FULL RECORDING – Lindsay Shepherd Interogated by Wilfrid Laurier University's Gender Police

Mind bogglingly abusive interrogation of a Teaching Assistant at Wilfrid Laurier University. She was accused of committing “gendered violence”, told she had broken the law, and threatened with jail. All for the crime of discussing the controversy of “non-binary” pronouns in a class on grammar titled “ISSUES IN GRAMMAR”!

UNBELIVABLE.

[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YdFlKaJv4g]
Here are the deranged freaks harassing this woman:

Dr. Nathan Rambukkana (twitter)

Dr. Herbert Pimlott (WLU website)

66 thoughts on “FULL RECORDING – Lindsay Shepherd Interogated by Wilfrid Laurier University's Gender Police

  1. Listening to these smug hypocrites is a challenge. They go on and on about Hitler and Charles Murray and the alt-right while playing the Orwellian pronoun game. A game propagated overwhelmingly by white men, many who side with the alt-right.
    Their gymnastics about why they can show controversial material in THEIR classrooms are charming too. She gets raked across the coals for showing an excerpt of a DEBATE because her students are “very young adults,” but they’re fine with racists and weapon production because ~grad students~. Condescending, nattering males through and through.

  2. I listened to the first nineteen minutes of this, and if I had been subjected to this kind of patronising explanation of basic concepts, couched in “do you understand how…” I would have walked out with middle finger raised. They are treating her like a child. To her credit she is responding like an adult. I can’t listen any more.

    1. Yes! it was infuriating how they kept assuming that she was uninformed (the part where they make sure to check she’s heard of tyranny of the masses….ugh….get a clue dudes)
      The emphasizing “do you understand” was sinister. As if “the only reason you might disagree is that you don’t understand. You could not possible hold a different opinion if you understood.” my skin was CRAWLING for that whole 48 mins. Yet another intelligent woman interrogated by smug dipshits.
      and it seemed to go on for ages. I am amazed she stood it for so long. I agree she managed to sound reasonable the whole time.

  3. Were Nathan Rambukkana and Dr. Herbert Pimlott the two men interrogating this woman, or were they the ones who complained? I say interrogating because it sounded more like a Big Brother thought police type interrogation than a friendly interview to discuss curriculum. I did a quick check on their backgrounds. They aren’t English professors. Their degrees are in communications. Why are they so concerned about pronouns? Before academia, Pimlott worked in radio and television.
    This was just a nasty politically correct witch hunt, and it’s clear to me that their goals were to put forth a particular political agenda and silence dissent, particularly any dissent from a female. Women are easier to intimidate than men.
    Two men interrogated this poor woman until she broke down in tears. It was disgusting. According to these academic morons, discussing the proper use of pronouns in a university classroom is just as evil and genocidal as Hitler. They really compared what she did to white supremacists. Who would have thought that questioning the use non-binary pronouns was as evil as the Third Reich and white supremacists?
    This woman didn’t say that non-binary pronouns were bad in and of themselves. She didn’t say that transgender people were inherently bad. Even discussing non-binary pronouns and “they” as in singular subjects a person to a forty five minute interrogation by the thought police.
    Someone needs to inform these self-righteous academic nitwits that in the real world no one uses “they” as in singular. For example, try this experiment. Instead of saying, “She is standing there”, say, “they” is over there meaning one person. Rational people who passed high school English instinctively know that “they” is never used in the singular. And, outside of trans and queer social circles, no one says, “ve”, “hir”, or “ze”. The last time I checked, there were over thirty different gender neutral pronouns. Who could memorize them all, and why should people be forced to memorize them.
    If these nitwits with their degrees in communications really believe that Professor Jordan Peterson is the only person who refuses to kowtow to the gender thought police and memorize all their special non-binary pronouns, they are delusional. The resistance isn’t just coming from Peterson. The resistance is coming from ordinary people across the political spectrum.
    Women must be silenced and bullied least they say something politically incorrect, and the English language must be butchered just to pander to a few delusional people.
    I felt so sorry for this woman, especially when she started to cry. Men bullying women is nothing new. Gender identity and trans is just a way for trendy left leaning men to feel good about themselves and superior all the while they are interrogating women to tears.

