The feminist movement is getting out of control.

[Silverstarqueen]

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.

So, your argument is that feminists (and many others) unfairly support a regulation, and unfairly resent wasting the court's time, but ordinary citizens should be able take the province to court because they have legally been denied their inalienable right to their choice in license plate logo.

If a feminist had chosen some license plate that was (potentially) offensive in the opinion of the province, would anti-feminists be so staunchly defending her right to take such a frivolous matter to the court? They would no doubt be screaming that it was a clear example of feminism gone too far, the disintegration of our society, etc.
For myself, it's not a feminist issue, it's a question of whether the law is reasonable, which it certainly seems to be, so it is silly for someone to waste the court's time on it.

His legal argument is that the law is too vague. But actually it isn't because it clearly states that the province may disallow a particular license choice if it deems that it might offend someone. It doesn't matter how many, if there is a complaint, it is evidence that the license could be offensive to others, so not every offended person has to report it. In fact many license logos are denied when there are no complaints. The law does not state that the applicant for the plate has to agree with the provinces opinion. This is a law which is quite widespread, across Canada and other jurisdictions.
Also, not irrelevant, a license plate is the property of the crown, so the province can regulate what logo is or is not permitted.
His only other argument is it is limiting his "freedom of expression". Since when did the Canadian constitution guarantee freedom of expression on a license plate? . Our society has accepted that "freedom of expression" can be limited on a license plate and the law regarding choices supports that. Not surprisingly, no one else has taken the province to court because their choice on a license plate was denied. Why? because it's stupid and childish.

[dirtybiker]

Truthfully, I did not take the time to fully read your post, It would have
been a waste of my time.
I will take time to respond.

You sure feel the need to waste a bunch of time talking about a licence plate on the other
side of the Country.

Instead of the topic. Your not helping your cause.
More bolstering the OP's sentiment.

[rustled]

So, your argument is that feminists (and many others) unfairly support a regulation, and unfairly resent wasting the court's time, but ordinary citizens should be able take the province to court because they have legally been denied their inalienable right to their choice in license plate logo.

If a feminist had chosen some license plate that was (potentially) offensive in the opinion of the province, would you be so staunchly defending her right to take such a frivolous matter to the court? You would no doubt be screaming that it was a clear example of feminism gone too far, the disintegration of our society, etc.
For myself, it's not a feminist issue, it's a question of whether the law is reasonable, which it certainly seems to be, so it is silly for someone to waste the court's time on it.

His legal argument is that the law is too vague. But actually it isn't because it clearly states that the province may disallow a particular license choice if it deems that it might offend someone. It doesn't matter how many, if there is a complaint, it is evidence that the license could be offensive to others, so not every offended person has to report it.In fact many license logos are denied when there are no complaints. The law does not state that the applicant for the plate has to agree with the provinces opinion. This is a law which is quite widespread, across Canada and other jurisdictions.
Also, not irrelevant, a license plate is the property of the crown, so the province can regulate what logo is or is not permitted.
His only other argument is it is limiting his "freedom of expression". Since when did the Canadian constitution guarantee freedom of expression on a license plate? . Our society has accepted that "freedom of expression" can be limited on a license plate and the law regarding choices supports that. Not surprisingly, no one else has taken the province to court because their choice on a license plate was denied. Why? because it's stupid and childish.

That's not my argument at all. Nowhere have I said anyone has the inalienable right to put whatever they like on a licence plate. Nowhere have I objected to the regulation. And not all of us are screamers. I find it interesting that you choose to think pointing out what's obvious to others here is "screaming".

Making it all about "supporting a regulation" avoids addressing the point. I've picked it out in red for you.

No need to continue to explain your position. IMO, you have every right to staunchly defend the rights of those who might be offended. I realize this is something feminists feel very strongly about, and that they are quite comfortable shaming and belittling those who might offend others, in the process. I think most of us already realize that when someone looks at the entire world through the lens of regulating anything that "could be offensive to others", there's very little likelihood they'll see what happened in this particular situation in any other way. In your eyes, the complaint can't have been frivolous (see red text above), and it's not at all odd to you that in our society the regulators behaved exactly as they did (see red text above). If anyone who thinks this is going too far wishes to take action, that action is "frivolous" and "stupid and childish".)

IMO this is, once again, a good example of why we still need the term "feminist", and another good example of how those who are proud to call themselves feminists see the world.

[normaM]

Guessing the fuqu family not getting their name on a vanity plate
I can just imagine what some of the ppl wanting 4play looked like.. then again I have a vivid imagination
Just ask my Unicorn Blinky

[Silverstarqueen]

That's not my argument at all. Nowhere have I said anyone has the inalienable right to put whatever they like on a licence plate. Nowhere have I objected to the regulation.
Making it all about "supporting a regulation" avoids addressing the point. I've picked it out in red for you.

No need to continue to explain your position. IMO, you have every right to staunchly defend the rights of those who might be offended.I reali ze this is something feminists feel very strongly about, and that they are quite comfortable shaming and belittling those who might offend others, in the process. I think most of us already realize that when someone looks at the entire world through the lens of regulating anything that "could be offensive to others", there's very little likelihood they'll see what happened in this particular situation in any other way. In your eyes, the complaint can't have been frivolous (see red text above), and it's not at all odd to you that in our society the regulators behaved exactly as they did (see red text above). If anyone who thinks this is going too far wishes to take action, that action is "frivolous" and "stupid and childish".)

IMO this is, once again, a good example of why we still need the term "feminist", and another good example of how those who are proud to call themselves feminists see the world.

As I pointed out, and you dismissed with a "whatever",and which you claimed was an "over the top exaggeration", this IS the argument of his lawyer, that it is a constitutional issue, that the regulations are restricting Grabher, and thereby interfering with his guaranteed right to "freedom of expression".
I am not defending the rights "of those who might be offended", I am defending the right of the province to regulate chosen license plate logos, because our society (not just those who are feminists) has supported this regulation, and taxpayers should not have to defend against a stupid frivolous court case whenever someone thinks their logo has been unfairly rejected.
It is not a feminist issue,regardless of how much you try to deflect this into one, as to whether the province has the legal right to restrict his "freedom of expression". His lawyer is challenging the province's right to regulate his choice of logo.
It doesn't matter if that is your argument or not, it is the argument of his lawyer. Which I quoted and referred to. You are the one that wants to make this an issue of feminists somehow interfering with this guy's rights or wishes. Feminists are not taking him to court, he is going to court against the province to protest a regulation, which he doesn't like.You sure don't need to be a feminist to believe that this guy is bringing a frivolous case before the courts over a really stupid issue, his right to choose a logo for his vanity (yes that's what they were called) personalized license plate.

[rustled]

As I pointed out, and you dismissed with a "whatever", this IS the argument of his lawyer, that it is a constitutional issue, that the regulations are restricting Grabher, and thereby interfering with his guaranteed right to "freedom of expression".
It is not a feminist issue, as the whether the province has the legal right to restrict his "freedom of expression". His lawyer is challenging the province's right to regulate his choice of logo.
It doesn't matter if that is your argument or not, it is the argument of his lawyer. Which I quoted and referred to. You are the one that wants to make this an issue of feminists somehow interfering with this guy's rights or wishes. Feminists are not taking him to court, he is going to court against the province to protest a regulation, which he doesn't like.You sure don't need to be a feminist to believe that this guy is bringing a frivolous case before the courts over a really stupid issue, his right to choose a logo for his vanity (yes that's what they were called) personalized license plate.

Again, you want to discuss the regulation and the lawyer and legal rights and freedom of expression issues.

Others may be interested in having that discussion with you. But again, you miss the point. Entirely.

You continue to focus on the frivolity of the lawsuit, while completely sidestepping the frivolity of the complaint and the greater issue of how we got to a point where that complaint triggered regulatory bodies to step in because it "could be offensive to others", as if those issues simply don't exist. You seem unable to see these parts of the bigger picture, or unwilling to acknowledge them, and it seems likely this blindness (willful or otherwise) is because you see the world as a feminist sees the world.

[Silverstarqueen]

How can we protect this poor guy then? Make it illegal to simply lodge a complaint over vulgar or offensive signage in public (particularly from females because they might be a feminist)?
Do you even accept that there might be people who are not feminists who might be offended at some license plates? Don't you think citizens should be able to point out to officials when they believe they may have missed a violation of a regulation? What do we do about them? Perhaps they are fathers of young children who don't want them to see vulgar language on a license plate. Should they be allowed to point out a possible violation?

[Dizzy1]

How can we protect this poor guy then?

By stopping the coddling of the weak minded and telling them to grow up instead of catering to their underdeveloped emotions.

[rustled]

How can we protect this poor guy then? Make it illegal to simply lodge a complaint over vulgar or offensive signage in public (particularly from females because they might be a feminist)?
Do you even accept that there might be people who are not feminists who might be offended at some license plates? What do we do about them? Perhaps they are fathers of young children who don't want them to see vulgar language on a license plate. Should they be allowed to complain?

While I don't see him as the culprit, I'm not sure it's necessary to cast him as a victim. I suppose it's up to him to decide whether or not he appreciates people suggesting he needs protection. Not my circus, not my monkeys. I'll assume your suggestion we make it illegal to lodge complaints is facetious, and that you're not really expecting a response.

And yes, of course I accept some people might be offended by some licence plates. From the inception of privatized plates, the provinces have had regulatory bodies in place to bring common sense to what's printed on those plates, including all of the 25 years that plate you are talking about was in use. Apparently, from the feminist perspective, there's no reason to think maybe, just maybe, acting on this particular complaint is going too far.

[Glacier]

[Glacier]

*removed*

[Glacier]

#FeminismIsMoreCancer


I’ve cheated on every guy I’ve ever dated, and I don’t feel even a little bit sorry...


https://babe.net/2018/02/21/ive-cheated ... orry-37120

[zoo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMzbyhD-xuc

Bingo, an intelligent women,(and lots of others) is getting it...

[Jack DeBear]

Another intelligent woman.

MARGARET ATWOOD

"Am I a bad feminist?"

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/ ... e37591823/

[rustled]

Another intelligent woman.

MARGARET ATWOOD

"Am I a bad feminist?"

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/ ... e37591823/

In times of extremes, extremists win. Their ideology becomes a religion, anyone who doesn't puppet their views is seen as an apostate, a heretic or a traitor, and moderates in the middle are annihilated. Fiction writers are particularly suspect because they write about human beings, and people are morally ambiguous. The aim of ideology is to eliminate ambiguity.