March 06, 2018

Pro-censorship reporters want on-air “FHRITP” outbursts banned

David MenziesMission Specialist

 

Heather Gillis, a reporter with NTV in Newfoundland, suffered the dreaded "F her right in the P (FHRITP) experience.

According to a CBC report, Gillis tracked down the cad who uttered the expletive and he was criminally charged under the Criminal Code for causing a disturbance.

But recently, Judge Colin Flynn, referring to a Supreme Court of Canada decision, decided the alleged offence didn’t meet the legal requirements.

Alas, so much for Heather Gillis’ claim that the FHRITP outburst made for sexual harassment and a workplace safety issue.

These interruptions suck for journalists, but having your feelings hurt doesn’t qualify as sexual harassment, and to call this a safety issue is laughable.

We experience FHRITP disturbances almost every time we venture out to shoot a Generation Trudeau segment, as I’ll show you.

In light of the judge’s decision, some are calling for new laws to be introduced to ban such lewd outbursts, but isn’t the risk of being “outed” as a vulgar dimwit enough of a penalty?

I’ll bet given the unwanted attention these cads receive, they undoubtedly wish they’d kept their mouths zipped!

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2018-03-08 00:33:14 -0500
In fact, let me revise my last statement: (b) if it was done in a situation in which it actually led to someone being raped (intentionally or not), then it should be prosecuted as incitement. And I do believe that. Just as yelling “fire” in an empty field is not a crime, but yelling “fire” in a crowded theater, causing someone to be trampled, is.
commented 2018-03-08 00:21:32 -0500
Cameron and Tammie, you’re right that no one should be charged for yelling FHRITP as a prank, and I’m not suggesting that, but I am thinking that (a) they should darnshur be heavily ostracized for uttering such a hateful thing against women, because yelling FHRITP in public is clearly an incitement to rape, intentional or not; (b) if was done in a situation in which it intentionally led to someone being raped, then it should be prosecuted as incitement.
commented 2018-03-07 15:28:57 -0500
This generation has been intentionally dumb-ed down on history so that they can have no perspective on the past disastrous evils of censorship. It typically begins with one party promises “egalitarian” revolution, the Media joins the party, censorship is used to silence opposition, products and services are nationalized, the economic “Orange” is squeezed, anarchy results, the dictatorship is set up and the political jails begin to fill. Venezuela is a perfect model. Run like hell when they promise an egalitarian society.
commented 2018-03-07 12:04:24 -0500
How long before the CBC will want the term “fake news” banned as well. The CBC is government controlled fake news. Heather Gillis is a fake journalist.
commented 2018-03-07 07:49:03 -0500
Kameron Cuk, I agree.
commented 2018-03-07 07:37:16 -0500
Ted,
I think there is a HUGE difference between Lara Logan being raped in Cairo and someone yelling out FHRITP in the background of a live on scene news report. Yes, its rude as hell and you’re a douche if thats what you’re saying but, we all know that its done to get a reaction…..like trolling people online. You are a news reporter, so suck it up and get over it because you’re an adult and we cant start charging people because your feelings got hurt
commented 2018-03-07 02:31:51 -0500
“Sticks and stones will break my bones but names can never hurt me”… I wish some of the snowflakes on both sides of left and right would go in extra layer of skin and we wouldn’t have to worry about the crybabies pissing and moaning because they were called some words they didn’t like… Nobody likes that kind of thing but the less fuss we make out of it the more it will go away. How far we have regressed as a society to be standing in front of a judge for calling somebody names but armed thugs can raid and rob farms in Saskatchewan or loot businesses in Ontario with impunity.!! Whatever happened to snappy comeback’s to name callers.!!
commented 2018-03-07 01:02:08 -0500
BTW, I am not advocating any legal restriction on speech in my last comment. But I do believe there should be legal recourse against anyone deliberately terrorizing another person, whatever the means being used.
commented 2018-03-07 00:51:40 -0500
Menz, I agree with you on virtually everything, but on this one I really think you should rethink the matter. This goes beyond extreme bad taste, to actual hate speech intended to degrade women. And it’s the sort of thing I can imagine happening to a woman walking in a neighborhood where it would not be just a very bad joke. I think of what happened not long ago to journalist Lara Logan in Cairo. Imagine yourself walking through a strange neighborhood and hearing people calling out, “F—- him right in the A—!” Think about how you would feel (probably terrified) and whether anyone should be made to endure that in any situation.
commented 2018-03-06 18:57:34 -0500
Word to the wise; although it’s obviously illegal for someone to serve you a knuckle sandwich when they witness you doing the FHRITP stunt, people have sometimes experienced moments of, shall we say, “temporary insanity” in situations like that.
So let’s be careful out there, folks…