The Gun Is the Great Equalizer

I am a bit of an anomaly when it comes to my family. It is not a secret, if you have read any part of this blog long enough, that I am a staunch proponent of firearms ownership. My wife, while passably tolerating my gun hobby, leans more towards the very common, yet erronenous notion that "guns are bad". Of course, if you get your information from the mass media, that's the impression you'll get, though you'll have a tough time defending it.

However, out of respect for my wife, I choose to keep my gun interests to myself. My kids, both under 7, don't know I don't own any guns. Of course, if they ever ask me, I won't lie about it, but I won't go out of my way to volunteer this information either (by the way, that's generally a good mindset to have, since you don't want to advertise that you have guns in your house anyway, just in case the wrong people get a hold of this information).

Over the past weekend, our family went camping with some Jewish friends of ours, who, while they are very nice and thoughtful people, are thoroughly indoctrinated in anything that smacks of today's liberal and left-wing mindset. They don't spank their kinds and frown when I say that both my kids get spanked. This weekend was evidence of what happens when you have a lassez-faire, "let the kids run your life" type of parenting style. But anyway, one interesting interchange between my son and one of our friends was when she was taking a photo of my son with her kids and my son decided to use both hands to make guns and point it to the side - you know the posture, the "here's lookin' at you kid" type of gesture. She said, "oh, you shouldn't be doing that - guns are not nice." I quickly remarked to my son, though I was indirectly talking with her, "guns can be used for good or bad", and I knew she shot me a look, but I wasn't really paying attention to her response.

It seems very typical that those who oppose gun ownership are the ones who probably can benefit from it the most. Whether you are a woman, a visible minority, a senior citizen, or someone who is physically in stature, guns are, for all intents and purposes, the great equalizer. I mean, think about it - if you are a woman and are attacked, chances are that your aggressor will be physically stronger than you (as a general rule, based on on the physical attributes of men and woman on a whole). If you are a visible minority, especially if you are black, you would benefit greatly from a firearm for self-defence, since blacks tend to be victims of crimes. It's no different if you're a smaller person like me. In whatever case, a gun evens the odds between potential victim and aggressor. The fact of the matter is, there will always be bigger, badder people out there. There is no shame in utilizing extra tools at your disposal in our own self-defence.

I am a bit surprised at our friend's response. Being Jewish, you would think she would have experienced racism or ethnic jokes at one point in her life or another (but then again, she is from a fairly multicultural country - a real multicultural country, so she may have been fortunate in avoiding all the racial tension those other of us who are minorities would have had to live through. Israel as a country, perhaps only second to Switzerland, has a very high per capita of gun ownership. Yet their crime rates in the cities are infinitely smaller than their North American counterparts. If you look in Canada and the U.S., are the areas where there tends to be more crime tend to be higher and denser-populated metropolitan cities like Toronto, New York, L.A., Chicago, etc. All these areas are high gun-control areas, yet crime remains rampant. Those who live in the poorest of these areas could greatly benefit from owning a firearm as these people are the most likely to have a crime committed on them.

Preach It, Barack Obama - There IS A Problem In the Black Community

This is, like, the only time EVER that I will heap anything close to praise for something Barack Obama said. Truth be told, while I've been following the U.S. presidential race and primaries since the whole thing began, with a new child in the family, I've not had as much interest in fervently commenting on the primary season, which of course, is now over and we will have Barack Obama and John McCain duking it out in November. Not the best candidates each party has to offer, but oh well...

But back to Obama - I cringe everytime I hear this guy talk - I swear, he sounds like an enthusiastic snake oil salesman. Speaks in platitudes and generalities, and why not? His experience is sorely lacking - he needs to make up for it in the only way a politician can - by generating revolutionary sound bytes and catch-phrases in order to ignite the imagination of a political audience who is cynical, despondent, and perhaps even ambivalent towards anything political.

But...his recent comments regarding problems in the black community, particularly in the area of absentee fathers and broken homes for black children was quite a welcome breath of fresh air (on Father's Day, no doubt). I mean, this is nothing new - Bill Cosby has been preaching this for years, yet for whatever reason, it seems as if when bright, highly educated Black folks like Cosby or Obama (well, not sure how bright he is, but anyhow) point a finger at the Black community and pours criticism on them for problems that are seriously over-represented in that community, they usually end up having charges of reverse discrimination, being an "Uncle Tom", "race traitor" and such thrown at them. Obama has been receiving some criticism for his words. But you know, I think this is symptomatic of what he is saying - not taking responsibility for one's actions.

You know, in my younger years when I was haplessly idealistic, naively egalitarian, and would rather turn a blind eye to a problem for fear of offending people, I would never have agreed to such a statement as what Obama and Cosby are saying. Hey, it's not just them - look at those loudmouths Louis Farrakkan (sp.) and Jesse Jackson - they all had that Million Man March back in 1995 - wasn't that sort of saying the same thing?

Now, I know what you are thinking - I certainly cannot be painting all Black people with the same brush. Of course I'm not - I do personally have several Black friends who are in strong, committed marriages, who discipline their kids and raise them right, who don't cry racism at the drop of a hat. I am smart enough to know that I cannot simply paint one broad brush on the "Black community" - which, incidentally is a bit of a peculiar term, since those Black folks I know do not associate with any "Black community" - I wonder whether this is more of a media construct than anything else.

But back to the point - Obama is touching primarily on the issues of Black men who disappear after porking their latest Black female, and producing a child. Who of course, ends up growing up without a father, and despite what the liberal media will tell you about the virtues of a strong single mother, let's all cut the bullshit here, shall we? It has been statistically proven over and over again (not to mention this is just basic common sense) that children from single-parent homes are many times more likely to join a gang, father a child at a very young age, or get pregnant at a very young age, get in trouble with the law, drop out of school, and so forth.

What gets me are these Black people who seem to have blinders on who say that single-parent families are not exclusive to the Black race. That is technically true, but my goodness, how can anyone deny the fact that over 50% of Black kids in the U.S. and Canada are not raised in a home where there is a father and mother present? I can you tell this - there is no better confirmation of something I hear than to see it myself. Several weeks ago, my wife (yes, the only one that I have), my kids (yes, I had them with my wife) and I went to a kids' party establishment. For whatever reason, at either of the locations of this establishment that we have frequented, there is a pronounced number of Black kids there (don't know why, can't be bothered to figure it out). Anyhow, it was of no surprise for me to see that only about 35% of these kids came with a mother and father (whether they were married, I wasn't sure). Yet, 90% of the White kids there, around 90% of the East Indian kids, and 95% of the Asian kids had both fathers and mothers present (and the ones that didn't, you could see that the mothers had wedding bands on - yes, I notice these types of things, and no, I wasn't looking for a date).

Now, I work at the corner of a major intersection in Toronto (and by major, I mean major - like, both of these intersecting streets encompass the length and width of the city, if not ore). On one of the streets, about a 10 minute drive Westbound, you will find perhaps the most notorious intersection in Toronto for crime and such. Again, when I was young and stupid, I used to think that that intersection's crime rate was a figment of the press' imagination. I've been there during the day (just driving through, though I've since learned to take severe detours around that intersection - even if it costs me an extra 15 minutes to do so). Let me tell you what I have seen and heard there. 1) I have seen several gangs openly doing drug deals (yes, I know what a gang looks like and what drugs look like). 2) I have heard gunshots during the freaking day - yes, I know what a gunshot sounds like. 3) I have seen all manner of complete lack of respect - ie. two young punks were trying to beat the light in crossing the street and plowed over an old man - which they didn't even bother checking to see if he was OK - he was. 4) it was a harem of single motherhood. Oh, did I mention that everyone in that neighbourhood was Black?

