andydanger85

I would love to see them live. For myself, I have three comedy shows coming up in November - Chris Rock, Jim Jefferies, and the Evil Dead Musical (I think this is like my sixth time I wanna say?!), Mogwai in December, and then in January/Feb (I don't remember haha) I am going to see Lorde.

I gotta say I found the atmosphere at the Toronto show strange. By the time Matt started playing, there was a pretty standard Toronto size crowd to see him, but inside Molson Amphitheatre (yeah, I know it has another name now - it's stupid though), that crowd was pretty dwarfed by the overall size of the venue. When Midnight Oil came on, it didn't swell to a decent sized crowd until like the third or fourth song. Either the Toronto chapter of the Midnight Oil fan club was stuck in traffic, or the Midnight Oil fans viewed Matt as an opener and didn't bother, but it was just a strange vibe. Either way, me and the other four people in my row were all MG fans and lost our minds during the duration of the show. Trying to remember setlists - some may be out of order ... Giant Hello Time Bomb Strange Days Decades I'm a Window Apparitions Let's Get It On Silent Army (which didn't get played because guitar mixup on stage) The Future is X Rated Load Me Up Weapon Might have missed one, and that's not the right order, but it's what I remember haha

Mike, I agree that it CAN (caps for emphasis) get ludicrous, but given the original parameters of this situation, we truly haven't reached that point. University campuses are a place to have your worldview challenged, sure. For myself, for instance, I had my opinion on Canadian history as a whole shaped and challenged while I was there - but, it happened in tutorial. That a university should not have a spirit of openness in the marketplace of ideas is not my position - that's what many of the opponents at U of T are trying to stifle. As I say above, I take a different approach. On a one to one level, I'm going to disagree : it's part of your job to be respectful in your interactions. Students are governed by a code of conduct, and so are professors. Professors, in fact, should be held to a higher standard. So, while Dr. Peterson is entitled to his opinion, and if he wants to go on podcasts and television talk shows as a private citizen and promote his opinion - all of that is great for debate and discussion and all of that stuff. However, when he has a colleague or a student in his office asking for help or input or whatever - as a public servant, as an employee bound by a code of professional conduct, and as an educator who is interacting with teenagers (many kids start university when they are 17 these days - I was part of the first cohort who did, back in 2003), it behooves him to be more responsible with the words he uses. I'll employ some of your rhetoric when it comes to that - it may be nice to think that we live in a free country and you can say anything you want at all times, but at a job where you deal with vulnerable/developing people, it is not appropriate to stubbornly insist upon using his own words for how a person sees themselves. It literally does not hurt him to do it, but it hurts them if he doesn't do it - and that should be enough. And again, I'd stress that I am not making the argument that people should be shielded from offence. A marketplace of ideas is good. Just call someone how they want to be called. Openness doesn't mean bad behaviour should be tolerated, and in my opinion, that is Peterson's greatest miscalculation here. The other thing is, truly effective educators don't tell other people what to think or what to believe. The best profs I had both times I was in university helped you learn how to think for yourself. The way to do that, while avoiding obvious false equivalencies or logical fallacies, is to present legitimate arguments and have students utilize and apply them as they see fit. I went to school with Reaganites (including one dude who actually wore Reagan quote T Shirts to class), Marxists, George W. Bush loving stalwart neo-cons, card carrying Liberal Party of Canada members, members of the campus Conservatives etc. and I can tell you that tutorial was a magical place that involved a lot of spirited debate. The difference is, it was never personal. This was, and is. And I think that's where the line should be drawn.

Thanks for this response, Tony. You've clarified your positions such that I understand what you're getting at now, and I think we can get to a place of agreement on certain parts of this as you have pointed out. The one thing I would point out is with your final coda; any threats made against him are a reaction to what he said, not a censorship of his views. Even so, violence or threats are so below any serious discussion that they're not even worthy acknowledging seriously because it gives them power, agency. It should go without saying that no one should advocate violence or personal threats, especially given that the people protesting his behaviour fashion themselves protectors of others. Certainly no one is doing that here - and I acknowledged above that the debate itself has become muddled and frankly, stupid. The argument i make, is in my opinion, a more effective/pointed argument than the ones actually being made by students on campus. Certainly, it's one that is much easier to enforce in terms of getting him to alter his behaviour and treat his students and colleagues with respect. I have a friend who enjoys some of Peterson's work and I am happy to listen to him if I come across him - as I suggested before, I do not think he is necessarily bigoted on this question, just being inflexible to the point of causing unnecessary harm. Also, Emma, no one is suggesting that anyone wants to be referred to as a zebra. I was originally using that as an example to essentially agree with your position - that no matter how outlandish a person's identity may seem to another person, a that matters is that this person feels this way. As I have maintained the entire time, there is incredible harm caused by not accepting a person for who they are regardless of any personal opinion on the matter.