    1. Nathan Rambukkana and Herbert Pimlott were Lindsay’s interrogators. No one knows who filed the complaint. When Lindsay asked to see the complaint so she could better understand how she caused offense, her interrogators cited some confidentiality requirement and told her she was not allowed to see the compliant, find out who it was, or even know how many people complained. All she was told was the complaint involved one or more students. So it may have been only one person.

        1. Wrong. Adriel Joel is a non-academic university lacky forced to attend proceedings that she did not participate in. There are many deranged women against free speech in academia like this one:

          Adria Joel acted more like a deer in the headlights on this one. Sorry dude, but this was a dickhead male harassment campaign against a female subordinate through and through.
          Joel should have been more proactive, agreed- how incredibly shameful for her to allow herself to be used in this way.

      1. GM, who is the woman’s voice we hear in the recording? The one who keeps citing university and Canadian(?) or regional policies regarding trans rights? Whoever she is, she sounds to me like the most hostile if them all, and one who is the most dangerous to this TV’s career. She sounds very law and order.

    2. The use of the plural “they” is obviously confusing. However this sort of thing has been seen before with the “y’all” heard in Southern States. Perhaps that pronoun could be pressed into use 🙂

  4. Problematic: favorite term of the illiberal left.
    I have been accused of appropriation for living in other countries and learning other languages. I have NEVER pretended to be another ethnicity. My interest, in fact, has been about a love of others’ experiences and desire to understand the points of views of people who are different from myself. It has been in the spirit of curiosity, empathy and understanding.
    I would have zero issues with any of this if men would not APPROPRIATE WOMEN’S IDENTITY AND SAY THEY ARE WOMEN AND ALSO TEAR DOWN ALL OUR RIGHTS AND PROTECTIONS. I honestly don’t have a problem with cross-dressing, if it is respectful. Blackface is clearly meant to be disrespectful; some forms of cross-dressing are, too, while some aren’t. My intent in learning other languages is not one of appropriation. I really do think it’s divisive and pushing a sort of segregationist fanaticism to say that people can never wear the clothing of a cultural background that isn’t theirs, or that men can never dress in traditionally feminine clothing and accoutrements–that is FINE! If the intent is disrespectful, and pushing a selfish ulterior motive, or based on stereotypes, then it’s “problematic,” as the liberal left so loves to say. But if it’s about genuine interest in another’s experience, and promoting unity and understanding? And just, well, liking something? WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?
    The absolute bullshit that these men are spouting while bullying this woman for her basic understanding that gender identity ideology is up for debate is hilarious. I would LOVE to debate the concept of gender identity, because I could tear it right down. The entire gender identity movement is so incoherent that it’s incredible. I got banned from a rape support group because they dug up information about me and found out I’m gender critical–for no other reason that that, even though I would *never* bring this up in that environment, *never* attack a trans rape survivor for being trans, and know that just speaking about my opposition to gender would get me horribly attacked by people previously supportive, as indeed happened, when I was “outed” as a TERF and then called a TERF and told I was therefore going to be unsafe for trans people and kicked out of a rape support group. And I REALLY need support after rape right about now. What I’ve experienced throughout my life because of the violence of gender forced upon me that made it hard for me to protect myself and by dint of being female is SO MUCH WORSE than anything some of these people could imagine, with their concerns about “misgendering.”
    SO HILARIOUS to hear this guy say “we are legitimizing positions that don’t have credible evidence” talking about gender critical views. It’s so fucking embarrassing. What doesn’t have any credible evidence is the religious belief in gender identity. It’s SO OBVIOUS this is all happening so fast because it’s about social engineering and WHO DOES IT BENEFIT? MEN!
    Do they actually believe what they are saying???
    This poor woman! I can’t believe they are indirectly calling her a Nazi and all kinds of other such bullshit.
    This is exactly why I don’t really want to teach at universities, at all. I am considering an entirely different career.

    1. I’m so sorry that you got bullied and attacked in a rape survivor group, of all places. That’s screwed up, and it’s exactly why male-centric politics should have no sway over what should be safe spaces for women to heal from male violence. Once those spaces become dominated by male-type thought patterns (regardless of whether it’s men or colonised women carrying out the ideas), they become spaces that perpetrate the victimisation women, particularly ‘bad’ women who don’t toe the patriarchal line.

