Free speech dies in Canada, Bill C-16 has passed the House of Commons (gender pronouns/hatespeech)

[MomentsofSanity]

more or less, yes.

You will get hauled before a HRT (human rights tribunal) where you are always guilty. HRT have a 100% conviction rate. You will have to cover your legal costs while the plaintiff's costs are covered by the government. You will be ordered to pay a fine to offset the emotional harm of not using the correct pronoun.

This should have been nipped in the bud a long time ago. Pronouns are not a human right. This is just more PC garbage that needs to go.

And no one anywhere will be targeted for using an improper pronoun. You will face consequences if you are a federal employee and continue to harass someone for their gender identity.

 

[Iron Woode]

And no one anywhere will be targeted for using an improper pronoun. You will face consequences if you are a federal employee and continue to harass someone for their gender identity.

just give it time. this is usually how things go here.

on a more positive note: are you ready for May 24? any plans?

 

[MomentsofSanity]

just give it time. this is usually how things go here.

on a more positive note: are you ready for May 24? any plans?

Of course. Week off. Heading to the trailer to relax and unwind for the entire week. Been needing this vacation time for a good six months!

You all set? Got the meat ready to grill?

 

[zinfamous]

yea but what about gaming journalism?

 

[Iron Woode]

Of course. Week off. Heading to the trailer to relax and unwind for the entire week. Been needing this vacation time for a good six months!

You all set? Got the meat ready to grill?

my doctor has me on a stricter diet now.

However, I am going to cheat a bit and make some homemade honey garlic ribs and some rice as a side dish for Sunday/Monday.

Not sure what I am going to have in the meantime.

 

[brycejones]

yea but what about gaming journalism?

The womens are still scaring them nothing has changed.

 

[umbrella39]

So, what exactly is the problem......what speech does this legislation prevent you from exercising? Be as specific as possible.

I'm curious as well. Seems as though he has glossed over this post...

 

[xthetenth]

Still not seeing how any of this destroys free speech. Anyone like Oroooroooo or that ilk care to explain how this destroys free speech.....without youtube videos? (In other words, in your own written words.)

That would require being able to intellectually engage with arguments being made, even for something as simple as digesting other people's points and repackaging them.

 

[Commodus]

more or less, yes.

You will get hauled before a HRT (human rights tribunal) where you are always guilty. HRT have a 100% conviction rate. You will have to cover your legal costs while the plaintiff's costs are covered by the government. You will be ordered to pay a fine to offset the emotional harm of not using the correct pronoun.

This should have been nipped in the bud a long time ago. Pronouns are not a human right. This is just more PC garbage that needs to go.

Did you actually read the law as mentioned in Meghan's post? Pretty sure you didn't.

The extension of the anti-discrimination law covers two things:

1. Producing hate propaganda that targets gender identity/expression. You can use the wrong pronoun if you want, but if you start running a website that calls transgender people subhuman, then the law kicks in.

2. Crimes where discrimination against gender identity/expression is a motivating factor. You won't be hauled in just for using the wrong pronoun, but if you harass a transgender person and intentionally use the wrong pronoun while you're doing it, then yes, this bill will cover that.

In short: your hateful views won't inherently be illegal. Being an asshole to others because of those views will be. Don't be an asshole and you'll be fine.

 

[justoh]

The extension isn't significant, or even meaningful. The whole concept is the problem, for the reasons why it's allowed in the US. I don't expect posters on a tech forum to understand this. Fucking peasants. lulz

 

[Commodus]

The extension isn't significant, or even meaningful. The whole concept is the problem, for the reasons why it's allowed in the US. I don't expect posters on a tech forum to understand this. Fucking peasants. lulz

What, the concept that you shouldn't treat someone like crap simply because of their sexuality? Yeah, perish the thought that someone would get a basic level of respect when their lifestyle choices don't affect you.

 

[xthetenth]

The extension isn't significant, or even meaningful. The whole concept is the problem, for the reasons why it's allowed in the US. I don't expect posters on a tech forum to understand this. Fucking peasants. lulz

Why would you be concerned? This is such a disjointed mess of a sentence that I doubt you'd be able to clearly enough express hate speech to be able to be charged, even though you're making it clear that you consider the ability to incite violence and verbally abuse people to be paramount to your personal freedom.

