Parents' fury as secondary schools ban skirts for girls - insisting trousers 'promote inclusivity' - "Northern Education Trust - which operates six secondary schools on Teesside - has written to parents outlining the changes to its school uniform policy, which will come into effect from September 2026. The new uniform policy bans skirts from being worn and says 'all students will be expected to wear tailored school trousers'. The trust claims that all students wearing trousers 'promotes equality and inclusivity' and is 'more practical for active learning and movement throughout the school day'... One mum, whose daughter attends a school within the trust, said: 'My daughter and many of her friends are upset about it. 'Many girls choose to wear skirts to express their gender identities. It is outrageous misogyny. There's nothing open, modern and inclusive about this.'"
Canada's first PM 'too controversial' for commemoration, federal board rules - "Canada’s first prime minister has been deemed too “polarizing and controversial” to warrant any new federally-sponsored commemoration, a federal board recommended."
Opinion: Please, no more straights who call themselves 'queer' - "rather than a tool of liberation, queer is a tool of timidity, confusion — capitulation. Straight people like Charlotte and Lily can be queer — the married (to a man) female curator at the LGBT art museum whose board I once served on was also “queer.” Hipster hetero dudes who once drunk-kissed a fellow fraternity brother call themselves queer. But ultimately, it’s a word that means nothing — a verbal vehicle for those seeking the benefits of minority status with none of the backlash. It’s transitory and ephemeral — a sensibility rather than actual identity or orientation. Black people can’t opt out of being black when it suits them. But queer can be discarded quickly and conveniently. There’s little risk to calling yourself queer — scant cost nor consequence. With little concern for commitment, let alone discrimination, queer isn’t brave, queer isn’t noble. Queer is a tool of privilege. Queer is also the logical outcome of two decades of shifting the focus of the LGBT movement from actual sexual behaviour and orientation — to gender identity and ideology. Rooted in feelings rather than discernible facts, queer means nothing and stands for nothing. It’s simply part of an identity-politics intersectional soup that degrades the real achievements of actual gays and Lesbians who spent decades fighting for the equality queers now so casually don as mere accessories and ornamentation... the murkiness around identity-based nomenclature like “queer” is doing real damage. After rising steadily for decades, LGBT acceptance peaked at 62 per cent in 2022 — dropping to 51 per cent this year... This decline corresponds to the peak of “gender’s” infiltration into the LGBT rights movement — and comes of little surprise. After all, what was once a cause rooted in lifestyle and behaviour — men dating, mating, marrying other men — has morphed into an amorphous “vibe” with few truly concrete signifiers. It’s hard to support rights for a minority group, when it’s nearly impossible to figure out what that minority actually is or stands for. One thing #queer certainly has become is #intersectional. Which makes sense. The mix-and-match principles of intersectionality — affiliation with one minority group means affiliation with all minority groups — is ready-made for the farcicality of queerdom. No wonder queers have so easily — yet bafflingly — aligned with the most farcical movement of all right now, #queersforpalestine. Think about it: Gays for Palestine, Lesbians for Palestine — never heard of them because such hashtag activism doesn’t really exist. But #queers for Palestine — they’re all over the place. A pairing of movements — queer liberation and Palestinian liberation — with scant consideration for fact or history or the truth. And the truth is, public-facing queerfolk — however they might present or manifest — wouldn’t survive a day in the Palestinian territories."
What is happening to higher education in the U.S. right now is not reform. It is destruction - The Globe and Mail - "There are valid critiques to be made of universities, especially in terms of cost, access and value, but what is happening right now is not a careful process of thoughtful, nuanced reform. It is vindictive, ideologically driven destruction... The guise of combatting antisemitism on college campuses is a complicated cover for a far-reaching ideological assault."
