Castanet

Gixxer wrote:

You missed the point

That is no newsflash !

IMO, it's absolutely imperative that we retain the word "feminism". It is the correct term for those who are most interested in championing women's rights.

The word they choose to describe themselves helps us understand the entire spectrum of feminists today, from extreme to the more sensible moderates, and the actions they're taking in the name of "feminism". Quite simply, their primary focus is, and always will be, using the means available to them to do whatever they think needs to be done in order to improve the lives of women.

dirtybiker wrote:

Gixxer wrote:

You missed the point

That is no newsflash !

And the license plate doesn't have a "word" on it so much as a surname which has been used for decades on all the mans dealings in business. It's never been an issue until some feminist took photos of it and complained. Therein is the true waste of courts time, over a man using his families surname on his own license plate.

A persons surname is exactly that. Nothing to do with grabbing women or violence.

How many people would feel it necessary to take it to the courts to decide if they should have a particular word on a name plate, even if that "word" was their last name? This is a waste of the courts time. It's stupid. Hundreds of millions of people manage to survive somehow with just a regular number, or some allowable word on their plate if they are really just that special, but not this guy. Various license plates are denied for many reasons, so what. Some people just can't accept the word "No", perhaps told them for the first time in their life.

https://globalnews.ca/news/3452256/thes ... u-to-have/

Silverstarqueen wrote:How many people would feel it necessary to take it to the courts to decide if they should have a particular word on a name plate, even if that "word" was their last name? This is a waste of the courts time. It's stupid. Hundreds of millions of people manage to survive somehow with just a regular number, or some allowable word on their plate if they are really just that special, but not this guy.

Perhaps this is the wrong question.

I'd ask: How many people would feel it necessary to complain about a licence plate that had been in use for 25 years? How many people would think this was actually worth making an issue of, to the point he'd have to go to court to continue to use it?

Perception bias?

rustled wrote:

Silverstarqueen wrote:How many people would feel it necessary to take it to the courts to decide if they should have a particular word on a name plate, even if that "word" was their last name? This is a waste of the courts time. It's stupid. Hundreds of millions of people manage to survive somehow with just a regular number, or some allowable word on their plate if they are really just that special, but not this guy.

Perhaps this is the wrong question.

I'd ask: How many people would feel it necessary to complain about a licence plate that had been in use for 25 years? How many people would think this was actually worth making an issue of, to the point he'd have to go to court to continue to use it?

Perception bias?

Not many, which is still why it is stupid to tie up the courts time with it. Whoever the complainant was, is not the person who denies the plate. People make complaints about all kinds of things, many inconsequential, many not. Still, why should this tie up the courts?

Silverstarqueen wrote:Not many, which is still why it is stupid to tie up the courts time with it. Whoever the complainant was, is not the person who denies the plate. People make complaints about all kinds of things, many inconsequential, many not. Still, why should this tie up the courts?

I quite agree this shouldn't be tying up the courts.

A single person complained, and a public agency decided (based on a single complaint) the public's "right to be offended" is the most important right of all, and here we are with someone taking a stand.

I don't think I'm alone in hoping the world doesn't go much farther in this direction, and I find it interesting you see the plate-holder as the culprit who should back down.

Silverstarqueen wrote:How many people would feel it necessary to take it to the courts to decide if they should have a particular word on a name plate, even if that "word" was their last name? This is a waste of the courts time. It's stupid. Hundreds of millions of people manage to survive somehow with just a regular number, or some allowable word on their plate if they are really just that special, but not this guy. Various license plates are denied for many reasons, so what. Some people just can't accept the word "No", perhaps told them for the first time in their life.

https://globalnews.ca/news/3452256/thes ... u-to-have/

This is a logical fallacy. The man has had the plates for over 25 years. The authorities/complainant are the ones who instigated the need for this to go to court. He is exercising his right to stand up for what he and most others believe should be his right to use his own name on his plate. Only through a vague pop culture reference which everyone will forget (or would have) forgotten about is this remotely offensive. He should not be chastised for defending himself.

rustled wrote: and I find it interesting you see the plate-holder as the culprit who should back down.

Poor guy, double whammy against him.
He, being a he, a man with a name, generations old, handed down to him
from his Dad, Who got it from His Dad, who.....etc.

Bad deal being a He, Him, His, in the radical world of fighting against,
in the stead of living, working and sharing together toward a common goal.

Harmony and happiness.

Some clearly get it, and can achieve it.
Some, clearly, cannot.....

Because dammit canadians have a Constitutional right to put anything they want on their license plate and no one is going to stop them, lol.

Silverstarqueen wrote:Because dammit canadians have a Constitutional right to put anything they want on their license plate and no one is going to stop them, lol.

It's all part of the feminist vagenda and making him change his license plate was only the start, next they'll be making him change his name completely.

#genderfriendlynames
#femgenda

Silverstarqueen wrote:Because dammit canadians have a Constitutional right to put anything they want on their license plate and no one is going to stop them, lol.

No one's suggesting that. My goodness, why is it easier to resort to this than it is to simply acknowledge that in this case, the complaint and actions taken were maybe, just maybe, unwarranted?

Silverstarqueen wrote:Because dammit canadians have a Constitutional right to put anything they want on their license plate and no one is going to stop them, lol.

rustled wrote:No one's suggesting that. My goodness, why is it easier to resort to this than it is to simply acknowledge that in this case, the complaint and actions taken were maybe, just maybe, unwarranted?

That is exactly what Grabher's lawyer is suggesting, that his "freedom of expression" is somehow guaranteed on a license plate, vs. the right of the province to disallow particular words on a plate that they deem "inappropriate" . Either you accept that the province has a right to reject some plates, even if you don't agree with the logic of it, or you don't. If Grabher wins, there should be no restriction on certain words or phrases on a plate. Maybe the province should just revert to only allowing given letters and numbers on a plate, such as most people somehow manage to survive with, and end the whole debate right there. Must "freedom of expression" extend to a license plate, or not?

"In a court hearing on Wednesday, lawyer Jay Cameron of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms asked for the right to argue that the wording of regulations for personal licences are so vague that they violate the guarantee of freedom of expression in the Charter of Rights.
Cameron said in an interview that Justice James Chipman allowed Grabher amend his original motion.
Grabher’s lawyers can now make constitutional arguments against the regulation, rather than simply seek to have the government’s ruling overturned"
It would be fairly simple to make the wording less vague, just don't allow personal plates.

ICBC has rejected 13,000 plates since 1987. e.g. 4PLAY has been rejected 100 times, what's wrong with that phrase? That's a lot of freedom of expression being squelched there. I really doubt that any one of those people thought to take it to court. Grown ups just select some other word or phrase and move on.

No one here has suggested this. It's probably a rather over-the-top exaggeration of what the lawyer suggested, but whatever.

You are going to great lengths to ignore the obvious.

It seems you feel the criticism should only be leveled at the man who was told that because of a single complaint, he can no longer use his licence plate. You apparently see nothing wrong with what happened as the result of that single complaint, and apparently feel it's appropriate to shame the plate holder for wasting the court's time because from your perspective, he is clearly the only culprit. All of this strikes me as being quite in keeping with your chosen role as a feminist.

Totally missing the point has become the agenda..