Weinstock affair: commentary
The Daniel Weinstock affair continues: La Presse’s Yves Boisvert and Paul Journet weigh in. Richard Martineau has deliberately worded his brief retraction (picture him writing this with two QMI lawyers standing over him) to sustain the implication that Weinstock mentioned allowing excisions symboliques on young women as a legitimate possibility.
There’s more on Twitter, but I haven’t found any commentary on other news sites. Maybe I’ve missed them?
Update: Daniel Weinstock has been kicked around the block this week. He was invited to that Quebec ethics forum, disinvited, partially reinvited with a bad grace, then the premier told media that it wasn’t a good idea for Weinstock to attend. So he stayed away. Facebook statement from the professor, who describes himself there as a “philosopher teaching law” at McGill.
Sunday update, via Jonathan Montpetit’s twitter feed: education minister JF Roberge has re‑extended a full invitation to Weinstock, with apologies.
Jack 11:27 on 2020-02-21 Permalink
“Mais on l’a humilié sans raison. On a officiellement jugé « controversé » sous des prétextes erronés un homme à la réputation impeccable, qui a passé sa vie adulte à réfléchir aux questions éthiques et qui s’est toujours fait un devoir de s’engager généreusement dans les débats de son époque.”
We are living in an era where people like Martineau have real power. Thats what I find so troubling.
Ian 19:32 on 2020-02-21 Permalink
Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.
Goebbels
Ian 20:26 on 2020-02-21 Permalink
I vote we start referring to JdeM as le piano…