Education Over Expulsion At Dalhousie

WestCoastRunner · January 9, 2015

Rape jokes might be offensive to you, and Mohammed jokes are offensive to Muslims. Neither one is a valid reason to do anything but calm the heck down and realize that society has jokes you might not like.

Sure, all those women who are rape attack victims should just calm down and mark it up to 'freedom of speech/action'. Just the calm the heck down, you silly women!

Do you even listen to yourself from time to time and contemplate your place in society.

Edited January 9, 2015 by WestCoastRunner

kimmy · January 9, 2015

Both cases are examples of thin skinned zealots demanding excessive responses to rude words. Supporting the expulsion of students and the destruction of their careers is not that different from Muslims gunning down people. In both cases the intent is to extract vengeance on people who offend them. It is not about justice. It is about intimidation with the intent to scare others into silence.

People have the right to free speech, but they're not immune from the consequences of things they say.

What's wrong with putting a name to the guy who talked about chloroforming and raping his classmate? Why not make that information available and let people decide for themselves whether they want that guy administering drugs to them. Personally, I wouldn't want to go under anesthesia with Dr Bill Cosby DDS, but other people might not see a problem. Why not let people have the information and decide for themselves?

-k

WestCoastRunner · January 9, 2015

No, I refused to acknowledge the validity of your point. Being "scared to rock a boat" is a lame excuse for letting "sexual predators" go undetected and having other women be victimized by them in the future. If someone is doing something inappropriate, nip it in the bud, anything else is cowardly and selfish. Why do you expect men to take all the responsibility for everything, while women can't even be expected to report misconduct when they see it?

If an employee is being sexually harrassed at a workplace, the last thing they are concerned with is preventing other victims from being harrassed. You know absolutely nothing about sexual harrasment in the workplace and your response indicates so.

Bonam · January 9, 2015

Sure, all those women who are rape attack victims should just calm down and mark it up to 'freedom of speech/action'. Just the calm the heck down, you silly women!

Nope, that's not what I said at all.

I just said that people who are victims of harassment, violence, and certainly rape should report these to the proper authorities and make sure the perpetrators are properly punished (for some reason you disagree with this statement).

It is only disagreeable speech (i.e. facebook posts) that people should calm the heck down about, not rape.

The fact that you conflate the two is quite puzzling. You are aware there is a difference, are you not?

WestCoastRunner · January 9, 2015

People have the right to free speech, but they're not immune from the consequences of things they say.

What's wrong with putting a name to the guy who talked about chloroforming and raping his classmate? Why not make that information available and let people decide for themselves whether they want that guy administering drugs to them. Personally, I wouldn't want to go under anesthesia with Dr Bill Cosby DDS, but other people might not see a problem. Why not let people have the information and decide for themselves?

-k

This is exactly what folks are stating. Let's find out who these students are and let the public decide if they want their families to be treated by them. I think this could be a fair solution to the problem. Let's send out a message with our wallets.

WestCoastRunner · January 9, 2015

Nope, that's not what I said at all.

I just said that people who are victims of harassment, violence, and certainly rape should report these to the proper authorities and make sure the perpetrators are properly punished (for some reason you disagree with this statement).

It is only disagreeable speech (i.e. facebook posts) that people should calm the heck down about, not rape.

The fact that you conflate the two is quite puzzling. You are aware there is a difference, are you not?

The fb posts are about violent rape threats. What is it you don't get?

Bonam · January 9, 2015

If an employee is being sexually harrassed at a workplace, the last thing they are concerned with is preventing other victims from being harrassed. You know absolutely nothing about sexual harrasment in the workplace and your response indicates so.

Why is that the last thing they are concerned with? If I get assaulted, my first priority would probably be getting out of the situation alive and not permanently injured, second would be to make sure the person who did it is locked up so they can't do it again, to me or to anyone else. In the case of workplace sexual harassment, survival isn't really an issue, so making sure it doesn't happen any more should be priority #1. Or are you saying that a lot of women prefer to continue to work in an environment where they are sexually harassed rather than doing something about it?

TimG · January 9, 2015

Sure, all those women who are rape attack victims should just calm down and mark it up to 'freedom of speech/action'. Just the calm the heck down, you silly women!

Free speech is a two way street. People most definitely have the right to express outrage at the comments. All I am saying is the people demanding an institutional lynching of all of the people involved whether they posted offensive comments or were merely passive participants are not really morally different from Muslims gunning down people for being associated with a magazine that published offensive cartoons.

Bonam · January 9, 2015

The fb posts are about violent rape threats.

If the posts contain anything criminal, the people in question should be tried in a court of law. If they don't contain anything criminal, then it's a matter of speech.

Edited January 9, 2015 by Bonam

WestCoastRunner · January 9, 2015

Free speech is a two way street. People most definitely have the right to express outrage at the comments. All I am saying is the people demanding an institutional lynching of all of the people involved whether they posted offensive comments or were merely passive participants are not really morally different from Muslims gunning down people for being associated with a magazine that published offensive cartoons.

I can't even begin to respond to this.

WestCoastRunner · January 9, 2015

If the posts contain anything criminal, the people in question should be tried in a court of law. If they don't contain anything criminal, then it's a matter of speech.

Can you offer anything original to this thread?

WestCoastRunner · January 9, 2015

Why is that the last thing they are concerned with? If I get assaulted, my first priority would probably be getting out of the situation alive and not permanently injured, second would be to make sure the person who did it is locked up so they can't do it again, to me or to anyone else. In the case of workplace sexual harassment, survival isn't really an issue, so making sure it doesn't happen any more should be priority #1. Or are you saying that a lot of women prefer to continue to work in an environment where they are sexually harassed rather than doing something about it?

