Chalk another one up for "Dumb ass decisions by the Manitoba Human Rights Commission". Before I even begin I have to ask the question:
"Are these people for real?"
Our story begins with 17 year old identical twins Amy and Jesse Pasternak. Two good ole’ Canadian girls from my hometown of Winnipeg city who have a passion for our beloved sport of hockey. They love the game so much that, naturally, they want to play the game for a team in an organized league. Sounds good so far. Canada’s women took home the gold in the past Winter Olympics so to see young ladies want too continue that dream is encouraging. And just as luck would have it Amy and Jesse’s high school (West Kildonan Collegiate) just happens to “ice” a girls hockey team every year. Great! Right?
Well, not really. You see Amy and Jesse are just not content playing with girls. They wanted to try out for the boys team. There is only one problem...their not boys. Matter settled then? Your a girl so you try out for the girls team correct? Not according to them. These little princess’s felt that because they were denied a tryout on the boys team (because they were NOT boys, DUH!) that this constituted an act of gender discrimination. WHAT?
The twins began their little quest back in June of 2006 by filing a complaint of gender discrimination against the Manitoba High School Athletics Association (MHSAA) for not allowing them to try out for their boys high school.hockey team. The response from MHSAA is that there was simply no need for the girls to cry “discrimination” when a team was already available for them to try out for. That of course being the girls high school team and guess what? The boys are not allowed to try out for the girls team. All things now being equal..case closed!
Not for the Human Rights Commission. The fact that they even considered the case in the first place shows just how mentally challenged these people really are (that means they are brainwashed with political correctness BTW) The case was not only sent to adjudication but the asinine, redundant, and blatantly bias findings of the adjudicator HERself , M. Lynn Harrison, was clearly demonstrated in her own discriminatory settlement. That’s right! The adjudicator settled a matter of “perceived” discrimination by discriminating against the MHSAA.
First she ruled in favor of the girls saying that the MHSAA did discriminate against them due to the fact they do not have penis’s....er...I mean their gender. The immediate response to this was that this will open up the floodgates for boys too try out for girls teams. However, Ms. Harrison made sure that would not happen either. Are you ready for one of the most outlandish discriminating decisions ever heard of by the “great defenders” of human rights, dignities, and did I mention freedom from discrimination?
After awarding the girls $3,500 each for punitive damages (yeah, whatever, like they were out any money) and the right to try out for the boys team she went on to say that there was no need for concern of “fallout” regarding boys trying out for girls teams because, in her words:
“This ruling only applies to girls wishing to play boys hockey”
The ruling only affects girls who want to play boys hockey. It does not allow for boys to try out for girls teams. So that’s it! Let’s settle a matter of gender discrimination by committing gender discrimination? Does the commission even begin to concieve how ridiculous they look? I think not. Here is the Commissions lawyer, Sarah Lugtig, in HER own words:
“Female hockey is a very different sport then boys’ hockey and very few women are able to play on men’s teams,” (That’s because they are women, NOT men stupid!)
More stupidity..
“You need girls-only teams to ensure girls have equal access to sport” (Right , only the boys are not allowed equal access because they have to make way for the girls in order not too be discriminatory)
In the end, West Kildonan Collegiate’s girls hockey team was absolutely insulted by the fact that these two girls did not want to join their team. And the Pandora’s box of boys wanting to try out for girls teams.... you know the box that the “All knowing” human rights commission said would never be opened?
Well, it only took 2 days. The following taken from this link
"At least half a dozen boys have asked for a chance to try out for girls' high school athletic team since the Pasternak twins won their controversial human rights' case last week".....(and)
"Two boys want to try out for a girls' volleyball team because their school doesn't have a boys' team, another boy wants a spot on the girls' curling team for the same reason, another boy wants to play girls' fastball and two boys who didn't make their high school boys' basketball team want a crack at the girls' team."
Let the games begin. Until next time...
19 comments:
Yet, in 2 years and after trying every technique of communication (nice, clever, mean, funny, aggressive, passive, questioning, preaching, and more) known I have not convinced one person to change their position on even one topic.
Does that statement not strike you as a tad arrogant Q? You are saying that in 2 and a half years you have been right every single time and everyone else has been wrong? Nobody is right all the time and people should be big enough to admit it when they are otherwise it just stinks of bigotry.
To me blogging is all about putting your own opinion out there and have people discuss it. If you have such a thin skin that you cannot do that then you are better off staying away although i did enjoy your posts and our conversations.
Q,
"I'm amazed that you stay with this blogging stuff. You are trying to use logic with people that are screwed up idots!"...
"Find a remote part of Canada to live in and let the rest of them self-destruct!!!"
You know as well as I do that silence leads to condoning. The easiest way to fight any battle is to lay down and die. Not my style. If one recognises something as ludicrous/sinful/evil (whatever name they choose to give it) then the best way for that "evil" to flourish is for good peole to do nothing.
I have too much of a warrior's heart to take any "guff" lying down. I stand for what I believe in, I stand by my convictions, and I am not ashamed to voice them. I have little to no respect for those who share the same values/beliefs as myself but are only good for generating "windstorms" with constant gum flapping behind the scenes. Christ did not call on me so that I could live out mu days in seclusion but to "be a voice in the wilderness".
I know the world makes no sense, how can it? It automatically rebels against anything God has to offer. But remeber it is written:
"The wisdom of man is but foolishness to God"
If man actually applied God's wisdom we would not be in the mess we are today. That is why we need to present the option not hide or shirk our duties as Christians.
"I have good relationships, good financial security (that I earned - not passed down), good health (knock on wood), and I'm educated.
You then have, to some degree, a responsibility to pass that wisdom on to those who would listen. I, for example, suck on the financial end of the spectrum. "Oh, if I knew then what I know now"
" I have not convinced one person to change their position on even one topic."
It is not your job to convince them it is your job to present it.
So that is it? Just pack it all in and throw in the towel? I didn't think a Texan would give up so easily.
Remember Elijah? His ministry went on for 40 years and he never saw one single convert BUT he finished the race!
Regarding the others you mention and their unwillingness to embrace or consider ALL facts...that is their choice to ignore it. For example, regarding evolution, I know that science continues to dispel that theory. I also know that evolutionists will vehemently continue to defend it even to the point of bending their own science to "fit" their perceived view on the origins. However, there ae some who aree willing to consider.
I look at it from the same angle as the witnessing Christian. If I present my case to one thousand people and win only one convert, it was still worth it. That is why I will not give up. That does not mean just on blogs. I present/live out my faith and my belief's in all areas of my life.
And, of course, to be totally honest, I just thrive on good debate as well. It is stimulating brain exercise.
Lucy & Q,
Were either of you going to address the topic of the posting itself?
Apparently I can read Q, and i can also sense someone squirming.
I am not going to get into a debate with you over it as i also sense you are slightly piqued by my drawing your attention to it. I apologise for starting it here TIO, if i had realised Q's hurt reaction i would of kept quiet.
TIO - We have a law here which allows mixed sports teams upto the ages of 11. The only reason for this is because of the changing room situation. I believe that ladies and gents should be seperated for lots of reasons, mainly because in most cases the men would be to powerful and strong for an even contest. For the women involved in this posting to go to court screaming sex discrimination does no favours for womankind. The bottom line is women and men are not equal in physical sports and they should just accept it instead of trying to prove something.
Lucy,
I see we are in full agreement. It seems this whole debacle about gender discrimination is lost when the idea of equality rights is thought to be further advanced by women trying to be men as opposed to women simply addressing where the inequality truly lies (i.e. employment opportunity, wages, voting priveleges, etc.)
Women trying to be men only demonstrates that they feel they need to be "just like" men in order to be considered equal. It embrasses their cause.
There we go agreeing again!
Since these girls had the option of a female team to join, there was no need for them to make a discrimination case. If they somehow end up on the girls' team in the end, they better prove themselves to be frickin' stars!
I don't know that I agree with Lucy about women and men being all that inequal physically. I think it depends on the individual, and the sport.
Our high school still has a coed soccer team. Hopefully, in the near future there will be enough feeder teams to generate enough interest in having both male and female teams.
I tried to respond to this a couple days ago but blogger was having problems again.
TIO
I think you should let Q ride off into the sunset. He seems to have a chip on his shoulder about anyone "lesser" than him.
Just so you know, Q, I've been married 29 yrs, but hub is leaving because he can't deal with my mental illness any more. (translate: He's having a midlife crisis)
My BP is under control with meds, my cholesterol is also. I'm a smoker, and overweight-can't lose because of the psychotropic drugs I take. I am very close to all my children and grandchildren and was close to both parents before they died.
I'm educated and still learning all the time. I do volunteer work. I'll be set for retirement when it comes.
Oh, and it's "witty" not whitty.
Please inject some practicality into the situation. Why not let the girls play for the boys' team. After a game or two they'll know why there are separate teams. They might even still be able to walk!
Recently some women golfers tried playing against the men. Even the very, very best of them went out early. They have since given up, not because they were treated unfairly but because biology prevents them from winning.
I used to play a lot of badminton and ocassionally (particularly in mixed doubles) you would meet a headstrong women who would try playing with another woman against a man/woman pair. The results were predictable the extra height and sheer strength of a man's shot told every time. Women playing against men produced predictable results.
Of course, ocassionally some women would show up who were really, really good - regional champions, etc. Then you'd get your ass whipped.
Lucy,
"There we go agreeing again!"
This is starting to get a little scary :o (LOL)
Karen,
Welcome back darlin'.
"If they somehow end up on the girls' team in the end, they better prove themselves to be frickin' stars!"
I doubt that they will. By "running down" the girls team as (I quote them from their tribunal hearing) "A joke!" they have essentially ostracized themselves completely from any concept of team spirit. There was some local news stories on the tube where some members of the girls high school team commented on the twins. Let's just say the "looks" alone were telling enough. I smell a "catfight" should these twins cross paths with the girls hockey team.
"I don't know that I agree with Lucy about women and men being all that inequal physically.
You should! Your both "Left" leaning Darwinist women. You HAVE TO agree! (LOL) I think Lucy was making a general statement. In the vast majority of cases (regarding sports) when it comes to strength (especially upper body) the male tends to dominate. Especially with a sport like hockey. Even if these girls could skate well and stick handle a puck like Wayne Gretzky I am quite convinced (playing league hockey myself for 5 years) that they would not endure a male's slap shot with a hard piece of rubber that averages 85 miles per hour. (Bobby Hull was clocked at 120mph). And they would get utterly creamed if they got nailed by a solid body check. In short, they would not survive long on a boys league. That is why we require separate leagues regarding gender.
Co-ed teams fare well in the younger years as boys and girls, physically speaking, are on a more equal playing field. In fact some of the girls (who tend to grow before the boys do) seem to have the upper hand in those earlier years.
"I tried to respond to this a couple days ago but blogger was having problems again."
Yeah, I know. Big surprise there. They seem to be down a lot lately.
"I think you should let Q ride off into the sunset. He seems to have a chip on his shoulder about anyone "lesser" than him."
I don't give up on nobody. I might give them space for a time but then I will seek them out again. That would also include atheists, evolutionist's, feminists, left winger's, pro gay/pro choice advocates, etc. All are welcome here...unless they only want to trash talk.
Anonymous,
Thanks for stopping by and contributing whoever you might be.
"Please inject some practicality into the situation. Why not let the girls play for the boys' team. After a game or two they'll know why there are separate teams. They might even still be able to walk!"
