Bill’s C-10 & C-11. If we aren’t talking about it already, shouldn’t we be?

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
19,062
4,737
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
That would seem to be a reasonable take away. However - while that might very well be true it is still also true that someone should be able to express their personal political opinion there without fear of being attacked by a gov't body just for having that opinion.

(I haven’t had a chance to review the videos above as I’m listening to my Girlfriend play music on her phone on a Sunday morning & just don’t want these to compete with that)

1673190090487.jpeg
Another complaint, this one made over the telephone, and summarized in notes from Feb. 9, noted that Peterson had spoken of Trudeau and Butts in “unprofessional, embarrassing, threatening, abusive and harassing” language.

The caller is “embarrassed to be in the same college,” and “concerned about clients under his treatment and also in the public domain that he is feeding misinformation in general,” the summarized notes indicate.

1673190245208.jpeg
1673190460421.jpeg

Think about it Ron, you're someone needing a psych doctor. Someone not as popular as Peterson throws out tweets that are, say, racist, or anti-GLBT, or misogynistic; you honestly think that the patients will have faith in that doctor, or the CPO in general, seeing stuff like this and not seeing it dealt with? Considering psychology is all about the mental state of people, psychologists should HAVE to be held to a higher standard about what they say/do publicly when it concerns patients.
If I needed the services of a psych doctor, I’m assuming (yeah, I know) that I’d have a choice in who that was. If I didn’t like a psych doctor’s political opinions, I’d be free to chose another without cancelling the first doctors career, wouldn’t I?
….so he really doesn’t need his license that the Ontario COP is threatening…..but it’s sure a warning for others that still need their licenses and are still under the potential thumb of the Ontario COP or other censoring parties that wish to decide what is acceptable thoughts and opinions compared to their own.
As it should, or rather, the thoughts and opinions as laid out by their regulations.
A governing body regulating opinions and thoughts. That’s….got a bad feel.
Reading through their guidelines, it seems like for the most part their intentions are good, but it’s still seems like an overreach for the most part with respect to Petersons, political opinions of the current Canadian governing party.
 

Taxslave2

Council Member
Aug 13, 2022
1,018
509
113
The CPO is a regulatory body that has to look out not only for it's members, but the patients said members will interact with, just like all other medical boards.

JP has two choices; follow through with the COP request, or give up his license.

Not that he's been actually practicing for a while.

So really what's the big deal? He's still a "doctor", he just can't actually sit with patients anymore.

The reality is JP is a mouthpiece to the Right; an "educated intellectual" who they can throw out there when accused of being anti-education (like they are; I mean they used to be anti-academia for the longest time and still are, unless you're like JP and are "anti" with them). He's a tool, nothing more.

And yes, I HAVE listened to his arguments, which boil down to nothing but word salad to confuse the ACTUAL points he makes. And when he DOES make a point, it's nowhere near valid or even correct to the conversation at hand.

Then there is his opinions in general which, well.... at least he's no longer being obsessive over Elliott Page.

"And who are they to insist on social media training for the greatest media personality their profession has even seen?" Because he's NOT the greatest media personality for their profession and that people see as such IS the point. And they are the regularity board who have a RIGHT to monitor and deal with their members as they deem fit.
Spoken like a true liberal sycophant. Are you on turdOWE's payroll now too?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Serryah

Taxslave2

Council Member
Aug 13, 2022
1,018
509
113
"And who are they to insist on social media training for the greatest media personality their profession has even seen?" Because he's NOT the greatest media personality for their profession and that people see as such IS the point. And they are the regularity board who have a RIGHT to monitor and deal with their members as they deem fit.


Not true. They are a regulatory board to ensure members follow the rules laid down for their profession. To ensure patients are treated in a professional manner, and to aid in the dissemination of new procedures and information to their members. They are NOT there to force lunatic political views on their members.
 

Serryah

Senate Member
Dec 3, 2008
7,440
1,492
113
New Brunswick
If I needed the services of a psych doctor, I’m assuming (yeah, I know) that I’d have a choice in who that was. If I didn’t like a psych doctor’s political opinions, I’d be free to chose another without cancelling the first doctors career, wouldn’t I?

You might have a choice, might not, depending how many psych docs are in your area. If you're lucky, sure you can choose...

But it's not the point.


A governing body regulating opinions and thoughts. That’s….got a bad feel.

