The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Your Turn -- Your Thoughts On The Pronoun Issue

Episode Date: October 5, 2023

Listeners were busy at their keyboards on two issues this week -- Truth and Reconciliation, and Pronouns. They both take centre stage on this week's edition of Your Turn, and the Random Ranter also jumps in on one of them.  Plus lots of other comments ranging from Paul McCartney's guitar to the handles on a bottle of maple syrup!

And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. You are just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge. It being Thursday, it's your turn and the Random Ranter. They're both coming right up. And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. Yes, it is Thursday, and that means your turn, your opportunity to weigh in on, you know, some of the major issues as you see it on the day. And as well, the Random Rancher will be by with his take on one of those issues this week.

A reminder, we get a lot of letters here at the bridge, a lot of letters, many of them, because, hey, listen, you have strong feelings and opinions on stuff, and some of the letters get quite long. I just usually pick out one part of each letter that I'm going to read on the air. So don't get upset if you figure, hey, I had a lot more to say than that. I think most of you understand.

To try and get a cross-section of opinion from different parts of the country, that's what we do. And these come at random. I try to isolate them into different topics. We're going to start off with some of your comments about truth and reconciliation. Then we're going to move into the gender issue that was as a result of, you know, comments that we made last week on good talk about pronouns and the kind of hidden issue that's kind of out there for a lot of people. While politicians and the media talk about other things,

they're talking about the pronoun issue as it affects their kids. Anyway, you had lots of thought on that as well. So I'm going to get all that and then the ranter. The ranter has some thoughts about the pronoun issue as well. So this should be interesting. Okay, let's get going with your comments. First on the truth and reconciliation front, Don Thompson writes from Winnipeg. Thank you for your words regarding the importance of truth and reconciliation. You refer to articles that people could read for information.

I would also suggest that people read the many memoirs written by residential school survivors. It's personal stories that have really hit home for me. The legacy of the residential school system has had on individuals, families, and Indigenous culture. I've just finished reading Thompson Highway's memoir, Permanent Astonishment. For example, this would be a good read for anyone who argues that we're ignoring the good things that happened at residential schools.

Thompson Highway learned to play the piano, speak English, and to write at residential school. However, he was also sexually molested, taken away from his family for months at a time, and bullied. No parent would sacrifice a child's safety and well-being for the sake of learning. Bud Taylor has this to say. To answer your question, do you think about

the truth and reconciliation issue? To answer your question, yes, I think about this a lot. I worked in Ottawa for 25 years, 1970 to 1995. While I was with the Treasury Board Secretariat, I had several assignments with the then Department of Indian and Northern Affairs. After leaving the federal government, I also did major project work with several tribal leaders who have remained friends. One thing I've learned is that there is neither a shared understanding of our past, nor a shared understanding of the future we are trying to create. As Yogi Berra supposedly said, if you don't know where you're going, you'll get there.

Greg Billings wrote a very long letter. I'm just going to read a part of it. Was I aware of the foul treatment of Aboriginals? Yes. I knew we stole their land, broke treaties, if we had them, and trapped them in reserves. But I didn't know what purpose of the Indian Act was, I didn't know what the purpose of the Indian Act was or its implication of taking an entire people

and making them wards of the state. I also didn't know the Canadian government tried to take the Indian out of the child with the residential schools. When I started to dig into residential school history, and that the last one closed in the 1990s, I was really angry. Jesse Johnson from Cobourg, Ontario. Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation. Jesse writes, You've been the voice of Canadian news for decades.

Residential schools were active for most of your career. Try to remember, what did you think of the schools at the time, before 1997? Did you ever report on them for CBC? I'm sick of hearing people claim ignorance when it was out in the open for decades. Nobody cared then. You know, I first was aware of these kind of residential schools in the late 1960s when I was in Churchill.

I was young. I was 19, 20 years old. And there was a school there for Inuit kids, mainly, who come down from the Arctic. And, you know, there would be kind of rumors about the kind of conditions they lived in and their separation from their parents who were, you know, obviously back in the communities in the high Arctic. But I'll be honest, Jesse, I don't remember it becoming an issue.

