"It is imperative that I don't lose this battle to find myself in a post-tribunal world where every stand-up comic - or artist for that matter - is subject to any kind of censorship or restriction on what they say while performing," he said.
"We comics are the canaries in a coal mine for freedom of speech."
Another martyr for the speechy cause. Sigh. Well, let me just say it again. This case is not primarily about free speech. Earle is being charged under section 8 of the BC Human Rights code, which covers "Discrimination in accommodation, service and facility". If you want an analogy, he's being charged with acting like a bit like an abusive waiter, not an edgy comedian.
As an interesting aside, according to one of the complainants supporters (see last comment), our two lesbians were not there to see comedians, Zesty's being a restaurant only part of which was given over to the open mic comedy show. However, "when the patio closed, they were taken to the table by the stage by the waitresses". This, if accurate, kind of spoils the notion that our gals were hecklers and therefore subject to comedy show justice.
h/t slap.
49 comments:
Carlin is rolling over in his grave. Comedy IS free speech. "Freedom from" arguments don't apply when there is a sign saying "the edgiest show in town." I fully support Guy Earle.
wow what an uncooperative a-hole, you mean he's being arrested by the thought police and he refuses to roll over and die? what gall!!!
a couple of points: whether the lesbian couple was there for the comedy show or not, does not mean that they did or didnt heckle - did they heckle him? or not? that's the important question, not who sat them next to the stage or why.
also, whether he's being sued under s. 7 or 8 or whatever, he's being sued for what he said while performing on stage - hence freedom of speech.
i suspect you will behave the same way when Harper gets his majority and implements his "real scary" agenda, and jails all liberal bloggers.
Also, I find the following a bit bizarre. You suggest that the lesbians were not there for the comedy, yet they are suing for being denied the comedy.
Oh, and he's being charged with acting like an abusive waiter? Yes, that makes total sense - great analogy. We all know that the best way to deal with bad waiters is through lawsuits or HRC complaints.
Jermo,
I don't think they're suing for being denied comedy as much as they are suing for being denied a normal restaurant experience.
However, you do make a good point about the heckling. Who cares what they were there for. They could still be hecklers, and as such, become part of the show.
Politics aside, this thing just reeks of not passing the "what is reasonable" test. Major slippery slope. Frankly, the back and forth slurs that get thrown around on this blog are more meritous of an HRC trial than this stupid comedy show.
Meritous isn't a word.
DT,
Can you be made a part of the show by the comedian against your will?
I think that's the point. If that ISN'T what they were there for, then they may have a case. And then it perhaps wasn't so much heckling as arguing with an abusive club employee (or agent).
In any case, the paper work essentially says that 1) this KIND of complaint is within the purview of the BCHRC and 2) the two lesbians MIGHT have a case. Therefore it goes to the tribunal.
PS The slurs that get slung around here are funnier than anything I've heard from Guy Earle.
dt: good point re: the restaurant service, fair enough.
meritous may not be a word, but it's pretty close.
i myself cannot wait for the new world of comedy that will be ushered in by our Government, where no one ever gets offended and no identifiable group is ever picked on. that's gonna be so great - no one's gonna laugh, but more importantly, no one will be offended.
Can you be made a part of the show by the comedian against your will?
if they indeed just sat next to the stage and did not heckle him, and the comedian out of the blue went on an anti-lesbian rant, that is definitely wrong, and maybe even actionable. im curious to see what the facts of this case pan out to be.
i've never seen a comedian just pick on an audience member without being provoked - usually they have a routine and prefer to stick to it - but hey who knows right.
more likely, in my opinion, they heckled, and if that is the case, they have no case at all.
BCL,
Fair enough. But do we know that they didn't make themselves part of the show by starting to heckle?
I don't want to sound like I'm defending the guy. He's a loser and I do feel sympathy for these rug-munchers. However, I just don't like the concept that events at a comedy show become part of some government sponsored witch-hunt. Don't we have regular courts that could allow them to sue the comedian, bar, etc?
The fact is, these lesbians actually did this guy a favour by getting him some free publicity, and likely some public support that would not have existed had he just been relegated to offensive blowhard status. Economic darwinism would have taken care of him.