 

[kinev]

And no one anywhere will be targeted for using an improper pronoun. You will face consequences if you are a federal employee and continue to harass someone for their gender identity.

Part of the problem is how harassment is defined. If I have an employee that I don't interact with very often that looks 100% male, but identifies as female and I call her "him" once, is that harassment? What if I'm not aware that she identifies as female and I use a male pronoun, is that harassment? What if I forget 8 months down the road and accidentally use another male pronoun? Hate speech? I'm terrible with names, much less any of the 58 new gender identities; if I make the same mistake 3 times in a year, is that hate speech? Discrimination? Does it matter that I'm not intending to harass anyone, but an employee feels harassed for me using the wrong gender pronoun once every four months after 40+ years of speaking English where there were only two genders? Should I, as a manager, be forced before a human rights tribunal for accidentally misidentifying am employee more than once? Where is the cut-off?

This isn't even getting into the area of gender fluid people that feel like different genders at different times? If someone is fluid and I use their PGP from the last time I interacted with them, is that hate speech? What if I use the last gender identity they used when we talked last, but they've changed 3 times in a month? Three instances of misidentifying them in one month; hate speech? Discrimination? Will I have to check a website of my 100+ employees on a daily basis to see what their identity is in order to not harass anyone?

If I make employee handbooks that previously had "his/her", is it promoting hate speech if I don't include the 56 other gender identities? Can an employee argue that I am systematically discriminating against "them" by not including two-spirit pronouns in all printed company materials? What if it's like the New York law, where the list is theoretically infinite?

Sure, this is theoretical and hyperbole, but, wow...

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Part of the problem is how harassment is defined. If I have an employee that I don't interact with very often that looks 100% male, but identifies as female and I call her "him" once, is that harassment? What if I'm not aware that she identifies as female and I use a male pronoun, is that harassment? What if I forget 8 months down the road and accidentally use another male pronoun? Hate speech? I'm terrible with names, much less any of the 58 new gender identities; if I make the same mistake 3 times in a year, is that hate speech? Discrimination? Does it matter that I'm not intending to harass anyone, but an employee feels harassed for me using the wrong gender pronoun once every four months after 40+ years of speaking English where there were only two genders? Should I, as a manager, be forced before a human rights tribunal for accidentally misidentifying am employee more than once? Where is the cut-off?

This isn't even getting into the area of gender fluid people that feel like different genders at different times? If someone is fluid and I use their PGP from the last time I interacted with them, is that hate speech? What if I use the last gender identity they used when we talked last, but they've changed 3 times in a month? Three instances of misidentifying them in one month; hate speech? Discrimination? Will I have to check a website of my 100+ employees on a daily basis to see what their identity is in order to not harass anyone?

If I make employee handbooks that previously had "his/her", is it promoting hate speech if I don't include the 56 other gender identities? Can an employee argue that I am systematically discriminating against "them" by not including two-spirit pronouns in all printed company materials? What if it's like the New York law, where the list is theoretically infinite?

Sure, this is theoretical and hyperbole, but, wow...

The clear distinction here is continue to harass. If you repeatedly do this after being made aware and do so in a manner that is clearly intended to offend then yes you'e accountable.

Let's look at it another way. You go up to someone and ask about their religion. No big deal. Now you keep doing it. Daily. You're told to cease and you still continue to do so. You are intentionally harassing that person.

It's not about getting something wrong once. People keep trying to use this example no matter how many times they've been told it's false. It's about knowing better and continuing to do so explicitly for the purpose of making that person uncomfortable or to offend them. No different than anything else that is defined as harassment in a workplace.

 

[Jaskalas]

The proposed legislation would add gender identity and gender expression to this list, making it very clear that transgender and other gender diverse persons have protection in the law.

Don't think I'll ever view Gender Dysphoria as anything other than a mental illness.
Which is not to say people should be harassed....

What's the next group that gets added to the list? Is there a criteria?

