The witchhunt continues...

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Yes, sometimes people have to be forced to do the right thing. Why is this news?

No, it is forcing people to participate in a lie.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

How is this any different to laws against harassment, bullying, intimidation or threats? Deliberately and repeatedly misgendering someone is a form of harassment, and harassment shouldn't be tolerated in educational or workplace environments.

It is harassment to force people to say in public things that are untrue. This is straight out of 1984.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's the real problem at hand. How dare we desire, expect or even demand (sometimes) that we get equal treatment under the law? We truly are evil just for that!

Pretty soon they are be making outrageous demands as gay people did when they insisted that they too had the right to marry the person that they loved. The nerve!!


Okay, back to sanity. Though I am so tempted to find a way to use the phrase. "They are shoving their homosexuality down our throats" in a homoerotic fashion, but do I even need to?

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, it is forcing people to participate in a lie.

What lie? You will have to support your claim with evidence.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Is it unusual to enforce respectful conduct within such institutions? Even if you don't accept it as valid, is it really such a struggle to humor them for the sake of politeness rather than go out of your way to misgender them out of petty spite?

I am a white male, what if I went to HR tomorrow and demanded that I be referred to as a black male, because I feel like I am a black male. Is this ok, or is this objectively not true and should not be allowed? It is forcing people to participate in a lie.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Aside from the fact that not so long ago the person identified as just that. We are supposed to get amnesia over that part, I suppose. And... given the rate that the person has changed their identity over the last few years can we really expect this drama to end here? What's next for Dylan? At the current rate this person should be changing their identity again in a few months? What is next for this Incarnation of Superficiality?

Oh well you still deliberately misgensered her. Amd has this Dylan really changed her identity multiple times over the last few years? I never heard of Dylan before this Bud Light thing so you'll have to furnish the evidence (as I care no more or less for this person than everybody else I don't know).
Amd if you think it's superficial and a gay man doing a caracature of what she thinks a woman is then do lead by example and show us how a woman behaves amd presents herself.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am a white male, what if I went to HR tomorrow and demanded that I be referred to as a black male, because I feel like I am a black male. Is this ok, or is this objectively not true and should not be allowed? It is forcing people to participate in a lie.

Now you are using a strawman argument.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I am a white male, what if I went to HR tomorrow and demanded that I be referred to as a black male, because I feel like I am a black male. Is this ok, or is this objectively not true and should not be allowed? It is forcing people to participate in a lie.

I've forced no one.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

And currently all but one justice does not agree with the statements. To say justices can change their minds, well that can be said for any issue brought before the court.

And while that is true, it is also true that several Supreme Court Justices have changed their minds on what "settled law" and "a precedent" mean, just since their confirmation hearings. As I said, what's to stop them changing their minds on Obergefell?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Well I don't wish for free speech to be abridged, so I hope you're right. But my intuition is that it will backfire sooner rather than later. Only time will tell, sigh.

That gets said a lot. But after the fact amd there's no indications or evidence of it happening don't you think it's silly to say it's going to happen?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I am a white male, what if I went to HR tomorrow and demanded that I be referred to as a black male, because I feel like I am a black male. Is this ok, or is this objectively not true and should not be allowed? It is forcing people to participate in a lie.

But you would go to HR looking like you -- which I am betting does not resemble a black male.

On the other hand, if a person who genuinely cannot be distinguished from a man (with his clothes on, which is generally how we appear at work) went to HR and asked to be referred to as a "man," why would HR really object? Would it really be better to have the whole office call him "miss" and have everybody snicker from 9:00 to 5:00?

 

[sun rise]

IF they, too, are to have freedom of expression, I frankly don't think you can.

LGBTQ+ rights have been the result of more and more ordinary people coming to realize that the variations on the human, while not commonplace, are completely natural -- and also because, when they looked around, they occurred within their own communities and even families. If those ordinary people are cowed into silence, then there will certainly be a loss of some of the rights achieved.

And then we'll have to begin again.

When there's a massive cultural shift, people go crazy trying to stop it. Ultimately that's a failure.

And in fact we are in fact seeing a boycott war with people avoiding Florida causing losses there and people fleeing that repressive regime.

 

[icehorse]

Sure.

Your argument is based on false equivocation, by alleging that any instances of alleged bigotry are somehow unjustified. You make no attempt to parse justified from unjustified allegations of bigotry, or explain what may comprise both, you simply dismiss all claims of bigotry as being instances of people being chastised for "deviating from the script".

Thus, you avoid making an argument as to WHY certain allegations of bigotry may not be justified, and instead just get to paint them all with the same brush. Yet, by the same logic, you can dismiss literally ALL bigotry, including genuine bigotry.

I did nothing of the sort.

 

[icehorse]

That gets said a lot. But after the fact amd there's no indications or evidence of it happening don't you think it's silly to say it's going to happen?

Free speech is under constant assault, and sadly, sometimes it gets abridged.

Without truly free speech, everything else that's good about society will ultimately fall.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Free speech is under constant assault, and sadly, sometimes it gets abridged.

Without truly free speech, everything else that's good about society will ultimately fall.

And yet that just has not happened in places with hate speech laws.

 

[Kenny]

Now you are using a strawman argument.

No... . That is exactly what they are requiring people to do, participate in a lie

 

[Debater Slayer]

Free speech is under constant assault, [...]

From what I've observed in the last few years, most people I have seen make this exaggeration about freedom-index-topping countries—just because they can't freely impose their beliefs on others or harass them in professional settings—have never experienced what life is like for the average citizen in an actual dictatorship.

Try going to Saudi Arabia, China, or Iran without a powerful passport and see how things are. If you come back from that experiment still making the hyperbolic claim that free speech is "under constant assault" in Canada of all places, I'll send a million dollars to your PayPal.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Free speech is under constant assault, and sadly, sometimes it gets abridged.

Without truly free speech, everything else that's good about society will ultimately fall.

At this point we can say those claims are no different than conservative Christians insisting that no more school led prayer, allowing gay marriage, and promoting a secular state will destroy America, tear apart the moral fabric of society, and lead to bad things.
Or how they're always saying we live in the end times, except we never are and it's never happened.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

From what I've observed in the last few years, most people I have seen make this exaggeration about freedom-index-topping countries—just because they can't freely impose their beliefs on others or harass them in professional settings—have never experienced what life is like for the average citizen in an actual dictatorship.

Try going to Saudi Arabia, China, or Iran without a powerful passport and see how things are. If you come back from that experiment still making the hyperbolic claim that free speech is "under constant assault" in Canada of all places, I'll send a million dollars to your PayPal.

Winner.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Winner.

It reminds me of how some people were calling countries at or near the top of freedom indices "police states" because of lockdowns during the pandemic. That included Australia, the UK, and Germany—all democracies where those who instituted the lockdowns could have been voted out of office if the majority of people had wanted them out.

Some of those comments struck me as borderline insulting to people who have lived in actual police states. They show no realistic concept of what that life is like, let alone a realization of the fact that they most likely couldn't so openly protest it if they experienced it.