Not sure about the transgender drugs, but depending on how they approach “race based hiring” that might actually win them some votes.
There are a lot of people who have had issues with that, including people who are visible minorities but are concerned that people will consider them a “minority hire” rather than one based on skill/merit.
I can understand how that’s be pissed off, as the ones I know or worked very hard to obtain their positions and apparently found themselves beside some people who very obviously… did not and felt that race might have be an influential factor in hiring/promotion.
I lost a job offer, way back, and I was told on the sly by a trusted insider it was a demographic issue.
It stings. I know my capabilities and the post was a dream job that suited my positives perfectly. And I lost it because I was the wrong sex/race/ability/whatever.
but even in the pit of my own trivial self-pity I’m not gonna revenge-vote for people who’ll fuck everything else up just so snowflakes like me don’t need to feel that sting. I’m a grown-ass adult with only moderate entitlement.
The math doesn’t work. I’m a big fan of jobs going to the most qualified, period, but this is a baby/bathwater thing and it’s just not worth it.
The question is how many other people might vote on this or other similar stuff. Lemmy is still mostly populated by people who probably are a bit more intellectual (and willing to think beyond a single issue) but out of the overall voting pool…?
They’re predominantly used to treat puberties that happen way sooner than should happen, they also are prescribed to help with prostate cancer.
I’m only correcting because saying “transgender drugs” gives a very very vague impression on the amount of uses that puberty blockers have.
Sorry though, that was just a nitpick
It has always been my dream as a white man to apply to a job created for a young black man from a low income family. Some day I will be able to do so without fear of persecution.
Conservative delegates voted Saturday to add some new social conservative policies to their policy playbook, including a proposal to limit access to transgender health care for minors and do away with vaccine mandates.
While some members warned these policies could be weaponized by their political opponents to hurt their standing among more moderate voters, a strong majority of the delegates on hand voted for one motion that stated children should be prohibited from gender-related “life-altering medicinal or surgical interventions,” and another motion that said Canadians should have “bodily autonomy” when it comes to vaccines and other health treatments.
About 69 per cent of the delegates agreed that young people should be barred from gender-affirming care, which sometimes includes hormone-related treatments that delay puberty or promote the development of masculine or feminine sex characteristics.
The vaccine issue sparked comments about events that transpired during the COVID-19 pandemic, including high-profile freedom rallies.
About 68 per cent of delegates voted on the motion to “affirm Canadians have the freedom and right to refuse vaccines.”
Discussion about the motion focused on Jordan Peterson, a professor with a large following in right-wing circles, who was ordered by the University of Toronto to take social media training in the wake of complaints about his controversial online posts and statements.
The original article contains 300 words, the summary contains 209 words. Saved 30%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Children can’t vote but their parents can and their base fear government telling them how to raise their children. This strategy forces liberals into a no win situation were they will always look like their goal is to brainwash their kids. That fear is something a lot of fence sitters already fear.
It is a type of reasoning, just a bit twisted. By giving kids the ability to transition or seek medical interventions, you’re also taking away the parents ability to control their kids, forced by the state which is a quick jump on the conclusions map to the other belief they’ve set up previously which is the state is brain washing kids to become trans through the state run education system.
So in their view, the liberals are forcing trans ideology on children while trying to remove parental rights.
No. Responsibility is not ownership. You have an obligation to your kids, not the other way around. If the kid doesn’t want to tell you a profound secret about who they are, then it’s time to reflect on your parenting, not to get the government to force teachers to rat them out.
Despite warnings that these policies could be weaponized by their political opponents to hurt their standing among more moderate voters, a strong majority of the delegates on hand voted for a motion that stated children should be prohibited from gender-related “life-altering medicinal or surgical interventions,” and for another that said Canadians should have “bodily autonomy” when it comes to vaccines and other health treatments.
These dumbasses are handed such an easy path to getting a majority and they’re going to squander it on these stupid conservative culture war takes. I really hope Canadians see soon that if they feel let down by the liberals, the conservatives are only going to be a shittier version of the worst aspects of the liberals. We should be looking to the NDP or green parties for real change.
None of the parties really seem like they are ready to even talk about the real issues facing Canada, let alone actually do anything about them. No party seems to have any real plans to address housing affordability/shortages, wage stagnation, high insurance/telecommunication service prices and the various monopolies fuelling these issues. I think the lack of plans for these major issues is a signifcant factor why younger generations are not voting. They don’t really feel like any party is ready to help with their biggest problems.
(Warning, PP’s YouTube channel, I don’t know if you want that in your watch history considering how yt might use it for recommendations).
