Racially limited dating sites exist for other ethnicities – Rezfox for FN, JDate for Jewish people, AsianDating for asian people, etc. Some of those have been lauded on the CBC even, so racially restrictive dating site options aren’t new, nor are they inherently wrong.
The CBC choosing to use hacked private information is concerning. It’s clearly information that was obtained through the blatant violation of peoples privacy – a crime – and they’re naming people in such a way as to encourage repercussions for the individuals they’re highlighting. Admittedly, their views are disgusting if they align with nazi shit, but it feels wrong all the same. Like this isn’t a govt ‘insider’ who has a conscience and wants to see gov actions made public as a check/balance; it’s a third party that stole peoples private data and then the cbc blasted it out to the public. If your bank got hacked, does the cbc get to report out your SIN number and questionable purchases?
Even more, the headline is click baiting in light of the actual findings they note in the article. Three military people out of… 500 hundred in Canada. Five hundred. I’d imagine that the other racially restricted sites have far more members. And their members would likely be better, cause there’s no stigma about joining/openly wanting to date within your race for other races – with white people it’s often the dregs of the gene pool, because we seem to hold white people to a different standard.
Also, even though I disagree with the white power shit, Canada’s local population has serious headwinds for dating/having families. The only demo of locals that’s growing are FN – all of our population growth comes via immigration, which is an absurd situation to be in for a whole slew of reasons. We’re a country where family lines go to whither and die. Minus the hate stuff, any tool/app/thing that can help any of our demographics on this front, is likely a net good in the long run. Like if you want equity, why not focus on equity of people/cultures immigrating – especially when such a thing dictates which groups ‘grow’ in the country.
We need to break the back of far right organizing in the military. This is not a joke, it’s an existential threat to our democracy.
Beyond dishonourable discharges of fascists (and banning them from joining any kind of armed force, eg police in the future), we need a serious and aggressive EDI recruitment policy. I know that the MAGAs and the Poilievrites use EDI as a slur. Which is EXACTLY why we should make it a core tenet of army recruitment. Disgust them, keep them out. And in the meantime, train a new generation of Canadian professional soldiers that are comitted to our constitutional multiculturalism and are as diverse as Canada.
deleted by creator
Studies have shown that racism is often caused by a lack of intelligence, so we’ve basically got a ton of idiots in the armed forces? That tracks.
Studies have shown that racism is often caused by a lack of intelligence
Social scientists don’t speak in such certain terms. I think what you may mean is, anecdotally, the people you’ve seen be racist seem unintelligent. Me too. But the answer to get rid of racism isn’t to get rid of unintelligent people. It’s more complicated than that. Hearing anecdotal experience disguised as scientific evidence (“studies have shown X is caused by Y”) feels like reddit not Lemmy
There’s nothing more Reddit like than “I think what you mean / you should be saying” and a “this is such a Reddit moment” to boot lol
(AFAIK the causal link between racism and intelligence is not clear, so we agree on your main point, though there are studies that correlate racist discourse and verbal ability)
There’s nothing more Reddit like than “I think what you mean / you should be saying” and a “this is such a Reddit moment” to boot lol
We can agree to disagree. I was respectful. I didn’t say the person or their viewpoint was wrong - I just pointed out what I think is inaccurate in their comment. And, most importantly, I fully explained myself so that others could examine my argument and disagree with it. In retrospect, I should have used “cloaked” instead of “disguised” for connotative language’s sake. I’m trying to help Lemmy remain a place for respectful and accurate discourse, not bots, disinformation, and dunking on people (edit: censorship too)
“Cloaking” a modicum of non-aggression as respect while still jumping the conclusion that someone is based solely on anecdotal evidence is not as helpful as you might think, but at least I appreciate the spirit
Why are you being so litigious about this? I’m blocking you because you’re detracting from my Lemmy experience. I have a honours degree in psychology, I work in hospital research, I have 20 publications. I’ve tried to avoid saying “I can tell you two both don’t know much about [social] sciences” but refrained from that out of civility
Is this an offence that would warrant a discharge?
Yeah, so they can get a job in law enforcement.
Or join as a Conservative MP.
You never know, it could warrant a medal.
Crazy times.
Yes, section 129 of the NDA at least.
