Free speech or hate speech??

[Videodrome]

But as a married guy with a kid.......not sure 'incel' fits in describing him; nor do the views he promotes come off as anti-female or misogynist..........

Not saying he is an incel, as he is a grandpa. Did you see him go on Rogan's podcast and discuss the "enforced monogamy" concept?

I think Peterson has grown much bigger than the fringe incel community really...like you are telling me the tens millions of people who watched his videos are incels including me who is a female lol?

A woman coined the term in the 90's, though she had no idea it would lead to killing sprees. But that is off topic.

Also, Lindsey Shepherd might deny it, but having gone on white supremacist podcasts and such, how is it wrong to call her a white nationalist?

 

[Jasmine18]

I think you have to understand that the Lindsay Case was likely one of the biggest talked about issues from a Canadian Uni a few years ago (newspapers really got into a lot) so I think it was for the best as I think it made a lot of Universities look at how they should handle such issues now for the best.


Like I am not arguing "The Ward is protected speech" because it's not.

I think we need to have a space that balances the sharing of ideas even ones that we dont like and then also not having people publicly engage in hate speech.

 

[Northern Light]

Not saying he is an incel, as he is a grandpa. Did you see him go on Rogan's podcast and discuss the "enforced monogamy" concept?

No, i have not. Perhaps I should.

 

[Jasmine18]

Not saying he is an incel, as he is a grandpa. Did you see him go on Rogan's podcast and discuss the "enforced monogamy" concept?



A woman coined the term in the 90's, though she had no idea it would lead to killing sprees. But that is off topic.

Also, Lindsey Shepherd might deny it, but having gone on white supremacist podcasts and such, how is it wrong to call her a white nationalist?

That was funny as I think Peterson realized he scored an own goal on himself as he pushing for sexual marxism on people.

From what I get his concept of enforced monogamy is that societal pressures sort of create an idea of enforced monogamy as polygamy is banned and cheating is looked own upon harshly.

The problem I had with his concept is that he thinks enforced monogamy is something women should follow which i found to be quite backwards lol

7:50 is jokes lol

Thing is I notice a lot of my male friends and younger cousins watch Peterson clips on Youtube and listen to his podcast on Joe Rogan (and they are not incels) so I feel Peterson while flawed sort of has a huge market to himself and is not going anywhere.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

There's no question that the way Lindsay Shepherd's case was handled (in the first instance) was weird, unreasonable and unacceptable.

But it was also relatively anomalous; to use that example and suggest a widespread issue is reaching.

Also she never faced jail (which is what free speech protection is supposed to prevent); she faced a reprimand of sorts.

One I think was ill-advised...........and motivated by reasons never clear to me............

Though I will say, anyone who heard Ms Shepherd speak subsequently will be aware she is not without a political agenda...........and that her choice of material may not have been entirely academic.............

Though that still does not excuse the nonsense that followed. But nor does it make it anything systemic; or something that can be compared with either the substance of the Hate Speech in 'Your Ward News', nor the actions
which such speech then wrought.

And of course, the notion of Peterson being a “free speech crusader” is kind of tempered by the reality that he had been using libel as a way to silence critics himself:

Jordan Peterson dishes out what he sees as harsh truths, but can he take them in return?

Jordan Peterson dishes out what he sees as harsh truths, but can he take them in return? Critics see hypocrisy and even misogyny in his threats to sue them for defamation.

www.insidehighered.com

And guess what, using libel as a way to silence critics is *exactly* the kind of strategies countries like Singapore uses to stifle free speech (and here by individuals through SLAPP)

AoD

 

[jayme2016]

Hazte speech

Not saying he is an incel, as he is a grandpa. Did you see him go on Rogan's podcast and discuss the "enforced monogamy" concept?



A woman coined the term in the 90's, though she had no idea it would lead to killing sprees. But that is off topic.

Also, Lindsey Shepherd might deny it, but having gone on white supremacist podcasts and such, how is it wrong to call her a white nationalist?

We should call them but not hold a double standard not matter right or left if you go and meet or on a show that is hate you need to be called out.

 

[Neutrino]

^not that there's anything remotely hateful about Rogan, Shepherd or Peterson.

 

[Jasmine18]

Yeah like I dont think Peterson hates on trans or women, just has a more conservative viewpoint on such matters.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I don’t see the hate speech in the Meghan Murphy library spat. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/cann...oversial-speaker-at-public-library/vi-AAJyFST If she was espousing hate speech, did anyone call the police?

Best I can find online, Murphy is saying men who identify as women can’t be women. Akin to black people saying white people who identify as black people, such as Rachel Dolezal can‘t be black, or more accurately represent blacks.

That likely makes Murphy a TERF, but where’s the hate?

 

[Neutrino]

There's no hate. This is just incoherent babbling from self-appointed activists who represent no one but themselves. Also, hate speech should have never been legislated into being.

 

[Northern Light]

There's no hate. This is just incoherent babbling from self-appointed activists who represent no one but themselves. Also, hate speech should have never been legislated into being.

The specific here is different from the general. The former is debatable. I really don't have time for saying that society can't criminalize speech that is clearly intended to induce violence and discrimination, either directly, or
by means of inciting or inflaming hatred against an identifiable group.

Do I think such a law should be narrow, and specific, yes; I'd also agree it ought to be enforced sparingly and reluctantly. One should not simply 'infer' hatred, it should be entirely obvious to justify intervention.

But allowing people to spread misinformation, exaggeration, stereotypes etc for the purpose of dehumanizing another group would not serve society well. It hasn't in the past; and its not now.

 

[Admiral Beez]

There's no hate. This is just incoherent babbling from self-appointed activists who represent no one but themselves. Also, hate speech should have never been legislated into being.

I think incitement of hate has a place on the law books. If I put up posters across the city saying an identifiable group is dangerous and should be "controlled", that should get me into trouble with the police. But that should be the bar that hate speech has to meet, that the speech incites others to violence. It can't just be that it challenges your identity or hurt your feelings or self esteem.

But allow people to spread misinformation, exaggeration, stereotypes etc for the purpose of dehumanizing another group would not serve society well. It hasn't in the past; and its not now.

Agreed. I'd argue that's not the position of Murphy. She's a feminist who stands up for women, and doesn't want men who identify as women to enter that space, and instead she suggests men who identify as women construct their own space.

 

[Northern Light]

I don’t see the hate speech in the Meghan Murphy library spat. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/cann...oversial-speaker-at-public-library/vi-AAJyFST If she was espousing hate speech, did anyone call the police?

Best I can find online, Murphy is saying men who identify as women can’t be women. Akin to black people saying white people who identify as black people, such as Rachel Dolezal can‘t be black, or more accurately represent blacks.

That likely makes Murphy a TERF, but where’s the hate?

I haven't read the woman's entire canon of work.

But, based on what I'm seeing, I don't see hate.

Mind you, I do see a self-promoter who likes to stir the pot, and who expresses some opinions without sympathy/empathy in such a way that a eliciting a strong reaction is to be expected.

From what I can discern (and someone will correct me if I'm wrong); she's attracted the most controversy around the issue of use of washrooms/change rooms and the notion that sex, rather than gender ought to determine who gets to use which space.

On the one hand, there is a point to be made for women who may have been subject to assault or threats feeling intimidated or unsafe having a biological male in what would normally be considered a female-only space.

On the other, the idea that trans-folk are particularly dangerous or likely to assault someone is a load of something or other.......

Personally, I don't understand the need for single-sex washrooms, it strikes me as terribly inefficient given that workplaces can be sex/gender imbalanced, and that cleaning and security staff may all be one-sex in any given workplace making
the checking and maintenance of spaces more problematic.

Why we don't just go the route of many nightclubs and some restaurants with toilets that are single-occupant with lockable doors and just a sliver of space at the ceiling or floor in case someone needs to ask for help, but too little space
for someone to slip a camera under or peek-over. ....... Strikes me that that resolves the issue.

Likewise, the City of Toronto is now building universal change rooms (single or family-occupancy) for swimming which allows staff of either sex to patrol and/or clean and maintain such a space.

It removes the need to make a distinction based on biology.

 

[Neutrino]

Of course, if speech is inciting violence, that should be policed. Anything else shouldn't. As the Admiral pointed out, speech that hurts feelings is not hate speech. The common "it's offensive" argument is meaningless.

But allow people to spread misinformation, exaggeration, stereotypes etc for the purpose of dehumanizing another group would not serve society well. It hasn't in the past; and its not now.

Good thing that's not the case here or ever, really, when it comes to extremely exaggerated claims from activist types. In fact, I would argue it's precisely the activist types railing against "dominant" groups who commit some of the worst hate speech. Agreed on the points about the law needing to be narrow, specific and sparingly enforced.

 

[Northern Light]

Of course, if speech is inciting violence, that should be policed. Anything else shouldn't. As the Admiral pointed out, speech that hurts feelings is not hate speech. The common "it's offensive" argument is meaningless.



Good thing that's not the case here or ever, really, when it comes to extremely exaggerated claims from activist types. In fact, I would argue it's precisely the activist types railing against "dominant" groups who commit some of the worst hate speech. Agreed on the points about the law needing to be narrow, specific and sparingly enforced.

What I have in mind as a basis for enforcement would be this trash:

Your Ward News publisher sentenced to 12 months house arrest for promoting hate - Toronto | Globalnews.ca

The publisher of a free Toronto newspaper that promoted hatred against Jews and women has been sentenced to 12 months of house arrest.

globalnews.ca