I’ve said before – most of their policy is terrifying and evil. But on the housing shortage, Poilievre’s echoing progressive YIMBYs like AOC. The party has clear and good policy ideas there and the Liberals should steal them to take this weapon away from them, the same way they steal policy ideas from the NDP.
Is he just removing some red tape on SFH, municipal taxes on devlopments and allowing places like the greenbelt to be developed or does he want to change the urban fabric of our cities by removing zoning laws that make builiding multi units and density impossible and force developers to build affordable housing as well as luxury homes? These both can increase the supply of housing but in very different ways that will impact urban fabric and housing prices. The conversation isn’t as simple as build more houses anywhere they can fit. Many of our cities have spralwed themselves into near bankruptcy and adding a new subdivsion and stripmall outside of town will not fix that. We need more variety in the housing market but as it stands it seems everyone is expected to own a minimum lot size with 2 car garage and 3 stories to their house regardless of their actual needs.
I’m a firm green infill YIMBY so I agree with you on the policy stuff there. As for PP, fortunately the greenbelt is provincial so he doesn’t have the right to do so. This is constitutional. And he’s calling out Vancouver, a place where there is no place to sprawl, so necessarily cutting out red tape and unlocking housing would mean upzoning, they’d have literally no other option to allow more housing.
If he wanted to push for that why hasn’t he used supporting language like density and transit? I hope for the best for these cities but I worry the conservative take will just mean more McMansions while SFH continue to be converted into multi units owned by landlords.
We gotta fix voting so the oranges have a shot of at least a minority and so the greens have to field a decent plan like in the 90s because they can’t bitch about voting anymore.
I hate the least-worse voting strategy and the alternatives we’re awarded if it fails.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
I really hope this is the stuff that turns the squishy middle against them. I know some trans kids and I’m scared to death of shit like this for them.
But I also know most people see trans kids as weird and scary as a concept, and are ready to go along with this fear.
Listen to the kids.
If you want trump policies in Canada PP and the CPC are your people.
As usual, this race war crap is also gonna hurt cis and trans kids who need hormone blockers for completely valid medical reasons.
Not sure about the transgender drugs, but depending on how they approach “race based hiring” that might actually win them some votes.
There are a lot of people who have had issues with that, including people who are visible minorities but are concerned that people will consider them a “minority hire” rather than one based on skill/merit.
I can understand how that’s be pissed off, as the ones I know or worked very hard to obtain their positions and apparently found themselves beside some people who very obviously… did not and felt that race might have be an influential factor in hiring/promotion.
I lost a job offer, way back, and I was told on the sly by a trusted insider it was a demographic issue.
It stings. I know my capabilities and the post was a dream job that suited my positives perfectly. And I lost it because I was the wrong sex/race/ability/whatever.
but even in the pit of my own trivial self-pity I’m not gonna revenge-vote for people who’ll fuck everything else up just so snowflakes like me don’t need to feel that sting. I’m a grown-ass adult with only moderate entitlement.
The math doesn’t work. I’m a big fan of jobs going to the most qualified, period, but this is a baby/bathwater thing and it’s just not worth it.
The question is how many other people might vote on this or other similar stuff. Lemmy is still mostly populated by people who probably are a bit more intellectual (and willing to think beyond a single issue) but out of the overall voting pool…?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puberty_blocker
They’re predominantly used to treat puberties that happen way sooner than should happen, they also are prescribed to help with prostate cancer.
I’m only correcting because saying “transgender drugs” gives a very very vague impression on the amount of uses that puberty blockers have. Sorry though, that was just a nitpick
What I actually meant is in not sure how their policies on such will influence votes.
I see, I’m sorry for getting that incredibly wrong
It has always been my dream as a white man to apply to a job created for a young black man from a low income family. Some day I will be able to do so without fear of persecution.
To whoever went through and downvoted everyone: we see you.
Your kids will hate you and it will be your fault.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Conservative delegates voted Saturday to add some new social conservative policies to their policy playbook, including a proposal to limit access to transgender health care for minors and do away with vaccine mandates.
While some members warned these policies could be weaponized by their political opponents to hurt their standing among more moderate voters, a strong majority of the delegates on hand voted for one motion that stated children should be prohibited from gender-related “life-altering medicinal or surgical interventions,” and another motion that said Canadians should have “bodily autonomy” when it comes to vaccines and other health treatments.
About 69 per cent of the delegates agreed that young people should be barred from gender-affirming care, which sometimes includes hormone-related treatments that delay puberty or promote the development of masculine or feminine sex characteristics.
The vaccine issue sparked comments about events that transpired during the COVID-19 pandemic, including high-profile freedom rallies.
