News   Nov 08, 2024
Tricon's Birch House Welcomes Residents to the Canary District
 463     0 
News   Nov 08, 2024
News Roundup for November 8, 2024
 372     0 
News   Nov 08, 2024
Aqualuna Dawn
 687     1 

Rob Ford's Toronto

Status
Not open for further replies.
hawc said:
You guys are too much. So if a woman says, I don't need to go to male strip clubs because I've got a stud of a husband at home that's sexist? Gimme a break.

It was incredibly crude and vulgar but he was not objectifying his wife. Or saying she has no other purpose in life but a sexual one. You guys are being ridiculous.

Anyway, I'm finally anti-Ford too. There are ya happy?
Click to expand...
He didn't say he had a hot wife. It was totally objectifying
 
hawc said:
You guys are too much. So if a woman says, I don't need to go to male strip clubs because I've got a stud of a husband at home that's sexist? Gimme a break.

It was incredibly crude and vulgar but he was not objectifying his wife. Or saying she has no other purpose in life but a sexual one. You guys are being ridiculous.

Anyway, I'm finally anti-Ford too. There are ya happy?
Click to expand...

Well, as I started this debate agreeing with you and have since turned around on it by considering the post from PinkLucy I'll just say that while the word itself in that context I wouldn't consider misogynistic, the whole situation - saying what he said about going down on his wife in the early conference and then parading his clearly miserable and uncomfortable wife through another press conference as a prop to show how happily married and orally fulfilled she is... man that's pretty demeaning. One day she's horribly humiliated by a ton of fucked up allegations about her husband's attempted and potentially successful infidelities and the next she's his box-munchee prop to prove hers is the only vagina for his tongue? Yeah. I see where people are coming from. That second presser was truly awful.
 
One Nut Kruk said:
In case this hasn't been posted already...Ford brothers to host show on Sun News Network

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/straighttalk/archives/2013/11/20131114-120008.html
Click to expand...

Wonder if they will appear as
RobDoug.jpg
 

Attachments

  • RobDoug.jpg
    RobDoug.jpg
    67.3 KB · Views: 503
People are way too sensitive about this whole objectification thing.

What Ford said and how he said it was misogynistic because the guy is a horrible person and obviously has no respect for his wife, women, minorities, or anyone who is not exactly him - really.

But the phrase he used falls more under the category of general stupidity than anything else. If a woman said, after being accused of blowing someone extra-maritally, "I have plenty to suck at home already", that would sound equally stupid - though not necessarily offensive from a gender-conscious perspective. It's just a pathetic thing to say.
 
Sweet Mister said:
To use your example, it would have been 'I don't need to watch the Chippendales because there's a big cock waiting for me at home'. Sorry for the crudeness.
Click to expand...

Well more accurately it would be I don't need to sexually use and harass my employees, the Chippendale dancers, because I have a c**k to use and abuse at home.
Sorry also for the crudeness. But the context was much worse.

Anyway, it can't really be translated because men have always had more agency than women. Women are still being objectified and judged based on their looks and sexual availability to men.
 
Last edited:
RC8 said:
People are way too sensitive about this whole objectification thing.

What Ford said and how he said it was misogynistic because the guy is a horrible person and obviously has no respect for his wife, women, minorities, or anyone who is not exactly him - really.

But the phrase he used falls more under the category of general stupidity than anything else. If a woman said, after being accused of blowing someone extra-maritally, "I have plenty to suck at home already", that would sound equally stupid - though not necessarily offensive from a gender-conscious perspective. It's just a pathetic thing to say.
Click to expand...

Yes exactly. The situation not the phrase itself.
 
RC8 said:
People are way too sensitive about this whole objectification thing.

What Ford said and how he said it was misogynistic because the guy is a horrible person and obviously has no respect for his wife, women, minorities, or anyone who is not exactly him - really.

But the phrase he used falls more under the category of general stupidity than anything else. If a woman said, after being accused of blowing someone extra-maritally, "I have plenty to suck at home already", that would sound equally stupid - though not necessarily offensive from a gender-conscious perspective. It's just a pathetic thing to say.
Click to expand...
Nope.
 
juniorfox said:
Well, as I started this debate agreeing with you and have since turned around on it by considering the post from PinkLucy I'll just say that while the word itself in that context I wouldn't consider misogynistic, the whole situation - saying what he said about going down on his wife in the early conference and then parading his clearly miserable and uncomfortable wife through another press conference as a prop to show how happily married and orally fulfilled she is... man that's pretty demeaning. One day she's horribly humiliated by a ton of fucked up allegations about her husband's attempted and potentially successful infidelities and the next she's his box-munchee prop to prove hers is the only vagina for his tongue? Yeah. I see where people are coming from. That second presser was truly awful.
Click to expand...

Your original point was not wrong, though. It's true that Rob is virtually implicated in a whole host of criminal activities, but it's his sewer mouth that seems to be doing him in. I think maybe it's easier for his former fans to grasp the fact that he's jerk than to accept that he is an alleged criminal.
 
zang said:
I can't answer all, but…


Municipalities are considered creatures of the Province. I believe at any time the Province can (with a majority vote) dissolve a municipal government. Technically, they don't unseat the mayor, but the entire government. And because a municipality cannot lack a government, an election is instantly called. Not sure what happens in the interim, but it'd be a MUCH shorter campaign period. As an alternative, I believe they can also instate interim seat fillers.



Re: Tools; I suspect some sort of super-majority vote of non-confidence amendment to the City of Toronto Act, i.e.; if ⅔ of council votes to unseat Ford, it would authorize the Province to vacate the seat (and not the entire government).

Hudak is toast if he sticks up for Ford. He might still try and stick up for Doug, but why waste the energy and risk the potential scandal if Rob gets taken down by the Law.
Click to expand...

Because I'm a politics nerd, I'll chime in again.

The constitution of Canada only sets out the governance of Canada and the Provinces and Territories. This effectively means that provinces are free (under the constitution anyway) to organize the efficient governance of the land and people within as they see fit. Really, if they wanted, there could be no municipal governments at all, no mayors, nothing. In Ontario, however, the province has decided to divide into 430 or so municipalities, and some regions, and defined the form of government for all of them. The province also delegates some responsibilities and powers (like property taxation and bylaw development) to the municipalities that they've decided are better run by those municipalities. All of this is set out in some detail in the Municipal Act: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_01m25_e.htm

Because Miller was the man, he managed to convince the province that since Toronto was so cool, they deserved special treatment (particularly since they had been so screwed over by the province by amalgamation... Ever wonder why Toronto got forcably amalgamated but other dual-level municipalities like Halton didn't? Look at where the PC MPPs were from at the time) so the province gave a bunch of extra taxation powers and other responsibilities to Toronto in he City of Toronto Act: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_06c11_e.htm


The upshot of all this is to say that what the province giveth, the province can taketh away. Since the province has set out in its own legislation how people get elected, and what positions they hold within those government, the province can go ahead and do whatever the heck it wants to remove or retain those people. Note that for the purposes of this paragraph the "province" doesn't mean the governing party, it just means that whatever rules come out of QP at the end of the day is what happens inside municipalities.

So, if the province wants to remove just Ford through a special Act, it can. If it wants to remove the whole government, it can. If it wants to appoint a caretaker homicidal robot MayorBot, and it goes through parliament and the Lieutenant Governor, it can.

That being said, there is only so much time for things to happen at Queens Park. The reason Wynne wants to only do things with Unanimous Consent isn't just because she doesn't want things to be contentious or to use up political capital on it, it's because if this goes through the whole process, then it's likely that something that she actually cares about won't have time to.
 
Adaax said:
Your original point was not wrong, though. It's true that Rob is virtually implicated in a whole host of criminal activities, but it's his sewer mouth that seems to be doing him in. I think maybe it's easier to grasp the fact that he's jerk than to accept that he is an alleged criminal.
Click to expand...

It's also the case that Ford's support has largely been on his personality, and his fans have argued that any victimless criminal activity done in private was his own business. For them, I think that seeing him as a violent, crude, foulmouthed asshole does far more damage to the reason they support him than any drug taking. I also think there is far more impact in seeing him act this way in public, seemingly intentionally, as opposed to on a recording of private time or allegations from others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top