 

[Blue_Max]

The clear distinction here is continue to harass. If you repeatedly do this after being made aware and do so in a manner that is clearly intended to offend then yes you'e accountable.

Letter of the Law vs. the spirit of it. Someone can claim "harassment" from the very first incident but they won't have a very strong case.
Strong case or not, all it takes is a Progressive judge to go in favour of the plaintiff anyway. It happens all the time.

Then you have to appeal. Tons of time and money wasted, and all that time you're being tarred and feathered as a 'hatemonger'.

See the actual Canadian hearing for yourself, live only 2 days ago:

 

[xthetenth]

Don't think I'll ever view Gender Dysphoria as anything other than a mental illness.
Which is not to say people should be harassed....

What's the next group that gets added to the list? Is there a criteria?

Let's accept your premise for a second. How do we treat other mental illnesses? Do we treat my depression by saying that I'm wrong and bad and a danger, or by making changes to my body chemistry (that's what medication does, kids!), and acknowledging how my brain works and trying to engage with it so that I can move to a mental state where I don't get into a depressive spiral over the fact that I have to share a world and participate in an economy with people like blue max and indirectly bankroll the harm they cause?

An analagous situation to the sort of harassment that this is intended to prevent would be something like your employer finding out you've got depression and deciding to corner you and picking away at your insecurities, except they can do it with every pronoun they use. Getting a pronoun wrong isn't harassment, willful, intentional misuse after being corrected, however, is.

 

[Blue_Max]

Don't think I'll ever view Gender Dysphoria as anything other than a mental illness.
Which is not to say people should be harassed....

Agreed. And whether it's a conscious decision or not, it's MORE cruel to force the general public at large to play along with your game (or mental illness) or be harshly punished for not playing pretend.
Like Fallout 3's Betty (the psychotic Dr. Stansilous Braun.)

and I can speak from some experience that the ones mostly-just-pretending to be the opposite gender are doing it just to be special and different (and still attracted to women and want to insert tab D into slot V.)

 

[xthetenth]

Agreed. And whether it's a conscious decision or not, it's MORE cruel to force the general public at large to play along with your game (or mental illness) or be harshly punished for not playing pretend.
Like Fallout 3's Betty (the psychotic Dr. Stansilous Braun.)

I don't know which is worse, liking Fallout 3, thinking that a fictional representation of a specific character is a good representation of an entire group of actual people, or the execrable quality of your analysis (Even if you accept the premise that Braun is trans despite the odds on bet being that he was different characters with each different simulations, you have no evidence whatsoever in the text that that is linked in any way to the megalomania, while on the other hand that sort of megalomania and whimsical callousness towards human life and suffering utterly pervades the vault project. In fact, Tranquility Lane is a perfect microcosm of the vault project as a whole, an institution of a huge number of people and a part of the distorted authoritarian vision of America that the pre-war US was (and I'm surprised you aren't a huge fan of). Trying to connect that to a tenuously shown trans identity on Braun's part is missing the point entirely and failing to engage with one of the very few thematically coherent parts of FO3)

Your literary analysis skills would be improved by some remedial middle school, this is incredibly sloppy work.

 

[Blue_Max]

I don't know which is worse, liking Fallout 3, thinking that a fictional representation of a specific character is a good representation of an entire group of actual people, or the execrable quality of your analysis (Even if you accept the premise that Braun is trans despite the odds on bet being that he was different characters with each different simulations, you have no evidence whatsoever in the text that that is linked in any way to the megalomania, while on the other hand that sort of megalomania and whimsical callousness towards human life and suffering utterly pervades the vault project. In fact, Tranquility Lane is a perfect microcosm of the vault project as a whole, an institution of a huge number of people and a part of the distorted authoritarian vision of America that the pre-war US was (and I'm surprised you aren't a huge fan of). Trying to connect that to a tenuously shown trans identity on Braun's part is missing the point entirely and failing to engage with one of the very few thematically coherent parts of FO3)

Your literary analysis skills would be improved by some remedial middle school, this is incredibly sloppy work.

