Free speech is under attack and Justin Trudeau is leading the charge

Prime Minister Trudeau takes part in the Symons Lecture in Charlottetown. November 23, 2017. /// Le premier ministre Trudeau prend part à la causerie Symons, à Charlottetown. 23 novembre 2017.

He tried to claim that his “peoplekind” comment was a joke, now we know for sure it isn’t.

While it would be easy to mock Justin Trudeau’s earnest fixation on political correctness, there is no doubt the man is out to change the language and through that the country he now leads.

Last week it was revealed that the government had issued a directive to employees at Service Canada, that people that help you deal with everything from employment insurance to accessing pension benefits. According to new guildelines, offensive terms like mother, father, Mr., Mrs., and Ms. are to be banished from use unless the person calling or standing before them at the counter asks to be addressed that way.

Quite frankly, I don’t know if I am “Parent One” or “Parent two” the government’s preferred lingo but I am quite sure that I am the father of my children.

But now father, like mother, is offensive because not all families are the same and some non-binary gender Canadians feel excluded.

Great, in true socialist form, now we all get to feel excluded and confused.

At the same time the government announced that it was starting a national consultation process on dealing with systemic racism in Canada, a follow-up to a budget promise that included money for Stats Canada to collect and analyze data on race, diversity and inclusion.

All of this is apparently an off-shoot of the committee that studied Motion M-103 on Islamophobia and other forms of discrimination.

I’m old enough to remember when collecting data on such things was considered racist and the progressive left pushed for it to stop, now they demand it be funded and conducted at the highest levels of government. Under Justin Trudeau the system is racist and the whole of government must have anti-racism policies worked into every policy.

It’s like the push to have a gender analysis of every bill and policy.

If you get the feeling that Justin Trudeau views the entire country as a collection of bigots, misogynists and Islamophobes, you’d be right.

He doesn’t trust us to address each other correctly. He believes that without government intervention all of our legislation, our policies, our lives will be teeming with racism and sexism.

This was the government after all that tabled a budget last month, ostensibly a fiscal document, that mentioned gender 359 times, discrimination 29 times and deficit just 12 times.

While most Canadians are worried about making life more affordable and getting by, this government is obsessed with virtue signalling and shaming Canadians, the people they govern, as not being enlightened enough.

Maybe the government should take a page from the middle class and those working hard to join it and focus a bit more on making sure they can pay their bills.


  1. Bill C-16 (2016 amended the Criminal Code by adding “gender identity or expression” to the definition of “identifiable group” in section 318.

    The Bill protects individuals from discrimination within the sphere of federal jurisdiction and from being the targets of hate propaganda, as a consequence of their gender identity or their gender expression.

    ##### The bill adds “gender identity or expression” to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Canadian Human Rights Act and the list of characteristics of identifiable groups protected from hate propaganda in the Criminal Code. #####

    MY gender is cis-normative or Hetero-normative and MY pronouns are “Sir, Mr., him, Father, Dad, Daddy”. To ban this or direct staff to address me otherwise violates my Human Rights under Bill C-16

    Their gender-ideology has PROTECTED my rights to be addressed by MY gender and MY pronouns.


  2. ‘Parent 1’ and ‘Parent 2’ is inherently discriminatory because it implies one parent’s priority over another. Justin Trudeau should just check his privilege and stop discriminating against 50% of the parents out there!

    This is systemic discrimination embedded in our governance structures, and it is driven by the microaggressing Justin Trudeau, a white male who should step aside to let more diverse peoplekind lead us!

    Perhaps ‘Parent 1’ and ‘Parent A’ would be more inclusive…though that whole ‘parent’ part is also problematic, as it discounts the role of non-parent guardians of the child. Again we see the systemic discrimination embedded in our governance structures.

    Perhaps ‘Guardian 1’ and ‘Guardian A’ may be more appropriate…but that could also be problematic, as there may be adults of influence in a minor’s life who do not enjoy the privileged title of being a legal guardian for that child. This kind of terminology would most clearly alienate them: we must find a more inclusive term.

    One that would also included non-human influences in a child’s like, like a family pet, or a tree, that the minor considers to be a mentor.

    Until that bigot Trudeau can find a more inclusive vocabulary, he should not be permitted to lead our progressive dystopia!

  3. Bryan

    On a smaller scale bit look at what is going on with the Ottawa council you have Deans wanting a women’s bureau at city hall and read what some want the budget to be pro women point is the left leaning types will be the end of western culture as we know it.

  4. To the ‘cis-normative or Hetero-normative’ thing who claimed that ‘the gender-ideology [of the Liberal government] has protected [his] rights to be addressed by [his]gender and [his]pronouns’, I would just say that until JT & his ilk brought in these terms, I never had to worry about what sex I was, nor if I fell into any other category … and should be addressed accordingly. Using this categorization is just playing IDENTITY POLITICS … with different rules and higher stakes. It is about as useful as someone crying “MeToo” and claiming victimhood. But most of the actions of this government fall into that pattern (as has been noted elsewhere). ‘What goes ’round … comes around’???

  5. A national consultation on systemic racism in Canada? Wouldn’t need this if the government would STOP PROMOTING IT!!! (Just my opinion).

  6. Well said. I long for the good old days that existed before the Liberal Party realized that if they ran the recognizable name Trudeau, and said Trudeau had a lovely head of hair, and that the generations behind us oldies was ready for a “Messiah” figure (what his father was)it would soon be the Liberal Party that was in power. My dismay includes the annoying fact that filling out forms will no longer be quite as much fun as you will not be able to respond to the question of SEX with either sure or later.

  7. You know that the worse thing to give a self indulgent egomaniac is the “spotlight”. In 2019 when the light goes as dim as Trudeau’s little mind it’s going to be okay. We’ll be able to talk again. TALL will be TALL again, SHORT will be SHORT again. MOM will be MOM again and DAD will be DAD. The charge is all he’s leading, the Country not so much…..

  8. GOOD GRIEF! You are either a man or a woman, a father or a mother .. how much more stupid can Liberals get??? I wonder if the PM’s kids at home have to refer to him as parent #1 or parent #2? LOL

  9. Conflating speech repression with socialism is a stretch. Are you implying that totalitarian capitalist systems can’t coincide? What about Facist govts? We now currently live in a capitalist inverted totalitarian system, and it’s repressing all of us, so blaming this stupidity on socialism is ridiculous. The Liberals don’t promote socialism, they are just like the Cons who promote corporate welfare, with the govt as the administrators of their welfare system, letting just enough trickle down to us to keep us from rebelling. That’s also known as trickle down economics, as per Ron Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. I suggest if you want to update your ideas on democracy, freedom, transparency and better ways of organize economic life, try Richard D. Wolff and Yanis Varoufakis. The Conservatives, the Liberals, and even the NDP are just different flavours of capitalist apologists, none of them are socialist. This is a divisive way of labeling other parties to get people to fight over the scraps instead of questioning the way the economic system is operated for the rich. And by the way, when it comes to corporate welfare, what about how the Cons also gave subsidies to fossil fuel corps, offered tax breaks to many multinational corps, and bailed out the banks while lying that they didn’t? All of these parties operate in such a way that assumes that capitalism is the only way, and they all just vary in terms of how they ameliorate the negative effects, but they all still want and support capitalism.

Comments are closed.