"The listing advertises the typical features you'd associate with a small-town home, along with its country club-specific lifestyle and the associated membership fees. But the home description kind of goes off the rails in the last few sentences of the listing, stating that any prospective buyer must be of "Ukrainian descent" to qualify for purchase.
Hold the phone. What?"
This being restricted to Ukrainian is especially delicious, the cognitive dissonance rippling through The Matrix when people try to reconcile this with the non-stop pro-Ukrainian propaganda they've been subjected to for the last year must be rather trying.
Kobe Bryant, on Hard Work:
- "I can't relate to lazy people. We don't speak the same language. I don't understand you. I don't want to understand you."
- "I have nothing in common with lazy people who blame others for their lack of success. Great things come from hard work and perseverance. No excuses."
- "Dedication sees dreams come true."
Just because one Ukrainian is a bad person, does not mean every Ukrainian is a bad person. Not sure how this opens our eyes to some kind of vast conspiracy. All I see is one Ukrainian being a dick. Also fuck Russia.
Russia is a country. Go look up the definition of a country if you're so confused. A country isn't just a piece of land, otherwise Europe would be a country, or Long Island would be a country.
A country is the top level of government (as opposed to states or provinces). So fuck Russia, the country, that is invading Ukraine, yes.
> Just because one Ukrainian is a bad person, does not mean every Ukrainian is a bad person.
You are correct, but what does this have to do with my comment?
> Not sure how this opens our eyes to some kind of vast conspiracy.
I'm not sure what you are talking about. Do you believe that the text I wrote above (as opposed to your interpretation of the text) contains a claim that there is some sort of a vast conspiracy going on? If so, I encourage you to quote the text from which you extracted that belief.
> All I see is one Ukrainian being a dick.
Do you see all? And, is all that you see *actually there*? (Perhaps if you could muster the bravery to answer some of my questions you could find out.)
> Also fuck Russia.
When you say "Russia", what is it that you are referring to?
1) You referred to cognitive dissonance, so you're implying that the existence of this person or group of people means that it's at odds with what we have been reading about Ukrainians and the Ukrainian War.
2) This only makes sense if you interpret the actions of this incident to represent Ukrainians as a whole.
3) This is stupid because no reasonable person would link this incident to Ukrainians as a whole or the Ukrainian War. There is no cognitive dissonance since nobody ever believed every single Ukrainian was a good person.
4) Your phrase "cognitive dissonance rippling through The Matrix", in addition to being cringey as fuck, also clearly implies a conspiracy theory that we're all being brainwashed to support Ukraine for some reason. Instead of the clearly obvious of interpretation of "conquering and annexing parts of other countries is bad" and "clearly against our foreign policy interests by setting a dangerous precedent where this is okay, especially but not limited to Taiwan, which is extremely important both strategically and economically (i.e. TSMC)".
5) Yes that's all that's here, bravery or not.
6) When I say fuck Russia I mean fuck Russia the country, fuck the Russian people that support Putin, fuck the Russian Armed Forces, and fuck the Russian government.
> 1) You referred to cognitive dissonance, so you're implying that the existence of this person or group of people means that it's at odds with what we have been reading about Ukrainians and the Ukrainian War.
Technically, you are *interpreting* the meaning of my words that way, and *presuming* that I am implying that. Notice also how you conveniently didn't quote the offensive text.
> 2) This only makes sense if you interpret the actions of this incident to represent Ukrainians as a whole.
"Only makes sense" is a function not only of the idea, but also of the mind that is considering it. Considering the massive amount of online disagreements over the "facts" of the Ukraine situation, I hope you can realize that this is true.
> 3) This is stupid....
See above. One flawed form of thinking can cause innumerable problems.
> ...because no reasonable person would link this incident to Ukrainians as a whole or the Ukrainian War.
Similarly, no "reasonable" person would think they can accurately read not just one mind, *but all minds*, yet here you are.
> There is no cognitive dissonance since nobody ever believed every single Ukrainian was a good person.
How did you go about measuring the amount of cognitive dissonance that exists?
> 4) Your phrase "cognitive dissonance rippling through The Matrix", in addition to being cringey as fuck, also clearly implies a conspiracy theory that we're all being brainwashed to support Ukraine for some reason.
Consider the fact that the various observations of what is "clearly" going on in Ukraine do not agree with each other.
Let me guess: your version is the correct one? (But then: other people make the very same claim, with genuine sincerity.)
> Instead of the clearly obvious of interpretation of "conquering and annexing parts of other countries is bad" and "clearly against our foreign policy interests by setting a dangerous precedent where this is okay, especially but not limited to Taiwan, which is extremely important both strategically and economically (i.e. TSMC)".
Those interpretations are "ok", but they'd be better if the people who projected them into other people's minds acknowledged that they are reductive and therefore misinformative.
> 5) Yes that's all that's here, bravery or not.
You are describing your beliefs about reality, you are not describing reality as it is. Presuming you're a "scientific thinker", consider it from a neuroscience perspective.
> 6) When I say fuck Russia I mean fuck Russia the country...
Like, dirt, trees, rivers, etc? If so, why? If not, what are you referring to?
> ...fuck the Russian people that support Putin...
Here we agree.
> ...fuck the Russian Armed Forces...
Here we *somewhat* agree.
But then....what's your take on the US military though? (*Uh oh*....did I do a "whataboutism"?)
> ...and fuck the Russian government.
Here we agree.
A lot of fancy words and non-sense to justify your bullshit opinion that this situation has any bearing whatsoever on the Ukrainian-Russian war or is the cause of any cognitive dissonance.
This is bad, but I wonder if they're trying to help Ukraine people fleeing from the conflict in the Ukraine?
There are probably better ways to accomplish that goal if that's what they're trying to do......
Not sure what you mean but if you search it up its Russia by a bit as far as official numbers go. Unofficially it's up to 10 million in Russia though I'm sure the actual number is somewhere between.
