quote:

Originally posted by StereoPrincess Harassment does not have to be from a person of authority. For example, if I have a phone stalker calling me and harassing me, that person is not in a place of authority because I may not know who they are but they are infringing on my right to feel confortable picking up the phone.

Ok, yes, you're right. The kind of harassment you're referring to is outside the realm of discrimination and now falls into the category of tort law dealing with harassment in general. This is what I mentioned in my original post about repeated unwanted behaviour. In this case it doesn't necessarily have to be sexual harassment; if a telemarketer calls you at 3 am every night asking you to switch your long distance plan and continues to do so after you've asked him/her to stop, that's harassment and you can sue them for it. The burden of proof in court will be on you to prove that the harassment was constant, undesirable, and not just a single isolated incident.

Strictly speaking, you don't have the "right" to feel comfortable picking up the phone, or to feel comfortable in any other situation. Your civil rights are simply whatever is in our charter of rights, and the charter of rights only applies to public laws and municipal and provincial rules and regulations - it's like if you loiter in a store or cause shit in a club, they can throw you out; you don't have the right to be there, because you're on their private property.

quote:

In the 7-11 case, there is no past case to go on... A service is being stopped because of racist ideas, no matter who causes it. Technically, the store owner could be held partly responsible for not stopping it.

There is no precedent for the 7-11 case because it's ludicrous. The store owner can't be held responsible for anything because there's no responsibility to be had. Rest assured that no competent lawyer would ever take this case. Even IF the store owner refuses to sell to a black person or jacks up the price - those cases have been brought to court and often lose when argued on grounds of discrimination. The way those cases are won is actually through contract law, because the store owner has advertised (i.e. made an offer) to sell a piece of merchandise for a certain price, and he is bound to his end of the agreement no matter who chooses to buy it.

"Human Rights" is sort of a misnomer, actually. The way the laws are structured don't technically guarantee rights to private citizens, but rather place responsibilities on businesses and government to provide equitable treatment for each person they deal with. Again, the laws are there to ensure equal opportunity, so if a guy tells a girl he wants to f*ck her, he's not denying her any rights (and I'm sorry, but the "right to enjoy her day" is not a real right!).

Again, I'm not trying to put you down, but I think you may be surprised if you look at some of the legal precedents out there. Your interpretation of human rights laws is very common, but not correct. If you can show a legal precedent that contradicts anything I'm saying, then I'm willing to concede the point to you, but for now I am going to say that what I'm presenting to you is actually a point of fact, not just an opinion.

To recap: I can't seem to find any clause in the charter that guarantees an individual's "right to feel comfortable, happy, and otherwise free of annoyance."

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

quote:

Originally posted by Durafei Fuck, THAT WAS A woman who complained.. The person who posted on the newsgroup wasn't just anybody. It was a course instructor(also female) for CS 342. She wouldn't lie in her posting. So, the girl who saw the poster, got offended, complained to that female instructor, who in turn posted on newsgroup that it was a woman that complained.

That's a crock of BS. Wouldn't she think this "girl" would be harrassed if people know who she is? SHe wouldn't tell you complained. But if this person walking by saw this poster, right? Then wouldn't countless others too? Get a girlfriend man.

quote:

Originally posted by Durafei Fuck, THAT WAS A woman who complained.. The person who posted on the newsgroup wasn't just anybody. It was a course instructor(also female) for CS 342. She wouldn't lie in her posting. So, the girl who saw the poster, got offended, complained to that female instructor, who in turn posted on newsgroup that it was a woman that complained.

You can't tell me that you're sure that it wasn't the i nstructor who wanted to get rid of the poster and claimed that someoneone else had complained? And you're saying that instructors never lie? How would you know.

Well Aaron, obviously we will have to disagree with our interpretation of how human rights work within our society. If you feel that any man has the right to harass any woman in any sense of the word and she doesn't have a right to fight back in any form (be it slapping you in the face or calling the cops) then we just disagree on this point.
I guess I never realized how much of an idealist I am but I truly hope that you are arguing just for the sake of arguing. Human Rights are real and there have been wars started because of them. Everyone has a right to do what they want as long as they don't bring down another person's right to do the same (this is general politeness). It is polite for Iliya's class to take down the poster if someone complained, what is the big deal? Just like everyone is saying what was the big deal with the girl complaining, but now everyone is complaining about the girl. There is no big deal, just take the poster down and put up another one. It shouldn't be an issue of law which it turned into after the rest of the University heard about it. There may not be set precedents for things like this because we should not even think of things like this happening. It sort of becomes a morality issue and not a law issue. I hope that from reading what you wrote about the actual laws doesn't influence someone on here to actually go and do some of the things mentioned. Do you think it might be wrong to propagate such beliefs?
I am not a law student and never wanted to be, I look at things as either wrong or right (in my head) not if there is a law that can back me up on doing things and I am the "judge" of the things that I do.

It gets somewhat tiresome trying to present facts and examples to support my argument and receive more rhetoric in response to it. So I will try one more time to make it all clear, and this will be my last post in the thread.

All I can say is that the difference between an obnoxious come-on and, say, pushing someone out of the way on the subway or farting in public, is entirely artificial and only really exists within North American society. You consider Malek's original example as harassment because it has to do with sex, but there are hundreds of rude things people do to me every day and I know that there's no legal action for it. That's why brunette says that this is such a sex-obsessed society (I think), it's because whenever something involves sex, it's automatically taboo and different from any other situation in life. To be honest, I find it downright sad and depressing that such a beautiful picture can be labelled as simply "offensive" and declared unfit for public viewing.

"Sex is offensive"... how much more morally "wrong" can you get than to say this? It defies the most fundamental laws of nature. And the disturbing pattern I've noticed is that whenever this subject comes up, women instantly start talking about rape. Was I in a coma when "rape" got listed under sex in the dictionary?

To further that point, was I in a coma when the authorities declared even the most hardcore pornography to somehow be more "degrading" to the women in it than the men? I mean, in the average porno, you don't even see the guy's face, just his dick!

Anyway, to close up, I have read extensively about the kinds of things I'm talking about here, and I could go on in great detail about the kind of extremism I'm trying to fight, but I think that's something best saved for a personal discussion with those who actually care and are interested in hearing the other side of the story. I've found that on this issue, most people are either apathetic or fixed in their own beliefs. If you want to know my sources, I'd be happy to share them, but otherwise, let's just lay this discussion to rest.

No hard feelings, of course!

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here