Lesbian in Vancouver CHRC

[JerrySeinfeld]

I am relaxed, Jerry. If at any time it appears to the contrary, it is because I have had to wipe your frothing spittle off my face because you cannot keep it cool.

What are you talking about?

It's your side having a fit and running off to the teache...er...government.

My guys are just makin' jokes and wanna be free to do so.

[Oleg Bach]

In Vancouver, a stand up comic made some onstage comments toward a heckling Lesbian.

He is now facing a Canadian Human Rights tribunal - at no expense to the complainant and at full expense to him.

Video of his account of the events.

Link to story in Vancouver Sun

Is this kind of censorship/witch hunt OK in a free society?

Guy Earle....looked at the comdians pic...I see why the lesbian heckled him --- the comedian looks like a woman - he takes after his mother - He is a woman with a penis --- a hetro sexual with the face and mind of a female...This must have really burned up and infuriated the lesbian - too look at this guy - and desperately want him - and know he was a man drove her finking nuts...so now this man woman has to be dragged before a tribunal because a frustrated lesbian hates him because she loves him --------human beings as so complex - she should have asked him out instead of heckling him ---besides - I am sure the male comedian has a very substantial clitoris...

[noahbody]

But, if you are a stuntman in a boxing movie, playing a boxer in the ring, there is also a possibility you will be punched in the face.

And the stupidest analogy ever award goes to....

In the second case, he is only supposed to make it look like he is punching you in the face, though he may misjudge and hit you harder than he ought.

When you heckle a comedian, you're saying "Give me your best shot." If you can't take it, don't sit in the front row and don't heckle.

[JerrySeinfeld]

When you heckle a comedian, you're saying "Give me your best shot." If you can't take it, don't sit in the front row and don't heckle.

And really, that's the whole thing in a nuteshell.

In Canada we have a judicial body which can actually make GOING TO A COMEDY SHOW less fun.

The last bastion. The only place left where you can actually speak your mind and make fun of people. Gone.

Because of the PC police.

Tragic, seriously.

[Oleg Bach]

When a man hater - has power of his magnitude - it is akin to racism - it's like a black man being punished for daring to speak to a white woman - how very un-far we have come.

[myata]

These commissions must go. The only real issue is the practical resort to legal action in case of actual discrimination. Society in general should be able to care of this kind of issues.

[Oleg Bach]

These commissions must go. The only real issue is the practical resort to legal action in case of actual discrimination. Society in general should be able to care of this kind of issues.

The tribunal should question the lesbian under oath-- and ask her one simple question --- to see if she is a healthy balanced human being...eg. "Do you hate males?" - If the answer is an affirmation of contempt and spite for males --- then she should be brought up before the tribunal also and dealt with as they would an anti-semite or any common racist...I am sure she perjur herself.

[JerrySeinfeld]

These commissions must go. The only real issue is the practical resort to legal action in case of actual discrimination. Society in general should be able to care of this kind of issues.

...and the criminal courts deal with hate speech. so what is the point of these kangaroo courts?

[JerrySeinfeld]

The tribunal should question the lesbian under oath-- and ask her one simple question --- to see if she is a healthy balanced human being...eg. "Do you hate males?" - If the answer is an affirmation of contempt and spite for males --- then she should be brought up before the tribunal also and dealt with as they would an anti-semite or any common racist...I am sure she perjur herself.

I know I said Gay is wierd. But LESBIAN? That's a whole other category of weird.

When I see Lesbians - the butch type, it's just freaky. It's a freak show.

Lots of Lesbians are man-hating fat uglies who struck out in the hetero world. But a few actually do prefer women as their first choice.

Edited June 19, 2009 by JerrySeinfeld

[Oleg Bach]

I know I said Gay is wierd. But LESBIAN? That's a whole other category of weird.

When I see Lesbians - the butch type, it's just freaky. It's a freak show.

Lots of Lesbians are man-hating fat uglies who struck out in the hetero world. But a few actually do prefer women as their first choice.

My point was that the comedian looks exactly like a woman...that may have confused her. I have always found lesbians who walk like men kind of facinating...must be the homo in me..I mean the lesbians that you look at closely and see they are beautiful powerful woman...I really don't think that they hate men for the most part - they just don't like being less than a man - and a woman does not have to be less - my first love could ride a horse like a lunitic - drive a car like a pro - and drink with the best of them - she was tom boyish - but what a very interesting character - I loved her.

[Remiel]

And the stupidest analogy ever award goes to....

How could you possibly be brave enough to issue such a pathetic response and yet not be brave enough to name your subject?

[Remiel]

I know I said Gay is wierd. But LESBIAN? That's a whole other category of weird.

When I see Lesbians - the butch type, it's just freaky. It's a freak show.

Lots of Lesbians are man-hating fat uglies who struck out in the hetero world. But a few actually do prefer women as their first choice.

How could I possibly doubt it when you tell me when you have a degree, a business degree at that, when you make such ingenious remarks as this?

[JerrySeinfeld]

How could I possibly doubt it when you tell me when you have a degree, a business degree at that, when you make such ingenious remarks as this?

i was educated once and it took me years to get over it

[Oleg Bach]

i was educated once and it took me years to get over it

Mark Twain, said of his father..." he was a dumbie---when I was fifteen he made no sense - now that I am thirty, I am amazed how much he has learned in fifteen years.

[Oleg Bach]

i was educated once and it took me years to get over it

Exactly - I just want to be five again - I was frinking brilliant ----to undo what the world and it's faulty systems have done in the tainting of the perfect young brain we are all granted in the begining ---there was light. We dim as we learn all that must be forgotten in order to concieve and think.

[tango]

I know I said Gay is wierd. But LESBIAN? That's a whole other category of weird.

When I see Lesbians - the butch type, it's just freaky. It's a freak show.

Lots of Lesbians are man-hating fat uglies who struck out in the hetero world. But a few actually do prefer women as their first choice.

Are you too young to be civil?

Or too old?

Just curious.

In my world, your rank in the food chain is about the same as Obama's dead fly!

[Argus]

I don't know if comedy that targets minorities is illegal.

However, I do know it is offensive and not very funny.

There is no one category of what is or isn't funny to everyone. Funny is funny to me, regardless of the subject, however morbid or politically incorrect.

Of course, the CHRC is not noted for a sense of humour.

[Tawasakm]

I don't understand the uniformity of such laws. I don't, for example, see a workplace as being the same as an x rated comedy club. What is appropriate behaviour in one may not be appropriate in another. I think we expect different standards of behaviour and control in a school than in a pub. Different situations, to some extent, must surely engender variations in standards. If a comedian was in a restaurant eating a meal and mouthed off this way it is a completely different thing to doing so in response to hecklers in an x rated comedy venue. Is it distateful? Maybe it is but I am not convinced it should be subject to modification or state oversight.

I firmly believe anti discrimantion and anti hate speech laws are necessary. I also firmly believe that a one size fits all approach will merely create different kinds of inequities. In different setting the rules, in my view, should shift and the laws should in some way seek to reflect this.

My two cents.

[Argus]

The problem now lies with the fact that different rights often clash, leading to difficulties...at least the way I understand things.

I understand where you would come to that conclusion, but it is an erroneous conclusion. One of the major reasons for your lack of underestanding is the expansive use of the term "human right". There are basic human rights which are enshrined in various constitutions around the world, among them, speech, religion, assembly, the press, etc.

The "human rights industry" in Canada and other western nations is not concerned with any of these basic human rights. They are all guaranteed and thus require no particular degree of advocacy. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association is probably the major organization in Canada concerned with actual Human Rights, advocating and lobbying on behalf of them.

The name Human Rights Commission, is a misnomer, as none of them are actually concerned with what are commonly referred to as Human Rights or civil liberties. For the most part, they concern themselves with organizations, government or non-government, percieved to be giving preferential treatment to one group or another, or to be offending one group or another on the basis of some racial, sexual, gender or religious characteristic. Lately they have expanded their interest to statements made by individuals which offend one group or another.

But terming any of these as "human rights" as in "the comedian violated my human rights by insulting my lesbianism" is rather a ludicrous stretch of the term "human right", as was the case where the Muslims claimed that Macleans violated their "rights" by printing a story they didn't like, or when some gay guy charged some priest with violatating his "human rights" by writing a letter to the editor which offended him. Comparing the importance of these "offense" violations to human rights is akin to comparing a rowboat to an ocean liner. And the notion that "offensive" speech or conduct should trump a basic human right is bizarre in the extreme, and only possible because the human rights industry has done its best to muddy the waters and make their complaints and activities seem far and away more important than is the actual case.

In short - a cop sticking a cattle prod up your ass is a violation of your human rights. The cop calling you a fag or nigger is merely offensive.

[Smallc]

In short - a cop sticking a cattle prod up your ass is a violation of your human rights. The cop calling you a fag or nigger is merely offensive.

No, actually it could be construed as hate....it isn't up to you alone to define what a right is. But those aren't the clashes of rights that I'm talking about. I'm talking about things like polygamy, where freedom of religion and freedom of equality collide.

[Argus]

No, actually it could be construed as hate...

Hate is a human emotion, not a crime.

.it isn't up to you alone to define what a right is.

I am using the standard terms which exist throughout the world and throughout world history.

But those aren't the clashes of rights that I'm talking about. I'm talking about things like polygamy, where freedom of religion and freedom of equality collide.

There is no such thing as "freedom of equality". Polygamy is a situation where a tiny minority of people choose to practice one aspect of their religion which has long been made illegal by the society in which they chose to live. But in this case the state is not banning or interfering with how these people worship, but with their actions in their private lives.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Any government appointed body charged with arbitrarily deciding what is and what is not acceptabel speech must be abolished.

It's orwellian, dictatorial, anti-liberty and just plain wrong.

[Remiel]

Any government appointed body charged with arbitrarily deciding what is and what is not acceptabel speech must be abolished.

It's orwellian, dictatorial, anti-liberty and just plain wrong.

So what about when it is not arbitrary?

[JerrySeinfeld]

So what about when it is not arbitrary?

Do your homework.

Freedom of expression IS a human right. You can look it up in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights.

"Not being offended" is NOT a human right.

Any infringement upon freedom of expression is a VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, and as such any activity by the Canadian Human Rights Commission under section 13 of their code (regulating expression), under the guise of PROTECTING human rights, is actually in VIOLATION of human rights.

Edited June 22, 2009 by JerrySeinfeld

[Remiel]

Just because you are absolutely free to carry a gun does not mean you are absolutely free to shoot people.