• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

LGBTQ Stuff (split from other political threads)

the language thing isnt specific to the workplace. But how often do people go around calling others he,she,they etc..
 
P.S. The marriage thing would not be problem if all provinces adopted the firmly anti-sexism/equality rule that Quebec uses: Women keep their family names in marriage - period, no choice. It would save on the name tag budget too. ;)

Fine until their kids with double barrelled names hook up with other double barrelled names and want to continue the practice. Like some friends years ago in Ottawa (they lived across the river at the time) who we referred to as PC (Papineau-Couture) and TC (Tremblay-Charbonneau). Fit that on a name tag.
 
Fine until their kids with double barrelled names hook up with other double barrelled names and want to continue the practice. Like some friends years ago in Ottawa (they lived across the river at the time) who we referred to as PC (Papineau-Couture) and TC (Tremblay-Charbonneau). Fit that on a name tag.

Met a couple of Basques over the years both of them had 8 surnames. Apparently it is a point of pride to know all 8 of your Great Grand Parents.

Then, of course, you have the Icelanders with Lars Ericsson and Helga Ericsdottir
 
The language issue here, that is to say the co-opting of language and compelling it's new use on others, is what initially propelled Jordan Peterson to infamy.

Ironic that the woke toronto liberal university crowd tried to cancel HIM, but instead they created the thing they fear the most - logical reasoning backed by science, not feelings and fairy tails. Send your kids to trade schools folks.
 
Ironic that the woke toronto liberal university crowd tried to cancel HIM, but instead they created the thing they fear the most - logical reasoning backed by science, not feelings and fairy tails. Send your kids to trade schools folks.
The irony here is that Jordan Peterson is a laurentian (McGill) educated Professor Emeritus from the University of Toronto, whose rise to prominence was fueled by escaping the need to back his work with science and academic rigour by choosing to monetize his feelings backed by charisma and rhetoric.

He's like Malcom Gladwell. Insightful and talented author. Brilliant orator. But not the intellectual titans with definitive opinions fanboys make them out to be.
 
The irony here is that Jordan Peterson is a laurentian (McGill) educated Professor Emeritus from the University of Toronto, whose rise to prominence was fueled by escaping the need to back his work with science and academic rigour by choosing to monetize his feelings backed by charisma and rhetoric.

He's like Malcom Gladwell. Insightful and talented author. Brilliant orator. But not the intellectual titans with definitive opinions fanboys make them out to be.
That term is unnecessarily limiting to a narrow section of identifiable people. In the spirit of inclusivity you may wish to consider a different term. For next time.
 
Fine until their kids with double barrelled names hook up with other double barrelled names and want to continue the practice. Like some friends years ago in Ottawa (they lived across the river at the time) who we referred to as PC (Papineau-Couture) and TC (Tremblay-Charbonneau). Fit that on a name tag.

The law specifies that no more than two names can be used. The real problem is not that you can then have 16 possibilities with the second generation, but that the law allows that each child in the same family can have a different last name.

Many family law specialists in Quebec argued (correctly in my opinion) that once a family name has been selected for the first child, then it should be the only one possible for all the other children of the same couple.

P.S. The worst I have seen is a poor Sea Cadet in Sherbrooke whose family name was Deslauriers-Delongchamps. He got the only two lines name tag I have ever seen and got the ribbing that came with it, as you can well imagine.
 
He's like Malcom Gladwell. Insightful and talented author. Brilliant orator. But not the intellectual titans with definitive opinions fanboys make them out to be.

Quite right. Just to see what he (it is he in his case :) ) is all about, I bought and read his book "12 Rules for Life". Sorry but, what a load of religion based crap, IMHO. I did the same thing, for the same reason, many years ago by buying "Godless: The Church of Liberalism" by Ann Coulter to see what she (it is a she in her case :) ) was all about: same result: religious based complete crap.

Actually, he was more sophisticated and rational than she was, overall., but not by as much as you would think.
 
Ok, confession time.

I think neo-pronouns (xe/xer/ fairykin, whatever)are silly. We have he, her, and the singular they, those cover well, everything.

If I encountered such things in the wild, I would have a lot of trouble not rolling my eyes while minding my manners. I have not. Graduated from a woke Ontario University. Have been working in private enterprise ever since (getting graduate degree at another woke Ontario university on the side). A shitload of exposure and opportunity- but not one single time have I actually received an email with a neo-pronoun in the signature, had someone request it, or heard one used seriously. Not one single time. These are set of words that a small minority of a small minority of a small minority (LGBT+ -> Non Binary -> Decide singular "they" isn't good enough) use. It's not a world defining issue. Furthermore, I personally believe the use of these neo-pronouns is a fad that will fade when the generation originating them gets into the professional world and realizes that while "they" doesn't fully express their desired uniqueness- it's not offensive and a hell of a lot more convenient.