This from a supposedly centre-right newspaper. Clearly, anti-Semitism is the only issue which can be hijacked for ideological reasons, and Harvard's own admission in its report that anti-Semitism is a problem is just misinformation. Left wingers claiming to be for "empathy", "kindness" and "diversity" couldn't possibly just be pushing the left wing agenda
Naturally, the article did not talk about how left wingers don't tolerate viewpoint diversity, or any other left wing abuses and excesses at all
The conservative case for saving academia - "Some of the most enriching, soul-shaping relationships in my life have been with old-school scholars — men and women who taught before every syllabus became a political manifesto and every footnote a confession. They were rigorous, eccentric, unfailingly curious. They prized clarity over cant, thought over fashion, truth over ideology. They were the keepers of what the late Sir Roger Scruton called “the conversation of mankind.” These scholars, many of them conservative in instinct if not in label, understood that conservatism is not simply a political brand, but a disposition. It’s a reverence for what Edmund Burke called the “wisdom of the ages”; a belief, in Michael Oakeshott’s words, that, “What has stood the test of time is good and must not be lightly cast aside.” They were not culture warriors. They were culture bearers. And they remind us that knowledge is not the enemy of conservatism, it is its foundation. That’s why the right’s growing disdain for academia troubles me so deeply. Yes, the rot is real. Departments that once trained statesmen and scientists now churn out bureaucrats of resentment, who are fluent only in grievance and jargon. The canon has been gutted. The humanities have become temples of nihilism. And yet, to walk away is to concede that this land now belongs to them alone. It is to say that the university, the very cradle of our civilization, no longer belongs to those who would conserve it. That’s not just cowardice — it’s suicide. To abandon the university is to abandon the formation of our future leaders — our judges, teachers, journalists, doctors and civil servants. It would hand the framing of every great moral and political question to people who hate us and then act surprised when the next generation has no idea what we stand for. But more than that, we would impoverish ourselves. The conservative tradition is one of the richest intellectual lineages in human history. Burke, T.S. Eliot, Oakeshott, Wilhelm Roepke, Roger Scruton — these were not demagogues, they were men of enormous learning and restraint, thinkers who engaged the world not with slogans, but with ideas. They wrote from within the university, not in defiance of it. They were not guests in the house of learning. They built the thing. That tradition must not be discarded. It must be reclaimed... Conservatives must do what the left did in the 1960s. We must build parallel institutions. We must fund research, endow chairs, launch fellowships, establish schools and support scholars not for what they say, but for how they think. We must cultivate conservative intellectuals, not just polemicists, but teachers, writers and thinkers — men and women capable of defending the good, the true and the beautiful, not just on stage or on screen, but in the classroom and the library. Because if we don’t, no one will."
Pride Toronto must return to its political roots: advocates - "As a major funding shortfall looms over Pride Toronto, some prominent LGBTQ+ advocates say it’s high time to rethink the organization’s corporate partnerships and return to its political grassroots... Fatima Amarshi, a former executive director of Pride Toronto, says this is the right moment for a reset. Amarshi led the organization for three years starting in 2005... “We weren’t looking at how corporate sponsors were funding arms manufacturers or fossil fuels or efforts to suppress Indigenous land claims. We were linking queer rights to human rights at the level of state repression and legislative oppression, but not via those who fund those efforts,” she said... Pride Toronto has faced calls to cut ties with corporations that allegedly profit from Israel’s offensive in Gaza. Gary Kinsman, one of the founding members of the Lesbian and Gay Day Pride Parade – the organization that eventually became Pride Toronto – resigned in 2024 over that issue and what he called the organization’s refusal to hear the demands of the group Queers in Palestine... For Beverly Bain, who along with Kinsman co-founded a group called No Pride in Policing, the growing calls to break Pride Toronto’s ties with corporate sponsors is long overdue. “Pride Toronto, as it exists today, is a corporate pinkwashing Pride. I do not think it’s an organization that should be continuing to exist,” Bain said. Pride Toronto hasn’t adequately highlighted issues that disproportionately affect the LGBTQ+ community, such as poor access to housing, mental health struggles and increased substance use, Bain said. “We go back to the political roots of Pride … a political struggle for the liberation of queer and trans and non-binary and those who are racialized and those who are Indigenous and two-spirited and Indigenous and queer.”"
