Boisclair's big gaffe

I agree that it's ludicrous to place Boisclair's comments in the same category as the systematic and far-reaching racism of Dumont and the ADQ. Still, when I see Boisclair backtrack with comments like "I'm doing politics, not linguistics," it reminds me so much of Michael Ignatieff that it's scary.

That's right, Andrй, you're in politics, and people pay a lot of attention to the words you use, because you want to be in a position of authority. And if you don't choose your words carefully, in a way that won't be interpreted badly by a range of audiences, it suggests that you might conduct policy in the same boneheaded blundering way. Or that you just don't care what entire segments of the population think -- like people who aren't familiar with the etymology of the term "yeux bridйs."

But no need to worry about all that, Andrй. No, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.... [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img]

I can't believe anyone would go to the mat for this one. The defense of language is very weak. The term so obviously refers to a 'them' and I can't believe the other leaders rushed to his defence. Perhaps there has to be changes in the language. Like the use of 'pate chinoise' to refer to shepherd's pie or 'ma blonde' for a girlfriend. I could hardly see the radio announcer who made homophobic comments about Boisclair and the PQ using the defence 'Hey fags is just what we call them up here everyone knows the term, its not meant to cause offence'. I think that this election is revealing some interesting things behind the nationalist facade. Its too bad because Montreal for me is the most diverse city I have lived in where communities really interact.

quote:Originally posted by Ken Burch:

In all liklihood, benjamin didn't know what had happened to your family, unionist.

First of all: Yes he did.

Secondly, did you notice his apology after I reminded him? Neither did I.

Thirdly, that wasn't my principal complaint. He parachuted into the thread and accused me of "systemic bias" before contributing any comment on the topic.

Maybe I should call him a racist, or a child molester, or an ignoramus, or a Stalinist, or a shop-lifter? Would that be an appropriate response? I asked him for a retraction, and he didn't provide one.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, Ken.

Dumont is a scary political figure in Quebec politics but Boisclair's offensive gaffe is tragic in that he won't apologize for it or find anything wrong with his hurtful comments.

Here's the continuing saga of the Fo Niemi/Boisclair debacle for those interested.

quote: Fo Niemi, executive director of the Montreal-based Centre for Research Action on Race Relations, said in an interview Thursday that he called the PQ to complain about the remark.

In a call back from PQ campaign communications director Shirley Bishop, he said she was aggressive with him when he said the remark was "racially offensive."

Niemi said Bishop told him "it is people like you who see racism in this."

"She did not see anything wrong with this," said Niemi, who is of Asian descent. "My blood was boiling. I hung up. The remark is not only insensitive, so is their handling of it. It's incredible."

The Toronto-based Chinese Canadian National Council also issued a statement calling on Boisclair to clarify his comment.

When asked about Boisclair's phrase, Quebec Premier Jean Charest came to his defence.

http://tinylink.com/?BrDV4SuIMx

Boisclair got an apology when a gay slur - "tapettes" - was directed at him by a shockjock yet doesn't give back a respectful apology himself when he's the one making an offensive slur.

We expect Canadians to be respectful of all Canadians, no matter the creed, sex, religion, stance, or sexual orientation. Why is Boisclair exempt from behaving in a decent and civilized manner?

[ 19 March 2007: Message edited by: mary123 ]

quote:Originally posted by unionist:

First of all: Yes he did.

Do you have any proof whatsoever, to substantiante your assertion, that I knew your familial history prior to posting?

I didn't thinks so.

quote:Originally posted by unionist:
Secondly, did you notice his apology after I reminded him? Neither did I.

To dig yourself into a hole is an English idiom which means "to do something which makes you embarrassed or causes you problems which will be difficult to solve". Link

I scoured the internet, looking to find if the origin of this particular idiom is as you say it is. Needless to say, I found no such information. Can you provide a reliable link to your understanding of the origin of this idiom?

quote:Originally posted by unionist:
Thirdly, that wasn't my principal complaint. He parachuted into the thread and accused me of "systemic bias" before contributing any comment on the topic.

We all have systemic bias Unionist, and we display it in the way we express ourselves. This much should be elementary for a racism forum on Babble. I believe my original words stand for themselves. You can take from them what you like, and superimpose whatever meaning or intention on them that you desire or can create.

You felt the need to post publicly that you had "advised" the moderators. BCG has of yet not contacted me. Perhaps this should suggest that it is you who is acting unreasonably.

quote:Originally posted by unionist:
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, Ken.

My understanding of the point he is trying to make, is that your logic does not follow my posted words.

quote:Originally posted by bigcitygal:
Okay guys! Mod bcg here. (As opposed to "old school bcg"? Ha.)

unionist and Benjamin, please stop derailing this thread with this issue.

I have initiated nothing on this issue since March 16 (other than replying to Ken Burch), while waiting for you to deal with it. I have not posted today and had no intention of doing so.

By the way, I posted thirteen (13) times in this thread before this issue came up. So I respectfully reject your "derailing" charge.

[ 19 March 2007: Message edited by: unionist ]

Okay, unionist shall we take this to PMs please? And yeah, check yours. And I'm still consulting.

A very effective way to get me to know that I have a PM is to tell me.

I invite everyone who has something to say on the thread topic to please continue.

[ 19 March 2007: Message edited by: bigcitygal ]

I am tired of hearing that this was not a racist statement. It lumps a group of people together because of their ethnic background and most people of that background think it is; end of story.

