Are we going to admit Universities are producing thin-skinned people?

[Guest]

Hahaha, how come none of this stuff happened when I was at BCIT?  The only demos we got were on control systems.  No fair!

 

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-ubc-prof-who-denounced-u-of-t-colleague-in-gender-debate-has-skeletons-in-her-own-classroom

[Bonam]

3 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Hahaha, how come none of this stuff happened when I was at BCIT?  The only demos we got were on control systems.  No fair!

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-ubc-prof-who-denounced-u-of-t-colleague-in-gender-debate-has-skeletons-in-her-own-classroom

Hah, hardly a surprise. At least we can take heart that the majority of people in the comments still have some common sense. Perhaps the time of backlash against all the "progressive" identity politics hatred is at last starting? 

[OftenWrong]

Just another twisted dyke who hates all men. What a mess. These are the people who are teaching young folks in Universities these days?
Man things sure changed since I went to school.

[BC_chick]

5 hours ago, Bonam said:

Hah, hardly a surprise. At least we can take heart that the majority of people in the comments still have some common sense. Perhaps the time of backlash against all the "progressive" identity politics hatred is at last starting? 

The wrongdoings of this professor have nothing to do with being 'progressive'.  They are wrong and as you noted virtually nobody would defend them. 

 

[BC_chick]

9 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Hahaha, how come none of this stuff happened when I was at BCIT?  The only demos we got were on control systems.  No fair!

 

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-ubc-prof-who-denounced-u-of-t-colleague-in-gender-debate-has-skeletons-in-her-own-classroom

Apparently there was a similar whack job teaching the women's studies course in my university the year before I started my 1st year.

Needless to say, she was fired mid year.

 

[-1=e^ipi]

On 2016-11-22 at 1:54 AM, BC_chick said:

I would say that most people, no matter their views on the issue, would feel that people who have transitioned should have the respect to be called what they wish. 

Do you agree that there is an element of discrimination if a colleague or professor continues to use a different pronoun for a fully transitioned transgender person?

If you can agree that it's discriminatory (essentially it is belittling and no different than calling someone a racial slur within a professional environment), you can understand why it's inappropriate for US as a society to decide when a person has earned their pronoun. 

If you reject the notion all together that it's discriminatory to continue calling a MTF person a he, then you are the reason why we need such legislation in the first place.

 

I do not have the same position as Jordan Peterson's position, but I think you misunderstand Jordan Peterson's position.

 

We aren't talking about Peterson refusing to call an MTF person she. In fact Peterson is willing to call MTF people she, such as Theryn Meyer.

 

Peterson takes issue with using 'new' pronouns such as ver, xemself and thon. He also dislikes using 'they' as a singular pronoun.

Also, this doesn't even go into otherkin pronouns such as dragonself.

 

Now, personally I don't mind using new pronouns or using they as a singular pronoun. I created a thread on the topic over a year ago. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/24700-gender-neutral-english-and-french/

But in any case you are misrepresenting Peterson's position.

 

What I will say is that if we start having 30+ sets of singular third person pronouns then we are basically defeating the purpose of pronouns. The reason we use pronouns is to simplify language and make it easier to communicate. Having 30+ sets of pronouns starts to defeat this purpose and we might as well use eachother's names instead. If we just had 3 sets of singular person pronouns (masculine, feminine and neutral) or perhaps 4 (it/itself/its could be considered a 4th category if it cannot apply to humans and only inanimate objects) then that would seem reasonable to me. It would be extremely useful to decide on a preferred gender-neutral third person set of pronouns that can apply to people because then you would have a pronoun that could apply to non-binary people and also then you could have a pronoun that would be used for situations where the gender is indeterminant (as opposed to writing him/her, he/she all the time). The usage of they as singular seems to be the most popular option recently, due to it having historic usage, being a pre-existing pronoun, and due to it being already used sometimes as a singular pronoun colloquially. Of course, they isn't exactly optimal because it makes it more difficult to distinguish between singular and plural.

 

As for the 'my pronouns are not up for debate' group, I don't think this is representative of trans people or non-binary people. A lot of transpeople take a traditionalist view that everyone is either male or female and don't agree with non-binary people or their pronouns. Many non-binary people don't really give a damn about pronouns. And many non-binary people take the view that there should be a gender neutral option, but not 30+.

Edited November 26, 2016 by -1=e^ipi

[Guest]

School official violently walks out of a meeting and gets misogynoir all over the place.  Outrage ensues.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-incident-behind-ryerson-anti-racism-protests-hardly-black-and-white

I actually think some of these people are kidding.  I mean, they have to be, don't they?