"Inclusiveness" is highly selective, of course. They don't bother to make Jews feel included, for one
Chickens for KFC are a thing, because Solidarity is Unconditional. At least for left wing approved causes
The Revolution is never complete. Activists always have to look for new "problems"
Leslie Roberts: Canada needs a centrist revolution - "Ideas once considered mainstream — free speech, public safety, fiscal responsibility — are now branded right-wing... Centrists have become disillusioned — and for good reason. Take the case of former prime minister Justin Trudeau. Once the darling of the centre, he took the Liberal party sharply to the left and abandoned the liberal principles that once defined the party: fiscal responsibility, common sense, personal accountability and respect for democratic institutions. One of the clearest examples came in 2023, when the federal government gave British Columbia the authority to decriminalize all drugs, including heroin and fentanyl. It was framed as a compassionate move, but the results were disastrous. The streets of Vancouver and Victoria were surrendered to an ideology that insists nothing — not addiction, not public disorder — should ever be judged or addressed. Then there was the overreach. In 2022, the federal government invoked the Emergencies Act to deal with some protesters in downtown Ottawa. There were horns and bouncy castles, but the protest was largely peaceful. Contrast that with the past two years, as antisemitic demonstrators have blocked streets in major cities, chanting violent slogans that frighten Jewish-Canadians — and police responded not with emergency powers, but with crowd control and, in one case, coffee. The double standard is glaring. And questioning it now gets you branded as far-right. Somehow, common sense has become radical. It’s not off-base to identify as a conservative, even for those who don’t support the Conservative party. These days, it can simply mean believing in accountability, freedom of thought and respect for institutions — values that used to unite Canadians across party lines."
CBC host resigns, saying he could not continue 'with integrity' - "A national CBC host announced his resignation from the public broadcaster Monday in a letter alleging he could not continue to work there “with integrity.” Travis Dhanraj describes leaving the network where the veteran journalist once hosted his own show... “After years of service — most recently as the host of Canada Tonight: With Travis Dhanraj — I have been systematically sidelined, retaliated against, and denied the editorial access and institutional support necessary to fulfill my public service role.” Dhanraj has spent 20 years in broadcasting, with stints at Global and Bell Media. “When I joined CBC, I did so with a clear understanding of its mandate and a belief in its importance to Canadian democracy,” he wrote. “I was told I would be ‘a bold voice in journalism.’ I took that role seriously. I worked to elevate underrepresented stories, expand political balance, and uphold the journalistic values Canadians expect from their public broadcaster.” But, according to Dhanraj, “what happens behind the scenes at CBC too often contradicts what’s shown to the public.” He accused the public broadcaster of “performative diversity, tokenism, a system designed to elevate certain voices and diminish others.” Dhanraj’s lawyer, Kathryn Marshall, said Monday that the CBC didn’t want him booking “Conservative voices” on his show. “It turned out, to Travis’ surprise, there was a strong editorial direction that he was supposed to promote,” Marshall said. Dhanraj is of Caribbean heritage. “CBC, when they hired him, thought that they were getting someone who would espouse a certain world view,” Marshall said. “I think they looked at him and they looked at the colour of his skin and they made some assumptions.” Marshall is weighing making a complaint to the Canadian Human Rights Commission about her client’s treatment at the CBC. His allegations would include discrimination, reprisal and harassment, she said."
Clearly, CBC media bias is a myth and misinformation and only racist far right white supremacists believe it is a thing. Dhanraj doesn't know what he's talking about because he has no experience in the media industry, and is just repeating nonsense he read online, and he wants MAGA Americans to own all the media in Canada and to destroy Canadian democracy by undermining trust in the CBC, which everyone Knows is Neutral, Fair and Unbiased. We need to give even more money to the CBC, so they can tell us what the Approved Thoughts are and everyone can think the same way, because the only way Democracy can work is if everyone believes a common set of Facts. Those who disagree need to be jailed for Denialism.
