you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]usehername 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

It actually isn't, if you read the bill. I'm American and I don't support hate speech laws at all. I think they're dystopian. However, calm and well-reasoned criticism of transsexualism will not be considered hate speech under this bill.

Bill C-261 full text

Definition of *hate speech*

(9) In this section, hate speech means the content of a communication that expresses detestation or vilification of an individual or group of individuals on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.

Clarification – hate speech

(10) For greater certainty, the content of a communication does not express detestation or vilification, for the purposes of subsection (9), solely because it expresses mere dislike or disdain or it discredits, humiliates, hurts or offends.

The idea that someone can be arrested for something they post online, which isn't a direct threat of violence, is detestable to me. However, it's also important to keep in mind that this law does not apply to private communications.

We can criticize them without expressing "detestation or villification." I think we can all tell what parts of the "GC" movement would be forced to tone it down. There is a lot of detestation and villification of transsexuals online from "GC" people. In my opinion, expressing that is their right, and again, laws restricting free speech give me the chills. If I had it my way, I would veto the whole thing, yes, including the anti-racism parts.

However, it's silly to claim that now it will be impossible to criticize them or the ideology at all. I think most of the panic over this bill is from the type of "GC" "feminists" that give the rest of us a bad name. The kind of people who say all "TIMs" (trans-identified males, clarifying since this sub is on s/all) are just evil p3d0ph!l3s whose sole purpose in life is to r@p3 and generally subjugate women and girls. The people who think that this is a conspiracy by George Soros to oppress women and "TIMs" are his agents of evil. That kind of silly shit. You know how Karen Davis's fans harassed Arty Morty for daring to call out their hateful behavior and trying to find out why heterosexuals choose to transition (he deviated from their narrative which would answer that question with: because they're demons who hate women). Those people. Nothing Arty Morty himself has ever said would break this law.

Transsexualism is something that's done to homosexuals. Heterosexuals are now also choosing to transition, but historically, this has been an issue for homosexuals only. Homosexuals have been dealing with it for thousands of years. Now, some annoying heterosexual/bihet women want to jump in and say actually they're poor widdle victims and this is their problem and they're suffering so badly that they detest transsexuals... the transsexuals that they created through their participation in homophobic systems of action and thought... it's just ridiculous and it makes the rest of us look retarded and evil.

[–]Canbot 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Wow, what a bunch of tyranny apologist bullshit.

However, it's also important to keep in mind that this law does not apply to private communications.

Oh, gee thanks, I can still say what I want as long as no-one hears it.

In this section, hate speech means the content of a communication that expresses detestation

That literally means you can't express any opinion that is negative. It literally means you can't say anything negative about any of it. The title is right.

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree, his comment is simply and utterly wrong.

Say I write a book about psychology in which I state that transexualism (is that even a word? No matter, you know what I mean) is the result of a mental illness. Is it detestation to describe the affliction as a mental illness? No. Could it be construed as such? HELL YEAH I am pretty fucking sure! Am I wrong?

Frankly if this law passes I'll have to seriously look at moving somewhere else. Nashville? I don't fucking know!

[–]RedEyedWarrior 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Corporations are just as bad as governments. Especially corporations who are propped up by governments.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

However, calm and well-reasoned criticism of transsexualism will not be considered hate speech under this bill.

I'd be fucked. I couldn't say tranny, faggot, or chink under those oppressive rules. And they're really fun words to say.

Good thing I'm not Canadian... although we can't be sure these rules will stay in Canuckistan (probably another violation).

Expression isn't just reasoned, calm debate. To say you can only discuss something clinically is fucked yo.

[–]package 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

ok retard

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Semantics.
As bad as them.