Forget the partisan politics for a second. Think of the world withouth comedians or with comedians that no longer have free reign. For every idiot like this Earle character, there are many better ones that represent a better source of societal critique/elightenment/challenge of establishment than most mainstream media. That's why I believe a case such as this one should be vehemently opposed and quickly dismissed.
i myself cannot wait for the new world of comedy that will be ushered in by our Government, where no one ever gets offended and no identifiable group is ever picked on. that's gonna be so great - no one's gonna laugh, but more importantly, no one will be offended.
I'm looking forward to comedians who use offense to target worthier subjects. Not too much offensive comedy being created to attack that cabal of neoconservative welfare wingnuts, such as that knob-gobbling man-whore, Mark Steyn.
Ti-Guy,
It's a nice thought. But unfortunately, there's no mass appeal to that comedy. The comedian would bomb because most in the audience would have no clue who he/she is talking about. Similar with Harper. Fact is, Canadian politicians are too boring to make fun of (although Chretien and Bernier more recently provided some good material.)
But you should all be glad that we at least have the option to make fun of people like Jermo's hero Steyn.
Not too much offensive comedy being created to attack that cabal of neoconservative welfare wingnuts, such as that knob-gobbling man-whore, Mark Steyn.
i think jon stewart and colbert make a pretty good job of making fun of neo-cons. of course, steyn is small potatoes to these guys, they go after o'reilly. but generally speaking, i feel liberals are a much easier target - and for that, no one is better than south park.
in one episode, Cartman hits Token for some reason in the schoolyard, but as Token is black, it's considered a hate crime, and the FBI come in and its freaking hilarious.
DT: i'm all ears for a good joke about Steyn. i wont be offended, and I promise I wont even sue you guys, serious.
i'm all ears for a good joke about Steyn.
Ask and ye shall receive.
Best. Steyn. Joke. EVAH!
Seriously, it's hard to joke about Canadian neocoservatives like Frum, Steyn, Levant, Amiel, Whyte, Kay mère et fils etc. etc. because they are angry and humourless, and their Canada-hating is so dreary, it's painful and draining to pay attention to for very long. At some point, it's not really worth it to use humour to speak truth to power when you know there's no chance these people will understand or appreciate one iota of it.
The Tory conservatives were worth making fun of because you got the impression that they at least appreciated the entertainment. This current crop of sour dullards would just get hissy and then...would get even.
yeah ti-guy, that's hilarious, 355 5-star reviews.
but hey whatever turns your crank.
i was hoping for a joke of the funny kind.
Hey, Jerome relax the defense of your lover. That was a good one by Ti-Guy.
However, Ti-Guy, I fail to see how Levant, Steyn et al are any more dry and humourless than Rove, Cheney, et al. Although Bush, Coulter and O-Reilly do provide a lot of hilarity on their own. Kind of like watching a bad movie that's so bad it's funny.
I do share your lament about the new crop of Tory. What happened to the good old days of what's his face that shut down the cod fishery...Mr "tear in my beer".
yeah ti-guy, that's hilarious, 355 5-star reviews.
You think those are reviews?
Now, that's funny.
...oh, hang on. No it isn't. It's sad.
I fail to see how Levant, Steyn et al are any more dry and humourless than Rove, Cheney, et al.
I never said they were. Americans don't find much to laugh about with Rove or Cheney either.
"Americans don't find much to laugh about with Rove or Cheney either."
You must not watch colbert and stewart then. Stewart's done some good stuff on Cheney.
"Americans don't find much to laugh about with Rove or Cheney either."
You must not watch colbert and stewart then. Stewart's done some good stuff on Cheney.
Thats because here in america, we actually can make jokes without the govt. busting us. Dont forget, whatever power you grant the govt. today can be used against you tomorrow.
You think those are reviews?
Now, that's funny.
...oh, hang on. No it isn't. It's sad.
oh geez, sorry ti-guy, "customer reviews". I'll try and remember not to assume that you can figure out something as obvious as this on your own.
Thats because here in america, we actually can make jokes without the govt. busting us.
We can here too, Yankee Doodle. But Canadians prefer to toss out their shitty politicians, rather than re-elect them over and over again or be satisfied that mocking them is all that participatory democracy requires.
Dont forget, whatever power you grant the govt. today can be used against you tomorrow.
Well, you would know, because that's exactly what you've done with the Bush administration. Good luck with that.
*sigh*...Dumbest people on Earth.
oh geez, sorry ti-guy, "customer reviews".