That's not that it shouldn't have become an issue. I just don't recall it being an issue. And, you know, then I moved on. I went to Winnipeg. I saw difficult conditions in northwestern Ontario, some in northern Saskatchewan. But listen, this didn't break out into the issue it became until, you know, like you're quite right. I mean, the last one closed, what, 1997?

So we all failed on that front. Right? All of us. Myself included. Claude-José Dallaire-Arsenault from Passe-Bébiac, Quebec. I think it's important to be careful when we take political actions at a political level

to reconcile for the past history of our country. We are quickly breeding a form of bitter resentment to all things of British and French contribution, be they deliberate or unintentional, innocent or deliberate. We are quickly creating a more militant and aggressive form of ethnic nationalism that will quickly become a threat to everyone who is not of the preferred genetic line.

I'm not sure we're quickly getting to that point, but I hear what you're saying. It is something for all of us to think about, but I still think it is a powerful reason. This whole issue has become a powerful reason for us to understand our past. And when we talk about our past, we talk about it in the sense of our shared past. All of us, not just some of us. Okay. The second issue that garnered a lot of attention this week from you, our listeners to the bridge, was a conversation that Bruce and Chantel and I had last Friday

on Good Talk, where it came up for no particular reason other than I was, you know, I was wondering whether while we were talking about the kind of things that we were talking about that were happening in Ottawa, that real people, you, were talking about something entirely different in your homes across the country. That could become one of those, not an underground issue, but an issue that plays out much more in various elections, whether they be provincial or federal, than we might understand or realize.

And the issue at hand that we talked about was this issue of pronouns, especially for kids and in some cases young kids at schools across the country. And it was a vigorous discussion that we had last week, and if you didn't listen to it and you want to, you should dial it back. It was last Friday's good talk. But you certainly haven't been shy in terms of the letters you've written about it. So let me bring them in.

Daniel Guillaume in Calgary, Alberta, wrote a long letter. This is a part of it. I found myself both agreeing and disagreeing with some of the things that Bruce and Chantal said. Canadian society is at a strange crossroads. Many of the customs and norms of yesterday have been largely abandoned. We're trying to figure out where to go next.

Political forces from both the left and the right are madly fighting to rapidly replace old norms with new ideas. Many parents are confused and talking. There's a lot we don't understand. What we do understand, however, is that this mad ideological rush to the left or to the right is ultimately to the detriment of our kids. Please let our kids be kids. Candice Kostner. She's in Winnipeg. I'm writing in response to one of the topics in last Friday's Good Talk, pronouns and the impact on schools.

As expected, the panel of Chantelle, Bruce, and yourself provided well-informed insights on the current issue that affects many families. This issue has many layers, and conversation is key to learning and understanding all its aspects. Chantelle shared she has had conversations with children at their initiative. As I see it, conversations involve talking and listening. Enlightened conversation about issues such as pronouns requires more listening than talking to develop a fuller understanding on our part. Perhaps all adults need to take a beat and just listen to the students.

They teach us so much. In my experience as a parent, classroom teacher, and now museum educator, I have found listening to others involved just as important, if not more so, than just talking about my views. There is definitely more to this issue than where we are in our understanding at the moment. Let's open our ears to learn more. Next one comes from Tristan Kuhlman.

Checking to see where Tristan is. Unionville, Ontario. My name is Tristan, and I'm a volunteer at Flag Canada York Region, PFLAG. If you're not familiar with Flag, we're a queer support organization led by caregivers of and members of the queer community. We run support meetings for folks to connect with community members and gain peer-to-peer advice on supporting their loved ones through issues like coming out, bullying, and other challenges queer folk face. Thank you for the discussion you all had about the issue of pronoun policies and the rights of kids who may be exploring or questioning their gender identity. Bruce talked about the increasing polarization of the subject and how folks who are legitimately uninformed on the issue may be getting lost in the shuffle or finding themselves alongside people who do not reflect

their true character. My message is simple. If you're willing to take a side on an issue, you need to do your research. I understand many don't want to invest that time, but I'm a firm believer that the side people claim in an issue and how they get there is a reflection of their character. We all need to take ownership and accountability over what we say and where we position ourselves, especially on issues of human rights. Maren Donley writes. She's in Stratford, Ontario. She's traveled all over the country and lived and worked in different parts of the U.S. as well.