In BC until a few decades or less ago the shortened form of Pakistan was used to describe people of south asian descent. I remember people telling me oh it is just describtive, that is where they are from. I said the same thing then as now. It is racist!!

The argument that it is used all the time in French sounds to me like the time I tried to tell a cop that almost everyone speeds on this road. You know I was absolutely right but I got a ticket for speeding anyway because speeding is speeding no matter how many people do it. Racist words are racist words no matter how many times they are used in French

2 linguist and translators from a Quebec university agree with the english media on this one.

quote:One anti-racism advertisement under the Parti Quebecois government a few years back reminded Quebecers, "Les yeux brides, le coeur Quebecois." In other words, "Slanting eyes, Quebecer heart."

It's hard to imagine a similar campaign in Ontario or British Columbia.

Language experts from a respected Quebec university took exception to Boisclair's use of the words, and not just the English translation.

"It's a blunder in French too," said Louis Jolicoeur, a professor at Laval University.

"It's a bad expression, it's dated, it's a facile observation. It's something our grandparents would say, it's not a normal expression of his era. It's true that it is much more neutral than in English, but a man who is so open to different communities should know better."

Jolicoeur and Sarah Cummins, both linguists and translators, pointed out Boisclair played on two well-established Asian stereotypes, putting sweatshop workers up against the geniuses taking over university campuses.

Cummins added that Boisclair put his Harvard colleagues into the generalized category of Asian foreigners when they are probably mostly American.

And, she added, he seems to have reached these conclusions based on an instant evaluation of the shape of their eyes.

"He goes down there and notices this physical feature of a lot of students and lumps them all together," said Cummins, a professor at the University of Laval in Quebec City.

"What people find offensive is immediately fixing on some physical feature of people and lumping together based on that."

The opinions of Cummins and other outraged Canadians come as a shock to many Quebecers.

http://tinylink.com/?bfYNuWgzqe

quote:Cummins said it all points to a Quebec tendency to divide people into quickly identifiable groups that has persisted longer than in English-speaking Canada.

"Quebec has not gone as far, partly because English Canada has had a kind of a politically correct bath," Cummins said.

"But English Canada has learned it, and become more attuned to why these things are insulting."

Cummins pointed out that foreigners in China are sometimes called "big nose."

"It's a physical fact, our noses are bigger than theirs," she said. "So is that OK? Do we start calling them 'flat noses"? When you insist on people's physical features, you're insisting on saying they're 'other."'

Boisclair had used the expression many times but during the speech he piqued the ears of reporters for anglophone newspapers and made headlines.

It left many francophones wondering, "What is the big deal?"

Many believe that Boisclair gets a free pass with the French language media in Montreal anyways.

[ 19 March 2007: Message edited by: mary123 ]

quote:Originally posted by Ken Burch:

Which is not proof that the phrase ISN'T offensive. What it is, instead, in my interpretation is what's known as "owning the word"...that is, a member of a particular group taking what is seen as a slur against that group when uttered by others and using it as an ironic badge of honor or a subtle statement of defiance.
When black people use the "n word" to refer to each other, or gay people use the "six letter f word" to refer to themselves, they are "owning the word".

I realize most posters in this forum would know that, but I felt I had to say it again for the benefit of the person who mentioned the name of the restaurant.

[ 19 March 2007: Message edited by: Ken Burch ]

From the article Mary123 links to above:

quote:Mai Ha had in mind the beauty of the Asian eye when she named her restaurant Les Brides - a play on the slant-eyed expression that embroiled Andre Boisclair in controversy this week.

Mai, a native of Vietnam, says the French expression "Les yeux brides" (pronounced 'bree-day') is sometimes used to insult, but believes most Quebecers are thinking of the grace of almond-shaped eyes when they say it.

"There's always two meanings, and it just depends on how they say it, on the tone of the voice," Mai said in an interview Friday.

"For me, I take it in a positive way, it's something that represents the Orient and prettiness, something of beauty," said Mai, who came to Quebec in 1975.

"But you know what? My eyes aren't even like that."

quote: Mai, a native of Vietnam, says the French expression "Les yeux brides" (pronounced 'bree-day') is sometimes used to insult, but believes most Quebecers are thinking of the grace of almond-shaped eyes when they say it.

"There's always two meanings, and it just depends on how they say it, on the tone of the voice," Mai said in an interview Friday.

"For me, I take it in a positive way, it's something that represents the Orient and prettiness, something of beauty," said Mai, who came to Quebec in 1975.

Thanks for the quote Drinkmore, it pretty much sums it up.

I would add that in the Quebec mind to refer directly to physical or cultural particularities is often associated to a polite and inclusive discourse -- it is a way of aknowledging one's differences, quite possibly the highest form of recognition a Quebecer can offer, yet expects from others. Differences are something Quebecer usually admire and overtly celebrate. The Quebec view on inclusion could be sumarized in this way: "You are not like me and so I love you".

Indeed, this has been a source of misunderstanding between french Quebecers and English-speaking Canadians for decades, the anglo-saxon mood being more often "notwithstanding our differences, we are all alike". To a Quebec audience, such a discourse can be frightening, as it may connotes a will of assimilation. Some would call it racist.

The truth is that both discourses are similar in meaning but different in approaches.

I certainly hope that all well-intended posters on this thread are willing to take a pause and ponder wheter or not cultural divide may be at stake here. It is the anti-racism forum after all.