Stereotyping just widens language divides
A stereotype can be defined, most simply, as an unfair generalisation about a group of people, generally based on prejudicial attitudes.
Instead of listening to and trying to understand those whose opinions might differ from their own, many people take the easy way out. They attach a label or stereotype to those with whom they disagree, to diminish their credibility and brush off their opinion, instead of engaging with the arguments. This has been the case all too often when it comes to debates around language in Quebec.
English-speaking Quebecers, when discussing minority-rights concerns, are often referred to as privileged or the “best treated minority in the world.” Anyone who challenges Quebec's language laws in an outspoken way risks being branded an “angryphone.” By the same token, francophones who support language laws that promote French are sometimes labelled “intolerant” or “racist.”
Such name-calling and stereotyping are not conducive to dialogue. Worse, they deepen divisions.
The recent mobilization efforts of the anglophone community in opposition to Bill 96, uncharacteristic of a community that more often displays resigned complacency, show just how deeply the community is concerned about the legislation's provisions. First, there were protests at CEGEPS, then a demonstration by thousands last weekend, the largest assembly I can remember for a rally on minority language rights in Quebec.
This emboldening of the community certainly stoked the attention of the francophone media. It elicited an interesting dichotomy of opinion: some very thoughtful analysis, but, unfortunately, also some of the same dismissive journalistic stereotyping like that seen in the past.
For example, after the student demonstrations at English CEGEPS, Radio-canada published an article on its website about John Abbott College that portrayed a privileged, anachronistic enclave where anglophone students scorn French and call Quebecers racists, appearing to tar all anglophones there with the same brush. Prominently featured in the story were quotes from interviews with five teachers in the college's French department whom the reporter allowed to speak anonymously. Another John Abbott teacher, this one named, said, “Every time we try to promote the French language, the reflex of the anglophone community of Quebec, a hyper-privileged community, is to call us racists.” Calling anglophones “hyper-privileged” is at odds with the facts and only serves to anger and polarize Quebecers. And both making allegations of racism and exaggerating the prevalence of such allegations are apt to generate more heat than light.
The Journal de Montréal tabloid wasn't much better. The march last weekend was extremely positive and respectful, with multilingual presentations. The paper's opinion writers do not seem to have been listening to the many strong messages of unity promoting rapprochement between the two linguistic groups in the province. The tabloid was rich with stereotyping and antagonistic rhetoric about the community. Mathieu Bock-côté referred to the participants as the “Rhodesian fringe” of the anglophone community, with other commentators attacking Liberal Leader Dominique Anglade for attending.
On the bright side, there was a thoughtful, nuanced analysis by Yves Boisvert of La Presse, which the Coalition Avenir Québec government would do well to read. Boisvert made a very important and insightful distinction, one heard far too rarely. The French language is undoubtedly threatened by the predominance of English geographically, culturally and economically, he wrote. But this threat is not coming from the Quebec English-speaking community.
As Boisvert suggested, Bill 96 completely misses the mark.
And so does much of the discourse about anglophone reaction to it.
The objective of protecting French should be shared by both communities. Divisive discussions about what means should be used to accomplish it breed perceptions of intolerance on both sides. Those who sling stereotypes make it very difficult to bridge that gap.