Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4376
Reputation: 245.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:06 pm    Post subject: Blatchford: Thought Police Strike Again! Reply with quote

More in our continuing study of so-called Human Rights and what's happening in our courts and in the universities ...

Quote:
Christie Blatchford: Thought police strike again as Wilfrid Laurier grad student is chastised for showing Jordan Peterson video
Her supervising professor told her that by showing the video to her 'Canadian Communication in Context' class, 'it basically was like … neutrally playing a speech by Hitler …'

Christie Blatchford
November 10, 2017
8:42 PM EST

A Wilfrid Laurier University teaching assistant has been identified as “transphobic” and sanctioned for last week showing her class an excerpt of a video debate involving the controversial University of Toronto psychology professor Jordan Peterson.

In fact, her supervising professor, Nathan Rambukkana, told her that by showing the video to her “Canadian Communication in Context” class, “it basically was like … neutrally playing a speech by Hitler …”

Lindsay Shepherd, a 22-year-old graduate student at the school in Waterloo, Ont., was informed that merely by showing the clip, taken from a televised debate between Peterson and Nicholas Matte, a lecturer at the U of T’s Sexual Diversity Studies program, she was “legitimizing” Peterson’s views about genderless pronouns.

She has been told that she must now submit her lesson plans to her supervisor in advance, that he may sit in on her next few classes and she must “not show any more controversial videos of this kind.”

The debate was originally aired last fall on the well-regarded TVO news show The Agenda, hosted by Steve Paikin, when Peterson’s YouTube lectures about the dangers of the then-looming federal Bill C-16 first went viral.

It was in the context of this bill, which added “gender expression” and “gender identity” to both the federal human rights act and the Criminal Code, that Peterson first publicly criticized the use of gender-neutral pronouns such as “zie”, “zher” and “they” and found himself in a free speech battle.

The bill received royal assent in June and is now law.

Shepherd was this week hauled into a meeting with Rambukkana, program co-ordinator Herbert Pimlott and Adria Joel, acting manager of the “Gendered Violence Prevention and Support” program.
[emphasis added]

She was told that after she showed the five-minute video clip, “one student/many students” — the group refused to say how many students were unhappy because that information is deemed confidential — complained that she had created “a toxic climate.”

Spunkily, she asked if she was supposed to shelter students from controversial ideas. “Am I supposed to comfort them?” she asked at one point, bewildered, and said it was antithetical to the spirit of a university.

Rambukkana then informed her that since Bill C-16 was passed, even making such “arguments run(s) counter” to the law.

[....]

Ah, said Rambukkana, “so you’re not one of Jordan Peterson’s students.”

He then told her Peterson was “highly involved with the alt-right,” that he had bullied his own students and asked, “do you see why this is not something … that is up for debate?”

When Shepherd protested that it is very much up for debate, Rambukkana chastised her by saying the discussion creates an “unsafe learning environment.”

[....]

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, Pimlott said, but the university has a “duty to make sure we’re not furthering … Jordan Peterson.”

They were oblivious to the fact that they themselves were proving him right by holding the 2017 equivalent of the “struggle sessions” so beloved in Mao’s China.

Shepherd is now sufficiently disillusioned, she told Postmedia Friday, that she is “about 70-per-cent sure I will be leaving Wilfrid Laurier after this semester is over.”

None of Rambukkana, Pimlott or Joel replied to emails from Postmedia.

• Email: cblatchford@postmedia.com |
http://nationalpost.com/opinio.....rson-video


This just proves the craziness has a home in faculties all over North America.

This is an example of what I am trying to get others on here to recognize. The ideological battles of today involve education. And the ideology is a weird mix of gender politics and welfare state solutions for everything, even things that most people don't realize are problems. Also part of the mix, in fact the most revolutionary part, is environmentalism. That's where the idea comes from that we have to do something, anything, now because tomorrow will be too late.

There are only two sides on this -- on the one side are all those dependent on the state for their livelihood, and on the other, those who are not. It's not the rich vrs the poor anymore. It's how the state is changing the society to suit itself.

The welfare state plays a gatekeeper function. It controls a big chunk of the economy.
The jobs inside the state, as much as possible, are saved for visible minorities, disabled people, and women. The pay package inside the state is 50% higher than in the private economy.

