It's been normalized in pop culture and media since a while now. On top, we have well meaning people do silly things. For example, the former PM of Canada pretty much said 'Samuel Paty was asking for it' without saying it in those words when he was murdered by an islamist. As a result of such incidents, lines get blurred further for many.

Prime Minister had to walk it back when people pointed out that you just empowered islamo-fascists who say "behead those who insult Muhammad" without thinking through the wider implications of your statement.

It's such a fine line to walk in our society. I don't want women attacked for their choice of headgear. I also don't want women attacked for refusing to wear religiously mandated "modest clothes". I know I'm not the only Canadian who knew girls in school who took off their religious attire as soon as they got to the locker. Then put it back on before heading home.

I also know that Iran conceded on mandatory head coverings after Masha Amini protests. I also know we used to have police harass women for showing too much skin in many western countries a few decades ago, which really isn't that far back. Raids on gay hangout spots to bash some heads was a favourite hobby of our cops.

Islamophobes, even on the Left, don't care about nuances or a productive conversation. They just start foaming, like Sam Harris and Bill Maher, as soon as muslims are mentioned. 2 billion Mohammad-lovers are not a monolith. Many of them actually oppose blasphemy laws and bigotry towards LGBT+ themselves.

Islamophobia gets way too much of a pass... Way way way too much to the point it turns murderous and we still scratch our butts like idiots.

Yea, I hear ya. It wasn't malice or targeted towards anyone.

One dude got mad at me and accused me of racist propaganda and stoking racial tensions. A total wtf moment but I was glad it made people Feel a certain way. One way or another.

This incident happened in the same city where an asshole thought its his duty to mow down a random innocent family because they weren't white. Then a significant number of people in the country got mad at the government for the government "getting involved" and paying for their funeral and whatnot. Cops in that city think it's okay for a proud white supremacist christan to attack a random muslim woman and her 2 daughters without any legal consequences. Plenty of people agree with that assessment and I know it's mostly because of their bias against muslims.

Anyway, it reached more eyes. Partly because of the engagement due to the title making people react. Mission accomplished without anyone getting hurt.

Look bud, we share the politics, ok? I'm not asking you to maintain etiquette towards the asshole in the article. I'm asking you to maintain it towards this community. Keep the Community Centre/Infoshop/Union Hall tidy, you know what I mean?

Obviously not a hate crime but

Idk... he says he's racist. He's proud of it.

Sure doesn't seem like a love-crime either.

I'm all for freedom from religion, no blasphemy laws and all that good stuff. But wtf kind of double standards do we have where drawing an ancient symbol is illegal but attacking a random family for their religious dogma because of your own dogma is acceptable?

Obviously not a hate crime but

her hijab was incompatible with Christian values,

Religion has no place in public life. He should be charged with infringing on people's freedom from religion for bringing up Christian values in public.

I don't think etiquettes are necessary in every instance in life. Certainly not when shitting on white supremacists and the system that protects them.

Which is why we ourselves must curate the conventions of our own communities, as opposed to some teacher. Which is why I talked about etiquette.

It's lemmy... social media. Not an educational institution nor an assignment.

In that case why bother with making a post that is a link to the CBC article? Write a post with your own text. You can link to the CBC article as a source.

It's just bad etiquette to mix the two. Either post the article (with the original title) and add your comments underneath. Or post a text article of your own with whatever title and content as you like and cite the article and any other sources that make sense to you.

It's not editorialized. It cuts to the chase and gets to the point in fewer words.

Why not use the actual title of the article for the post?

Then editorialize in the comments all you like.

Okay.

and I agree, if that's what happen (and I'll take your word for it) then it's hypocrisy.

That’s kinda the point, he faces no consequences. More of his islamophobic cousins and friends get emboldened.

He faced some consequences: the 2 women, police check, and exposure he probably didn't want.

(His car apparently runs on water.)

​

Swastika isn’t a hateful symbol either IMHO. Indigenous people of North America, European pagans and South Asians were drawing it long before nazis took it. They even called it a “cross” not Swastika.

​

(source: wc:File:William Neptune, Passamaquoddy chief, 1920.jpg)

​

Anyway, you’re of the opinion that harassing a random muslim family is ill mannered at best. I think that’s bullshit double standards.

Not necessarily. Is he harassing them? Is he threatening them? Call the police.

Most people carry phones with cameras, as these people apparently did. Maybe get his license number.

​

Arresting people for drawing an ancient symbol while ignoring proud racists harassing a muslim family for existing. That’s literally how you build fkd up shithole societies.

agreed.

Yes, I'm aware. Which is why I pointed it out as hypocrisy.

This same Montreal had a viral video not long ago where an Israeli was harassing a random muslim and bragging about how he slaughtered Palestinians back home. Nobody in the government or police thought it was criminal. Yet they tried to make it illegal to insult police despite the fact that supreme court already ruled that it is indeed legal.

