Transgender Thread.

  • Thread starter Com Fox
  • 2,194 comments
  • 129,625 views

Transgender is...?

  • Ok for anyone

    Votes: 4 57.1%

  • Ok as long as it's binary (Male to Female or vice versa)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Wrong

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No one's business except the person involved

    Votes: 3 42.9%

  • Don't care

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    7
Carbonox
Does that law only involve real pronouns (he, she, they) or are people also expected to pander to those with special snowflake Tumblr pronouns?

I'll obviously oppose the bill either way, though.
Click to expand...
From what I can gather, it includes the 70+ (and growing) non-binary terms. I think technically if I say I identify as an Attack Helicopter, I can force you to use my prefered pronoun, which is Chopper Inbound.

TRGTspecialist
Could either of you clarify what this bit is based on? Reading through the bill I can't find any mention of pronouns. Knowing squat about Canadian law I'm probably missing out a lot of information but in the bill's summary it says this



Is it an assumption that the courts will now interpret misusing pronouns (accidentally and/or deliberately) as hate propaganda? If so what is the basis (or is there any precedence) for that?
Click to expand...
I'll be honest, I haven't read the bill for myself. That said, everything I can find regarding the bill, both for and against it, badically says its specifically about amending the Canadian Humsn Rights Act to include provisions to include trans gender as a protected group. Basically if people in the trans community are considering C16 as a victory for the trans community, then I'm inclined to believe the bill has to do with trans issues (at least on the surface).




Unrelated to the two comments I just quoted, but related to the topic, here is the article Peterson references in the Rubin interview - the one about kids in Alberta being encouraged to move away from boy/girl identity, and move toward friend/comrade.
http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/...-a-teaching-tool-in-alberta-schools-1.3830417

As this article sort of explains, it seems that many of these trans related issues, such as biology being unrelated to sex, are being written into Canadian legislation, despite the joury on the issue seemingly still being out - and it's being done with most Canadians having no clue it's taking place. Certainly every single person in my social circles that I have mentioned this to stared at me like I was a crazy person. And I'll be honest, I too had no idea this was going on - I just stumbled on the Rubin/Peterson interview while on an SJW salt mining YouTube rampage :lol:


Also, Peterson was on the Joe Rogan podcast, where they talk for about 3 hours. You can really get a sense of his position in that podcast, as he has the freedom to really go in. If you have time, I suggest listening to it.

Edit: the Joe Rogan Podcast
 
Last edited:
twitcher
From what I can gather, it includes the 70+ (and growing) non-binary terms
Click to expand...

When will Canada be renamed to Tumblrland?

Cgfdnul.gif
 
Carbonox
The joking term "pokegender" is already a thing at /r/TumblrInAction. :sly:

Scary world we live in.
Click to expand...
Does it include the legendary gender, Attack Helicopter? :sly:

In all seriousness, I do think the bill is ridiculous, even if I don't like it when people purposely be 🤬 to people, taking peoples right to say it in something rather vague enough so even people who generally don't agree with can't say anything really harms people's freedom.

It's like the foil to the HB2 Bill in North Carolina. On opposite ends but just as bad.
 
You guys are arguing against a strawman and are completely wrong about what the bill entails.

C16 doesn't make it a hate crime to use the wrong pronoun. The bill only adds gender identity to existing anti-discrimination and hate speech legislation. That just means gender identity exists alongside race/religion/sexual orientation etc. as "prohibited grounds for discrimination". As in, you can't make hiring decisions based on someone's gender identity. It also means gender identity is now included under existing hate speech and hate crime law which is a completely different thing from general discrimination laws.

TRGTspecialist
Is it an assumption that the courts will now interpret misusing pronouns (accidentally and/or deliberately) as hate propaganda? If so what is the basis (or is there any precedence) for that?
Click to expand...
Yes this is a huge and unfounded assumption. Hate speech in Canadian law has a specific definition based around calling for/inciting genocide with legal precedent, this only adds gender identity to it. Calling someone the wrong pronoun would not be remotely close to hate speech under Canadian law.
 
Last edited:
Joel
hate speech
Click to expand...
Mind if I ask you what "hate speech" is to you?

I often see "hate speech" as associated with people simply not liking a particular group, even if it's discriminatory or someone not accepting it people shouldn't be ban from sharing any opinion whatsoever or getting into rallies about it.

I do agree in businesses and works, you shouldn't hire or not-hire someone based solely on their gender identity but removal of speech about it attacks peoples freedom of speech regardless of "hate speech" or not.
 
Dan
The only person I normally hear that says "transtrender" is Blaire White. She is an intelligent and entertaining transgender YouTuber who debates SJWs and pokes fun at people who make absolutely ridiculous statements. Some of the people who she calls "transtrenders" are Riley Dennis and Milo Stewart who claim to be transgender, but have made almost zero effort to transition.
Click to expand...
This again touches on a seemingly common bigotry among trans people, and their cheer squads. That if one's situation does not fit within the "rule book", then they can't be part of the "trans club".

I think that the concept of transgender exists because we've not allowed anywhere near enough scope for the behaviours, thoughts and appearances of the genders. I think that the term transtrender exists as a logical extension of that limiting. It harks back to the great debate in this thread - the one addressing that trans is necessarily sexist. Trans doesn't go against traditional sexist thinking, it conforms to it, then rams the prejudice home by on-discriminating against atypical transgender people.

I would have hoped to see a modern, free-thinking society dissolve the importance and focus on gender. Instead, there's a whole lot of doing old school sexism's bidding, just with a "friendly" face put on it, going on.
 
Joel
You guys are arguing against a strawman and are completely wrong about what the bill entails.

C16 doesn't make it a hate crime to use the wrong pronoun. The bill only adds gender identity to existing anti-discrimination and hate speech legislation. That just means gender identity exists alongside race/religion/sexual orientation etc. as "prohibited grounds for discrimination". As in, you can't make hiring decisions based on someone's gender identity. It also means gender identity is now included under existing hate speech and hate crime law which is a completely different thing from general discrimination laws.


Yes this is a huge and unfounded assumption. Hate speech in Canadian law has a specific definition based around calling for/inciting genocide with legal precedent, this only adds gender identity to it. Calling someone the wrong pronoun would not be remotely close to hate speech under Canadian law.
Click to expand...
If that is the case, then why has the U of T legal department started issuing warnings to Peterson? When Peterson made his very first video, he said that he was actually braking the law - and the U of T legal department agrees with that, which is why they started taking steps to end his tenure. Why is it that with a simple google search, I can find a 1/2 dozen lawyers who agree with you, and I can find another 1/2 dozen who agree with Peterson? Are you a lawyer?

Watch the U of T debate in full. The trans person on the right of the panel outright labels what Peterson is saying as Hate Speech - even though after watching the video in full, there wasn't a single hateful thing said.

I think the whole postion that you're taking - "guys, it's no big deal, you're overreacting" is exactly the position this bill is designed to work you into. It's supposed to appeal to the SJW in all of us, and while we're all wrapped up in our happy feelings, axe strokes at the foundation of western society are being made.
 
twitcher
If that is the case, then why has the U of T legal department started issuing warnings to Peterson?
Click to expand...
I don't know the details and I can't say why they are. Maybe he's breaking the law or a university code of conduct. I'm not going to spend hours litigating a specific case on a racing game forum when I know none of the details.
twitcher
I think the whole postion that you're taking - "guys, it's no big deal, you're overreacting" is exactly the position this bill is designed to work you into. It's supposed to appeal to the SJW in all of us, and while we're all wrapped up in our happy feelings, axe strokes at the foundation of western society are being made.
Click to expand...
This is absurd. The bill does not make any new laws. Read it. All it does is add gender identity to existing anti-discrimination law that's been on the books for decades.
RESHIRAM5
Mind if I ask you what "hate speech" is to you?
I do agree in businesses and works, you shouldn't hire or not-hire someone based solely on their gender identity but removal of speech about it attacks peoples freedom of speech regardless of "hate speech" or not.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter what I think hate speech is. In Canadian law it's about inciting genocide against a group, and calling someone the wrong pronoun would not even be remotely close to qualifying as hate speech.
 
