Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: WLJ on March 19, 2021, 09:53:40 AM

Title: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: WLJ on March 19, 2021, 09:53:40 AM
 :facepalm:

Quote
The warrant was issued by a judge for the arrest of a father after calling his biological female child his "daughter," and referring to her with the pronouns "she" and "her." He was found to be in contempt of court.
Father jailed after referring to biological female child as his daughter
https://thepostmillennial.com/rob-hoogland-canada-prisoner-of-conscience

Canadian father who ‘misgendered’ his child reportedly held in contempt of court
https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2021/03/18/canadian-father-who-misgendered-his-child-reportedly-held-in-contempt-of-court/
Title: Re: It takes a village and the village is nuts
Post by: RocketMan on March 19, 2021, 10:20:52 AM
:facepalm:
Father jailed after referring to biological female child as his daughter
https://thepostmillennial.com/rob-hoogland-canada-prisoner-of-conscience

Canadian father who ‘misgendered’ his child reportedly held in contempt of court
https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2021/03/18/canadian-father-who-misgendered-his-child-reportedly-held-in-contempt-of-court/

Just a matter of time before this becomes a regular occurrence on this side of the border.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: MechAg94 on March 19, 2021, 11:02:32 AM
Quote
Hoogland is a father to a gender non-conforming biological female 14-year-old who identifies as transgender and prefers the use of male pronouns. Hoogland has repeatedly called this person his daughter, though the court has forbade it.



[Robert] Hoogland opposes his child’s undergoing “gender affirmative” medical procedures, and has stated this opposition again and again, in the hope of saving his child from irreversible harm. The Canadian medical system, the legal system, and the child’s mother press ahead with social and medical transition of the child.
Sounds like a mess. 
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 19, 2021, 11:18:36 AM
He should hold a memorial service for the loss of his daughter (may she rest in peace).
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: Boomhauer on March 19, 2021, 12:10:17 PM
He should hold a memorial service for the loss of his daughter (may she rest in peace).

There’s a 41% chance he will be holding a real one...
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: MillCreek on March 19, 2021, 12:30:22 PM
I don't know what the laws are in Canada, but in most states of the USA, once a child reaches a certain age, they have the right to provide consent for behavioral health care, and the rights of the parents in the process can be minimal or non-existent.  If there is a conflict, the Courts generally tend to support the rights of the teenager over the parents.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: RoadKingLarry on March 19, 2021, 01:27:37 PM
Quote
Hoogland is a father to a gender non-conforming biological female 14-year-old who identifies as transgender and prefers the use of male pronouns. Hoogland has repeatedly called this person his daughter, though the court has forbade it.



[Robert] Hoogland opposes his child’s undergoing “gender affirmative” medical procedures, and has stated this opposition again and again, in the hope of saving his child from irreversible harm. The Canadian medical system, the legal system, and the child’s mother press ahead with social and medical transition of the child.

What do you bet that dear ole dad still gets stuck with the bill?
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: TommyGunn on March 19, 2021, 02:10:44 PM
I don't know what the laws are in Canada, but in most states of the USA, once a child reaches a certain age, they have the right to provide consent for behavioral health care, and the rights of the parents in the process can be minimal or non-existent.  If there is a conflict, the Courts generally tend to support the rights of the teenager over the parents.

So if a 15 year old daughter wants to be refered to as "son"  her/"his"  43 year old father either complies or is jailed?


 =|     

Uh,   when does Civil War 2.0 start?  :old:
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: WLJ on March 19, 2021, 02:18:56 PM
So if a 15 year old daughter wants to be refered to as "son"  her/"his"  43 year old father either complies or is jailed?


 =|     

Uh,   when does Civil War 2.0 start?  :old:

It won't be civil
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: MechAg94 on March 19, 2021, 02:58:35 PM
So if a 15 year old daughter wants to be refered to as "son"  her/"his"  43 year old father either complies or is jailed?


 =|     

Uh,   when does Civil War 2.0 start?  :old:
In court at least. 
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: MillCreek on March 19, 2021, 03:58:15 PM
So if a 15 year old daughter wants to be refered to as "son"  her/"his"  43 year old father either complies or is jailed?


