Ryerson student takes veganism discrimination dispute to Human Rights Tribunal of Ont


Goober
#1
Ryerson student takes veganism discrimination dispute to Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

Ryerson University student takes veganism discrimination dispute to Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario | News | National Post

The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario is to decide whether ethical veganism is a creed, as protected by anti-discrimination laws, in the case of a Ryerson University master’s student in social work who claims senior faculty “sabotaged” her career because of her moral equivalence of animals and humans.


Sinem Ketenci, 37, who immigrated from Turkey as a young woman and studied at Lakehead University in Thunder Bay before doing a master’s at Ryerson, alleges a senior professor disagreed with her comparison of maltreated animals with marginalized people, said the connection was “very inhuman and racist,” and pressured Ms. Ketenci’s untenured supervisor into withdrawing his recommendation of her PhD candidacy at other schools, which she called an academic “kiss of death.”


In an interview Monday, Ms. Ketenci said the fallout has extended to her personal life, costing her friends among fellow students, and left her “traumatized.”

“This systemic discrimination and harassment that silences marginalized minority peoples’ voices, such as me as a Racialized Ethical Vegan, is a serious threat towards freedom of speech and freedom of belief,” Ms. Ketenci writes in her complaint to the tribunal.

“I entered the [master’s] program with good intentions, and instead, I was attacked and treated unfairly because of my belief in ethical veganism and because I am a member of a marginalized community, vegan animal rights activists.”

Ryerson declined to comment Monday and has not filed a written response. The complaint has only just been laid. If it is accepted, mediation will precede a hearing.

Correspondence from the school to Ms. Ketenci indicates it views the dispute as an academic matter, exempt from discrimination law.

Ms. Ketenci implies racism motivated the decision to reject her research project on animal rights in social work, but does not explicitly allege it.

“If I were white, born here, this case would not have happened,” she said


Cassandra Hanrahan, assistant professor at Dalhousie University’s School of Social Work in Halifax, published a paper in August describing her encounters with “speciesism, a specific form of discrimination based on species not recognized within social work’s anti-oppressive practice paradigm.”

Through “epiphanies” she felt while walking her dogs — Aureole, a 15-year-old border collie, and Ramon, a beagle — Prof. Hanrahan describes herself as a “witness to animals as marginalized groups whose exploitation is symbolically and empirically linked to the exploitation of marginalized and disenfranchised groups of humans.”


Note
Guess hse better get rid of those leather sneakers eh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veganism

Veganism is the practice of eliminating the use of animal products. Ethical vegans reject the commodity status of animals and the use of animal products for any purpose, while dietary vegans or strict vegetarians eliminate them from their diet only.[1] Another form, environmental veganism, rejects the use of animal products on the premise that the industrial practice is environmentally damaging and unsustainable.[2]
Last edited by Goober; Nov 8th, 2011 at 07:15 PM..
 
mentalfloss
+1
#2
Not sure about the racist bit, but utilitarianism also accepts a moral equivalence of treatment between animals and humans on the basis that both are autonomous beings capable of experiencing pain and suffering. It's a pretty well respected doctrine, and if the prof isn't aware he can ask my Rye-high, ethics teach about it just down the hall.
 
Goober
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

Not sure about the racist bit, but utilitarianism also accepts a moral equivalence of treatment between animals and humans on the basis that both are autonomous beings capable of experiencing pain and suffering. It's a pretty well respected doctrine, and if the prof isn't aware he can ask my Rye-high, ethics teach about it just down the hall.

Do they also get the vote?
 
mentalfloss
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

Do they also get the vote?

What, animals?

This is about ethics, not democracy. If I had a stronger will, I would give up all meat as well. But it's a personal choice that has a pretty good utilitarian foundation.
 
Goober
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

What, animals?

This is about ethics, not democracy. If I had a stronger will, I would give up all meat as well. But it's a personal choice that has a pretty good utilitarian foundation.

Then where would you get that very tiny amount of trans fats the body needs to stay healthy.

http://www.naturalnews.com/034010_tr...s_natural.html

Spencer Proctor, a researcher in the Department of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science and director of the Metabolic and Cardiovascular Diseases Laboratory at UA, and his colleagues arrived at this conclusion after conducting an in-depth review of different types of trans fats. They found that ruminant trans fats found in meat and dairy products have a vastly different fatty acid profile than industrial trans fats like hydrogenated vegetable oil.

The natural trans fats found in organic, pasture-based animal meat and dairy products can actually help reduce the risk of developing cardiovascular disease and cancer, while industrial trans fats found in various processed foods lead to conditions like high cholesterol and coronary heart disease.
 
mentalfloss
#6
I'm sure meat products can provide a negligible health benefit in certain limited aspects of nutrition. I would still say that a vegetarian for all intents and purposes is the healthier diet and one that is better for the environment and the well-being of animals in as much as how the demand would change the industry.
 
Goober
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

I'm sure meat products can provide a negligible health benefit in certain limited aspects of nutrition. I would still say that a vegetarian for all intents and purposes is the healthier diet and one that is better for the environment and the well-being of animals in as much as how the demand would change the industry.

I would also lean that way. No pun intended. But we are meat & fish eaters. Why are we still flesh eaters- taste is one main reason.


And the deal killer is listed below.Also it is not a HR Case in my opinion but an academic one as stated by Ryerson


“I entered the [master’s] program with good intentions, and instead, I was attacked and treated unfairly because of my belief in ethical veganism and because I am a member of a marginalized community, vegan animal rights activists.”
Ms. Ketenci implies racism motivated the decision to reject her research project on animal rights in social work, but does not explicitly allege it.

“If I were white, born here, this case would not have happened,” she said
 
mentalfloss
+1
#8
She needs to decide if it's because she's white or a vegetarian, lol

I'm going to wait for more info. on this one, but my spidey-sense tells me her case is bull****.
 
Colpy
+1
#9
And here I thought getting a post-graduate degree required you to deal with some aspect of the discipline chosen, and to demonstate that you have some form of a functioning intellect.

Guess I'm just old-fashioned.

Not that "social work" is an actual academic discipline.
 
taxslave
#10
Gold digger.
 
CDNBear
+1
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy View Post

Not that "social work" is an actual academic discipline.

Since Kooter began mentoring Native youth and become an Elders helper. He's been offered a scholarship, so long as his chosen course, pertains to social work.

He's really on the fence, since he wants to own his own restaurant.
 
VanIsle
+1
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBear View Post

Since Kooter began mentoring Native youth and become an Elders helper. He's been offered a scholarship, so long as his chosen course, pertains to social work.

He's really on the fence, since he wants to own his own restaurant.

You don't own restaurants - they own you. I hope he goes with the social work. Too many restaurants already and it's a hard hard business to profit in.
 
CDNBear
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by VanIsle View Post

You don't own restaurants - they own you. I hope he goes with the social work. Too many restaurants already and it's a hard hard business to profit in.

I managed a Pizza place years ago, I've warned him, lol. But for him, it's a passion. We pay $110 a month, so he can take the GoBus to school in another district, because it has a culinary course, and a football team.

Although I'd love it if he was drafted into the NFL someday, I think his passion for cooking is far stronger.
 
SLM
+2
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBear View Post

I managed a Pizza place years ago, I've warned him, lol. But for him, it's a passion. We pay $110 a month, so he can take the GoBus to school in another district, because it has a culinary course, and a football team.

Although I'd love it if he was drafted into the NFL someday, I think his passion for cooking is far stronger.

I'd encourage the NFL dream. If he plays those cards right he can open up any damn restaurant he wants after.
 
karrie
+4
#15
I don't know that I'd trust a social worker who views most of her clients as no better than animals, which is exactly what she's done if you look at her comparing marginalized people to mistreated animals.

The fact that even her friends haven't stuck by her, tells me that there is more to her story, more to how she offends people, than just the fact that she's a vegan from Turkey. Colleges and Universities are riddled with vegans.

Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBear View Post

I managed a Pizza place years ago, I've warned him, lol. But for him, it's a passion. We pay $110 a month, so he can take the GoBus to school in another district, because it has a culinary course, and a football team.

Although I'd love it if he was drafted into the NFL someday, I think his passion for cooking is far stronger.

Social work and feeding people can easily go hand in hand. Just throwing it out there When I was renting to a girl through social services, she used to go twice a week to a community kitchen to learn how to cook, and put her meals together there for the week.
 
SLM
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by karrie View Post

I don't know that I'd trust a social worker who views most of her clients as no better than animals, which is exactly what she's done if you look at her comparing marginalized people to mistreated animals.

The fact that even her friends haven't stuck by her, tells me that there is more to her story, more to how she offends people, than just the fact that she's a vegan from Turkey.

Good point.

Quote:

Colleges and Universities are riddled with vegans.

It is the age for that phase, for some.
 
WLDB
+1
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by karrie View Post

I don't know that I'd trust a social worker who views most of her clients as no better than animals, which is exactly what she's done if you look at her comparing marginalized people to mistreated animals.


I'm of the same opinion as her. You're looking at it as her lowering her view of humans whereas for me its raising my view of animals.
 
bobnoorduyn
+2
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

I'm sure meat products can provide a negligible health benefit in certain limited aspects of nutrition. I would still say that a vegetarian for all intents and purposes is the healthier diet and one that is better for the environment and the well-being of animals in as much as how the demand would change the industry.

Animal protein has been a year-round staple for most populations for all recorded time, with vegetation being a supplement during the warmer months. How advanced a society is, or was, and their geographic location determines the balance between the two. Generations of consuming a particular diet conditions the body genetically. Switching to a total vegetarian or vegan diet may show no ill effect immediately, but may effect future generations. The practise of turning rumanants into omnivores lead to disastrous results in a very short time. If vegetarian diets were so heathy the demand for the scientific wisardry in manufactured dietary supplements would not be needed.

Quote: Originally Posted by WLDB View Post

I'm of the same opinion as her. You're looking at it as her lowering her view of humans whereas for me its raising my view of animals.

Unless you already had a lower view of animals I don't see how she could raise it without lowering your view of humans. It is the purpose of animal rights groups to do just that, and virulent veganism is a part of it. They use relativism in much the same way as any pressure group, even our supreme court uses it, and it works, to the detriment of society. If you can't raise the bar on one side, you lower it on the other. It is done by demonizing humans, (the ones who don't follow their ideology), and deifying animals. It is not enough for these groups to make a choice for themselves, but to force this choice on everyone else, either through shame, or by government decree, i.e. the EU ban on Canadian seal products. I suppose I'll give them more credit when they are able to convince lions and tigers to abide by their morality and leave the zebras and antelope alone.
 
mentalfloss
#19
We don't need meat and are healthier without it. Becoming a vegetarian is in fact good for us, the environment and the well being of the sentient creatures (with fully developed nervous systems) that we slaughter everyday.

This is a personal choice, but society will continue to move in that direction. One gambit that we have to get over in order to help settle this is for people to accept death, but not slaughter.
Last edited by mentalfloss; Nov 10th, 2011 at 07:47 AM..
 
DurkaDurka
+5
#20  Top Rated Post
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

We don't need meat and are healthier without it. Becoming a vegetarian is in fact good for us, the environment and the well being of the sentient creatures (with fully developed nervous systems) that we slaughter everyday.

This is a personal choice, but society will continue to move in that direction. One gambit that we have to get over in order to help settle this is for people to accept death, but not slaughter.

Perhaps you don't need meat, but I certainly do. Now take your mango smoothie and beat it, kid!
 
taxslave
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by VanIsle View Post

You don't own restaurants - they own you. I hope he goes with the social work. Too many restaurants already and it's a hard hard business to profit in.

Far too many social workers as well and they are a drain on the tax system.

Quote: Originally Posted by DurkaDurka View Post

Perhaps you don't need meat, but I certainly do. Now take your mango smoothie and beat it, kid!

Where I grew up there were two food groups. Meat, and all the rest.
 
petros
#22
I want peanut oil put back in peanut butter. Can I go to the SCC?
 
karrie
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by WLDB View Post

I'm of the same opinion as her. You're looking at it as her lowering her view of humans whereas for me its raising my view of animals.


I'm looking at it strictly the way the article puts it. It doesn't say she compares humanity to animals, only marginalized people are compared to animals. Thus she's lowering only a certain segment of the population. I suspect if she were making the comparison you're making, and presenting it as you just did, she would not have alienated everyone.
 
mentalfloss
#24
There are so many different inter-related issues about this item that it's hard to get an accurate depiction of the context.

I'm not sure how she's comparing marginalized people to animals, and exactly what segment and how they are marginalized. The only comparison between both, that I've ever seen/read relates to an ethical standpoint on the autonomy of the individual compared to animals.

I could go dig up my practical ethics book if everyone wants to get bored, but I think the gist is that you can actually show how an animal's life should be of higher value than that of a vegetative newborn (as an example) and therefore the latter can be axed while the former shouldn't be prevented a fruitful existence.
Last edited by mentalfloss; Nov 10th, 2011 at 12:02 PM..
 
IdRatherBeSkiing
+2
#25
This thread is making me crave a nice big juicy steak.
 
Colpy
+2
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

We don't need meat and are healthier without it. Becoming a vegetarian is in fact good for us, the environment and the well being of the sentient creatures (with fully developed nervous systems) that we slaughter everyday.

This is a personal choice, but society will continue to move in that direction. One gambit that we have to get over in order to help settle this is for people to accept death, but not slaughter.

Baloney.

See Vitamin B-12, the deficiency of which causes problems with the nervous system.

Somehow that makes perfect sense.

Yes, I know you can get supplements or food enhanced with B-12, that is as long as you live in a urban area in a first world country, and have the money.
 
karrie
+1
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

There are so many different inter-related issues about this item that it's hard to get an accurate depiction of the context.

I'm not sure how she's comparing marginalized people to animals, and exactly what segment and how they are marginalized. The only comparison between both, that I've ever seen/read relates to an ethical standpoint on the autonomy of the individual compared to animals.

I could go dig up my practical ethics book if everyone wants to get bored, but I think the gist is that you can actually show how an animal's life should be of higher value than that of a vegetative newborn (as an example) and therefore the latter can be axed while the former shouldn't be prevented a fruitful existence.

And see, I think if you view a baby, vegetative or not, as less deserving of existence than an animal, healthy or otherwise, you are showing that you truly don't give a **** about the humans that are all connected to that child. As purely intellectual endeavour, devoid of empathy and compassion, I'm sure you cuold spell it out for me easily. But it would make me respect you a whole lot less.
 
IdRatherBeSkiing
+4
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by Colpy View Post

Baloney.

Please refrain from quoting meat in a Vegan thread.
 
The Old Medic
#29
Another nut job filing a complaint.

Want to bet that she ends up marrying an animal?
 
Cannuck
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalfloss View Post

We don't need meat and are healthier without it.

False.