When I embarked on an analysis of a mountain of tweets, articles and podcasts authored by Amy Hamm, I anticipated that two key points would be clear. Amy Hamm, a Vancouver nurse, has been embroiled in a legal challenge with her professional college concerning a number of gender-critical opinions she has publicly expressed.
The complaints led to an internal investigation by the college into other opinions Hamm has expressed online. Albeit unpopular and confronting a divisive political topic, neither her opinions nor the manner in which she has expressed them provide evidence that her professional competence has been compromised.
This newsletter tackles hot topics with boldness, verve and wit. Subscriber-exclusive edition on Fridays. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Platformed will soon be in your inbox. We encountered an issue signing you up.
Please try again. Hamm addresses ideas she views unpalatable with outspoken criticism and even mockery. The increasing trend of regulatory bodies silencing licensed professionals whose political and social views diverge from those of the colleges raises a concerning question about our commitment to the values of free expression.
What is most evident is that Hamm is not one of these individuals. For instance, on Oct. But Hamm herself acknowledges her confrontational style. In a tweet dated Oct. Although her language is unvarnished and direct, her discourse typically avoids personal attacks against individuals with opposing views. This aspect of her commentary stands in contrast to the discourse common on both sides of the current identity politics landscape, where repulsive personal attacks are commonplace.