 =|     

Uh,   when does Civil War 2.0 start?  :old:

I read the source article and saw that the father was deliberately not complying with the court orders, no doubt for what the father thought was good and sufficient reason.  It is a fairly common legal principle that judges do not like people flagrantly violating court orders, and if you do so, consequences will likely follow.  So in this case, the father is taking a stand and accepting the consequences.  I admire him for standing up for his principles.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: Ben on March 19, 2021, 05:00:09 PM
I read the source article and saw that the father was deliberately not complying with the court orders, no doubt for what the father thought was good and sufficient reason.  It is a fairly common legal principle that judges do not like people flagrantly violating court orders, and if you do so, consequences will likely follow.  So in this case, the father is taking a stand and accepting the consequences.  I admire him for standing up for his principles.

There is a concern that there can be court ORDERS forcing someone to refer to another person as "he" or "she". I should be able to refer to anyone I want as "Hey Jackass" without fear of being thrown in the pokey.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: Perd Hapley on March 19, 2021, 05:03:09 PM
So refusing to affirm the person's actual gender is called being "gender-affirming," and referring to a person's actual gender is called "misgendering." That is some of the most lefty left-speak I have ever heard.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: MillCreek on March 19, 2021, 05:26:26 PM
There is a concern that there can be court ORDERS forcing someone to refer to another person as "he" or "she". I should be able to refer to anyone I want as "Hey Jackass" without fear of being thrown in the pokey.

i don't disagree, but if your wife or co-worker got a court order forbidding you to do that, you violate the order at your own risk.  In my legal journals, I have heard of a related concept occurring in divorce cases.  Party A gets a court order for Party B to stop denigrating Party A. If Party B keeps on with the denigrating, the judge can get unhappy and take whatever action they deem appropriate.  Usually this is in the context of 'parental alienation' in which one parent is bad-mouthing the other parent.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: zxcvbob on March 19, 2021, 06:05:53 PM
There is a concern that there can be court ORDERS forcing someone to refer to another person as "he" or "she". I should be able to refer to anyone I want as "Hey Jackass" without fear of being thrown in the pokey.


Seems like a First Amendment issue, don't it?    (BTW, "Hey jackass" might be acceptable because it's gender-neutral)  Although this wasn't in USA, was it?
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: HankB on March 19, 2021, 06:36:59 PM

Seems like a First Amendment issue, don't it?    (BTW, "Hey jackass" might be acceptable because it's gender-neutral)  Although this wasn't in USA, was it?
Actually, jackass refers to a male donkey, so it's not actually gender-neutral.  :old:
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: zxcvbob on March 19, 2021, 07:06:12 PM
Actually, jackass refers to a male donkey, so it's not actually gender-neutral.  :old:


True, but it's not all *that* gendered of a reference, and the girl wants to be called a male anyway so she should be pleased.  :angel:   (how about "Hey, ahole!")
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: TommyGunn on March 19, 2021, 08:12:05 PM
It won't be civil

The first one wasn't, either.  >:D
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: TommyGunn on March 19, 2021, 08:13:58 PM
I read the source article and saw that the father was deliberately not complying with the court orders, no doubt for what the father thought was good and sufficient reason.  It is a fairly common legal principle that judges do not like people flagrantly violating court orders, and if you do so, consequences will likely follow.  So in this case, the father is taking a stand and accepting the consequences.  I admire him for standing up for his principles.

Well, good for him I suppose.  He's a good myrmidon - - - ooops,  I mean martyr. 

It's still nutzo.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: HankB on March 20, 2021, 11:52:39 AM
I'm beginning to think tarring and feathering is too good for some public officials.  =(
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: T.O.M. on March 20, 2021, 01:01:52 PM
i don't disagree, but if your wife or co-worker got a court order forbidding you to do that, you violate the order at your own risk.  In my legal journals, I have heard of a related concept occurring in divorce cases.  Party A gets a court order for Party B to stop denigrating Party A. If Party B keeps on with the denigrating, the judge can get unhappy and take whatever action they deem appropriate.  Usually this is in the context of 'parental alienation' in which one parent is bad-mouthing the other parent.

I have, many times, ordered parents to not denigrate the other parent in the presence of their children.  I don't care what they say to friends, co-workers, etc., but no kid needs to hear one parent speak in nasty terms of the other parent.  Yes, I have held people in contempt for this.  Usually, saying that gets the point across.  I have issued a few fines.  Never had to jail anyone.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: Ben on March 20, 2021, 01:20:30 PM
I have, many times, ordered parents to not denigrate the other parent in the presence of their children.  I don't care what they say to friends, co-workers, etc., but no kid needs to hear one parent speak in nasty terms of the other parent.  Yes, I have held people in contempt for this.  Usually, saying that gets the point across.  I have issued a few fines.  Never had to jail anyone.

