[evvabeing]

Dominatrix wants shot at whipping Rob Ford into shape

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/02/05/dominatrix-wants-shot-at-whipping-rob-ford-into-shape

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

What is sexist and patently offensive is the many comments that were made about Robyn Doolittle's appearance. I can't imagine anyone commenting about a male journalist's sex appeal or lack thereof.

Really? Dale got all kinds of 'he's not a manly man' comments. Folks go back to John Roberts' JD MuchMusic days in almost every profile. Katy what'shername from CP24 often attracts comments on her weight. It might be sexist, depending on the context, but it happens to anyone who goes on camera.

 

[Soop]

The Toronto Public Library had received just shy of 500 hold requests for Crazy Town before the book became available Monday afternoon.

Talk about demand. With that many requests, considering the library's 21-day borrowing policy, it would take 10,500 days (or more than 28 years) for everyone with a current hold request to get their hands on a single copy of Crazy Town. Thankfully for them, the Toronto Public Library has ordered 145 copies, which would cut the best-case waiting period down to about 72 days.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...ted-demand-crazy-town-rob-ford-174829269.html

Happy to say that I'm one of the first 145 on the list, so the book is currently 'in transit' to me. When I looked this morning, the hold list was over 700. And saying every person will hold the book for 3 weeks is a stretch. Having been on many huge hold lists, popular books are rarely held for the full 3 weeks by everyone. I know I'll probably have my copy back in a week.

 

[nfitz]

Absolutely, completely, wildly incorrect.

First of all, hate crime is very much illegal in the US: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_crime_laws_in_the_United_States

That's mostly discussing other crimes, where hate is a factor.

if the only crime there is expressing one's opinions, which is what we normally call a hate crime here, then it's legal.

If Facebook were to block those speaking freely, they'd be at risk of being on the losing end of a civil action - doesn't matter what's in their TOS.

 

[DSC]

Happy to say that I'm one of the first 145 on the list, so the book is currently 'in transit' to me. When I looked this morning, the hold list was over 700. And saying every person will hold the book for 3 weeks is a stretch. Having been on many huge hold lists, popular books are rarely held for the full 3 weeks by everyone. I know I'll probably have my copy back in a week.

The bigger the hold list the more copies the TPL buys.

 

[Jatt]

The bigger the hold list the more copies the TPL buys.

Over/Under on when the Ford's once again target Toronto Li-Berries as gravy, I say under 2.5 days.

 

[kbdid]

That's mostly discussing other crimes, where hate is a factor.

if the only crime there is expressing one's opinions, which is what we normally call a hate crime here, then it's legal.

If Facebook were to block those speaking freely, they'd be at risk of being on the losing end of a civil action - doesn't matter what's in their TOS.

Hilarious - FB bans people all the time and blocks photos (blocked breast feeding photos make the news at least once a year). You have no right to a FB account, and when you click on agreeing to TOS (which you have to open an account) they can wipe you for violating it .

Opinions are not hate speech, what turns opinion into hate speech is when violence or criminality are advocated. You can say "Rob Ford is a big fat idiot" but you cannot say "Rob Ford is a big fat idiot who should die a miserable death and I've got $5,000 to make it happen".

 

[Crazy]

Over/Under on when the Ford's once again target Toronto Li-Berries as gravy, I say under 2.5 days.

Two Dougie quotes:

"I've got more libraries in my area than I have Tim Hortons."

And, after Atwood weighed in to defend libraries:

“Well good luck to Margaret Atwood. I don’t even know her. If she walked by me, I wouldn’t have a clue who she is."

The first quote is BS. But even if there were more libraries than donut shops, would that be a terrible thing?

As for the second quote, I'm not a fan of Atwood's, but seriously? You're a 50 year old man born and raised in Canada and you wouldn't recognize one of Canada's most famous writers?

 

[BobBob]

You're a 50 year old man born and raised in Canada and you wouldn't recognize one of Canada's most famous writers?

It's the being proud of it that turns it upside down and makes it into some kind of valuable point to those who are into that type of politics.

 

[SecretSquirrel]

If Facebook were to block those speaking freely, they'd be at risk of being on the losing end of a civil action - doesn't matter what's in their TOS.

Strongly disagree.

I'm not a Constitutional scholar or a lawyer or what-have-you, but it seems to me that your thinking here is a bit off. Facebook aren't impingeing on your freedom of speech if they shut down your group or account arbitrarily; you have the right to say whatever you want, but no right to a platform.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Dang, it's going to be tough sorting through all those phone records what with RoFo fielding 500 constituent calls a day on that thing.

I'm sorry. The mailbox is full. Try again later.

Wonder if the records include the number of full mailbox calls.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Really? Dale got all kinds of 'he's not a manly man' comments. Folks go back to John Roberts' JD MuchMusic days in almost every profile. Katy what'shername from CP24 often attracts comments on her weight. It might be sexist, depending on the context, but it happens to anyone who goes on camera.

http://www.flare.com/celebrity/entertainment/profile-crack-reporter/

And to follow up, Doolittle is profiled in Flare and apparently getting feminist blowback for the hot red lipstick in her picture. Solid article, kinda weird pic, overall it seems people like to pass judgement on pix they see. Who'da thunk?

 

[SecretSquirrel]

http://www.flare.com/celebrity/entertainment/profile-crack-reporter/

Solid article, kinda weird pic, overall it seems people like to pass judgement on pix they see. Who'da thunk?

Here's a picture I chose at random:

 

[ShonTron]

It's the being proud of it that turns it upside down and makes it into some kind of valuable point to those who are into that type of politics.

And most people don't really care who Atwood is. No knock against her, but that anti-intellectualism, politically incorrect BS took Robbie far.

 

[euler]

If Facebook were to block those speaking freely, they'd be at risk of being on the losing end of a civil action - doesn't matter what's in their TOS.

No. This is incorrect. As I've pointed out free speech is a concept created by the first amendment to the constitution, which in no uncertain language says it only applies to Congress making laws. The government can't tell you what to say or not to say on Facebook, or what church to go to, or what have you. That is the first amendment. That's all it means. It has always been interpreted broadly to really stretch the definition of what is 'speech', on the other hand laws *do* exist limiting free speech ('fighting words', for example), but never has anyone tried to suggest it applies to private enterprise.

Forget Facebook for a second, let's say I'm some American that runs a blog, you start making hateful comments so I ban you from commenting on my blog. *According to you, that would open ME up to civil litigation?* Ha! 1) On what grounds? Your constitutional argument certainly won't work 2) What are the damages?

Think things through, come on.

How did we get on this topic anyway?