On corporations and outrage culture
- Thread starter Crystalpall
- Start date
- Status
Neon
I like to be fat shamed
There is nothing to argue man calm your fucking tits bud.
hom
Legend
@Crystalpall
Yes that's pretty much what I beleive and also @Chops point is another huge part of the model
I guess I didn't flesh out the law point enough. I'll try to do a better job of it.
Some of the Trans community in ontario took on board the idea that they should be addressed with a certain pronoun as using his/her assumes gender identity.
They proposed that if you use the wrong pronoun to address someone it should considered discrimination.
Now ontario the state actually passed their own law first and following this it moved to federal law not long after.
Here's the full summary
The bill is intended to protect individuals from discrimination within the sphere of federal jurisdiction and from being the targets of hate propaganda, as a consequence of their gender identity or their gender expression.
The bill adds "gender identity or expression" to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Canadian Human Rights Act and the list of characteristics of identifiable groups protected from hate propaganda in the Criminal Code. It also adds that evidence that an offence was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on a person's gender identity or expression constitutes an aggravating circumstance for a court to consider when imposing a criminal sentence.
For a start, this bill is extremely poorly written as its so vague. The portion in bold is what I'm really talking about though, gender expression/identity is and can be the choice of pronoun you use. Use it incorrectly and you technically break the law.
Now I'm not saying the Canadian government is swooping in to arrest anyone who breaks this law, but it's the principle.
It's the fact that you now have to subscribe to the theory of multiple genders and you have to use government approved words to address someone. Your free speech is no longer free.
"So what does this have to do with outrage culture?"
A group of people made enough fuss, enough noise, enough outrage to pass a bill of law over being offended by words.
Quite similar to the laws Stalin and Hitler passed to condemn anyone with views they didn't agree with. An extreme example but the same principle.
Hopefully that explains my issue with it more clearly. Freedom of expression is a right we cannot compromise or allow groups to manipulate.
Yes that's pretty much what I beleive and also @Chops point is another huge part of the model
I guess I didn't flesh out the law point enough. I'll try to do a better job of it.
Some of the Trans community in ontario took on board the idea that they should be addressed with a certain pronoun as using his/her assumes gender identity.
They proposed that if you use the wrong pronoun to address someone it should considered discrimination.
Now ontario the state actually passed their own law first and following this it moved to federal law not long after.
Here's the full summary
The bill is intended to protect individuals from discrimination within the sphere of federal jurisdiction and from being the targets of hate propaganda, as a consequence of their gender identity or their gender expression.
The bill adds "gender identity or expression" to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Canadian Human Rights Act and the list of characteristics of identifiable groups protected from hate propaganda in the Criminal Code. It also adds that evidence that an offence was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on a person's gender identity or expression constitutes an aggravating circumstance for a court to consider when imposing a criminal sentence.
For a start, this bill is extremely poorly written as its so vague. The portion in bold is what I'm really talking about though, gender expression/identity is and can be the choice of pronoun you use. Use it incorrectly and you technically break the law.
Now I'm not saying the Canadian government is swooping in to arrest anyone who breaks this law, but it's the principle.
It's the fact that you now have to subscribe to the theory of multiple genders and you have to use government approved words to address someone. Your free speech is no longer free.
"So what does this have to do with outrage culture?"
A group of people made enough fuss, enough noise, enough outrage to pass a bill of law over being offended by words.
Quite similar to the laws Stalin and Hitler passed to condemn anyone with views they didn't agree with. An extreme example but the same principle.
Hopefully that explains my issue with it more clearly. Freedom of expression is a right we cannot compromise or allow groups to manipulate.
OP
OP
Crystalpall
the F2P PvEr
Are you afraid of a conversation then? I said I don't want to argue my point because of how much different your view is, but now I just want to understand where you're coming from. And there's no need to say "calm your fucking tits", I am respectful towards you show some respect back.
Chops
Soccer Dad
You bolded it and you still dont understand how it works... this just adds gender identity to the list of things that can be discriminated against in the canadian human rights act, which I googled and it actually lists what counts as discrimination and what doesnt.
You are free to be as openly transphobic towards people as you want as a private citizen. This entire thing is in regards to denying housing, denying employment, denying wages, etc.
Nowhere in here does it say you choosing, as an individual, to not use someones pronouns is somehow illegal. Your free speech is in no way impacted by this law.
Edit: just read some more and this law actually states quite clearly that its *not* considered legally discriminatory for an individual to engage in discriminatory behavior and language if it 1) doesnt cause physical or material harm or encourage the causing of that harm and 2) could be considered "reasonable" use.
Jesus, there's a clause in the very law youre citing that undermines your whole position
Last edited:
Neon
I like to be fat shamed
Look man I don't know you and you don't know me. I aint afraid of a little talk. Let's not get out of hand here.
OP
OP
Crystalpall
the F2P PvEr
Then I would like to hear why you think women problems aren't bad and maybe next time if you say a view and get called a racist, maybe your first thought should be a little self reflection?
Neon
I like to be fat shamed
Look we all have problems they are different though. Sometimes it isn't even about race, sometimes it just happens these days. Self reflect my ass.
Chops
Soccer Dad
Speaking of hysterical cry-baby twitter mobs bullying corporations into doing stupid things... The Snyder Cut is apparently gonna cost like 70 million
hom
Legend
So gender expression is considered discrimination
http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/gender-ide...s each person's,from their birth-assigned sex.
This is ontario state definition of gender expression, see pronoun. Also Department of Justice in Canada defers its definitons to Ontarios human rights commission.
Obviously each state will interpret this bill differently.
So if you continue to read Ontarios definitions you'll see that under discrimination and harassment they also reference pronouns or gender expression.
One can definitely be arrested for harassment. So by their law if you were to repeatedly call someone a him who wants to be called a hiz or whatever you could, by law be arrested for harassment because you're discriminating their gender expression.
I don't think anyone will be arrested or charged for this ever. But it's the principle
OP
OP
Crystalpall
the F2P PvEr
This is clearly avoiding any conversation or argumentation whatsover, so I'll just accept it that you've put no thought into it at all.
As for the discussion about the canadian law, after reading it it does indeed clarify exactly what is discriminatory and I have to say I agree with that, maybe this is actually the case of an outrage from the other side of the argument? Fake accusations to get loud reactions.
Edit: From what @hom linked, I also think nothing's wrong with that?
"Harassment is a form of discrimination. It can include sexually explicit or other inappropriate comments, questions, jokes, name-calling, images, email and social media, transphobic, homophobic or other bullying, sexual advances, touching and other unwelcome and ongoing behaviour that insults, demeans, harms or threatens a person in some way. Assault or other violent behaviour is also a criminal matter. Trans people and other persons can experience harassing behaviour because of their gender identity or expression (gender-based harassment) and/or their sex (sexual harassment)."
All this sounds perfectly reasonable. It states that they "can experience harassing behaviour because of their gender identity or expression", but nowhere it states that harassment is using the wrong pronoun - it clearly states it's "sexually explicit or other inappropriate comments, questions, jokes, name-calling, images, email and social media, transphobic, homophobic or other bullying, sexual advances, touching and other unwelcome and ongoing behaviour that insults, demeans, harms or threatens a person in some way"
Chops
Soccer Dad
they wont be arrested and charged because the scenario you're imagining isnt against this law. Its crystal clear that your freedom to be a bigot is protected by not just the spirit but the letter of this law.
I know you keep saying its "the principle" but this law goes out of its way to say individual speech doesnt count.
Edit: I know you want to believe that you're being oppressed because being oppressed seems like all the rage to kids these days, but my dude... I assure you that you're fine. Your prime minister, after all, likes to run around in black face and he's still prime minister. You arent gonna get arrested for misgendering someone.
hom
Legend
But this is the whole problem. Its about what one considers harmful, offencive or harrasment.
If someone considers the pronoun him to be offencive, demeaning or bullying then it's in law as harrasment and discriminatory.
Am I completely reading this law wrong or is that not what it insinuates?
If someone considers the pronoun him to be offencive, demeaning or bullying then it's in law as harrasment and discriminatory.
Am I completely reading this law wrong or is that not what it insinuates?
hom
Legend
Harassment is a form of discrimination. It can include sexually explicit or other inappropriate comments, questions, jokes, name-calling, images, email and social media, transphobic, homophobic or other bullying, sexual advances, touching and other unwelcome and ongoing behaviour that insults, demeans, harms or threatens a person in some way.
Discrimination happens when a person experiences negative treatment or impact, intentional or not, because of their gender identity or gender expression.
Harrasment can land you in jail, we can agree on that?
So those two together give me the idea that if someone finds the pronoun him offensive because due to their gender expression they're a hiz, it's now grounds for harrasment as you're discriminating against their gender identity....
OP
OP
Crystalpall
the F2P PvEr
Harassment is the behaviours mentioned. It can happen because someone would prefer to be pronouned a certain way. Which is what caused the action, but the person isn't punished for the cause, but for their action.
A lady has big breasts. You go and touch her breasts. You get punished. Her being hot has made you do it, but your touching was the harassment.
Someone would like to be called a certain way. You hear that, you find it ridiculous, you go and insult that person. You get punished. That person saying they would like to be called a certain way made you do it, but your insult was the harassment.
Neon
I like to be fat shamed
@Crystalpall my real views are too factual for this community and would cause alot of controversy. You won't like what I have to say.
Daltert Moropi
Legend
just to think that someone had a complaint about a random name of a box of food that existed for years (probably decades) and lead toward this moment of all of us arguing about a random box of food.
Chops
Soccer Dad
no. what you're working off of isnt a law. Its a Human Rights commissions statement of principles.
The law states:
"15 (1) It is not a discriminatory practice if...
- (e) an individual is discriminated against on a prohibited ground of discrimination in a manner that is prescribed by guidelines... to be reasonable;"
in other words. You're free to be a bigot as long as your bigotry isnt causing physical or material harm
- Status