[cybercoma]

Christie Blatchford commentary. I'm sure it's very factual.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, cybercoma said:

Christie Blatchford commentary. I'm sure it's very factual.

You think she made it up?  Doesn't she have editors?

I'd be outraged, but that would be misogyblatch.

Edited November 29, 2016 by bcsapper

[Bonam]

28 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I actually think some of these people are kidding.  I mean, they have to be, don't they?

No, they really aren't. They really are that brainwashed. 

[Bonam]

10 minutes ago, cybercoma said:

Christie Blatchford commentary. I'm sure it's very factual.

Weak, cybercoma. No defense of how the professor really is the embodiment of racism and "misogynoir"? No explanation of how his walking out of a meeting is indeed an act of "violence"? No statement about how they are justified in "refusing to allow this behavior to continue"?

The tide is turning, all the politics of identity and victimhood, virtue-signaling and race-shaming, will have to be re-examined by their proponents. People have had enough and all around the Western world refuse to stand for it any more. They'll even elect people like Trump if they think he champions the charge against "political correctness" now. They'll leave the European Union to reject it and send a message that they've had enough. All kinds of "far right" parties are surging towards greater popularity in Europe as a backlash against decades of this crap being forced down their throats. 

[cybercoma]

Nothing needs to be re-examined. There needs to be long-term violent backlash. That's the only solution.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, cybercoma said:

Nothing needs to be re-examined. There needs to be long-term violent backlash. That's the only solution.

Well, the guy did walk out of a meeting!  Not violent enough for you?

[cybercoma]

Blood in the streets.

[Guest]

Bring it on, I'm armed.

[TimG]

2 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Well, the guy did walk out of a meeting!  Not violent enough for you?

Walking away from conflict - now an act of violence! George Orwell could not do better.

[Bonam]

54 minutes ago, cybercoma said:

Blood in the streets.

Ah, the utopian progressive vision of our peaceful future world of racial harmony. 

[Argus]

12 minutes ago, Bonam said:

Ah, the utopian progressive vision of our peaceful future world of racial harmony. 

There is enormous self-righteousness in these people, and a fixation on ultimate goals which cares nothing for individual lives - much like all the Marxists and Communists in world history, who covered themselves in blood trying to reach utopia, and then it turned out they really just meant THEIR utopia, and not the people's.

[Bonam]

8 minutes ago, Argus said:

There is enormous self-righteousness in these people, and a fixation on ultimate goals which cares nothing for individual lives - much like all the Marxists and Communists in world history, who covered themselves in blood trying to reach utopia, and then it turned out they really just meant THEIR utopia, and not the people's.

Indeed. I've said before that the ideology of social justice is just as dangerous and potentially destructive as that of communism and fascism. They share a common disregard for individuals in favor of ideologically-motivated collective "good", and they share the desire to blame all evils found in society on a particular group of people. I only hope it can be relegated to the dustbin of history with less loss of life than it took for communism and fascism. 

Edited November 29, 2016 by Bonam

[cybercoma]

Right. My sarcastic comments are indicative of all progressive politics. This is pretty sad even for you guys.

[Bonam]

16 minutes ago, cybercoma said:

Right. My sarcastic comments are indicative of all progressive politics. This is pretty sad even for you guys.

With absurdity like that in the last linked article, it's hard to tell the sarcastic comments from the sincere ones. 

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, cybercoma said:

Right. My sarcastic comments are indicative of all progressive politics. This is pretty sad even for you guys.

So, I'm gonna have to stick to shooting trap?

[OftenWrong]

It's no joke, they're serious. As we saw during the aftermath of the US election, these people are potentially violent and the pressure is rising to the boiling point. It's only a matter of time some of the crazier ones start to act out on the threats being espoused by people like the girl on the CNN video ("there will be casualties on both sides"), and cybercoma. Because they hate our country. If there's one thing we've learned about domestic terrorism, it's to take threats seriously.

[Michael Hardner]

Quote

It's only a matter of time some of the crazier ones start to act out on the threats

Yes, I am hearing the same thing about the crazy Trump supporters.

Who is selling all this fear anyway ?  

[OftenWrong]

31 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Yes, I am hearing the same thing about the crazy Trump supporters.

Who is selling all this fear anyway ?  

The media feeds it 24/7. There's probably like 0.1 of 1 % or even less who are crazy enough to do something, but when they do, we all hear about it. It's enough to whip people into a frenzy of fear. A good sign that their turning is when there sentances become incoherent.