Started By
Message

re: Canada’s Supreme Court finds the word woman to be “problematic”

Posted on 3/14/24 at 11:15 am to
Posted by el Gaucho
He/They
Member since Dec 2010
53268 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 11:15 am to
What if women wake up and stop voting for libs


Nah jk it’ll never happen
Posted by Weekend Warrior79
Member since Aug 2014
16537 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 11:20 am to
quote:

Please use the phrase “person with a vagina” to avoid confusion

So now we are supposed to just assume what type of genitalia this person has? For those that chose not to be called by their birth gender, how are we supposed to know where they are in their transition?
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89697 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 11:20 am to
quote:

Will we see a wave of plaid and maple syrup rise up to take back their country?


Make Canada Great For the Very First fricking Time (MCGFVFFT)?

Just doesn't pop, does it?
Posted by fr33manator
Baton Rouge
Member since Oct 2010
124721 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 11:24 am to
quote:

“person with a vagina”





If only we had a term for that...
Posted by Auburn1968
NYC
Member since Mar 2019
19884 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 11:25 am to
I sure Fidel Trudeau approves of this form of insanity.
Posted by SoFla Tideroller
South Florida
Member since Apr 2010
30393 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 11:27 am to
I'm serious when I say that there's a good chance we will have to go to war with Canada some time in the next 30 years.
Posted by jizzle6609
Houston
Member since Jul 2009
4395 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 11:28 am to
quote:

White chicks - destroyers of worlds.


Ill say it again, we allow it.

As soon as men dont allow it anymore in the West it will stop. That simple.

Eventually enough will be enough and men will grab their sack and take everything back in order to right the ship they have tried sinking because most of them are ugly unhappy people with stinky vaginas.
Posted by LarryCLE
Member since Apr 2017
1567 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 11:32 am to
Wouldn’t it be offensive to call a trans woman with a surgically created vagina a “person with a vagina” rather than a woman, after he/she/they went through all the trouble? Sure seems like she’s implying trans women can’t have vaginas.
This post was edited on 3/14/24 at 11:33 am
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
56586 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 11:37 am to
quote:

Eventually enough will be enough and men will grab their sack and take everything back in order to right the ship they have tried sinking because most of them are ugly unhappy people with stinky vaginas.

Wishcasting.
Posted by jizzle6609
Houston
Member since Jul 2009
4395 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 11:38 am to
quote:

Wishcasting.


It just takes one hero.
Posted by Jimbeaux
Member since Sep 2003
20166 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 11:46 am to
They are trying to include men with their penis cut off and a hole carved in their crotch as people with vaginas.

Spawn of Mengele.
Posted by andwesway
Zachary, LA
Member since Jun 2016
1544 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 11:47 am to
frick this world. God help us. We're in a bad spot and it just keeps getting worse.
Posted by bhtigerfan
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2008
29793 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 12:02 pm to
quote:

I wonder what OTers with a vagina think about this

It’s bullshite.
We should have never given people with a vagina the right to vote.
Posted by Salviati
Member since Apr 2006
5605 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 1:56 pm to
I hate to piss on this reactionary, misogynistic party this late in the thread by bringing reason and logic. Y'all look like you're having so much fun.

But in this case, Justice Martin has a point.

In a sexual assault trial, one issue was whether the assailant penetrated the victim's vagina. The victim testified that the assailant penetrated her vagina with his penis. The defense attorney demanded proof of how the victim would know if something penetrated her vagina. The prosecutor asked the trial judge to take judicial notice that a woman would know if her vagina was penetrated. The defense counsel argued that the prosecutor should be required to bring an expert to testify about whether a woman would know if her vagina was penetrated. The trial judge convicted the assailant reasoning that it “is extremely unlikely that a woman would be mistaken about that feeling [of having a penis inside her]."

To be clear, the issue was not whether the assailant could be convicted based solely on the victim's testimony. The issue was whether a judge can accept a woman's testimony that her vagina was penetrated or whether the prosecutor must bring expert witness to prove that a woman would know if her vagina was penetrated. The prosecutor would still have to prove the other elements of assault: penetration actually occurred, lack of consent, etc.

The court of appeals overturned the conviction because the victim was a woman, and the trial judge was a man. The court of appeals held that the trial judge’s conclusion that it was unlikely that a woman would be mistaken about the feeling of penile-vaginal penetration relied on speculative reasoning and was not the proper subject of judicial notice. In other words, the court of appeals ruled that a male judge cannot determine whether a woman would know if her vagina was penetrated.

The supreme court noted the trial court's unfortunate use of the word "woman" in the trial court's decision. The supreme court reasoned that a "person" knows if they have been physically assaulted, whether by "a punch to the face or a kick to the shins," and an expert witness is not required to support that testimony. Accordingly, the supreme court held:
quote:

Where a person with a vagina testifies credibly and with certainty that they felt penile-vaginal penetration, a trial judge must be entitled to conclude that they are unlikely to be mistaken. While the choice of the trial judge to use the words “a woman” may have been unfortunate and engendered confusion, in context, it is clear the judge was reasoning that it was extremely unlikely that the complainant would be mistaken about the feeling of penile-vaginal penetration because people generally, even if intoxicated, are not mistaken about that sensation.
In other words, a judge can take judicial notice that a person would know if they have been contacted without consent whether that contact happens in the vagina or anywhere else on their body.
Posted by jizzle6609
Houston
Member since Jul 2009
4395 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 1:58 pm to
quote:

Just doesn't pop, does it?


Canada is Cuck works perfectly fine.
Posted by Iowatiger209
Pleasant Hill, IA
Member since May 2021
726 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 2:01 pm to
quote:

wonder what OTers with a vagina think about this


quote:

It’s bullshite.


Have another upvote! Well said!!
Posted by Paco_taco
Dallas, Tx
Member since Apr 2012
1365 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 2:26 pm to


quote:

Supreme Court of Canada Justice


Is Mrs Claus really on the Canadian Supreme Court?
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
64966 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 2:50 pm to
quote:




I wish our forefathers across Western Civilization could have had the foresight to see the devastating effects their insanely stupid decision to give women a voice in government would have on society in just over a century.
Posted by Snazzmeister
IHTFP
Member since Jan 2015
1078 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 2:57 pm to
quote:

The court of appeals overturned the conviction because the victim was a woman, and the trial judge was a man. The court of appeals held that the trial judge’s conclusion that it was unlikely that a woman would be mistaken about the feeling of penile-vaginal penetration relied on speculative reasoning and was not the proper subject of judicial notice. In other words, the court of appeals ruled that a male judge cannot determine whether a woman would know if her vagina was penetrated.


We're the misogynists? The honking you hear isn't coming from the geese.
Posted by SoFla Tideroller
South Florida
Member since Apr 2010
30393 posts
Posted on 3/14/24 at 3:07 pm to
No one hates women like progressives and feminists.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram