Canada is touted as a diverse, tolerant, and multicultural country where the prevailing understanding is that racial injustices emanating from structural oppression are not widespread. Analysing lived experiences of racialized participants who worked in publicly funded places of employment in British Columbia (BC), this qualitative study offers a phenomenological exploration of a particular manifestation of racial discrimination: that of quarantine-like containment of mobility at work. Examining undue restrictions and mobility limitations imposed on participants, this article will use three metaphors—stranger for racialized individuals, body for workplaces, and cordon minoritaire as the process of containing the mobility of strangers within the body—to present and discuss findings on: 1) excessive targeted scrutiny; 2) wrongful seating arrangements; 3) cold and transactional interactions; and, 4) bad faith references. In this regard, cordon minoritaire is presented as a novel analytical framework to illustrate the ways in which racialized workers were cordoned off, with their professional freedoms and career mobilities restricted, in order to quarantine White ecosystems of employment. Consequently, cordon minoritaire machinations created perniciously unequal conditions that fundamentally and unjustly constrained participants into working under discriminatory conditions—depravities that are at odds with whimsical notions of Canada as tolerant, multicultural, and morally superior to its neighbour south of the border.

This paper examines how older men perceive, experience and internalise ageist prejudice in the context of their everyday lives. We draw on in-depth interviews with 29 community-dwelling Canadian men aged 65–89. Although one-third of our participants were unfamiliar with the term ageism, the majority felt that age-based discrimination was prevalent in Canadian society. Indicating that they themselves had not been personally subjected to ageism, the men considered age-based discrimination to be a socially distant problem. The men explained their perceived immunity to ageism in terms of their youthful attitudes and active lifestyles. The men identified three groups who they considered to be particularly vulnerable to age-based discrimination, namely women, older workers and frail elders residing in institutions. At the same time, the majority of our participants had internalised a variety of ageist and sexist stereotypes. Indeed, the men assumed that later life was inevitably a time of physical decline and dependence, and accepted as fact that older adults were grumpy, poor drivers, unable to learn new technologies and, in the case of older women, sexually unattractive. In this way, a tension existed between the men's assertion that ageism did not affect their lives and their own internalisation of ageist stereotypes. We consider our findings in relation to the theorising about ageism and hegemonic masculinity.