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-friday-edition-1.3786140/i-m-not-a-bigot-meet-the-u-of-t-prof-who-refuses-to-use-genderless-pronouns-1.3786144 "Carol Off: Professor Peterson, why have you said you don't recognize another person's right to determine what pronouns you use to address them? Jordan Peterson: That's right. I don't recognize that. I don't recognize another person's right to decide what words I'm going to use, especially when the words they want me to use, first of all, are non-standard elements of the English language and they are constructs of a small coterie of ideologically motivated people. They might have a point but I'm not going to say their words for them." "CO: Professor Peet would like to be addressed by the pronoun "they" — do you accept that? JP: The mere fact that professor Peet would like to be addressed by a particular pronoun does not mean that I am required to address him by that pronoun. That doesn't mean that I deny his existence or the existence of people who don't fit neatly in binary gender categories. I reserve the right to use my own language and I'm perfectly willing to take that to its conclusion. If it's the case that I can't use my language the way that I see fit, because I'm using my language to formulate and articulate the truth in the clearest manner I can possibly manage and if that lands me in legal trouble — well, so be it." It's all right there. The article mentions Bill C-16 elsewhere, sure, but his unvarnished views independent of the bill are reinforced several times here. I'm sorry, but if you need to try to make his argument for him, perhaps he is not making his case very effectively. I read this interview awhile back, and I think his attitude is arrogant and dismissive. That does not make me want to check out any of his other work. I will not go as far as other people in saying he is bigoted; his views independent of the way that he refuses to call people as they wish to be called are not subject to the same standard. Espousing an opinion in the abstract is much different than treating colleagues and students without respect. Frankly, he's a provocateur. He sticks his foot down his throat - and then acts all shocked and incensed when people do not like what he has to say. As much as I do not like the censorship occurring on university campuses, I think sometimes people (not saying you, but out in the world) misconstrue censorship for backlash. In so many of the cases, the person in question isn't being censored - they're being criticized after the fact. Just because they may *feel* like they are being censored, they have not been physically restricted from speaking or threatened with consequences if they do so. There are, however consequences - of the intellectual kind. People don't agree with their position and they are forced to justify it, and instead, so many cry "free speech" so as to obscure the context of their comments. I'm not saying that happens all the time, or even a minority of the time, but there does seem to be an increasing tendency towards it. Re: suicide, if that's what was meant with the initial comment, I tend to agree with that as well. I just did not understand the way it was initially phrased. I certainly respect the fact that you enjoy him, and I hope that you continue to do so in the future. I apologize if by responding to another poster's reference to the pronoun controversy I derailed your initial intent - I get excited to share someone I admire with others, as well. :)

This doesn't have anything to do with order being kept. This has to do with what the teacher thinks about their students. You have to do your job, and part of your job is to treat people with respect. I'm not really sure I understand your position on LGBTQ suicide, with all due respect. I mean, not being understood/validated is a huge causal factor. Whether or not they've been medicated or treated at too young an age is a completely separate, unrelated issue - I agree with you on that point. I'm not saying that McDonald's cashiers are walking around claiming they're dentists - that's a straw man fallacy in action. Fluid gender identity is something that, while I admit there is more study that needs to be done to examine the reasons it occurs, is something very real that people feel or are attuned towards. To compare it with McDonald's cashiers claiming they're dentists calls into question the conscious experience of many people. Peterson's main contention is that he is a psychologist, and what he has come across so far has not been proven to be a naturally occurring state - all of those things were said about same-sex couples about 40-50 years ago. As we continue to become a more sexually liberated/permissive society, we are going to see people that are comfortable enough to speak out about their experiences as a result. We are going to learn a lot more about ourselves because ultimately society is progressing in a direction that allows us to have more frank discussions. As such, no one is "enabling crazy thoughts", they're acknowledging a person's self conception. I agree that there are some limits, and perhaps I should not have used an absurd example to elucidate this notion, but I do not think we have reached that limit in this case. As for your final comment (I just don't get how there's this change of knowledgeable grown adults being treated like babies by teens somehow acceptable today. I will forever choose sitting in an empty classroom to listen to a professor teach facts than a safe space between students basing things off feelings & will censor you as soon as your opinion differs.) - I agree. It's just that that is not what has happened here - teaching is different from referring to your students in the way that they would like to be referred. I completely agree that there's a tangent of far left wing political correctness that is stifling meaningful conversation on college campuses. It's a thing. Absolutely. However, it is not even approaching the same thing in this case. As I maintain above, I believe Peterson to be exploiting this issue in order to make up for his own unprofessional actions. No one has censored him. He chose to say what he did, and now he doesn't like the backlash. Those are two very, very different things.

