Prove the Canadian government recognizes all words as potential pronouns.
I'll wait.
Advertisement
by Galloism » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:00 pm
by Herskerstad » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:01 pm
by The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:02 pm
Napkiraly wrote:And he just pointed out that as long as he calls it a gender then it's fair game.The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:
My point was that under that law, you can not as you would fail to provide the requirements for being a roman emperor.
Genders have no bar for entry.
And you know what? I'm fine with that. I don't really care what gender someone is, just if they are a nice person.
by Herador » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:02 pm
The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:Napkiraly wrote:And he just pointed out that as long as he calls it a gender then it's fair game.
But it can not be a gender beacuse there is a male and female use of the word 'Emperor'. It also is by definition not a gender so no one would actually take this seriously. Like the cops who would be using there best judgment on enforcing this possible law.
by Aellex » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:02 pm
Herador wrote:Whatever you say Romain.
by Herskerstad » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:03 pm
The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:Napkiraly wrote:And he just pointed out that as long as he calls it a gender then it's fair game.
But it can not be a gender beacuse there is a male and female use of the word 'Emperor'. It also is by definition not a gender so no one would actually take this seriously. Like the cops who would be using there best judgment on enforcing this possible law.
by The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:04 pm
Herskerstad wrote:The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:
Except that has nothing to do with people being assholes about misgendering people deliberately.
No, it held the more important point, which is that compelled speech is bad.
When it comes to criminalising things that hurt feelings, the argument is easy enough that it should be self-explanatory at this point. Entirely subjective values should not be crowned in special legal preferences.
by Aellex » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:04 pm
The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:But it can not be a gender beacuse there is a male and female use of the word 'Emperor'. It also is by definition not a gender so no one would actually take this seriously. Like the cops who would be using there best judgment on enforcing this possible law.
by Des-Bal » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:05 pm
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos
by Proctopeo » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:05 pm
by Herador » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:06 pm
Des-Bal wrote:Penalty is a little stiff, the idea is fine for government run institutions, it is unconscionable for private ones.
by Aellex » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:07 pm
Proctopeo wrote:They probably don't have any definition or boundaries established for this.
The only way to be sure would be for someone to test it.
by Herskerstad » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:07 pm
by The Portland Territory » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:07 pm
by The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:08 pm
Herador wrote:Herskerstad wrote:
Hate speech.
fite me nerdThe Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:But it can not be a gender beacuse there is a male and female use of the word 'Emperor'. It also is by definition not a gender so no one would actually take this seriously. Like the cops who would be using there best judgment on enforcing this possible law.
There should be a thread on this. Like what does and does not constitute a pronoun legally.
Be a fun fight to watch.
Herskerstad wrote:The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:But it can not be a gender beacuse there is a male and female use of the word 'Emperor'. It also is by definition not a gender so no one would actually take this seriously. Like the cops who would be using there best judgment on enforcing this possible law.
Oh by entirely serious people you get pronouns like flowergender and anxietygende, even a fucking venndiagram gender out there, and no, I won't let them force me to do math.
by Des-Bal » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:08 pm
Herador wrote:I left for a year and now that I'm back I agree with you on stuff.
I changed or you did, either way, I'm scared.
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos
by Herador » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:09 pm
by Proctopeo » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:10 pm
Aellex wrote:Proctopeo wrote:They probably don't have any definition or boundaries established for this.
The only way to be sure would be for someone to test it.
Didn't someone used "His Majesty" as preferred pronoun in one of your universities and had it accepted?
I mean, if a place of learning allows it...
by The Grande Republic 0f Arcadia » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:10 pm
The 19th Century wrote:The Grande Republic 0f Arcadia wrote:And one of the most blatant laws violating the constitution,
plus why should we get fined or jailed if we call a person thier physical sex such as Mr, Mrs. ,Mrs., Man, women, he, she, ect. Its dumb to force people to change the way they speak for a very small minority of people and if they dont comply or forget its a fine or jail time, if you want to use gender neutral pro-nouns more power to you, but dont force it on everyone.
"Willfully and repeatedly."
It doesn't apply to people that just forget a couple times.
by Galloism » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:10 pm
by Salus Maior » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:17 pm
by Herskerstad » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:19 pm
The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:Herskerstad wrote:
No, it held the more important point, which is that compelled speech is bad.
When it comes to criminalising things that hurt feelings, the argument is easy enough that it should be self-explanatory at this point. Entirely subjective values should not be crowned in special legal preferences.
Bullying is also a crime and that involves hurt feelings, and all 50 states have that.
Doesn't that also involve compelled speech?
by Herskerstad » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:21 pm
by Herskerstad » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:25 pm
The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp wrote:Herador wrote:fite me nerd
There should be a thread on this. Like what does and does not constitute a pronoun legally.
Be a fun fight to watch.
It would yes.Herskerstad wrote:
Oh by entirely serious people you get pronouns like flowergender and anxietygende, even a fucking venndiagram gender out there, and no, I won't let them force me to do math.
I... don't understand what you are saying.
I am sorry if I made you or any one hear mad...
by Cosmalia » Thu Aug 17, 2017 5:27 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Cyptopir, Dogmeat, El Lazaro, Ineva, Kannap, Nyoskova, Outer Sparta, The Holy Therns, The Jamesian Republic, Vassenor
Advertisement