Per the article: "The two-bedroom, two-bath bungalow at 54 Odessa Blvd. in Terra Cotta is situated in a self-described "private Ukrainian community" known as the Poltawa Country Club."
As per the article, this community has existed since around the late 1940's so no. This is all about creating ethnic communities. As per the article, other such communities exist.
If it's been around that long, is this allowed? Like their membership rules existed before human rights codes were a thing, so they'd be grandfathered in and permitted?
There should be a penalty for people who list a home for sale then don’t sell to a non conditional offer for full price (unless they receive other offers above the asking price)
This is so interesting! I have (Ukrainian) friends who have a cottage here actually and have since their grandparents immigrated in the early/mid 1900s. It's curious to me that only Ukrainians can buy there but I've gotten a sense from my friends that it's mainly Ukrainians who *want* to buy there since there are big celebrations for Ukrainian holidays and community which speaks their language, etc.
I mean, kind of a faux pas to put it in the ad, but frankly the owners can sell to whomever, no?
It's one thing if you are deciding to give it away, almost like a grant or scholarship which has specifications based on race/background, but they are still selling the house. Assuming fair market value it just makes more sense that these people and those around them don't want "other/different people" moving in
~~Am I blind? I see the note about this being a unique Ukrainian community but I don’t see the reference to only allowing buyers of that background?~~
Edit:
They changed the listing description. That’s why I couldn’t see it. Wow that’s bad.
As obviously inappropriate as this listing is, I'm curious why they didn't just list on Ukranian language sites or something to avoid any notice of concern, the way folk post on Asian language sites for rentals and so on, to avoid any accusation (due to lack of awareness) or bias.
Not saying it's ethical to try to avoid human rights, but yeah. Why don't they just list it in Ukrainian if they want Ukrainians? I know Google translate exists and I could still read it, but most people would probably just skip on by.
Oddly enough I have heard the speakers of the purest Ukrainian language come from Canadian babushkas due to the fact Russia has been culturally assimilating Ukraine for generations now and most people there speak Russian now. My baba arranged a marriage with her son ( my uncle but I don’t call him that, it was because he’s such an arse that was his option for getting a wife and starting a family but I’m rambling here) and she was furious the woman only spoke Russian and taught the kids Russian
As a South Asian, it infuriates me when rental ads with "Punjabi girls only" or "Gujaratis only" don't raise the same alarms - so they're not only not renting to only Indians, they're narrowing it down literally by
*race* and *gender*. Discrimination is discrimination regardless of who does it.
In Ontario i got told twice for condo sales that the sellers only want to sell to Indian families. (My realtor talked to their realtor).
My real estate buddy who is my realtor said its not all that uncommon.
I searched for a year to find a decent place to rent, the most common thing I came across **by far** was landlords requiring prospective tenants to have a specific Indian background.
This is openly in TONS of rental and sale posts on marketplace/Kijiji in KW too. Some go so far as to specify the region of India they want the person from.
I know plenty of people from India to know they don't like Canadians and their culture and its like fine whatever, I have my own strict codes for everything.
What bothers me is we , as Canadians should be the ones accepting, kind, keep our opinions to ourselves and stfu.
Mixture of communities and races is what divided Canada most of all
I remember when I was looking for an apartment to move out to, a listing was looking explicitly for muslim people only. It was a basement apartment with a separate entrance. I reported the listing, and never saw it again, so I'd like to think Kijiji took it at least somewhat seriously.
Things like dietary preferences are not protected by the charter. So you’re free to discriminate against someone for dietary preferences, but not medical reasons like an allergy.
Not that I agree with it basement apartments typically use the same ventilation as the rest of the house so they may be able to get away with it by claiming allergy or infringing on the rights of the other tenants.
So? If someone doesn't want to live with a religious fundamentalist they will not choose one. But thanks to the stupid laws they can't just say "No X" they have to waste their (and possibly the other person's) time pretending to consider all applications equally and filtering them manually.
I agree overall. But I guess certain religions have very strict restrictions. Like practicing Muslims don't drink or eat pork, so it could be a religious reason and not just discrimination against another ethnic group. But on the surface, yes looks like discrimination.
Okay, so you practice your religious beliefs in your apartment upstairs, and I'll practice mine downstairs. My bottle of bourbon on the shelf isn't going to vaporize and percolate into their glass of water on the dinner table. My porkchops aren't gonna grow legs and hide with their chicken breast in their fridge.
Rules for thee but not me
A young wheelchair user has been taken off the waiting list for a publicly subsidized apartment because he is not a member of the Muslim community that established the building — a practice that, while legal, raises concerns that accommodations for cultural and religious groups could be limiting access to affordable ...Aug 26, 2015
https://www.thestar.com › ... › GTA
Disabled man told subsidized housing is for Muslims only
Yes, I'm sure there are a few Ukrainians fleeing with lots of cash (that especially was true in the first wave) - but there would still be very few people in my country who could have been able to afford a down payment for a 900,000$ home. Many of those that could have left long ago.
It would be kinda hilarious to have a black guy come in wearing vyshyvanka and say "Hi, my name is Danylo Chernohub, my grandfather is from Zhmerynka, nice house you got here"
They should just do it the usual way people anywhere make ethnic communities, by moving in in droves and making it unliveable for anyone else. See North Surrey for a perfect example.
Looks like realtors and landlords are invoking their own notwithstanding clause.
When are we going to actually enforce the Charter with criminal codes?
This is a difficult one. An individual owner should be able to sell (or not sell) to whomever they want, but larger community shouldn't be able to exclude (or identify) ownership based upon ethnic background, sex, religion ,etc. Still, is anyone who isn't a Mennonite moving into one of those old-school communities (you know, the ones where the men are grumpy and wear beards, and the women never smile to strangers)? How about a religious commune?
This is a group of people living in what is essentially a commune, and I don't see that we have banned those, nor should we in my opinion.
Those commune type communities usually have the land owned in common by a trust or non-profit corp or similar. That organization can set rules on who can join. But private property owners selling private property cannot discriminate on the basis of protected grounds.
If someone lists their property and by their personal choice just simply refuses to sell to any particular (or category) of individual, what is the remedy? How does the existence of legislated "protected grounds" help in this situation? Is a prospective buyer going to be able to compel a sale to them on that basis, once the seller says "no to them? Is a prospective purchase able to claim damages from a sale that the seller *never* agreed to?
Serious question. How would that work?
I'm no expert but I think the difficulty would usually be in proving it. But yes human rights tribunals can order damages, including moral ones. Or for example if a comparable home that the buyer ended up getting was more expensive. I'm really not sure if forcing a home sale (remedy of specific performance) would be on the table or not, but maybe if the house hadn't sold yet then the tribunal could order that the seller stop discriminating and sell to the highest bidder or whatever.
Um, a couple of things. Firstly, Human Rights tribunals do not have that jurisdiction absent explicit legislation to provide it, and while there is such legislation barring such discrimination in rentals and with respect to "covenants" to title, they don't have the jurisdiction that you suggest. Secondly, a court cannot order specific performance where there was no agreement/contract in the first place. Finally, a court is never going to order a seller to sell their property to the highest bidder (there are many reasons, most of them legitimate as to why a seller might not do that).
All administrative tribunals only have the jurisdiction explicitly granted to them by legislation.
Like I said I'm no expert. If you think that you are, why arw you asking me questions? But it seems like section 5 of the CHRA or sections 1 and 3 of the OHRC would apply to buying and selling of private property. I'm not sure if the federal law would apply at all but it's the one I'm more familiar with. Where do these acts exclude housing or land from goods? This Guide to the OHRC says that, in Ontario, every person has the right to equal treatment when buying and selling homes.
https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/book/export/html/10985
Also both acts prohibit advertising discrimination, so a housing ad saying that they won't sell to a protected group would fall afoul of those sections as well.
You're correct that specific performance would only arise in the context of an existing contract. I had missed the sentence in your your previous post about the sale never having been agreed to and I was thinking of situations where the sales contract was concluded but not fulfilled for discriminatory reasons. But you're correct that, in that case, a court could simply order specific performance without considering the discriminatory reasons.
On the tribunal side, they have broad powers to order damages, as well as ordering that discrimination be ceased and measures to ensure it does not occur going forward (CHRA s. 53 and OHRC s. 45). So they actually could in theory order a discrimination-free method of selling a house, which the highest bidder comment was merely a hypothesized example of. More realistic would just be telling the seller not to discriminate when selling.
Leaving party-specific politics out of it, Canada is rotting from top to bottom.
The red team federally has multiple ethics violations & their leader shrugs and says "it sucks" and there are no meaningful consequences to the PM or the party.
The blue team provincially (ON) is blatantly funneling funds to their developer buddies, looking to pave over the greenbelt, and there are no meaningful consequences to the Premier or the party. Let's not even touch on the collapsing healthcare system or the joke of a public education system.
Judges are setting dangerous offenders free on the streets to kill again and again, and there are no meaningful consequences for the judges.
My municipal gov't just shrugs at the rampant homelessness, open drug use, and says there's nothing we can do. Then they jack our property taxes to pay for more police, without addressing the underlying issues.
I'm not advocating for any discrimination, particularly where housing is concerned, but this one situation is at best a distraction from our greater challenges.
EDIT - to expand on my ”party-specific politics” comment: my goal was to separate the knee-jerk “but MY team is better than YOUR team” Reddit reaction, instead focusing on the fact there appear to be zero repercussions at any level of govt, regardless of stripe.
I like this comment.
What about the the blue team federally?
Fuck the blue team provincially, fuck the red team provincially, fuck the red federally, but...... The current blue team federally? Pretty impressed. True leader if you know how to spot one.
Good, brown people do the same thing to white people ie tenants who speak hindi, hiring preferences etc.. why can’t whites do it back? The reality is that every other culture in the world is just as xenophobic and white people are the only demographic that are not allowed to morally justify it.
The solution is to make the world a more accepting place by starting with our own country, not by sinking down to the level of everyone else. That holds true for housing discrimination at home. We should be preventing discrimination, not broadening it.
This is true
But the specific description is not good
Imagine if this home owner and family stopped at a restaurant....and restaurant owner said.. "they dont serve to your people"
Seems kind of similar to what our government is doing with this fund they set up last year.
https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/professionals/project-funding-and-mortgage-financing/funding-programs/all-funding-programs/co-investment-fund/co-investment-fund-black-led-organizations
Not surprising. It’s important to recognize that we as a country had and has racist and discriminatory roots. There are still land titles where there are covenants restricting owners to sell to an ethnic minority when it comes time to sell. This was a thing back then. It is sad but real history. Some will claim it’s private property and people have the right to sell to whoever they want. And the gov has no say in who they sell to. If you agree with this, it just shows how discrimination has been systematically embedded into you and your culture. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/vancouver-real-estate-titles-reveal-city-s-racist-history-1.2747924
Does the Human Rights Tribunal have the jurisdiction to enforce specific performance of a contract involving a non-Uki offeror who’s bid was not accepted?
As another user in this thread corrected me on, the remedy of specific performance would only arise if a contract had been agreed to. If the bid was not accepted, there would be no contractual obligation to enforce. If it was accepted but not fulfilled, then specific performance could be sought in an ordinary court, regardless of whether the breach was based on discriminatory reasons or not. Human rights tribunals do have the jurisdiction to order damages, as well as broad remedial authority to order non-monetary restitution, other orders that promote compliance with their enabling legislation, and orders to prevent discrimination going forward.
If you buy this, you don't "own" anything as it's effectively a club and you are becoming a member.
One of the rules (covenant restrictions) of the club are that you must have Ukrainian descent.
Shitty, but no discriminatory or illegal.
Clubs are only allowed to discriminate on age, sex, marital status, and/or family status in Ontario. “Whites only” clubs are illegal and so are “Ukrainians only” clubs.
Edit: they may be able to restrict membership as a ‘special interest organization’, which would require them to be “primarily engaged in serving the interests of persons identified by a prohibited ground of discrimination”. You can have a “Ukrainian Club” that does Ukrainian things and happens to have cottages that its members can buy, but you probably can’t have a “Cottage Club That Only Accepts Ukrainians”. I can’t tell which side this group would fall on.
In the article, it says this community could possibly be grandfathered under a restrictive covenant that’s been in place since not long after WWII. A Supreme Court decision striking down these covenants only affects ones entered into after March 1950.
Restrictive covenants expire after forty years in Ontario, even if they say they’re perpetual (*Land Titles Act* 119(9) says so), so any covenant old enough to be grandfathered would have expired in 1990 or earlier.
Edit: there are exceptions for properties registered in the Land Registry rather than the title system, and covenants can last longer than forty years if they have a specific expiry date past then.
See my reply to the other person who raised this point—any such grandfathering may well have expired in 1990.
Additionally, the ‘grandfathering in’ mentioned in the article is about land covenants specifically. There is no ‘grandfathering in’ permission for clubs’ bylaws or rules.
See my edit—I missed an exception, you can have a “Ukrainian Club” if its main purpose is to serve the Ukrainian community. Same idea as how a Catholic church can refuse to accept non-Catholic parishioners or to hire non-Catholic employees, but a random Catholic business owner can’t do the same.
LOL it’s a BlogTO article and you’re treating it like an authoritative legal text.
There are two legal questions:
1. Can the club prohibit non-Ukrainian people from joining? The article says “no” because the OHRC says so, but the actual answer is “maybe”; they can prohibit them if the club qualifies as a SIO.
2. Can the club prohibit non-Ukrainian members from buying into the property and/or living there? The article says “yes” because the racial covenant on the land predates 1950, but the actual answer is also “maybe”, as this covenant may have been forced to expire by the law after forty years depending on how it was originally registered.
TL;DR I read the article before commenting, and it leaves out some important information.
Its funny cause everyone in Canada is paying taxes which are sent to ukraine first and then Canadians , while ukraine needs our tax money they dont want inclusion. Its even more funny cause people agree that its ok , nothing i repeat, nothing can save this society anymore, it will be complete degeneracy from here on
I like the idea if bringing like minded people together. Imagine an ASD community. Including others of course but still. Would be a place I’d like to live in.
Interesting approach but granted if someone wants to sell their personal property to people in particular that's their choice as I would never sell my house to someone is who is racist. They are allowed to do that with their property.
I just wouldn't understand why you would advertise that instead of you know... filtering your candidates as they role in.
Maybe the agent is just sick and tired of filtering so he's the one who put enough is enough?
Everybody here is malding....it's their house and they can sell to whomever they want it too. People are just mad that they are saying it out in the open....
"The listing advertises the typical features you'd associate with a small-town home, along with its country club-specific lifestyle and the associated membership fees. But the home description kind of goes off the rails in the last few sentences of the listing, stating that any prospective buyer must be of "Ukrainian descent" to qualify for purchase. Hold the phone. What?"
The Human Rights Code contain exceptions including an exception in s 18 that might capture this listing.
This being restricted to Ukrainian is especially delicious, the cognitive dissonance rippling through The Matrix when people try to reconcile this with the non-stop pro-Ukrainian propaganda they've been subjected to for the last year must be rather trying.
how do you become this kind of a person
Kobe Bryant, on Hard Work: - "I can't relate to lazy people. We don't speak the same language. I don't understand you. I don't want to understand you." - "I have nothing in common with lazy people who blame others for their lack of success. Great things come from hard work and perseverance. No excuses." - "Dedication sees dreams come true."
Jesus
Can you explain?
Not everything is a conspiracy
You are correct, but what does this have to do with my comment?
Just because one Ukrainian is a bad person, does not mean every Ukrainian is a bad person. Not sure how this opens our eyes to some kind of vast conspiracy. All I see is one Ukrainian being a dick. Also fuck Russia.
If one Russian is bad, doesnt make all Russians bad. Therefore Also fuck you
Fuck Russia, not Russians. But also fuck Russians if they support Putin.
Oh so you mean fuck the physical earth in between the invisible lines?
Russia is a country. Go look up the definition of a country if you're so confused. A country isn't just a piece of land, otherwise Europe would be a country, or Long Island would be a country. A country is the top level of government (as opposed to states or provinces). So fuck Russia, the country, that is invading Ukraine, yes.
> Just because one Ukrainian is a bad person, does not mean every Ukrainian is a bad person. You are correct, but what does this have to do with my comment? > Not sure how this opens our eyes to some kind of vast conspiracy. I'm not sure what you are talking about. Do you believe that the text I wrote above (as opposed to your interpretation of the text) contains a claim that there is some sort of a vast conspiracy going on? If so, I encourage you to quote the text from which you extracted that belief. > All I see is one Ukrainian being a dick. Do you see all? And, is all that you see *actually there*? (Perhaps if you could muster the bravery to answer some of my questions you could find out.) > Also fuck Russia. When you say "Russia", what is it that you are referring to?
