Re: woke
Re: woke -- Rod Top of thread Post Reply Forum
Posted by:
Jim ®

04/25/2024, 17:00:45
Author Profile
Edit
Alert Forum Admin
Post Reply

Rod, 

Recently, the Supreme Court of Canada issued an opinion that criticized a lower court judge for using the word "woman" instead of "person with a vagina":

The term “person with a vagina” made its legal debut in Canada last Friday. It’s inclusive-speak for “woman,” and now it’s part of the vernacular of the Supreme Court.

The decision in which it was used, R v. Kruk, dealt with sexual assault, and whether it was correct in law to assume that women know when they are being penetrated by a penis. The answer turned out to be yes, as one would imagine, but the reasoning to get there took a bizarre route. Writing for all judges (except for Justice Malcolm Rowe, who wrote a concurring opinion), Justice Sheilah Martin wrote:

“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.”

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jamie-sarkonak-we-didnt-need-person-with-a-vagina-added-to-the-legal-vernacular

What do you think about this? Nothing to worry about? Not indicative of anything bigger? A one-off? 

Is this something I'm troubled by because I'm a conservative but more reasonable people would approve of, even celebrate? 

Oh and to be clear, I’m calling this woke. 






Modified by Jim at Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 18:56:10

Previous Current page Next

Replies to this message