No, they govern the consequences of thoughts and opinions that could tarnish the appearance of Psychologists needing to be impartial, as a whole.

Reading through their guidelines, it seems like for the most part their intentions are good, but it’s still seems like an overreach for the most part with respect to Petersons, political opinions of the current Canadian governing party.

It's, again, consequences of his thoughts/ideas/opinions that he put out publicly and how it makes the profession appear as a whole.

It's no different than any other job and a company having their own outline of what you're allowed/not allowed to present/be like in public due to blowback to that company.

A woman who has trauma over some incident in her past with male members of her family is looking for a psych doc. If she's able to choose one, sure, she can always look online to see if there are scandals concerning local docs, but she shouldn't HAVE to. A doctor that actually gives a shit about their PATIENTS shouldn't be putting themselves out there in a way to expose themselves as no longer trustworthy of the patients they serve. And then there's the lack of punishment/dealing with a doctor who HAS views that could harm the profession. If they don't hold that doc to account, what about others?

It's ethics, simple as that.
 

Dixie Cup

House Member
Sep 16, 2006
4,850
2,884
113
Edmonton

(I haven’t had a chance to review the videos above as I’m listening to my Girlfriend play music on her phone on a Sunday morning & just don’t want these to compete with that)

View attachment 16944
Another complaint, this one made over the telephone, and summarized in notes from Feb. 9, noted that Peterson had spoken of Trudeau and Butts in “unprofessional, embarrassing, threatening, abusive and harassing” language.

The caller is “embarrassed to be in the same college,” and “concerned about clients under his treatment and also in the public domain that he is feeding misinformation in general,” the summarized notes indicate.

View attachment 16945
View attachment 16946


If I needed the services of a psych doctor, I’m assuming (yeah, I know) that I’d have a choice in who that was. If I didn’t like a psych doctor’s political opinions, I’d be free to chose another without cancelling the first doctors career, wouldn’t I?


A governing body regulating opinions and thoughts. That’s….got a bad feel.
Reading through their guidelines, it seems like for the most part their intentions are good, but it’s still seems like an overreach for the most part with respect to Petersons, political opinions of the current Canadian governing party.
Apparently, people are unable to decide for themselves what they can do. An analogy to Dr. Peterson's situation would be - if one doesn't like a TV program either change the channel or turn the bloody thing off. Ron is right - there are other phycologists out there. Do your due diligence when looking for one (or anything really). Common sense (which isn't common any more).
 

Serryah

Senate Member
Dec 3, 2008
7,440
1,492
113
New Brunswick
Apparently, people are unable to decide for themselves what they can do. An analogy to Dr. Peterson's situation would be - if one doesn't like a TV program either change the channel or turn the bloody thing off. Ron is right - there are other phycologists out there. Do your due diligence when looking for one (or anything really). Common sense (which isn't common any more).

Yeah, except that works only if you have an area with Psych doctors available to you beyond the number of one.

This is Canada, majority rural, sometimes you don't have that choice; sometimes you don't even have ONE, hence the mental health crisis going on.

Last I heard, it's FIVE YEARS to see a psychologist.

And the help you can get online/on the phone? Not the same.

So if JP was your only option, depending on your situation, there IS no option.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Dixie Cup

Serryah

Senate Member
Dec 3, 2008
7,440
1,492
113
New Brunswick
Not true. They are a regulatory board to ensure members follow the rules laid down for their profession. To ensure patients are treated in a professional manner, and to aid in the dissemination of new procedures and information to their members. They are NOT there to force lunatic political views on their members.


They're not forcing views on their members.

They're saying "If your views break the rules of conduct, there's CONSEQUENCES for that behaviour".

There's a difference.
 

Serryah

Senate Member
Dec 3, 2008
7,440
1,492
113
New Brunswick
Ron, this came up on my youtube feed and it's an interesting video breaking down JP and his philosophy ideas only and why there are issues with it.


And I want to add that, some of the videos I've seen of JP from years ago, he actually made some sense and I could agree with what he's saying. But now it's like something broke in his brain and it doesn't make sense anymore, and he almost contradicts himself and his previous views/opinions.

As a final thought to the COP issue; what Peterson is undergoing is no different than, say, a teacher who comes out vocally to support the holocaust didn't happen, or that (and I'm not going to say the OTHER N word) Fascists in Italy had the right idea. On top of that, if said teacher also was verbal against Government, that too would lead to a "training" for them about what to and not to say on social media.

