Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
... LastLast
  1. #21
    Do the new rules include -Don't by a hypocrite? or Don't be an attention seeking Nazi enabler?

  2. #22
    The Unstoppable Force Lorgar Aurelian's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Land of moose and goose.
    Posts
    24,551
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus;52834414I
    mean, I literally linked the entire bill in full and emphasized that it's really only like a page long, knowing this stuff was going to happen. Anyone who bothered to check would see that there's nothing about pronoun use in there.
    Ya Peterson was obviously trying to target the lazy/incompetent/malicious who either wouldn’t read or understand the bill. first thing I did when I heard about it was read the bill and see he was full of shit but it worked on a ton of people.

  3. #23
    Over 9000! Milchshake's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Shitposter Burn Out
    Posts
    9,974
    Quote Originally Posted by Daemos daemonium View Post
    Ya Peterson was obviously trying to target the lazy/incompetent/malicious who either wouldn’t read or understand the bill. first thing I did when I heard about it was read the bill and see he was full of shit but it worked on a ton of people.
    That's how the youtube algorithm radicalized Jordan Peterson.
    "Clean your room" 100 views
    "You're unfuckable because of secret plot by Femenists and Queer folk." 10000000000 views.

    Or how the algorithm got Peterson to embrace his inner radical more loudly.
    Government Affiliated Snark

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Daemos daemonium View Post
    The bill doesn’t do that in any way shape or form all it does it add gender identity to protected classes so you can’t say harass an employee because of how they identify just like you can’t call your gay employee fags or queers or not hire them because there gay. The bill was already in effect where he lived/worked any way C16 was just making it country wide.

    Go read the bill what it does is like two sentences long, don’t trust Charlottes on the internet.
    What's to stop someone from claiming harassment if they are misgendered?

  5. #25
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,898
    Quote Originally Posted by crewskater View Post
    What's to stop someone from claiming harassment if they are misgendered?
    The legal standards that define harassment.

    Stop feigning ignorance. You're just engaging in the same horseshit-peddling that Peterson does.


  6. #26
    The Unstoppable Force Lorgar Aurelian's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Land of moose and goose.
    Posts
    24,551
    Quote Originally Posted by PresidentElectMilchschake View Post
    That's how the youtube algorithm radicalized Jordan Peterson.
    "Clean your room" 100 views
    "You're unfuckable because of secret plot by Femenists and Queer folk." 10000000000 views.

    Or how the algorithm got Peterson to embrace his inner radical more loudly.
    I don’t think he was radicalized personally I think he knew he could make money off of it and went out of his way to aim for such YouTube sections.

    Nothing else makes sense as if he had given C16 even a passing glance he’d know it didn’t do any of the things he said it did let alone the fact that it was already in effect where he was which he of course never brings up because then he wouldn’t come out as railing against the left taking control of speech.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Bill C-16 has nothing to do with pronoun use. Trying to defend Peterson's lies just deflects from the fact that he was lying to bring up pronouns at all.
    It's also pretty easy to just call people by their names if you're unsure of their preferred pronouns. Nor would anything under the law be triggered with an accidental misgendering. It would only come into play if there was a concerted pattern of deliberate harassment on the grounds of someone's gender identity.

    Like tehealadin, you're trying to defend Peterson's lies just to avoid acknowledging that he was lying to even bring it up in the first place.
    I honestly take no issue with calling a person by whatever pronoun.

  8. #28
    The Unstoppable Force Lorgar Aurelian's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Land of moose and goose.
    Posts
    24,551
    Quote Originally Posted by crewskater View Post
    What's to stop someone from claiming harassment if they are misgendered?
    The written word and Legal precedent of harassment laws.

    You could Harass some one by misgendering them if it was a repeated and targeted thing like if you were say filling there work locker with dresses mocking them ect. But the case that Peterson made of simply calling some one the wrong gender as a slip would go no where.

  9. #29
    So pronoun use, or misuse, isn't covered by gender discrimination? Endus, you used the example of a boss calling me a miss and that counting, it isn't clear to me (yet) how this is different. Just to be clear on the law, if someone insists on being called a "Ze" and someone said "no", then this absolutely would not be covered by this law? Your use of the miss/mr example has thrown me a little, just want to clarify. If that is the case then fair enough.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Daemos daemonium View Post
    I get that people don’t read laws as it’s easier to just parrot what people say online but C16 has literally nothing to do with ze/xe or what ever other nonsense it literally just covers gender identity like endus laid out the fact that you think it has any thing to do with Ze/XE and not miss/mr is you just eating up his bull.
    So Ze/Xe has nothing to do with gender identity? A genuine question, pretty much everything I have seen online regarding that seems to strongly suggest that it is. If I misunderstood that then I hold my hands up.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gelannerai View Post


    Remember, legally no one sane takes Tucker Carlson seriously.

  10. #30
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,898
    Quote Originally Posted by tehealadin View Post
    So pronoun use, or misuse, isn't covered by gender discrimination? Endus, you used the example of a boss calling me a miss and that counting, it isn't clear to me (yet) how this is different. Just to be clear on the law, if someone insists on being called a "Ze" and someone said "no", then this absolutely would not be covered by this law? Your use of the miss/mr example has thrown me a little, just want to clarify. If that is the case then fair enough.
    No, I cited a hypothetical where your boss made a concerted effort to continuously and repeatedly demean and harass you, by deliberately misgendering you.

    It would be harassment whether that was the tactic, or they were abusing you with racist epithets, or mocking you for being a woman, etc.

    I linked the damned law. Why didn't you bother to read it for yourself? You'd have answered your own questions.


  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    No, I cited a hypothetical where your boss made a concerted effort to continuously and repeatedly demean and harass you, by deliberately misgendering you.

    It would be harassment whether that was the tactic, or they were abusing you with racist epithets, or mocking you for being a woman, etc.

    I linked the damned law. Why didn't you bother to read it for yourself? You'd have answered your own questions.
    I did read it, it said gender identity. That is a wide thing. And someone saying "call me Ze" and me saying "no" it is harassment and the same as using racist epithets? Really? Do you actually believe that?
    Quote Originally Posted by Gelannerai View Post


    Remember, legally no one sane takes Tucker Carlson seriously.

  12. #32
    The Unstoppable Force Lorgar Aurelian's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Land of moose and goose.
    Posts
    24,551
    Quote Originally Posted by tehealadin View Post
    So Ze/Xe has nothing to do with gender identity? A genuine question, pretty much everything I have seen online regarding that seems to strongly suggest that it is. If I misunderstood that then I hold my hands up.
    As far as C16 goes? No. If some one wants you to call them either you could just use there name.

    As far as people on the internet go? Some likely think it does I guess?

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    Based on the law what you describe isn’t illegal... it has to go beyond that.
    Then fair enough.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gelannerai View Post


    Remember, legally no one sane takes Tucker Carlson seriously.

  14. #34
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,898
    Quote Originally Posted by tehealadin View Post
    I did read it, it said gender identity. That is a wide thing.
    As wide as, say, race. And?

    And someone saying "call me Ze" and me saying "no" it is harassment
    If you're doing it deliberately and repeatedly, knowing that your target is bothered by it? That's the definition of harassment, yes.

    Edit: This seems to be a continuous misunderstanding, and I'm honestly confused as to whether you drew it from Peterson's disinformation campaign or are misrepresenting the bill for your own reasons. These laws don't criminalize or create civil liabilities for the accidental use of a particular word or phrase. It's always been about the intentional harassment, discrimination, and persecution of people for their membership in a protected class. Including gender identity doesn't widen it from that definition, it simply includes gender identity and expression among the classes it protects.

    and the same as using racist epithets? Really? Do you actually believe that?
    Your goal is the same; to bother and denigrate your target.
    Your motive is the same; intolerance and/or hatred for them over that particular characteristic.

    How is it any materially different?
    Last edited by Endus; 2020-11-25 at 09:26 PM.


  15. #35
    Pit Lord Magical Mudcrab's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    All across Nirn.
    Posts
    2,422
    Quote Originally Posted by PresidentElectMilchschake View Post
    Jorden Peterson is attempting to return to public life after recovering from addiction to exotic barbiturates, by publishing a list of 12 new rules.
    • Is he really in the best position to be shilling a self help book? When you need to travel the globe for professional help for your own problems.
    • Does this invalidate all the previous rules?
    • Does the promise of even more sequels just invalidate these new rules?
    (1) Working on your own problems does not negate your insights into helping people overcome theirs. If this were the case, no one who has ever struggled with addiction of any kind would ever be able to act as an advocate.
    (2 & 3) Not necessarily, the rules he could be proposing could be build upon those previously set. It's only negating if they are contradictory.
    Sylvanas didn't even win the popular vote, she was elected by an indirect election of representatives. #NotMyWarchief

  16. #36
    Meh there are always suckers who will follow charlatans like him they are free to be parted with their money by buying into whatever new BS he is selling.