Just a part of her letter. Right now we're in the midst of, one, the end of the Ice Age. The polar caps are melting and the impact of drought, famine, floods will drive global migration in a way we've never seen before. Two, the end of the patriarchy in business, religion, giving women more options. And three, the end of white supremacy in the Western world. Young people are caught between the old white guys clinging by their fingernails and more aware of what's happening in the world around them. Sadly, we no longer just let children be children. So have we made this more complex than it has to be? Children are fluid until puberty.

Malcolm Campbell writes from Kennesaw, Manitoba. There's a reason that children are prohibited from purchasing and consuming tobacco, alcohol, cannabis and pornography. There are reasons why children are prohibited from operating a motorcycle, voting, and volunteering for military service. It's because a child does not possess the physical, emotional, and psychological maturity to properly consent to their own participation in the aforementioned. So you see, we've been getting a lot of different thoughts on this.

And there's more. Lisa T. from St. Catharines. When I was 12 and several of my friends started smoking, luckily we all managed to eventually quit, we took a lot of other risks too. I also remember when kids started getting their tongues and eyebrows pierced, getting tattoos. I really can't believe how a 12-year-old asking to be referred to as they or them has caused such an uproar among adults.

Tongue piercing and tattoos were less dangerous than smoking. Changing pronouns should not pose any danger to a child unless adults start politicizing it. Can't we instead get angry about things that will actually harm today's children? Things like climate change, poverty, and opioids, to name just a few. Safia Nero in Montreal. I was motivated to write by Friday's Good Talk episode about the pronoun issue in schools, specifically Chantal's point that we should listen to how kids are talking about gender identity in their own conversations. I'm a 22-year-old woman,

part of Gen Z, and though I agree that we should hear what they have to say, listening should not mean accepting uncritically. At that age, our ability to make well-considered decisions is notoriously bad, hence why we don't let kids get tattoos or drive or own a gun. It's easy to think that this comparison is unwarranted because isn't this about just being your true self? Isn't it just the next form of prejudice to overcome? No different than the women's movement, civil rights and gay rights. Just part of Safia Nero's letter. Brenda Hattie from Salmon River Bridge, Nova Scotia. I listen to your podcast every weekday.

I was so glad when the summer came to an end and you resumed, though I totally support your need to have a break. It's Friday and I listened with particular interest to the segment about pronoun usage. I agree with Chantel and Bruce and add that it's disturbing to see the notwithstanding clause used by the Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe. Rights are rights and they must be defended.

We absolutely have to avoid what's happening in the U.S. As a queer woman, I intend to resist the trends I see emerging to my last breath. Shannon Stange. I was born in Saskatchewan, lived in BC, Ontario, and now Alberta. I feel I need to state this as I'm concerned that if I only said Alberta, there would be a bias. Not necessarily from you, no offense intended. I enjoy your podcast.

You know what? I don't... Shannon, you don't need to say that. You're a Canadian. You live in Alberta. Just like the Canadians we've heard from Quebec and Newfoundland and BC and Ontario and Nova Scotia. Anyway, Shannon writes, If I found out the school had given my son the ability to change their pronoun, this would have been totally unacceptable.

If the school needed permission from me to participate in a field trip, but not this. If this notion is true, I'm shocked. My son's school would phone if they didn't show up for class, missed assignments, and even wearing an inappropriate T-shirt. Can I just say, make sure you understand what is actually going on and what's not going on at your school. Right? Don't assume anything. They're not going to hide from you what their policies are in this regard

so you should know that here's the last one on this issue and it's it's not really about the pronoun issue it is about the use of the notwithstanding clause. David Harrison writes from Toronto, I found the analysis on Friday's pod to be historically inaccurate. To describe the notwithstanding clause as Pierre Trudeau's legacy is not accurate. It was the water he had to take in his wine

to get agreement on the entrenchment of the charter. There would have been no agreement without the clause. As for the hand-wringing that now accompanies it, we need to be mindful that it does not pertain to all Charter rights, that it is a decision of the Legislature and not the Government, and that it must be renewed. The UK is an example of a country with no charter, just like Canada from 1867 to 1982.

Well, let me say this about that. There was no full agreement among the 10 provincial provinces on what happened in 1982, right? Quebec didn't sign, still hasn't signed. So let's keep that in mind, okay? He did not get the full agreement of all the participants in the country. Pierre Trudeau. And the notwithstanding clause is definitely part of his legacy.

And it was discussed at the time that it would be and has been at varying times ever since, including now, as Saskatchewan becomes the latest province to say it's going to use the notwithstanding clause. All right. The pronoun issue. The random ranter has actually, for the last couple of weeks, even before we had this, mentioned this last week, has been saying to me, I want to do something on the pronoun issue. Well, here's the perfect time to do it. This is the ranter's opinion.

And you've heard a variety of different opinions already today from you, the listeners. Here is what the random ranter has to say about this issue. When it comes to education, I believe in a few fundamental things. Like it's a school's responsibility to protect the children in its care, and it's a teacher's job to provide a safe learning environment for all their students. Parents need and deserve to be kept in the loop on everything that affects their children's learning, like their reading comprehension, their numeracy, and their behavior. But let's draw the line at their gender identity. Outing kids to their parents

is not a teacher's responsibility. If a kid isn't comfortable talking about their identity with their own parents, then that should tell you something. And what it tells me is that politics need to stay out of the classroom. That said, I get why this is such a great wedge issue for conservatives. I mean, when someone asks, don't you think schools should let parents know what's going on with their kids? The answer is always a pretty easy and emphatic, hell yes. But think it through. If little Billy prefers they to him, how does that affect their education? Because I don't think it does. But outing that kid to the parents, well, that could put them in serious jeopardy on so many levels.

Knowing your child's gender identity is really your job as a parent. If your kid doesn't feel safe coming out to you, but feels safe enough to come out at school, well, that's kind of sad. But your family dynamics are not a teacher's job. They're just there to provide support for your kids without judgment and regardless of circumstance. Look, I know a lot of parents aren't comfortable with all the LGBTQ and gender talk in schools these days. But the talk isn't confusing kids, and it's certainly not indoctrinating them. It's just giving them a safe space to figure out who they are. And that stands in stark contrast to the culture of shame and fear that many of us grew up with in school. I mean, how many negative outcomes, how much abuse, how much self-harm could have been

avoided back in the day if there was just someone there to provide some unconditional acceptance, just someone to say it's okay to be the way you are. If that's not you as a parent, then shame on you and double shame on the politicians who are trying to make votes by exploiting such a delicate situation. All right, there's the rancher's view. That's his. Some of you might agree with him. Some of you might disagree with him. Some of you may go, hmm, I don't know, maybe.

But that's his view. Here's one part of it I'll take issue with. He said it's a great wedge issue for conservatives. I'm not so sure. They tried to make it a wedge issue in the Manitoba election this week. And it didn't work. You know, the NDP, Wab Kanu, they want a majority government.

They put this issue, they couched it in the terms of parental rights. They took ads, papers, television, parental rights. Didn't work for them. So if it was a wedge issue, I mean, maybe it worked in some parts of the province. It certainly didn't work in enough parts that could maintain government for the conservatives. And you knew when they dragged this issue out in the last couple of weeks, they knew they were in trouble. And so they were going to a campaign that made it obvious that they

were. Anyway, we'll see. We'll see in the campaigns to come whether it becomes an issue and a wedge issue that works for conservatives. We'll see. Okay, there are lots of other issues we've got to cover, but it's time for that halfway break. So let's take it, and we'll be right back. And welcome back.

You're listening to The Bridge, the Thursday episode, right here on Sirius XM, channel 167, Canada Talks, or on your favorite podcast platform. We're happy that you're listening on whatever platform you are listening on. I'm Peter Mansbridge. I'm in Toronto today. And we're reading your letters. And there's a bunch more. They're all over the place in Toronto today. And we're reading your letters. And there's a bunch more.

They're all over the place in different issues. Now, this is obviously from a long-time listener. Because it's been a couple of years since I mentioned this. Karen Boshy from Edmonton. Karen's actually written before a number of times. Just a quick note. It took a while to get it on our book list this past week as we feared, or excuse me,

as we neared another day of truth and reconciliation. My book club finally read and discussed What I Remember, What I Know by Larry Audeluk. Audeluk. You introduced us to this book about Inuit families from Quebec who were relocated to the High Arctic during the 1950s for sovereignty and economic opportunities and the hardships that they experienced in this desolate and isolated region, victims of many broken promises.

