Canadian professor speaks out against bill c-16 and political correctness

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: CranialSponge
a reply to: ketsuko

No.

That's not what the definitions say.

That's just you reflecting your false logic thought processes (and completely irrelevant analogies) to try to justify your icky feelings towards the subject.

The definition of gender identity in the OP says that it is completely internal. It is your internal experience of your gender.

Meanwhile, your gender expression is your outward expression of gender, or how you physically express gender.

Nothing in either definition says that one is dependent at all on the other. Ergo, it is possible for a person to express one gender while identifying as another in legal terms in Canada.

So please explain to me where I am wrong.

Where are you wrong ?

You seem to think that gender expression/identity somehow magically means that anyone and everyone will now be able to go into any and every locker room and shower with people's 5 year old daughters.


Like I said, your own fears and false logics are being reflected in how you're processing the information on this subject... the things you're claiming as fact in your posts make this abundantly clear.

originally posted by: audubon
a reply to: TheFlyOnTheWall

What on earth are you talking about the animal kingdom for ? That's totally illogical; a non-sequitur.

I think you'll find that humans are animals. Or we were last time I checked.

Anyway, I can tell from the appearance of the 'we'll be letting people commit bestiality next!' meme that you're impervious to argument, on this subject at least. It can only be a matter of time before the 'Adam and Steve' line comes out.

I'll leave you to your fearful world in which the human race is being degraded by some governments recognising the fact that homosexuals exist and have human rights. I think society will get along without your input.

The bestiality remark no matter how offensive, is a valid hyperbole to express the seriousness to what limits this will go. Given the ideology of the cultural Marxist is to infinitely divide and categorize individual idiosyncrasies among the general populace, it will only be a matter of time until concessions are made to accommodate fringe groups. You can take that to the bank.

I'll leave you to your fearful world in which the human race is being degraded by some governments recognising the fact that homosexuals exist and have human rights.

You're a pro at creating a false narrative. Premise: Governments recognize homosexual's rights. Conclusion: The human race is being degraded.

This is not what I stated in the OP. Nice try though.

a reply to: CranialSponge

Then show me where in the legal definitions that would be stopped.

I showed you where the two contradict. The contradiction is what creates the possibility of that situation.

If someone goes into a locker room who looks sexually male in every way and you challenge them, the first definition provides them cover - they identify as female because they can claim their internal experience of the world is as a woman. Can you deny they have a legal shelter there? No one can read their minds to see how serious or authentic they are about that, and the law says you cannot question them.

So show me where the laws in your country stop it from happening again.

a reply to: intrepid

We're not talking about 12 years ago.... We're talking about now. Who care where the OP was 12 years ago, maybe he was 4 years old. His point remains valid.

Re-read the OP and watch the video. try to understand what the OP was about and quit trying to make this into a Harpewr thing. It's not!

************Update***********
Lauren Southern of TheRebel.media covered the clash between pro- and anti-free speech demonstators at the University of Toronto. Includes Dr. Jordan B. Peterson's passionate defence of liberty.