About 68 per cent of delegates voted on the motion to “affirm Canadians have the freedom and right to refuse vaccines.”
Discussion about the motion focused on Jordan Peterson, a professor with a large following in right-wing circles, who was ordered by the University of Toronto to take social media training in the wake of complaints about his controversial online posts and statements.
The original article contains 300 words, the summary contains 209 words. Saved 30%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
The conservatives voted for body autonomy and ban mask mandates… and then banned body autonomy for transgendered children
Children can’t vote but their parents can and their base fear government telling them how to raise their children. This strategy forces liberals into a no win situation were they will always look like their goal is to brainwash their kids. That fear is something a lot of fence sitters already fear.
Brainwashing kids by not injecting the state into private medical decisions?
I don’t get it, but fear is not rational.
It is a type of reasoning, just a bit twisted. By giving kids the ability to transition or seek medical interventions, you’re also taking away the parents ability to control their kids, forced by the state which is a quick jump on the conclusions map to the other belief they’ve set up previously which is the state is brain washing kids to become trans through the state run education system.
So in their view, the liberals are forcing trans ideology on children while trying to remove parental rights.
Their view is that children are their property.
Yup, which they kind of are in a way.a parent is responsible for them legally until 18.
No. Responsibility is not ownership. You have an obligation to your kids, not the other way around. If the kid doesn’t want to tell you a profound secret about who they are, then it’s time to reflect on your parenting, not to get the government to force teachers to rat them out.
From a party of babies who are afraid of a needle, they sure seem to care about what other people do with their bodies.
I thought they were for freedom?
They want freedom to do what they want, not freedom for you to do what you want. To be fair, we are all a bit like that.
I think its more that they can infer with this stuff that liberals are coming for ✌️your✌️ kids
This is great. It’s harder to nail them when they don’t say the quiet part out loud.
These dumbasses are handed such an easy path to getting a majority and they’re going to squander it on these stupid conservative culture war takes. I really hope Canadians see soon that if they feel let down by the liberals, the conservatives are only going to be a shittier version of the worst aspects of the liberals. We should be looking to the NDP or green parties for real change.
None of the parties really seem like they are ready to even talk about the real issues facing Canada, let alone actually do anything about them. No party seems to have any real plans to address housing affordability/shortages, wage stagnation, high insurance/telecommunication service prices and the various monopolies fuelling these issues. I think the lack of plans for these major issues is a signifcant factor why younger generations are not voting. They don’t really feel like any party is ready to help with their biggest problems.
Look, I hate the conservatives as much as the next guy but this isn’t true. They have specific policy planks about the housing shortage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvFFGoAVeDY
(Warning, PP’s YouTube channel, I don’t know if you want that in your watch history considering how yt might use it for recommendations).
I’ve said before – most of their policy is terrifying and evil. But on the housing shortage, Poilievre’s echoing progressive YIMBYs like AOC. The party has clear and good policy ideas there and the Liberals should steal them to take this weapon away from them, the same way they steal policy ideas from the NDP.
Is he just removing some red tape on SFH, municipal taxes on devlopments and allowing places like the greenbelt to be developed or does he want to change the urban fabric of our cities by removing zoning laws that make builiding multi units and density impossible and force developers to build affordable housing as well as luxury homes? These both can increase the supply of housing but in very different ways that will impact urban fabric and housing prices. The conversation isn’t as simple as build more houses anywhere they can fit. Many of our cities have spralwed themselves into near bankruptcy and adding a new subdivsion and stripmall outside of town will not fix that. We need more variety in the housing market but as it stands it seems everyone is expected to own a minimum lot size with 2 car garage and 3 stories to their house regardless of their actual needs.
I’m a firm green infill YIMBY so I agree with you on the policy stuff there. As for PP, fortunately the greenbelt is provincial so he doesn’t have the right to do so. This is constitutional. And he’s calling out Vancouver, a place where there is no place to sprawl, so necessarily cutting out red tape and unlocking housing would mean upzoning, they’d have literally no other option to allow more housing.
If he wanted to push for that why hasn’t he used supporting language like density and transit? I hope for the best for these cities but I worry the conservative take will just mean more McMansions while SFH continue to be converted into multi units owned by landlords.
I mean he is? He specifically calls out density limits around transit hubs.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=WvFFGoAVeDY
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
We gotta fix voting so the oranges have a shot of at least a minority and so the greens have to field a decent plan like in the 90s because they can’t bitch about voting anymore.
I hate the least-worse voting strategy and the alternatives we’re awarded if it fails.
Liberals should really campaign by just showing Ontario since Doug ford was elected and saying “see what happens”
The Liberals could include Manitoba in that campaign as well.