The end of FHRITP in Toronto?

[AlvinofDiaspar]

So it's like an offensive 'Bababooey' bomb? Interesting, if anything this goes to show why we have to be careful with freedom of speech issues.

Except that the "sex toy in the ear" quip left no room for any "freedom of speech" issue. It's abuse, period. As an experiment - try saying that to your mom, if extant, and tell me just how "free speech" she would have felt?

Plus, as said many, many times - he is free to have said what he said - he is also free to pay the price for saying what he have said. And he did. The end.

AoD

 

[Admiral Beez]

Or a profanity delay on live broadcasts that the media choose to do in an uncontrolled environment.....oh wait, they have that, but the typical producer in the control room doesn't know how to push a button.

No need for the delay. AFAIUI, this wasn't a live broadcast.

 

[aquateam]

It's not one issue.

Four issues are:
- the original actions (which are arguably criminal)
- the one-year MLSE ban
- the firing
- the mob bullying

Many seem to be using the first issue, to justify the others. Personally the first disgusts me, and I'd think that criminal action should be taken against such misogyny. The second seems reasonable, given the context. The third deeply troubles me ... though I've seen more than enough comments from those unfortunate enough to have had to sit near the individuals in question for years, or live near them, that I'm no longer that concerned.

The final issue deeply disturbs me.

And then there's the media hypocrisy. Apparently this has been going on for sometime ... and has been particularly bad at Leaf games. But the media chooses to make it an issue at a soccer game? The media keeps running these stories implying soccer fans are hooligans, disproportionately compared to football or hockey fans.

This is 100% how I feel about the issue. The MLSE ban is 100% justified. The firing and public lynching is not.

It's the modern phenomenon of callout culture. Someone makes a faux pas or lapse in judgement that is funny enough to go viral but hurts the sensibilities of some. These people whip themselves into a frenzy, doxx the offender and don't stop until they taste blood. The person is left to pick up the pieces: changing their address, phone number, and unemployed, hoping that the mob has found a new target so that he/she can be left alone. This is what happened to a techie at a conference (dongle-gate), a woman who made an unfortunate tweet (Adria Sacco), and a woman who had an out-of-context photo (Lindsey Stone). This article is a great read on call-out culture.

 

[doug]

No need for the delay. AFAIUI, this wasn't a live broadcast.

....Where's that picture about missing the point?....

 

[ladyscraper]

Except that the "sex toy in the ear" quip left no room for any "freedom of speech" issue.

The guy is a big moron but this part of what he said is being misunderstood like he was saying he would do that to her. What he was actually referencing was an incident that happened in England to a reporter there. He was clearly trying to say that yelling something obscene isn't as bad as that. Here is the incident he was referring to:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ya63uUHGfXM

Like I said, this guy is still a huge idiot but I think that one thing he said is misunderstood by people that don't know about that England incident.

 

[Johnny Au]

 

[Admiral Beez]

I love it!

 

[The Golem]

I don't feel too bad about Simoes. He can run for political office in Ward 2 in the next election, they love that sort of talk.

 

[Tewder]

C'mon Tewder, it's not 'free speech' if I punch you in the head. This is not a 'free speech' issue. I'm impressed by the number of people that are trying to 'nuance' this thing.

Was somebody actually physically assaulted? I missed that part. Of course that would not be free speech, clearly.

Plus, as said many, many times - he is free to have said what he said - he is also free to pay the price for saying what he have said. And he did. The end.

AoD

I agree, but the price isn't jail. A law wasn't broken here, to my knowledge. As for public outcry and losing his job, well that's all fair game in my opinion.

The guy is a big moron but this part of what he said is being misunderstood like he was saying he would do that to her. What he was actually referencing was an incident that happened in England to a reporter there. He was clearly trying to say that yelling something obscene isn't as bad as that. Here is the incident he was referring to:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ya63uUHGfXM

Like I said, this guy is still a huge idiot but I think that one thing he said is misunderstood by people that don't know about that England incident.

Exactly. If people read a little deeper they'd see there are cultural layers to this. Now I don't appreciate these cultural layers one bit, and I don't appreciate this kind of behaviour, but there has been an overreaction.

 

[TonyV]

I don't feel too bad about Simoes. He can run for political office in Ward 2 in the next election, they love that sort of talk.

Damn. You beat me to it.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I agree, but the price isn't jail. A law wasn't broken here, to my knowledge. As for public outcry and losing his job, well that's all fair game in my opinion.

Few, if anyone, is contemplating jail term as an appropriate response (IMO, it isn't) to this incident, so I am not sure what that red herring is about.

Exactly. If people read a little deeper they'd see there are cultural layers to this. Now I don't appreciate these cultural layers one bit, and I don't appreciate this kind of behaviour, but there has been an overreaction.

I don't think of it as an overreaction at all, when one note how prevalent and normalized this practice has become. In fact, it is the under-reaction/desensitization to what's an unacceptable public behaviour that's bothering me. Since when is using the phrase FHRITP in *any* public setting not deserving of reaction and opprobrium? Or better yet - since when do we accept individuals not governing themselves and refraining from using kind of language. much less use it like some badge of honour? You're quite right it's "cultural layers" all right - and somehow those layers bypassed the brain.

AoD

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Was somebody actually physically assaulted? I missed that part. Of course that would not be free speech, clearly.

No, someone was verbally assaulted. Which is also not 'free speech.'

I agree, but the price isn't jail. A law wasn't broken here, to my knowledge. As for public outcry and losing his job, well that's all fair game in my opinion.

The Calgary police have charged a man there yesterday. So, they believe a law was broken.

Exactly. If people read a little deeper they'd see there are cultural layers to this. Now I don't appreciate these cultural layers one bit, and I don't appreciate this kind of behaviour, but there has been an overreaction.

Pshaw. There are 'cultural layers'? Not allowing a Sikh to wear a turban in the RCMP is a cultural debate. Not being allowed to harass journalists by being a knob is not exactly going to be a complaint to the Human Rights Commission.

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

What's "funny" about it is that it's not socially acceptable behaviour... have you ever seen a really crude stand-up routine, or heard of "The Aristocrats"??? That is the whole point.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I don't think the individual in question volunteered to be involved in a stand up comedy routine. Besides, plenty of stand up comedy routines are quite racially charged - one should try doing that outside the confines of the club, in the public sphere and not expect an outcry or consequences.

There are boundaries, the guys broke it and pays the price. It's a pretty good lesson for one to re-evaluate their own behaviours.

AoD

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

What, you mean the reporter? The phrase, while vulgar and offensive, is not directed at the reporter. The "joke" is that the person being interviewed works the phrase casually into an unrelated sentence.