to save another’s life, while he doesn’t?

Lets face it, its about prejudice, plain and simple.  If there is no statistical or scientific evidence to support the bias, and in fact the test itself is flawed, then its time to put the puritan shadows of fifty years ago aside, let all members of our society, regardless of where they fall on the straight / gay spectrum, be full members of our society.

So Health Canada, if you want to regulate behaviour, go ahead.  But when you want to moralize and punish sexuality, you’ll be held accountable.

To be or not to be...

The recent attention being paid to teen suicides, particularly the suicides of young LGTBQ people in North America is... in a word... interesting.

I've held the view for years now that being a teenager, despite our parent's assertions that it was "the best time of our lives", is the scariest, most challenging, most dangerous and hardest part of our lives.

Lets face it - its no cup of tea.  Yes, many teens have a boat load of fun. We engage in behaviour that we look back on as adults and wonder "How the hell did I survive doing that to my body?" and we do it with huge, often drunken, grins on our faces.  We forge friendships and bonds that, in many cases, will last a lifetime.  We tan, we drink, we date, we fornicate our faces off, we buy our first cars, we have our first jobs, we fall in love for the first time and we are firm in our belief that we are invulnerable.  Except when we aren't.

Those firsts are all accompanied, unfortunately, with their darker "first" counterparts.  We - usually - lose our first love, sometimes to another person, sometimes to a drunken car accident.  That first job is our first real taste of having responsibilities and not being able to do what we want when we want.  That fornication sometimes leads to far greater responsibilities than we are prepared, or able, to accept.  That new car needs work, which takes more money than you have, which means a loan, which means you have to work more hours... That's part of life, right?  Well... yes it is.  Nothing is permanent.  Nothing stays the same forever.  But here's the thing that many of us forget when we become adults - we didn't know that when we were 13.  Or rather, we knew it, but we didn't understand it. 

It takes age and experience to learn how to deal with the crushing pain that loss brings.  It takes dealing with dozens of assholes to learn how to deal with a bullying boss or a bullying classmate.

Teens are still learning who they are - and that's the hardest part of all.  They have friends telling them to be this way, media telling them to be that way, parents telling them to be another way and, if they listen hard, a little voice inside themselves telling them to be their way.  That little voice is the only one that they really ought to listen to, but it gets drowned out by all the others, which are much louder and more capable of enforcing their views.  The lucky ones have a support network that lets them listen to that inner voice, and that encourages and assists them in making that voice truly theirs.  Unfortunately, most don't.

For kids who want / need to go against what society is telling them, that's hard to accept.  Whether its not taking over the family business so you can go to art school, not dating a guy your mom introduced you to because you are lesbian, wearing pink instead of blue or picking up The Origin of the Species instead of The Holy Bible these are the moments, and decisions, that define teens' lives, and the roadblocks that they face in these moments are huge.

Add to that being bullied, and it gets even worse.  Now you have a teen, unsure of themselves, wanting desperately to feel appreciated, supported and loved, and you push their faces in the mud, often literally.  When these teens have no one to turn to, when their social networks, their parents and their teachers won't stand up for them, then the situation goes from terrible to tragic.

I was bullied in school.  The fat kid, the smart kid and the wiseass, I had a target for bullies on my back about as wide as the seat of my "husky fit" jeans.  Add in a fear of physical confrontation, and it was made even worse.  Physically assaulted, called names and teased, I went through much of junior high trying desperately to avoid pain and humiliation.  When I tried to talk to my family about it, I got nowhere fast.  I thought about suicide, even halfheartedly tried it once.  Until I was in my late twenties, I really thought I was the only one who felt that way.  To my surprise, almost every person I speak to relates similar stories.  I was not the only one.  Hell, in comparison to some, I had it pretty easy.

US President Obama just did an PSA for the "It Gets Better" campaign, and, despite my growing disdain for PSAs in general, I liked what he did.  He didn't focus on any particular group, didn't overly single out the LGBTQ community for comment.  And that's the right way to look at it.  All teens feel these tremendous pressures, and all people, regardless of age, deserve and need support from the rest of us.  We all made it through, scarred and battered, so we know that it doesn't have to be as bad as it is.  And we do know that it does get better.

Now, adulthood has its own challenges, no question about it.  And the responsibilities can really crush you sometimes.  But at least you have the experiences of your past, and some greater security in your own abilities, as well as a greater understanding of your recourse when a situation exceeds your capacity.  And its important that we remember all of that, when our kids come to us and tell us that they're upset or frustrated by their situations.  Its vital that we, as adults and thus the holders of all the power, stand up for our kids and all kids, and not accept bullying, not accept intolerance. 

Bigotry and hate are everywhere.  Small minded people the world over are spouting messages of hate and ignorance, and other small minded people are listening to them.  But the voices rising against them are getting louder, more persistent.  They are yelling back, and shining lights on the dark little caves these bigots are trying to hide in.  And their messages are getting through, slowly, a little bit at a time.

