Zesty Discrimination

There we go again, things getting out of hand because of the convenience of human rights tribunals which can be called upon to rescue someone out of high dudgeon, while at the same time slandering and bankrupting someone else.

One individual feels entitled to bringing the wrath of human rights down on the head of some feckless individual who has no intention whatever of scorning human rights, but is simply responding on a person-to-person basis of social antipathy. People just don't get along all the time, simple as that.

Some people have a habit of going around rankling others simply because they can, and they focus on a target, and then draw back in horror because their target defends themselves. No one is that personally entitled that they can harass others and become enraged when a response from their heckling seems too um, personal.

Calling someone's professional credits as a humourist into question does invite some pay-back.

Guy Earle, a comedian living in Ontario was standing up there on a stage at a Vancouver restaurant called Zesty's, and doing his shtick. It's a difficult thing to do, but a committed comic knows the show must go on, even when he has a paucity of those to amuse, as occurred in May 2007 when he was performing before a sparse, lacklustre crowd.

Mr. Earle's temerity in responding acidly to a heckler through the acknowledgement of sexual orientation has so far cost him $20,000 in 'penalty' of defending himself. If the complainant, Lorna Pardy, is successful in her 'free' bid to have Mr. Earle convicted by the B.C. Human rights Commission of the charge brought against him of 'discrimination' on the basis of her lesbianism, it will cost him another $20,000 to satisfy her hurt feelings.

In a classic he-said, she-said exchange of accusation and counter-accusation, common sense appears to have dissolved into mindless acrimony. Mr. Earle, living in Georgetown, asked for a little human rights-consideration to be drifted his way, citing issues such as debts, employment and family obligations, which a tribunal judge dismissed. He'll be squeezed until he truly repents his haste in returning insult with insult.

Ms. Pardy, according to her complaint, was a complete innocent, attending a local event at a private restaurant that featured Mr. Earle as master of ceremonies and comic factotum. Whereupon she was treated to a string of vulgar homophobic and sexist comments courtesy of Mr. Earle. She returned the compliment by dousing him several times with the contents of her drink. He, while not appreciating the spontaneous shower, insulted her beyond limits.

On the other hand, Mr. Earle claims that Ms. Pardy and her same-sex partner refused to stifle their objectionable comments throughout his and another comic's performance, interrupting their spiel and generally discombobulating them. It's called heckling, and it is extremely difficult to rise above with equanimity while attempting to impress an audience with one's wit. It is not uncommon for responses from performers to be on the caustic side. Profane, too, tch, tch.

Ms. Pardy resents and denies Mr Earle's version of events and predictably, Mr. Earle finds fault with Ms. Pardy's story line. They disagree vehemently, it is safe to say. But Mr. Earle has not set the dogs of political correctness upon Ms. Pardy who is evidently a "fat, ugly lesbian"; he forgives her her unfortunate appearance and predilection. Ms. Pardy is not so easily comforted.

She is intent on extracting her $20,000 to soothe her hurt feelings and that, is the human rights truth.