      1. >”I would have zero issues with any of this if men would not APPROPRIATE WOMEN’S IDENTITY AND SAY THEY ARE WOMEN AND ALSO TEAR DOWN ALL OUR RIGHTS AND PROTECTIONS.”
        Fine.
        Now, YOU start paying royalties to men for using male-created things like indoor plumbing, internal combustion machines, electricity, jets, ballpoint pens, flushing toilets, iPhones, the wheel, eyeglasses, trains, the Industrial Revolution, modern management techniques, universities, written history, highways, brick homes, skyscrapers, elevators, air-conditioning, refrigerators, dishwashers, plate glass, suspension bridges, tunnels, television, radio, the Internet, computers, penicillin, sewage systems, frozen food, vaccines, microwaves, x-rays, malt liquor, pre-rolled cigarettes, and more.
        Also, you and the Sisterhood need to stop acting like whiney, pedestal’d princesses and begin finally doing your fair share of driving long-haul trucks, mining coal, mining diamonds, mining copper, mining other minerals, drilling for oil, harvesting crabs, deep-sea fishing, stringing high-tension electrical wires, creating dams, tunneling, logging, being steeplejacks, building suspension bridges, installing elevators, repairing escalators, building skyscrapers, washing high-rise windows, cleaning septic tanks, picking up garbage, maintaining sewers, paving/maintaining roads, building dams, laying railroad tracks, policing cities, creating production machinery to build cars and can food, crewing on cargo ships, stringing cable-car wires, test-piloting jets, fighting on front-lines, filling military cemeteries, tunneling through mountains, logging, butchering meat, harvesting chickens, making first-moves sexually, cleaning oil spills, detoxifying chemical spills, decontaminating nuclear accidents, covering roofs, operating cranes, installing plumbing, parachuting into forest fires, rescue swimming, being under-fire combat medics, stringing and repairing high-tension electrical wires, and working on farms.
        Mkay?

    2. Shlomo Shunn you are a complete idiot. How many women who use those things are claiming to be men/male? I’d say almost none. If men want to go around wearing make up and girly clothes looking like a complete fruitloop like one guy does in my town, go right ahead, but dont call yourself something you aren’t. And that’s the real problem men who think they are women or know what it’s like to be a woman just because they slap on some make up and a dress.
      Some of the things you mention women don’t even have the physical ability to do. I fail to see how women not doing things women have never done makes us whiney princesses. Most men don’t even do those things you list so why the hell would women?
      You sound like a typical mra who is using this transgender crap as a way to try to get back at women you hate. Pathetic!

      1. There doesn’t seem to be a reply button for this idiot but…obvious troll is obvious, right?
        I don’t believe this person is trans (PLEASE tell me he’s not). They’re generally not patriarchy-denialists, at least.
        Yo shlomo: I’d love to do all that stuff! Can you guarantee I’d get hired despite having breasts? (Doubtful). Also, can you make sure I’d get paid the same, and no one would harass me or attempt to rape me while doing all these things alongside men? (Also highly doubtful).
        You are aware that while men were creating this shitshow they helpfully dubbed “civilization,” they were actively keeping women out of it, right? And that even when women fought the odds to contribute to the public good beyond the slave-role we were given (as we have, in many ways), our work was either suppressed or stolen by men?
        You’re aware this still happens, right? Do you think it’s because of female privilege that women are not well-represented in some of the jobs you list? LOL! (“North Country” is a pretty good movie. Might want to give it a watch).
        If women had not been enslaved and had been allowed to participate in public life, who knows where we’d be now (probably not in the pickle we’re currently in, with idiots like Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un participating in Best Portly Unkempt Demagogue stream-crossing contests.
        Civilization would be a whole lot more civilized if women had been equally represented all along, and twice as advanced, as well. Yet you want us to pay you for our slavery? Participate in the civic duties you deny us?
        Why not pay us for ours? Thousands of years of bearing slavers’ children and washing their dirty fucking underwear while putting up with rape and murder and torment, completely disallowed from participating in fully and safely and thus enjoying the benefits of this so-called “civilization” you’ve built–seems like some reparations are in order.

