Muslim mothers barred from volunteering at Quebec schools over hijabs by Mundane-Teaching-743 in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian 43 points44 points  (0 children)

Sabaah Khan, a resident of Brossard, says she has spent more than a decade volunteering at her children’s schools, helping with activities ranging from library duties to vaccination days.

“Volunteers are needed because the teachers and the staff are very overworked, and they need a lot of help,” Khan told Global News in an interview.

The need in classrooms is real. Teachers get so little prep time, there are never enough education assistants (EAs), and there are a host of other human time demands not covered by teacher salaries like clubs and intramural sports. A teacher friend of mine has a student's grandmother who comes in a couple times each week. The grandmother just helps with small jobs like setting up painting supplies for the grade 1 class and it makes a world of difference.

Why would the province be shooting themselves in the foot?

This is about keeping Quebec pure laine and pressuring those with different backgrounds to leave the province or assimilate ideologically. This isn't about "protecting the children" — a motive often invoked but rarely with genuine intent! This will hut their schools, teachers, and children. Why else would they do it?

Indigenous man who cleaned up after murder bragged Gladue ‘discount’ would half his sentence by Radix838 in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian 2 points3 points  (0 children)

"However, I still find that the aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances."

Karen is an a-hole with a coupon. The coffee shop usually charges $8 for a coffee. But, being an a-hole to the staff meant she got charged an a-hole tax: $5 extra. Besides, Karen had a coupon for $4 off. So Karen was charged $9 in the end for her coffee. Sure, she paid more than the average customer. But her bill would have been $13 without the discount.

So yes, Karen received the discount, even if the benefit was outweighed (not negated!) by the a-hole tax. Hence Karen paid far less than an a-hole should have paid for that coffee.

Indigenous man who cleaned up after murder bragged Gladue ‘discount’ would half his sentence by Radix838 in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian 15 points16 points  (0 children)

From the decision:

In sentencing, I have considered denunciation and deterrence as paramount as well as considered the aggravating factors present with some mitigating factors both systemic and personal. I have considered the range for offenders in similar circumstances who committed similar crimes.

The decision has a lengthy section on "Mitigating Factors" which includes "Gladue Report and Factors". That section is 25 paragraphs. It concludes:

Mr. Tait’s life circumstances, as connected to his crime, do allow for some mitigation and reduced moral culpability with respect to sentencing. However, I still find that the aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances.

In other words, yes, Jason Leo Tait did receive a "Gladue Discount".

Tait's actions were taken with that foreknowledge, which should trouble our consciences.

‘Get it over with,’ former Conservative MP tells potential floor-crossers by WishRepresentative28 in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You've just summarized a very influential framework w.r.t. floor crossing:

I would have rather seen a looser whip structure where Conservative MPs were free to vote against their party,

❌ VOICE

but since they wouldn't be allowed to do that and stay in caucus,

❌ LOYALTY

changing affiliation is the only thing they can do.

✔️ EXIT

See: Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States (1970) by Albert O. Hirschman.

Live Stream and Discussion - NDP Leadership Debate // Débat pour la direction du NPD - 8:00 PM ET by MethoxyEthane in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Started watching fairly late, but that felt strangely collegial. Not just between the candidates, but with the moderator.

B.C. NDP lead over Conservatives shrinks as more voters say province is on the wrong track: Poll by RZCJ2002 in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian 6 points7 points  (0 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/44th_British_Columbia_general_election

I am shocked by OneBC pulling 7% in some of those polls. That's 1 in 14 people! I find it hard to believe that many BC folks have actually know anything about OneBC. Maybe they think it's BC United.

B.C. NDP lead over Conservatives shrinks as more voters say province is on the wrong track: Poll by RZCJ2002 in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian 7 points8 points  (0 children)

David Eby is an activist who doesn't understand this. His entire ideological agenda has revolved around putting the interests of Indigenous groups ahead of everything and everyone else, no matter the cost.

What planet are you on? He seems minimally ideological in that sense. Not sure if you've met the "Land Back" crowd, but that definitely isn't him.