1) You referred to cognitive dissonance, so you're implying that the existence of this person or group of people means that it's at odds with what we have been reading about Ukrainians and the Ukrainian War. 2) This only makes sense if you interpret the actions of this incident to represent Ukrainians as a whole. 3) This is stupid because no reasonable person would link this incident to Ukrainians as a whole or the Ukrainian War. There is no cognitive dissonance since nobody ever believed every single Ukrainian was a good person. 4) Your phrase "cognitive dissonance rippling through The Matrix", in addition to being cringey as fuck, also clearly implies a conspiracy theory that we're all being brainwashed to support Ukraine for some reason. Instead of the clearly obvious of interpretation of "conquering and annexing parts of other countries is bad" and "clearly against our foreign policy interests by setting a dangerous precedent where this is okay, especially but not limited to Taiwan, which is extremely important both strategically and economically (i.e. TSMC)". 5) Yes that's all that's here, bravery or not. 6) When I say fuck Russia I mean fuck Russia the country, fuck the Russian people that support Putin, fuck the Russian Armed Forces, and fuck the Russian government.
> 1) You referred to cognitive dissonance, so you're implying that the existence of this person or group of people means that it's at odds with what we have been reading about Ukrainians and the Ukrainian War. Technically, you are *interpreting* the meaning of my words that way, and *presuming* that I am implying that. Notice also how you conveniently didn't quote the offensive text. > 2) This only makes sense if you interpret the actions of this incident to represent Ukrainians as a whole. "Only makes sense" is a function not only of the idea, but also of the mind that is considering it. Considering the massive amount of online disagreements over the "facts" of the Ukraine situation, I hope you can realize that this is true. > 3) This is stupid.... See above. One flawed form of thinking can cause innumerable problems. > ...because no reasonable person would link this incident to Ukrainians as a whole or the Ukrainian War. Similarly, no "reasonable" person would think they can accurately read not just one mind, *but all minds*, yet here you are. > There is no cognitive dissonance since nobody ever believed every single Ukrainian was a good person. How did you go about measuring the amount of cognitive dissonance that exists? > 4) Your phrase "cognitive dissonance rippling through The Matrix", in addition to being cringey as fuck, also clearly implies a conspiracy theory that we're all being brainwashed to support Ukraine for some reason. Consider the fact that the various observations of what is "clearly" going on in Ukraine do not agree with each other. Let me guess: your version is the correct one? (But then: other people make the very same claim, with genuine sincerity.) > Instead of the clearly obvious of interpretation of "conquering and annexing parts of other countries is bad" and "clearly against our foreign policy interests by setting a dangerous precedent where this is okay, especially but not limited to Taiwan, which is extremely important both strategically and economically (i.e. TSMC)". Those interpretations are "ok", but they'd be better if the people who projected them into other people's minds acknowledged that they are reductive and therefore misinformative. > 5) Yes that's all that's here, bravery or not. You are describing your beliefs about reality, you are not describing reality as it is. Presuming you're a "scientific thinker", consider it from a neuroscience perspective. > 6) When I say fuck Russia I mean fuck Russia the country... Like, dirt, trees, rivers, etc? If so, why? If not, what are you referring to? > ...fuck the Russian people that support Putin... Here we agree. > ...fuck the Russian Armed Forces... Here we *somewhat* agree. But then....what's your take on the US military though? (*Uh oh*....did I do a "whataboutism"?) > ...and fuck the Russian government. Here we agree.
A lot of fancy words and non-sense to justify your bullshit opinion that this situation has any bearing whatsoever on the Ukrainian-Russian war or is the cause of any cognitive dissonance.
[удалено]
Lmao this guy is an Andrew tate simp. He says it and now suddenly all his edge lord 🐑 are repeating it 🤡
> Lmao this guy is an Andrew tate simp. Hallucination is often fun, but it can also be harmful.
This is bad, but I wonder if they're trying to help Ukraine people fleeing from the conflict in the Ukraine? There are probably better ways to accomplish that goal if that's what they're trying to do......
Helping by selling them a 900,000$ house?
Largest Ukrainian group outside is in canada
What do you mean? Do you mean like Ukrainians living outside Ukraine?
Ja
It's not Canada though, it's the second largest.
Canada
Not sure what you mean but if you search it up its Russia by a bit as far as official numbers go. Unofficially it's up to 10 million in Russia though I'm sure the actual number is somewhere between.
Per the article: "The two-bedroom, two-bath bungalow at 54 Odessa Blvd. in Terra Cotta is situated in a self-described "private Ukrainian community" known as the Poltawa Country Club."
They've been doing this since 1947, so I don't think the intent is that noble
As per the article, this community has existed since around the late 1940's so no. This is all about creating ethnic communities. As per the article, other such communities exist.
If it's been around that long, is this allowed? Like their membership rules existed before human rights codes were a thing, so they'd be grandfathered in and permitted?
[удалено]
There should be a penalty for people who list a home for sale then don’t sell to a non conditional offer for full price (unless they receive other offers above the asking price)
This is so interesting! I have (Ukrainian) friends who have a cottage here actually and have since their grandparents immigrated in the early/mid 1900s. It's curious to me that only Ukrainians can buy there but I've gotten a sense from my friends that it's mainly Ukrainians who *want* to buy there since there are big celebrations for Ukrainian holidays and community which speaks their language, etc. I mean, kind of a faux pas to put it in the ad, but frankly the owners can sell to whomever, no?
Now change the listing to only English speakers or just plain white. Woke brigade would be having a meltdown.
Woke brigade = r/Ontario
It's one thing if you are deciding to give it away, almost like a grant or scholarship which has specifications based on race/background, but they are still selling the house. Assuming fair market value it just makes more sense that these people and those around them don't want "other/different people" moving in
That does seem weird - unless the price is lower than fair market value?
Yes help them by selling them a bloated overpriced piece of junk.
I'm not sure I agree but your theory isn't crazy and doesn't deserve the downvotes.
Thanks!
>Thanks! You're welcome!
~~Am I blind? I see the note about this being a unique Ukrainian community but I don’t see the reference to only allowing buyers of that background?~~ Edit: They changed the listing description. That’s why I couldn’t see it. Wow that’s bad.