Well, that's a pretty substantive distinction, don't you think? Anyway, even "customer reviews" is a little dodgy, since we don't have any real proof that all of those people actually read the book in question.
"Thats because here in america, we actually can make jokes without the govt. busting us."
We can do much of the same. My argument is that our comedians wouldn't get any laughs using our politicians as material. We don't have hilarious characters like Karl Rove. Just some douchebag virgins like Levant (I imagine Rove has had his fair share of hookers).
Jermo,
See Spot Run got a bunch of great reviews too.
Ti-guy,
I take it by your avoidance of the original post topic, you're generally thinking this complaint is a sham? Or am I putting words in your mouth?
Well, that's a pretty substantive distinction
sure, but given that we're talking about an amazon web page, it was obvious. anyways, if it made your day to catch this oversight, i dont want to take it away from you.
in fact, you should be happy to know that i shriveled in the fetal position as soon as i read your post, and I am still not fully recovered.
DT: Dion is the funniest thing to come from Canada since Jim Carey. Also, quebecers are pretty good at making fun of their politicians - Et Dieu Crea Laflaque, while not at the level of south park or daily show in terms of funniness, is miles ahead of 22 minutes and royal canadian air farce. Rick Mercer is alright. As an aside, Mercer has made one of his rants specifically about supporting Levant.
DT:
The topic of this post is "This case is not primarily about free speech. Earle is being charged under section 8 of the BC Human Rights code, which covers "Discrimination in accommodation, service and facility".
What else needs to be discussed? That the lesbians don't have a right to make complaints under existing law?
I myself make no judgement about the validity of the complaint because I do not have sufficient evidence at hand.
If you want an analogy, he's being charged with acting like a bit like an abusive waiter, not an edgy comedian.
Cause that's what we need more of - government committees seeking out and punishing abusive waiters.
There's perfectly good solutions to all of this: Next time these women get abused in a restaurant, complain to the management, publicize their complaint, and don't
patronize that restaurant any more.
But that's so 20'th century. Today's citizens declare themselves political victims and go running to the government.
Today's citizens declare themselves political victims and go running to the government.
Yes, all of us do that...all the time.
If you don't like living in this country, move to Alabama.
Well, you would know, because that's exactly what you've done with the Bush administration. Good luck with that.
*sigh*...Dumbest people on Earth.
*sigh*... not quite as dumb as the people who cant even learn from us. Yes, i would know, because, yes, that is exactly what happened with the bush administration. You people gonna learn from our mistakes or are you satisified with your smug little swipes?
You people gonna learn from our mistakes or are you satisified with your smug little swipes?
*ding ding ding*....He used the word "smug."
How about you guys learn from your own mistakes first and stop lecturing everyone else?
The citizen here is using the law and a civil process to mediate a dispute. This isn't the same thing as the executive (which isn't separate branch in our government) wielding power illegitimately.
It does that in other ways, of course, but when it does, no one here even tries to argue it's democratic...not even the wingnuts.
If you don't like living in this country, move to Alabama.
So is that your big constructive comment, Ti-Guy? If you don't like the way Canada is, move to the U.S.?
That's as brainless as it comes.
That's as brainless as it comes.
Well what else can I say? You know how the law works and what's required to have it changed. I don't know why you think hectoring and scolding those who don't agree with you (an activity which you and your ilk have been engaging in for months now) is more sophisticated than my recommendation that you leave Canada if you don't like it and don't seem to be motivated to change what you don't like.
And I didn't recommend just anywhere in the US...Alabama...to be precise.
Ti-Guy:
BigCityLib is the one who brought the topic up in his blog. Presumably he wanted people to give their opinions on it. So I did.
If BCL doesn't want people to give their opinions, he should not allow comments. If he doesn't want comments from "free speechers", he should say so or moderate them out. He did neither.
Regarding "your ilk", you sure like to categorize people, don't you Ti-Guy? Does that make your world easier to deal with - pigeon holing everyone? I guess it's easier than thinking.
How about you guys learn from your own mistakes first and stop lecturing everyone else?
Ok, i learned. I learned that if you allow your government to abuse people just because you dont like them, then you are on the road to tyranny. I learned that no matter how you cloak your tyranny in the law its still tyranny.
But i guess i cant share these insights with Canadians, because im not from some hypothetical perfect nation.
But i guess i cant share these insights with Canadians, because im not from some hypothetical perfect nation.