I haven't heard or seen much of his stuff outside of the trans pronoun controversy, either. The debate surrounding it has valid points on both sides, however, as a teacher, I would make a different argument with regards to the whole thing. To me, I think it's unconscionable that he would refuse to refer to one of his students as anything other than what they want. Number one, as a lecturer at a public university, he has to abide by codes of conduct that include respecting students - if my students want to be referred to as a zebra, I'll let them do so and refer to them accordingly. He has made his personal choice for another person, and I do not believe that this speaks to the professionalism needed to be a post-secondary educator. Number two, I do not believe it speaks to the mindset needed to be a teacher of young people. Let's keep in mind university students start when they are 18 years old - their brain is still developing, and having your teacher seemingly not accept you for who you are due to some sort of need to be "right" is asinine. Universities are supposed to be places where you talk about ideas, and you disagree, but there are healthy ways to frame a debate instead of ramming that idea down your students' throats. I firmly believe that. I do also agree with others in that I am wary of government legislating what pronouns should be used. That said, given that I work in a very similar profession, Peterson at the very least is unprofessional, at the most wholly unsuited to interacting with young people. Peterson has not been muzzled; ultimately, he has been asked to act with more professional discretion and he has been punished for it. There are very, very few jobs where you can do whatever you want to do at all times - there are codes of conduct and standards of professionalism all the way up from McDonald's cashier to Neurosurgeon. As such, in my view, this has never been about free speech. It has been about one man trying to justify his unprofessional behaviour using the current lightning rod of censorship on university campuses to do so. He saw an opportunity to save face and he's exploiting the hell out of it.

I see what ya did there. :lol:

The Rains of Castomere - Sigur Ros (Game of Thrones Soundtrack - I'm catching up!!)

Yeah, but I don't think we need use the past tense ...for example: In the last hour alone on Indie 88 in Toronto (I'm referencing their recently played) .... Hannah Georgas Metric Arcade Fire (they're on heavy rotation everywhere, I know) Tokyo Police Club Death From Above Tragically Hip Canadian acts constitute 50% of the available playlist in the last hour; CanCon has served us well. In terms of all of the above, with the exception of the Hip, they've either required VideoFACT funding or Government of Canada grants early in their careers, or just plain benefitted from CanCon rules. Obviously in general, yeah, I could do with a little less Hip/Guess Who/Hedley etc in general, but that's a pretty tasty lineup of current Canadian bands even just in the last hour. And they vastly outpace the required Canadian content directions. In a general sense, I'm typically against prescriptive rules like these ... but I think we're still hearing a lot of stuff that'd get drowned out by bigger budgets, bigger names and standard radio overplaying. Even still, I'm aware that's the Toronto market and you may not get that the further you are away from a major city. If bland/overplayed is the name of the affiliates game, may be time to invest in Sirius XM haha

The CRTC rules you're mentioning are the whole reason we know who Matthew Good is. As you rightly point out later on, it'd be ID or Mumford and Sons on repeat (or, during the early days - NSYNC and Britney Spears on Much and Staind and Papa Roach on rock radio from that time period). I agree that it is now the trend to play a few Canadian artists many times (Hedley, Carly Rae, Marianas Trench et al), but with regards to Matt specifically, radio has been really good to him. I've heard him mention the loyalty of Ottawa rock radio stations multiple times in various interviews etc. So, while things have changed, "sad" might not be the best way to frame it! I know about a lot of bands that I may have otherwise never heard of because of those rules!

Indie 88 in Toronto played AYSAD relatively often; I am not listening to radio as much these days, so I don't know if Decades or Bad Guys Win got spins.

It is definitely heartbreaking. So young, too.

Matt updated this on Instagram. It's related to Midnight Oil, not him or the band.

No central A/C sucks, for sure. I went without it for approximately 15 years but always had window units. I. Can.Not.Sleep if I am hot period. Some ideas that have worked for me in the past ....wet a facecloth and put it around your neck. I also find if I keep the back of my head a little bit wet, it tends to control the degree of discomfort I feel.

I agree with this statement. Just hopped on Ticketbastard to grab tickets and ended up not getting any...there's only two price levels ($65 and $85), which is a little too rich for my blood. Will wait and maybe see if the price drops (usually I wouldn't think that's a thing - but it happened for the 3EB) show later this summer and I kicked myself later.