Hell, even people in my position of work can't be absolutely "free speech", there are some guidelines that need to be followed or I can be sent for 'training' or 'fired'. So, the point is, what JP is going through is no different than anyone else in this day and age who is on social media and is employed in certain institutions.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
19,062
4,737
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
I went through about 10 minutes of the above video. Five 2 minute shots and the last five minutes…Peterson seems like a blowhard (it could just be because I’m tired), but it didn’t take long for him to sound like the teacher from peanuts. Postmodernism and destructionism and how it’s interpreted in his own slant influencing, young men on philosophy, etc…meh….is this really something a governing body need to inflict censorship upon? It’s still seems like an overreach.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
103,595
8,236
113
Low Earth Orbit
It's cancel culture. It's an attack on Peterson for simple exercising the Right of opinion and advice on how the live a better life. If people like his opinions so be it. He makes no "calls of action" unless promoting rational, logical thought is considered harmful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dixie Cup

Serryah

Senate Member
Dec 3, 2008
7,440
1,492
113
New Brunswick
I went through about 10 minutes of the above video. Five 2 minute shots and the last five minutes…Peterson seems like a blowhard (it could just be because I’m tired), but it didn’t take long for him to sound like the teacher from peanuts. Postmodernism and destructionism and how it’s interpreted in his own slant influencing, young men on philosophy, etc…meh….is this really something a governing body need to inflict censorship upon? It’s still seems like an overreach.

Well stuff like this isn't why he'd be up before the board, rather it's moreso to give an idea of how... full of BS he is.

I've already gone into why the board has every right to do what they're doing at this point.
 

Taxslave2

Council Member
Aug 13, 2022
1,018
509
113
They're not forcing views on their members.

They're saying "If your views break the rules of conduct, there's CONSEQUENCES for that behaviour".

There's a difference.
Not what is happening. He is being censured for not following lefty groupthink.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dixie Cup

Taxslave2

Council Member
Aug 13, 2022
1,018
509
113
Yeah, except that works only if you have an area with Psych doctors available to you beyond the number of one.

This is Canada, majority rural, sometimes you don't have that choice; sometimes you don't even have ONE, hence the mental health crisis going on.

Last I heard, it's FIVE YEARS to see a psychologist.

And the help you can get online/on the phone? Not the same.

So if JP was your only option, depending on your situation, there IS no option.
Same could be said about some far left fruitloop. If that is the only shrink in town, you will be in trouble. And yes, there just happens to be one here. Fortunately, we have options. Then there was our former conservative MP, who is a shrink, that also happens to be a raving loon.
I don't know how long the wait is here for an appointment for a shrink or psychologist here because as a firefighter/ first responder I get preferential treatment. Usually a day or two.
 

Serryah

Senate Member
Dec 3, 2008
7,440
1,492
113
New Brunswick
Not what is happening. He is being censured for not following lefty groupthink.

That's exactly what's happening and happens to other people in other work places all across the planet.


Same could be said about some far left fruitloop.

Absolutely agree; and if a far left psychologist spouted out the BS that deserved the board to step in, and there were protests about it, I'd agree with the board then too.


If that is the only shrink in town, you will be in trouble. And yes, there just happens to be one here. Fortunately, we have options. Then there was our former conservative MP, who is a shrink, that also happens to be a raving loon.
I don't know how long the wait is here for an appointment for a shrink or psychologist here because as a firefighter/ first responder I get preferential treatment. Usually a day or two.

Lucky you; as a medical employee we don't get that and I'm not sure our local FD's get that either. For us, at work, they refer you to Employee Help stuff and while it might work for some, others it doesn't. Immediate crisis they suggest going to an ER or calling the suicide line or help line, but that's limited too. There's all sorts of factors that go into someone needing a psych doc and not getting them.

Trust in your "Shrink" or psych doc shouldn't be part of that list. As a patient you should be able to go to either without fear of biases interfering in their help to you.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
19,062
4,737
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Which is part of my thought on the issue; that he's making more of a big deal of it than it needs to be.
As it should, or rather, the thoughts and opinions as laid out by their regulations.

Think about it Ron, you're someone needing a psych doctor. Someone not as popular as Peterson throws out tweets that are, say, racist, or anti-GLBT, or misogynistic; you honestly think that the patients will have faith in that doctor, or the CPO in general, seeing stuff like this and not seeing it dealt with? Considering psychology is all about the mental state of people, psychologists should HAVE to be held to a higher standard about what they say/do publicly when it concerns patients.
Canadian universities and national research funding agencies insist on mandatory training that offers highly-politicized claims about discrimination and equity. Failure to accept the training means you might not get hired, or be allowed to sit on hiring committees — or, for universities themselves, that they won’t receive highly coveted Canada Research Chair positions. This training isn’t meant simply to avoid discrimination in the workplace — for that would be commonsensical and not at all controversial. Rather, the so-called training redefines the meaning of what counts as discrimination in ways that are very debatable — and yet no debate is allowed.

What the College of Psychologists is doing is the equivalent of an old school teacher who wants to discipline a whole classroom and so selects the biggest kid to come to the front of the class to face the strap.

The big kid might be able to handle the pain, but the dark message is really for all the others watching. “This is what happens when you act out,” the college is saying. “This is what we do to those who break our rules.”

The college claims it’s upholding professional public standards. Yet any reasonably intelligent person can see the subjective bias they are using to make that claim.
Since 2018, Peterson’s Practice & Teaching Duties at the University of Toronto have been on hold. He’s got a couple of best selling books & a podcast, so he really doesn’t need his license that the Ontario COP is threatening…..but it’s sure a warning for others that still need their licenses and are still under the potential thumb of the Ontario COP or other censoring parties that wish to decide what is acceptable thoughts and opinions compared to their own.
And he may not need the license today, but what if tomorrow he decides that he wants to give up the public spectacle and go back to being a simple psychiatrist or teacher? He earned the license, he should be allowed to keep it if he wants regardless of his politics.
The issue here isn’t the political opinion. It is instead the way professional associations and institutions are being taken over by activists who demand that only certain political views are the new normal.

It’s easy to see this as a power grab, and it is. But it’s also likely that the psychologists and other professionals genuinely believe what they’re doing.
It's not that he can't have an opinion but rather it falls under the "opinions have consequences" thing. His basic continual misogynistic attitude is a great place to start. And then there's his opposition to Bill C-16.

Over the last few years as our media landscape has polarized in correlation with the rise of social media, we have not spent nearly enough time noting how this transformed informational world has affected our highly educated professionals. Many of our educated classes listen to CBC radio and read the Globe and Mail and the New York Times, and many seem not to have noticed how the viewpoints they find in those outlets have narrowed. It can seem as if the radicalization and polarization in our media ecosystem has all taken place somewhere else and to somebody else. Polarization is about Fox News and right-wing media personalities like Ben Shapiro. Surely it can’t be about me!

It’s too easy for such figures to believe that they occupy the centre — even as the news outlets veer leftward, and increasingly exclude opinions now deemed “problematic” but which were, five minutes ago, simply an alternative perspective.
Since 2018, Peterson’s Practice & Teaching Duties at the University of Toronto have been on hold. He’s got a couple of best selling books & a podcast, so he really doesn’t need his license that the Ontario COP is threatening…..but it’s sure a warning for others that still need their licenses and are still under the potential thumb of the Ontario COP or other censoring parties that wish to decide what is acceptable thoughts and opinions compared to their own.
Now I don't know for sure if he's been practicing or not; I am admittedly assuming. Considering everything he's been doing since he got kicked out of UoT, likely he has no real patients, but keeps on the right wing circuit of mouth pieces.
Certainly, radicalization happened on the right. Polarization has been a two-way street. But the difference is that it was more obvious what was happening to those on the right. They actively sought out different points of view. Many of our professionals and intelligentsia continued to sit in the same space, ingesting the same media, and failing to realize that their new normal was radically different from what it had once been. Polarization came for them and they didn’t need to get out of their chair.

As the Trump presidency deranged America, and as woke ideology jumped into the mainstream, many of our highly educated professionals simply switched what they saw as normal. The Overton window shifted. Canada became a genocidal state; questions like “where are you from?” became racist, and a white kid sporting dreadlocks went from being a bad hair-fashion choice to evidence of white supremacy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dixie Cup

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
51,631
4,697
113
Washington DC
Leads to the question. . . is "compensatory discrimination" the right answer for past discrimination (which never happened, of course)?

My answer is no, it's not worth giving the supremacists the fodder for their terrified whining.

Rather, strict and criminal enforcement of discrimination violations seems to be the best answer.