  5. hahahahahahahahahahahaha
    ha hahahhahaha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
    This student is *fantastic* (and so savvy, to have recorded the conversation). Those profs are such bullies. This is delightfully, delightfully, delightfully satisfying. It almost never goes this way, that bullies get exposed so totally by the person they are bullying.
    “Problematic” “toxic climate” “unsafe” have now become the language of vicious disciplinarians. up is now down, good lord.

  6. Oh that was so painful to listen to. A bunch of lefty white men lecturing a young woman on privilege. So condescending. So manipulative. So very wrong. I am so glad that she released this tape.

  7. Why was my comment not published? Is it because I said I’m tired of people accusing people of “appropriating” for ridiculous reasons like learning another language while failing to care about the actual appropriation of women’s identities and spaces, or because I said I didn’t actually mind men wanting to dress in women’s clothing as long as they don’t pretend to be us (mainly because I think we should all relax a little a bit and get over these fierce identity politcs), or because it was ranty and off-topic? Just curious.
    I also said that their whole lecture about critical thinking, peer review and science-based evidence was not only condescending to her (men condescending to a woman and talking nonstop, unsurprising) but also embarrassing. How could they say this with a straight face? There is no science-based or credible peer-reviewed evidence for gender identity ideology, period. Their characterization of gender critical viewpoints as akin to genocidal bigotry are not only supremely hyperbolic but also, once again, an astonishing reversal. Personally I find efforts to promote a hierarchy of violent domination which has severely hurt my life, rendering me unable to either meet gendered expectations or to protect myself from male violence, to be not only hateful and bigoted in the extreme but also incredibly dangerous.
    Jordan Peterson is no hero, but he is right about this one thing. I have had this discussion about grammar and language with many people. I am upset by the policing of language wherever it happens. Language should not be used to propagandize. It’s the first phase of a totalitarian takeover.
    Kudos to this young woman for standing her ground, and for recording this. These men ramble on and on and on for ages, trying to shame her, and even compare her to Hitler, and still she maintains “there are two sides.” She is quietly indomitable, and she is absolutely right about free speech and the exposure to new and even uncomfortable ideas as being one of any university’s main goals. She sounds like a great teacher; discussion and debate should be what the classroom is for. These wealthy men with tenure condescendingly ask about her lesson planning (though the university undoubtedly exploits her as a TA, while still expecting her to work as hard as tenured faculty) and imply she is not doing a good job at it if she hasn’t been planning far enough in advance for them. Honestly, they sound like such, such assholes. I am so glad she recorded this.
    She even says outright she doesn’t agree with Jordan Peterson on this, but that it *is* a debate, and that she has a right to present that debate neutrally. She sticks to her guns that there are two sides, and that believing that is not akin to neo-Nazism. I am sorry she had to experience this, but hope it will help her to become more critical of the gender identity movement and its aims, as well as the “problematic” aspects of leftist identity politicking and identity policing more generally.
    I would love to have my students debate gender identity as part of the debate section of one of my classes, but it could never, ever happen in this world, ever. I don’t want to live in a world where this could never happen, really, much less work in an environment where I know my thoughts make me a heretic, and that if I am ever found out–doxxed, for example–I’m toast.
    I am seriously considering doing something entirely different as a career because of this stuff.
    Good for this young woman for standing her ground and releasing this, but what an awful experience.

    1. “Why was my comment not published?” ? This is the only comment I received from you. ETA- it went into spam for some reason, thank you for telling me. I pulled it out. 🙂 And thank you for leaving such a good comment.

    2. “I am seriously considering doing something entirely different as a career because of this stuff.”
      I don’t blame you one bit. Universities are horribly rife with this shit in one form or another.
      When I was in college (’00s), the leftist boys and male professors were obsessed with Kerouac and other misogynist shits from the Beat generation. If you tried to address any unfavorable element of their works, you were met with accusations of oversensitivity, ignorance of their cultural importance, advocating censorship or being a plain old feminazi (hmm). I hear that same patronizing, self absorbed tone in the voices of the pricks harassing Shepherd. The only difference is that the boys have traded black for glitter and high heels and framed themselves as the attacked and censured and new revolutionaries.
      Tl;dr: the more things change, the more they stay the same.
      Also, it’s infuriating that you were run out of a support group for having critical thoughts 🙁 I hope you’ve found more caring and helpful resources since then.