My "hey jackass" comment was more about in public. I guess people don't do decorum anymore, but I was taught to wear a suit to court and address people properly and the judge respectfully.

In public, "hey jackass" should not have legal consequences. Maybe "punch in the nose" consequences (and we don't do enough of that anymore thanks to lawsuits).

Regardless, I will simply never be able to process that addressing a female as "she", in court or otherwise, is grounds for jail. I don't see how you can denigrate someone by stating a simple fact.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: T.O.M. on March 20, 2021, 03:42:33 PM
My "hey jackass" comment was more about in public. I guess people don't do decorum anymore, but I was taught to wear a suit to court and address people properly and the judge respectfully.

In public, "hey jackass" should not have legal consequences. Maybe "punch in the nose" consequences (and we don't do enough of that anymore thanks to lawsuits).

Regardless, I will simply never be able to process that addressing a female as "she", in court or otherwise, is grounds for jail. I don't see how you can denigrate someone by stating a simple fact.


I've got to say, I struggle with that as well.  Saying " her wife " or "his husband"  is like nails on a chalkboard to me.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: kgbsquirrel on March 20, 2021, 05:15:30 PM
I read the source article and saw that the father was deliberately not complying with the court orders, no doubt for what the father thought was good and sufficient reason.  It is a fairly common legal principle that judges do not like people flagrantly violating court orders, and if you do so, consequences will likely follow.  So in this case, the father is taking a stand and accepting the consequences.  I admire him for standing up for his principles.

Prior restraint on speech.  Some court orders are never valid, and jailing someone for violation them is nothing more than kidnapping and false imprisonment under color of law.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: lee n. field on March 21, 2021, 09:40:03 AM


I've got to say, I struggle with that as well.  Saying " her wife " or "his husband"  is like nails on a chalkboard to me.

As a related aside, over the (many) years I've run into a couple of women who would always refer to their off-scene significant other as "my spouse",  not "my husband".  Always made me wonder if that was a lesbian partner.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 21, 2021, 01:33:23 PM
As a related aside, over the (many) years I've run into a couple of women who would always refer to their off-scene significant other as "my spouse",  not "my husband".  Always made me wonder if that was a lesbian partner.

The same question arises when I read articles that refer to someone's "partner."
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: Ben on March 21, 2021, 01:39:55 PM
The same question arises when I read articles that refer to someone's "partner."

I remember who weird that sounded to me when I first heard it in grad school. Boomer here, but "partner" was often how guys referred to each other for more than work partnerships - it was for fishing, hunting and what not. You wouldn't say "hunting partner", you just said "partner" and everyone knew it was for some recreational pursuit or other.

Hearing girls use it for their boyfriends was weird. Moreso when guys used it for their girlfriend. Even weirder, grad school was where I first learned of the phenomena of people getting married making up a new last name composed of a part of each of theirs, or guys hyphenating their last name. I still don't get that. If the girl doesn't want the guy's last name, just keep your own. Much easier.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: zxcvbob on March 21, 2021, 01:43:33 PM
I remember who weird that sounded to me when I first heard it in grad school. Boomer here, but "partner" was often how guys referred to each other for more than work partnerships - it was for fishing, hunting and what not. You wouldn't say "hunting partner", you just said "partner" and everyone knew it was for some recreational pursuit or other.

Hearing girls use it for their boyfriends was weird. Moreso when guys used it for their girlfriend. Even weirder, grad school was where I first learned of the phenomena of people getting married making up a new last name composed of a part of each of theirs, or guys hyphenating their last name. I still don't get that. If the girl doesn't want the guy's last name, just keep your own. Much easier.


You can't say "girl" or "guy" anymore (guy is almost okay)  It's racist.   :rofl:
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: lee n. field on March 21, 2021, 02:07:44 PM
The same question arises when I read articles that refer to someone's "partner."

"Partner" I take as "together but not officially married".  Often homosexual, but can be hetero.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: lee n. field on March 21, 2021, 02:13:05 PM
Hearing girls use it for their boyfriends was weird. Moreso when guys used it for their girlfriend. Even weirder, grad school was where I first learned of the phenomena of people getting married making up a new last name composed of a part of each of theirs, or guys hyphenating their last name. I still don't get that. If the girl doesn't want the guy's last name, just keep your own. Much easier.

Back in the '80s, a married couple we knew started off both with his last name.  Then she changed hers it to HerName-HisName.  Then finally went back to her unmarried name.  All while being married.  She "didn't like his last name"  (which was "Lackey", so I can maybe see that.)  They moved away before we could see the end of all this, but I always wondered if they eventually split up.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: HankB on March 21, 2021, 04:11:21 PM
As a related aside, over the (many) years I've run into a couple of women who would always refer to their off-scene significant other as "my spouse",  not "my husband".  Always made me wonder if that was a lesbian partner.
If you ever tune in to some house remodeling show on HGTV, you'll see they seem to select for a lot of those.  ;/
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: Fly320s on March 21, 2021, 04:54:06 PM
If you ever tune in to some house remodeling show on HGTV, you'll see they seem to select for a lot of those.  ;/

I work with two people who were on one of those house buying shows.  House Hunters, maybe?  They said the whole thing is essentially scripted and the couples have already decided on a house and had an offer accepted.  I shouldn't be surprised, because Reality TV is anything but reality.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: WLJ on March 21, 2021, 04:59:48 PM
I work with two people who were on one of those house buying shows.  House Hunters, maybe?  They said the whole thing is essentially scripted and the couples have already decided on a house and had an offer accepted.  I shouldn't be surprised, because Reality TV is anything but reality.

(https://i1.wp.com/the-american-catholic.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/NYY7cDE.jpg?fit=400%2C300&ssl=1)
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: Ron on March 21, 2021, 05:03:42 PM
I work with two people who were on one of those house buying shows.  House Hunters, maybe?  They said the whole thing is essentially scripted and the couples have already decided on a house and had an offer accepted.  I shouldn't be surprised, because Reality TV everything on TV including the news is anything but an accurate representation of reality.

More accurate  :laugh:
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: HankB on March 21, 2021, 10:27:07 PM
I work with two people who were on one of those house buying shows.  House Hunters, maybe?  They said the whole thing is essentially scripted and the couples have already decided on a house and had an offer accepted.  I shouldn't be surprised, because Reality TV is anything but reality.
I'm embarrassed to admit that the first time I tuned in to "Moonshiners" I didn't fully realize that it was fake scripted until about halfway between the first and second commercial break - I knew something was wrong with the show since nobody sane will admit on TV that they cheat on their taxes (even if they're using a pseudonym) but since it was on the Discovery channel I thought it might be for real.

It wasn't and isn't.

Duh.  :facepalm:
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: kgbsquirrel on March 21, 2021, 11:17:06 PM
I'm embarrassed to admit that the first time I tuned in to "Moonshiners" I didn't fully realize that it was fake scripted until about halfway between the first and second commercial break - I knew something was wrong with the show since nobody sane will admit on TV that they cheat on their taxes (even if they're using a pseudonym) but since it was on the Discovery channel I thought it might be for real.

It wasn't and isn't.

Duh.  :facepalm:

But to be fair, tax evasion is our nation's founding sport.  =D
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: RoadKingLarry on March 21, 2021, 11:17:37 PM
Back in the '80s, a married couple we knew started off both with his last name.  Then she changed hers it to HerName-HisName.  Then finally went back to her unmarried name.  All while being married.  She "didn't like his last name"  (which was "Lackey", so I can maybe see that.)  They moved away before we could see the end of all this, but I always wondered if they eventually split up.

I know several womens that have hyphenated their name when they got married. A couple of them were already established in their field of work when they got married so kind of makes sense. My #1 sailing buddy's wife just kept her last name.
I know several couples where the guy took the wife's last name, the latest is one of my nieces and her husband.
What ever works for them is none of my business.
Title: Re: It takes a village but the village is nuts
Post by: lee n. field on March 24, 2021, 07:47:53 PM
Back in the '80s, a married couple we knew started off both with his last name.  Then she changed hers it to HerName-HisName.  Then finally went back to her unmarried name.  All while being married.  She "didn't like his last name"  (which was "Lackey", so I can maybe see that.)  They moved away before we could see the end of all this, but I always wondered if they eventually split up.

OK, now that's a little bit weird.

One of the few posts on my Book of Faces that I've set to world viewable is a link to the obituary of a lady we knew a while back, the mother of some college friends.  It'll get random likes from spammy accounts, now and then.

Who should "like" it today?   This lady.  The lady I was talking about, the one shuffling her name around back in the late '80s, trying to figure out what she wanted to be called.  We have had zero contact with them, nor news, for 30+ years.  I'd totally forgotten her husband's name, and gotten the spelling not-quite-right.

Weird.