Posts by bohm

86

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

by cofty in

professor jordan peterson of the university of toronto will be streaming a live debate on his youtube channel on the topic of free speech and "bill c-16".. if you haven't heard (where have you been?

) peterson has been making waves by opposing the demands of pc "social justice warriors" at the u of t to use their chosen gender neutral pronouns.

in his judgement proposed "bill-c16" will make his non-compliance illegal - an egregious threat to free speech.. professor peterson is an intelligent and thoughtful academic who has found himself at the focus of attacks from the neo-marxists that are dominating the conversation at elite universities.

bohm

So many important battles to fight right now, and some idiots want to fight this. This is why the left loses so often - the right attacks the extreme left first that doesn't have general support and then work toward the center until they meet resistance. The left attacks the center and those only slightly to their right while ignoring the extreme right to their peril.

Okay that resonates a lot with me. The way I see it there is the "crazy blue-haired left" and the "crazy right". Both are trying their hardest to sell moderates as their worst parody of the other side. However, I think the right-wing has been far, far more effective in selling (and spreading) the picture of the "crazy left". This can be seen by how the fake news writers have found the right-wing stories to sell better and Trump might just have won an election based on fake news stories largely parroting crazy-right propaganda.

Furthermore, the white house strategist is professional alt-right troll Steve Bannon. This has a large impact on the world stage whereas I think the worst the crazy left has managed so far is to ban the occasional Halloween. If I actually meet a student one day who will be called Xir I will call him or whatever Xir and mentally put him on ignore: Problem solved.

I will go so far as to say there might be an ethical (not legal) issue in Jordan Peterson posting videos of students who might not be well in their heads who go off on this Xir and Zip stuff and making money off it.

86

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

by cofty in

professor jordan peterson of the university of toronto will be streaming a live debate on his youtube channel on the topic of free speech and "bill c-16".. if you haven't heard (where have you been?

) peterson has been making waves by opposing the demands of pc "social justice warriors" at the u of t to use their chosen gender neutral pronouns.

in his judgement proposed "bill-c16" will make his non-compliance illegal - an egregious threat to free speech.. professor peterson is an intelligent and thoughtful academic who has found himself at the focus of attacks from the neo-marxists that are dominating the conversation at elite universities.

bohm

Simon:

Except that completely mischaracterizes the issue. The real issue with the legislation is, as he highlights, that the conversation could go:
"Yes, the lady in the back".
"OMG, you called me 'lady' instead of 'fingfangfooey', the word we just invented yesterday, you are guilty of a HATE CRIME!!!"
(Black helicopters swoop in and Jordan Peterson is taken to room 101).
Much more sinister.

But is that actually what the law is about?

I have taken anti discrimination/harassment courses in this stuff in a university environment (I won't say which but I can PM it) and the behaviour they try to limit is nothing like this (also, university policy is far more restrictive than that in outside society as it is in most workplaces).

If his student wished to be called 'fingfangfooey', Jordan's subsequent actions would need to meet the bar for actual harassment for that to be a problem. That bar is quite high in other circumstances and does not usually pose a problem.

The problem of students wanted to be called 'fingfangfooey' should be seen in relations to how often that occurs (according to Cofty, less than 0.3% of the people are transexuals, and presumably the fingfangfooes are a subset of those so you are unlikely to encounter one in several years), and what harm will come to Jordan for saying "Sorry, 'fingfangfooey'", and get on with the class. Not getting upset by the occasional stupid stuff said in class is part of maintaining your professional distance.

Of course there are trolls who will try to abuse that system, and that trolling is reported very wide and far, but I think that when Jordan manage to find trolls or genuinely confused students then perhaps another course of action is to recognize he is dealing with a confused person and take it like a man and say Xir?

Simon, do you also see C 16 as a great threat to free speech in canada as Jordan claims?

86

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

by cofty in

professor jordan peterson of the university of toronto will be streaming a live debate on his youtube channel on the topic of free speech and "bill c-16".. if you haven't heard (where have you been?

