Free Speech - Jordan Peterson Debate Live 9:30 EST Saturday

by cofty 85 Replies latest social current

  • LoveUniHateExams
    LoveUniHateExams

    If we agree that black people shouldn't be addressed using the N word or women shouldn't be addressed with sexists names like, pet, doll, honey, or whatever - agreed.

    Then it seems pretty reasonable that transgender people be allowed to insist that they not be addressed using language that they find distressing - you've lost me. Transsexuals find the terms 'Mr', 'Mrs' and 'Ms' distressing?

    Take a person who's transitioned to male, as an example (born biologically female, with XX chromosomes, but is really a man trapped in a woman's body). Prof Peterson refuses to address this person as 'Mx' (as requested) but addresses this person, against this person's wishes, as 'Mr'. What's wrong with Professor Peterson's actions here?

    Any sense of proportion at this moment would allocate no time whatever to mister storm in a teacup Peterson - agreed. Peterson should be allowed to use only the terms Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms when addressing people, regardless of other peoples' wishes and with no recrimination. That's what's known as a Free Society.

  • cofty
    cofty
    but that it's okay, in fact it is his "right", to address someone as he and him and his, who does not feel themselves to be a man - SBF

    Which is a total misrepresentation of his position. As usual you are attacking a straw man.

    Peterson has stated that he has no problem calling a transgender person by he or she.

    ...

  • bohm
    bohm

    LUHE:

    Take a person who's transitioned to male, as an example (born biologically female, with XX chromosomes, but is really a man trapped in a woman's body). Prof Peterson refuses to address this person as 'Mx' (as requested) but addresses this person, against this person's wishes, as 'Mr'. What's wrong with Professor Peterson's actions here?

    That he is being a dick?

    The discussion is about Petersons claims that bill C16 is an unprecedented challenge to free speech from the far left which, according to him, has infiltrated academia. If you agree with Peterson, could you please point out what part of bill C16 that actually form that threat? (I copy-pasted the bill a few pages back).


    What this issue of free speech in the wider society is being confused with is that Petersons university is telling him to behave in a certain way in front of the students, namely to use their made up pronouns. His university is fully within their right to do that (do we agree?) similar to how they can (and very likely are) dictating who he dates, how he grooms, talks, behaves, etc. while on his job. Quite frankly, that goes without saying: It is in my opinion as a teacher hugely unprofessional of him to make a fuss about how a student wish to be address while he is carrying out his job.

    For instance, I could decide, as a private person, that a student's name was so ridiculous I didn't want to say it, but I should leave that private opinion at home when I went to work and still use the students name. That is simply part of being a grown-up and acting professionally.

    I also think it is unethical (not illegal) to monetize videos of his students in the manner he is.

    SBF Nailed it on the previous page:

    We have a president of the United States who is intimidating the press, encouraged violence in the campaign, is stigmatising minority groups, and threatened to put political opponents in jail. Any sense of proportion at this moment would allocate no time whatever to mister storm in a teacup Peterson.

    I simply cannot help to notice that outside the blue-haired crazy-left (and I have never encountered one in real life) the people who are really interested in these stories are the right-wing: "Look at the regressive left, all they care about is if you are called Xir or Hen or some other fashionable word, haha! They have lost touch with the common man!".



  • bohm
    bohm

    Cofty:

    but that it's okay, in fact it is his "right", to address someone as he and him and his, who does not feel themselves to be a man - SBF

    Which is a total misrepresentation of his position. As usual you are attacking a straw man.

    I think that is not exactly a strawman. The students in question believe they are not a man or a woman and therefore wish to be called "they". We can argue that they are just trying to be special, a bit like how students used to wear dark makeup and pierce themselves with safety pins 15 years back, or trying to troll him, however, Jordans position is that on campus he should still be able to call the person "him" or "her" according to the student's biological sex.

    In other words, the student "does not feel themselves to be a man" and Peterson believe it is his "his "right", to address someone as he and him and his", as SBF wrote unless I am missing something.

    BTW is there a video of the debate online? and did you read C 16 yet?