I am the wrong kind of transwoman for CBC. Dhanraj made me a regular - "I received an unexpected call from Travis. He was putting together a panel debate for Canada Tonight and wanted to know if I’d be willing to participate. He had gotten my number from Toronto radio host — and mutual friend — Alex Pierson, who had suggested my name when Travis asked for right-leaning voices that might bring ideological diversity to his primetime segment. In truth, I am hardly conservative. I occupy an increasingly wide gap between the ideological left and right — right-leaning only in contrast to today’s progressive orthodoxy. But as a transgender Canadian critical of “woke” progressive politics, I represented a viewpoint that ran counter to the prevailing current of CBC’s programming. In the eyes of many within the institution, that alone made me a conservative. Travis laid out his vision for what he called the “intersection panel.” He sought a segment highlighting the range of voices and perspectives held by Canadians, informative, unfiltered and honest. His aim was clear: to break free of the groupthink that has come to define much of the CBC’s coverage, and to reintroduce the kind of spirited, diverse debate that reflects what Canadians are actually talking about. I was on board. Excited, even. But there was one hurdle: Travis didn’t have production approval to bring me on air. My transgender credentials checked the requisite diversity box, but my hot-take on the news of the hour — that a parent should be informed of their child’s decision to transition at school — posed a problem. CBC has immovable boundaries around which perspectives are deemed acceptable, and Travis was candid that mine wasn’t one of them. There was already internal resistance about the prospects of having me — a transgender woman with the “wrong” perspective — on a CBC broadcast. Translation: CBC was interested in the optics of diversity, but not the substance. They wanted the visual representation I offered but not the messy perspectives I might actually bring. To his credit, Travis didn’t flinch. He pushed ahead, and a few days later I was screened with his producer. The questions I was asked in pre-interview were safe, rehearsed and carefully vetted, as if designed to test whether I could be trusted to stay within the lines. I passed, and was booked to join that evening’s live broadcast. Travis has an incredible knack for showmanship and an instinct to bring abraded energy to an interview. The moment we went live, he dropped the scripted questions and took us off book, pressing thoughtfully into the nuances of children swapping names and pronouns without their parent’s knowledge. I suspect Travis knew he’d get the most fresh and authentic responses from me if he kept me on my toes. He got what he was looking for. What Travis showcased that evening was unsparingly rare on CBC: a candid, unscripted conversation about identity politics that dared to challenge progressive orthodoxy. His questions were sharp, off-the-cuff, and unflinching and I responded in-kind, defending a position held by nearly 78 per cent of Canadians — that when a young person socially transitions, involving parents isn’t just reasonable, it’s responsible and reassuring. To my knowledge, this remains a rare instance in which a dissenting view on transgender issues has been aired — let alone explored — on CBC primetime. Fittingly, it came from a transgender voice. The dialogue struck a chord with the audience. By the next day, CBC had clipped and promoted the debate as a featured article across its digital platform. The reach was substantial. For weeks afterward, I was identified by strangers at shopping centres and gas stations (One perk of being transgender in media: memorable notoriety). I was invited to join the roster as a recurring panelist on Canada Tonight. But inside the show’s production, the cracks were already forming. Travis’ willingness to engage a broader spectrum of viewpoints had not gone unnoticed by his superiors — and not in a good way. Comments in passing from Travis and his team revealed a not-yet public tension brewing between Travis and CBC leadership. The question wasn’t whether Canada Tonight could reflect a divided county — it was whether the CBC was willing to let it. Perhaps CBC brass had internal data that suggested Travis’ approach was dragging down ratings and viewership. If that was true, it wouldn’t be all that surprising. After all, the CBC’s monolithic editorial stance has spent years alienating much of its potential audience — the very Canadians who might have welcomed the diversity of thought Travis finally introduced to their primetime lineup... In an age where media increasingly cedes ground to unfiltered, uncredentialed influencers, our public broadcaster should be leaning into rigorous, inclusive debate, not retreating from it. Travis Dhanraj tried to bring CBC a little closer to that ideal. And for a brief, hopeful moment, it worked."
On reddit, left wingers were accusing Dhanraj of wanting to bring on far right conspiracy theorists, of course. But then, to left wingers, not letting children be castrated due to gender ideology makes you a far right bigoted transphobe complicit in trans genocide
Parks Canada staffers annoyed over activists pushing for CPR commemoration changes - "Persistent emails from activists pestering Parks Canada to rewrite a commemoration of Canada’s transcontinental railway through a revisionist lens spurned annoyance among agency staffers. In a report published by Blacklock’s Reporter, Parks Canada staffers complained in emails about the revisionists, demanding changes to a commemoration of the Canadian Pacific Railway, taking exception to descriptions of the transcontinental railway’s last spike driven on Nov. 7, 1885 at Craigellachie, B.C. — about 40 km west of Revelstoke — as being “the moment when national unity was realized.” In a Sept. 2023 email, a Parks Canada director-general said the agency was looking to review designations and plaques that no longer reflect contemporary values, targeting those “missing a significant layer of history, contain outdated or offensive language, celebrate figures associated with controversial beliefs or glorify themes of colonialism or settlement without giving the perspectives of those impacted or involved.” One manager described them as “persistent emails from an archivist and activist calling for the addition of the Chinese,” while others were seeking greater recognition of Japanese labourers and inclusion of First Nations hunting and trapping references. While Chinese-Canadian activists pushed for mention of Chinese labourers put to work in constructing the railway’s western portions, a Parks Canada manager noted in an email that they weren’t the only foreign labour pressed into laying rails.
Time to fire all the Bigots who work there!