It's been like this for at least forty years. It wouldn't be so bad if the state was small, but it is huge, and they have the best jobs available and they promote from within. They tell us that this is how Canada -- meaning the government -- fights racism, and other attitudes they don't want us to have. They keep us out of the jobs, on the basis of race and gender, and they muzzle us any time we squeak.

They have even corrupted the universities.

Politics isn't about who's got the better child benefit package -- unless that's the only choice put before the people. Conservatives have to put a different vision on the table.

In our time, it's about finding a way to oppose the drift of an unsustainable welfare state. It runs on debt. It has gone past the point where the general benefits improve all of Canadian society.

Now the state uses debt to finance targeted tax cuts and bonuses to key parts of its base. Can it go on? It can in Canada, but the real problem is our neighbor to the south. You know the old idea about if they get a cold, we get pneumonia? Well, what if they get pneumonia?

The drift of the welfare state has often been in accord with public opinion, or at least it didn't go against it. But it is getting crazy right now, taking away the freedom of inquiry in universities and filling the education system with toxic ideas.

It ought to be our party that voices those discontents in the halls of power. The genius will be in figuring out how to make it persuasive for the mainstream. People prefer denial, especially when realism requires facing up to big social changes.
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 634
Reputation: 93.7Reputation: 93.7
votes: 3
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

All this is just a misguided University's staff not knowing the law and what it does.

None of this applies (C-16) to a University.

I imagine the Uni will announce an apology soon enough.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4376
Reputation: 245.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Obviously, it does. This is a case of it being applied prematurely, perhaps, but it is being applied, and the universities know what they are supposed to do.

In other cases like this, it turned out to be YOU who was the one that was misinformed about the law. This law puts gender expression -- whatever that is -- into an activity that is protected by "hate" laws.

Hate laws can give you a severe kick in the ass. It takes freedom of speech away. I mean, in all honesty, if a guy dresses up like a woman and goes into a woman's restroom, and someone called a cop when a ruckus ensued, the cop might think he should take the woman away for expressing hate rather than having an honest concern for her own safety.

Are you saying a weekend in the slammer is what she needs?
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 634
Reputation: 93.7Reputation: 93.7
votes: 3
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
Obviously, it does. This is a case of it being applied prematurely, perhaps, but it is being applied, and the universities know what they are supposed to do.

Short and sweet for ya...

Bill C-16 states..."That makes it illegal to deny services, employment, accommodation and similar benefits to individuals based on their gender identity or gender expression within a federal regulated industry."

University isnt a federal regulated industry.

Case over.

Next?
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4376
Reputation: 245.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

And yet, this graduate student has to submit to having her teaching materials supervised weekly, and she cannot show videos of Professor Jordan Peterson.

Maybe TC isn't telling us the whole story. After all, did you know about any of these changes when they made them? They just sneak them in, and bang, first thing you know, comedians can't heckle back if the hecklers are lesbians.

University faculty have been told that they must comply with Ontario law, including that fascistic bit if business called the Human Rights Code. And, in the opinion of these learned professors of law, that means individuals can be penalized heavily for using the wrong pronouns in referring to gearboxes. And, in the opinion of the learned law professors, it means professors can be terminated for not using the new pronouns to the guy with his eyes made up in the front row.

My question: if we're to have special pronouns for transgender folk, why shouldn't cocksuckers get their special set too? Maybe they could weak pink triangles so we know who's who. Gearboxes could wear purple question marks.

Interestingly enough, the people that have an actual medical diagnosis of sexual dysphoria (as opposed to being in a tom-boy stage) know very well what sex they are. It's just that they are wrong. Those people don't want special pronouns to highlight them, they want to be inconspicuous.
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 634
Reputation: 93.7Reputation: 93.7
votes: 3
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 11:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
And yet, this graduate student has to submit to having her teaching materials supervised weekly, and she cannot show videos of Professor Jordan Peterson.

For now ..yes. But they are still wrong.
Quote:
Maybe TC isn't telling us the whole story. After all, did you know about any of these changes when they made them? They just sneak them in, and bang, first thing you know, comedians can't heckle back if the hecklers are lesbians.

Changes?
Bill published on‎: ‎May 17, 2016
Date of Royal Assent‎: ‎June 19, 2017

Comedians can always heckle people, including Lesbians.



