Jordan Peterson launches anti-censorship site Thinkspot

[Machismo]

he is right about the gender pronoun thing , plain and simple.jsut because people come up with made up words doesnt mean you will force other people to use them .
because muh pronoun.If you believe in something you cant force others to believe the same thing .

Great, I agree that the government shouldn't be restricting speech in such a manner.

And yet, why is he so upset about speech, that he felt compelled to sue twice to stop people from saying things he doesn't like?

What hypocrisy.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

it has been made illegal in other countries tho , read the ny law

Peterson is from Canada no other country is relevant, he lied about c16 no other law is relevant.

He played you like a fiddle and still is.

[niztheundead87]

Peterson is from Canada no other country is relevant, he lied about c16 no other law is relevant.

He played you like a fiddle and still is.

he was talking about the law in general not just canada, such a law is absurd any way you see it

- - - Updated - - -

Great, I agree that the government shouldn't be restricting speech in such a manner.

And yet, why is he so upset about speech, that he felt compelled to sue twice to stop people from saying things he doesn't like?

What hypocrisy.

its called defamation

[Machismo]

he was talking about the law in general not just canada, such a law is absurd any way you see it

- - - Updated - - -



its called defamation

So, you mean like misusing pronouns is also a crime?

Wait for it...

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Clickbait much?

The article itself explain that proposed measure is not shadowbanning.

The point of shadowbanning (the "shadow" part) is that user is unaware that his messages are no longer being shown; messages marked as "hidden due to downvotes" are generally indicated to user and fully visible to everyone by clicking.

The article also explains that conservatives have labelled this process as "shadowbanning" in the past..so by their misconstrued definition...this is "shadowbanning"

[niztheundead87]

So, you mean like misusing pronouns is also a crime?

Wait for it...

not what i said read previous post

my words : having to use a made up word is absurb

[Deletedaccount1]

Oh, the YouTube banning? And now I remember him, he's...and interesting cat, and not someone I imagine conservatives would be rallying around.

Looking at some context - https://metalinjection.net/its-just-...acy-theory-ban

In addition to his questionable history and hate-crime convictions, he uploaded garbage, racist conspiracy theories - https://metalinjection.net/editorial...lind-or-racist

More conspiracy theory garbage - https://metalinjection.net/politics/...political-tool

Seems like a pretty fair and deserved ban. We can quibble over the lack of consistency with tech companies enforcing their rules, because they're fucking terrible at that regardless of "which side" they're dealing with, but I'm not seeing what's so outrageous or offensive about this. Seems like a pretty routine part of their cleaning house of channels that violate their rules.

He is a weirdo but he is also inarguably one of the most influential black metal musicians in the world. The real problem with banning him is that he purposefully kept his more radical racist views off of Youtube. He's a very quirky character and interesting to listen to. I'm also not rallying behind him because he believes in a lot of things I don't like. He's a white supremacist, an environmentalist, a pacifist, an anti-Christian, and an anti-capitalist.

That is why he's interesting because his views are pretty unique and he's had a really weird life. Youtube should ban extremists only if they are being extreme on that platform but most of his videos are just him talking about why you shouldn't do drugs and why you should live in the woods and hunt for your own food and shit like that. He's sort of like Ted Kaczynski mixed with Ed Norton's character in American History X.

Varg also stabbed his neo-Nazi band mate in the face so he's officially killed more Nazis than all of Antifa combined.

[Edge-]

my words : having to use a made up word is absurb

You never had to, and you still don't have to. You're complaining about a literal nothingberder that comes out of Peterson's willful and intentional lies about the bill.

[Machismo]

not what i said read previous post

my words : having to use a made up word is absurb

Having to not be able to say something, because people don't like it...

Sound familiar?

[Lorgar Aurelian]

[QUOTE=niztheundead87;51319743]he was talking about the law in general not just canada, such a law is absurd any way you see it[/QUOTE
No he cited c16 many many times, just like him you are lying about something that is easily checked.