Last edited:
Joel
It doesn't matter what I think hate speech is. In Canadian law it's about inciting genocide against a group, and calling someone the wrong pronoun would not even be remotely close to qualifying as hate speech.
Click to expand...
That's just in all of canada, each area and territory have expanded this law to mean more than genocide, and some of it is concernily vague and while these are never ok to begin with, the inclusion of gender identity makes it worse in terms of having the freedom of expression and speech

In the Northern Territories, forbids any speech that is "is likely to expose any individual or class of individuals to hatred or contempt" and can be charged with up to $10,000 fine if anything was to cause injury to, "dignity, feelings , and self respect". I can imagine this being heavily exploited where mispronouns count. A similar law applies in Nunavut and Ontario as well. It isn't just citing genocide in these places.
 
Joel
I don't know the details and I can't say why they are. Maybe he's breaking the law or a university code of conduct. I'm not going to spend hours litigating a specific case on a racing game forum.

This is absurd. The bill does not make any new laws. Read it. All it does is add gender identity to existing anti-discrimination law.

It doesn't matter what I think hate speech is. In Canadian law it's about inciting genocide against a group, and calling someone the wrong pronoun would not even be remotely close to qualifying as hate speech.
Click to expand...
You don't need to spend hoirs litigating anything.

What is absurd is for you to say "you're overreacting, it's no big deal," and then when presented a specific case where the consequences of this legislation are on display, you admit that you don't know the details, and that you don't have the desire to look into them because we're on a racing forum.

If you watch the Rubin Report interview, Peterson lays out, in detail, exactly what is happening to him, why it is happening, and who the driving forces are. The only thing he has done is refuse to use made up gender pronouns - and because of it, he knows he risks losing his tenure at the university, and in other interviews, says that he already sees the wheels turning to drag him before the Ontario Human Rights Commision, where he will be charged with hate speech. If that happens, he has said that he will refuse to pay the fines, and upon going to jail, will go on a hunger strike. Are you saying Peterson is overreacting, and this is no big deal?

In another instance, on a panel of guests on national TV show, someone from the trans community formally accused Peterson of "abusing his students"....all for refusing to use the pronouns. That's a serious accusation to make.
 
Last edited:
RESHIRAM5
That's just in all of canada, each area and territory have expanded this law to mean more than genocide, and some of it is concernily vague and while these are never ok to begin with, the inclusion of gender identity makes it worse in terms of having the freedom of expression and speech

In the Northern Territories, forbids any speech that is "is likely to expose any individual or class of individuals to hatred or contempt" and can be charged with up to $10,000 fine if anything was to cause injury to, "dignity, feelings , and self respect". I can imagine this being heavily exploited where mispronouns count. A similar law applies in Nunavut and Ontario as well. It isn't just citing genocide in these places.
Click to expand...
Yes, so much this!!! Most of Bill C16 is written with the Ontario Human Rights Act (or Commision ci forget) as its backdrop.

Also, as Peterson and other's explain, there are moves afoot to change how speech can be punished - that is, instead of being punished for the intent of your speech, you can now be punished for the consequemces of your speech. Basically, if you tell someone to jump off a bridge - as a joke - and they actually do it, you can be held legally responsible.

So with that in mind, when you look at the Northern Territories interpretation of Hate Speech, they're basically saying that if you hurt someone's feelings, even if you didn't mean to, you can be legally responsible. To me, that is beyond crazy, and it's why this is a big deal.