I am sorry, but whatever you may hear about Asians, I can confirm that the rate of children being raised in two-parent homes (and I mean a mother and father, not that gay/lesbian shit that has been all over the press lately) is significantly higher. In fact, in the whole time growing up, I think I only know or one or two Asian families whose mother and father figures divorced. I'm sure it's slightly higher now, based on the poisonous North America anti-marriage culture, but I can bet every dollar in my bank account that it is still nowhere near the epidemic proportions of out-of-wedlock births and single-parent homes that just permeate in the Black community. I'm pretty sure my fellow Asians aren't lining up the jails and penitentiaries. I'm almost certain that a high majority of gun crime in Toronto is not perpetrated by Asians. Heck, I think I'd be comfortable in saying that White folks, who have experienced a high incidence of divorce as this sad scenario continues to rise statistically, are still by and large more likely to be in two-parent homes, as compared to Black folks.

Now, onto a topic that is a favourite of mine: guns. Let's be honest here - who commits most of the gun crimes in the U.S.? Despite the fact that millions of Whites have guns, it's not the Whites perpetrating the crimes (sure, you'll see the Columbines and what not where White people are "featured", but for every reported White crime with a gun, I guarantee there are many more unreported Black crimes with guns. But of course, it is not fashionable to paint Blacks in a negative light nowadays, so the generally left-leaning press tends to ignore it. I find it funny that these "Black leaders" are calling for gun bans and extreme gun control measures, yet the eventual targets of these proposed bans would be mostly law abiding White folks. Consider this as well - you see guys like 50 Cent who, on both his "Get Rich or Die Trying" and "The Massacre" albums - by the way, both albums are pretty good from a music perspective even though the lyrics aren't exactly the more family-oriented - both of these albums feature 50 Cent and his posse holding Tec-9s, 9mm handguns, some assault rifles, and so all, while they are all dressed up in gang regalia. You ever see a White person dressed like this holding all these weapons? We'd probably all laugh at it. But for Black rappers for the most part, this is commonplace - and in a sense, it is almost portrayed as cool, and kids (and adults) buy into this. I remember when I was a teenager, the big controversy was Ice-T's track, "F*ck The Police", which at the time generated great concern among a number of folks. These days, no one would bat an eyelash, as Blacks seem to almost be synonymous with gangs and drive-by shootings, etc. I mean, looking like a pimp is not only in fashion in the Black community, but exudes an air of street credibility, and life experience (forget the fact that the practice is not exactly legal or moral).

I happened to turn to a radio call-in show on the car ride home from work today, and they interviewed a Black guy from Africa on this. He says that this problem with Blacks is U.S. issue - it's not like that in Africa at all. Is he kidding me? Africa - the place where the largest incidence of A.I.D.S. occurs. No, it's not because African males are bonking monkeys, as urban legend would have it (at least not anymore). Fact of the matter is, in Africa, Blacks encounter the same thing - lots of fatherless children, and the A.I.D.S. virus is passed by men having several women partners (whether by a polygamous "relationship" or wild, heathenistic living. Don't believe me? My wife and I sponsor an adorable little girl in Africa (Rwanda, to be exact). Her father and mother are not married. Where is the father? In jail. Sounds familiar?

Last year, I hired a guy at work from Africa. Aside from the fact that he really didn't do his job properly and we ended letting him go, I got to know him as a person through the number of months he was with us. I found out that he had two kids - ah, that's great, I said. I asked him why they didn't come to Canada with him. He said they are with their mother. I said, "oh, you mean your wife?" He said, "I'm not married". Sound familiar?

I keep in touch with this 46-year-old lady from Alabama, to whom I sold some Michael J. Fox collectibles. She has given me great insight on the American South, and have confirmed some of what I had always thought about the South. She did tell me, interestingly enough, that racism is alive and well there. However, it is her opinion (she she says is echoed by many) that she would never date a Black man. And I mean never. She said where she lives, the Asians there are "hard working and treated like Whites". The Blacks, however, no matter how hard working, are still not regarded well. And I think we're starting to see a subtle backlash now. Growing up, my parents were of the mindset that "you marry your own kind", though they added the caveat that "if you do decide to marry of a different race, please let it be anyone other than Black." Now, I will be the first to admit that Asian have their own hangups and can be one of the more racist groups out there (though as a general rule, Asians never have the balls to actually tell someone else how they feel about their race - ie. Asian parents are not likely to confront their daughter's Black boyfriend and tell him to get lost, at least not explicitly. Anyway, I am mentioning this because I am still seeing this nowadays talking with parents who have teenage kids - there's still an "anyone but Black" mentality out there. But whereas before I was disgusted at this sentiment, now that I look at it objectively, based on my observations, would I be happy with my daughter dating a Black guy, knowing what I know about the rate of out-of-wedlock teenage pregnancies among Black women (or White women who obviously try to be Black)? Probably not. If you are shocked by this, think about what you would do in your situation.

Why is it like this? I am neither a sociologist or anthropologist, so I cannot be definitively sure, but I can say a few things. One, is that similar things beget similar things. It's not really all that different from the oft-mentioned notion that victims of physical or sexual abuse as children, tend to become perpetrators of the same once they become adults. After all, like it or not, we tend to be a product of our environment (and this doesn't even count my belief in the presence of sin as a key factor to why people are all born bad, in my opinion). So the Black child (a boy in particular) who grows up without a father generally does not have certain key elements of manhood passed down to him. What do I mean by this? Well, let me just say that is my belief that while a mother and father both equally impart important life lessons to a child (a boy in this case), a father has a particular role in teaching his son the value of accepting responsibility, honour, treating women properly, etc. Without that father teaching his son about these things (and enforcing them through example), the child grows up without a compass of masculinity. As a result, he seeks the acceptance he probably subconsciously wants from his father, so he will join a gang to get it. Women will be regarded as objects to be used, rather than people to love. Having a child would be considered a collateral event as a result of "hitting it" rather than a responsibility to be accepted.

Now, before you target me a closet racist (or even an overt racist), consider the following: I am really targeting my rant here towards young Black people. With older Black folks, it's a different ballgame. I have a deep respect for Black elders - if you look at Black folks who are 45+ years old, chances are you will see them married with kids, just like the rest of us. I guess I am talking about Black men here. In fact, one of the people on this earth I have the most respect for, is my former boss at work, who of all my bosses I have ever had, took care of my career and job development more than anyone else - he secured fantastic raises for me during the time I worked for him and he really looked out for my well being and best interest, career-wise, as well as peronal-wise. I actually will likely be leaving my company of 11 years and joining him within the next year, as a Network Manager at his establishment (he's the C.E.O., by the way). He also happens to be a born-again Christian, and a mature one at that. And this is one thing I really like about older Black people - there is a deep sense of spirituality that is very strong. I am not entirely sure where there is such a dichotomy between older Blacks and younger Blacks, but that's what I've noticed.

Now, I don't want to give the wrong impression here - a lot of Black folks are equally as concerned about this problem in the "community". I am on an Asian cultural discussion forum and one of the topics one day was why you seldom see Asian male, Black female couples. Most of the Asian males did not bother responding to the topic, so one of the gals there, who is extremely articulate and well spoken, answered the question - it's the stereotype of Black people out there - the stereotype of the Black man is well known, but Black women are portrayed in the media as loud-mouthed, opinionated, fat-assed, rude bit..., er...persons. Now, I can tell you that that is a total media construct, as I have met more than my fair share of Black women who do not fit that stereotype in the least, starting when I was in high school. In fact, before I met my wife, I went on a couple of casual walks (don't know if I'd consider them dates or not, probably not) with this girl I met at our school named Lorna (interestingly enough, she was from the same town/city my wife is from). She was a really kind-hearted girl. And she was Black. A number of my female friends in school in grade 12 were Black - from Guyana, etc.). I know several Black ladies nowadays who are kindest, loveliest friends that we have. I know the stereotype is not true. Besides, you see these Rosanne Barr and Rosie O'Donnell types and know that loud-mouthed obnoxious women are not unique to Blacks.

(I'M NOT FINISHED THIS POST YET - MORE TO COME)...

Black-Only or Afro-Centric Schools - Are You Kidding Me?

Ah, leave it up to the liberal establishment in Toronto to float an idea that reeks of racial preference and reverse discrimination under the guise of "increased tolerance" and "racially advantageous education". If you haven't heard by now, Toronto has approved the start-up of a racially segregated school. Yup, you heard that right, and nope, we're not back in the 1950s in the American south, ladies and gentleman. In 2008, in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, there will be the establishment of an essentially all-black school. I suppose afro-centric is the proper politically correct name, but since this isn't the Toronto Star, black-only school is more than sufficient to describe what will undoubtedly be a inevitable failure. I don't agree with much with the very liberal premier of Ontario, one Dalton McGuinty, but I have to say that I am in full concurrence with him in his uneasiness and opposition to such a school being put in place.

Unfortunately, such an issue can not only be a contentious one, but has an extremely high risk of polarizing people racially. From what I've seen and heard, not unlike many race issues, we see a clear divide in how members of racial groups (in this case, the reaction is generally broken down along historical Black/White lines). However, despite what the media may report, not all Black folks are keen on this idea.

Earlier last month, my wife and I had the opportunity to accept an invitation to have "brunch" with one of my wife's clients. I don't know them very well, and to be honest, didn't really want to go, but she insisted, so I went, mostly to serve as an example to my son that you can't always do what you really want to do. The family is part Haitian/part African (for the sake of this discussion, it would be safe to simply say that they were Black). Anyhow, we show up and the food is not ready. For a brunch, we didn't eat until 3PM. While to me it is generally not generally a significant detail as far as social interactions go, I did chuckle to myself, as this late lunch sort of underscored a prevalent societal stereotype about Black folks - that late is OK (of course, I'm always late, so it may be an Asian thing as well). Anyhow, we thought it would be an oppotunity to get to know this family better. Between trying to make conversation over the large Samsung LCD TV that was blasting away the soundtrack portion of some clearly pirated DVD, we found out that we weren't the only ones that were invited to this late brunch. In fact, there are lots of people invited. Fantastic, I thought, it's going to be a freaking house party now, as if the CD player blaring in the background, trying to compete with the aforementioned DVD, wasn't loud and irritating enough.

Their friends showed up, and not surprisingly, they were all Black. The conversation turned to world current events and then proceeded to focus back on local Canadian issues. It was a pretty interesting conversation, with some very knowledgeable and articulate folks there, not the least of which was this news junkie, who like me listened to talk radio and had an opinion on almost any current event. To no one's surprise, after some ice-breaker topics, the subject shifted quickly to the (at the time) proposed all-Black school in Toronto. The fellow turned to me, and with other eyes turned my way, he asked what I thought of the idea. Now, what the heck would you say to a group of Black folks huddled together to discuss such a topic, particularly if you were the only non-Black there (my wife was there as well, but didn't say a whole lot and was subtly tapping my foot with hers as code to say that it's time that we went home)? Of course, I am not one to be shy with my opinions and since I figured that I am not exactly bursting with politically correct diplomacy skills, I may as well state my honest opinion, and if I do get attacked (figuratively or physically), there were several exit routes I could have taken. So I told the group how I thought it was such a terrible idea, not because it was contrary to some contemporary utopian view about how everyone should simply get along and ignore the differences between us, but that the idea did not have my support because it was essentially a weak, bailing-out type of response, which is not uncommon in today's lack-of-responsibility and throwning-in-the-towel mentality. People nowadays do not deal with challenges very well, whether it be societal, financial, emotional, physical, etc. People as a whole have also generally abandoned long-coveted virtues such as hard work and paying your dues, to use an overused cliche.

Here's the rub, essentially, I continued to tell them. The idea of this school was floated, in part due to some Blacks (in mostly urban centres) not performing as well academically, in relation to their non-Black counterparts (White, Asian, etc.) Now, there are people, like that sociologist (what's his name? Russell or something?) who make claims that Black people are as a whole less intelligent than Whites, and especially Asians, due to brain size, etc.) I don't give that guy's argument much credence, because over time, I have seen more than my fair share of Black nerds out there, just as much as I have seen White nerds, though hardly competitive with the amount of Asian nerds out there. Still, I don't think any of this is due to any racially-contributed gifting of natural intelligence. Have a look at where these Black kids come from? Fact is, many of them in urban areas come from single families, the vast majority of which are headed up by a Black woman who has to work to support her kids that she more than likely had out of wedlock. The father is nowhere to be seen. No one can debate this - it's just a fact. Now, these kids grow up with essentially an absentee mother (who, to her credit is working) but there is no one at home to stress the value of education and academic achievement. Contrast that to the amount of White families who have a mother and father in the house (I know this is changing, but the incident of two-parent White families is considerably higher than Blacks) and contrast that particularly with Asian families who almost certainly have a mother and father at home and are culturally achievement-oriented. That's why you see Asians excel at school. Culturally, they have no choice, since any slacking at a young age would be met with spanking or worse, a paternal beating (netiher of these are kosher in today's sensitivity-trained politically correct environment). So having all these Black kids, who are underachieving, in their own school will do nothing but perpetuate mediocrity.

Now, there are the racial and social aspects. Some parents claim that their kids would perform better socially with people who are the same as them. I won't dispute this claim, since I am pretty certain of its validity. Growing up in an all-White school, I think I would have gained more social skills at an earlier age, if there were more people like me at the school. Instead, I was a bit of an outcast, carrying my Chinese food-based drink and wearing my Hong-Kong inspired clothing to class, where I was met with jeers and worse. However, if I were to do it again, I wouldn't do it any differently. Reason why is because despite my being ouside of my own comfort zone, I did realize at an early age (grade four) that by going into a shell and keeping to myself, I wasn't going to make matters any better. Sure I wanted to fit in, but moreso I wanted to desperately show that I wasn't much different than they were. I believe through my efforts, I have diffused future racists from developing. Could you imagine if there were more Asians in my school? No doubt I would have gravitated towards them. We would have formed our own clique. Probably ate lunch together and avoided the rest of the White kids. What would that do? I'd certainly feel more comfortable and to a degree, safer. But make no mistake, I would have perpetuated all the stereotypes that others already had about Asian kids. I have always maintained that mentality, from childhood throughout adulthood. My disgust over a city like Toronto which claims to be multicultural and "tolerant" (which is as much of a hogwash term - I had a stronger word, but this is a family show - as I've ever heard), while they in essence practice a sort of isolationist politic by allowing ethnic ghettos to develop and remain self-sustaining (like it or not, places like Chinatown, Greektown, Koreantown, Little Italy, etc. are in essence all segregated ethnic ghettos) is something that constantly leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Being a born-again Christian, I find it absolutely abhorrent that Christian believers have chosen to segregate themselves in various ethnic churches, under the guise of cultural limitations). The former pastor of the church that I currently attend once told me that he was faced with a decision long ago - shall they do the right thing and stay in the increasingly Asian community that they found themselves and partner with other Asian ministries, or shall they pick up and leave. At the time, the church's demographics were heavily white and middle-age/elderly, and when the church decided that the right thing to do was stay put and partner up with an Asian church, 20% of the congregation left. My former pastor impressed upon me while a homogenous church will likely grow faster than a heterogenous church, is catering to one's self-absorbed sense of comfort and ease the right thing to do?