Their hypocrisy and double standards are an issue that should be pointed out, called out, highlighted everywhere.

That's kinda the point, he faces no consequences. More of his islamophobic cousins and friends get emboldened.

Swastika isn't a hateful symbol either IMHO. Indigenous people of North America, European pagans and South Asians were drawing it long before nazis took it. They even called it a "cross" not Swastika.

Anyway, you're of the opinion that harassing a random muslim family is ill mannered at best. I think that's bullshit double standards.

Arresting people for drawing an ancient symbol while ignoring proud racists harassing a muslim family for existing. That's literally how you build fkd up shithole societies.

City of Montreal bylaw banning insults against police officers is unconstitutional, lawyers claim

https://www.ctvnews.ca/montreal/article/lawsuit-claims-city-of-montreal-bylaw-banning-insults-against-police-officers-is-unconstitutional/

By Joe Lofaro

Updated: October 01, 2026 at 3:57p.m. EDT

Published: September 30, 2026 at 7:20p.m. EDT

​

(my bold)

The legal challenge was filed in Superior Court on Tuesday by the Saint-Michel Legal Clinic (CJSM) and the Association des juristes progressistes (AJP). In it, they argue that the Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled that expressions that could be characterized as “abusive, insulting, offensive, aggressive, provocative, or even humiliating are protected by freedom of expression.”

I’m sensible enough to understand that not all of them believe Mo raped a child just because christian nationalists like David Wood or zionist bigots like Gad Sad accuse them all for believing it.

wp:Aisha#Age at marriage and consummation

First line:

Classical Islamic sources state that Aisha was six years of age at the time of her marriage with Muhammad (then fifty) and nine at the time of its consummation.

​

You can’t have double standards like “drawing a symbol is a criminal offence but attacking muslims for being muslims is acceptable” and expect to be taken seriously by sensible people.

Yes, these are charged incidents, but IIUC, the first was essentially a property crime that was quickly remedied.

The other looks like a dumbass picked an argument with a woman in a hijab—a woman who is probably a bit concerned about assault from men and/or Mulslimphobes, and/or racists.

Maybe charge him with harassment.

If you want to ban the swastika and attacking Islam, then that's something else.

​

You don’t have to like their religious head gear. You can’t pick and choose which hats are sacred and which ones get attacked by racist white supremacists publicly and be taken seriously.

No hat is sacred, but you don't touch another's headwear (unless you get consent), because it's their property, and if they're wearing it at the time, it can be assault.

But commenting on headwear, while possibly ill-mannered, isn't a crime, IMO.

​

This isn’t about mohammad or blasphemy, which is thankfully still legal in this frozen shithole.

My part of Canada isn't frozen, nor has it been frozen for over 150 days.

​

It’s about a proud racist proudly attacking a family and disgusting people defending his actions.

I thought he was alone.

They explicitly said "motivated by hatred". Yet the racist, who proudly says he's racist, spewing hateful venom at an innocent family is protected and even celebrated by many.

In the same country where he'd be charged if he insults SPVM. Drawing a stupid symbol is illegal. Mocking or insulting a cop is illegal. Attacking muslims for being muslim or wearing headgear despised by islamophobes is perfectly acceptable.

I'm able to differentiate between muslim people and their prophet.

I'm sensible enough to understand that not all of them believe Mo raped a child just because christian nationalists like David Wood or zionist bigots like Gad Sad accuse them all for believing it.

You can't have double standards like "drawing a symbol is a criminal offence but attacking muslims for being muslims is acceptable" and expect to be taken seriously by sensible people.

You don't have to like their religious head gear. You can't pick and choose which hats are sacred and which ones get attacked by racist white supremacists publicly and be taken seriously.

This isn't about mohammad or blasphemy, which is thankfully still legal in this frozen shithole. It's about a proud racist proudly attacking a family and disgusting people defending his actions.

Oops. You're right. My error. Sorry. Thank you.

​

So this looks like a crime against property.

Islamophobia ≠ racism

indeed,

Islamophobia ≠ Muslimphobia

You can like people without liking their beliefs.

​

Christianity is stupid.

Judaism is stupid.

Islam is stupid.

Their prophet Muhammad had sex with a 9 year-old.

Wearing a hijab because a pedophile says that bare hair tempts men is stupid.

I linked it above.

for drawing a symbol in gravel earlier this month?

Huh?

What racist propaganda?

You have a white supremacist proudly admitting he's racist on video. He's attacking her for being muslim.

"Racist symbol that I dislike shouldn't be allowed. Attacking a woman and her children is despicable but not a crime". How do you not see hypocrisy and double standards here? Is this a translation issue? White supremacist issue?

Go cry about your white supremacists somewhere else.