Speak for yourself,...
Oh,... and you left out racist,...
I did speak for myself - as a person who doesn’t seem to experience what she (Kathleen) seems to experience.
I had hoped “et al.” would be enough to cover them as-well, but we could just go with ‘purveyors of inequitable beliefs and/or actions, both conscious and unconscious’ to keep it simple and inclusive...
Sorry I'm not clear on your answer. Do you agree with the author that lessons covering the horrors of the residential school system need to be added to the TDSB's curriculum?
I don’t totally understand this, but an indigenous friend was part of the group that re-wrote at-least the history curriculum in Ontario 4 or 5 years ago. ‘Residential School system’ is a part of the new curriculum that’s been in Ontario high schools for a while now. Well before TRC wrapped-up.
I don’t believe school boards have a choice over what is/isn’t curriculum - the Peel and TDSB parents who protested the sex ed. curriculum a couple years ago seemed to misunderstand this.
—
I was at an event run by TDSB last year where they did an indigenous land acknowledgement, which suggests to me that they’re taking all of this very (justifiably) seriously.
It makes a ton of sense to me that organizationally they would take a look at their unconsciously racialized language. Sure the word in it’s present use pre-dates colonial oppression in BNA, but this hardly is the first example of a word we retire after it became a symbol for oppression.
What interests me about this is how ‘chief,’ if it is indeed recognized as oppressive language by indigenous leaders, will be used by indigenous peoples going forward. Will they follow suit and de-anglicize? Will they go back to Ogimaa or whatever? Will each indigenous linguistic group have a different name/title?
It doesn’t seem likely in the communities I've spent the most time in.