Doesn’t sound like you understand how things when when you bring up aliens and conspiracy theories as a defense.
Pronouns-as-socialist-takeover is also a conspiracy theory, and a pretty lousy one too.
Please try harder.
Nice try distracting the issue at hand when you can’t produce a defense besides it’s like aliens.
As long as you don’t tell me a human rights court in Canada wouldnt consider pronoun misuse a form a discrimination.
http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/questions-and-answers-about-gender-identity-and-pronouns
Okay, you really want this?
Define “pronoun misuse”.
Can you define it? It’s not exactly very clear.
You’re the one making the claim.
No. I’m saying what the OHRC said. I’m just pointing out that’s what they said so why is it a question of the human rights tribunal wouldnt.
You’re the one making the claim they would lock you up for refusing to say zie. Or is your claim something else?
My problem with Canadian bullshit laws is a bit what JP points out: freedom of speech requires the freedom of words choice and the government, following some minorities’ command (those minorities that have louder than ever and that don’t represent what most of people think), and thinking that this is the right thing to do political marketing wise, impose this minorities’ vision and restriction on language.
Language shouldn’t be manipulated in the way this hysterical idiots with megaphone and the government are attempting to modify, and among other reasons, because this restricts people’s freedom and abilities to think and develop ideas.
We see every day ridiculous examples of how the hysterical left is effectively constraining what can be and can’t be said in what otherwise should be the home and arena of ideas: the universities.
People getting fired in the USA because the angry SWJ demand so is real. People not being able to share ideas in universities because of same reason too.
And these people are influencing politics, policies and trying to shape ideas and minds to their retardedness:
I repeatedly cleared up that’s not what JP claimed and not what I’m claiming. I’m saying it could result in a fine or an order of non monetary remedy by the human rights tribunal.
Then I pointed out how the Ontario Human Rights Council made it their stance that misgendering is a form of discrimination so maybe it’s not a stretch the tribunal also would which would result in the said fine or non monetary remedy ordered.
After that, I pointed out that contempt of court can result in being sentenced to jail. I’m not saying it’s easy, but the pathway is there and have been used in the past.
If you think I believe the legislation will lock people up left and right, that’s not true. And I certainly don’t think it’s happening right now either.
I’m not saying whether it’s right or wrong. I’m saying that it could happen - which was JP’s original point. As opposed to you saying it won’t happen with pronouns. Maybe it won’t, but it could.
Are you asking us to not worry about bad laws, because the tribunal members are reasonable people? That is a frightening thought.
Laws should be narrowly tailored to achieve an end, not so broad and vague that we dont know what’s being asked of us (such as which preferred pronoun to use), nor so vague that we rely only upon the reasonableness of the adjudicator to save us.
You’ve been talking about going to jail since at least post #550.
If your “it” is not refusal to say zie, what exactly is it?
Then I pointed out how the Ontario Human Rights Council made it their stance that misgendering is a form of discrimination
Is misgendering not a form a discrimination?
(Of course, as we have already discussed, the context matters. If it’s a question of providing an anatomy-based service, it’s the anatomy that matters.)
It’s more than a stretch to say they would do it for refusing to say zie. They wouldn’t. (And I’ll say it again: hypothetically, in a future world where zie has gone mainstream, maybe they would.)
You’re talking about the anti-Semitism case again. Not pronouns. Not even gender identity. Not even gender.
I wonder what JP would say about it now. He’ll admit when he was wrong, I’ve seen him do it. He’s taken those original videos down which could be for a number of reasons, but interesting.
@jmee and @BiggusDickus, I still think you’re missing the point.
The crazy artist in TO wrote like a manic street preacher. Very long and ranty and conspiratorial, but if you boil it down you basically get lots of white people are racist and I’m black so here’s a list of white people I’ve met and I think they’re racist so make them give me money.
The tribunal’s decision to ban her from filing further complaints politely hints that they think she’s mentally ill, and it’s not hard to see why when you actually read the stuff. It’s not hard, either, to imagine her being shunned by lots of people she meets and incorrectly assuming they (at least the white ones) are shunning her because of racism and not because they don’t want to deal with someone who sounds like a manic street preacher.
So she was declared vexatious, and that was that.
Yet the fact remains that the law was misused, albeit unsuccessfully. Hypothetically, if the tribunal were run by extremely biased people who don’t care about justice, it could have fined a whole bunch of people who didn’t actually do anything wrong… yet that scenario doesn’t bother me, because Canada, despite some serious problems, is not that kind of country.
So the fact that she (unsuccessfully) misused the law, how would you deal with that? Remove race from the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination?
I have laid it out over and over again. I just made it clear, I did not claim misgendering will directly be used to sentence anyone to jail, that can not happen because the legislation does not allow that. What I did say is it could result in a fine or non monetary remedy. And failure to obey will result in contempt of court which a jail sentence can be used to back up the court order or fine.
What part is this is confusing to you?
You brought out the issue before, define misgendering. It’s not clear to me and have never been laid out to my knowledge. So there’s problem 1. Another issue is that you and I can believe it is, but it’s the question of how it’s applied in law.
Why is it a stretch when the Ontario Human rights Council says it’s a form of discrimination to misgender? Your best defense right now lays on it’s a stretch, which is not a very good one. Instead, can you point out how it would not be used in this way.
The person was not sentenced to jaul for anti semitic speech which is a form of discrimination and hate crime/hate speech as the court ruled. The person was sentenced to jail for contempt of court. They were ordered to stop as a non monetary remedy and a fine by the court for hate crimes/hate speech. The person did not follow the order or pay the fine which is contempt of court.
IDK if you’re doing this on purpose or what, I never said for not saying zie. Stop using the most ridiculous terms to ridicule the issue. He or she will do.
And for the record, I would be more than happy to use someone’s preferred pronouns if they asked in a reasonable manner. That’s not the issue at hand. I might even consider zie if they ask nice enough.
It feels like you are debating an image in your mind, there are some people who freaked out and believed you would be directly sentenced to jail if you didn’t memorize all 100000000 pronouns. That’s not what i’m saying. I am simply discussing about potential consequences of the legislation and clearing up what JP said. He never said it would land you in jail, he asked what happens if you got a fine or was told to stop and didn’t. It seems like a lot of people read somewhere he said it would land it jail and freaked out on both sides rather then what he actually said.
Jessica Yaniv’s complaints were accepted by the tribunal. They could have rejected them as frivolous, or vexatious or some other legalese but they didn’t. They allowed her to seriously disrupt the lives of the recent immigrants she was persecuting. OK, they found against her because it was blindingly obvious that she was a nasty fruitcake, but they allowed her permission to cause more harm,