  17. #37
    Pit Lord Magical Mudcrab's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    All across Nirn.
    Posts
    2,422
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    The only reason to take that approach against Bill C-16 was transphobia.
    I thought that one of the issues brought up with C-16 was that it wasn't specific in regards to what constitutes a valid "gender identity", essentially allowing nonsensical identities to be protected? For clarification, I'm not referring to those currently held under the LGBTQIA2s+ (such as the lesser known two spirit of various First Nations groups), but those self-ascribed that have no well-grounded basis for existing.
    Sylvanas didn't even win the popular vote, she was elected by an indirect election of representatives. #NotMyWarchief

  18. #38
    The only thing I know about this guy is; 1. he's a transphobe? 2. He's a "traditionalist"

    The first put him on the bubble for me early on and as soon as traditionalism crossed my Twitter feed with this guy attached, I immediately blocked and muted all that shit.

    All traditions are complete garbage. And the desire to believe in such or gain anything from them, I personally view as useless and disgraceful. I don't give a shit about this guy.

  19. #39
    Pit Lord Magical Mudcrab's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    All across Nirn.
    Posts
    2,422
    Quote Originally Posted by tehealadin View Post
    Race and gender identity are two very different things. Your conclusion is extremely flawed.
    Race and gender are both socially constructed. There is no all-encompassing set of characteristics that fully define the "black race" or "white race" in the same manner that there is no set which properly defines "man" and "woman".

    For clarity, gender, gender identity/expression, sexual orientation, and sex are all very different things.
    Gender is the social construct which categorizes people into male and female based on secondary sexual characteristics.
    Gender identity/expression is harder to summarize, but it is essentially the way which people perceive their own gender. A good example of this which I previously referred to is two spirit, which is a First Nations concept which outlines their idea of a third defined gender role.
    Sexual orientation is who you are attracted to based on gender.
    Sex is your biological sexuality.

    If someone asserts that I identify as X, therefore you must refer to me as Y, and you don't agree, that doesn't necessitate hate, it doesn't require hate, only a zealot thinks that way.
    If someone is born a woman, but identifies as a man, someone denying their identity or purposefully mislabeling them is hate or, at least, willfully and intentionally hurtful.

    Some of the assertions surrounding gender identity are made with the certainty of someone proclaiming that water is wet, there is plenty of reason to be skeptical about some of these claims and it isn't bigotry to be so. The weaponisation of bigotry to prevent this is dishonest.
    Calling out the intentional misgendering of people is not the weaponization of bigotry, it's just describing the situation as-is.
    Sylvanas didn't even win the popular vote, she was elected by an indirect election of representatives. #NotMyWarchief

  20. #40
    Legendary! Frolk's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Norway, Lørenskog
    Posts
    6,546
    Quote Originally Posted by PresidentElectMilchschake View Post


    Seems like Random House very *clearly* knew this was going to be a problem with their staff, because the article mentions that the publisher went out of their way to hide it from the employees, which might have had a little something to do with why they're upset.
    If they dont like it, they can QUIT working there and go elsewhere.

    In these days people should cling to any work they can get.

    "Another employee said “people were crying in the meeting about how Jordan Peterson has affected their lives.” They said one co-worker discussed how Peterson had radicalized their father and another talked about how publishing the book will negatively affect their non-binary friend. "

    I can visualize these people with purple hair and a Verified twitter account, sad SJWs.
    PROUD TRUMP SUPPORTER, #2024Trump #MAGA
    PROUD TRUMP CAMPAIGN SUPPORTER #SaveEuropeWithTrump
    PROUD SUPPORTER OF THE WALL
    BLUE LIVES MATTER
    NO TO ALL GUNCONTROL OR BACKGROUND CHECKS IN EUROPE
    /s

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •