Cited on HN 3 times, 2017–2020, never outright recommendedscore 0
Years with an HN recommendation, 2007–2026
Referenced as the hearing that propelled Peterson to public visibility and as a source on the compelled speech debate.
Jordan Peterson's testimony at the Canadian Senate hearing on Bill C16, which added gender identity and expression to protected grounds. He argues against compelled speech.
“This was precisely the argument in the Canadian Senate, 2 years ago, that propelled Jordan Peterson to public visibility.” (HN, 2019)
> despite numerous respectable legal scholars informing him that you could never get in trouble for not using a person's preferred pronoun because of this bill. [this video] As mentioned, his employer's lawyers did think so. The Adversarial Model (legal system) doesn't consider that some parties come to other conclusions. It would be ill-advised to listen to "experts" that are not part of a case, taking the advice of pundits* or other unconnected parties is not compelling evidence of legal finding. *It's primarily in the US, that the mass media promotes education pundits as corroboration in legal matters.
Senate hearing where legal scholars discussed Bill C16
I'm not sure if the compelled speech was actually adopted into law. I'm referring to Jordan Peterson's interview and senate hearing in relation to the law. [1] [link] [2] [this video]
Source on Peterson's senate hearing about compelled speech
Video list and Hacker News comment labels from HackerTube (prompted by @karpathy), released under ODC-By 1.0, built on the open-index/hacker-news archive. Hacker News data is provided by Y Combinator; comments remain the work of their authors. Video titles, channel names and thumbnails belong to their creators and are shown via YouTube. HackerTube Watch is an unofficial edition. Data export of 2026-10-31.
Plays via YouTube's privacy-enhanced embed
3 Hacker News comments
From the HN archive; up to 20 kept per video, favoring different commenters. Recommendations first.
Read more