Legault and freedom of expression
The premier has spoken out on social media about “freedom of expression.” This is the statement, much as I wish our elected officials would resist using Facebook for important communications – if you’re not logged in, it’s possible to read the statement but a huge popup makes it difficult. (Do we need to join Facebook to participate fully in democracy?)
Several incidents are mentioned in the stories. One involved that high school teacher who used an offensive word multiple times – we discussed him here in October. A few of the other incidents involved simple mention of the word in context, in one case simply naming a well-known book by Pierre Vallières that has its place in Quebec history. Teachers have been condemned for mentioning the book, as was CBC’s Wendy Mesley who was disciplined and had to do public penance for mentioning the title (in English translation, I gather – which Amazon doesn’t carry, although they offer several editions of the original book).
It looks like we may have to condemn the simple mention of any title or quotation involving that word because, on balance, it can end up with ugly situations like that high school teacher. But Legault doesn’t like that and this debate is going to drag on.
Johannes 17:09 on 2021-02-14 Permalink
Please refrain from using the term “n-word” as it immediately evokes the actual word and equally perpetuates harm and violence.
Kevin 18:09 on 2021-02-14 Permalink
Legault’s post was embedded on CTV when I saw it earlier today, and it’s currently linked on CBC.
Kate 18:15 on 2021-02-14 Permalink
Johannes, is the current view that even an indirect reference to the word should be avoided? I am sorry if I’ve offended and will go back and clean up my post.
Kevin, likewise to my claim.
Johannes 18:40 on 2021-02-14 Permalink
I was not serious about indirect references and I was being facetious about perpetuating violence. Legault has a point. That said, the high school teacher was completely out of line. He gleefully said the word multiple times in a shocking and despicable display.
EmilyG 21:37 on 2021-02-14 Permalink
Yeah, what that high school teacher did was unacceptable. And from what I remember, he’s done other racist things as well.
Kate 11:41 on 2021-02-15 Permalink
If we agree the word is only acceptable in context, e.g. when citing the title of a book that’s relevant to the matter under discussion in the class – something most people will understand, including erring on the side of caution and consideration if in doubt – somebody like that teacher will inevitably interpret “context” to cover his own assholish tendencies.
Ant6n 14:13 on 2021-02-15 Permalink
It’s ironic that Johannes was being facetious about even saying the “n-word” not being allowed, but Kate took it seriously. Clearly it’s makes sense to tread very lightly on this subject matter.
I’d say it’s important to this story that the word isn’t just offensive (cuz “fuck” would also be offensive), but that we’re talking about an offensive racial slur.
Kevin 14:20 on 2021-02-15 Permalink
Kate,
My apologies, I misread your post. Shouldn’t post on the blog while napping.
Kate 16:51 on 2021-02-15 Permalink
Kev, we were both in error. No worries.
ant6n, you are right. I assumed Johannes was serious, but I’m old enough and out of touch enough with what university students and people of that general age group think, that I thought better to err on the side of being extra scrupulous.
Maxim Baru 16:20 on 2021-02-17 Permalink
I’d bet money the freedom of expression at school issue is going to be twisted to attack student unions. Sounds unrelated, but it’s precisely the kind of cynical and devious thing that often lurks behinds these kinds of initiatives.
EmilyG 09:51 on 2021-02-18 Permalink
There’s a good article on the CBC website about what’s wrong with Legault’s position.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-campus-free-speech-academic-freedom-legault-1.5917113
From the article:
“The contentious part of this debate is not the merits of academic freedom per se. It’s widely accepted that scholars should be able to debate ideas without fear of repercussion from the powerful, or the popular.
Things turn controversial when it comes to identifying what, exactly, is threatening this ideal.”