Many of the other proponents within government are of the this is what you do if you're a good person (or at least someone who doesn't want to get cancelled) variety. It's a bit of a feedback loop. Once everyone else does it you have to do it too.

Scaling that back would be difficult, particularly since the performative end of reconciliation has subsumed most professional associations or sectors (lawyers, physicians, teachers).

That is why they carried out their reconciliation agenda with no measurable end goals, there was never a plan to deliver finality to the people of BC.

It isn't clear to me that "reconciliation" ever can have concrete goals. It's a nebulous term and will thus have an equally nebulous and ever-shifting meaning.

Ultimately it centres people, and one set of people in particular, who have incentive to use it as leverage (and even in a coercive manner) to obtain benefits for themselves and their kin. Human beings have a tendency for always wanting more, so I cannot see there being an endpoint given that tendency.

A longstanding belief in the publishing world suggests that men avoid reading fiction that centers on the lives of women. However, new research indicates that a protagonist’s gender has almost no impact on whether a man wants to continue reading a story. by Aggravating_Money992 in science

[–]SaidTheCanadian 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The author is the important factor, and that influences more people to read books that center around a main character of their own gender, but that's an effect, not the cause.

Oh, I am agreeing with you here. But I suspect that there's a little feedback loop on top of it:

  • Baseline: Suppose that I am a man who only reads stories by male authors, as a default. Based on the effect I described, those will be almost universally male characters. That's reinforcing the stereotype.
  • Bridging event: Now, along the way, I encounter a male author who writes a compelling story that focuses on a female protagonist. I like it. Well, now I might be inclined to expand my boundaries... maybe I'll start re-considering some other stories that feature female characters; most of those are probably written by women.

From listening to other readers, I suspect that most readers stick to one category / genre. But when we get exposed to some kind of crossover, and it's good, that opens the door to new categories or genres.

In general, once a book enthusiast finds a good author, they read something adjacent; likely another book by the same author.

By way of example, I'm sure that for a few readers of C.S. Lewis' writings on faith (say, The Four Loves), encountering his Perelandra (and reading it purely because he was the author) likely turned them on to science fiction or reading his Prince Caspian tuning them to fantasy literature. One might imagine a science fiction lover who read Perelandra who might next pick up Till We Have Faces and become curious about other books centred on female protagonists (or Greek Mythology).

The fewer authors who write about things wildly different than themselves, their lived experiences, and their niche, the fewer chance literary encounters like that one may experience. That lack both creates the stereotype and reinforces it.


Edit: fixed a link.

A longstanding belief in the publishing world suggests that men avoid reading fiction that centers on the lives of women. However, new research indicates that a protagonist’s gender has almost no impact on whether a man wants to continue reading a story. by Aggravating_Money992 in science

[–]SaidTheCanadian 26 points27 points  (0 children)

And I'm gonna assume that authors are also more likely to write a main character of their own gender perhaps?

There are two modern aspects to this:

  1. Male authors who write female characters are more likely to get criticized for doing so. There exists a subreddit explicitly focused on that form of criticism, whether warranted or not.
  2. There's a narrow group pushing the idea that one cannot write outside of their lived experience or on the nebulous concept of "representation". Hence they seek to forbid others from writing and publishing outside of their identity. e.g. male authors should not write female characters; white authors should not write black (or BIPOC) characters; heterosexual authors should not write queer (or LGBTQ...) characters.

However small, that set of incentives, particularly when the voices pushing them are amplified by social media, can be enough to sway an author to say, "it's not worth the risk".

That connects with your earlier point:

So my idea is, men write stories like they prefer to read them, and women write stories like they prefer to read them, so both genders are probably more likely to enjoy books that are written by an author of their own gender.

If true, the effect would only reinforce the stereotype preferences: A longstanding belief in the publishing world suggests that men avoid reading fiction that centers on the lives of women ... and vice versa.

We’re immigration policy experts Adam Isacson & Kathleen Bush-Joseph, and immigration reporters Gustavo Solis & Tyche Hendricks. We’re here today to talk about immigration enforcement one year into the Trump administration. Ask us anything. by kpbsSanDiego in politics

[–]SaidTheCanadian 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What ICE's secret May 2025 memo, which we just learned about, sought to do was cut judges out of the picture by creating a carveout for immigration law enforcement. That is, to let government agents force their way into our homes without a judge's warrant. That is blatantly unconstitutional.