My opposition to an all-black school carries the same tenets of arguments that I espouse for other ventures that try to cater to a castle-type of mentality. It is no surprise to anyone that I hold a very strong view against things like homeschooling, which are really segregationalist schools for White parents who hold either religiously fundamentalist views, or who have a fortress mentality to child-rearing. In either case, it's not much different than the all black-schools argument. I suppose you can take me to task and argue that there is no difference between black-only schools and private schools. In private schools, however, there is generally no overtly sinister intention - that is, there isn't any racial overtones, though it may be argued that subtly, some parents by sending their kids to a private school are in essence keeping their kids away from urban minority youth. Private schools are also not funded by any level of government, whether it be municipal or provincial. The old adage applies - it's your money - you do whatever you want with it - as long as I'm not paying for your private school or segregated school, I don't really care.

It is funny that this whole thing has cropped up this year. Last year, in the Ontario election, Progressive Conservative leader John Tory was roundly criticized for his position on allowing faith-based schools to be provincially funded. While I disagree with Tory's position (in which he has since backtracked), I find it funny that there seems to be a modicum of support for an all-Black school, while there was vocal opposition to a provincially funded all-Christian or all-Jewish or all-Muslim school (all of which I oppose, as well as the currently government-funded Catholic school system in Ontario).

Some of the other problems with a all-Black school include an unhealthy focus on race. Yes, February is officially Black history month (not sure who decided this, but I neither observe nor support it), but you would think that with all the struggles that Black civil rights leaders have fought to achieve, that the best that the community can come up with is a all-Black school. There are more than Black people in a city like Toronto, in academia, is there really a racial distinction when it comes to core subjects like math, science, reading, etc. - which brings me to my next point: in the global economy and in today's business world, one has to be prepared and able to work with a diverse employee base. I mean, I have worked with people who are of all races, and have worked with gay peple as well as an individual who had a horrific sex change. Did I enjoy all these interactions? Absolutely not. Did I agree with these people's personal views? No. But I have to work with them. And, I believe that in learning and interacting with different people during my academic and educational days, it well prepared me in dealing with a diverse group of people, some of which I don't agree with and even some that I may not particularly like. In perpetuating a Black school, I believe its students would not be as well prepared to work in the workplace when they graduate (except for working for B.E.T. or something like that).

Last week, it was revealed that a Barrie police inspector circulated a email that essentially played up the stereotypes of Black people, in the context of the all-Black school in Toronto. Many were offended by the email, which posed mathematical problem solving scenarios based on drive-by shootings, drugs, or prostitution. I can't say that I was necessarily offended by this, but I do thing that another negative by-product of such a school is to create more racists, or possibly bring racists that were in the closet out in the open. I can forsee Whites glad to see Blacks no longer attending the same schools as their kids. Add to that the fact that these all-Black schools are essentially a double-standard: if several Whites came together to propose an all-White school, would that have much traction? Likely, the societal condemnation would be fast and swift. In my view, having an all-Black school is no different than an all-White school or an all-Asian school. It is essentially a poor effort to address a symptom of a larger issue.

Racial Stereotyping and Generalizations - Not Necessarily A Bad Thing

Last night, my brother, along with my Dad, came out to my son's Christmas concert. The concert was pretty funny, and lots of fun, watching the school staff trying to co-ordinate the singing and maintaining the enthusiasm of 90 kindergarten kids on stage, most of them, I am sure, were ready for bed, based on the sleepy faces and the confused "deer in the headlights" look. I enjoyed watching my son sing along with his fake antlers affixed to a headband that he wore, tambourine in hand. He did a fabulous job, as did all the kids.

After the concert, and a short visit to our home by my brother and Dad, I drove my brother home (about 45-50 minutes away). We had a chance to chat, and I remarked that earlier, before the concert, as we were getting our Festive Family Dinner meal at Swiss Chalet, he seemed rather irritated. He said at the time, it was possibly work related, but in discussing it all, he said that he was able to pinpoint the cause of his frustration and mood. It was because of the Toronto people in general seemingly losing all manners during the Christmas holidays, particularly on the roads and in the malls. Now, this came as no surprise to me, since, as I had previously stated in this here blog, that people in general seem very fickle during this time of year, turning on the good vibes seemingly at will, with this "Christmas spirit" crap, while they selfishly plow themselves through a mall, pushing and shoving like a bunch of refugees in seeing a box of goodies from the Red Cross. I mentioned to my brother that what he is experiencing is not unusual, since I generally avoid the malls as well for this reason, and save myself a lot of headache and aggravation.

My brother, however, added some other comments, which I found both interesting, and surprising, coming from his mouth. He indicated that people in the Toronto area are ruder in certain areas. He recently did a favour for a colleague of mine (and a former colleague of his) in getting her the much-sought-after Nintendo Wii system. As a favour to her, he delivered the unit to her in Brampton, where she lives. My brother had indicated that "I don't want to be stereotypical, but those people in Brampton are very rude - they cut you off, and don't even exercise the simplest of courtesies!" Now, I knew what he was getting at, and since him and I were in the car and could talk without the ears of bleeding-heart liberals listening, we were able to have a frank discussion. Brampton, you may not know, is a suberb of Toronto, and is populated by a heavy East Indian/Pakistani population. Just look during a general election in any Brampton riding, and you'll invariably see that all the candidates for the various political parties are East Indian or Pakistani or Tamil. Obviously my brother was talking about those people, even though he didn't name. I, of course, don't really give a rat's ass about being politically correct, so I said, "Why don't you just come out and say that you're irritated by that ethnic group?" Interestingly enough, my brother's roommate and long-time friend from university, is of East Indian background, but he is quick to indicate that she is different than the rest of them. He was careful not to sound stereotypical and I said it's OK if he stereotypes, since we live by what our experience tells us. It's not like he's riding with an NDPer left-wing "tolerance for everyone" type of person here...

I told him of my own opinions on this subject, and in particular, how I wasn't all that far off in terms of my own perceptions. I sell a lot of stuff on craigslist. And as is the craigslist method, everything is paid for during local pickup. I meet a lot of people from a lot of different demographics, and the one thing I have noticed is that people of East Indian or Pakistani (that were not born here) tend to be irritatingly hard to deal with when it comes to making the sale. Nine times out of ten, they will try to haggle the price with me, and not a reasonable haggle, but a ridiculous offer that is insulting (ie. I sell something for $60.00, which is fair market value, and they offer $15.00, at which point I tell them to go take a hike). Now, am I being stereotypical and racist? Yes, I am being stereotypical, because I go by what my own experience tells me. If I get mugged nine separate times by nine separate guys who happen to wear Toronto Maple Leafs jerseys , you'd be an idiot to not feel apprehension the next time a guy is walking behind you at night with a Toronto Maple Leafs jersey on. Now, I don't believe it's racist, because I haven't (as of yet) gotten to the point where I will tar every single person with the same brush. I do know of a few very nice and kind East Indian guys and gals, so I know better, even though I do have some formed opinions already. I think in this sense we all do.