FedEx employee fired for attending Alcoholics Anonymous meeting claims ‘anti-white’ discrimination - "A recovering alcoholic working at a FedEx facility in rural Pennsylvania claims she got fired for leaving early to attend an AA meeting, and contends her termination came about, to a significant degree, because her boss was prejudiced against white people. In a federal lawsuit filed Monday and obtained by The Independent, Margaret Fiander, 64, alleges violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, and Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which proscribes race-based discrimination. On top of allegedly failing to accommodate her disability, Fiander’s former supervisor at FedEx “discriminated against [her] because she is Caucasian and not Hispanic,” according to her complaint, which says Latino employees were given “preferential treatment,” while whites were “treated… less favorably.”... In March 2021, Fiander asked her then-manager if she could leave early on Mondays so she could make her regular meeting, the complaint continues. It says he told Fiander that doing so “would not be an issue.” “Thereafter, [Fiander] left at approximately 4:00 pm every Monday to attend AA meetings,” the complaint says. Fiander would always inform whatever supervisor was on duty of the arrangement, and for the next two years, “no manager objected,” the complaint states. “I never had documentation in writing that I could leave at 4 o'clock, but I should have,” Fiander told The Independent. “I said, ‘Should I just get this in writing?’ And they said, ‘No, just let them know.’ It got to the point where everybody knew. I mean, common sense – you don’t walk off the job without permission.” On August 7, 2023, Fiander reminded the shift manager that she would be leaving at 4 p.m. for her meeting, to which the manager replied, “OK,” the complaint goes on. The next day, according to the complaint, Fiander received an alert on the FedEx scheduling app, informing her that all of her shifts for the rest of the week, as well as the following week, had been canceled."
'Wound is opened up again' after exam features controversial Charlie Hebdo cover: Muslim community leader - "A Muslim community leader in Winnipeg says she was shocked and disappointed to see a controversial magazine cover with a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad included as part of a case study in a provincial Manitoba Grade 12 exam last week. The province's education department has now redacted that section of the French-immersion exam, and made the exam — which was intended as a standardized provincial test — optional for students, after the province's largest school division raised concerns about it. "This exam is just another piece, another layer, that has been added to the suffering we thought we were all behind," said Shahina Siddiqui, the executive director of the Manitoba-based Islamic Social Services Association. A case study in the exam included an image from the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, originally printed in 2011. The exam booklet included a photo of a person holding up a copy of the magazine, which featured the caricature of the Muslim prophet on its cover. Depictions or imagery of the Prophet Muhammad are not allowed in Islam, and the cartoon itself is an Islamophobic image that could create fear and spur hate toward Muslim students, Siddiqui said. The image's inclusion could give the impression that educators are OK with students experiencing Islamophobia in schools, she said... This year's exam theme was "La liberté d'expression: un bien ou un mal?" meaning, "Freedom of expression: good or bad?" Students were asked to write arguments about why they believe freedom of expression is a good thing or a bad thing using case studies included in the 51-page test booklet... the province said the education department has requested schools collect the test, redact the offensive content and return the booklets to schools. Schools can also give alternative exams in its place, the province said. "The department takes the concerns raised about this content seriously and is reviewing this matter to ensure that future examination materials are appropriately considered," a provincial spokesperson said. Siddiqui said it is important for educators to educate themselves about the impact of Islamophobia. "I don't believe in suppressing information, but choosing what information is appropriate," she said, suggesting the exam could have included a different case study that illustrated a similar point. "In a human relationship, you're supposed to respect each other. If you know that something will hurt me and you know the history, those who put it together know the history of the cartoon, know how much Muslims were hurt … that wound is opened up again," she said... In a statement, the Manitoba Islamic Association said the exam included "several factual inaccuracies that contribute to harmful misrepresentations of Muslim communities." "The exam perpetuates stereotypes that have historically fuelled discrimination and, tragically, hate crimes against Canadian Muslims. Such messaging risks making Muslim students feel unwelcome or marginalized in their own schools." Lillian Klausen, president of the Manitoba Teachers' Society, said the image used in the exam "crosses the line into hate speech.""
Of course, the suffering of the victims and their families does not matter, and understanding recent history and events in the Francophone world are bad, because they cause "Islamophobia"
I guess with what they did, the school board gave the model answer about whether freedom of expression is good or bad
Of course, it doesn't seem as if the "inaccuracies" were identified
