RE: Peterson's 12 Rules For Life, have you heard of this?
August 21, 2018 at 7:31 pm
(This post was last modified: August 21, 2018 at 7:34 pm by bennyboy.)
I dug this up while researching the actual bill C-16 (which I've already said I think is perfectly harmless)
The last paragraph is fairly interesting. I think the faculty reprimand constitutes an attempt to limit free speech, in the clear interest of the politics of the PC left-- in this case, they are clearly attempting to limit free speech, and referencing Bill C-16 in that attempt. However, the end of the paragraph makes it clear enough-- no real legal action is likely to come out of this.
So I'd say Peterson's real beef is with the tendency of universities to lean left, than with any real worry about application of the law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Act_to_...minal_Code Wrote:Jordan Peterson, a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, criticized the bill, claiming that it infringed freedom of speech and enacted compelled speech. Some academics challenged Peterson's interpretation of the legal effects of the bill.
The Canadian Bar Association supported the passage of the bill, by writing a detailed letter to the Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. Speaking for the CBA, the President, René J. Basque, Q.C./c.r, argued that the bill would provide necessary protections for transgender people; made explicit the protections for transgender people which were already contained in the prohibition on discrimination based on sexual orientation; and did not pose any risk to freedom of expression.
In November 2017, Lindsay Shepherd, a teaching assistant at Wilfrid Laurier University who showed a video of Peterson's critique of Bill C-16 in her "Canadian Communication in Context" class, was reprimanded by faculty members, who said that she had created a "toxic climate" for students by showing parts of Peterson's argument, compared it to "neutrally playing a speech by Hitler, or Milo Yiannopoulos", and claimed that she had violated Bill C-16. Commenting on the incident, University of Toronto law professor Brenda Cossman noted that the Canadian Human Rights Act (which C-16 amended) does not apply to universities, and that it would be unlikely for a court to find that the teaching assistant's actions were discriminatory under the comparable portions of the Ontario Human Rights Code.
The last paragraph is fairly interesting. I think the faculty reprimand constitutes an attempt to limit free speech, in the clear interest of the politics of the PC left-- in this case, they are clearly attempting to limit free speech, and referencing Bill C-16 in that attempt. However, the end of the paragraph makes it clear enough-- no real legal action is likely to come out of this.
So I'd say Peterson's real beef is with the tendency of universities to lean left, than with any real worry about application of the law.