      1. Kerouac is still around? In the 00s? Ugh. I was in school in the 80s. Kerouac wasn’t featured but he was approved. 🙄 And even then he/beatniks were well past its sell by date. 😴

      2. @petunia
        Yep. He’s had revivals here and there and I want to barf every time, haha. Of course, boring “poet” dudes who fantasize about being freelovin’ wanderers love him.

      3. I studied literature, and Kerouac is one of my top red flags for lefty doodz to avoid. Chuck Palahniuk, Ernest Hemingway, William Burroughs and Charles Bukowski are others. For some Thomas Pynchon and David Foster Wallace also rate as literary bro-speak for sexist self-important dude; I find with them that self-important, yes, but sexist ymmv. Certainly ALL of the queer theorists, most especially Michele Foucault, and many of the French deconstructionists, to boot (if they are FAVORITES and not just things someone has read). Those are rather most sophisticated-type literary sexists; going by Hemingway, Kerouac and Bukowski is easiest.
        This is not to say I dislike all of these men’s writing, just that in my admittedly unscientific sampling the men who worship them as literary heroes tend to be unsavory. Kerouac, though, is SO overrated. He behaves like a useless, misogynist asshole in that book he wrote I couldn’t even get through it was so boring and badly-written. Truman Capote famously said of him “he doesn’t write, he types,” and truer words have never been spoken. Capote himself was no master (as he acknowledged), but he really worked hard on his books, and he birthed the true crime literary genre with In Cold Blood, so I really respect his work, as a journalist and as a writer.
        I told myself I would NEVER get involved with a writer. This is mostly because I’m a writer myself, and I tend to think even relationships between two different types of artist can be tumultuous, and writers are famously neurotic and prone to a variety of mental illnesses (myself included); add to this that MALE WRITERS can be so goddamn arrogant and I told myself I should stick to someone level-headed, not prone to mood swings, and firmly grounded in the world of rational thinking. I broke my rule for the first time last year, and that guy raped me. Then he tried to block me out of the writing community and the activist community and restyled himself as poet, all because he was mad at me for not worshiping the ground he walked on and, I think, making him dimly suspect that I might actually be a better writer than him, especially when it comes to poetry.
        So I can’t say that I will ever again break my rule. I might never date men again, honestly. It’s not the first time I’ve experienced sexual violence by a long shot, but it is the first time someone I loved and trusted has used it so deliberately to hurt me.
        He didn’t read Bukowksi, Kerouac or Hemingway, though, or I might’ve known. He had great taste in literature and music, honestly–lots of wonderful female writers, Joyce Carol Oates and Jennifer Egan, and Latin American writers like Borges, whom I adore, and a love of feminist punk bands and the riot grrl movement; he was also well-versed in feminist literature, and extremely supportive and knowledgeable about the effects of sexual abuse when I opened up to him about past experiences of male sexual violence, so altogether it was a shocker that he turned out to be a rapist.

      4. @unabashed
        I’m really sorry you had to go through that. I’ve been through similar with supposedly enlightened men and I know how difficult it is to feel isolated from political and creative communities as a result.
        Manipulative, narcissistic men gravitate toward the left far too often because the bar is so freaking low for male “feminists” to begin with and learning and preaching the right things is great camouflage. I’m glad gender critical and radfem communities exist. They feel like the only places you can share the same values without male piggery stealing the show.

      5. Thanks, Riffraff. That comment was so full of typos; I can’t write these days, really. My brain has been fried by long-term PTSD, so much so that I’m going to go on lithium for its anti-anxiety and neuroprotective qualities.
        He did indeed quite purposefully block me out of the community afterward. He colonized every writing group, every activist community, every everything I would have liked to be a part of, as well as self-styling as a “poet” and taking over poetry communities in town, even getting himself appointed as organizer in more than one poetry reading series in town. He befriended people I’ve known since I was fifteen.
        Not that it mattered, as I was experiencing social withdrawal after rape. He has since been outed–it was, in fact, my trans former roommate–who picked a fight with me before I left about not really seeing him as a woman, but who has since forgiven me–who outed him on my behalf in a private group post #metoo hashtag campaign, without naming me. Several more women came forward about his behavior then. I had also, in my desire to *know,* contacted his ex-girlfriend (a friend of mine from another town; I actually knew her before he did–before he met either of us–and I wish I’d reached out for a reference first, I REALLY wish), and found out about his past behavior; his ex-wife had sought me out to implore me to take him to court so he wouldn’t teach high school, as she had heard about what he’d done to me and knew what he’d done to her. I honestly think considering the commonplace nature of male violence it would be prudent all around for women to get references before dating someone. I know I wouldn’t speak ill of exes who didn’t abuse me, I’d just be honest about the reasons for our breakup, including my role in it.
        He joined feminist groups, anti-rape campaigners and he showed up at Take Back the Night as an organizer and stood right behind me in the crowd.
        I’m pretty sure he has NPD, which is, I think, another reason the behavior of trans activists is so familiar. I am sorry for their mental illness, just as I am very, very sorry for him–he tried to apologize to me on the anniversary of his violent crime, he said how badly he screwed up and how much he missed me–but what difference does his pitiable nature make when he uses it to hurt people, and all he does is hurt people? I told him off and got a new phone number so he could never pull something on me like that again.
        I agree with you about how manipulative, narcissistic men find a home on the left because of the low bar for “male feminists,” and because they know that liberal feminism will let them use women any way they want, whether it’s sexual abuse, financial abuse, or manipulation for whatever their ends are, especially if they use pity ploys, which leftist women fall for the hardest. Some of them are looking to victimize women who have already been victims; a lot are predators attracted by sexual libertarianism and the way it pushes women to self-objectify and participate in all kinds of “liberating” fare like “sex work,” BDSM “play parties,” polyamory, and porn. Some are just guys working an angle, even if it’s not about sexual exploitation of women per se (gay trans-identified males also find their homes on the left).
        Are there people who are genuine on the left too? Who are genuinely oppressed/genuinely care for the oppressed? Of course.
        But when you have a group that identifies itself as the “home for the oppressed and those who advocate for social justice,” you should get USED TO THE FACT that you’re going to attract a whole lot of con men who want to manipulate you for their own ends.
        Leftist women never have, it seems. (Except, as you say, for truly radical and gender non-conforming people. They seem to see with eyes wide open).

  8. This is utterly awful and shows very well what’s wrong with these people. They want to be Good, and to be seen as such. This is an easy way to do it because attacking someone in a weaker position is easy and doesn’t pose any risk to them while they can be cheered on by their peers. It’s just pure cowardice.

  9. Dear Laurier Community,In the face of recent media attention, we feel it is our responsibility to speak out against…

    Posted by WLU Rainbow Centre on Tuesday, November 21, 2017

    Dear Laurier Community,
    In the face of recent media attention, we feel it is our responsibility to speak out against the climate of transphobia that is being fostered at Laurier. The university’s silence on these issues has allowed for a one-sided perspective to be cultivated in the media that is entirely disconnected from the experiences of trans people. We speak now as a collective of queer and trans students, asking you to engage critically with the media you read and to hold our community with care.
    On Friday November 10th, an article was published in the National Post that disparaged the university’s response to a situation that emerged in a first year Communications course. We are obligated to uphold the confidentiality of all parties and, therefore, are unable to comment directly on the situation that instigated this article. We can, however, speak to the ways in which this article, and the dozens that have been published since, are defending and perpetuating transphobic beliefs and attitudes.
    Under the banner of freedom of speech, the news media have advanced a critique of institutional practices aimed at increasing inclusivity and challenging oppression. The always present but often unnamed ‘other’ at the center of these critiques, are the trans and non-binary individuals who these institutional practices would support. We must understand the ways in which these attacks on the “PC culture” of the university are, in actuality, attacks on the needs of trans people that these critics do not support.
    The discourse of freedom of speech, is being used to cover over the underlying reality of transphobia that is so deeply ingrained in our contemporary political context. Ironically, these discourses seem intent on silencing those who speak out against the systemic violence perpetrated against trans people while propagating a far right ideology. In fact, recent empirical studies conducted by White and Crandall (2017) have shown that freedom of speech endorsement is predicted by underlying prejudicial attitudes.
    We must, therefore, be critical of the ways in which trans bodies are being appropriated as the battleground on which the war of freedom of speech is waged. Debates about gender neutral pronouns or the validity of trans identities are not only discussions about (dis)allowable speech but, also, affronts on the reality of trans experience. These debates, regardless of how “neutrally” they are presented, constitute a form of epistemic violence that dehumanizes trans people by denying the validity of trans experience.
    For trans people, these debates invalidate their gender identity or expression as wrong or pathological, with very material impacts for their well-being. According to a national study, two-thirds of trans youth in Canada have engaged in self-harm and one-third have attempted suicide (Veale et al., 2015). For cisgender (non-trans) people, these debates validate the ideologies of cisnormativity and genderism that inform transphobia, once again with material impacts for trans people. According to the Trans Pulse project, for example, 20% of trans people in Ontario have been physically or sexually assaulted for being trans and 34% have been verbally threatened or harassed (Bauer & Scheim, 2015).
    In this context, we must respond to the enactment and maintenance of transphobia and problematize media that upholds transphobic ideologies. We should take students’ concerns about their safety and well-being as a result of the intensification of these ideologies on campus very seriously. These concerns are real, with students accessing the Rainbow Centre for support around experiences of harassment in their classrooms, on campus, and in online forms, as a result of this increased media attention. The Rainbow Centre itself is being targeted on this issue, with antagonizing posters being left on our windows and emails criticizing our educational initiatives around Transgender Day of Remembrance.
    These experiences of transphobia and their aforementioned implications, are the realities in which our conversations about this issue need to be embedded. We all have a responsibility to create an environment for learning and living in which trans people are safe from epistemic and transphobic violence. We all have a responsibility to speak out about these issues, and we call on our allies who have remained silent to please take a stance. This political moment is intent on derogating trans people in the name of freedom of speech and we cannot allow for this profound violence to be continued.
    For individuals who are requiring support, we encourage you to access the Rainbow Centre or Sarah Scanlon, the Sexual Violence Support Advocate. For individuals who are unsure how to respond to these issues, we have provided additional resources and encourage you to contact us at rainbow@wlu.ca.

    1. EPISTEMIC EPISTEMIC EPISTEMIC
      someone learned a new word recently
      “profound violence”
      LMFAO
      And for all their railing about terfs being fascists, they sure love attacking freedom of speech. HMMMM

    2. Lmfao that was hilarious. The apology from the university came out like right after the posting. This is some scientology level “SUPPRESSIVE PERSON ALERT” shit that makes them appear totally unhinged. I hope everyone sees this. They are claiming every media source covering the story is transphobic, so the newspapers really should issue some kind of response, if only to inform the public how free speech is incompatible with transactivism.

    3. Does anyone remember calls to limit speech of anti-gay people in the gay rights movement? I don’t recall that happening at all. As I remember it, lesbians and gays demanded debate- the more the better. We fought for debate.

      1. We even tolerated religious fundamentalists showing up to our pride parades with their “God hates fags” signs. I don’t recall any discussion about shutting them out, though they did try unsuccessfully to stop our marches. Used to be conservatives were trying to shut down speech of the lesbian and gay community. I would never have predicted an anti-free speech movement spearheaded by the queer community.

      2. Yes- it was always the right wing trying to stifle debate. We almost enjoyed the crackpot protesters as a part of the cultural melange. Maybe surviving the literal mass death of the AIDS epidemic (as opposed to the absurd “death by pronouns” that transgender people claim to suffer) had something to do with that resilience.

      3. The “Transgender Day of Remembrance” which valorizes the less than average murder rates of transgender people is a cynical colonization of the impact that the actual mass death of gay men had on the gay rights movement.