A lot of women would prefer to earn a living.

Bonam · January 9, 2015

Can you offer anything original to this thread?

Before new ideas can be explored, there needs to be some kind of common framework regarding the most basic ones. That is not yet present in this thread.

TimG · January 9, 2015

People have the right to free speech, but they're not immune from the consequences of things they say.

IOW you are saying the people at the French magazine are to blame for their deaths because they published offensive things. Consequences should be proportionate to the offense. Murder, institutional lynching are simply not proportionate responses to rude statements.

Personally, I wouldn't want to go under anesthesia with Dr Bill Cosby DDS, but other people might not see a problem. Why not let people have the information and decide for themselves?

That would be closer to a proportionate response. Kicking them out of school would not be proportionate. Edited January 9, 2015 by TimG

Bonam · January 9, 2015

A lot of women would prefer to earn a living.

So it's worth subjecting oneself to continued sexual harassment in order to avoid the hassle of maybe (if the complaint goes extraordinarily poorly) looking for a new job?

kimmy · January 9, 2015

If the posts contain anything criminal, the people in question should be tried in a court of law. If they don't contain anything criminal, then it's a matter of speech.

People have the right to free speech, but they don't have the right to be students at a school of dentistry, or to be licensed by provincial dentistry boards (just to pick two examples.)

You have the right to call somebody a fat-ass, but if you work at my McKimmy's restaurant and you're calling my customers fat-asses, you're going to be out of a job real quick. If you work at CBC and you creating an environment where your female co-workers are terrified of you, you'll probably get fired (unless you're Jian Ghomeshi, in which case people will cover for you.) If you go to work or school and create a hostile environment for someone, you might not work or study there for long, freedom of speech or not.

-k

WestCoastRunner · January 9, 2015

Consequences should be proportionate to the offense. Murder, institutional lynching are simply not proportionate responses to rude statements.

Again, you are associating these fb posts with rude statements when in fact they aren't. They are violent threats against their female colleagues. Why do you continue to deny this?

WestCoastRunner · January 9, 2015

So it's worth subjecting oneself to continued sexual harassment in order to avoid the hassle of maybe (if the complaint goes extraordinarily poorly) looking for a new job?

You are a man, you have no right to judge what a woman experiences when they are subjected to sexual harrassment on the job (especially if they are a single parent). There are many complexities and the fact you can't understand it means we have a long way to go to educate society on this issue.

Edited January 9, 2015 by WestCoastRunner

kimmy · January 9, 2015

IOW you are saying the people at the French magazine are to blame for their deaths because they published offensive things.

That's a bullshit response, and you know it.

I'm not talking about criminal reprisals, I'm talking about people responding in completely legal ways to speech they disagree with.

"I'm not going to vote for that politician."

"That guy is no longer going to represent our political party in this riding."

"I'm firing that guy as my product spokesman."

"I'm not doing business with that company anymore."

I think you knew exactly what I meant and bringing martyred cartoonists into this is a real punk-ass move, IMO.

IOW you are saying the people at the French magazine are to blame for their deaths because they published offensive things. Consequences should be proportionate to the offense. Murder, institutional lynching are simply not proportionate responses to rude statements.

LOL, and WTF is "institutional lynching"?

-k

TimG · January 9, 2015

People have the right to free speech, but they don't have the right to be students at a school of dentistry, or to be licensed by provincial dentistry boards (just to pick two examples.)

Well, you can't create new rules and retroactively apply them. If there are existing rules that would immediately disqualify someone for making rude statements then those students should face the consequences. I suspect that such rules don't exist because if they did they would have been applied already. Edited January 9, 2015 by TimG

TimG · January 9, 2015

I'm not talking about criminal reprisals, I'm talking about people responding in completely legal ways to speech they disagree with.

We are talking about people demanding that a school expel students without any due process to determine who said what. I don't care if it is legal - it is immoral and wrong. Edited January 9, 2015 by TimG

Bonam · January 9, 2015

You are a man, you have no right to judge what a woman experiences when they are subjected to sexual harrassment on the job (especially if they are a single parent).

Ah I see, back to the men are stupid and can't understand anything schtick. Guess what, that whole freedom of speech thing... it includes the right for me to comment on this issue, even though I'm one of these man-things.

WestCoastRunner · January 9, 2015

Well, you can't create new rules and retroactively apply them. If there are existing rules that would immediately disqualify someone for making rude statements then those students should face the consequences. I suspect that such rules don't exist because if they did they would have been applied already.

I suspect that social media is hitting a lot of organizations out of left field and they better grab it and deal with it.

kimmy · January 9, 2015

Well, you can't create new rules and retroactively apply them. If there are existing rules that would immediately disqualify someone for making rude statements then those students should face the consequences. I suspect that such rules don't exist because if they did they would have been applied already.

I don't have a Dalhousie student handbook nearby, but I can guaran-damn-tee that it contains a code of student conduct that forbids creating a hostile or threatening environment for fellow students.

And the Alberta College of Dentists says this:

“As outlined by the Health Professions Act, all applicants for registration in Alberta must supply evidence of having good character and reputation by submitting any requested materials.”

-k

WestCoastRunner · January 9, 2015

Ah I see, back to the men are stupid and can't understand anything schtick. Guess what, that whole freedom of speech thing... it includes the right for me to comment on this issue, even though I'm one of these man-things.

I don't recall calling men stupid. I did say that we have a long way to go in educating men as to the barriers that women face in the workforce. Something to that effect anyway.