Thank you for bringing this book to our attention. The first-hand description of this experience within the book sheds even more concern and shame on our nation for how we as Canadians have treated Indigenous Canadians. We learn from reading this book. Educating ourselves is so important. We all need to gain a greater understanding of the reality of the lives and pathways that many Indigenous peoples have taken following residential schools,

Sixties Scoop, and the High Arctic Human Experiment, a good and timely read. It certainly is. I highly recommend it. I mean, I remember sitting with Larry in Grease Fjord, Canada's most northern community, right? Way up there in the high Arctic. And it's about two years ago, a little over two years ago now. We were sitting there. We talked about his book, talked about how as a kid at three or four years old, he was moved to that community

from northern Quebec up to Grease Fjord. And how his parents hated it initially, demanded to be sent home after they'd been promised they could go home if they didn't like it. And year after year, Ottawa denied them that right. Now, Larry's still there. He could have left. And he's been all over the place. But he decided to stay there because his roots became in Greasefjord. But his book is terrific. And if you can, you should get it. What I Remember, What I Know. Larry Audlelouk. A-U-D-L-A-L-U-K. And I'm sure you can find it at any good bookstore.

If you can't find it, they'll order it for you. Catherine Taminen. My question today is for Brian Stewart. I appreciate your Tuesday episodes with him and the ongoing coverage of the war in Ukraine. His analysis is incredibly helpful in understanding what's going on, and I appreciate both of your discussions and commentary about the historical context of current affairs. I was wondering if you might ask Brian about the role of women in the war, or if he can talk about the effects of the war on women in Ukraine. I'm curious to know whether there are many women fighting in the war or in leadership positions in the military there.

Okay, well, I'm going to set this one aside because I don't know the answers to those questions. And I'll ask Brian on Tuesday. We'll see where we get on that. The other day I talked about the missing bass guitar of Paul McCartney. It was one of the end bits. Got a couple of letters about it. I thought, oh man, somebody's found it. No. Dave Betts from Grand Bend, Ontario. I couldn't help but be intrigued by the segment on Paul McCartney's Hoffner bass guitar that seemingly has been missing for over 50 years. I thought that I should also add that aside from the affordability of the guitar when first purchased in Hamburg,

my understanding is that Paul also purchased this guitar specifically because of its unique violin-style body shape. Because Paul was a left-handed player, using and purchasing guitars in those days could really be a challenge, as the vast majority of guitars were designed for right-handed players. If one was left-handed, they would have to turn the instrument upside down in order to properly play it, and thus it tended to look quite awkward. The Huffner, because of its shape, was practically designed for both righties and lefties. Paul could easily turn it over and the guitar looked just fine, aside from being easier to play. A fortuitous break, Paul,

and one that will forever be a part of musical history. Thanks, Dave. Marty Zylstra from Maple Ridge, B.C. also had that guitar story on its mind. It was his second Hoffner that people think of when they think of the Beatle bass. It's what he played on Ed Sullivan and beyond, and is what he still has and plays today. He only pulled his first Hoffner out of retirement

after getting the pickups remounted and the whole thing repainted for the Revolution promo video in 1968 and on some Let It Be sessions. Then it disappeared. In other words, the first bass that is lost was barely touched late 1963, early 1964. It was not used in the Rooftop gig in January 1969, however, was used in studio earlier that month. It could easily be presumed then that it disappeared in a studio session around that time but before the rooftop performance. Wow, Marty knows his stuff. Love the podcast, listen very regularly. Thanks, Marty.

Michael Artendale, Sudbury, Ontario. I've recently found your podcast. I used to watch you on The National and missed your insight into the news. The only thing I would really like your insight into is, what would happen if Trump got elected and was convicted and was sentenced to jail for the crimes he's convicted of? He'd pardon himself. I don't think it's going to get that far. As far as I know, there's nothing stopping a person in jail from running for and being president. There's nothing stopping him from running for it.

I think a conviction is a problem for higher levels of leadership. That's one of the arguments that's going on right now about whether or not he should even be allowed to run. But I think the basic answer to your question is if he got convicted and he was president, he'd pardon himself. That'd be the end of that. He'd pardon himself even before the trial was over, if the trial was still going on, if he won the election. But my prediction is he's not going to win the election.