Quote:
My question: if we're to have special pronouns for transgender folk, why shouldn't cocksuckers get their special set too?


They do.

We call them Politicians.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4376
Reputation: 245.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TC once again demonstrates that he's talking through his hat when he talks about the law and the Courts. And, by the way, "politicians" is a noun. But he scores a smile on that, and while he can hope my weakness for humour and wit will lead me to give him his humanity back, it's got to become more regular for that to happen.

My inner lesbian knows what she wants. (Shhh ... nobody knows.)

Quote:
Lesbian wins $22,500 over comedian's insults
CBC News Posted: Apr 21, 2011 12:14 PM PT Last Updated: Apr 21, 2011 2:42 PM PT

A Toronto comic and a Vancouver restaurant owner have been ordered to pay a lesbian patron $22,500 in compensation over a tirade of insults, after the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal dismissed the comic's claim that his words were an appropriate response to a heckler.

Lorna Pardy filed a complaint in 2008 alleging she and her lesbian partner were the targets of the offensive comments made by Guy Earle, who was hosting the open mike night at Zesty's Restaurant on Commercial Drive in May 2007.

Earle did not deny he was offensive, but claimed Pardy and her same-sex partner first rudely heckled him along with the amateur comics on stage that night. Earle claimed that Pardy threw two drinks in his face, and admitted he broke Pardy's sunglasses in a confrontation after the show.

Earle's lawyer later walked out of the Human Rights Tribunal hearing after claiming it was an illegal restriction on his client's freedom of speech.

But on Thursday, the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal sided with Pardy and ruled Earle must pay her $15,000. The owner of the restaurant, Sam Ismail, was ordered to pay Pardy $7,500 for failing to prevent the incident.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/.....-1.1060726


This is a video tracks the sound-track of the meeting described by Blatchford, with commentary interjected. I agree with the comments, but I present this more as evidence because it is from the actual meeting. If you like, it gives a good taste of the meeting, and the role bill C-16 played in creating the reason for the meeting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WCoH7RupCs

Back to the Lesbian case: The BC Supreme Court upheld the Human Rights Commission. So that means that, while it's disguised, the force of law is behind the Human Rights and its efforts to effectively neuter the Charter of Rights. In this case, they have virtually announced that we don't have free speech, we have, at best, supervised speech.

TC simply doesn't know what he's talking about. He can be forgiven because few people are aware of how bad it is. We no longer have free speech, really. It will be the same with the pronouns. If you mis-pronoun somebody (it's already a word on campuses) you can be found guilty under the anti-hate provisions of whatever ... and. given the size of the incentives involved, somebody is sure to go looking for people to target.

Moslems do that already. Mark Steyn was hauled before them for writing a book on how Moslems were taking over Europe, and the implications of that -- and he was accused of hate speech. His defense cost hundreds of $thousands, and he might not have won if he weren't a big name. Ezra Levant had the same experience because he published the famous Mohammed cartoons, a classic freedom of the press issue.

They call it "lawfare", and they use it as a substitute for "warfare". They exhaust the accused of their resources, so the trial, itself, becomes the penalty. Defending yourself in a so-called Human Rights proceeding will cost you $10,000 and up.

Ask TC -- he will concede that they are Kangaroo Courst, even less worthy of earned respect than our regular courts.

Human Rights Commissions give none of the traditional protections of the accused. The person appearing is guilty, and has to prove their innocence without ever being able to cross-examine the evidence against them. The procedural abuses only go on from there. Be sure to get TC to unload on this, because if he knows anything at all about these Star Chamber deals, he knows what I say is true. If he is silent, it is because he it too ashamed to reveal his inner fascist.
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 634
Reputation: 93.7Reputation: 93.7
votes: 3
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Toronto Centre wrote:
All this is just a misguided University's staff not knowing the law and what it does.

None of this applies (C-16) to a University.

I imagine the Uni will announce an apology soon enough.

...and with that said...they did.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/laurier-apologizes-to-t-a-who-aired-debate-clip-from-tvo-1.3687914

Such a shame huh? Now you cant keep on with the BS about the horrible HRC's and your gross miscalculations of what they do.

(pssst ...Steyn was never charged-but dont let truth ever get in the way)
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4376
Reputation: 245.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, this would be a perfect time for you to balance the picture.