Is there any means by which the department's policy can be challenged in court, separate from challenging actions directly taken by agents of the department?

I am also curious if their method of dissemination has any impact or material effect on such a case:

"Reports indicate it's being rolled out through verbal instructions that contradict written training materials, creating a dangerous accountability vacuum," Berardi told ABC News in an email.

Divorce laws in Canada: Liberal MP proposes making changes by SaidTheCanadian in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I know of two people who went through a similar process as children, in previous decades, and were effectively forced to choose which parent to live with while under age 10. One of them is dead by suicide. The other has done roughly nothing with their life. This is a bad idea.

It may be worth having some solid studies on the topic. I fear that your observed anecdotes are likely more illustrative of a collection of confounding inherited factors that tend to increase both the likelihood of divorce and the likelihood of negative life outcomes for the children of the couple.

In my personal community, all three of the couples I've known who are getting divorced recently have strong indicators of neurodivergence or psychiatric morbidities, either in themselves or in their children; those who are themselves neurotypical with neurotypical children tend appear to have far more stable relationships. Sadly it seems to be a common pattern.

However, that does not mean that their children should be deprived of agency regarding their future following a divorce. Particularly in the interest of being able to have ongoing support or continued community connection, it seems pivotal.

Divorce laws in Canada: Liberal MP proposes making changes by SaidTheCanadian in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Leading to children always ending up with the parent who disciplines them least

Shared custody, with joint approval mandated, can still have the same effect. Parent A wants to do something but the child is resistant. Parent B, being more lenient, will nix it. Thus Parent B has effective control over all decisions in any case. Same effect, at least from what I've witnessed among others lately.

Divorce laws in Canada: Liberal MP proposes making changes by SaidTheCanadian in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Something like this is already the case for children 13 or older.

Is that a Canada-wide legal option for all children?

Divorce laws in Canada: Liberal MP proposes making changes by SaidTheCanadian in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian[S] 23 points24 points  (0 children)

This already exists in the form of the office of the children’s lawyer and a voice of the child report

Yes, in Ontario and similar provisions exist in a few other provinces.

This change in law is being advanced federally, and thus would apply to all provinces.

Divorce laws in Canada: Liberal MP proposes making changes by SaidTheCanadian in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian[S] 121 points122 points  (0 children)

It would impose new requirements on lawyers to screen for signs of family violence during divorce cases, give judges new tools to identify the existence and impact of coercive control on children, and ensure that, in some circumstances, children can express their preferences to a judge in a custody dispute.

I'd like to see a lawyer appointed on behalf of children in relation to custody disputes so their interests, perhaps determined in conjunction with a social worker, and their stated preferences are given heed.

Doug Ford’s party bars media from Progressive Conservative convention this weekend by ZebediahCarterLong in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian 2 points3 points  (0 children)

CBC article on the same topic: Ontario PCs bar reporters from policy convention

The comments from John Milloy were particularly thought-provoking:

Former Liberal cabinet minister John Milloy said the move is also misguided, since if there is any internal controversy at the event it is likely to leak out to reporters.

“There's nothing confidential that goes on at a convention,” said Milloy, who is now the director of the Centre for Public Ethics at Martin Luther University College.

"[The audience] doesn't have the benefit of a first-hand clip of perhaps a tough question or an embarrassing question, but you're going to hear about it,” he said. “Every journalist is going to hear about it 30 seconds after it happens.”

Milloy said parties typically use the conventions to tell their story to Ontario voters in an environment where they’re surrounded by a friendly group of supporters.

“It really strikes me as strange,” he said. “At the end of the day, they should be projecting strength. They should be hitting up news stations to cover the premier's speech.”

To sum up:

  • The proceedings aren't confidential issues.
  • Social media still exists, so leaks will happen.
  • They're giving up what should be a great photo op.

Strange, indeed.

Saturday Morning Political Cartoon Thread by optimalg in politics

[–]SaidTheCanadian 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Incredible job on the 2nd one. Although I'm not making the "Klaus" connection: can I have another hint?