He's not even going to run in the election. There's a long time between now and a year from November let's see what happens but what do I know? I've been wrong on Trump every time except I'm not wrong that he's a liar he's a proven liar over and over and over again

he's also a fraud but I'll be careful how I say that he's liable for fraud in a civil case in New York But I'll be careful how I say that. He's liable for fraud in a civil case in New York. And that's the one we're watching play out. He's already lost in one of the counts. Michael Patton, Edmonton. Peter, the news has been very ugly the last few weeks.

I really appreciate your podcast. I can hear fair and balanced conversations about important issues. Thank you, Michael. Not everybody feels the same way you do, but we're glad you do. Can modern politicians do the same? Are they too focused on the soundbite or the tweet? Probably. Lately, it seems like there are fewer and fewer politicians capable of having a grown-up conversation about important issues.

Far too many seem like they never miss an opportunity to act like a bratty teenager. Is this a feature of the modern politician? Well, it's certainly the feature of some modern politicians. Hopefully not all of them. And I don modern politicians. Hopefully not all of them. And I don't think it is of all of them. Sadly, these get a lot of attention from people like us in the media who talk about them, perhaps more than they deserve to be.

I did an inbid last week about Netflix getting out of the delivery service for DVDs. Right? They started this years ago, 20 years ago. You could order like a rental service, but you order a particular movie and they mail you the movie and a DVD. Well, streaming has long since caught up to that. And so they finally called it a day, shutting down that operation just last week or the week before.

And I said, when I was reading that story, I said, gee, I didn't know that. And Scott White wrote, Netflix's DVD service was never available in Canada. Perhaps why you never rented from them, don't you think? All right, Scott. Your point has been made. However, maybe you didn't know that there in fact was

a DVD rental service in Canada that was extremely popular that operated just like Netflix. It was called Z zip.ca and they were millions of DVDs mailed out by them but they figured it out earlier than Netflix they figured out hey we're going to end up

losing on this if we keep it going because of streaming so they pulled the plug in 2014, somewhere around there. Remember a couple of weeks ago the ranter was on about bees, butterflies, and birds and how he wasn't hearing them in a particular forest that he was walking in. Well, Annex Saint-Hilaire in Depey in Ontario writes, The renter blamed climate change, which is likely an important contributing factor. Another significant factor is human encroachment on natural habitat,

resulting in the loss of forests, meadows, wetlands, etc. I'm surprised no listener brought up gardening practices and plant selection in urban and suburban areas. The low number of bees, butterflies, and birds in these regions is caused by the human desire for extensive weed-free lawns and gardens full of non-native, sometimes exotic, and even invasive plants, shrubs, and trees. These types of plants provide little to no food source for our native insects and birds

and can even spread and take over the natives in the wild. We need to be better stewards of our land and make careful choices to support native ecology, prioritizing native plants and limiting exotics, hybrids, cultivars, and especially invasives. We also need to reduce, if not ban, the use of pesticides and herbicides. Our survival depends on it. Okay, Annick. Two more. Joseph Murdoch Flowers. I was just walking around in the Ottawa airport and spotted a payphone. I was surprised to see that it now costs 50 cents to use for local calls.

There was no phone book attached. How would one know which number to call? No one I know memorizes phone numbers attached. How would one know which number to call? No one I know memorizes phone numbers anymore. Then he sent a picture from the Ottawa airport. There are two pay phones separated only by a defibrillator on the wall. But there they are, two phones, no phone book, 50 cents for a phone call.

I'm so old, I remember when it was 5 cents. Okay, last letter. Gus Livingston from Dunville, Ontario. The other day you were talking about the original look of maple syrup bottles, which always had small handles. Well, originally, I also had small handles. But because of overindulgence of maple syrup and other sweets, I no longer have small handles.

Now I believe they're called love handles. All right, Gus. Gus occasionally writes in with an attempt at humor. And he had some there. They're good for you. Enjoy your maple syrup. And enjoy your evening. Tomorrow, Friday, Good Talk is here.

Chantelle Hebert, Bruce Anderson will be back. Look forward to that. Meanwhile, have a great day. Talk to you in 48 hours 48 hours man a little too much maple syrup we'll talk to you again in 24 hours