Canadian Politics Today

Let's see if we can look at some good old-fashioned moralizing, independent of politics.

I present for you, the parent of Lil Tay.

https://news.google.ca/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fhollywoodlife.com%2F2018%2F05%2F10%2Flil-tay-mom-fired%2F#pt0-381588

Your URL is broken, but I read a story about this person the other day.  Basically, a Vancouver realtor has turned her 9 year old daughter into an "Instagram celebrity" by having her act like a stereotypical rap music star. (waving around wads of cash, sitting in luxury cars, throwing wads of cash on luxury cars, bragging about living the high-life, insulting "the haters", and so on.)

The article I read didn't give an explanation of what specifically caused the mother to be fired by the real estate company she worked for.   But the overall takeaway for me was that the kid is the most obnoxious little brat on the planet and the mom has turned her into this on purpose, with the intention on creating a celebrity and cashing in. I felt like it was quite **** up, to say the least.

From a philosophical or ethical point of view, I guess my question is whether this is different from more conventional stories of parents cashing in on their kids.  Child beauty pageant parents, for example.  Or the parents of child stars.  Is the mom in this story really much different from Lindsay Lohan's mom?   Andre Agassi's parents drove him relentlessly to turn him into a tennis star... and he hated tennis.  He hates tennis so much that he won't even pick up a tennis racket anymore.  The idea of parents using their kids as a vehicle to live out their unfulfilled fantasies and maybe make a whole bunch of money isn't exactly new. So is this realtor really any different from what has come before?

 -k

Brittney Spears turned out great.

Brittney Spears' parents basically sold her to a record company.  But yeah, I get what you're saying.

If people would stop watching that ****, then there’d be no issues.  People are idiots.

Hey kids, don't go to school, you can become a millionaire acting like a jackass. Welcome to 2018.

So this seems an appropriate enough thread for this. Megan Kelly. Not my favorite person, allegedly unpleasant to work with. And now fired for apparently suggesting, briefly before apologizing, that donning black face wasn't exactly the crime of the century.

If this is all she did I'm shaking my head at how little it takes in these self-righteous times to cost someone their job.

The move comes after she was heavily criticized for defending Halloween costume "blackface" during a segment on her morning show earlier this week.

"But what is racist?" she asked an all-white panel on Monday during a discussion about a university crackdown on offensive costumes.

"Because you do get in trouble if you are a white person who puts on blackface on Halloween, or a black person who puts on whiteface for Halloween. Back when I was a kid that was OK, as long as you were dressing up as, like, a character."
She then defended a reality television show star who drew ire last year for darkening her skin and donning an afro wig to dress as Diana Ross.

"Who doesn't love Diana Ross? She wants to look like Diana Ross for one day? I don't know how that got racist on Halloween," Kelly said.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45990543

"Who doesn't love Diana Ross? She wants to look like Diana Ross for one day? I don't know how that got racist on Halloween," Kelly said.

Pretty dumb statement for a TV personality to make.

This also strikes me as a morality thing, a meaningless insincere gesture of political correctness meant by well-meaning liberals filled with white guilt. Acknowledging that this or that meeting or this school or this whatever is on the land of the Algonquin or whatever the hell tribe claims it strikes me as ludicrous, something only progressives would come up with.

How so ?  You yourself say it's about 'well-meaning'.  Is that somehow WORSE than pissing people off to make a point ?  Since when is listening and empathizing a bad thing ?

As I write this, I would like to acknowledge that I am doing so while sitting at my desk on the unceded, unsurrendered traditional territory of the Algonquin people. Why am I telling you this? I’m not sure. But I’m also not sure why I am hearing a similar message every morning on the announcements at the school where I work. Furthermore, I don’t know why the same statement is being read prior to my staff meetings and teacher’s federation meetings.

Ok but this person seems to asking for *more* than just a 'meaningless statement'.  Are you ok with that ?

I wonder how many schools have brought in an elder to speak about this topic.  Probably very few. I have never been taught anything about territorial acknowledgements; they just started happening. Someone needs to explain to me how token gestures and insincerity bring about reconciliation.

The author of the piece also brings an opinion of First Nations writer Lynn Gehl.  Well, then let these people be heard, and not just in snippets to support the idea that these pronouncements are 'meaningless'.  For if the idea is to return back to no such statements, and status quo... well that's cultural appropriation if I have ever heard of it.

https://journeymagazineptbo.com/2018/09/20/the-tree-of-peace-saves-the-earth/

But was it really worth ending her career? She did offer an apparently heartfelt, tearful apology.

To be honest, I don't know what goes into such decisions.  I would guess it's 90% money and 10% morality... which is also tied into money.  The Rosanne firing was much braver than this one, but also a dumber comment from the star.  As I understand the NBC host wasn't pulling numbers so this could have been a chance to try again.

Does 'well meaning' make doing stupid things okay in your mind?

'Stupid' or 'Ineffectual' ?  We do a lot of stupid things because, well, people want to do it.  Why do I have to stand for the national anthem at a baseball game ?  Who knows, but people want it so ok.

Depends on what. But I'm not up on bleeding heart liberals continually self-flagellating over the real or imagined sins of our ancestors. And I'm also not okay with the pomposity of declaring small tribes of a few hundred or a couple of thousand people 'nations' and giving credence to their sweeping claims of owning millions of square kilometers of territory.

Well, that's an opening position for a discussion which I can give you credit for. 

Snippets of opinion and quotes are routinely used to support other people's statements around the world. Why should that of natives be any more protected? Are they special?

Not in this regard, but you are acknowledging my point which is that it's a dishonest technique.