) peterson has been making waves by opposing the demands of pc "social justice warriors" at the u of t to use their chosen gender neutral pronouns.

in his judgement proposed "bill-c16" will make his non-compliance illegal - an egregious threat to free speech.. professor peterson is an intelligent and thoughtful academic who has found himself at the focus of attacks from the neo-marxists that are dominating the conversation at elite universities.

bohm

I already said that transgender people "should be treated with dignity and respect". However I can understand why, for example an employer might not want to hire a man with gender dysphoria for certain jobs within their business.
A biological man in a dress at a reception desk might not be the image a company wants.
Do you understand how you totally misrepresented Peterson's position?

Then please explain his position to me, in particular where the actual harm is in C 16. This is supposedly a major threat to free speech, something radically new which is why he speaks out with no regard to his job, career or freedom (according to himself), so it should be fairly easy.

As to your example, yes, I too can also understand why you don't want a man in some jobs (for instance, cleaning the women's shower in the swimming pool), or you don't want a 69-year-old as a bouncer in a club, or a person who refuse to handle pork on religious grounds in a restaurant. These too are protected characteristics (gender, age, religion) but these examples do not present insurmountable obstacles to the courts or civil society.

The kind of example which is in mind for these laws is that where your local firefighter is fired because the boss decides he is no longer a "real man" now that he likes to dress up as a woman in the weekend. Is that in your opinion discrimination that should be legal?

BTW. the standards for "harassment" (which I think is what Jordan is getting at with the legal business and not using pronouns) is quite high when it comes to the other protected characteristics. At best, he might get in troubles with his university, but that remains to be seen and is (as you noted) a place where it is reasonable to let the employer use some discernment in terms of who should represent the university.

The alt-right keeps banging on with these slippery-slope arguments when it comes to transsexuals without understanding that these obstacles are already successfully navigated for N-1 other similar characteristics and their associated potential problems.

86

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

by cofty in

professor jordan peterson of the university of toronto will be streaming a live debate on his youtube channel on the topic of free speech and "bill c-16".. if you haven't heard (where have you been?

) peterson has been making waves by opposing the demands of pc "social justice warriors" at the u of t to use their chosen gender neutral pronouns.

in his judgement proposed "bill-c16" will make his non-compliance illegal - an egregious threat to free speech.. professor peterson is an intelligent and thoughtful academic who has found himself at the focus of attacks from the neo-marxists that are dominating the conversation at elite universities.

bohm

Okay, let's imagine a situation. In class:
"Yes, the lady in the back".
"Excuse me, Mr. Peterson. I prefer you call me 'gentleman' rather than 'lady'"
(Normal world:) "Sorry. The GENTLEMAN in the back"
(Petersons world:) "I REFUSE to pander to your Marxist ideology!" (Black helicopters swoop in and Jordan Peterson is taken to room 101).
From what I have heard of Peterson you have totally misrepresented his position. If a transgender person wants to be known as he or she he would have absolutely no problem with that. Neither would I.

Well, I was not trying to represent his position, but trying to understand what this whole pronoun business as an infringement of my free speech comes down to in practice ("pandering to special snowflakes")

Suppose you are on campus and someone wants to be called "Zip" or whatever on his application form instead of Mr or ms. is that what is bad? Or if the person wants to be called "Zip" in class? is that what is bad? I have been teaching myself, and if someone asked to be called Zip I would just do it and shrug. I can't see where the actual harm is in that request and quite frankly I don't think there is any such harm without a very elaborate argument about marxism.

If Jordan is not imagining a situation where he refuses to call a person "Zip" in class, what else is it?

And while we are on it, no legal harm has come to Jordan for refusing to use certain pronouns. The idea that there is potential legal harm is entirely hypothetical at this point.

86

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

by cofty in

professor jordan peterson of the university of toronto will be streaming a live debate on his youtube channel on the topic of free speech and "bill c-16".. if you haven't heard (where have you been?

) peterson has been making waves by opposing the demands of pc "social justice warriors" at the u of t to use their chosen gender neutral pronouns.

in his judgement proposed "bill-c16" will make his non-compliance illegal - an egregious threat to free speech.. professor peterson is an intelligent and thoughtful academic who has found himself at the focus of attacks from the neo-marxists that are dominating the conversation at elite universities.

bohm

I have no idea what it would mean to make "gender identity" a protected class.

A protected characteristic is one which you are not allowed to discriminate upon. For instance, I am allowed to discriminate by a person level of education (only applicants with this level of education will come into consideration), but I am not allowed do discriminate based on e.g. sex or religion (no Muslims or men need to apply).

An idea behind this law is to make gender identity (code word for transexuals) a protected characteristic. So I am not allowed to discriminate by for instance refusing to hire a trans person.

Do you think that is a bad idea?

86

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

by cofty in

professor jordan peterson of the university of toronto will be streaming a live debate on his youtube channel on the topic of free speech and "bill c-16".. if you haven't heard (where have you been?

) peterson has been making waves by opposing the demands of pc "social justice warriors" at the u of t to use their chosen gender neutral pronouns.

in his judgement proposed "bill-c16" will make his non-compliance illegal - an egregious threat to free speech.. professor peterson is an intelligent and thoughtful academic who has found himself at the focus of attacks from the neo-marxists that are dominating the conversation at elite universities.

bohm

If it is true that a university professor can be in legal trouble for declining to pander to special snowflakes who demand to be referred to as Zi and Hir then it's a very bad law.

Okay, let's imagine a situation. In class:

"Yes, the lady in the back".
"Excuse me, Mr. Peterson. I prefer you call me 'gentleman' rather than 'lady'"

(Normal world:) "Sorry. The GENTLEMAN in the back"

(Petersons world:) "I REFUSE to pander to your Marxist ideology!" (Black helicopters swoop in and Jordan Peterson is taken to room 101).

I work in a university environment and I have had no exposure to anything remotely resembling these problems. If a student wished I called him or her something else than him or her I can't see why I should not simply do it similar to how I try to call people by the name they prefer.

In terms of legal troubles, well, the kind of legal troubles Jordan would face would be determined by the courts, but at most he could get a fine. And I think that requires far more than not wanting to say "Xir" to someone similar to how you are currently allowed to say very crass things to people who currently have a protected status without getting fined. If I said: "All women are stupid" that would not get me fined, and gender identity is just getting added to the same list...

86

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

by cofty in

professor jordan peterson of the university of toronto will be streaming a live debate on his youtube channel on the topic of free speech and "bill c-16".. if you haven't heard (where have you been?

) peterson has been making waves by opposing the demands of pc "social justice warriors" at the u of t to use their chosen gender neutral pronouns.

in his judgement proposed "bill-c16" will make his non-compliance illegal - an egregious threat to free speech.. professor peterson is an intelligent and thoughtful academic who has found himself at the focus of attacks from the neo-marxists that are dominating the conversation at elite universities.

bohm

Cofty: Yes, it will probably be interesting. But have you read the actual bill C 16? I would really recommend you do so (I copy-pasted it above).

Jordan Peterson, if you watch his videos carefully, is talking about some general trends he sees in society and thinks are very scary (the millions and millions of Marxist indoctrinated leftist people) and then go on to tie that into this specific bill which he sees as a key moment for free speech in Canada (and, what do you know, he just happens to be right in the middle of it). But in terms of what is actually in the bill (rather than what people are writing about the bill), it seems like a minor change to me.

But I want to put you on the spot here: Do you think gender or gender identity should be a protected class similar to marriage status, age, religion, race, sex, etc.? Do you think making them a protected class erode fundamental rights? If so, why have the same rights not already been eroded by treating race, religion, etc. as protected characteristics?

As for all this "yes, but what is someone insists I call him 'Xxspskghpf'", the same kind of arguments can be made as in "yes, but what if someone makes up a really stupid religion!". Being a protected class does not put your views or political ideology above scritiny.

86

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

by cofty in

professor jordan peterson of the university of toronto will be streaming a live debate on his youtube channel on the topic of free speech and "bill c-16".. if you haven't heard (where have you been?

) peterson has been making waves by opposing the demands of pc "social justice warriors" at the u of t to use their chosen gender neutral pronouns.

in his judgement proposed "bill-c16" will make his non-compliance illegal - an egregious threat to free speech.. professor peterson is an intelligent and thoughtful academic who has found himself at the focus of attacks from the neo-marxists that are dominating the conversation at elite universities.

bohm

Cofty:

he earns about 5300 a month by talking on this subject - Bohm
Do you have a source for that?

Yes, I checked his Patreon page yesterday. In reality, he might also earn money from youtube, and possibly talks in the future. There is a large market for these kinds of things (leftish people behaving badly).
Not that I think he is doing it for the money, I think becoming an internet celebrity and selling his research to a wider audience is a more important driver to a person in his position. However, I am hoping you will take your time to read through the bill (I copy-pasted it above) and then we can discuss the change you object to? As far as you can tell, is this bill doing more than adding "gender identity and expression" to the list of already covered groups? (religion, race, marital status, etc.). As far as I know, you can say really nasty things about married women in Canada in general and the sky isn't falling.

