LogFAQs > #929152783

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, Database 5 ( 01.01.2019-12.31.2019 ), DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Explain Jordan Peterson to me.
adjl 10/23/19 6:51:58 PM #62:	Noop_Noop posted... youre right adjl, outlawing words and mandating speech are exactly the same thing. That's not what I said. I said that outlawing words and outlawing words are exactly the same thing. Duh. Try to keep up, little one. Kyuubi4269 posted... Their chosen pronoun is not always the most appropriate pronoun. In which case, pronouns should not be used so as to avoid confusion. As I said. Kyuubi4269 posted... When it's law that hateful and discriminatory things are criminal; yes, that's exactly the case. Hateful speech and criminal hate speech are two very distinct things. Same with discriminatory behaviour and criminal discrimination. I'm really not sure why you seem to think otherwise. Kyuubi4269 posted... Calling him a he is recognising him as a human male, to refer to him as female suggests he doesn't follow human dimorphism and is dehumanising, or at the very least discriminatory. Do you really think that recognizing a human's anatomical traits is more humanizing than recognizing that human's cognitive identity? Most would say that humans are defined by their minds, after all, much more so than any particular physical traits. Kyuubi4269 posted... It's entirely dependant on circumstance. If the teacher choses to refer to everybody by their student ID it could help separate the learning environment from a social one, reinforcing the mindset demanded from learning. They could refer to everybody by their GPA and class rank to drill a competitive environment to enhance engagement, it doesn't really matter. Again, see the Stanford Prison experiment. What you're suggesting is a hideously, insanely horrible idea that no competent educator would ever consider a reasonable way to approach their job. Kyuubi4269 posted... The teacher may also not agree with using their chosen term as they don't consider it helpful for the student's well being, For the most part, students that are transitioning or otherwise experimenting with a new gender identity are doing so because it's been suggested to them by a medical professional. Giving teachers free rein to supersede medical advice like that is generally a very bad precedent to set. In instances where the student is trying out a new identity without medical advice, the teacher's right to be concerned, but completely disregarding their request in front of their peers is not an effective way to act on that. Instead, the teacher should be talking privately with the student (or referring them to the school nurse, where applicable) to suggest that they seek therapeutic guidance before continuing. In neither case is refusing to call a student by their preferred name appropriate conduct. Kyuubi4269 posted... Remember when you said you were being consistent in insisting that speech was not compelled? If you're in a context where not talking to the person is not an option, your speech is compelled by your circumstances, not by the government. Still consistent. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:929152783] in Explain Jo... [t:78105048]...</cite> <quote>Noop_Noop posted...</cite> <quote>youre right adjl, outlawing words and mandating speech are exactly the same thing.</quote> That's not what I said. I said that outlawing words and outlawing words are exactly the same thing. Duh. Try to keep up, little one. Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Their chosen pronoun is not always the most appropriate pronoun.</quote> In which case, pronouns should not be used so as to avoid confusion. As I said. Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>When it's law that hateful and discriminatory things are criminal; yes, that's exactly the case.</quote> Hateful speech and criminal hate speech are two very distinct things. Same with discriminatory behaviour and criminal discrimination. I'm really not sure why you seem to think otherwise. Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Calling him a he is recognising him as a human male, to refer to him as female suggests he doesn't follow human dimorphism and is dehumanising, or at the very least discriminatory.</quote> Do you really think that recognizing a human's anatomical traits is more humanizing than recognizing that human's cognitive identity? Most would say that humans are defined by their minds, after all, much more so than any particular physical traits. Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>It's entirely dependant on circumstance. If the teacher choses to refer to everybody by their student ID it could help separate the learning environment from a social one, reinforcing the mindset demanded from learning. They could refer to everybody by their GPA and class rank to drill a competitive environment to enhance engagement, it doesn't really matter.</quote> Again, see the Stanford Prison experiment. What you're suggesting is a hideously, insanely horrible idea that no competent educator would ever consider a reasonable way to approach their job. Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>The teacher may also not agree with using their chosen term as they don't consider it helpful for the student's well being,</quote> For the most part, students that are transitioning or otherwise experimenting with a new gender identity are doing so because it's been suggested to them by a medical professional. Giving teachers free rein to supersede medical advice like that is generally a very bad precedent to set. In instances where the student is trying out a new identity without medical advice, the teacher's right to be concerned, but completely disregarding their request in front of their peers is not an effective way to act on that. Instead, the teacher should be talking privately with the student (or referring them to the school nurse, where applicable) to suggest that they seek therapeutic guidance before continuing. In neither case is refusing to call a student by their preferred name appropriate conduct. Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote>Remember when you said you were being consistent in insisting that speech was not compelled?</quote> If you're in a context where not talking to the person is not an option, your speech is compelled by your circumstances, not by the government. Still consistent. --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1