Postmodernism is alive, very influential, very destructive, and very opposed to critical thinking

[Nous]

@Nous Some selections from the Ontario Human Rights Commission policies (link below):



So if someone wants to be called "xer" and I call that person "her" I could well be committing "gender-based harrassment" by "reinforcing traditional heterosexual gender norms", correct?

Your "conclusion" here is a non sequitur from the premise of the statements at that OHRC webpage. Indeed, your "conclusion" here is contrary to the statements on the OHRC webpage about using language with hostile or bullying purposes or intent as grounds for "harassment" allegations. Your "conclusion" is contrary to the Dawson holding where it constituted discriminatory treatment for the police officer to refer to Dawson as "male" and by a male name despite knowing that she is a transgender woman (for whom it would be appropriate and hardly an expression of hostility or bullying to refer to as a female).

 

[icehorse]

Your "conclusion" here is a non sequitur from the premise of the statements at that OHRC webpage. Indeed, your "conclusion" here is contrary to the statements on the OHRC webpage about using language with hostile or bullying purposes or intent as grounds for "harassment" allegations. Your "conclusion" is contrary to the Dawson holding where it constituted discriminatory treatment for the police officer to refer to Dawson as "male" and by a male name despite knowing that she is a transgender woman (for whom it would be appropriate and hardly an expression of hostility or bullying to refer to as a female).

I'm not sure I'm understanding you here. Are you saying that there was a case in which a police officer was held to be guilty of discrimination because the officer used the wrong pronoun?

 

[Nous]

Are you saying that there was a case in which a police officer was held to be guilty of discrimination because the officer used the wrong pronoun?

No, I did not say or imply that. Using "the wrong pronoun" was not the basis of the discrimination finding by the British Columbia HR Tribunal Member in Dawson.

What I did say is that your "conclusion" (that "if someone wants to be called 'xer' and I call that person 'her' I could well be committing 'gender-based harrassment' by "reinforcing traditional heterosexual gender norms") is contrary to the Dawson holding where it constituted discriminatory treatment for the police officer to refer to Dawson as "male" and by a male name despite knowing that she is a transgender woman (for whom it would be appropriate and hardly an expression of hostility or bullying to refer to as a female).

BTW, note that the OHRC page you linked to was last updated in 2013, whereas the BCHR ruliing in Dawson was 2015.

 

[icehorse]

No, I did not say or imply that. Using "the wrong pronoun" was not the basis of the discrimination finding by the British Columbia HR Tribunal Member in Dawson.

What I did say is that your "conclusion" (that "if someone wants to be called 'xer' and I call that person 'her' I could well be committing 'gender-based harrassment' by "reinforcing traditional heterosexual gender norms") is contrary to the Dawson holding where it constituted discriminatory treatment for the police officer to refer to Dawson as "male" and by a male name despite knowing that she is a transgender woman (for whom it would be appropriate and hardly an expression of hostility or bullying to refer to as a female).

BTW, note that the OHRC page you linked to was last updated in 2013, whereas the BCHR ruliing in Dawson was 2015.

So your Dawson case doesn't prove or disprove my contention because - by your own explanation - it's a distinct case.