My brother also mentioned how he detests riding the subway to certain parts of Scarborough (not the greatest part of Toronto, since there are very crime-ridden pockets of it). Again, he didn't come out and say this, so I said it for him, but there are some subways stops which are in some fairly Black-populated areas. He said that the kids there lack respect, manners, and so forth. That's generally been my experience as well with Black youth in Toronto, but again, this can be attributed primarily to the type of family structure you see in these communities (and I've discussed this before so I won't bother rehashing it) with generally no fathers present, a great deal of poverty (some of it may be residual from racism in the past, but much of it I believe continues to be self-inflicted through lack of self-responsibility, initiative, and wallowing in one's guilt and blaming everyone else. I know I'm not the only one who holds this view. Is this stereotypical? Perhaps. Generalizing? Of course. But that's been my experience, all the way from grade four, when the only black guy in the class stole my coveted video game system, to when I was bowled over by this huge black guy running down the hall in high school and not watching where he was running. He never apologize, but just laughed. To an extent, I may still carry some of the residual avoidance of coloured people that my parents harboured. However, despite my generalized perception, I know that it is unfair to paint all Black people with the same brush (as racists like to do) since I know of many Black folks who don't fit that stereotype at all (interestingly enough, some Blacks may consider these folks "trying to be White"). The best boss that I ever had was a Black man (and a very strong Christian), who took care of me
at work and helped my career progress. Two of our close friends are Black. There are a number of Black people at our church with whom I get along very well. So I know that while I still may have some perceptions based on what I see, I warned my brother not to let his observations cloud his general opinion. Now, if you have not ever met a Black person that was nice to you, then I certainly don't blame you for not being comfortable around them.

Generalizations can cause problems sometimes. This became abundantly evident a couple of months ago at my son's school. There was this kid, who was picking on my son (and many others). My son told me his name and I got pretty pissed, since to me, it was a Middle-Eastern type of name. I remember remarking to my wife, "Those stupid damn Arabs, causing trouble again", (to my shame, what I actually said was considerably worse, and I won't brother repeating it here) to which my wife responded by reminding me that as a Christian, I should have love in my heart and forgive people. She is right, and I felt bad in saying that. However, I felt even more bad the day I walked my kid to school, and he pointed out at that bully kid, and he was a white kid from Eastern Europe. Well, I learned a lesson that day about assumptions and the problematic aspects of generalizing. I have, over the years, developed a lack of fondness for those from the Middle East (and it has nothing to do with 9/11, which seems to be the catalyst for a lot of anti-muslim sentiments). It's funny, because I have known Jews over the years, and they have never been pushy to try to force their beliefs or way of life onto others. Muslims, though, I find, seemingly like to complain about Canadian society and in particular, the Western way of life, since there is much cultural clash between that and their own lifestyle. My brother and I discussed this last night and we both agreed that there should be something instituted in becoming a Canadian citizen that makes you swear off any problems you had back in your former life in your former country. Please...don't bring your shit to Canada. In Scarborough, I see all these conflicts between East Indian and Sri Lankan gangs, the origins of which came from the other side of the world. I have seen first hand that the Jewish and Palestinian conflict is well and alive in Canada. There are Asian gangs that run amok certain parts of Toronto because of conflict and irritation started back in Hong Kong or Vietnam.

I've been involved with sport shooting for almost a year now. I've discussed airgunning thoroughly here on various articles and will continue to do so. However, getting into the sport/hobby has caused my fair share of apprehension. This was due to perceptions (by others, and to a lesser extent, by me) and generalization that the shooting sport hobby is something that is enjoyed exclusively by gun-toting, loner, anti-government Caucasians. This may be, in part, fueled by stereotypes of a bunch of White guys at NRA meetings or people may attempt to make the following links:

Shooting = nothing to do = rural = farms = white guys

or

Shooting = gun nut = uneducated = trailer trash

or

Shooting = violence = video games = young white male

But as I got into sport shooting (not hunting), I realized that what the media (who typically has a hand in handing us these stereotypes) has historically depicted is simply not true. Many of the fellow airgunners with whom I correspond are very educated folks who are married and have families (in fact, the incidence of stable, married people) are much higher amongst outdoorsmen than the general population (ie. office workers and city people). All the airgunners I know have jobs. They are mostly articulate. Now, I have run into one or two stereotypical gun nuts who believe that the government is out to get them (which may be true!) and believe that they need to arm themselves to the teeth to overthrow the Zionist takeover in the future. Aside from these few glaring exceptions, having exposure to these folks has made me realize that much of the perceptions of them in the media are unfounded. And to boot, there are a lot of Asians and minorities who do sport shooting - I see them when I go into the gunshop at my local outdoors store. In fact, one of the local instructors for the Canadian Firearms Security Course in Markham is an Asian guy, who holds classes in Cantonese for his students and there is a growing interest amongst Asians in the outdoors. It's nice to see stereotypes dispelled.

Now, I don't want to leave this entry with you thinking that I have a problem with minorities, per se. As an Asian guy myself, I should be more understanding, right? Wrong. I am not a bleeding-heart liberal who expects handouts from others or the government. If my life sucks, it's because I've at least in part contributed to it. Everyone has a choice, and you look at people who have come from similar situations who have pulled themselves up by their bootstraps and refuse to be a victim of generalization, you can see that hard work, initiative, and taking responsibility are not unique to any one racial group. They may even fight to show that they do not fit the stereotype. I applaud these people.

Race and Sports: Mark Bell Vs. Michael Vick Vs. Dany Heatley Vs. Donovan McNabb

I seem to be on a theme about racial issues lately and since there seems to be some of this on the news, I thought I'd throw in my own bone... This post has more of a sports focus, but I think it brings out the point that I want to make - if it doesn't, well...what can I say... This posting differs from previous postings in that I'm brainstorming this while I'm reading, so I suspect that everything will seem rather disjointed. This is not normal, but it's late, and I'm getting sleepy.

If you have read this blog from the beginning (and it's still in its infantile stage), and I know from emails to me that there are about eight of you who have, you'll know that when it comes to race issues, I almost never play the race card. I've been accused of being insensitive all the way to being called a race traitor (which I find laughable, since it seems like anyone who refuses to go into victim mode is called a race traitor). I also don't generally care what people think about my opinions - I welcome feedback, and while I admit there are times I can say things with more tact or more constructively and am open to adjusting my entries so I don't sound like an uneducated raving lunatic, I have never once felt that I needed to apologize for any opinion that I expressed here, and this won't change anytime soon. Especially when it comes to discussing racial topics.

Today we're going to talk sports. I love sports, both as a spectator as well as a participant. In fact, tomorrow, I am going out to play tennis with my son (I just bought him a Wilson SpongeBob tennis racquet tonight) and wife (who will likely watch the balls sail by, more than play, due to her pregnant condition). Anyhow, it is fitting that I discuss a marriage of two topics which intrigue me quite a bit: sports and race.

If you don't think there's been any racial overtones in the sports world for the past few years, you better give your head a shake. Particularly this year alone, there have been many incidents in sports which take on potential racial tones. My goal here, through this brainstormed posting, is to buttress my opinion that I firmly believe that there is a determinable double-standard applied to whites and black athletes in the sporting arena - I am not here to brainstorm solutions, but simply to show instances where such a double-standard seems to be in place.

