Lmao i doubt she could get a job at starbucks.

I supose it doesnt really matter, there are tons of things she could put in the law suit

Defamation of character would be the easiest one I could think of

you'd still have to prove an impact to her earnings or future earnings to get any award, though. unfortunately its hard to put a finger on the fact that half or more of the private sector won't hire her and neither will the public/gov sector because it would be very political.

She will never get hired by a state/government agency.

whelp... looks like Tommy Robinson will be dead soon

F

As far as I'm aware there are no universities in Canada that would uphold the principles of the Chicago Letter, and none want the risk of hiring a person like Shepherd. I doubt she could find someone as a PhD advisor.

Says that suit claims that someone told her " showing the clip was illegal under human rights law"

this seems very simple and easy to prove

That's in the recording as far as I'm aware.

So either A it is illegal under human rights law to question laws

or B The university/person has stepped beyond thier bounds

Bill C-16?

Canada does not have free speech, so it's possible that the law could be interpreted that way.

They dont say, just that showing the clip was Illegal under human rights laws

Now the university has to argue one of those two points in court

I want them to hang that person out to dry to make an example of her

However i doubt it will come to that, theyll probably try to settle before they have to get involved in this free speech debate that puts peterson back in the spotlight

@Atkins She fought back by publishing a secret recording. Shes going on the offensive by suing now

in any fight bad shit happens

im unemployable in a shitload of jobs

publicity does that

She should not have had to fight anything because universities should not be political indoctrination centers.

Yeah its just impossible to explain that legitimately because there's no proof.

So her choices where say something and fight back and get ruined, or go along with the political indoctrination.

right

shes fighting back and she will be surrounded by eh collateral damage of that

I'm saying it's bullshit to say it's her own fault for fighting back.

I really dont think she will win the suit but Laurier will likely settle

It's victim blaming.

personal responsibility and choosing your battles

and this isnt even a pyrrhic victory

side note

Whatever buzzwords you choose to call it, atkins, it is what it is. Tim isn't making up the rules.

new merch will start appearing on my channel

beanies for everyone

If choosing your battles means keeping silent and allowing political indoctrination to go unchallenged, what battle should she have chosen to fight instead?

Just keep her head down, finish her masters, then keep her head down and stay on the PhD track, then keep her head down and try to get a professorship then keep her head down and try to get tenure to do what?

Retire?

if she wanted a PhD yes