And yes, different people are still being singled out, and the urge to conform, to just do what people seem to want of you is huge. But the world is changed, every day, and in every way, by the very people that refuse to conform, by those that stand up and demand change, by those who listen well to that inner voice and act on its demands. 

Nothing ever stays the same.  But nothing ever changes, really changes, over night.  And I just hope we can tell that to our kids, and remind them that it does get better, and support them with our love and our actions while that happens.  So that they'll be here when it does.

Dove, a symbol of peace?

Terrorism: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.


That’s the definition of terrorism from Websters-Miriam dictionary.

Recently a particular asshat has been in the media, announcing to all and sundry that he and his faithful flock of fifty parishioners (which means that my Facebook "Friends" list has more members than this idiot’s church) were going to engage in a day of book burning. Old news for conservative Christian groups in the US. But this book wasn’t Harry Potter, or Darwin’s Origin of the Species (the aforementioned conservative Christians usual targets), no, this book was the Qu’ran - the holy word of Allah as given to Muhammad - a sacred text to over a billion people on the planet. I’m going to say that again - a billion people.

Of course, the good news is that media got involved. When haven’t they made a potentially explosive situation better by covering it from every possible angle, and broadcasting their generally ill-informed and often ludicrous opinions to a few billion people? Thankfully, this idiot managed to get these right minded and forward thinking media people to take his message beyond his fifty BFFs, and broadcast it to the world. Which had, as you have probably noted, a result.

Denouncements of the plan flew from every possible angle. The US President, our own Prime Minister, heads of state from all around the globe, including both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hammas leader Ismail Haniya, the military leaders of at least four nations that I know of, the Secretary General of the United Nations, movie stars, rock stars, media pundits, and every religious leader, up to and including the Vatican and several prominent Imams throughout the world, along with every single human being on the planet that has any shred of respect and integrity.

On the flip side, the Taliban loved it. They called for an attack on every Christian everywhere, regardless of how they feel about the book burning. The head of a militant Islamic group in Indonesia has proclaimed a death sentence on the idiot, though they note that it is targeted at the idiot himself, not at Christians or Westerners in general - a nice touch on any death threat I think.

So yeah, the moderate world (read almost all of it) is aware that the idiot is, in fact, an idiot, and is begging him not to do it. The extremists out there killing in the name of their perversion of Islam will use it to further their own political aims, and likely manage a few more recruits from the uneducated and down-trodden.

Now it looks like he may have called the whole thing off. That’s the right decision to make, Mr. Idiot. But why has it been called off? The Associated Press (and likely a lot of other sources by the time I post this) have reported that the burning was called off when the imam involved with the so-called “Ground Zero Mosque” (see Keith Olbermann's Special Comment on how this is incorrect) agreed to meet with Mr. Idiot, apparently to discuss the moving of the mosque to another location. Which of course, is not happening - the imam and the other organizers for the cultural center have been very clear that the location is fixed and they can't be intimidated into moving it.

So lets look at this, and maybe go back and read the first sentence... Here we have an individual, actually a small group of like minded religious persons (the Dove World Outreach Center is ostensibly a church, albeit very ironically named, based on the idiot’s behaviour) who are threatening an act of violence against a particular group, an act which will very likely kick off futher violence as extremists and disillusioned people around the world react to it, and he’ll only call it off if his demands are met. “Move your mosque or I burn these books, and set a fire that will cost human lives!” How is this any different than the actions of the other extremists that we send the military after?

Coercion of this kind is always wrong. There is never an excuse to threaten to kill (or cause to be killed) innocent people to get what you want. And, Mr. Idiot, it doesn’t matter what name you call the Almighty, or which book you preach from, terrorism is still terrorism.

My only real plea here? Media, don’t show up - no matter what. If the burning goes ahead and there is no media coverage, there’s no problem. Why give the idiot and his idiot congregation more coverage? Its not news, its hate. And reporting on hate simply amounts to spreading that message, rightly or wrongly. Just let him have his stupid BBQ, and let him reap what he sows - don’t involve the rest of the world in his idiocy.

And to his supporters (yes, believe it or not there are people who agree with this message of hate) - I don’t actually have words to express how disappointed I am in the current state of humanity. If you are Christian, regardless of flavour, hate isn’t what your God teaches. Jesus preached that one should love one’s enemy as one’s brother (Matthew 5:43-47) and that you should love your neighbour as you love yourself (Matthew 22:36-40). And for those American’s out there in favour of this burning, and who aren’t themselves Christian, remember your own founding father’s words....

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Secular or theocratic, we can all agree that the world would be a better place without the misguided hatred that is being espoused in this issue. So reach out today, and embrace the other. Learn about another culture. Take ten minutes to learn how to say hello in another language. Spend thirty seconds on Google to find out the meaning of Ramadan. Learn what Buddhists think about reincarnation. Read a few pages of Darwin’s Origin or Dawkins’ God Delusion.