To start: I'm not going to delve into the whole recent Michael Vick thing with the dogfighting, as that has had more than adequate press coverage, not to mention that for me, I already wrote a blurb about it. I think he brought much shame on the NFL, the Falcons, and his sponsors, who rightfully dropped him from his contracts. Public opinion was quick and decisive on this one, overwhelmingly condemning him for his absolutely horrendous and immensely irresponsible actions with his dog-fighting activities. It got to the point where a lady on eBay auctioned off several of her Michael Vick sports cards that have been personally chewed on by her dog, the proceeds of the auction went towards a local animal shelter. If I remember right, the auction netted thousands of dollars for these chewed up cards. Michael Vick is likely going to do jail time, and he is likely done with the NFL, based upon his indefinite suspension from the league at present. He should be punished and banned from playing in the NFL. Basketball player Stephon Marbury chimed in on Vick's suspension, indicating that he was treated with a different standard because he is a black athelete. Marbury was roundly criticized for his remarks, but you know, I agree with him for the most part. To me, as a spectator, the first impression that I got was that Vick was pounced on. I don't know anyone or have read anyone who is willing to publicly defend Vick - not necessarily excuse what he did (which was a criminal act), but to suggest that there is more to the story than what the press is telling you.

Anyway, back to my point. Let's look at a recent incident in the NHL surrounding newly minted Maple Leaf Mark Bell. If you don't know this story, Bell was traded to the Leafs from the San Jose Sharks, thrown in with the goalie Toscola (sp.). The Sharks wanted to unload him, probably because of the baggage he brings with him, the baggage being that he was convicted of drinking and driving, and causing someone a pretty bad injury as a result. He gets sentenced to six months in jail, but only AFTER the upcoming NHL season is complete (which is sometime next June, though for the Leafs, it will be next March, as usual). Now, tell me this. If I, Jeremy, were to drink and drive, hit someone injuring them, try to walk away from the accident, am found in a court of law that I am criminally responsible and am sentenced to six months in jail, do you think they would actually allow me to serve the sentence next year after my new child is born, when I have more vacation time at the beginning of the year, and when work is a little slower? No, the judge will demand that I serve out my sentence quickly and likely, immediately. The NHL suspends Bell for 15 games. Ooooh... I dunno - you can't really directly compare running a dog fighting operation with drinking and driving, but the consequences seem to indicate that drinking and driving and injuring someone is less harshly viewed upon, as opposed to being involved in dog fighting (folks, take off your PETA hats, and look at this somewhat objectively). Bell has had a LOT of supporters who muse that he should be given a second chance, that he made a foolish mistake in his youth, etc. etc. It doesn't seem to me that the general public afforded Vick the same conciliatory gestures.

How about Dany Heatley? Another hockey player - he sped in his car years ago with his friend Dan Snyder (his Atlanta Thrashers teammate) onboard, got into a horrific accident and killed his friend as a result? OK, it was an accident, but it was idiotic behaviour nonetheless and he was charged. He doesn't seem to be any worse for the wear as he's lacing up his skates. Todd Bertuzzi - in that act of angry violence against Steve Moore, knocking him out literally, as well as figuratively as it relates to his career. Bertuzzi's playing back in the league now, again no worse for the wear. Craig McTavish, former Oiler and now coach, killed someone in a drinking and driving accident, and now is a respected NHL coach (at least he still was employed in this capacity last I checked).

Rob Ramage, former Flames hockey player and Leafs captain. Also got into a drinking and driving accident which killed his buddy. I don't see anyone creating anti-Rob Ramage websites (OK, he's 48 and has been out of the game forever)...

Now think of whether they would have been welcomed back with open arms if they were black athletes? How are they really any different than Michael Vick? They broke the law. They were involved in incidents that caused injury, sometimes severe, and in a couple of cases, death to people (not animals). Yet, they don't have indefinite (likely lifetime) suspensions - not even close. Do you honestly think that a black athlete would have received such reconciled treatment? A second chance? Patrick Roy, a future Hall of Fame goalie (if he isn't already), was involved with a domestic dispute in which he physically assaulted his wife. Not really in the news. Considered a personal issue. Yet when Jason Kidd does it, he's now subhuman. I am not excusing any of these behaviours, but just like anything else, I am hoping to see some consistent rules applied to all.

A day or two ago, Donovan McNabb of the Philadelphia Eagles, a very talented multiple pro-bowl selection, went on the airwaves and intimated that there is a racial divide in that only six out of thirty-two starting QBs in the NFL are black. Seven, if you previously counted Vick. It is clear that he was insinuating that there is a racial double-standard when it comes to sports. Anyhow, McNabb's comments have been scrutinized as without merit or supporting evidence.

Rush Limbaugh, a guy for whom I used to have a lot of respect, in terms of his conservative opinions, before he started going the way of a prescription drug addict, was highly critical of Donovan McNabb a year or two ago, making a comment that he's only considered good because he's black, insinuating that if he wasn't black, he'd be mediocre at best. I'm glad that Rush was forced out of an TV analyst role shortly after that, since his comments were dead wrong. The knock on McNabb has always been not being able to win a Super Bowl, but that was the knock on Peyton Manning up until this past year. McNabb is a tremendous athlete and while I would not say that he is as good as Manning is, from a technical perspective, he's right up there with the top QBs in the league (personally, I think that the guy to watch out for in the future is Vince Young of the Titans). McNabb is a very good player, and the fact that he feels that he needs to work doubly-hard to gain acceptance does indicate a wall, invisible or otherwise, that black athletes need to overcome. That being said, some of McNabb's race card arguments lose steam pretty quickly since last I heard, 75% of NFL players are black.

Musing about this further, let's look at this from this angle. You have a predominantly white sport such as hockey. Fighting is considered part of the game and is generally not frowned upon. You have a predominantly black sport like basketball or football. Fighting is considered aggressive and signals a lack of control - remember the whole flap about the Pacers-Pistons game a couple of years back, which spilled into the stands? OK, that is an extreme example, but that was roundly criticized. Several sports commentators called the participants "animals", "savages" and such. There have been bench clearing brawls in hockey and sometimes (albeit rarely) fans are involved in the melee. I don't recall the players being labelled with such names. Remember, I am not one to cry racism at all, so if I were to make such observations, I believe there is intrinsically noteworthy as far as a double-standard is concerned.

I remember a couple of years ago, in hockey, there was a game between the Oilers and Flyers (I think). It was infested by many fights, which the commentators, as impartial as they tried to be (and they weren't try too hard), enjoyed immensely. Most of the fights were white-on-white fights. When it came, however, to Georges LaRoque dropping the gloves with Donald Brashear (both of whom were black), the crowd went significantly wilder and the commentators remarked, "look out, here's the rumble from the ghetto!" You make up your own mind on this one.

North of the border, there has been much discussion about white and black athletes in the Canadian football league (CFL). The CFL has historically been slower to integrate black QBs and coaches, but look at the league now - I follow it more than the NFL, and it's because the CFL has a really good mix of raw talent, not just settling on local talent (though I will be the first one to admit, I love watching Jesse Lumsden - a local boy - play). I've always been a fan of Casey Printers, back to his BC Lions days - so glad that he came back to the CFL after the Chiefs cut him - he is now installed as the starting QB for the Tiger Cats. The local Argos used to have Damon Allen, but now has Michael Bishop as their main pivot - he's a good QB. Henry Burris of the Stampeders just won player of the week - Burris has always been a good QB, and I'm glad to see him back in Calgary. Winnipeg has Kevin Glenn, who is probably the best QB in the CFL right now (yes, even better tha Ricky Ray). The BC Lions have Jurious (sp.) Jackson. The Alouettes are giving Marcus Brady a good shot. Remember, the CFL is an eight-team league, but has made tremendous inroads in integrating black athletes in pivotal roles on teams (not to fulfill a quota, but properly recognize the talent of these players). Guys like Pinball Clemons (who is a strong born-again Christian whom I've met), are examples of guys who really work naturally towards breaking racial stereotypes. Pinball is coach of the Argos and either GM or President of football operations. He is the first CFL black player which I can say that the mass audience has embraced without reservation.

