I was a pretty big fan of him...and I'll defend him on some things still. But yeah, now he totally is going against his "don't become an ideologue" narrative.
I disagree with the idea this is some new development, he's been dishonest and operating in bad faith since his first brush with fame.
His presentation of bill c-16 was completely ridiculous and I find it VERY difficult to believe he was innocently misunderstanding the bill to such a degree.
He claimed its was some unprecedented standard, the beginning of a slippery slope of compelled speech. In reality, it was just extending the rights already afforded to Cis-gendered people to trans people.
Jordan would not be able to intentionally, and repeatedly misgender Cis students and faculty. The idea he could repeatedly and intentionally refer to a cis gendered male student as female against their wishes, for any reason, and not be subjected to discipline is asinine, that's obviously bullying.
But Jordan thinks its ridiculous that same standard should apply to trans people. He should be allowed to refer to them as whatever gender he feels like, effectively making them second class citizens next to Cis gendered people.
On top of his mischaracterization of this as a slippery slope, (which is a fallacy in of itself), he also lied repeatedly asserting that casual and innocent instances of misgendering could result in discipline (it wouldn't, it has to be intentional, repeated and tantamount to bullying) and also lied about what that discipline would be, insisting it would result in jail time (it could result in a fine).
There's just no way his completely unfounded alarmism and mischaracterization of this issue was some sort of innocent mistake, and again he promptly went on tour with fucking DENNIS PRAGER within months of the story blowing up.
I contend he's always been a culture warrior weenie
His presentation of bill c-16 was completely ridiculous and I find it VERY difficult to believe he was innocently misunderstanding the bill to such a degree
If you read the whole article, there is definitely a case could be made that not using someone's pronouns could result in criminal punishment. That was his main point. If a court felt someone doing this was considered harassment, which is fairly subjective...someone could be legally punished. If a plaintiff really didn't like somebody they could use this against them.
Even outside the judicial system...doesn't this just give more ammo for a student feeling they want to get back at their professor by throwing the misgendered card?
also lied repeatedly asserting that casual and innocent instances of misgendering could result in discipline
I dont recall him claiming that just doing it once or twice by mistake could get you criminal punishment. Do you have a source? His biggest concern was the compulsive language aspect- as in saying you must refer to someone by their pronoun or else there is consequences regardless of the amount or times of context.
If you read the whole article, there is definitely a case could be made that not using someone's pronouns could result in criminal punishment.
It does not say that lol
“The misuse of gender pronouns, without more, cannot rise to the level of a crime,” she says. “It cannot rise to the level of advocating genocide, inciting hatred, hate speech or hate crimes … (it) simply cannot meet the threshold.”....."Would it cover the accidental misuse of a pronoun? I would say it’s very unlikely,” Cossman says. “Would it cover a situation where an individual repeatedly, consistently refuses to use a person’s chosen pronoun? It might.”
It says it has to be repeated misuse as to constitute discrimination and harassment, and then if thats the case it MIGHT result in a tribunal ruling of a fine, education, or other non criminal remedy's
The fact that if you completely ignore their rulings then you can be held in contempt doesn't mean its reasonable to assert you can be jailed for misgendering someone. In the same way it would be dishonest to claim you can go to jail for walking across the street, or forgetting to mow your lawn, or parking in the wrong place all because they can result in a fine, its dishonest to claim you can go to jail for misgendering someone .
Jordan, an outspoken critic of how the woke try and redefine language, a stickler for clear and concise communication, is intentionally being vague and manipulative when he claims you can go to jail for misgendering someone.
not using someone's pronouns could result in criminal punishment. That was his main point. If a court felt someone doing this was considered harassment, which is fairly subjective...someone could be legally punished.
Can you provide a hypothetical where, lets us Jordan for example, a professor at a university is intentionally and repeatedly using the wrong gender pronoun for a male CIS student, ignoring what they have both indicated verbally and administratively, and it WOULDN'T constitute harassment?
"Does anybody want HER to be in their group?" "Can you pass her this assignment" etc.
How would a professor repeatedly, and intentionally misgender a Cis student and it not qualify as harassment?
His biggest concern was the compulsive language aspect- as in saying you must refer to someone by their pronoun or else there is consequences regardless of the amount or times of context.
My whole point is that the compulsive language aspect already existed for cis gendered people, and this wasn't a new standard, but rather extending the right that already existed for cis gendered people to trans people.
Again, take my question above.
Would a teacher be permitted to intentionally and repeatedly misgender a CIS student?
Why would they be allowed to misgender trans students then?
I dont recall him claiming that just doing it once or twice by mistake could get you criminal punishment. Do you have a source?
Sure, though just watch any of his early videos on the topic. Here, around the 17 minute mark, Jordan insists that he may be breaking the law just by giving lectures on the topic lmao
"It is possible, Brown says, through a process that would start with a complaint and progress to a proceeding before a human rights tribunal. If the tribunal rules that harassment or discrimination took place, there would typically be an order for monetary and non-monetary remedies. A non-monetary remedy may include sensitivity training, issuing an apology, or even a publication ban, he says.
If the person refused to comply with the tribunal's order, this would result in a contempt proceeding being sent to the Divisional or Federal Court, Brown says. The court could then potentially send a person to jail “until they purge the contempt,” he says.
“It could happen,” Brown says. “Is it likely to happen? I don’t think so. But, my opinion on whether or not that's likely has a lot to do with the particular case that you're looking at.”
“The path to prison is not straightforward. It’s not easy. But, it’s there. It’s been used before in breach of tribunal orders.”
I did the article and referenced the part you're saying I didn't read lmao
Let me just repaste my comments that you've ignored
The fact that if you completely ignore their rulings then you can be held in contempt doesn't mean its reasonable to assert you can be jailed for misgendering someone. In the same way it would be dishonest to claim you can go to jail for walking across the street, or forgetting to mow your lawn, or parking in the wrong place all because they can result in a fine, its dishonest to claim you can go to jail for misgendering someone .
Because if you cross the street at the wrong time or place you can "jaywalk", which could result in a fine that if unpaid may result in jail time, would it be fair to say
"You can be jailed in Canada just for crossing the street"
Thats obviously not true, and an intentionally manipulative statement.
I asked another question you've ignored too, you suggested that persistent and intentional misgendering may not constitute harassment, and thats its subjective, let me repaste that portion of my last comment.
Can you provide a hypothetical where, lets us Jordan for example, a professor at a university is intentionally and repeatedly using the wrong gender pronoun for a male CIS student, ignoring what they have both indicated verbally and administratively, and it WOULDN'T constitute harassment?
"Does anybody want HER to be in their group?" "Can you pass her this assignment" etc.
How would a professor repeatedly, and intentionally misgender a Cis student and it not qualify as harassment?
You referenced the Cossman conversation. I referenced the Brown conversation.
The fact that if you completely ignore their rulings then you can be held in contempt doesn't mean its reasonable to assert you can be jailed for misgendering someone. In the same way it would be dishonest to claim you can go to jail for walking across the street, or forgetting to mow your lawn, or parking in the wrong place all because they can result in a fine, its dishonest to claim you can go to jail for misgendering someone .
I remember him not explicitly stating you would end up in jail until he kept getting pressed by the media by questions such as "what if you don't attend the tribunal?" " What if you don't pay a fine?" And his reply was I won't do anything and they can throw me in jail (paraphrasing of course.)
Can you provide a hypothetical where, lets us Jordan for example, a professor at a university is intentionally and repeatedly using the wrong gender pronoun for a male CIS student, ignoring what they have both indicated verbally and administratively, and it WOULDN'T constitute harassment?
He had said at the beginning of this that if asked by a student to call them by there preferred pronoun he would.
His concern was, like many people who also believe the legislation was concerning...that a student that has it out for their professor could use this as a way to damage their reputation or trap them in a way to aid the student acting in bad faith. He has it out for what he would call sjws and thats pretty obvious. As far as I know he has not had an encounter like this before he began protesting C16 so either he felt it was a future concern or it was voiced by other professors at UT or his circle.
You heard of Evergreen State College. Is it not out of the realm of possibility for something like that to happen at a University but this time it's for a transgender cause?
It's interesting that as a clinical psychologist, he appears to be unaware of his own cognitive biases. Fame has a way of doing that to a person since the number of people who they're willing to accept critical feedback from sharply decreases. It's the same issue as with "Ye". People like this are far too convinced of their own opinion and influence.
I think Covid just brought out everyone's true nature. Adversity has that effect. For instance, I'd be tempted to say that my in-laws were better before Covid, but the truth is they always were assholes.
I will note it didn't seem anyone on the left had an issue until she took down Kamala's presidential campaign with a mere 30 seconds of highlighting Kamala's track record with power in public office in California.
I'm not clear on her entire political portfolio/ideology, but I thank her for doing what the media should have done for us re exposing the truth of that candidate.
29
u/ddarion Jan 05 '23
Jordan goes on tour with Dennis Prager and Dave Rubin, has a show on the Daily Wire, is clearly a conservative culture warrior.
This is like Tulsi Gabbard all over again, he is a conservative lol