BC Lags Behind Other Provinces in Life Satisfaction

[TheIronMaiden]

These types of name changes remind me of Malcom X's quote:

“The white man will try to satisfy us with symbolic victories rather than economic equity and real justice.”

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Only an absolute idiot would think that those two things are comparable analogies.

Again, it's also not entirely about what's offensive/inoffensive. It's about recognizing accurate terminology to describe people who live in B.C., who may not identify as British Columbians due to how they view their relationship with their traditional territories. Due to the fact that most of these territories being unceded in B.C., the courts and the government recognize them as nations within Canada.

Conservatives sure do get pissy about the dumbest ####.

EDIT: Also, how does this affect your life in any way? Are you a government worker in B.C.?

What purpose does a reference to "people living in BC" serve when addressing Indigenous Peoples or other individuals who do not recognize British Columbia to begin with? For anyone identifying as a member of a sovereign nation it might feel like occupier language to say that they are "people living in BC."

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

What purpose does a reference to "people living in BC" serve when addressing Indigenous Peoples or other individuals who do not recognize British Columbia to begin with? For anyone identifying as a member of a sovereign nation it might feel like occupier language to say that they are "people living in BC."

I am sure they can play with the wording. I hear “people of <insert place name>” all the time. It doesn’t need to be controversial.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I am sure they can play with the wording. I hear “people of <insert place name>” all the time. It doesn’t need to be controversial.

If I've said it once, I've said it a million times.

It should just be "Residents of 53.7267° N, 127.6476° W."

Just take all of the ambiguity out of it. Its going to make for longer conversational introductions but thats just the Cross they're going to have to bear.

[you&me]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Only an absolute idiot would think that those two things are comparable analogies.

Again, it's also not entirely about what's offensive/inoffensive. It's about recognizing accurate terminology to describe people who live in B.C., who may not identify as British Columbians due to how they view their relationship with their traditional territories. Due to the fact that most of these territories being unceded in B.C., the courts and the government recognize them as nations within Canada.

Conservatives sure do get pissy about the dumbest ####.

I'll give you a pass this one time, but I hope you take this as an opportunity to be better and less offensive.

This includes “Aboriginal groups,” “Aboriginal interest” and the word “traditional.” “Traditional knowledge, traditional territories, makes it seem like it is only applicable to the past and not the present,” it reads.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I actually like this idea...I kinda abhor the idea of being referred to as an Albertan *shudder*. I'm just a mostly sensible person living in Alberta.

I lived in Calgary for 20+ years and never once referred to myself as an "Albertan". That said, I didn't call myself a (former) "New Brunswicker" or "Maritimer" either. I've always considered myself a "Canadian" first and foremost.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

These types of name changes remind me of Malcom X's quote:

“The white man will try to satisfy us with symbolic victories rather than economic equity and real justice.”

That's all well and good, but I wonder how much progress society would have made if we ignored these symbolic victories and continued the status quo of throwing the N word around derisively?

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

What purpose does a reference to "people living in BC" serve when addressing Indigenous Peoples or other individuals who do not recognize British Columbia to begin with? For anyone identifying as a member of a sovereign nation it might feel like occupier language to say that they are "people living in BC."

It's people first language. Disabled person vs person with a disability.

Now this doesn't always apply as 'autistic person' is generally preferred to 'person with autism'. It largely boils down to identity - being autistic or gay is an intrinsic element of a person. Losing an arm in a wood chipper or having MS may be an omnipresent factor in a person's life, but it's not really an intrinsic quality. Being blind or deaf can probably fall either way depending on the person.

Indigenous person living in BC makes sense. And spare me the BS about not recognizing BC - most of us are smart enough to understand the nuance involved when someone declares that sort of thing. Danielle Smith is the premier of the province I live in but she sure as #### is not 'my premier'...I would even go so far as to say I do not recognize her as a premier (because she is a malignant ####).

British Columbian who is Indigenous...or even Indigenous British Columbian ascribes intrinsic identity to something that doesn't necessarily deserve it.

