Religious accommodation or ‘accessory to sexism’? York student’s case stirs debate
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
I'm not aware of any religion other than 'Talibanism' that would prohibit people of the opposite sex to talk to one another.
I almost get the impression that that student was testing the waters out of curiosity or something.
I almost get the impression that that student was testing the waters out of curiosity or something.
Orthodox Jews, Hutterites, some Muslims.... and I'm sure there are others I'm unaware of.
My point is that it is a dead horse that the ideologues are continuing to whip. It was never an issue.
Why did this student who has taken recent courses at the University request such an exemption.
This request smells to high heaven
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...igious-accommodation-request/article16294547/
After consulting York’s legal counsel and human-rights officials concerning the Ontario Human Rights Code, however, Dr. Singer also concluded that granting the accommodation “would have no substantial impact on the experience of other students.” And he suggests “the student would presumably not have enrolled” had the course not been advertised as exclusively online, even though Dr. Grayson says he knows the student has taken in-person courses at York.
This request smells to high heaven
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...igious-accommodation-request/article16294547/
After consulting York’s legal counsel and human-rights officials concerning the Ontario Human Rights Code, however, Dr. Singer also concluded that granting the accommodation “would have no substantial impact on the experience of other students.” And he suggests “the student would presumably not have enrolled” had the course not been advertised as exclusively online, even though Dr. Grayson says he knows the student has taken in-person courses at York.
Last edited:
There's no smell, if you smell something, I suggest a shower. The kid made a request. Not unusual for kids to push the boundary and see what they can get away with. He made the request, was turned down, and then carried on. It obviously was not a big deal to him in the end as he DID attend the class and completed the assignment. The only reason this is still going on is because of ADULTS with an agenda trying to make it out to be more than it was.
ya, and your point is? It's policy in a lot of places to accommodate ones religious beliefs. In this particular case, it ended a long time ago. It ended amicably with the kid in question even stating that he was happy with the way it was handled. Why is it still being discussed and debated?
What religion is he referring to. No one seems to know.
People assume it is Islam, and I am just going by the Google hits on the quacked forums.
So with this policy we then accept that women are a lower class of student.
The use of the linkage that a student was out of the country as an equivalent is ludicrous.
If as many think it was a Muslim, Islam is itself divided over gender segmentation in educational facilities.
Myself I do not know what his religious beliefs are.
The request was bogus. The decision was idiotic.
The decision was idiotic? How is that? You think the kids request should have been granted?
The professor is so full of it. He has not problem accommodating other students for all sorts of reasons, but won't accomodate this one, because he's anointed himself the thought police. He doesn't care about the women in his class, or he wouldn't have made such a public issue of this. The women would never have had to know. Now they do, thanks to him.
Meanwhile, we have about 500 'women only' gyms in Canada, but as soon as one student wants to be excused from a project, someone has to play the 'sexism' card, and worry about how women will feel to be excluded from the company of this individual.
Meanwhile, we have about 500 'women only' gyms in Canada, but as soon as one student wants to be excused from a project, someone has to play the 'sexism' card, and worry about how women will feel to be excluded from the company of this individual.
The Dean made the decision in the students favor. The Dept voted against it.
Still policy at York U.
Wait for the next one to come along.
As sure as green apples will give you the runs, it will come.
You know exactly what I meant.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...-student-to-snub-working-with-women-1.2491476
An official with York University in Toronto says although a male student asked to be excused from a group project with women for religious reasons, that's not why his request was granted — a decision that has stirred widespread controversy.
The student, whose name has not been released, cited religious grounds for his request to be excused from a group project in his sociology class. His religion is unclear.
Prof. Paul Grayson originally rejected the man's request that he be allowed to skip the group project and the student went on to meet with his female classmates as scheduled.
But Grayson said he was later told by the dean of the faculty of liberal arts and professional studies that the student should have been accommodated, since the request did not have a "substantial impact" on the rights of other students.
"The course had been advertised as an online course and the student had signed up for the course on the understanding that he would not be required to attend on campus," said Lenton. "If it had been an in-class on-campus course, the likely response here would have been that an accommodation would not have been provided."
Last edited:
What the Dean decided is moot as the kid took the Profs decision to not allow the accommodation.
Only after all the Profs in that dept refused to accept his policy. Only then.
Did they buckle.
Did you miss this little tidbit? Likely would be denied- They have got the brains to come up with a policy. As I mentioned, wait as it is coming.
Canadian Content Forums -
"The course had been advertised as an online course and the student had signed up for the course on the understanding that he would not be required to attend on campus," said Lenton. "If it had been an in-class on-campus course, the likely response here would have been that an accommodation would not have been provided."
here is all that matters in this case.
"The dean’s office told the student if he wished to drop the course, the fee would be refunded. But less than a week later, the student told Dr. Grayson he would “respect the final decision” to deny the request, was pleased with the way it had been handled, and has since met with his learning group."
"The dean’s office told the student if he wished to drop the course, the fee would be refunded. But less than a week later, the student told Dr. Grayson he would “respect the final decision” to deny the request, was pleased with the way it had been handled, and has since met with his learning group."
If that was all it was then, yes. Of course we all realize that blacks were excluded from white only drinking fountains so your analogy makes no sense whatsoever.
Yes, it is policy at York, as it is policy in many institutions. It is not an unusual policy. I'm just pointing out that it is over and done with, the young man is happy with the outcome, so the discussion of what ifs and maybe's is moot. It is becoming a case of mutual masturbation.
I can see your point. But I see it arising for classes on campus. Only a matter of time.