Do you think we don't have our own concerns about tyranny? Canada didn't pop out of an egg two weeks ago; it's now one of the oldest continuous democracies in the World.
You still don't seem to understand that this is a complaint-driven civil process (it's not criminal law). That's hardly tyranny. Compare that to the type of vigilante persecution that's taking place with regard to PZ Meyers and his freedom of expression.
Anyway, Canadians know Canada isn't a perfect nation. There's a much higher degree of tolerance for Canada-hating from our citizenry than in the US, where expressing less than complete devotion to America is considered serious treason.
You still don't seem to understand that this is a complaint-driven civil process (it's not criminal law). That's hardly tyranny.
Yes it is, its the government using its power to police speech. What could happen to this comedian? Could he be fined? Could he have an injunction placed against him? If the answer to either of those questions is yes, then you have government censorship. Who cares that its a civil "court" and not a criminal matter?
Let me ask you a serious quesion, TI, if someone were to come along and say "im really offended by the stuff you said in these comments, im gonna take you to an HRC court." Would it really matter if the _worst_ thing was a 5000$ fine? What if the person complaining was Mark Steyn? Would you find it totally just that you should pay him money because you called him a dick-sucker?
I mean seriously, stop and think of how you would feel if this bullshit was directed at you and not some other jack-ass. Thats what supporters of the Bush administration wont do, they wont imagine how unjust it would feel to be tortured and held captive without a trial. They think its all just because its happening to people they dont like.
Are you going to do the same? Are you going to cheerlead for censorship just because its people you dont like being censored?
I'm not re-hashing every single argument I've made over this over the last few months just become some hysterical American is objecting, yet again, to the laws of another country.
What arrogance.
My, my. Such anger and aggression.
Yea, i get frustrated when people puff themselves up then run from a real argument. Really, im frustrated with myself for wasting time arguing with some stupid 12 year old pretending to be an adult. The lack of any real responses, the ad hominems, smarmy swipes, yea i should have seen this coming.
Well, too bad for you. Search BCL's blog. You'll find I've pretty argued all I need to on this.
s.b "I've pretty much argued..."
Oh, well you got me on that one, kid. I couldnt just walk away, i had to see if you actually had responded in some meaningful way at some point in the past. Sorry, not seeing it dood. Just more personal attacks and snotty , useless BS. Did i miss the part where you articulated your points like an adult? Can you provide a link to the part where you offered some coherent thought on the subject?
Just more personal attacks and snotty , useless BS.
So coarse, so low class.
So coarse, so low class.
This coming from the guy you said:
Not too much offensive comedy being created to attack that cabal of neoconservative welfare wingnuts, such as that knob-gobbling man-whore, Mark Steyn.
Is "knob-gobbling man-whore" your idea of high-brow dialog?
Oh, still waiting for that link where you actually make some kind of argument, i mean, we wouldnt want you to have to rehash all those old points you supposedly made.
I hope Yankee Doodle's done.
So ti-guy wrote "You still don't seem to understand that this is a complaint-driven civil process..."
And apostate wrote "...its the government using its power to police speech."
Are you arguing that citizens do not have a right to complain if they have been abused? You do understand the meaning of "complaint-driven" don't you? It means someone complained about something and then the government looked into this complaint. Isn't that what government is supposed to do?
Abused physically, sure. Likewise with fraud or libel. But this is neither, this is someone just getting their feelings hurt, not the same thing at all.
The fact that its complaint driven doesnt mean anything either. Again, fraud and libel are also complaint driven, no big deal because people can avoid both by not lying. How do you avoid hurting someone's feelings? How do you know in advance what will make someone upset? And more importantly, how do you have any sort of meaningful conversation when offending people can get you hauled into court?
How do you avoid offending people? By treating them with courtesy. By common ordinary politeness. Why is that so hard?
I think I put it as simply, and to the point as I could at the Protest...DON'T BE A BAD GUY.
If you check the November live podcast of Guy Earle on www.straight.com you will hear him tell of how he was drunk, in a foul mood, didn't want to be there, what he thought of the other comics, and how he hopes that all this controversy will give him free PR. He also tries to dump responsibility of his acting out on his employer at the time....what a hero for Free Speech eh?
The guy needs a prune smoothie to turn his eyes blue again...now he says in the news that there were THREE lesbians heckling him AND the other comics.
Make that 2 prune smoothies waiter.........
Post a Comment