Follow-up on the forced woke “gender” speech in BC Courts

I alluded to this sort of in passing ten days ago, and other normals have followed-up with their like-minded missives. First, I wrote this:

“…After the election, the Big NDP Government of John Horgan had time to engage in the likes of this most emergent public social policy proclamation, which is in reality and to us common non-elites, the kind of forced speech and decadence suitable only to the most utterly stupid, moronic governments of the left-wing woke elitist world.

Page 1 of 1
Effective date: 16 December 2020
NP 24

“At the beginning of any in-person or virtual proceeding when parties are introducing themselves, or lawyers are introducing themselves, their client, witness or another individual, they should provide the judge or justice with each person’s name, title (e.g. “Mr./Ms./Mx./Counsel Jones”) and pronouns to be used in the proceeding. If a party or counsel do not provide this information in their introduction, they will be prompted by a court clerk to provide this information. For proceedings without court clerks they may be prompted by the judge or justice to provide this information. […]

“Melissa Gillespie
Chief Judge
Provincial Court of British Columbia”

[See the PDF here if you’re inclined toward reading the rantings of the woke in high places of leftist governments and institutions. “NP 24 Form of Address for Parties and Lawyers”]”

Here’s one of those follow-ups from the normal set this week in the National Post (my highlighting), which itself points to another article:

Bruce Pardy: B.C. courts asking for ‘correct pronouns’ is state-mandated identity politics

“… The previous month, a judge of the Court gave a preview of the implications. The Court was hearing the case of a 17-year-old who wanted to transition from female to male. The father and provincial authorities supported a plan to have an operation to remove both of the teen’s breasts, but the mother had brought an action trying to prevent it. The mother regarded the teen as a girl, and it was the transition to male that was the very issue before the court. Yet the judge challenged the right of the mother and the mother’s counsel to refer to the teen as “her”. According to the transcript, the judge said, “there has been a request that counsel refer to (the youth) as he or him … are you refusing to do that?” Translation: You may be arguing that your client’s daughter should remain a girl, but please acknowledge that he is a boy. …

” … However, when courts enforce prescribed pronouns, they are not merely requiring civility but taking sides in a legal, political, and philosophical dispute. To compel pronouns is to insist that people can own and control how others regard them, and to force them to reflect a particular view of reality.

The agenda is to force social change by making dissent illegitimate. Last week, when Canadian Lawyer Magazine published an opinion piece by B.C. lawyer Shahdin Farsai critical of the direction, an enraged mob of social justice lawyers descended, threatening over social media to boycott the magazine and demanding retraction. The editors obliged, removing the article and pleading that it “did not reflect the views” of the magazine, as though that has ever been the criterion for publishing op-eds. Such is the present state of open debate on these issues within B.C.’s legal community.

“Free people make their own choices. …”

The left-wing woke authoritarianism is indeed progressing, as I have warned. Because that’s progressive.

Vote liberal. Get more of this.

Joel Johannesen
Follow Joel
Latest posts by Joel Johannesen (see all)