Table of Contents
Web Discussion 1: Identity and Multiculturalism in Canada, Topic 3
Give an example of a recent discussion in the media about a cultural practice of an ethnic group that contradicts the liberal values of modern society. How do individuals in modern societies react to such traditional practices? In what way is this practice represented? Is the opinion of the people of the ethnic group involved taken into account in this media discussion? Do you think that the group and the group members are being represented fairly? Why or why not?
Peer Posting
Forced Marriage in Canada
by Megan – Monday, 18 November 2019, 2:22 PM
In a Quebec Youth Court, a daughter of a refugee family fled from a forced marriage to her neighbour’s house where the police were called and she was put in foster care. The court ruled in favor of the daughter based on her safety and welfare (Rukavina, 2019).
At first glance, this news article reports that forced marriage is illegal and this traditional practice contradicts Canadian liberal values. Canadians react to such practices by passing laws and legislation to protect the women they view as oppressed and victims of their culture. Many programs and policies are used to help this ethnic group assimilate into Canadian culture. Those members that are resistant need to be ‘de-cultured’ or somehow forced to adopt Canadian practices (Razack, 2004). Canadians with the help of media focus on certain ethnic groups for not adhering to Canadian ideas of marriage, violence, rights, and authority (Evans, 2017).
At a second glance, forced marriage is indeed illegal but Razack’s article shows that the way a traditional practice is represented can be troublesome. In the news report, the daughter’s marriage was arranged without her consent and refusal would cause great dishonour to the family. Other elements of this culture were also condemned such as the fiancé controlling her personal life like her appearance and contact with friends (Rukavina, 2019). Razack explains this representation comes from the view that non-white cultures are stuck in traditions and ancient ways (Razack, 2004). Media helps perpetuate myths of forced marriage being connected to certain traditional cultures, religions, or ethnic groups. Pointing blame can ignore human rights violations and other forms of violence against women that happen in Canada (Evans, 2017).
When the culture or cultural practice is represented in a racist way, the voices of the members may or may not be taken into account. In this news report, the father and fiancé were able to explain to the court their customs of their country. They explained the dishonour of certain Canadian values and actions if the daughter were to follow them such as leaving the family. The family also explained their customs of marriage and the normalcy in their country (Rukavina, 2019). Many parents who arrange marriages believe what they are doing is right and that Canada has no place in their private business. Not all voices are heard in the court cases, in news reports, developing legislations and solutions (Evans, 2017).
The family members and their ethnic group have not been represented fairly in this news report because their culture was also put on trial. Razack warns that a cultural approach to forced marriage can enforce a sense of cultural superiority. This is made worse when new reports like this one pick worse case scenarios and treat them like typical experiences. Blaming Muslim culture ignores other causes of forced marriage and violence against women such as racism and patriarchy (Razack, 2004). Muslim women and their views, in particular, may not be represented fairly in court. Despite being considered a helpless victim, women have a support network and other strategies to deal with such situations that do not involve law enforcement. Law enforcement intervention is not always helpful as the women may lose support from their family, relatives, and community. Many Muslim women respect their cultural traditions and seek proactive prevention instead of criminalization (Evans, 2017).
References
Rukavina, S. (2019). Quebec judge removes teenager from family home after she flees forced marriage. Retrieved from –
Evans, K. A. (2017). Forced Marriage in Canada: To Criminalize or Not to Criminalize. Canadian Journal of Human Rights, 49. Retrieved from https://search-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.tru.ca/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edshol&AN=edshol.hein.journals.canajo6.4&site=eds-live.
Razack, S. H. (2004). Imperilled Muslim Women, Dangerous Muslim Men and Civilised Europeans: Legal and Social Responses to Forced Marriages. Feminist Legal Studies, 12(2), 129–174. Retrieved from https://doi-org.ezproxy.tru.ca/10.1023/B:FEST.0000043305.66172.92.
Web Discussion 2: Nation building and belonging, Topic 3
How did Canadian governments seek to assimilate Native peoples into mainstream society? Choose one specific policy and assess its negative impacts and consequences.
Peer Posting
Nation building and belonging, Topic 3
by SANMING – Friday, 11 October 2019, 8:28 PM
The Canadian government policy of “aggressive assimilation” was designed to force the Aboriginal people to learn English and adopt Christianity and Canadian customs. The government believed it was responsible for caring for the Aboriginal people and this was the best way to achieve success. The policy was to be implemented in government-funded industrial schools run by the church (Eshet, 2015). The government believed that it was easier to assimilate children than adults. The children would be put in boarding schools called residential schools where they would be taught in readiness for life in mainstream society.
The Department of Indian Affairs under the Federal government was in charge of the residential schools. Children from the many communities that did not have day schools were required to attend the residential schools. Government agents moved around to confirm that every indigenous child had been recruited. It is estimated that a total of 150,000 children were taken from their communities and forced to attend residential schools (Eshet, 2015). As a result, their lives were damaged forever.
The establishment of residential schools was based on the view that Aboriginal culture was not tenable in a rapidly modernizing society. Therefore, this education and indoctrination was necessary to prepare them for mainstream Canadian society. The children were prohibited from speaking their first language or practicing their cultural traditions (Eshet, 2015). The rules were enforced through serious punishment for offenders.
The residential schools were characterized by poor living conditions. The children were also subjected to physical, emotional and sexual abuse. They were kept in school for long periods and rarely got to see their families. Even siblings in the same school rarely saw each other. Any letters home had to be in English, and yet the parents back home were illiterate. There were also illegal experiments done on the children with the knowledge of the Federal government (Eshet, 2015). The skills taught in the schools were substandard and could not help much in the urban setting. When the children returned to their native homes, they struggled to fit in. The aggressive assimilation policy proved to be a total failure.
Eshet, D. (2015). Stolen Lives: The Indigenous Peoples of Canada and the Indian Residential Schools. Ontario, Canada : University of Toronto Press.
Web Discussion 3: Inequality and Difference in Canada, Topic 3
What is heteronormativity? Why do you think that it is significant that the invention of the word homosexual preceded the creation of the term heterosexual? (Gannon & Easton, 2012, p. 244) In what way is heteronormativity oppressive to members of the LGBTTIQ community? Provide specific examples in your posting.
Peer Posting
Heteronormativity
by Aaron – Thursday, 5 December 2019, 2:31 PM
Heteronormativity is the the definition of an idea that heterosexual relations are the standardized and acceptable representation of intimacy. This by default either negates the legitimacy of same sex relations or at least marginalizes it to the point where it is either a sin, or a result of a mental disorder (Gannon and Easton, 2012, 247, 254-255). Heteronormativity also carries with it the assumption that certain character traits are inherent in individuals according to their sexuality (Gannon and Easton, 2012, 255). For instance boys are expected to be masculine, that is aggressive, competitive, logical, and stoic while girls are expected to be emotional, nurturing and passive. Historically speaking, any deviation to this criteria of acceptable character traits were met with suspicion and scrutiny. In this way, sexual orientation and sexual identity were linked. The premise of these assumption denied the idea that a persons identity could be “robustly plural” and they had to adhere to societal and cultural expectations.
Homosexuality first was defined in 1869 while heterosexuality was defined in 1892 (Gannon and Easton, 2012, 244). I believe the significance behind this had to do with scientific origins. When scientists began studying variations of sexuality, distinctions had to be made between “normal”(hetero) sexuality and aberrations (Gannon and Easton, 2012, 244-245). Therefore homosexuality was used as to define “the other” while heterosexuality was the quintessential “control group”. I believe that another reason heterosexuality wasn’t defined was because no one wanted to acknowledge that homosexuality existed therefore heterosexuality was a given so there would be no need to differentiate it from anything else.
Heteronormativity is oppressive to people in the LGBTTIQ community because it suggests that people in this community are not normal and therefore it is inferred that they are an anomaly which deviates from the normal standard of society. It seems as though individual expressions of differences including those based on sexuality are becoming more accepted and celebrated. I believe that heteronormativity is becoming less relevant as society becomes more accepting of these differences.
References
Gannon, S. and Easton, L. (2012). Sexual diversity in Canada. In P. U. Angelini (Ed.).Our society: Human diversity in Canada (pp. 241–255). Toronto: Nelson.
What Students Are Saying About Us
.......... Customer ID: 12*** | Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐"Honestly, I was afraid to send my paper to you, but you proved you are a trustworthy service. My essay was done in less than a day, and I received a brilliant piece. I didn’t even believe it was my essay at first 🙂 Great job, thank you!"
.......... Customer ID: 11***| Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
"This company is the best there is. They saved me so many times, I cannot even keep count. Now I recommend it to all my friends, and none of them have complained about it. The writers here are excellent."
“Order a custom Paper on Similar Assignment at essayfount.com! No Plagiarism! Enjoy 20% Discount!”