86

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

by cofty in

professor jordan peterson of the university of toronto will be streaming a live debate on his youtube channel on the topic of free speech and "bill c-16".. if you haven't heard (where have you been?

) peterson has been making waves by opposing the demands of pc "social justice warriors" at the u of t to use their chosen gender neutral pronouns.

in his judgement proposed "bill-c16" will make his non-compliance illegal - an egregious threat to free speech.. professor peterson is an intelligent and thoughtful academic who has found himself at the focus of attacks from the neo-marxists that are dominating the conversation at elite universities.

bohm

Cofty: Can you make it clear what piece of the legislation you specifically object to?:

As far as I can tell, the Canadian Human Rights Act already grant rights and protected status to quite subjectively defined groups (for instance, religion). What this bill does is to introduce "gender identity and expression" (another subjective criterion) to that list; something which has already happened locally in many Canadian provinces including Toronto.

For instance here is an old version of the purpose of the canadian human rights act pre-C 16:

Purpose
2 The purpose of this Act is to extend the laws in Canada to give effect, within the purview of matters coming within the legislative authority of Parliament, to the principle that all individuals should have an opportunity equal with other individuals to make for themselves the lives that they are able and wish to have and to have their needs accommodated, consistent with their duties and obligations as members of society, without being hindered in or prevented from doing so by discriminatory practices based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, disability or conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:K5XrYRtQf8kJ:laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/h-6/page-1.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

How is that doing harm of real significance? Is that really all that bad? (should we be allowed to discriminate against transsexuals in the workplace or for instance incite to genocide against transsexuals?)

Here is the content of C-16:

----

1 Section 2 of the Canadian Human Rights Act is replaced by the following:

Purpose

2 The purpose of this Act is to extend the laws in Canada to give effect, within the purview of matters coming within the legislative authority of Parliament, to the principle that all individuals should have an opportunity equal with other individuals to make for themselves the lives that they are able and wish to have and to have their needs accommodated, consistent with their duties and obligations as members of society, without being hindered in or prevented from doing so by discriminatory practices based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, disability or conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered.

1996, c. 14, s. 2; 2012, c. 1, s. 138(E)

2 Subsection 3(1) of the Act is replaced by the following:

Prohibited grounds of discrimination

3 (1) For all purposes of this Act, the prohibited grounds of discrimination are race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, disability and conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered.

3 Subsection 318(4) of the Criminal Code is replaced by the following:

Definition of identifiable group

(4) In this section, identifiable group means any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, national or ethnic origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or mental or physical disability.

4 Subparagraph 718.‍2(a)‍(i) of the Act is replaced by the following:

(i) evidence that the offence was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity or expression, or on any other similar factor,

86

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

by cofty in

professor jordan peterson of the university of toronto will be streaming a live debate on his youtube channel on the topic of free speech and "bill c-16".. if you haven't heard (where have you been?

) peterson has been making waves by opposing the demands of pc "social justice warriors" at the u of t to use their chosen gender neutral pronouns.

in his judgement proposed "bill-c16" will make his non-compliance illegal - an egregious threat to free speech.. professor peterson is an intelligent and thoughtful academic who has found himself at the focus of attacks from the neo-marxists that are dominating the conversation at elite universities.

bohm

Cofty: 0.3% of the world population is transgender. A far larger percentage of the students at elite universities are poseurs. They don't need laws to protect their affectations.

Whether it is necessary to make it illegal to discriminate against a transperson ("sorry we don't hire transsexuals"), or that they need to be protected against hate speech ("kill all trannies") is, in my opinion, a side point. You are free to argue that they should not be a protected group (similar to religion, sex, ethnicity, etc. etc. I think they should if we have such things), but what I am addressing is Jordans claims that the bill C-16 pose an immediate danger to free speech -- which is unrelated to how many actual trans persons there are.

I am simply failing to find a persuasive argument beneath the rhetoric (and there is a LOT of rhetoric in his piece) and I can't help noticing he earns about 5300 a month by talking on this subject.