In the NFL, last year's SuperBowl brought together the first-ever pairing of black coaches competing against one another. Both Tony Dungy and Lovie Smith happen to be very mature born again Christians, who are well respected on and off the field. Yet in several online forums in which I participate, after the Superbowl game was all said and done, people started chiming in their opinions on the game, the coaching, the players, etc. A number of people (presumably black, since I can't imagine whites making these kinds of comments) were miffed at the coaches, saying that they weren't aggressive enough, that they "acted like white coaches". Pretty sad when this is the thing you notice about a football game. Even in the CFL years ago, when Danny Barrett's Roughriders (I think) were playing the Argos (coached by Clemons), one of the TV commentators remarked "this is the first meeting of two black guy coaches" (yes, that's what he said).

I still believe people see black and white when they view sports, and treat black athletes and participants differently.

The Jena 6 - It Can Only Happen in the U.S.

Our whole family's health has been in the crapper for the past few days, so I've been unable to formulate much of a coherent blog contribution. Now that I'm on the mend, there are a number of items on which I would like to chime in, not the least of which is the current situation in Jena, Louisiana. If this is news to you, this is essentially the gist of the story:

The town high school in Jena, for all intents and purposes is segregated. Not officially, of course, but you know how it is in certain parts of the U.S. (my brother went to Kentucky several years back and told me that he felt as if he was going to be lynched, and that was him being in the company of his mostly Caucasian friends with whom he travelled). Honestly, I've never really had a burning desire to visit the American South, and these types of stories just really re-iterate my perceptions, whether they are justified or not. I have spoken with enough people who live in the American South, both black and white, who have uniformly confirmed that racism is alive and well in that part of the country.

Anyhow, with the high school being unofficially segregated, there is this big tree under which whites predominantly gather. One day, so the story goes, some black kids want to sit in the shade of tree and so they ask their principal or vice-principal, who tells them they can sit wherever they want. So they sit in the shade of this tree. Shortly after (a day or so), three black nooses are hung on the tree. The white kids who were responsible for this act are discovered and the principal recommended that they be expelled. The school board disagreed and in the end they received three day suspensions.

All of this may have triggered a number of other racial incidents, one of which involved a white boy who was beaten up badly by six black youths, who became known as the Jena 6. While I can detail the other incidents, the problem I find is that there are conflicting stories on either side (like, with the arson done to the school - both sides are blaming each other). The media, unfortunately, being its liberal self, chooses to make these black youths like victims. Don't get me wrong - I think to a degree, they are, as there are some clear injustices done here with the white kids not being charged with hate crimes (which I believe they should have been)...but remember, these six black kids beat the crap out of the white kid because of an alleged racial slur (which again would qualify for charges stemming from a hate crime); last I checked, it is not kosher to attack someone unless it's in self-defence, which this doesn't sound like it was (six on one?). So let's remember, that no matter what injustices were done to these black kids, they are still responsible for what they did to the white kid. Do I sympathize with their reaction? Absolutely. If there is anything that can make me violent, it is calling me racial epithets - and yes, I do realize that how I react may potentially land me in jail, and these kids should know that they committed a crime (the severity of the charge may be debated, but it was a crime nonetheless), and those reporting on this case should at least not glean over this fact.

Does there seem to be racist overtones throughout the events? Absolutely. The white kid went to court in front of an all white jury with all white witnesses called by a white prosecutor in front of a white judge. Normally, such details would be lost on me, but in the American South, when you have six black defendants in front of a white jury, prosecutor and judge, and the white plaintiff does not get any type of charge or reprimand for using the "n" word, but the six blacks face attempted murder charges (they should face assault charges for sure). Apparently, even in court the blacks and whites sat on separate sides. Sheesh. What I don't get is the overwhelming media and politician response to free these six guys. They freaking attacked someone. Unless it can be proven it was in self-defence, these guys aren't exactly innocent. However, the white guy who instigated the attack should be charged with a hate crime.

The media is not reporting this right. In a lot of reports, it is stated that the D.A. addressed a school assembly and looked directly at the black teens (who of course, were on one side of the gym) and indicated that he can take their lives away with a stroke of a pen. What the media fails to report is that this incident is hotly debated, and there are a number of people who are willing to come forward to contend that this never occurred in the assembly. Yet the media seems to indicate it as fact, since it is fashionable to call for the instant release and the dropping of all charges against the Jena 6. Even in my reading of this case, something doesn't smell right with a lot of incidents. It seems like some of this is taken out of context. Back to my point about the six youths - the media does not place much emphasis on the fact that they attacked that guy. The media also gives more attention than it should to those big mouths Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, who of course, can find nothing wrong with any black youth. They will, of course, be involved in the march on Thursday in Jena protested this whole fiasco. There is apparently a petition going around too.

I think in this case, there was definitely wrongs done, but I believe it was on both sides.

I'm not done on this race theme. More tomorrow, with a sports twist.

Pitfalls & Shortcomings of Forced Multiculturalism

It is often said of Toronto that it is a great world model for showcasing and highlighting cultural diversity, toleration, ethnic co-operation and so forth. You may concur with this statement. Toronto is indeed a city which is comprised of people from various ethnic and cultural backgrounds. There is hardly any doubt about that, as one quick trip to viturally anywhere in the city will show. However, despite all of the liberal rhetoric, the question must be asked, "Does cultural diversity, multiculturalism, and toleration" really foster a greater sense of cohesion among people of different backgrounds, or is it stifling collective growth?" In observing the social climate over the past two decades, along with drawing from personal experience, I would conclude that multiculturalism may not be as beneficial as some people think.

By my surname, you may have correctly concluded that I am of Asian descent. I, like my younger brother and sister were born in Hong Kong, and in 1977, my parents emigrated to Canada along with their three children, and we spent five years in Edmonton, Alberta. In 1982, we moved to Ajax, Ontario where my Mom, Dad, my sister and her husband still live. In both Edmonton and Ajax, I have seen my fair share of racial tensions, and have concluded that prejudice and racial tension stems from an unwillingness to get to know another person, particularly taking the initiative to fight off initial prejudices. However, read closely here: interaction goes both ways.

From grades 4-8, I attended a school in which the student population was overwhelmingly white, with a very small handful of visible minority students. As such, it was not terribly surprising that from time to time, I would hear the occasional oriental joke, names, and what not, and 100% of the time, the person doing the taunting has never met me before (there were exceptions, of course). A funny thing happened though, with many of these kids. Once they got to know me, the jokes and name-calling ceased. But here is the rub and the central point: I did not allow the name-calling (as hurtful as it was, trust me) to force me into a ethnic ghetto community, or to avoid difficult situations and relationships, orto react in a way which re-inforces the prejudice.

Once I made friends (some of whom were previously enemies), these new friends of mine would often come to my defence whenever someone else cracked a joke. From an early age, I had realized that people did not necessarily have a problem with me, but that they are making generalizations based on age-old stereotypes, and it was perhaps their way of dealing with something different. The best way, I found, to dispel these stereotypical notions is to get to not let their jokes get the best of me, while at the same time making efforts to try to know the other person, emphasizing commonalities instead of differences. To this day, I take this approach, even in my business relationships, not focussing on a colleague or client's known reputation, but simply taking on relationship and one interaction at a time, finding common ground and building from that point.

