Some private member's bill and media pressure have forced a total waste of time in Parliament today yammering away about bullying. Well, maybe it is not a waste of time - it keeps Parliament away from devising more harmful interventions in other areas. They can chatter away about bullying, and thus leave the rest of us alone and not invent new interventions.
And yet they seem full of delight at the idea of inventing new interventions; and their focus on social media seems to suggest they want to invent new restrictions on expressed speech. This is ominous; right now we live in a time where the chattering classes are very ready to zip their lips, sometimes out of fear of beheading, and sometimes because the social environment says it is impolite and therefore NOT PERMITTED. This is a slippery slope - a sort of Puritinaism is trying to be on the rise. And worse, this has all happened in an era where students are no longer expected to fight for esteem and respect, but in which the environment says they have a right to self-esteem. I am glad nobody ever told me that when I was young. Nobody deserves my esteem without doing something to deserve it; if they automatically esteem themselves, I'd say they have a problem.
I find this discussion in Parliament utterly alien. This is in NO way a federal issue constitutionally other than via criminal behavior.
What has inspired this is the recent suicide of a BC girl named Amanda Todd; this is sad enougn, but sadder in that she posted this YouTube video several weeks ago.
Dim lights Embed Embed this video on your site
It is sad but has some interesting moments. "He hooked up with me," is an interesting phrasing. Another one was "but he just wanted the sex". BUT? Did anyone educate this kid about males? Her refusal to support any laying of charges against her tormentors seems odd to me, though it seems there were at least assault charges available. It also seems that whatever system we have as working - she talks about being on prescriptions.
Seems Parliament will rant on on this in no interesting way actually related to the real case at hand and what failed and what worked in the existing system.
Too bad - but on the other hand this could keep the NDP away from far more harmful ideas than some intrusion into personal lives that is likely unconstitutional.