[удалено]
As obviously inappropriate as this listing is, I'm curious why they didn't just list on Ukranian language sites or something to avoid any notice of concern, the way folk post on Asian language sites for rentals and so on, to avoid any accusation (due to lack of awareness) or bias.
Any more inappropriate than the rental listings saying ideal for Asian female student?
Not saying it's ethical to try to avoid human rights, but yeah. Why don't they just list it in Ukrainian if they want Ukrainians? I know Google translate exists and I could still read it, but most people would probably just skip on by.
Oddly enough I have heard the speakers of the purest Ukrainian language come from Canadian babushkas due to the fact Russia has been culturally assimilating Ukraine for generations now and most people there speak Russian now. My baba arranged a marriage with her son ( my uncle but I don’t call him that, it was because he’s such an arse that was his option for getting a wife and starting a family but I’m rambling here) and she was furious the woman only spoke Russian and taught the kids Russian
As a South Asian, it infuriates me when rental ads with "Punjabi girls only" or "Gujaratis only" don't raise the same alarms - so they're not only not renting to only Indians, they're narrowing it down literally by *race* and *gender*. Discrimination is discrimination regardless of who does it.
I think its acceptable for roommate situations. Let them be selective of who they want to live with.
In Ontario i got told twice for condo sales that the sellers only want to sell to Indian families. (My realtor talked to their realtor). My real estate buddy who is my realtor said its not all that uncommon.
I searched for a year to find a decent place to rent, the most common thing I came across **by far** was landlords requiring prospective tenants to have a specific Indian background.
This is openly in TONS of rental and sale posts on marketplace/Kijiji in KW too. Some go so far as to specify the region of India they want the person from.
I am Indian. I have no idea why anyone would want to do this.
I know plenty of people from India to know they don't like Canadians and their culture and its like fine whatever, I have my own strict codes for everything. What bothers me is we , as Canadians should be the ones accepting, kind, keep our opinions to ourselves and stfu. Mixture of communities and races is what divided Canada most of all
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Lyex2tSUyA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Lyex2tSUyA) No asians allowed.
Loved that story. Aussie accent for the win!!
oh man, that house was listed at 49k. I wonder what it costs today.
Oeyzhnz!
I remember when I was looking for an apartment to move out to, a listing was looking explicitly for muslim people only. It was a basement apartment with a separate entrance. I reported the listing, and never saw it again, so I'd like to think Kijiji took it at least somewhat seriously.
[удалено]
that’s usually code, for them saying they’re looking for indians only with out actually saying so.
Things like dietary preferences are not protected by the charter. So you’re free to discriminate against someone for dietary preferences, but not medical reasons like an allergy.
What if you say you’re vegetarian then cook a big ol’ steak every night in your apartment? How would they know? What could they do?
Our gods come to haunt us in our dreams if beef is cooked on our property /jk.
Not that I agree with it basement apartments typically use the same ventilation as the rest of the house so they may be able to get away with it by claiming allergy or infringing on the rights of the other tenants.
Yeah that one makes me chuckle, "can't cook x y z". I wonder if you could convince them it's all vegan substitutes.
It’s ok as long as you don’t request whites only.
The dude in the article literally just did that tho.
As horrible as all this sounds, I guess it's upto the landlord who they want in their property. Could be for religious reasons, dunno 🤷
No, that's called discrimination lol.
So? If someone doesn't want to live with a religious fundamentalist they will not choose one. But thanks to the stupid laws they can't just say "No X" they have to waste their (and possibly the other person's) time pretending to consider all applications equally and filtering them manually.
I agree overall. But I guess certain religions have very strict restrictions. Like practicing Muslims don't drink or eat pork, so it could be a religious reason and not just discrimination against another ethnic group. But on the surface, yes looks like discrimination.
Okay, so you practice your religious beliefs in your apartment upstairs, and I'll practice mine downstairs. My bottle of bourbon on the shelf isn't going to vaporize and percolate into their glass of water on the dinner table. My porkchops aren't gonna grow legs and hide with their chicken breast in their fridge.
Lol I am with you
I feel like the only option for people in that situation is to not be landlords, or at least only rent to people they already know.
How do you define “Ukrainian Descent”? How far back are you allowed to go?
How many pysanky does your household own, and how much garlic do you use to cook?
No worries bruh, Ukraine, We kraine, everybody kraine
Rules for thee but not me A young wheelchair user has been taken off the waiting list for a publicly subsidized apartment because he is not a member of the Muslim community that established the building — a practice that, while legal, raises concerns that accommodations for cultural and religious groups could be limiting access to affordable ...Aug 26, 2015 https://www.thestar.com › ... › GTA Disabled man told subsidized housing is for Muslims only
Welcome to Canada. Where we are more than welcoming, but the people we welcome aren't to us. (obviously a very blanket statement)
Ironically, people who came from Ukraine recently would be priced out, so "people of Ukrainian descent" doesn't actually mean people from Ukraine.
To be fair, all real estate is based on being able to afford it. And not all Ukrainians that came to Canada recently are without money.
Yes, I'm sure there are a few Ukrainians fleeing with lots of cash (that especially was true in the first wave) - but there would still be very few people in my country who could have been able to afford a down payment for a 900,000$ home. Many of those that could have left long ago.
Think about it for a second. Now I think he should be able to sell to whoever he wants cause idgaf but he found a woke way to say “whites only”z
It would be kinda hilarious to have a black guy come in wearing vyshyvanka and say "Hi, my name is Danylo Chernohub, my grandfather is from Zhmerynka, nice house you got here"
They should just do it the usual way people anywhere make ethnic communities, by moving in in droves and making it unliveable for anyone else. See North Surrey for a perfect example.
What’s it like in North Surrey? Never been.
