Jimmy McGill

Members
  • Content Count

    29,392
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    61

Jimmy McGill last won the day on June 8

Jimmy McGill had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

34,536 Gaming the system

2 Followers

About Jimmy McGill

  • Rank
    Canucks Hall-of-Famer
  • Birthday 10/09/1970

Profile Information

  • Location
    New Mexico.... or maybe the Omaha Cinnabon.
  • Interests
    sous vide junkie

Recent Profile Visitors

44,681 profile views
  1. @Jester13 @The Lock @BoKnows @JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo @aGENT thanks folks for being willing to engage in a reasonable way today, I actually learned some things and I thank you for that too, and not doing the childish confusey face pile on thing. and @bishopshodan I do.
  2. ah. In nutshell, i think JP uses controversy to further his career.
  3. what part isn't making sense? happy to clarify.
  4. it was/is. But lets not pretend that he didn't know that protest would not be controversial and that it would be a popular view with certain demographics, like young conservative males. He also used it to great effect to boost his career. Thats one of the reasons i don't like him, I think he uses these battles for his own gain.
  5. Haven't seen this one. There's nothing in the uni letter shown in the story specifically firing her for her views.... its what she's claiming tho. It'll be interesting to see where this one goes and what evidence she has. She could be legally let go if the terms of her employment were somehow breached, like maybe making statements outside of her role? dunno. Have to see what the facts are. I totally agree on universities being places where freedom of expression is allowed and promoted. As I said before, I don't agree with cancel culture.
  6. yeah OK. Thats actually a difficult family case but I'm going to quit while I'm ahead, so to speak. You know, to save some confused emoji's for other people.
  7. they do, but its in the context of what they are able to hear, which is pretty low level stuff most of the time. This reminds me a little bit of the right wing fear mongering over Trudeau also supposedly allowing the use of "Sharia law" in Canada. Lots of ruffled feathers there too. What it was in realty was people being allowed to use it in private mediation cases where both parties freely wanted to bring it in as a way they chose to settle a dispute.
  8. So thats a pretty wide field to go off and speculate in as a public speaker wouldn't you say? To me his stance seems to do more harm than good and helps promote trans and non binary fear. But thats my take on it and like him I suppose I could also be looking at principles as well. I used the salon example since it also had to do with the idea of using the charter to compel action - thats a really hard thing to do.
  9. well, we did vote them in I guess being guys we've always had representation and role models in government. Women haven't. I'm not sure how much better government we'll get, but on decisions where guys maybe have no experience thats where it would come through most.
  10. If there was equal opportunity for men and women to apply, I agree with you in the majority of cases. For something like Trudeau picking a 50-50 cabinet, there's also the consideration of having equal representation in decision making so thats one exemption to the rule I think makes sense. Government should represent everyone if possible.
  11. So look at it this way. Someone would have to have a charter right denied, because someone used gender identity as the reason to prevent that right. There's literally nothing in the charter about 'zie' or any specific word. You'd need a situation where a person was denied something for that reason. Its not enough to say 'no i won't use zie' if theres nothing else attached to it. There was a recent BC human rights tribunal case recently about a self-identified trans person who claimed discrimination because a woman only waxing place wouldn't wax their male bits. They lost, and they should have lost. There's nothing in the charter that can compel a salon to wax man bits. Thats the level the JP stuff is on, if JP was correct, that person would have won their case. What you quoted Jester was the Ontario human rights commission guidelines. They actually make a good suggestion in there about just using someones name as a reasonable thing to do.
  12. yeah i saw that too But I think you'd agree that there are times when public figures do go too far. Whats the bright line that tell us when?