Yes! Or "Dirty enough like hot meat loaf"

Just a suggestion in case you don't find one... maybe have one made? Study some photos and get a font as close as possible to the original one Matt had made for himself, match the yellow and hope that they have a similar shade of blue and bam! One sweet birthday gift ...

My updated/current list: April 13 - Crash Vegas at Danforth Music Hall April 23 - Explosions at Rebel April 25 - Mono at Lee’s Palace June 10 - Do Make Say Think at Danforth Music Hall June 11 - Deftones/Rise Against at Molson Amphitheatre June 22 - Alexisonfire at Danforth June 28 - Third Eye Blind /Silversun Pickups at Echo July 18- Muse and 30 Seconds at Molson Amphitheate December 5- Mogwai at Danforth Music Hall

I saw Sigur Ros at the Bronson Centre almost 15 years ago -- that place weirded me out because I did not expect it to be a school inside. Truthfully (pre- Google maps), we weren't sure it was even the place, with it being school-like in nature. I had a terrible cold, but I do remember noting that it had great sound. Yeah, I tend to agree, though I think the kind of show dictates the atmosphere. Just as it is insane to expect people not to try and have a good time, it's also not a Slayer concert. I've been to a lot of MG shows, specifically, where there have been a disproportionate amount of (casual - I'm happy to admit that's slightly presumptuous) fans that think we're all 19 and drinking our first beer. Which is why I also agree with this comment: Specifically, more solo acoustic Dallas Green shows than you can shake a stick out. In the early days, especially, you'd get all the frat boy Alexisonfire fans (not that their fans are all frat boys, but lots of that demographic seemed to be into them) screaming I WANNA FUCK YOU or MARRY ME DALLAS in between songs about heartbreak or death. A little bit strange... I agree also, to an extent, with the idea that some people don't want to stand for health (or tiredness) reasons; I feel that venues should maybe consider creating a "no standing" section, perhaps. Danforth Music Hall is like this, and I appreciate that. On the mezzanine and balcony, people tend not to stand up because they specifically selected a seat, as opposed to General Admission on the floor. It's sort of implied, in this environment, that standing up is a faux pas. Maybe an innovation for venues that struggle with the standing up/sitting down conundrum....

Hmm ... the more discussion about this and the more it seems like demographics with regards to place and age. I went to see the Tea Party in Brantford recently ... another 90's band with the same general demo as Matt but it was a wild crowd that looked to wanna get obliterated that night and skewed older as well... it's interesting the different vibes people can get.

So, at the risk of starting a inter-municipal incident, I'm actually going to slightly disagree with the flavour of Ottawa crowds. There's definitely a general attitude to a crowd, and there are some things that are representative of a city. Now, from an outsider's perspective (I am from the GTA, but I have been to Ottawa probably a hundred times if I've been once), I've always found Ottawa to be a much more impolitic place -- there are times you can cut the anglo-french tension with a knife, and I've seen probably half a dozen incidents of this interspersed among many visits. That, and people in Ottawa are also way more likely to actually talk to you in public - so many shows and social situations where someone will walk right up and say "Hey bud". I'm well aware this is all anecdotal, but my experience has shown me that Ottawa crowds blow Toronto crowds (again, in a general sense) out of the water. Now, my understanding from past posts with regards to past tours is that the NAC itself seems to be the culprit with regards to clamping down on stuff considered normal concert etiquette anywhere else. Wasn't it last tour, or maybe the one before that, where someone was saying that the NAC staff were actively telling people to stop taking pictures and video? Was there also a rule against standing during the show at this venue? I know that Massey Hall in Toronto used to be discriminating in this way also, but that seemed to abate around 08-09ish ... I just know that Matt has always loved Ottawa audiences because that's one of the markets where MGB made it big first, and I think the crowds/disposition of the city have a lot to do with it. They may be reserved during the day time, but if you have ever attended a Canada Day celebration, Ottawa throws a pretty wicked party, too!

So, I have to say that this happened to me as well. When I was at my first show in Hamilton, seeing a few of the songs that haven't really been played since the old days made me very emotional. I was immediately brought back to the thoughts, sounds and smells of those days when I first heard these songs and it was amazing on several levels. It was an emotional "high", that's for sure.

Nice! I hope you enjoy!

Here is some video I took from the Wed March 8th Danforth show ... End of Born to Kill Clip from Machine Gun The end of Born to kill was especially good at this performance. All in all, yet another fantastic show. Matt was into the bourbon a little bit, so he was noticeably a bit more loosened up! I also happened to meet Kelly, who I know a few people from the board here know ... I don't believe she is a member, but definitely Bored-adjacent. Very cool experience!