Not challenging but bullying

I saw this

So I read the letter. It does indeed show a mind gone astray.

Under the guise of protecting free speech, you published content that bullied Prof. Rambukkana, as well as the university at large, into apologizing for an act of intervention that was neither unfair nor unwarranted. Instead of taking a stand against hate speech, you have given dangerous credence to the views of (University of Toronto Prof.) Jordan Peterson and his supporters, flying in the face of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Professor Rambukkana’s intervention was neither unfair nor unwarranted? Really? Haling Shepherd before a panel of three stern interrogators simply for giving an example of a point of view in a classroom? And there’s a clause in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that says Jordan Peterson=hate speech and must never be mentioned, even (say) as an example of hate speech?

I don’t believe any of that. It’s hyperbole at best.

As the leaked recording of their meeting shows, Prof. Rambukkana did not attack or endanger Shepherd’s right to hold an opinion. Rather, he challenged her decision to represent that opinion in class without a critical acknowledgment of its social impact.

Along with two other people, accusing her of all sorts of evils, refusing to tell her even the number of complaints. That goes well beyond “challenging” her decision, even if you think his challenge had merit, which I don’t.

As recognized by federal law and nearly all progressive social institutions, gender pronouns are a basic site of self-representation.

God almighty.

Just for one thing – in English gender pronouns can’t be “a basic site of self-representation” for the very simple reason that first-person pronouns are not gendered. What other people call us is not our self-representation. It can be all kinds of things, including threatening (cunt, nigger, faggot, kike, etc), but it is not self-representation.

And then there’s the triviality and absurdity, which is too obvious to belabor.

Peterson’s brazen disdain for these protections is a violation of the human rights of students with non-normative identities.

No, it really isn’t. It may be rude or unkind or both, but it’s not a violation of anyone’s human rights. All this hyperbole and overreaching is just going to turn people off rather than convincing them of anything.

When Shepherd was reported for showing the video, Prof. Rambukkana acted as he should have: by challenging her pedagogy and working to make his classroom safer.

Spoken like a true authoritarian. She wasn’t “reported” because there was nothing to report. Someone emailed a complaint, which is a different thing. And again, Rambukkana didn’t just challenge her pedagogy, he hauled her before a tribunal to chastise her.

These people have lost their minds.

10 Responses to “Not challenging but bullying”

Leave a Comment

Subscribe without commenting