2017/05/17: Senate hearing on Bill C16
Jordan B PetersonCited 3× on HN, 2017–2020
other · general · 2017–2020 on HN
Jordan Peterson's testimony at the Canadian Senate hearing on Bill C16, which added gender identity and expression to protected grounds. He argues against compelled speech.
Referenced as the hearing that propelled Peterson to public visibility and as a source on the compelled speech debate.
Up next
11 mo on HNRepublic, Lost | Lawrence Lessig | Talks at Google
Talks at Google
10 HN recommender · 2011–2017
9 mo on HNChristopher Hitchens - Free Speech
hitch archive
9 HN recommender · 2018–2022
9 mo on HNWe the People, and the Republic we must reclaim | Lawrence Lessig
TED
8 HN recommender · 2013–2026
6 mo on HN28c3: The coming war on general computation
28c3
6 HN recommender · 2011–2026
6 mo on HNJoe Rogan Experience #1258 - Jack Dorsey, Vijaya Gadde & Tim Pool
PowerfulJRE
6 HN recommender · 2019–2023
6 mo on HNCopying Is Not Theft - Official Version
Question Copyright
6 HN recommender · 2010–2026
6 mo on HNCivil War General-Purpose Computing | Cory Doctorow | Talks at Google
Talks at Google
4 HN recommender · 2012–2026
5 mo on HN"Two incompatible sacred values in American universities" Jon Haidt, Hayek Lecture Series
Duke University Department of Political Science
6 HN recommender · 2017–2026
5 mo on HNJames Baldwin Debates William F. Buckley (1965)
The Riverbends Channel
5 HN recommender · 2016–2024
5 mo on HNJordan Peterson debate on the gender pay gap, campus protests and postmodernism
Channel 4 News
5 HN recommender · 2018–2023
5 mo on HNADL's Never Is Now 2019 | ADL International Leadership Award Presented to Sacha Baron Cohen
Anti-Defamation League
6 HN recommender · 2019–2025
3 mo on HNThe Alt-Right Playbook: Control the Conversation
Innuendo Studios
4 HN recommender · 2017–2025
3 comments from Hacker News
I'm not sure if the compelled speech was actually adopted into law. I'm referring to Jordan Peterson's interview and senate hearing in relation to the law. [1] link [2] ▶ this video
This was precisely the argument in the Canadian Senate, 2 years ago, that propelled Jordan Peterson to public visibility. ▶ this video
> despite numerous respectable legal scholars informing him that you could never get in trouble for not using a person's preferred pronoun because of this bill. ▶ this video As mentioned, his employer's lawyers did think so. The Adversarial Model (legal system) doesn't consider that some parties come to other conclusions. It would be ill-advised to listen to "experts" that are not part of a case, taking the advice of pundits* or other unconnected parties is not compelling evidence of legal finding. *It's primarily in the US, that the mass media promotes education pundits as corroboration in legal matters.