In saying all of this, here is where I see the current state of race relations in a melting-pot of a city. First off, advocates of multiculturalism argue that people are co-existing well within what has been called a "mosaic". Is this really true, though? In Toronto, there are numerous ethnic communities located in certain geographical points, which may rightly be argued as being segreational. There is Chinatown, Greektown, the Italian community, the Jewish community, the Black community, Little Portugal, and so forth. All the communites have their own little shops set up, their own restaurants and their own local hangouts. Sure, this may be great for tourist attractions, and I have definitely benefited from the tasty food offered up by these communities, but what about for relationship building? To paraphrase Reginald Bibby, who in his essay, "Is multiculturalism tearing us apart?" observes that although multiculturalism is beneficial in that it allows one to maintain their culture/heritage, the broader benefits of this cultural diversity are not realized unless interaction occurs between people of different cultural backgrounds." This is so true. Think about it. Let's say I enjoy humour. You are a person who also enjoys humour. If both of us do not make an effort to meet and discuss jokes, and what not, are we not robbing ourselves of an opportunity to share our mutual fondness of humour, and make one another laugh?

Of course, one may argue with me that these folks are making a valuable contribution to our collective society as a whole by setting up a business and stimulating the economy. I guess this may be technically true, but just who are the majority of the patrons of these establishments? I have found that many ethnic businesses draw their business mostly from within their own community. How does this benefit Canadian society as a whole, other than the feds getting some more tax money from businesses - at the very least, the feds don't discriminate - they'll suck you dry (monetarily speaking), no matter what your nationality is. My dad told me a while back that I'm an idealist; that I should deal with the stark reality that people are not comfortable with others who are different from them. My concern is not whether this behaviour or mindset exists, or whether it is real, but rather, is it right?

A person who believes that there are no racial problems in North America had better take another look. If the O.J. Simpson verdict more than a decade ago was any indication, racial problems are alive and well. Just recently, it was reported that, in the American South, some white teachers were caught doing hanky panky with black underaged students. The debate on many news sites focussed more on whether this will stir up racial tensions (since if it was a black adult and an underaged white female - the response probably would have been much different, and I tend to concur).

Personally, I see many factors which contribute to current existing racial tensions. For instance, it seems quite chic these days for people to cry racism at the drop of a hat. I have a real problem with people who do this. Of course, at times, this charge is valid, but in some cases, it is not. I am a frequent contributor on RedFlagDeals.com, which is a Canadian bargain-hunter website. Recently, some guy got on and said that he was an Asian guy who was seated at the back of a Swiss Chalet and he felt that he was a victim of racial discrimination. I read that and thought, "give me a break!" I am happy to get any spot after waiting - this person obviously already had something in his head. Thankfully, he was overwhelmingly chastised for taking such a ridiculous view, particularly when it was at a well established franchise restaurant (known to hire many visible minorities) in a large Asian surburban area, and besides...in 2007, almost every company out there has a zero-tolerance policy towards any type of discrimination. One would have to be foolish in order to do something like that.

When people are labelled as racist, when in actuality they are not, it can easily foster a sense of resentment and obvious defensiveness. In more than a few cases in Canada, when a white police officer shoots a black individual, all of the sudden, it becomes a racial issue, and more fuel is added to the fire. Forget the fact that the black person may be actually committing a crime, no different than a white person or anyone else getting shot in commiting the same crime. No doubt, there is policy brutality out there, there is unfair racial profiling going on, and no doubt, there are crooked cops, but one's first reaction should be to find out all the facts, rather than playing the race card on the first round.

I also feel that hiring quotas and associated affirmative action policies may be doing more harm than good. Sure, these practice may have evolved from honourable intentions, but the problem, as I see it, is that it is simply reverse discrimination. My arguments here are nothing new, as countless people have echoed these sentiments. As the old cliche goes, two wrongs do not make a right. I also find it to be a slap in the face of the individual being hired. Who wants to be hired on the basis of their skin colour? I certainly would be tremendously insulted if I found out that I was hired not because of my abilities or my aptitude or my attitude, but rather by what I look like in order to fill a quota. Hiring quotas/affirmative action may completely ignore one's skills and educational background, both of which a person has had to work hard to obtain. Furthermore, what message is this sending to visible minorities, women, and the disabled? That they can't "cut it" unless they need a certain push? That's nonsense. To be quite blunt, people should be hired on the basis of merit and qualifications, not by their colour or what they have between their legs. If I or my wife or my son was in a burning building, you can be pretty sure I'd like a person to rescue me (that is, if I needed to be rescued) who could actually lift me. I wouldn't care what they look like, but if they can save us, hey, that's what counts.

Finally, two trends which trouble me greatly. The first one is criticism which I get saying that I am a cultural traitor, that I am too westernized, etc. All of this criticism comes from, thankfully, only a handful of people. Put quite simply, this is my response: there is no doubt that environment plays a role in one's development. As such, I was essentially brought up in North American culture, like millions of other Asians. I had very little difficulty in adjusting and adapting to Canadian culture. Frankly, I thought it was quite cool that I was able to "get the best of both worlds", as my parents would make efforts to try to ensure that I had some knowledge of my cultural background (and to this day, I am so thankful for this). Since a very early age, I was enrolled in a Chinese heritage program, and for a good seven years in Toronto, went through the program (it was on Saturdays), often scoring high on exams, penmanship contests and what not. All the while I was also attending public school and learning Canadian history, art, gym, and so forth. To this day, I can still carry a conversation in Cantonese as well as English. I really suspect that my critics are not making much of an effort to get to know me first (yet, am I crying discrimination per se?). As well, I suspect that these people have had a harder time adjusting to Canadian culture, and may resent my relative ease of adjusting. I believe that it comes down to one's willingness to accept his/her new country and learn some of its customs. So many minorities complain that they are being misunderstood. The question which I often pose is, "are you making an effort to get to know someone else?"

As a Bible-believing Christian, I have been struggling with the second trend for a number of years. The second trend concerns itself with how culture and ethnicity affects the local church at large, and while I can easily devote an entire article on this topic (I probably will), I will try to keep this short and concise. Over the years, I have been more and more convinced that homogenous churches are nothing more than ethnic social clubs (I'm not just talking all-Asian churches here, but I'm talking about all-white or all-black churches as well - both of these are in abundance in the Toronto area). Of course, I have met a number of people at homogenous churches who put the Word of God first over cultural aspects, and I know of quite a few very Godly men and women who hold leadership positions in ethnic churches. Still, I wonder what the role of the ethnic church is, other than to impart the message of the Bible to those whose mother tongue is not English. The young people at many of these churches are completely fluent in English. There are services which are entirely in English. Yet a number of these young people do not attend camps and church retreats unless they are with other churches of the same ethnic background. Somehow, I don't doubt that parents are to blame here. I am entirely convinced that homogenous churches provide a certain degree of cultural comfort, and feel so strongly about this topic that when a guest speaker came to one of our church and missions courses at the college (many years ago when I was young) and spoke on this topic, I openly debated him about why I do not believe that the homogenous church is fostering that universal bond between the body of Christ (usually, I don't say anything in class). Instead, the body has splintered off, with one part not being terribly sensitive the others.

I used to attend an all-Chinese church, as it was our family church. In 1995, I left that and joined an non-denominational multi-cultural, multi-ethnic church. Our pastor (who has since left) had a great conversation with me once about the fact that even though a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural church grows a lot slower than an ethnically homogenous church, the Biblical model is that there should be no distinctions between believers (Galatians 3:28, I think). As such, I really think our church is doing great things in bucking the megachurch trend (most of the large megachurches in the U.S., with some exceptions, are pretty homogenous).

Well, these are my thoughts on this matter. Please, by all means feel free to share yours. I would be interested to hear what you have to say. Thanks for taking time out to read this.