My claim was that law professors, the Canadian Bar Association, legislators themselves and experts in discrimination law have all spoken out against his interpretation. I have provided you with sources backing up all of those. Let's not starting shifting the goalposts by dismissing these as "regurgitated articles". The fact that you consider official press releases by the national Bar Association and literal transcripts from parliamentary debates involving the legislators themselves as "regurgitated" is insane and reveals your bias on the topic.
Maybe you can't, but I definitely can remember Peterson actually saying that and putting up a huge narrative of how misgendering could land us in jail by "compelled speech". No, I don't care enough to go back and sift through the man's ramblings from years ago.
And please leave that kind of closing rhetoric in the anti-fact cesspool that is t_D. We're not talking about his frustration. We're talking about him peddling blatant lies that actual experts have refuted time and time again/ "The field of science" is also what has brought us better insights in gender, so please don't pretend you care about that when you so blatantly ignore actual research on the topic.
I've provided you sources for every one of my claims. Peterson was dead wrong and many actual experts on the topic completely refuted his misleading and inaccurate claims. Nothing more has to be said.
My claim was that law professors, the Canadian Bar Association, legislators themselves and experts in discrimination law have all spoken out against his interpretation.
Yeah, only using one actual paper though to disprove JP's work. The other articles that mention some professors can be easily bought off as partisan hacks. Their words have no meaning or credibility as a consequence. Unless of course they have a scientific paper to refer to. Or at least some research the way JP often references to in his speeches and lectures "citing" examples.
Also, the articles you share don't answer Peterson's accusations. Because, the often claim about him goes accordingly: "Peterson argues he would refuse to use gender-neutral pronouns if requested by a non-binary student.
Whether or not he should refuse, let's say if he did, then based on the information in C-16 according to the information from the professors you're sharing, it would not be a hate crime. Would it be discrimination, or harassment then?
What happens if he doesn't pay the fine? If he doesn't accept training? Will they take his license, criminalize his business, and yes ultimately they throw him in jail? These are JP's legitimate reasons of concerns.
The fact that you consider official press releases by the national Bar Association and literal transcripts from parliamentary debates involving the legislators themselves as "regurgitated" is insane and reveals your bias on the topic.......
I've provided you sources for every one of my claims. Peterson was dead wrong and many actual experts on the topic completely refuted his misleading and inaccurate claims. Nothing more has to be said.
Nope, it demonstrates your uncritical thinking. Take for example, the National Bar Association is America's oldest and largest national network of predominantly "African-American" attorneys and judges. Not sure why they have any more authority than non-African American attorneys and judges.
By the way, here is an official Senate hearing about C-16 with Peterson joining it for some further information on his position: 2017/05/17: Senate hearing on Bill C16
Last but not least. Tenured university professors, like Jordan Peters, are not just any employee for a reason. The role of interrogating ideas is often highly controversial, but it is necessary to make progress. Many, if not most, of today's social and scientific principles were controversial and even offensive at one point.
We cannot make progress if we can't safely do that job without fear of reprisal. Fining, losing a license, and mandatory "training" that is an indoctrination into the very thing that you are questioning are exactly the kinds of intimidating reprisals that create the chilling effects that "tenure" exist to avoid.
2
u/spam4name Dec 12 '19
My claim was that law professors, the Canadian Bar Association, legislators themselves and experts in discrimination law have all spoken out against his interpretation. I have provided you with sources backing up all of those. Let's not starting shifting the goalposts by dismissing these as "regurgitated articles". The fact that you consider official press releases by the national Bar Association and literal transcripts from parliamentary debates involving the legislators themselves as "regurgitated" is insane and reveals your bias on the topic.
Maybe you can't, but I definitely can remember Peterson actually saying that and putting up a huge narrative of how misgendering could land us in jail by "compelled speech". No, I don't care enough to go back and sift through the man's ramblings from years ago.
And please leave that kind of closing rhetoric in the anti-fact cesspool that is t_D. We're not talking about his frustration. We're talking about him peddling blatant lies that actual experts have refuted time and time again/ "The field of science" is also what has brought us better insights in gender, so please don't pretend you care about that when you so blatantly ignore actual research on the topic.
I've provided you sources for every one of my claims. Peterson was dead wrong and many actual experts on the topic completely refuted his misleading and inaccurate claims. Nothing more has to be said.