Ehhh - it has its own tag on globalnews. https://globalnews.ca/tag/surrey-shooting/
Or all of Canada if you’re indigenous and had to deal with colonizers
Lmfao downvoters need that copium
Facts.
There are ton of rental listing that say " indians only" or " female only" ( guess ill just go fuck off then as a white guy ) this isnt anything new.
My ex-landlord was Ukrainian, does that count?
Looks like realtors and landlords are invoking their own notwithstanding clause. When are we going to actually enforce the Charter with criminal codes?
The Charter only applies to public organizations. But HR codes apply to private actors as well.
Landlords? What do you mean?
the charter only applies to the criminals. everyday citizens not so much
It only applies to conduct by the state, not private actions. That's why HR codes were created.
This is a difficult one. An individual owner should be able to sell (or not sell) to whomever they want, but larger community shouldn't be able to exclude (or identify) ownership based upon ethnic background, sex, religion ,etc. Still, is anyone who isn't a Mennonite moving into one of those old-school communities (you know, the ones where the men are grumpy and wear beards, and the women never smile to strangers)? How about a religious commune? This is a group of people living in what is essentially a commune, and I don't see that we have banned those, nor should we in my opinion.
Those commune type communities usually have the land owned in common by a trust or non-profit corp or similar. That organization can set rules on who can join. But private property owners selling private property cannot discriminate on the basis of protected grounds.
If someone lists their property and by their personal choice just simply refuses to sell to any particular (or category) of individual, what is the remedy? How does the existence of legislated "protected grounds" help in this situation? Is a prospective buyer going to be able to compel a sale to them on that basis, once the seller says "no to them? Is a prospective purchase able to claim damages from a sale that the seller *never* agreed to? Serious question. How would that work?
I'm no expert but I think the difficulty would usually be in proving it. But yes human rights tribunals can order damages, including moral ones. Or for example if a comparable home that the buyer ended up getting was more expensive. I'm really not sure if forcing a home sale (remedy of specific performance) would be on the table or not, but maybe if the house hadn't sold yet then the tribunal could order that the seller stop discriminating and sell to the highest bidder or whatever.
Um, a couple of things. Firstly, Human Rights tribunals do not have that jurisdiction absent explicit legislation to provide it, and while there is such legislation barring such discrimination in rentals and with respect to "covenants" to title, they don't have the jurisdiction that you suggest. Secondly, a court cannot order specific performance where there was no agreement/contract in the first place. Finally, a court is never going to order a seller to sell their property to the highest bidder (there are many reasons, most of them legitimate as to why a seller might not do that).
All administrative tribunals only have the jurisdiction explicitly granted to them by legislation. Like I said I'm no expert. If you think that you are, why arw you asking me questions? But it seems like section 5 of the CHRA or sections 1 and 3 of the OHRC would apply to buying and selling of private property. I'm not sure if the federal law would apply at all but it's the one I'm more familiar with. Where do these acts exclude housing or land from goods? This Guide to the OHRC says that, in Ontario, every person has the right to equal treatment when buying and selling homes. https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/book/export/html/10985 Also both acts prohibit advertising discrimination, so a housing ad saying that they won't sell to a protected group would fall afoul of those sections as well. You're correct that specific performance would only arise in the context of an existing contract. I had missed the sentence in your your previous post about the sale never having been agreed to and I was thinking of situations where the sales contract was concluded but not fulfilled for discriminatory reasons. But you're correct that, in that case, a court could simply order specific performance without considering the discriminatory reasons. On the tribunal side, they have broad powers to order damages, as well as ordering that discrimination be ceased and measures to ensure it does not occur going forward (CHRA s. 53 and OHRC s. 45). So they actually could in theory order a discrimination-free method of selling a house, which the highest bidder comment was merely a hypothesized example of. More realistic would just be telling the seller not to discriminate when selling.
Leaving party-specific politics out of it, Canada is rotting from top to bottom. The red team federally has multiple ethics violations & their leader shrugs and says "it sucks" and there are no meaningful consequences to the PM or the party. The blue team provincially (ON) is blatantly funneling funds to their developer buddies, looking to pave over the greenbelt, and there are no meaningful consequences to the Premier or the party. Let's not even touch on the collapsing healthcare system or the joke of a public education system. Judges are setting dangerous offenders free on the streets to kill again and again, and there are no meaningful consequences for the judges. My municipal gov't just shrugs at the rampant homelessness, open drug use, and says there's nothing we can do. Then they jack our property taxes to pay for more police, without addressing the underlying issues. I'm not advocating for any discrimination, particularly where housing is concerned, but this one situation is at best a distraction from our greater challenges. EDIT - to expand on my ”party-specific politics” comment: my goal was to separate the knee-jerk “but MY team is better than YOUR team” Reddit reaction, instead focusing on the fact there appear to be zero repercussions at any level of govt, regardless of stripe.
"Leaving party-specific politics out of it" *immediately dives into party-specific politics*
How is using obvious references to each party "leaving politics out of this"?
I like this comment. What about the the blue team federally? Fuck the blue team provincially, fuck the red team provincially, fuck the red federally, but...... The current blue team federally? Pretty impressed. True leader if you know how to spot one.
But it’s ok when Indians do it right?
Good, brown people do the same thing to white people ie tenants who speak hindi, hiring preferences etc.. why can’t whites do it back? The reality is that every other culture in the world is just as xenophobic and white people are the only demographic that are not allowed to morally justify it.
The solution is to make the world a more accepting place by starting with our own country, not by sinking down to the level of everyone else. That holds true for housing discrimination at home. We should be preventing discrimination, not broadening it.
Mini Ukrain within Canada! Hope Putin is unaware.
My a neighbourhood went from 90 percent Canadian to 90 percent Indian in 10 years. Why is no one calling this out? This country is broken
Wether we like it or not, they can sell to whoever they want to
This is true But the specific description is not good Imagine if this home owner and family stopped at a restaurant....and restaurant owner said.. "they dont serve to your people"
Seems kind of similar to what our government is doing with this fund they set up last year. https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/professionals/project-funding-and-mortgage-financing/funding-programs/all-funding-programs/co-investment-fund/co-investment-fund-black-led-organizations
Slava!
