Here is a news flash for all you ladies that think this is an outrage. Young, single women coming into Canada alone gets grilled by immigration more than you know. The presumption is that these women are coming into the country looking for a way to stay through marriage, fake or otherwise. A couple of my friends and my ex can attest to that.
Bijou...you don't get it. As a Canadian citizen you do not possess any rights when crossing the US border - whether you're a man or woman. You are not an American citizen. For some reason or another you don't seem to grasp this reality.
You cross that border at your own risk and should be prepared to deal with whatever it is they throw at you. They don't give two shits about your sense of entitlement if they don't want you within their borders (and clearly you feel you are entitled to enter into the US without restriction or reservation for some reason - heaven knows why??)
Am I ok with it??? Well, I'd love to have free access, but I'm not stupid. I'm smart enough to know when to pick a fight and when to realize that there are fights that are nonsensical to get into.
Of course I get that no one has the right to enter a country they are not a citizen of. I understand that perfectly. But that is not what I am referring to.
What I've heard repeated over and over in this thread is 1) we don't have a 'right' to be granted entry in the US 2) the border guards have a right (ie its legal) to deny entry to anyone and don't need proof of anything, including suspecting a woman of being a prostitute since prostitution is illegal in the US so they 3) they also have every (legal) right to profile and flag individuals attempting to enter the US who fit a certain profile by falling in one of these (or a combination of) these categories: travelling alone or with an unrelated male, carrying condoms and/or lingerie etc.
Is my understanding of these points correct?
Because if so, I can confirm that I do understand all of these facts and
I do not dispute them. I know we don't have the right to be automatically granted entry. I understand that border guards are within their legal rights and acting based on policies. But that is not what I was arguing about. The fact that something is legal, a fact or 'just the way it is' really doesn't mean that I can't or shouldn't complaining, condemn or criticize it. Nor does it make it right.
I understand Canadian border guards also have similar policies though not concerning the same circumstances (because as far as I know women travelling from the US to Canada and fitting the "profile" described above do not automatically become suspicious, fair game to be permanently flagged and subjected to hours of interrogation, humiliation, delays and ultimately denial of entry and potentially hundreds of dollars having to make new travel arrangements -
but please correct me if I am wrong and they are in fact subjected to the same arbitrary profiling and treatment based on those same few criteria) as other have mentioned previously regarding entering Canada or the US for marriage - which is actually really ridiculous considering no one can argue there's anything illegal about marrying anyone (although I suspect it's more about trafficking than it is about marriage and the profiling criteria are different but that's a whole discussion altogether because the intent and context is quite different, as are the consequences - in Canada, trafficking victims are to be treated as victims and not as criminals. They are offered temporary Visas, access to resources, healthcare, support etc - though I believe it's conditional on their cooperation with LE in going after the 'traffickers'. I don't think fear of them coming to get married has anything to do with it) -
I understand all of that and do not dispute that this is true.
So with that settled....
The fact that I understand that this is how they operate, that these are policies they follow, that it is perfectly legal for them to do it and that Canadian and US border guards also have similar policies concerning women who are travelling from certain specific countries (ie I don't think women coming from the US, Australia, England, France, Italy, Spain, Israel etc are being flagged as potential trafficking victims) doesn't mean I have to agree with, accept or condone it, that I cannot criticize or condemn it. Just because the act of my doing so is not going to have a direct effect on these policies, doesn't mean I shouldn't bother, I'm not allowed/have no right to or means I just don't understand how things works or that I'm out of line for objecting. It doesn't mean it's useless or wrong to share this particular example, knowing this might come as a surprise to some, while others may not be surprised yet had not been previously aware of these policies. Clearly many of you agree that because they have the right to do what they want, we have no right to be granted entry, that these policies are acceptable and inevitable. This is where we disagree.
Regardless of the fact that it is their right, that it is their policy, that prostitution is illegal in the US, that a majority of prostitutes are women, that I can't change the situation or even have any effect by voicing my objections and criticism - I still think it's my responsibility as a person living on this planet, who is being made aware of something I believe is simply wrong -even if legal- to say it because not doing so implies I support it. Implicit support gives even more power to people who don't need any more than they already have. And implicit support is the main reason people get away with That applies to this and to anyone, anywhere, anytime where implicit support of the powerful has enabled injustice. No one has to agree with that and believe they have any such responsibility but I'm not going to accept being ridiculed about not accepting things I find unacceptable. Whether its legal, policy, common or 'just the way it is', as far as I'm concerned, could not be any less relevant to the issue of what I think about it.
I assume that boils down to differences in beliefs about power, discrimination, profiling, dissent, reactions to injustices, cynicism, apathy, civic responsibility etc - among other things. I suspect most who hold those views would also believe that racial profiling in the case of Arabs or Muslims crossing the border going or returning to the US, leading to flagging as suspicious and interrogating would also be acceptable, if unfortunate. I strongly disagree with that and voice my objections in these cases as well.
Let's even take a super simple and completely trivial example to illustrate what I mean. Take the threads about hockey that periodically pop up in the lounge or in conversations everywhere. Do people really think that criticizing or complaining about a player, a team, an official, a trade, a contract, a rule etc....is going to "change jackshit", as it was put to me? They would be delusional to think what say about it would make any kind of difference or matter to the person concerned. So is the only valid reaction to tell these people to shut the fuck up about it, to ridicule them for objecting to something because they have no power over it and cannot change it, to dismiss their criticism by pointing to another similar example - as though that were a valid justification - to berate them, telling them it means they must just not get it or they'd accept that it's just the way it is? Obviously not. So why am I getting all of these responses then? One after the other, this is what I've been told. Only, obviously the hockey example is actually completely trivial, concerns a private corporation that answers to no one from outside of it and at the end of the day, everyone concerned is still walking away millions of dollars richer..
How exactly am I expected to respond to this kind of nonsense? When I do respond with what is the only logical way I can't think of, I get vitriol and vile abuse! I'm not directing this at you because your comments to me were thankfully kept civil. But....Seriously, some posters must be really fucking insecure for the kind of shit they've been pulling all week to be the only thing they are capable of saying in response to my comments. To actually spend time, purpose and intent on this.... It's so beyond the realm of acceptable or civil behaviour, it's absolutely despicable. All this in an attempt to shut me up and silence what I have to say? Really? Some people have serious fucking issues and could make better use of their time looking themselves in the mirror. If these displays are needed to feel good about themselves, it's a sad, sad testament to the kinds of men they are.