Sorry if this comes up as a DP.
 
twitcher
Sorry if this comes up as a DP.
Click to expand...
Can't imagine why a double post would come up as a double post....


Even if the laws are wrong to have in place, they should be wrong but apply to all people. I take @Joel at face value, and would see it as simply a logical update for the equality of the laws. Argue that the laws are unfair, but don't argue that they should be unfairly unfair.

I looked a little at the Peterson case. I can see certain fears that he's expressing, and some posturing from his employers, but nothing from any of the people that would actually apply the laws.
 
twitcher
Yes, so much this!!! Most of Bill C16 is written with the Ontario Human Rights Act (or Commision ci forget) as its backdrop.
Click to expand...
No. It. Is. Not.

Read it. All it does is add gender identity to the anti-discrimination laws we've had for decades.
 
Last edited:
LeMansAid
Even if the laws are wrong to have in place, they should be wrong but apply to all people. I take @Joel at face value, and would see it as simply a logical update for the equality of the laws. Argue that the laws are unfair, but don't argue that they should be unfairly unfair.
Click to expand...
I guess you have a point there.

The problem really isn't adding gender identity to the anti-discrimination laws. It's the laws themselves in places like Ontario and need to revise as it's now becoming a problem of Free Speech.
 
The American College of Pediatricians issued a statement this week condemning gender reclassification in children by stating that transgenderism in children amounts to child abuse. “The American College of Pediatricians urges educators and legislators to reject all policies that condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex. Facts – not ideology – determine reality.”

http://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/gender-ideology-harms-children
 
Small_Fryz
The American College of Pediatricians issued a statement this week condemning gender reclassification in children by stating that transgenderism in children amounts to child abuse. “The American College of Pediatricians urges educators and legislators to reject all policies that condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex. Facts – not ideology – determine reality.”

http://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/gender-ideology-harms-children
Click to expand...
I had a brief look into the ACPeds and it seems that they are a socially conservative group of pediatricians that have advocated for reparative therapy and abstinence before marriage. They're also against same-sex adoption.

Source: https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-...es-gays-and-lesbians-name-protecting-children
ACPeds Website
Recognizes the fundamental mother-father family unit, within the context of marriage, to be the optimal setting for the development and nurturing of children and pledges to promote this unit.

Recognizes the unique value of every human life from the time of conception to natural death and pledges to promote research and clinical practice that provides for the healthiest outcome of the child from conception to adulthood.

Recognizes the physical and emotional benefits of sexual abstinence until marriage and pledges to promote this behavior as the ideal for adolescence.
Click to expand...
Source: https://www.acpeds.org/about-us

Additionally ACPeds is only estimated to have a few hundred members (Google-fu says between 200 and 500) versus the American Academy of Pediatrics, which has around 64,000 members (Source 1, 2)
 
Last edited:
Here's another story on the girls wrestling championship in Texas:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/spor...a3817ac21a5_story.html?utm_term=.15318049236f

IMO its a real shame that the Texas wrestling board didn't classify Mack Beggs as ineligible to wrestle in the girls division since she had been taking testosterone for two years.

I hope that eventually, Chelsea Sanchez, the girl who placed 2nd, is eventually declared the State Champion in the girls division.
 

Similar threads

Com Fox
  • Poll
Representation in media. Is it important?
Replies
21
Views
2K
TexRex
TexRex
VBR
An Exposé - Pushing Back on Grievance Studies
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
TexRex
TexRex
TexRex
Banned Books
2 3 4
Replies
111
Views
22K
Famine
Famine
VBR
  • Poll
PRIVATE POLL: Social Justice
2
Replies
41
Views
3K
UKMikey
UKMikey
Com Fox
  • Poll
Voting in Elections. Should it be Mandatory, Optional, Restricted, or none at all?
2
Replies
46
Views
3K
Danoff
Danoff

Latest Posts

Back