3 ms·

Part of the problem is that Peterson really obfuscated the nature of the legislation. It was never about whether or not misgendering someone is malicious, it ad

Part of the problem is that Peterson really obfuscated the nature of the legislation. It was never about whether or not misgendering someone is malicious, it added workplace protections against discrimination. Peterson, for the sake of his own career, made it into the larger debate you describe. In fairness, it’s a debate that engages a lot of people, but the legislation in Canada was never intended to affect common parlance.

TheRealDunkirk 7y ago
Very interesting. Your comments are the first I've heard that the law only applied to workplace discrimination. This seems a pretty thorough overview: http://sds.utoronto.ca/blog/bill-c-16-no-its-not-about-criminalizing-pronoun-misuse/ http://sds.utoronto.ca/blog/bill-c-16-no-its-not-about-crimi.... Like most legal things these days, it clearly gets complicated very quickly.