      4. I think the issue now is that the right wing have learnt to try to drag the debate backwards as a deliberate tactic, to shift the Overton window, and just to make it hard for their political opponents to make any progress. Debate over current feminist issues is one thing, but they now want us to debate even women’s suffrage all over again. Older people talk a lot about my Millennial generation shutting down free speech, and as we know there can be issues with that, but imo my generation did at least have a point in perceiving how big a threat this tactic is. Not all issues have two sides, not ones that are both sensible, and it can be unreasonable for everything to be debated endlessly. It’s just the transgender issue has been snuck in as a Trojan horse amid this cultural battle. The transcult itself is are making lesbian and gay people refight battles that should’ve already been won.
        So rather than it being about free speech as such, I think it’s about the actual context and content, just the validity, of the argument, that determines the need for debate or not.

      5. I also don’t recall gays and lesbians calling for violence against homophobes. Maybe I’m old, but never saw a blood color smeared “punch a Christian” shirt at a rally.

        1. Good point. Reminds me that even at the height of the literal emergency of the AIDS epidemic, the ACT-UP protest disrupting religious services within St. Patrick’s cathedral was considered highly controversial within the gay community.

    1. Undercover at the trans town hall pure comic gold if it wasn’t totally creepy about transing kids…. Dr. Butt, sheesh you can’t make this stuff up.

      1. That Rex Butt pervert is the heterosexual white male Executive Director of the (formerly gay) Pride Center of Vermont. He trans’ed his gay son as a child. Gag!
        You’ll note there isn’t a single Lesbian or Gay staff member at Pride Center of Vermont. In fact, the words “gay” and “lesbian” do not appear even once in their materials here:
        https://www.pridecentervt.org/about-us/staff

    2. Love it when Crowder’s wife complains she wants a boob job (because she’s dysphoric too!) just like the trans women get … and the Medicaid laws are sexist.
      TRUE!–and how ironic that a conservative readily understands that, when these gender radicals can’t.

  10. Record these men behind closed doors, expose their total hatred of women, and the men in the discussion had no experience actually teaching English grammar. This teacher is innovative and obviously got her students’ attention. Comparing her to Hitler, or bringing all kinds of issues to the table that had nothing to do with the subject is pathetic. BUT I heard the university is now looking bad, once the truth of this behind closed doors intimidation was revealed, notice how they never actually said how many students complained. I find that telling, probably one male to trans woman hater in the mix me thinks…

  11. I commend this woman’s professionalism in the face of such Orwellian madness. And kudos to her for recording that stuff. Sadly, it might have the unintended consequence of colleges searching people like her for wires before they drag them in front of tribunals for wrong-think in the future
    Also, as the descendant of Holocaust survivors, I would have reached across the table and smacked them if I were in the room when they compared anyone who questions trans orthodoxy to Hitler. That is just….so ignorant and offensive on so many levels.

  12. Shepard was on a CBC program last night (was it the National?) talking about how there has to be room for debate — for everything and everyone — yes, even Milo.
    But what men don’t get is that we do suffer the consequences of a large group of men getting together and teaching each other how to rape women and get away with it. There’s no justice. Women are left to pick up the pieces.

  13. I’m back in academia atm and checking up on my the conversation recording laws of my state and the capabilities of my laptop mic because of this. People dont listen to us, don’t want to know the truth. As in everything everywhere forever, we women must cover our asses.

    1. Yes, check if your state has a one or two party recording law before recording people in a private setting or on the phone, you can get in real trouble.

  14. We are 3 days into the UN 16 Days of Action Opposing Violence Against and Twitter has suspended me for asking a man to get men to stop raping and murdering women. I’d post a screenshot but I can’t see how to do that. Is there any way of posting an attachment?

  15. Update – lawsuit –
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/lindsay-shepherd-wilfrid-laurier-university-lawsuit-1.4704724
    “In an unproven statement of claim filed this week, Lindsay Shepherd says Wilfrid Laurier University behaved negligently, leaving her unemployable in academia.
    “The suit, not tested in any court of law, names the school in Waterloo, Ont., two professors, and a manager of the university’s diversity and equity office. It seeks a total of $3.6 million in various damages.”

    1. HELL YES. Thank you for posting this, I’ll be on the lookout for updates. I hope she drags them and gets every penny, if not more.

  16. Recent news. Lindsay Shepherd is suing Laurier University for neglience and ruining her academic future. Looking for $3.6m Canadian in damages.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


The maximum upload file size: 512 MB.
You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other.
Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded.