Herein lies the problem with naming 'groups' and claiming they all have the same thoughts - I agree with Murphy that male-looking people don't really need to be in women-only spaces, but because I also don't see a problem with Muslims immigrating to Canada, I'm lumped in with people you might consider hypocritical or inconsistent.
Not necessarily hypocritical or inconsistent. But unconditional support for trans rights is a huge litmus test for progressives, and support for mass third world immigration is also a huge litmus test for progressives, and if you're not in favor of both, you might not be very progressive after all-- ask Megan Murphy.
And I point out, once again, that we have been accepting refugees from the essentially the same countries, in roughly the same ratios for decades, yet we have still managed to implement progressive policies, and have increased the rights of gays, trans and women. It simply does not seem logical that only those from Muslim-majority countries will suddenly turn us on our ear and result in going backwards in this regard.
While the ratios may be the same, the numbers have risen dramatically in recent years. Sooner or later, if it's not already happening, we're going to have Muslim enclaves, kind of like Richmond has become essentially a Chinese city within Canada. And when you do get these areas where immigrants can go through all your business in a day without interacting with anybody from outside their culture, integrating with the Canadian mainstream is no longer a priority. They have this in England. We'll have it in Canada before long. Is that good?
This flies in the face of the conservative argument that "immigrants will only vote Liberal because of Liberals open door policy on immigration, that's why Liberals let in unlimited numbers of immigrants and refugees". I did a quick search and couldn't find anything I considered credible on voting habits of immigrants, but judging by who I see running for various parties, it looks to me as if immigrants tend towards more socially liberal platforms by a slight margin. But I could be wrong about that.
My hunch is that immigrants vote Liberal because they're worried that Conservatives don't want immigration, not because they're socially liberal.
Are homosexuals in Eritrea (50% Christian/50% Islamic), Russia (Catholic official religion) and Uganda (Christian) treated as refugees as well? All three of those countries jail homosexuals, and in Eritrea and Uganda especially, there is not much backlash for attacking and killing them.
I believe Canada's stance is that you're in a country where you're likely to suffer persecution due to your sexual orientation, you've got a valid refugee claim. Uganda certainly qualifies. Not sure what the status is in Eritrea. Not sure about Russia-- it's not just a matter of "people don't like gays here", it's a question of actual persecution. Recent news items indicate that Chechnya would certainly qualify. It's not just Muslim countries.
I agree, the girl from SA wearing a miniskirt isn't coming to Canada, and she is one of the many that gets lumped into the 'Muslims are bad' narrative. And sure, not able to wear a miniskirt is pretty mild compared to other abuses women endure in SA - but the yearning and bravery I saw in this stuck with me.
SA is a dirtbag country and while we could do something about it, we'd rather have oil.
The truly sickening thing about Saudi Arabia is the treatment of foreign workers who go there only to discover they've become virtually slaves, with no real rights and no way to get back home. It's a disgusting place. If the god of Abraham were real, he'd rain down punishment on that place that would make Sodom and Gomorrah look like an amusement park.
-k