Personally, I am intrinsically Canadian. I am not intrinsically Albertan or Calgarian. I am probably intrinsically white, but for a whole boatload of reasons it isn't equivalent to being intrinsically Black, for instance.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

What purpose does a reference to "people living in BC" serve when addressing Indigenous Peoples or other individuals who do not recognize British Columbia to begin with? For anyone identifying as a member of a sovereign nation it might feel like occupier language to say that they are "people living in BC."

For the same reason you can't change the name of the province. There are 200 distinct First Nations in B.C., 30 different languages, and 60 dialects. It would be functionally impossible to refer to the province or indigenous peoples as a collective under one name.

I agree it's occupier language, but it's a case of doing the best we can under the structures we have.

Originally Posted by you&me

I'll give you a pass this one time, but I hope you take this as an opportunity to be better and less offensive.

I'm sure this is a very sincere post and you regularly advocate for indigenous people.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

These types of name changes remind me of Malcom X's quote:

“The white man will try to satisfy us with symbolic victories rather than economic equity and real justice.”

100% true. I often think the same thing about land/territory acknowledgements.

There's still no real good reason for anyone to get upset about the symbolic victories.

[FlamesAddiction]

As a first generation Canadian, I have sometimes struggled with the identity to a degree. Don't get me wrong, I am happy and blessed to live in one of the best countries in the world. Probably 75% of the people on this planet would trade places with me in a second, and that is something I don't take for granted. But growing up, I never really identified with the history. I consider myself a citizen of Canada living outside of my ancestral homeland.

My wife is completely the opposite. She traces her family back to some of the first settlers from Europe and also has Indigenous heritage. For her, being Canadian is being attached to that history and is approaching the idea of not just nationality, but an ethnicity. I just could never identify like that. To me, it's just a piece of paper, but not part of me identity.

I think a lot of Canadians feel the same way, which is why many Canadians apply a modifier before being Canadian. Probably way off topic though.

[you&me]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I'm sure this is a very sincere post and you regularly advocate for indigenous people.

Admittedly, no... But I know you do and I sincerely thought you should be aware that you were being offensive.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by you&me

Admittedly, no... But I know you do and I sincerely thought you should be aware that you were being offensive.

Fair enough. I should have probably used "ancestral."

[you&me]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Fair enough. I should have probably used "ancestral."

Again, genuinely not trying to play this as a "gotcha", but I'm wondering if you - as someone I assume is more up to date on appropriateness of language than most - were aware of the offensiveness of "traditional"? Like, you knew and would have used "ancestral", had it not slipped your mind? Or is this new to you as well?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by rubecube

100% true. I often think the same thing about land/territory acknowledgements.

There's still no real good reason for anyone to get upset about the symbolic victories.

I think territorial acknowledgements were something recommended by First Nations as part of the move towards reconciliation, so not a white man's imposition. I've been a guest in meetings hosted by First Nations who do them to acknowledge other First Nations and the overlap of their ancestral and traditional lands.

[Monahammer]

There has to be some common identity that underpins the social contract though, right? IMO we are testing that limit pretty boldly with moves like this.

I think there is a distinct difference legally between immigrants and unceded territory dwelling indigenous peoples as well.

But moreover on the subject of being Canadian, what even defines that other than living within a quasi imaginary border? And if the answer is nothing, what's to stop people from forming (or importing) other, stronger community ties that create sub-social contracts?

IMO we are already seeing this with the south asian extortion problems across multiple cities. There's a perceived lack of societal implications for those individuals, and thus they are acting within the confines of the society they know.

Canada lacks a basis for a social contract.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by you&me

Again, genuinely not trying to play this as a "gotcha", but I'm wondering if you - as someone I assume is more up to date on appropriateness of language than most - were aware of the offensiveness of "traditional"? Like, you knew and would have used "ancestral", had it not slipped your mind? Or is this new to you as well?

Traditional isn't offensive. It's inaccurate (or perhaps more precise would be less accurate).

You saying offensive is inaccurate. Nobody* is actually offended


This stuff is on the level of tar sands vs oil sands. Tar sands was the original name and probably the more accurate term to describe it (after bitumen perhaps...though tar sand is actually more descriptive and accessible).