I take it that you accept that they have replaced what was once 'free speech' with 'supervised speech'?

How much of our tattered charter is worth a damn?

You know the way I see it. Show me where I'm wrong. Tell me what good they do.
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 634
Reputation: 93.7Reputation: 93.7
votes: 3
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
Well, this would be a perfect time for you to balance the picture.

What picture? The one where some Uni folks got it all wrong and thn corrected it and apologized?
Quote:

I take it that you accept that they have replaced what was once 'free speech' with 'supervised speech'?

Ahh....I see. That this hienous crime was corrected means you need to move the goalposts of free speech.

Just accept that we have it as you have not shown we dont.
Quote:

How much of our tattered charter is worth a damn?

All of it.
Considering you dont understand it and is not my problem.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4376
Reputation: 245.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Still, so many respectable people say we don't. And true, the university got caught, and made a pro-forma apology, but they aren't going to stop.

Which means they are subverting the parliamentary process. They simply ignore the Charter of Rights and Freedoms ... Russia had a wonderful constitution under Stalin, as well, but the thing is -- they just ignored it when push came to shove.

We have constructed this vast web of social control, where various activists are invited onto quasi-judicial boards and start cashing in on their 'human rights' -- which involves the rest of us involuntarily having to support them as a legal obligation to such groups As it how stands we have a legal obligation to keep women from getting upset, for example, as do transsexuals have a right to control the pronouns we use.

And the trouble is -- these things so seldom stop until they are stopped. There seems to be an endless ways to outrage women, to name just one of the oppressed groups they serve, and we haven't even gptten to homosexuals yet.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4376
Reputation: 245.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Sat Nov 25, 2017 8:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is just a taste of what the rest of the world thinks of all this social justice double-talk.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=118ulZQJas4

There are now full tapes of the interview between the TA, Sheppard, and her inquisitors circulating all over the electronic world. It's hard to believe the language they use. I have followed a lot of Jordan Peterson's stuff -- not the long ones -- and I can tell you, this isn't about pronouns. This is because he takes the philosophical and pedagogical assumptions behind the students' education apart. He rips post-modernism a new one, as the classic philosopher Spinoza might have said.

If you want to watch the original Agenda discussion, here it is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kasiov0ytEc&t=2494s Warning, this is a half-hour long, but you can get a taste, depending on your interest.

The whole program is a good airing of the issues, but the issue is joined about the 10-minute mark. Professor Nicolas Matte lays out his argument and the discussion is laid out by the start of the 13th minute. There are other commentators, but it gets relevant, starting at minute 23:00 going to 29:00 is the heart of the discussion. It picks up again at 34:30. If you like seeing Professor Matte, he starts up 39.40 and explains how men in dresses are discriminated against. Embedded on this is the actual trans woman siding with Peterson on entirely sensible grounds!

Peterson sums up his concerns starting at the 43:00 minute mark, and the lawyer gives the social justice line starting at 46:00. It's gets really crazy after that -- a real study in sociological surrealism. Along the way Mr. Rogan, the writer, revealed that she felt that the if the pronouns changed, more and genders would flower. So it doesn't matter that this only involves half on one percent of people, and a lot of them feel that being able to pass as the opposite sex is an achievement!
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4376
Reputation: 245.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Fri Dec 01, 2017 9:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I said elsewhere that I suspected the TA was trolling the system when she aired the Jordan Peterson video. They 'triggered' their supervising faculty into a kangaroo court proceeding.

Most of us were probably unaware that students could be called before such informal tribunals. I doubt if they had such things when I went to university. This is exactly the kind of creeply supervision that the Stalin imposed on the Russian people -- little desktop trials, with a commissar present. I can see that a normal employer would want a certain performance at work -- except the commodity here is developing a skill in some kind of analytic thought, whether the subject is history or psychology. And that means letting the mind wander outside of the box.

She stood very strong, and it suggested she was prepared.

This video shows that there is a group agitating for a more open ideological atmosphere on their campus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvttWur04tE

Ms Shepherd, the TA, is a member of that group. She was offered a chance oo crowdfund -- donation bucks -- but she said that isn't what her action was about.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1

  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Blatchford: Thought Police Strike Again!

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB