Jordan Peterson says Ontario psychologist licence may be suspended over public statements

[Knuckle Ball]

No it's not violence. It's just angry people sending e-mails, to the CPSO. The CPSO is complaining they got 200 e-mails last month. Prior to this, the CPSO, probably received a total of 200 e-mails, in the last 10 years!!

At this point, I honestly do not think you are being serious anymore because you are advocating for violence. I respect your honesty and I understand how strongly you feel about this but violence is a mistake.

I’m not perfect. I’ve made offside comment about Trump over the years that did not age well; don’t make the same mistake.

 

[Valcazar]

IMHO, the school board is being ridiculous.

WARMINGTON: Catholic school cancelling teen for religious views not the answer

Could this be a watershed opportunity in Canadian history to marshal compromise instead of cancellation?

torontosun.com

Are you going to talk about what he actually did or not?
What's ridiculous about it, given what he did?

 

[mitchell76]

At this point, I honestly do not think you are being serious anymore because you are advocating for violence. I respect your honesty and I understand how strongly you feel about this but violence is a mistake.

I’m not perfect. I’ve made offside comment about Trump over the years that did not age well; don’t make the same mistake.

I'm not advocating for violence. You are allowed to verbally disagree with staff members (by e-mails etc), of the CPSO (for example). As long as you don't physically hit anybody.

 

[mitchell76]

Are you going to talk about what he actually did or not?
What's ridiculous about it, given what he did?

It's all in that article, by Joe Warmington, that I linked to you.

 

[mitchell76]

At this point, I honestly do not think you are being serious anymore because you are advocating for violence. I respect your honesty and I understand how strongly you feel about this but violence is a mistake.

I’m not perfect. I’ve made offside comment about Trump over the years that did not age well; don’t make the same mistake.

IMHO, nothing wrong with offside comments about Trump, as long as you literally, didn't physically hit Trump.

 

[Valcazar]

It's all in that article, by Joe Warmington, that I linked to you.

No, it isn't.
Why do you believe that is an accurate account?

But sure - let's start there.

You believe he said in class that there are only 2 sexes/genders and the school suspended him.
You also believe that is unreasonable, correct?

 

[Knuckle Ball]

No, it isn't.
Why do you believe that is an accurate account?

But sure - let's start there.

You believe he said in class that there are only 2 sexes/genders and the school suspended him.
You also believe that is unreasonable, correct?

Student arrested for trespassing at St. Joe’s following “non-disciplinary exclusion” | The Eganville Leader

www.eganvilleleader.ca

This kid is a Fa Right, anti-Trans, Christian Nationalist.

 

[mitchell76]

"200 emails a month consisting of serious threats against staff and council members" according to your own post.

So by your own admission, it has gone from 200 threats over the last 10 years to 200 threats a month.
That's an escalation in the threat of violence of 12,000%.

IMHO, it's a grey area, in canada's criminal code.

Is Verbal Assault a Crime in Canada?

In Canada speaking or otherwise communicating some hurtful words might actually lead to criminal charges.

www.masstsang.com

.

 

[mitchell76]

No, it isn't.
Why do you believe that is an accurate account?

But sure - let's start there.

You believe he said in class that there are only 2 sexes/genders and the school suspended him.
You also believe that is unreasonable, correct?

Yes, the school shouldn't have suspended him for saying there are only two genders.

 

[mitchell76]

Student arrested for trespassing at St. Joe’s following “non-disciplinary exclusion” | The Eganville Leader

www.eganvilleleader.ca

This kid is a Fa Right, anti-Trans, Christian Nationalist.

He's still entitled to attend school, like any other student. He didn't threaten any student, or assault any student. He's just expressing his religious beliefs.

 

[The Oracle]

He's still entitled to attend school, like any other student. He didn't threaten any student, or assault any student. He's just expressing his religious beliefs.

Yeah but the trans students weren't feeling safe......Cause you know words equal violence and all.....

 

[Valcazar]

Student arrested for trespassing at St. Joe’s following “non-disciplinary exclusion” | The Eganville Leader

www.eganvilleleader.ca

This kid is a Fa Right, anti-Trans, Christian Nationalist.

This is a much better article in terms of laying out the sequence of events - although it still is only telling his side.

Here it appears he was temporarily suspended for organizing the protest.
That suspension was issued before the protest happened - which is not a good look for the school.

So the question that follows needs to be what the school's justification was for the original suspension.
That after he was suspended, he refused to comply and was warned repeatedly that if he kept coming in he would be considered to be trespassing -- that's pretty clear.
At that point, he can't complain about his arrest or any of it - it seems they have been very open about their position and very measured in their responses as he escalates for the sake of his activism.

It's the original suspension that interests me now.

The "I said there are only men and women in class and they suspended me" narrative is bullshit, as this article makes clear.
The suspension revolves around organizing the protest.
To me, a peaceful protest off of school grounds is nowhere near anything a kid should receive even a temporary suspension from classes for. Maybe if at the protest something happened, but this was before.

So for the moment - until I can get some better details, anyway - the kid is more in the right in my books.

 

[Valcazar]

Yes, the school shouldn't have suspended him for saying there are only two genders.

Which they didn't, as the other article makes clear.

By the way - we agree there.
If all he did was say that in class, the school suspending him would be outrageous.

 

[Valcazar]

IMHO, it's a grey area, in canada's criminal code.

Is Verbal Assault a Crime in Canada?

In Canada speaking or otherwise communicating some hurtful words might actually lead to criminal charges.

www.masstsang.com

.

No one has been accused of a crime here, but thanks for pointing out that actual threats are criminal.

You were complaining that they limited their hours.
They limited their hours because there has been a 12,000% increase in threats, according to you.
Taking safety precautions before the crime happens is perfectly reasonable.

But the pure legality is besides the point.
You are saying that threatening violence against people to make them change their policy is ok with you, which is what I disagreed with.

 

[mitchell76]

No one has been accused of a crime here, but thanks for pointing out that actual threats are criminal.

You were complaining that they limited their hours.
They limited their hours because there has been a 12,000% increase in threats, according to you.
Taking safety precautions before the crime happens is perfectly reasonable.

But the pure legality is besides the point.
You are saying that threatening violence against people to make them change their policy is ok with you, which is what I disagreed with.

I guess you mis-interpreted my comments. I was kind of being sarcastic. Before covid, the cpso, didn't receive very many e-mails, at all. Now because of anti-vaxxers, who are pissed off with the CPSO, for "encouraging injections of covid vaccines", the CPSO is receiving many more e-mails.

According to the criminal law article I linked. "You can legally cuss people out, and say mean things to them." As long as you don't verbally threaten people. For example, you can e-mail a staff member at the CPSO, and call him/her, "an idiot." As long as you don't verbally threaten him/her, in any way.

I also never said that you should threaten violence against anyone, to change their policy. That's what hiring a lawyer is for.

 

[Valcazar]

Luckily, the Liberty Coalition of Canada is actually keeping their correspondence (I'm sure it isn't everything relevant, but it appears to be most of the stuff they have from their interaction with the school) available on their page about the case.

https://libertycoalitioncanada.com/liberty-defense-fund/josh-alexander-v-rccdsb/

There they have a letter from December concerning the November suspension. (warning - it is a pdf: https://libertycoalitioncanada.com/...ecember-20-2022-Suspension_Josh-Alexander.pdf)

You can see the school's argument somewhat in that letter.

Alexander was temporarily suspended pending an investigation into whether or not suspension or expulsion was warranted.
(Remember, this is after he had come to the Principal and demanded the rule be changed, then started organizing a protest. The school seems to have had other complaints about his behavior and so investigated.)

Alexander and his parents refused to meet with the School officials or otherwise help with the investigation.

The principal decided that expulsion was unwarranted, but Josh should get an official suspension of 20 days listed, which he had already served.
He was welcome to come back to school in January as long as he didn't dead name students and he didn't attend the afternoon classes that included the two students who the investigation had found he bullied or harassed.

Josh's lawyer responded that they would refuse to accept those terms.
The principal then said he couldn't come back.
Josh then came back on the first day of school, skipped the two classes he was told he was allowed to attend, and showed up only for the two classes he was told he shouldn't attend in person. He showed up with a camera crew and with no class materials.

He also appears to have refused to talk to the school's teachers and student support services, which have reached out to try and organize the best way for him to get his full education and have specific support for the courses he is missing class time in.

There also appears to be a weird thing where he and his lawyer are insisting he has removed himself from parental control but only for the purposes of appealing the suspension.
This doesn't appear to be legal in Ontario. His parents can appeal his suspension for him, but they appear to not be willing to do that. Either that or the lawyer is specifically doing this so that the appeal can't actually be heard and they can claim to be martyrs because the province won't even let them appeal.

So further reading makes this really look like it is just someone who is not looking for a solution, but looking to escalate as an activist for the press coverage and to political pressure.

 

[Valcazar]

I guess you mis-interpreted my comments. I was kind of being sarcastic. Before covid, the cpso, didn't receive very many e-mails, at all. Now because of anti-vaxxers, who are pissed off with the CPSO, for "encouraging injections of covid vaccines", the CPSO is receiving many more e-mails.

According to the criminal law article I linked. "You can legally cuss people out, and say mean things to them." As long as you don't verbally threaten people. For example, you can e-mail a staff member at the CPSO, and call him/her, "an idiot." As long as you don't verbally threaten him/her, in any way.

I also never said that you should threaten violence against anyone, to change their policy. That's what hiring a lawyer is for.

You linked to an article that said they now received over 200 threatening emails a month.
Maybe you meant in your statement that they probably only received 200 emails over 10 years before that it wasn't 200 threats in the last 10 years but only 200 emails total.
If so, I apologize for misunderstanding.

That is, of course, much worse. That means they may not have received any threats before and are now getting 200 a month. We don't know how much more supportive email they get now, since that 200 only counts the threats.

No one is talking about "people saying mean things". We are talking about the emails "consisting of serious threats against staff and council members" according to the article you cited.
If it was just "now they get 200 emails a month calling them idiots" they wouldn't be limiting access and increasing security.

 

[The Oracle]

Luckily, the Liberty Coalition of Canada is actually keeping their correspondence (I'm sure it isn't everything relevant, but it appears to be most of the stuff they have from their interaction with the school) available on their page about the case.

https://libertycoalitioncanada.com/liberty-defense-fund/josh-alexander-v-rccdsb/

There they have a letter from December concerning the November suspension. (warning - it is a pdf: https://libertycoalitioncanada.com/...ecember-20-2022-Suspension_Josh-Alexander.pdf)

You can see the school's argument somewhat in that letter.

Alexander was temporarily suspended pending an investigation into whether or not suspension or expulsion was warranted.
(Remember, this is after he had come to the Principal and demanded the rule be changed, then started organizing a protest. The school seems to have had other complaints about his behavior and so investigated.)

Alexander and his parents refused to meet with the School officials or otherwise help with the investigation.

The principal decided that expulsion was unwarranted, but Josh should get an official suspension of 20 days listed, which he had already served.
He was welcome to come back to school in January as long as he didn't dead name students and he didn't attend the afternoon classes that included the two students who the investigation had found he bullied or harassed.

Josh's lawyer responded that they would refuse to accept those terms.
The principal then said he couldn't come back.
Josh then came back on the first day of school, skipped the two classes he was told he was allowed to attend, and showed up only for the two classes he was told he shouldn't attend in person. He showed up with a camera crew and with no class materials.

He also appears to have refused to talk to the school's teachers and student support services, which have reached out to try and organize the best way for him to get his full education and have specific support for the courses he is missing class time in.

There also appears to be a weird thing where he and his lawyer are insisting he has removed himself from parental control but only for the purposes of appealing the suspension.
This doesn't appear to be legal in Ontario. His parents can appeal his suspension for him, but they appear to not be willing to do that. Either that or the lawyer is specifically doing this so that the appeal can't actually be heard and they can claim to be martyrs because the province won't even let them appeal.

So further reading makes this really look like it is just someone who is not looking for a solution, but looking to escalate as an activist for the press coverage and to political pressure.

So in other words, he didn't use the deemed appropriate name or pronouns of these trans kids and that's construed to be bullying. Cause the trans kids, who are most likely just confused about being gay, are feeling unsafe. Hmmm...

This is why Peterson was so opposed to Bill C-16

 

[mitchell76]

You linked to an article that said they now received over 200 threatening emails a month.
Maybe you meant in your statement that they probably only received 200 emails over 10 years before that it wasn't 200 threats in the last 10 years but only 200 emails total.
If so, I apologize for misunderstanding.

That is, of course, much worse. That means they may not have received any threats before and are now getting 200 a month. We don't know how much more supportive email they get now, since that 200 only counts the threats.

No one is talking about "people saying mean things". We are talking about the emails "consisting of serious threats against staff and council members" according to the article you cited.
If it was just "now they get 200 emails a month calling them idiots" they wouldn't be limiting access and increasing security.

You make some excellent points. I'm not sure how many e-mails the CPSO, received in the last 10 yrs. Thanks for posting that Liberty coalition of canada material. Much appreciated. You have to assume that Josh's lawyer, James Kitchen, knows what he's doing.

Here's another article, that is not very impressed with the Renfrew school board.

LILLEY: High school student suspended, arrested for saying only 2 genders

It happened in Renfrew about an hour away from Ottawa. A student said there were only two genders in class and then trouble started.

torontosun.com

 

[Valcazar]

So in other words, he didn't use the deemed appropriate name or pronouns of these trans kids and that's construed to be bullying. Cause the trans kids, who are most likely just confused about being gay, are feeling unsafe. Hmmm...

We don't actually know that.
What behavior, exactly, was considered bullying isn't clear from the letter that Liberty posted.
It is possible that going around saying those people are dangerous and are going to attack women in the bathrooms was considered harassment, not the name thing.
(Although repeatedly refusing to call someone by their name can be considered harassment and bullying, obviously.)

It would be nice if the Principal had submitted some kind of comprehensive report, but I doubt he did.

Still, the solution of "limit your contact with those two" was considered untenable by Josh, which doesn't speak well of him.
After all, if you have no intention of harassing someone, an order to limit contact with them and not harass them isn't hard to follow.

It isn't like his complaint about the requirement was "they are going to seek me out and cause trouble", was it?