[niztheundead87]

You never had to, and you still don't have to. You're complaining about a literal nothingberder that comes out of Peterson's willful and intentional lies about the bill.

you do udnerstand there are people that actually ask for it to be made illegal , which is the problem at hand , which is what he was discussing in the first hand?

[Edge-]

He is a weirdo but he is also inarguably one of the most influential black metal musicians in the world.

This is true, but that in no way means that he should have a platform for his extremist or hateful views.

The real problem with banning him is that he purposefully kept his more radical racist views off of Youtube.

Oh, so his videos that broke their rules are fine because he had even worse videos elsewhere? This is a bad argument.

He's a very quirky character and interesting to listen to.

Quirky...no. Not by any definition. Interesting? Absolutely, the guy is fascinating. Terrifying, but fascinating.

I'm also not rallying behind him because he believes in a lot of things I don't like. He's a white supremacist, an environmentalist, a pacifist, an anti-Christian, and an anti-capitalist.

That alone seems like a pretty good reason for YouTube to remove him from their platform, and I'm not sure why you'd be upset about this.

Youtube should ban extremists only if they are being extreme on that platform but most of his videos are just him talking about why you shouldn't do drugs and why you should live in the woods and hunt for your own food and shit like that.

He broke their rules that he voluntarily agreed to follow. That has consequences, even if you're famous.

He also stabbed his neo-Nazi band mate in the face so he's officially killed more Nazis than all of Antifa combined.

Cool, I guess good for him? Not sure what relevance this has to anything in the discussion. He wasn't censored, he suffered the consequences of breaking site rules that he agreed to. Had he followed the rules he'd still be there.

[Endus]

not what i said read previous post

my words : having to use a made up word is absurb

No law forces you to use a particular pronoun for someone.

None.

This is an entirely imaginary meme that you people swallowed whole without actually checking source materials. Don't blame reality because you didn't bother to check the facts.

[niztheundead87]

No law forces you to use a particular pronoun for someone.

None.

This is an entirely imaginary meme that you people swallowed whole without actually checking source materials. Don't blame reality because you didn't bother to check the facts.

he said , that people are trying to make it illegal which is a problem
its already illegal in ny and other places , do you think this is reasonable at all?

[Edge-]

you do udnerstand there are people that actually ask for it to be made illegal

There are people asking for all kinds of absurd shit to be made into law.

And?

Does it matter? Is it going anywhere? Or is this just people on the internet talking with nothing coming from it.

which is what he was discussing in the first hand?

No, "in the first hand" he was dishonestly lying about the bill and what it did. He made a big to-do about "compelled speech" and how it leads to authoritarianism from the left, despite there being literally no compelled speech, which makes his entire "argument" little more than a dishonest smear.

- - - Updated - - -

its already illegal in ny and other places?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/tr...ouns-fine-nyc/

It's not illegal in New York, that too is a lie. Where else do you think it's apparently illegal? Because right now you're 2 for 2 on being wrong and buying into bullshit, easily disproven lies from idiots like Peterson.

The only time it would be illegal was if the store owner repeatedly, intentionally, maliciously refused to use the persons correct gender pronoun, not for accidentally using the wrong one. And at that point that's damn reasonable and in-line with other laws regarding hate speech against protected classes.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

he said , that people are trying to make it illegal

Which is a flat out law as the law he sited does nothing of the sort.

[niztheundead87]

There are people asking for all kinds of absurd shit to be made into law.

And?

Does it matter? Is it going anywhere? Or is this just people on the internet talking with nothing coming from it.



No, "in the first hand" he was dishonestly lying about the bill and what it did. He made a big to-do about "compelled speech" and how it leads to authoritarianism from the left, despite there being literally no compelled speech, which makes his entire "argument" little more than a dishonest smear.

- - - Updated - - -



https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/tr...ouns-fine-nyc/

It's not illegal in New York, that too is a lie. Where else do you think it's apparently illegal? Because right now you're 2 for 2 on being wrong and buying into bullshit, easily disproven lies from idiots like Peterson.