  • cofty
    cofty
    BTW is there a video of the debate online?

    Doesn't seem to be.

    and did you read C 16 yet?

    As I said earlier, yes I read it weeks ago.

    I would also refuse to use made-up pronouns. Don't pander to people's delusions. Students should be challenged to grow up not codelled.



  • cofty
    cofty
    Jordans position is that on campus he should still be able to call the person "him" or "her" according to the student's biological sex

    For the third time no it isn't.

    He has stated clearly - including in the latest video I posted - that he has no problem addressing a transgender person as he or she according to their preference.

    SBF did not "nail it". He also misrepresented Peterson's position - straw man.

    To assert that issues that don't concern you should be dismissed because, in your opinion x or y is a bigger issue is not an argument.

  • bohm
    bohm

    Cofty: Sorry I forgot if you mentioned that you read the bill in question.

    Could we perhaps try to figure out where we agree or do not agree on the bill and leave the on-campus stuff alone?

    Firstly, do you agree with Peterson this bill forms an unprecedented and new challenge to free speech in Canada?

    Secondly, I think we are on the same page regarding the general principle that trans people should be a protected category, i.e. that you are not allowed to fire a fireman for coming out women similar to how you should not be allowed to fire him if he converts to Christianity?

    If you do not agree on this, i.e. that trans people should be a protected category, perhaps we can agree that making them a protected category is not really that important (i.e. the 0.3% point you brought up).

    With these things in mind, what (or which) of the three changes in the bill is it you disagree with? i.e. which of the changes is it that forms the important challenge to free speech in Canada?

  • bohm
    bohm

    Bohm: Jordans position is that on campus he should still be able to call the person "him" or "her" according to the student's biological sex

    For the third time no it isn't.
    He has stated clearly - including in the latest video I posted - that he has no problem addressing a transgender person as he or she according to their preference.

    Then I am confused. Is his position not that he "refuse" to call a student "Xir" or "they" as a matter of principle, and that would automatically mean he calls the student "him" or "her" as he deems appropriate?

    I agree with you that he calls a "true" transperson his or her preferred pronoun. But that was clearly not what my comment referred to.

  • cofty
    cofty
    Firstly, do you agree with Peterson this bill forms an unprecedented and new challenge to free speech in Canada?

    I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. Peterson's explanation of why it does is compelling but perhaps he will be shown to be mistaken. If it does coerce others to use made-up pronouns then it is a very bad law and should be opposed by everybody who cares about free speech. Even those who think that made-up pronouns are charmingly whimsical.

    trans people should be a protected category, i.e. that you are not allowed to fire a fireman for coming out women similar to how you should not be allowed to fire him if he converts to Christianity?

    I'm not sure if I'm on the same page with you about that. Converting to christianity demonstrates poor judgement but it probably doesn't interfere with a person's suitability to do most jobs. Insisting on turning up for work as a hotel receptionist in a dress and a beard probably would. That is why it is a badly formed law. "Gender expression" can be interpreted to mean absolutely anything.


  • bohm
    bohm
    I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. Peterson's explanation of why it does is compelling but perhaps he will be shown to be mistaken.

    Petersons make specific and very noteworthy claims which it is up to him to prove; if the issue is as clear as he makes it out to be, it should be easy to find support for the bill. How many scholars have come forth and supported his interpretation of events?

    I'm not sure if I'm on the same page with you about that. Converting to christianity demonstrates poor judgement but it probably doesn't interfere with a person's suitability to do most jobs. Insisting on turning up for work as a hotel receptionist in a dress and a beard probably would.

    Please notice that you changed my example to something else. As a receptionist, you are subject to rules about dress or grooming which you are not subject to as a fireman.

    What is being glossed over in these cases is that rules are interpreted by the courts. For instance, if a receptionist decides on religious grounds to not shower for two weeks, and the manager decides to fire him or her, then the case can be taken to court by the receptionist but I doubt it would be with much success.

    But let us make this plain: You believe that it should be legal to fire a fireman for coming out trans? For instance, suppose a female fireman comes out as a man, you believe it should be possible to fire that person?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit