Canada.
$1000 fine had to be payed not sure if that’s still the case.
It’s been a while since ive done any reading about it but I believe it should still be the law there. The law basically states that using the incorrect pronoun is a violation of human rights.
Might be on it’s way to usa and other countries too.
Really? I’ve never encountered it here. At all. I know years back there was a curfluffal over Trudeau by the Conservatives and expanded “pronouns” but as far as I’m aware nothing became of it.
Which Province and I’d sure like to see the Legislation. At least what it’s been put under…
from what I could find it apparently isnt the case in canada but surely is in usa
Yah - a few years back. C-16. Now I think 
I remember.
I’ll have to try to think back.
Edited to add: Nope. Nothing coming to me. Nothing in the bill about language as suggested. I find the credibility of being fined over a pronoun next to nil -
Perhaps - but again, I sure like to know the “context” of the pronoun use.
I have absolutely no problem with transgender people but I wont use words like zie, (f)ae ze, ey or xe. It’s stupid.
1 Like
Trudeau gets a little too idealistic for my liking.
Language has a way of evolving - like gay. Or “bruh” or the many other words I’ll hear and think “whaaaa???” And then ask what they mean.
Hate speech can be legislated.
Word usage or language - good luck.
People have a hard time with dictionaries.
Mind you I remember being in grade 3 and our teacher told us we couldn’t use the word Eskimo. We should use the word Inuit. Not sure what that was about 
BUT I did understand the stopping of the word “squaw”. Fucking English…
If we required the pronouns in our language they would gradually be added in. The same could be said for any words. The fact that they people are forced to use them and that the governments made it the norm in a period of time so short that it could be called an instant will lead many people to dislike the idea.
What are you talking about?
No one has to use these pronouns. There is no legislation supporting it. I just posted the legislation and the criminal code changes.
It was to add or recognize that transgendered are protected in employment, housing, etc, like every other Canadian.
oh alrighty then. just ignore that entire post. I believe the fact that its 5 am and I haven’t slept yet is one of the contributing factors to my temporary ignorance. Farewell for now.
Hope you sleep well.
Reading the articles you posted - yes - this was when Peterson made his first real appearance into public awareness.
I felt at the time that debate was necessary and he may have been exaggerating or extreme in where he saw this proposed legislation going…or maybe he wasn’t- his public opinion and then the discussions from the other extreme “political correctness” settled
us somewhere in the middle.
Ain’t that the truth.
Though as a corollary of course, they’re all contributing to dictionaries, as the definitions are based on common usage.
The name "Eskimo " is commonly used in Alaska to refer to Inuit and Yupik people, according to the Alaska Native Language Center at the University of Alaska. "This name is considered derogatory in many other places because it was given by non-Inuit people and was said to mean 'eater of raw meat.
I can relax now, as I’ve learned something new for today. I am also now less likely to unwittingly cause offence. A win win.
Also a word of caution.
It’s easy to get swept up with credentials. They can be important and are necessary to demonstrate ability and required levels of achievement.
However each and every argument has to be looked at based on the individual claim. Arguments from “authority” is a fallacy.
He still is with the 
University but has withdrawn from it (on his own) pursuing his current 15 minutes of fame.
Personally, he’s too “out there” for me - tends to argue many indemonstrable beliefs.
OK
WOW! Really. I didn’t know that. Who are ‘they’ and where is this happening? Could you possibly point me at the actual laws? I’d be livid too if they tried that shit here in Oz.
I haven’t thought about the new ways of using pronouns. I don’t intend to start now. I guess I’ll learn as I go along. I have no problem in principle, it has cost me nothing and has had no impact on my life so far. Right now it seems a matter of good manners rather than belief here in Oz.
I’d heard about laws being introduced in Canada, of all places, that would censure people for using the incorrect gender pronoun. Don’t know if they went ahead, and to be honest it seems like an unworkable law to me, how for instance would they differentiate between a genuine mistake, and something deliberate? Proving mens rea would be all but impossible surely, so would the law punish someone for a simple error?
Can’t seem to find it in the context present by the poster. If anything, the “hate speech” we have would cover it - but again, this is also very carefully weighed and rarely enacted.
I’ve only heard those pronouns in context of presented by alt-right - they maybe used more commonly within a trans community 
I don’t hang out there, don’t know BUT nobody is making or enforcing “words” via fines.
1 Like
From my interpretation, that law would only apply to persistent abuse of a name, for example by the employer or landlord. This law deals with discrimination, not human error or mistakes.
The reason Jordan Peterson got involved because 1) it is a restriction on free speech, and 2) it deals identity politics. Which is the meat in the sandwich Peterson is munching on.
Just watch any video containing Peterson, and all he talks about is group identity stuff.
1 Like
Ok, that makes a bit more sense at least.
Thanks for the information, much appreciated.
1 Like
Honestly it really sounds like something made up by some deluded fascist git.
Yeah, that’s my guess too. As I said, it comes down to good manners. My mother use Emily Post on us. I hated that fucking book.
My Canadian nan was above all pragmatic. She taught me that good manners are nothing more than doing all you can to make those around you feel comfortable. Most important in one’s home. Generally speaking, one tries not to cause others distress. A simple rule as long as one doesn’t spend too much time arrogantly insisting on one’s rights whilst ignoring the rights of others.***
***ignoring the feelings and rights of others is a definition of aggressive behaviour I was taught. And yes, I sometimes forget.
2 Likes
I can’t comment on your claim about ‘many’ atheists following atheism as belief.
Welcome from South Australia, hope you enjoy your stay.
Well you can but you’d be in error if you agreed. . 
What I mean by that is an atheist is simply a person who does not believe in god(s) . Period. Nothing else is implied or may be inferred.
Atheism is not a belief system, religion, philosophy, political position or even a club.
1 Like