The only time it would be illegal was if the store owner repeatedly, intentionally, maliciously refused to use the persons correct gender pronoun, not for accidentally using the wrong one. And at that point that's damn reasonable and in-line with other laws regarding hate speech against protected classes.

part of ny yuman rights law:

Examples of Violations
a. Intentional or repeated refusal to use a person’s name, pronouns, or title. For example, repeatedly calling a transgender woman “him” or “Mr.” after she has made clear that she uses she/her and Ms.

Under the NYCHRL, employers and covered entities (in the areas of employment, public accommodations and housing) are required to use the name, pronouns and title (e.g. Ms./Mrs./Mr./Mx.) with which a person self-identifies, regardless of that person's sex assigned at birth or the sex indicated on that person's identification, or that person's anatomical makeup, gender, appearance or otherwise. Failing to use pronouns with which a person self-identifies can constitute as discrimination under the law.

should i go around and ask everyone their pronoun before i talk to them so they dont sue me or what

[Deletedaccount1]

He broke their rules that he voluntarily agreed to follow. That has consequences, even if you're famous.

He didn't break any rules though, unless there's a rule that you can't sit in your car and talk about why masturbation is bad which was like 99% of his videos. He's a European identitarian and a convicted church burner but he was careful to never endorse those views on Youtube, honestly probably out of guilt for his past actions and the realization that a lot of young people watch his videos and he didn't want to set a bad example.

He actually specifically endorsed non-violence in several videos. They didn't even tell him why they banned him and he apparently still doesn't know why. The reason is, of course, that someone at Youtube looked him up and panicked without analyzing his channel and he ended up being caught in the middle of a ban wave that was meant to target people who actually do endorse extremist violence.

[Edge-]

Examples of Violations
a. Intentional or repeated refusal to use a person’s name, pronouns, or title. For example, repeatedly calling a transgender woman “him” or “Mr.” after she has made clear that she uses she/her and Ms.

Yes, which I specified. This is no different than other laws regarding hate-speech, and it's one of the easiest things ever for folks to not get in trouble for.

"Excuse me miss, can I help you?"
"Yes, and I'm actually a he if you don't mind."
"Oh, sorry about that sir! What can I help you with today?"

Oh the fucking horror.

Under the NYCHRL, employers and covered entities (in the areas of employment, public accommodations and housing) are required to use the name, pronouns and title (e.g. Ms./Mrs./Mr./Mx.) with which a person self-identifies, regardless of that person's sex assigned at birth or the sex indicated on that person's identification, or that person's anatomical makeup, gender, appearance or otherwise. Failing to use pronouns with which a person self-identifies can constitute as discrimination under the law.

should i go around and ask everyone their pronoun before i talk to them so they dont sue me or what

No, because that's not what the law says at all. The law is very forgiving when it comes to simple mistakes like that. It's teeth only come into play if people decide they want to be assholes about it and refuse to use folks prefered gender pronouns after being corrected.

You continue to dishonestly pearl-clutch over literally nothing.

[Heladys]

part of ny yuman rights law:

Examples of Violations
a. Intentional or repeated refusal to use a person’s name, pronouns, or title. For example, repeatedly calling a transgender woman “him” or “Mr.” after she has made clear that she uses she/her and Ms.

Under the NYCHRL, employers and covered entities (in the areas of employment, public accommodations and housing) are required to use the name, pronouns and title (e.g. Ms./Mrs./Mr./Mx.) with which a person self-identifies, regardless of that person's sex assigned at birth or the sex indicated on that person's identification, or that person's anatomical makeup, gender, appearance or otherwise. Failing to use pronouns with which a person self-identifies can constitute as discrimination under the law.

should i go around and ask everyone their pronoun before i talk to them so they dont sue me or what

No, an intelligent person would refer to a new acquaintance in whatever way seems applicable, maybe go the extra mile and ask if that's okay, but either way if corrected to something else, adapt.

You read it yourself, "intentional or repeated refusal