There is definitely some funny overlap on people who clutch pearls at the slanderous term tar sands, but who also think it's silly to worry so much about how we refer to fellow humans.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by you&me

Again, genuinely not trying to play this as a "gotcha", but I'm wondering if you - as someone I assume is more up to date on appropriateness of language than most - were aware of the offensiveness of "traditional"? Like, you knew and would have used "ancestral", had it not slipped your mind? Or is this new to you as well?

It's definitely new. Like another poster, I recently took a course on indigenous cultural safety, which was curated by indigenous peoples, and "traditional" was used throughout the course IIRC.

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I think territorial acknowledgements were something recommended by First Nations as part of the move towards reconciliation, so not a white man's imposition. I've been a guest in meetings hosted by First Nations who do them to acknowledge other First Nations and the overlap of their ancestral and traditional lands.

Right, but we both know "First Nations" aren't a collective, and some of the First Nations folks I know have very negative opinions regarding territory acknowledgements. I'm personally fine to do them, but they do feel like empty gestures if there is no intent for reconciliation, restorative justice, etc., from the people giving them.

Originally Posted by Monahammer

There has to be some common identity that underpins the social contract though, right? IMO we are testing that limit pretty boldly with moves like this.

Canada lacks a basis for a social contract.

I'm trying to understand what you're saying here. Are you implying that a social contract can't exist without a distinct, identifiable, and universally-shared nationalist identity?

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I think territorial acknowledgements were something recommended by First Nations as part of the move towards reconciliation, so not a white man's imposition. I've been a guest in meetings hosted by First Nations who do them to acknowledge other First Nations and the overlap of their ancestral and traditional lands.

My foster parent training sessions always start with at least a 5 minute list of acknowledgements as to who's land we knicked that were on, the zoom meetings can have 7 or 8 bands acknowledged and can take 15 minutes now due to the geographic scope of the participants

Personally I always felt that stealing something by force, not giving it back and then thanking the person that you stole it from for 'letting you have it' is just rubbing salt into the wound.

[fotze2]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

My foster parent training sessions always start with at least a 5 minute list of acknowledgements as to who's land we knicked that were on, the zoom meetings can have 7 or 8 bands acknowledged and can take 15 minutes now due to the geographic scope of the participants

Personally I always felt that stealing something by force, not giving it back and then thanking the person that you stole it from for 'letting you have it' is just rubbing salt into the wound.

Like Tampa Bay acknowledging the Flames for 2004?

[activeStick]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

As a first generation Canadian, I have sometimes struggled with the identity to a degree. Don't get me wrong, I am happy and blessed to live in one of the best countries in the world. Probably 75% of the people on this planet would trade places with me in a second, and that is something I don't take for granted. But growing up, I never really identified with the history. I consider myself a citizen of Canada living outside of my ancestral homeland.

My wife is completely the opposite. She traces her family back to some of the first settlers from Europe and also has Indigenous heritage. For her, being Canadian is being attached to that history and is approaching the idea of not just nationality, but an ethnicity. I just could never identify like that. To me, it's just a piece of paper, but not part of me identity.

I think a lot of Canadians feel the same way, which is why many Canadians apply a modifier before being Canadian. Probably way off topic though.

Your post totally resonates with me, I'm also first generation here in Canada. I too value being a Canadian, like you, but I don't really struggle with it. I'm Chinese. I was born in Canada. I love being Canada and I think I'm unique and love it that I'm a mix of Canadian and Chinese. I get to celebrate Canadian customs like Canada Day, Western traditions like Christmas and Thanksgiving, as well as the Spring Festival, Autumn Festival and others from my Chinese side.

Are you very close to your ancestral roots? When you were young, did your parents and family strongly value ensuring their culture's traditions continue with you? Do you continue now to celebrate whatever customs and traditions (like holidays, meals, etc) are important for your ancestral country?

Mine were very much that way for me growing up and as a result, I too identify extremely strongly with my Chinese ancestral roots. I also apply a modifier if asked, that I'm Chinese Canadian.

I have many friends as well (especially Italians) who are the same and strongly identify with their ancestral roots from Italy and introduce themselves as Italian Canadian.

I do sometimes see patterns amongst groups where for example, Italians and Chinese being mostly this way vs. other groups not as much.