An informative explanation of the subtle differences in the law. One of Amy Hamm’s complainants apparently is anonymous. Is this normal? It seems to me that an accused facing the loss of her certification should be allowed to face her accuser and be able to question their motivation. Her hearing does seem to be dragging on. I presume she has the right to appeal. Her defence is being funded by an advocacy group. It seems to me unfair that the BC College has much deeper pockets than Amy and should be liable to pay Amy’s legal fees.
I work at a “progressive” employer that encourages staff to add pronouns to their signatures. I want to be a shit disturber and ask, if I use he/him, does that give me the right to use the men’s bathroom and vice versa?
I would like to say this, and add that I don’t think that’s right, and puts women’s safety at risk. But I assume that if I did that, the lawyers would point to the Ontario Human Rights Code, which forbids discrimination based on gender ID. I think my company would say, we’re just following the OHRC and, by the way, you’re a bigot and you’re fired. No defence for me, right? I don’t belong to any professional group.
Good information. Its clear in JBPs case this is a witch hunt. The thing that kills me is that the complaints were made anonymously, by people who were never his clients, and as far as I can understand, not even resident in Ontario. If anything, through his work, the public opinion of the psychological profession has been manifestly increased. Its clear that the powers that be don't like his opinions or how he expresses them, personally I find him deeply hilarious and to be a very wise man.
An informative explanation of the subtle differences in the law. One of Amy Hamm’s complainants apparently is anonymous. Is this normal? It seems to me that an accused facing the loss of her certification should be allowed to face her accuser and be able to question their motivation. Her hearing does seem to be dragging on. I presume she has the right to appeal. Her defence is being funded by an advocacy group. It seems to me unfair that the BC College has much deeper pockets than Amy and should be liable to pay Amy’s legal fees.
I work at a “progressive” employer that encourages staff to add pronouns to their signatures. I want to be a shit disturber and ask, if I use he/him, does that give me the right to use the men’s bathroom and vice versa?
I would like to say this, and add that I don’t think that’s right, and puts women’s safety at risk. But I assume that if I did that, the lawyers would point to the Ontario Human Rights Code, which forbids discrimination based on gender ID. I think my company would say, we’re just following the OHRC and, by the way, you’re a bigot and you’re fired. No defence for me, right? I don’t belong to any professional group.
Good information. Its clear in JBPs case this is a witch hunt. The thing that kills me is that the complaints were made anonymously, by people who were never his clients, and as far as I can understand, not even resident in Ontario. If anything, through his work, the public opinion of the psychological profession has been manifestly increased. Its clear that the powers that be don't like his opinions or how he expresses them, personally I find him deeply hilarious and to be a very wise man.