|
I clicked on this thread thinking "I wonder how long it'll take Melian Dialogue to show up and shower everyone in crypto-fascist apologia" and, welp,Cultural Imperial posted:Why do we need national security when there's nothing worth protecting in this country But how will we protect our precious Mounties if we don't catch all the  potential radicals in Mr. Big operations before they have a chance to radicalize by themselves??  e: legalize weed and make it so affordable that everyone is too baked to do terrorism Angry Diplomat fucked around with this message at 15:44 on Oct 27, 2015 |
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 1, 2024 23:43 |
|
|
I don't know much about flipping, other than that my... I guess uncle-in-law, if that's even a thing, does it for a living. Is it contributing to unreasonable property values/gentrification/the housing bubble in some way? I didn't think it was common enough to be a Thing.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:How's it going out in Alberta? Hahaha quote:PermaCorp message leads to backlash, company response The wonders of social media. That "apology" is incredibly mealy-mouthed and milquetoast, but what can you expect from a company whose management posts poo poo like this in the workplace? e: wait a minute, these are the guys who make PermaRail. I've heard of these guys.  I am not at all surprised that these guys are in construction and renovation; this kind of weird corporate fiefdom attitude seems crazy common in this industry's business owners
Angry Diplomat fucked around with this message at 14:16 on Jun 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2016 14:12
|
|
|
Yeah the very basic motivation behind much of the current training model is, itself, relatively well-intentioned; "you must protect yourself and/or your partner from harm" is a perfectly reasonable first priority in decision-making, not least because trying to train officers to override their self-preservation instincts during crises would essentially require training them more like soldiers than peace officers. The problem doesn't lie with officers being able, willing, or trained to defend themselves and civilians - that's a logical necessity of policing. The problem lies with a police culture that prioritizes authority and control, views common social issues through a cultural lens so outdated that it verges on superstition, and is rarely subjected to anywhere near the level of accountability and unbiased supervision that it needs. Angry Diplomat fucked around with this message at 17:17 on Jun 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Hey, having a weapon on me would certainly make me inclined to do what someone said to do, regardless of whether it's a police officer, armed robber, or mugger. See, you'd think that, but in reality it turns out that pulling a gun on people and yelling at them makes them panic, and panicking people are unpredictable as gently caress. Escalation is really, really, really bad policing. Armed robbers and muggers just want your poo poo. If they shoot you, well, they still get your poo poo. Cops are literally paid, appointed, and sworn to protect you. If they shoot you, there is a very high likelihood that they have cataclysmically hosed up, because the thing they did was the exact opposite of the thing they are supposed to be doing.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:If they're being armed like soldiers they can follow the same ROE as soldiers. Rank-and-file cops should definitely not ever be armed like soldiers outside of truly extraordinary temporary emergency measures, so yeah, sure, they can play soldier if we get invaded. In the meantime, they should probably behave like officers of the peace.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/northern-gateway-pipeline-federal-court-of-appeal-1.3659561 Yes! Yes!! namaste faggots posted:gently caress enbridge Yes, I vociferously agree.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
Whatever else we may believe, I'm sure we can all agree that coal power is a crock of radioactive poo poo. Let's find some common ground before we degenerate into celebratory squabbling 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
THC posted:If you're queer or you fancy yourself an ally and your opinion is against BLM then you need to sort your fuckin life out  but I mean, heaven forbid the rainbow street party be slightly delayed by queer people demanding a voice in the event meant to represent and validate queer people. What a grave injustice this is.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
I'm gonna go with "literally loving forever unless the officer(s) in question is/are queer" tbh
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:yeah, because attending a pride parade if you're not queer is like stealing their identity, man We've historically had a pretty loving rocky relationship with the police, to the point that, yes, some queer activists have advocated for not letting police anywhere near Pride. I, on the other hand, would simply prefer if they did not march in Pride unless they, themselves, were queer, and I'd prefer it if they kept their on-duty presence fairly low-key seeing as there are both cops and queer folks alive today who remember - and in some cases may have been affected by or even involved in - violence against queer people as perpetrated by the police. Thanks for the worthless snark though, guy. infernal machines posted:I'm not advancing this position myself, but I think the argument is it's better to have TPS positively engaged with the community than not at all. Remember that big conversation about de-escalation a few days back? Saying "hey, let us know if you need help" and then loving off to a respectful distance is a pretty good de-escalation strategy in this case I think. Angry Diplomat fucked around with this message at 05:59 on Jul 4, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 05:57
|
|
|
zapplez posted:Police is a pretty queer occupation. Do you know a lot of cops? There is a large proportion of both gay/lesbian and bi officers then in a lot of other jobs. I'm definitely going to need a source on this info. I also don't see that it necessarily has anything to do with what I said; the salient point is not that queer people and cops cannot coexist, it's that there's a poo poo-ton of bad history and bad blood between queer communities and police services in most places. Queer cops are great and we need more of them, and I am always legitimately thrilled to see them marching in Pride with their partners/spouses/whoever. But uniformed officers outside of that context make a fair number of queer folks feel intimidated and unsafe, and since Pride is a queer march for queer people, I think maybe it's pretty reasonable to suggest that police officers who aren't queer should demonstrate mindfulness of the history between us by stepping back a little and letting us have our own space. I have no problem at all with straight, cis officers attending Pride off-duty. Hell, if they're willing to engage with the community and make an effort to be friendly and non-threatening, I wouldn't even mind them hanging around with the other attendees in-uniform. But the only police who need a float, or a stand, or anything of the sort at Pride are the police who are fundamentally part of Pride, and that's queer cops. Sorry if this is somehow controversial.  David Corbett posted:Regardless of the rightness of their opinions, it's pretty hard to imagine BLM Toronto coming out of this looking good. Judging by public opinion on this matter, their victory is Pyrhhic at best. This is true and it's a real shame. Given the history of Pride and the history of intersectional cooperation between queer and black activists in past generations, it seems to me that Pride is not only a perfectly appropriate time for a demonstration like this, but even a genuinely respectful and well-chosen one; it appears to indicate awareness of the history of Pride and the history of queer activism. Unfortunately the precise timing and the manner of the demonstration has kicked up the usual shitstorm of respectability politics, so it's likely that all the general public - including, to my absolute despair, the majority of the queer community - is going to get out of this is "BLMTO wants to hijack everyone else's issues, and none of their statements or complaints can be taken seriously." MA-Horus posted:So are LGBTQ2S TPS officers now banned from Pride? That doesn't seem right. They'd better loving not be. Banning actual queer people of any kind from Pride would be a shockingly wrongheaded move unless they were doing legitimately bad poo poo like starting fights or spreading TERF ideology or somesuch nonsense. The community's gotta self-police to an extent, but letting one group of queer people negotiate the exclusion of another is the exact kind of idiocy that's got our community so divided and fractious to begin with. Angry Diplomat fucked around with this message at 15:51 on Jul 4, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 15:48
|
|
|
zapplez posted:This is exactly the reason its so important today for there to be a upfront face from the police force saying we are pro LGBT. Thats why they are at the parade. Because of the future not the past. If we exclude them from the parade how is that accepting them and them accepting LGBT in the future? Its a good thing that cops are in floats there, just like its good the PM was there. I'm not totally sure how you can argue this and not also remember that queer cops exist and are greatly loved by most of the queer community. Like... a couple of generations ago the cops were smearing us, and now our children are becoming cops. That owns. Give us a float that's just queer cops, and let the rest of the cops cheer from the sides. None of us will feel intimidated or spoken over and you will get the same result. In point of fact, it will be more effective, because at no point will any of us have to think, "hmm, I'm not sure how I feel about a straight, cis police officer claiming a position of prominence and visibility in a parade whose history and significance are both heavily informed by the Stonewall riots, in which straight cis police officers were absolutely the bad guys." Hiring queer officers is literally the most meaningful and progressive thing the police could do, and they're doing that (although they still seem to have a pretty poo poo relationship with trans people, and don't even get me started on queer sex workers). They literally don't need to do anything else. We just need to see queer people wearing uniforms and badges and know that we're being protected by our own. That's it. You did it. Now the police are in Pride and everyone is happy. Like... to my knowledge, no Prime Minister has ever played Smear the Queer. Prime Ministers are important political figures in a democratic system of governance. Their presence in, or absence from, a Pride event is a statement in and of itself. That is not at all comparable in any way to the police, an institutional power structure with a history of being pretty violently bad to queer people, choosing to put officers who are not queer into a thing that commemorates the queer community and its roots. They can still cheer and show support from the sides. We very much like seeing that. But straight, cis cops really legitimately do not need a float, particularly considering that there are queer cops who we don't feel intimidated by, because they represent concrete evidence that the police are taking our poo poo seriously and treating us like actual citizens in present day. I am genuinely having difficulty understanding why this is a troublesome concept. Angry Diplomat fucked around with this message at 16:05 on Jul 4, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
I mean, that's great, but are you queer? Because as a queer person I certainly appreciate your thoughts and your engagement in this dialogue but I'm not totally certain you get where I'm coming from here. The notion that anyone who isn't queer is "entitled" to march in Pride is kind of hosed up and is probably a symptom of its deviation from its roots; a lot of queer people today have only the vaguest idea of what Stonewall even was and don't realize Pride has anything to do with it at all. Pride is our thing, and it's really, really important to us for a lot of reasons. Queer activists had to fight tooth and nail to help create a society that allows Pride to exist, and forcing their surviving old guard to stand by and watch straight cops drive a float in the parade is wrong. It's important to commemorate our history and remember what brought us to where we are today, and putting straight, cis, and often white and/or male officers in the parade itself flies in the face of that. Like I completely understand your argument but it just... doesn't address or suggest any understanding of the point of contention here at all. e: I mean gently caress, police officers entering queer spaces without an invitation used to mean that a whole shitload of gay, lesbian, bi, and trans people were about to get beat the gently caress up and possibly chucked in a cell. This was true until very recently in this country's history, comparatively speaking. Do you really not grasp why some of us are a little unhappy to see straight cops claiming a space in Pride regardless of our own feelings on the matter? Angry Diplomat fucked around with this message at 16:28 on Jul 4, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 16:24
|
|
|
Ikantski posted:Oh hey what's going on in canpol? The gays have revoked straight people's rights to even have opinions on certain topics. Yeah man I, a member of "the gays," will proudly abide by the ironclad word of law passed down in Supreme Gay Overlord Pinterest Mom's flippant comments. I guess we'd better completely stop having our occasionally emotional but overall respectful and good-faith discussion on the subject and go back to angrily shitposting about Calgary or whatever. Sorry  Ambrose Burnside posted:is it really so loving hard for us straight people to stop doing lovely queer entryisms and watering pillars of the lgbt struggle down into some godawful hey-me-too-this-is-cool horseshit. not everything has to be ours, no matter how 'cool' it is You. I like you.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:Who does? All queers or just the right-thinking kind? I'm not certain I follow. Can you elaborate? Excelsiortothemax posted:On one hand I can understand wanting LBGTQ people in the parade only. It's meant to show visibility and that the members of the community should be proud and not hide who they are. I don't think anyone here is advocating the mass expulsion of everyone outside the queer community. Some of us just don't really want to see non-queer cops occupying a place in the parade, due to the specific history between us and said cops. 
Angry Diplomat fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Jul 4, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:Has anyone here said anything yet about the general nasty attitude of the black community towards LGBT people and the fact that a black LGBT person is way more likely to get curb stomped by a regular black person while the rest turn a blind eye than by a cop? If you are neither black nor queer this is an incredibly thorny issue to broach, and with good reason. It almost universally comes across as the same kind of insincere moral opportunism as "black people are actually really racist" and "ah bloo bloo why isn't there a straight pride parade?" There's a really important history of intersection between black activism and queer activism. If there's major social hostility and danger for people who are both black and queer, I think we community-minded queer people have a definite responsibility to do something about that, regardless of which community (black or queer) is the primary source of that discrimination. Black people have also never abused institutional power to beat us to a pulp with impunity so uh, you don't really know what you're talking about and should probably step back.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
Ikantski posted:Alright I just give up trying to understand you Toronto people The more I read about BLMTO lately the more I think their top organizers are either totally nuts or just media-seeking opportunists. That doesn't invalidate everything the organization itself is saying, but it's a real drat shame that genuinely important social issues are getting lost by the wayside amidst a confusing shitshow of grandstanding and garbled messaging. Like... they were so close. Pride was a perfect, appropriate time to raise their voices, and they had relevant complaints and the core of an important message. But they botched the delivery pretty badly, their founders have apparently been implicated in a nasty controversy or two, and now everyone's determined to write every last one of them off as shock artists or something 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:Statements like: You should probably take into account that my quote there was a run-up to gently pointing out that someone might not have the perspective needed to fully understand the motivations behind the position he was arguing against, and that the other quote was basically empty snark. People running their mouths about things they absolutely don't understand is a very real and very frustrating constant in any public discussion, and those being spoken over have every right to be frustrated by it. TERFs tend to range from misguided kids swallowing harmful ideology to astonishingly vicious, predatory people who relentlessly harass and demonize some of our most vulnerable peers; their leadership is complete poo poo, they are harmful to the queer community, and I don't think its possible to use them as a comparative example in a good-faith discussion. I'm not totally sure where the rest of your weird identity politics wedge argument is coming from, to be frank. It seems like a bit of a non-sequitur at this point.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
A handful of rabid lunatic hyperliberal queer posters: were not totally comfortable with heterosexual cis police officers marching in Pride. They can still be there, we'd just prefer if they watched from the sidelines. Let us explain why- Intellectually honest individuals with no ulterior motives: so what you're saying is that all straight people are banned from Pride forever??? Wow nice, Frosted Flake posted:I'm sure there's already a dismissive term for bisexuals currently in heterosexual relationships. There is, it's "heterosexual"  Turns out that bisexual invisibility is nowhere near as cool as it sounds. Angry Diplomat fucked around with this message at 21:07 on Jul 4, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:Oh... Oh, jeez. I don't think you're queer enough to have a valid opinion on Pride, unfortunately. Man, at least put some effort into it. We had a pretty good dialogue going, so if we're gonna derail into shitpost hell, they should at least be pretty good shitposts.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
lmao I'm not sure why the gently caress I thought D&D would be less subject to the usual brigade of snide straight people insisting that every queer person has to drop everything to heed and politely respond to their worthless uninformed opinions, but for some reason I did. At least the discussion was refreshingly sincere and constructive for a while there. I'll take what I can get, I guess. e: I mean, yes, there are a handful of legitimate and worthwhile points scattered here and there that we could possibly benefit from discussing, but I'm not gonna slog through paragraphs of smuggery from a guy willing to argue from the perspective of "I refuse to understand the difference between wanting to retain a degree of control over your own traditional public event and wanting to Silence All Cishets" to find them. Christ, even gunchat is better than this. Angry Diplomat fucked around with this message at 01:05 on Jul 5, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:Well, you live up to your name. I apologize for immediately discounting your opinion, whatever it was. Next time I'll spend less effort on trying to offer a queer perspective on queer issues; that should give me enough time to line-by-line a million willfully obtuse posts and make everyone feel important and clever. I appreciate your valuable feedback in this matter Ikantski posted:Only gun owners are allowed to have an opinion on their traditional activities from now on though. I get the point you're trying to make here but it would probably be more honest to use "frightened reactionaries who know nothing about guns and keep forgetting that they're used for hunting and pest control" as your point of comparison here, because that's probably a much closer analogue to the tedious fairweather ally hand-wringing these discussions always seem to bring out.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:I was going to PM you but I guess I can't, so I'll leave it at a simple sorry. Alright, fair enough. We're cool
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2016 01:32
|
|
|
Do any of you absolute loving lunatics actually think convicting an aboriginal woman of a hate crime against a white person would end in anything other than a complete shitstorm as emboldened racist assholes and justifiably really loving angry aboriginal Canadians square off amidst the blasted ruins of the public's faith in the administration of justice
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 04:31
|
|
|
I, a middle-class white person, am deeply outraged that the administration of justice has, for once, attempted to take massive structural and institutional inequality into account when passing judgment. Perhaps the courts are the real racists here,
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 04:48
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Okay then, consider if a white/straight assailant said "I hate gay people" or "I hate black people" immediately before assaulting a member of either group. Should that meaningfully change how the incident should be responded to? I would say not. Hi, hello, as a member of the queer community I am politely requesting that you refrain from using us, any of us, as examples in this incredibly bad and obtuse argument you are making. Thank you for your time. e: lol you legitimately do not grasp the purpose of hate crime laws
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 04:51
|
|
|
PT6A posted:This is so divorced from any semblance of a point that I question why you took the time to even type it out. Said PT6A, renowned anti-intellectual misanthrope, whilst arguing that laws intended in part to curb violence against the marginalized should instead be used to justify incarcerating them for longer because they don't like white people.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 05:24
|
|
|
Yes your honor, we did in fact take his sister on a starlight tour, and she did die in the wilderness as a result, but he still called me whitey before he punched me so I contend that this particular case of assaulting an officer constitutes a hate crime. This is a clear-cut case of racially motivated violence and this racist criminal needs to be taken off the streets.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 05:33
|
|
|
PT6A posted:If the PCs made an attempt to move the party in that direction, by de-emphasizing all their socially conservative nonsense and doubling down on fiscal responsibility, I think they'd probably do quite well. A lot of people have been saying this about the Conservatives at every level for years, and they've been right for years. I have to wonder how Harper's reign would have gone if he hadn't behaved like such a psycho when it came to social issues, the missing & murdered indigenous women inquiry (holy gently caress he hamfisted that), and the like. If he'd been canny (and, uh, not-fundamentalist-turbochristian) enough to maintain a low to moderate level of divisive xenophobia while superficially maintaining a relatively progressive image on certain hot-button issues, I can't help thinking that he might still be in power today thanks to the lack of any real competition on the right. I mean, what the hell are disgruntled social conservatives going to do? Vote Liberal? In any case, I'm quite sure the Conservative brand is now pretty solidly associated with regressive (or at best stagnant) social policies in the minds of a fair percentage of voters. It's almost like their reluctance to change with the times has led people to believe that they're unlikely to change with the times. Then again, LGBTory marches are a thing that exist, so who the gently caress even knows anymore. Angry Diplomat fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
THC posted:They replaced Transgender with Tory. I know. They're literally the lovely Entitled White Cis Gay & Lesbian League. They don't even pretend to give a gently caress about anyone else in the queer community. But hey, the Conservatives are backing down on gay marriage so that makes everything okay! 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
Just another day on Parliament Hill.   (Please excuse the lovely phone quality photos) e: highlights include the crowd chanting "you're sexy! You're cute! Take off your riot suits!" while the police struggled desperately to keep straight faces Angry Diplomat fucked around with this message at 19:40 on Sep 30, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2017 19:34
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:CBC coverage. I happened to be within earshot when the antifa organizer guy spoke to one of the cops before leaving. The cop gave him the usual line about everyone having the right to free speech and the antifa dude gave the usual "hate speech isn't and should not be protected" response, but they were quite civil to one another. I found that particularly impressive given that the counterprotest broke through the police line and marched into the CCCC/Soldiers of Odin protest... enclosure thing. No arrests to my knowledge, no injuries. A Nazi skinhead did get water dumped on his head amidst a chorus of jeers for trying to start poo poo though.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
mik posted:Who are the turds with their arms crossed in the second photo? Whatever the Soldiers/Sons of Odin are calling themselves these days. They had lovely graphic tees with crossed axes behind a round shield and viking helm. Supposedly this is a splinter faction of the SoO that broke off because a racist girl tried to gain some influence and authority in their racist boy's club and that was a bridge too far lmao
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
The last centrist NDP leader frustrated and disenfranchised young and leftist voters, and ultimately led the party into a thorough political defeat that further diminished its already shaky credibility as a viable left-wing party. Clearly what we need is another centrist leader - one who, instead of vacillating between angry and mealy-mouthed in caucus, simply does not appear in caucus at all! There is no way this can go wrong. e: fwiw I don't dislike Jagmeet and I hope he does a great job, I just wish we had an actually, overtly leftist party instead of a centrist party, a right wing party, and a further right wing party
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2017 22:28
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:Who were people in here generally rooting for in the leadership election? I would have liked Ashton to take the leadership since I liked her platform, personally. Drizvolta posted:Yeah they usually just intervene by handing out bomb parts. 
Angry Diplomat fucked around with this message at 13:39 on Oct 2, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2017 13:36
|
|
|
It is really, amazingly, spectacularly, dangerously stupid to assert that because people in general are morons who don't bother doing their research or waiting for information, we should do literally anything that isn't taking every allegation seriously and investigating in good faith. It is not the fault of the many, many, many, many sexual assault victims in the world that other folks love a good crucifixion, and hamfistedly attempting to shape policy to preemptively protect people from these hypothetical consequences - which take place entirely outside the justice system and are largely beyond our control anyway - at the potential expense of actually pursuing and upholding the law and the citizens it protects is straight up dumb as poo poo. If someone reports a crime, the police should seriously investigate the reported crime. How the gently caress does this suddenly become controversial solely and specifically in the case of rape
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2017 05:09
|
|
|
Hey, speaking as a husband, a father, a brother, and a son: I would literally rather be subjected to one of these feared and legendary false accusations and deal with the fallout than go about my day knowing that my pearl-clutching cowardice contributes to a world in which my kid and my other family and friends are significantly more likely to be sexually assaulted by some entitled troglodyte emboldened by the idiot wailing of rape culture apologists hope this helps
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2017 12:28
|
|
|
RBC posted:i believe the 11 year old You fool! What if the 11 year old accuses an adult of molesting them and it turns out not to be true??
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2017 12:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 1, 2024 23:43 |
|
|
PT6A posted:"stop spending money on administration." This is the funniest pseudo-fiscal conservative attitude because it's essentially "vote for me and I'll ensure the government stops doing any of the things it's supposed to do" It stops being funny when people buy into it and elect the dumb bastards
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2017 16:28
|
|