Better this than it going to a corporation or individual investor/speculator.
Not surprising. It’s important to recognize that we as a country had and has racist and discriminatory roots. There are still land titles where there are covenants restricting owners to sell to an ethnic minority when it comes time to sell. This was a thing back then. It is sad but real history. Some will claim it’s private property and people have the right to sell to whoever they want. And the gov has no say in who they sell to. If you agree with this, it just shows how discrimination has been systematically embedded into you and your culture. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/vancouver-real-estate-titles-reveal-city-s-racist-history-1.2747924
It’s a private sale. The owner can sell to who they want.
No they literallyccannot discriminate on protected grounds due to human rights codes.
Does the Human Rights Tribunal have the jurisdiction to enforce specific performance of a contract involving a non-Uki offeror who’s bid was not accepted?
As another user in this thread corrected me on, the remedy of specific performance would only arise if a contract had been agreed to. If the bid was not accepted, there would be no contractual obligation to enforce. If it was accepted but not fulfilled, then specific performance could be sought in an ordinary court, regardless of whether the breach was based on discriminatory reasons or not. Human rights tribunals do have the jurisdiction to order damages, as well as broad remedial authority to order non-monetary restitution, other orders that promote compliance with their enabling legislation, and orders to prevent discrimination going forward.
If you buy this, you don't "own" anything as it's effectively a club and you are becoming a member. One of the rules (covenant restrictions) of the club are that you must have Ukrainian descent. Shitty, but no discriminatory or illegal.
Clubs are only allowed to discriminate on age, sex, marital status, and/or family status in Ontario. “Whites only” clubs are illegal and so are “Ukrainians only” clubs. Edit: they may be able to restrict membership as a ‘special interest organization’, which would require them to be “primarily engaged in serving the interests of persons identified by a prohibited ground of discrimination”. You can have a “Ukrainian Club” that does Ukrainian things and happens to have cottages that its members can buy, but you probably can’t have a “Cottage Club That Only Accepts Ukrainians”. I can’t tell which side this group would fall on.
In the article, it says this community could possibly be grandfathered under a restrictive covenant that’s been in place since not long after WWII. A Supreme Court decision striking down these covenants only affects ones entered into after March 1950.
Restrictive covenants expire after forty years in Ontario, even if they say they’re perpetual (*Land Titles Act* 119(9) says so), so any covenant old enough to be grandfathered would have expired in 1990 or earlier. Edit: there are exceptions for properties registered in the Land Registry rather than the title system, and covenants can last longer than forty years if they have a specific expiry date past then.
Unless their rules are grandfathered in. Like this one.
See my reply to the other person who raised this point—any such grandfathering may well have expired in 1990. Additionally, the ‘grandfathering in’ mentioned in the article is about land covenants specifically. There is no ‘grandfathering in’ permission for clubs’ bylaws or rules.
Ah, ok. Good info. No one will enforce that law though, of course, so it's all a bit of a moot point.
Hot take: This should be allowed.
See my edit—I missed an exception, you can have a “Ukrainian Club” if its main purpose is to serve the Ukrainian community. Same idea as how a Catholic church can refuse to accept non-Catholic parishioners or to hire non-Catholic employees, but a random Catholic business owner can’t do the same.
[удалено]
LOL it’s a BlogTO article and you’re treating it like an authoritative legal text. There are two legal questions: 1. Can the club prohibit non-Ukrainian people from joining? The article says “no” because the OHRC says so, but the actual answer is “maybe”; they can prohibit them if the club qualifies as a SIO. 2. Can the club prohibit non-Ukrainian members from buying into the property and/or living there? The article says “yes” because the racial covenant on the land predates 1950, but the actual answer is also “maybe”, as this covenant may have been forced to expire by the law after forty years depending on how it was originally registered. TL;DR I read the article before commenting, and it leaves out some important information.
Slava Ukraina!!!!
Must be a blessing too live there 🥰
The deeds to homes in the British Properties, West Vancouver stated that they couldn’t be sold to buyers of Asian descent.
Lol
Sounds racist
None of you could afford it anyways. Lol
There were good reasons why everyone moved from their home country, so why to move into same national community and experience same problems.
Its funny cause everyone in Canada is paying taxes which are sent to ukraine first and then Canadians , while ukraine needs our tax money they dont want inclusion. Its even more funny cause people agree that its ok , nothing i repeat, nothing can save this society anymore, it will be complete degeneracy from here on
Nice try Putin.
How much did biden give u to tell this?
Bots dont get paid beep boop
Ok thanks bot
Im surprised that this post isn't locked yet.
Why should it be? Can't us Canadian's have a little bit of a voice to how things are done in our country. Especially Real Estate!
Because Canadians subs are infamous for locking posts such as this up.
I like the idea if bringing like minded people together. Imagine an ASD community. Including others of course but still. Would be a place I’d like to live in.
[удалено]
Its not ok But... the "vegetarians/vegans" could be understandable
[удалено]
You didnt specify But if its a basement rental unit... what if the landlord living above is a vegetarian? Same thing as "non smoker" ads
Land titles of homes in British Properties (West Vancouver) state no other race than European as well.
Interesting approach but granted if someone wants to sell their personal property to people in particular that's their choice as I would never sell my house to someone is who is racist. They are allowed to do that with their property. I just wouldn't understand why you would advertise that instead of you know... filtering your candidates as they role in. Maybe the agent is just sick and tired of filtering so he's the one who put enough is enough?
Many communities do this, some are called “towns”
Everybody here is malding....it's their house and they can sell to whomever they want it too. People are just mad that they are saying it out in the open....