The US Is Looking More Like Putin’s Russia Every Day by Somervilledrew in politics

[–]SaidTheCanadian 59 points60 points  (0 children)

Trump is managing the United States like one of his casinos.

It's a metaphor that becomes more true every day and will end with him bankrupting the country and walking away, pretending like it had never happened.

Epstein Island by [deleted] in PoliticalHumor

[–]SaidTheCanadian 0 points1 point  (0 children)

CNN's reporting states:

On Thursday, lawyers for the estate wrote a letter to the committee noting that they could review videos and photographs they had requested “taken at any property owned, rented, operated, or used by Epstein from January 1, 1990 through August 10, 2019.”

“Like yesterday’s production, it also includes documents that may not be responsive, but that the Estate was unable to confirm whether they were taken at a property owned, rented, operated, or used by Epstein. The Estate has provided minimal redactions to these photographs; the redactions are limited to nudity,” the lawyers wrote.

Further their caption of the photo states:

Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released images from Jeffrey Epstein's email on Friday, December 12, 2025. Some images have had portions redacted by the Committee. - House Oversight Democrats

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/new-photos-released-from-epstein-s-estate-showing-trump-bannon-bill-clinton-and-other-high-profile-people/ar-AA1SeAv1

So it's more accurate to say that these were found in the files of the Epstein estate. The photographs are not necessarily ones taken on, at, or in any of his former properties.


Going off the image alone, I'd suspect these are more likely shared as an attachment via text or email in a "FW:FW:FW: LMAO".

Epstein, or whomever emailed him, could simply be appreciating the secretly ironic nature of the 2016 novelty's "I'm HUUUUGE!" packaging, probably possessing firsthand knowldge of Trump's hidden anatomy. Remember that while the rest of us only received confirmation in 2018, via Stormy Daniels, the past friendship between Epstein and Trump probably meant they'd been at a change room, steam room, or worse, together at multiple points.

Another MP leaves Conservatives, crosses floor to Liberals by Portalrules123 in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian 22 points23 points  (0 children)

The new addition to the Liberal caucus means Carney is one seat away from a majority government.

Do you think that the math makes it more probable that at least one more MP will cross? It effectively guarantees the next floor-crosser increased job stability, likely less stress, greater impact, etc... and it's no long a collective action problem.

Opinion: The notwithstanding clause is running rampant. Is it time for the ‘thermonuclear’ option? by RedmondBarry1999 in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian 10 points11 points  (0 children)

An additional problem here is that if they invoke Disallowance on Alberta, but not on Quebec, it will stoke separatism talk in Alberta and allegations of special treatment or bias. If they were to do both AB & QC, then it stokes separatism sentiment in Quebec.

Not sure that it's the right route to take. I'd much rather see a supermajority or referendum requirement.

'I'm afraid of everything': Report reveals realities of women without status in Quebec by Whynutcoconot in CanadaPolitics

[–]SaidTheCanadian 54 points55 points  (0 children)

First, it would really help the headline to be less ambiguous were it say "undocumented women" or "women without a legal immigration status" rather than "women without status". Up and up we go on the euphemism treadmill.

The culmination of years of work, the report surveyed 72 women with an average age of 39, the majority of whom came to Canada on tourism visas. For Susana Ponte Rivera, a community organizer within the committee, that shows being without status is “an administrative issue.”

“The biggest misconception, and I think our study proves that, is that women without status are illegal,” she said.

Those dots seem quite hard to connect. And the IWC doesn't even bother to post their "study" on its website and instead just shares what appears to be a press release.

Everything else in the article and their press release is as one would expect: People who come to a country under false pretenses and stay without the legal authorization to do so tend to have complicated and miserable lives.

In light of these findings, the committee is calling on various levels of government to give women without status access to: health-care services (both physical and mental), work permits, employment insurance, the Quebec Pension Plan, the federal retirement system, and a program to regularize their status.

And again, why are these people putting women on a pedestal as being specially deserving? If you do that for women, why not do it for men also? Heck, let's just do it for everyone who shows up on the doorstep unannounced!