LOL. I agree. My take on it was that if they want be part of the boys team (NOT co-ed) then they can use the same change rooms and showers. And if there is a bench clearing brawl they are fair game on the ice. That includes all the verbal cheap shots that are taken on the ice. Unfouratanelty practicality seems rather elusive when it comes to the Human Rights commission. Not to mention pure simple common sense and logic.
One of the photo's that appeared in the Winnipeg Sun showed one of the twins standing beside one of the male players. No exaggerating here, but it looked like Gandolph the wizard standing beside Frodo the hobbit. These girls would have been sitting ducks with targets on their backs in this league.
"Recently some women golfers tried playing against the men. Even the very, very best of them went out early. They have since given up, not because they were treated unfairly but because biology prevents them from winning."
That is why they have a ladies tee off which is closer to the hole. It is not gender discrimination. It is actually their for their consideration in order that they can have an equal chance at a decent score. BTW were you aware that the term golf is derived from an acronym that was intentional back when the game was first created that stands for Gentleman Only Ladies Forbidden. Another game the ladies appeared to have muscled in on ;)
Thanks for your input Anon.
Actually, I understood that it was called "Golf" because "sh*t" was already taken .....
Hey, I'm all for using the same dressing rooms and showers! THAT could be interesting. Might liven up the pre and post-game interviews, too.
My back yard edges up to the ladies' tee of the 7th hole of a golf course. I see old men shankin' the ball off there all time. Me, I have a set of clubs, but I don't play golf. I do it backwards...I flog the ball. I'm very proficient at the stroke where the head of the club goes crashing into the ground and the energy created reverberates up through the shaft and into my shoulder, making me shake all over like a cartoon character sticking a finger in a wall socket.
But being chased and bitten by deerflies makes it all worthwhile. ;)
Quick, somebody give Q a hug. And tell him what Winston Churchill said:
“[N]ever give in, never give in, never, never, never, never-in nothing, great or small, large or petty - never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.”
The politicians always say that you sometimes have to lose a battle to win the war. Concede the little ones to win the bigger ones. To never concede anything just makes you look bigoted.
Lucy,
That’s a good point. I think Churchill was not that arrogant. Let me bold his qualification:
“[N]ever give in, never give in, never, never, never, never-in nothing, great or small, large or petty - never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.”
Never give up, but don’t be stupid either!
~Wulf
Fair enough Wulf, I was blinded by all the never's i think.
1) Human Rights Commission? How many people does the Canadian government torture or execute a year? Why would any government create such a thing for itself?
2a) I'm of the understanding that the school in question is run by the state. State schools are, in general, bad. Private schooling is cheaper and produces better results. Without going into a treatise sized explanation, I'll just say that, even without a voucher program, the children of lower class parents would still be better educated if there were no state schools.
2b) One of the primary problems of state schools (and state everything else) is that everything has to be standardized into a bland one-size-fits-all solution. There can't be any meaningful innovation in the area because there can't be any competition. And when things are solved using the political mechanism, there are winners and there are losers. If the state picks the colors of cars, there will only be one color.
2c) Given all this, private institutions ought to be able to set their own standards. I'm sure that in a truly free society, some schools would let girls play on boys teams and some wouldn't. If winning is a big issue, in all likelyhood there wont be many girls on boys teams. The problem would solve itself.
Nog,
"Why would any government create such a thing for itself?"
Because in Canada that is the politically correct thing to do! (LOL)
"I'm sure that in a truly free society, some schools would let girls play on boys teams and some wouldn't. If winning is a big issue, in all likelyhood there wont be many girls on boys teams. The problem would solve itself."
But the point overall is missed. There is a reason it is called a "boys" team and not a co-ed team. When a boys team forms it is because that is how they would like to play the game. Especially when the rest of the league is a boys league.
Women in general need to stop trying to be men and feminise the excisting men we have. There are times when they just need to butt right out and let boys be boys.
We do not have boys teams with the thought in mind of gender discrimination. We do it because there are those moments in life where boys/men need the comradre of one another without the influence of woman around them all the time.
Women need to learn to accept this and even more RESPECT it!
Post a Comment