In true progressive fashion, you reeeeeally over-thought the process in order to come to the conclusion desired.

I meant ONLY what I said, "play along with the pretend game or be punished severely".

You wanna' stick to the real world, how about this genius?

I'm sure you know the basics... but you should hear his interview where he goes through the thought process involved, where he DECIDED to become a little girl. Originally wanted to be about ten, but a girl in the family said she wanted a little sister so the two of them agreed on six. Then the big game of pretend started.

You'll be punished for not playing along.

Last I heard the girl who wanted him to be six doesn't want to play anymore and is disassociating with the weirdo. Is SHE a hatemonger?

 

[justoh]

What, the concept that you shouldn't treat someone like crap simply because of their sexuality? Yeah, perish the thought that someone would get a basic level of respect when their lifestyle choices don't affect you.

No, commoduh. Any restriction on speech. The minimum restrictions in the US are more than enough and should serve as a model for everywhere. You should be proud. That and turning right on a red. The good things about America.

 

[xthetenth]

In true progressive fashion, you reeeeeally over-thought the process in order to come to the conclusion desired.

I meant ONLY what I said, "play along with the pretend game or be punished severely".

I'm sorry that you're so limited that you can't consider things outside the context of how they make you right. Intellectual dishonesty like that must truly be a curse to you and those unfortunate enough to have to interact with you.

You'll be punished for not playing along.

Last I heard the girl who wanted him to be six doesn't want to play anymore and is disassociating with the weirdo. Is SHE a hatemonger?

Oh lawdy. So a dysfunctional, borderline abusive relationship is representative of an entire group of people? Your worldview is actually literally assembled around carefully curated outrage bait isn't it?

Never mind that you've managed to produce absolutely zero examples with two tries of cases where the trans person being trans causes a negative impact, instead coming out with a fictional (possibly but unlikely to be trans) character who's a representative of a massive unethical experiment on people who's built a personal unethical experiment on people, and someone who used someone else to feed a narcissistic fantasy of theirs and then discarded their victim (who happens to be trans).

No, commoduh. Any restriction on speech. The minimum restrictions in the US are more than enough and should serve as a model for everywhere. You should be proud. That and turning right on a red. The good things about America.

Seeing how many times you edit your posts as you desperately try to catch up to your fingertips makes your comments on typing speed in another thread utterly hilarious.

And any restriction on speech whatsoever? So people should be able to freely advocate for your murder, tell lies about you to your employer that would get you fired, and so on?

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

I'm sorry that you're so limited that you can't consider things outside the context of how they make you right. Intellectual dishonesty like that must truly be a curse to you and those unfortunate enough to have to interact with you.



Oh lawdy. So a dysfunctional, borderline abusive relationship is representative of an entire group of people? Your worldview is actually literally assembled around carefully curated outrage bait isn't it?

Never mind that you've managed to produce absolutely zero examples with two tries of cases where the trans person being trans causes a negative impact, instead coming out with a fictional (possibly but unlikely to be trans) character who's a representative of a massive unethical experiment on people who's built a personal unethical experiment on people, and someone who used someone else to feed a narcissistic fantasy of theirs and then discarded their victim (who happens to be trans).



Seeing how many times you edit your posts as you desperately try to catch up to your fingertips makes your comments on typing speed in another thread utterly hilarious.

And any restriction on speech whatsoever? So people should be able to freely advocate for your murder, tell lies about you to your employer that would get you fired, and so on?

Remember, if something cannot be distilled into two sentences and a funny gif/picture/video, that's probably going to go over the head of the kind of people that use 'progressive' as a derogatory term.

Great FO3 analysis btw.

 

[xthetenth]

Remember, if something cannot be distilled into two sentences and a funny gif/picture/video, that's probably going to go over the head of the kind of people that use 'progressive' as a derogatory term.

Great FO3 analysis btw.

Thanks. It's actually a lot more interesting once you sit down and get into it. I wish more of the story showed more thematic depth when you dug into it like that bit does.

 

[justoh]

And any restriction on speech whatsoever?

The same restrictions they have in the US. Sorry. I had meant to mention that.