I think the neo-pronouns trivialize the basic, simple decency of letting people people choose between he/she/they without fanfare. It's not a big deal. We let people choose between Ms/Mrs. , Walter/Walt/Wally, James/Jim/Jimmy etc etc. .
 
The irony here is that Jordan Peterson is a laurentian (McGill) educated Professor Emeritus from the University of Toronto, whose rise to prominence was fueled by escaping the need to back his work with science and academic rigour by choosing to monetize his feelings backed by charisma and rhetoric.

He's like Malcom Gladwell. Insightful and talented author. Brilliant orator. But not the intellectual titans with definitive opinions fanboys make them out to be.
He is far more fact based than the people that try to oppose him. So they need to undermine his credibility.
 
The law specifies that no more than two names can be used. The real problem is not that you can then have 16 possibilities with the second generation, but that the law allows that each child in the same family can have a different last name.

Many family law specialists in Quebec argued (correctly in my opinion) that once a family name has been selected for the first child, then it should be the only one possible for all the other children of the same couple.

P.S. The worst I have seen is a poor Sea Cadet in Sherbrooke whose family name was Deslauriers-Delongchamps. He got the only two lines name tag I have ever seen and got the ribbing that came with it, as you can well imagine.

Quebec has the right idea; they clearly regulate the name to adopt (actually, not adopt) on marriage and what surname offspring may be assigned. Other jurisdictions are more loosey-goosey. PC and TC of my story were at the time living common law and hadn't had kids by then. While they were being 'mostly' facetious, they would proclaim that when they married (something that they assumed would be necessarily inevitable to get posted together) they would both compound and hyphenate their names (just as their respective parents did when they married) as would be automatically permitted in other jurisdictions and let the kids deal with it. Almost child abuse.

I've seen a couple of two line nametags. But the best one I recall was an individual with a long 'Eastern European' surname; he only wore a nametag with "PAZ" - it was several months before I realized it wasn't his actual last name.
 
He is far more fact based than the people that try to oppose him. So they need to undermine his credibility.

Most of his arguments are an application of a blend of philosophy and psychology to other matters- law, science, etc.
Calling a philosopher more "fact based" is like arguing blue bikes are better because they're faster. It's neither provable nor relevant to the field.

See the last sentence of the quoted post. He's not right, he's not wrong. He never should have been "cancelled", nor he some infallible arbiter of truth.
 
As for the sleepover thing, did you acquiesce on principle or on parts?
They're female so I was fine with it. On the same note I'm happy to refer to them as he.

You have a right to your beliefs until
It's a nuance but I'm going to say I have a right to my beliefs, period. There's no until.

this nonsense is already mandated in our email signatures.
That's an easy fix. Tell your chain of command that forcing members to identify their pronouns in their signature block is non-binaryphobic and non-conformingphobic. It's the same as ordering a transmale to use she/her pronouns.
You could even take it a step further and suggest everyone using pronouns in their signature block is a passive-aggressive attack on non-binary people and creates a non-inclusive and toxic workspace for them.
 
You could even take it a step further and suggest everyone using pronouns in their signature block is a passive-aggressive attack on non-binary people and creates a non-inclusive and toxic workspace for them.

If you use the last census data related to transgenderism and non-binary (0.33% of the population 15 and over) and applied the statistic to the CAF of, a very generous 60k people, you’d have less than 200 people in the CAF who’d identify as trans or non-binary. With that number in mind, the likelihood of working with, never mind encountering, a non-binary or trans CAF member is extremely remote.
 
Frankly, I'm a strong proponent of (modified) Faceless Person doctrine.

"A person has no honour!"
 
Most of his arguments are an application of a blend of philosophy and psychology to other matters- law, science, etc.
Calling a philosopher more "fact based" is like arguing blue bikes are better because they're faster. It's neither provable nor relevant to the field.

See the last sentence of the quoted post. He's not right, he's not wrong. He never should have been "cancelled", nor he some infallible arbiter of truth.
He has never stuck me as one that believes he is the
Most of his arguments are an application of a blend of philosophy and psychology to other matters- law, science, etc.
Calling a philosopher more "fact based" is like arguing blue bikes are better because they're faster. It's neither provable nor relevant to the field.

See the last sentence of the quoted post. He's not right, he's not wrong. He never should have been "cancelled", nor he some infallible arbiter of truth.
He has never said he was a "infallible arbiter of truth" Some people treat that way, but that is not his fault, when he clearly that title was held by his wife :cool:
 
Back
Top