Take a minute, just sixty seconds, to reflect on what kind of world you want to live in, what kind of world you want to leave for your children and grandchildren. And then think about what you can do to make it a reality. Because if the idiot has shown us anything, if we can take one positive thing away from this entire situation, it is that one person can make a difference. His is a message of hate and intolerance. What will your’s be?

One Step Forward - Three Steps Back...

Now I know this is old news now, but I can’t stop ranting about this one... Quebec, la belle province, is set to ban the wearing of cultural head coverings in a new bill that is being tabled shortly. You can read all about it in the various media, my personal favorite was The Globe and Mail article about two weeks ago. I'd link it in, but have lost the ability to link a story for some reason... I'll assume you can do a Google search and find it. :)

This flurry of anti-Muslim leanings (and lets face it, there aren’t any other folks being targeted by this legislation) was kicked off in Quebec when a Muslim woman who wears a niqab (a full face covering which shows only the eyes and is worn by an extremely small percentage of Muslim woman here in Canada) was kicked out of a French language class because the teacher “needed to see her face to properly instruct her.” OK, first rant. What? My computer is teaching me Japanese. Its doing so without the ability to see me at all, let alone the ability to make judgement calls about me or my ability. It is simply listening to the sounds and comparing them to what the word in question is supposed to sound like and then correcting me when necessary. I could be wearing a Storm Trooper helmet from Star Wars and still get the proper coaching.

The woman then attempted to enroll in another class, and the Minister of Immigration actually intervened in this new course to have her removed once more. Suffice to say, she’s filing a Human Rights complaint with the Commission des droits de la personne et des droits do la jeunesse (Quebec’s Human Rights Commission).

Now let us put this in perspective... this is a woman attempting to learn one of the official languages of Canada. Language is frequently cited as the means though which one can most easily understand a culture. So she’s making an attempt to learn more about Canada, to become, as it were “more Canadian” and we’re telling her no.

I won’t say that I favour the niqab or the burka. I personally consider them to be dehumanizing and can’t condone their use. That said, I also respect a woman’s right to wear one if she chooses to do so, particularly if that woman is making that choice out of a religious obligation.

The last time I checked, Canada was involved in a war against the Taliban and its supporters in Afghanistan. One of the reasons that Canadians were so incensed about the situation in Afghanistan was the way women were treated. We were inundated with images of these poor women, trapped behind their burkas, not free to choose. We sent troops there, and many have died. We’ve spent billions of dollars, and have cost thousands of lives, to (among other things) give women the right to choose. Now, here in our own country, we’re taking away that right?

Where does the line get drawn? I am offended by many things each day. I think the manner of dress of many young people these days is deplorable and borderline pornographic. Yet I respect their right to choose, even if I can’t understand their choice. Why does Sally Smith get to walk through the mall wearing only a belt and two pasties, while Najiira can’t wear her niqab? Safety? Security? Come on people, lets try and move past the culture of fear and oppression.

The miles behind us...

My work exposes me to some of the most... interesting specimens of humanity (and I use that word losely sometimes) that you might ever expect to meet. White supremecists, homophobes, skinheads, racists and misogynists... you name it, I deal with them. Sometimes it can be hard to have any hope for the future, or even any hope at all. You do the work though to give people hope, to try and make the world a better place - it sure isn't for the pay check.

One of my colleagues fell into a funk about it the other day. "Why" she asked, "do we even bother? Its not getting better, its never getting better." I had been having a rough day too (see the above noted misogynists) and had to sympathize with her for a bit. But I tried to remember the story of the Chinese Emperor who asked all of the scholars of his kingdom to assemble an encyclopedia of all the knowledge of the world. They first came back with a thousand volumes of knowledge, proud to have completed their work. The Emperor looked at what they had written, shelves and shelves of knowledge, and told them the work was too long. For another ten years they laboured, distilling everything into a shorter version. Finally, they presented him with the completed 50 volumes. He looked over the books, without reading a word, and told them it was still too long. The scholars went back to their libraries, and spent years reducing the work still more. At long last, they presented the Emperor, now an old man, with a single sheet of paper. On that paper, they had written "This too shall pass."

And that really says it all, doesn't it? That one phrase captures the heart and soul of all that has happened, and all that will happen. And hatred and racsim are passing, going the way of the dinosaur and the dodo bird. Sometimes people like to forget that it was only 1954 (only 55 years ago) when Brown vs. Board of Education was decided. Granted, that is an American case, but let's face it, that's really the starting point for most civil libertarians when discussing the civil rights movement. So in 55 years we have come from seperate schools and washrooms, to shared boardrooms. In 55 years, we have come from a black man not being able to eat in the same restaurant to a black man sitting in the Oval Office. In 55 years, we have made huge inroads into racism, sexism, hatred and disdain... which had been the prevailing mentality and behaviour for a thousand years. That's pretty damned impressive.

Are we done? Not even close. We have so much work to do, so many hatchets to bury and treaties to ratify, so many bigots to expose, so many children to educate that the task seems insurmoutable. But look how far we've come. Look at the miles behind us.