Jump to content

The Mizzou/Yale/PC/Free Speech Topic


FireChan

Recommended Posts

On 10/15/2019 at 5:47 PM, B-Man said:

 

So apparently this is a thing.......................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EG7GXnwXUAwDFzt.jpg............Until people "conform".......:wallbash:

 

It's not a thing.  It's one idiot trying to make it a thing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

‘You know the drill’: The Independent tries to stir up outrage over Chris Pratt joking about his wife’s cooking, comes up pathetically short

 

 

 

 

 

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2019/10/22/you-know-the-drill-the-independent-tries-to-stir-up-outrage-over-chris-pratt-joking-about-his-wifes-cooking-comes-up-pathetically-short/

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/11/2019 at 1:26 PM, B-Man said:
 

 

by Bethany Mandel

 

The other day at the playground I had one of the more uncomfortable conversations in recent memory. I was talking with a conservative-leaning mom friend and her liberal 83-year old grandmother (“Bubby”) about the “transgender movement.” Bubby had a simple question for me, and one I get a lot when I express dismay about the movement: “Why do you care what someone else calls you?” My answer, to quote Erick Erickson, “We will be made to care.”

 

It’s not enough to live and let live; those in the social justice Left want to force you to accept and embrace whatever is on their agenda, which has shifted from gay marriage (which I was a long-time supporter of) to the idea that we can decide to be whatever gender we feel, with no connection to our DNA, biology, anatomy, etc.

 

Bubby asked me how it differed from gay marriage, in that we just should accept people for whatever they are. But being gay or lesbian isn’t about who or what you are; it’s about who you are sexually attracted to; it’s entirely based on feelings. But gender isn’t a social construct, no matter how much we’re told it is. Our genetics, our bone structure, our brains, our biology determine if we are a man or if we are a woman.

 

Bubby then asked what exactly it means to be “made to care” and what that looks like. And hence, the uncomfortable conversation. Her granddaughter mentioned “Jessica Yaniv” a transgender activist in Canada targeting immigrant beauticians and charging discrimination when they won’t offer their services. Yaniv asked for genital waxing, and even though Yaniv claims to be a woman, biology says otherwise. Yaniv has a case for discrimination, and it could mean that women in the beauty industry who are only comfortable doing a bikini wax on a woman could be forced to handle the genitalia of biological men alone in treatment rooms.

 

What could go wrong?


Follow-up:

BC Human Rights Tribunal rules in favour of female estheticians who refused to wax male genitalia
 

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF.ca) is pleased to announce that the BC Human Rights Tribunal has ruled in favour of home estheticians’ right to refuse to handle male genitalia against their will.
 

The decision noted, “human rights legislation does not require a service provider to wax a type of genitals they are not trained for and have not consented to wax.” The decision further found that the complainant Jessica Yaniv “engaged in improper conduct”, “filed complaints for improper purposes”, and concluded Yaniv’s testimony was “disingenuous and self-serving.” Finally, noted the Tribunal, Yaniv was “evasive and argumentative and contradicted herself” while giving evidence.
 

</snip>
 

  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


Follow-up:

BC Human Rights Tribunal rules in favour of female estheticians who refused to wax male genitalia
 

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF.ca) is pleased to announce that the BC Human Rights Tribunal has ruled in favour of home estheticians’ right to refuse to handle male genitalia against their will.
 

The decision noted, “human rights legislation does not require a service provider to wax a type of genitals they are not trained for and have not consented to wax.” The decision further found that the complainant Jessica Yaniv “engaged in improper conduct”, “filed complaints for improper purposes”, and concluded Yaniv’s testimony was “disingenuous and self-serving.” Finally, noted the Tribunal, Yaniv was “evasive and argumentative and contradicted herself” while giving evidence.
 

</snip>
 

That would be like complaining to the mercurial chef about your dinner tasting likeshit. It might come back from the kitchen with good reason for it tasting like that. I've never been waxed (intentionally) but I would assume that the esthetician could cause some pretty severe pain if she really didn't want to be waxing male genitalia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, GG said:

 

And then you wonder why inner city kids have trouble in college physics courses? 

 

Does anyone look at Step 2 of any proposed rule?

 

the divide between male and female students on college physics is staggering enough after 60 years of trying to make it equal

 

 

 

 

Edited by row_33
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

It’s become so painful for me to watch this sort of charade play out.  This piece of trash dressed up as a member of Congress makes up a narrative for political gain, is corrected immediately yet she pushes forward even though she ended up looking like a girl who got called out in chemistry class for insisting that the atomic number of Moscovium is 5! 
 

More importantly, she’s so proud of her performance she includes it on her house account. 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 
THIS IS NOT YOUR FATHER’S ACLU:
 
UConn students arrested for engaging in offensive speech. The ACLU of Connecticut puts out a press release denouncing racism at U Conn, apparently endorsing new hate speech rules, and opining that “policing is an inherently white supremacist institution.”
 
Only at the very end of the release do we get a statement from the national ACLU that the speech in question is constitutionally protected.
 
 
 
.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...