Transphobes gunning hard for 'paedophilia' angle all of a sudden

[belboid]

When I see on the television, a middle aged woman entering a building surrounded by security, because others wish to physically prevent her from speaking, I know who the fascists are.

Free speech means that others may say say things you don't like, and cuts both ways.

Shame you didn't get to see all the people who aren't given security and who do get the shit kicked out of them and worse just for the crime of being trans.

And free speech does cut both ways, which is why a crowd decrying Stocks bigotry is both a good thing and positively part of free speech. But you're decrying it as fascist. Then again, you think the SNP are fascist, so we all know it's a concept you have zero understanding of.

 

[SpookyFrank]

When I see on the television, a middle aged woman entering a building surrounded by security, because others wish to physically prevent her from speaking, I know who the fascists are.

Free speech means that others may say say things you don't like, and cuts both ways.

You give people free speech, and  this is the pathetic shit they choose to say with it

 

[Yossarian]

Then again, you think the SNP are fascist

Also the governments of Australia and New Zealand for their anti-smoking legislation

 

[SpookyFrank]

Remembering of course that Kathleen Stock's former university, in its scorched-earth attempts to defend Stock and keep her in post, overtly threatened students who used their free speech to protest against Stock's behaviour. And it was her behaviour that was the problem, not her (admittedly vile) opinions or her academic output.

I don't recall Stock giving it the, 'defend to the death your right to say it' routine then.

 

[danny la rouge]

Also the governments of Australia and New Zealand for their anti-smoking legislation

That famous policy of Fascist states.

 

[Dystopiary]

View attachment 377190

That famous policy of Fascist states.

the correct policy:

 

[Sasaferrato]

Shame you didn't get to see all the people who aren't given security and who do get the shit kicked out of them and worse just for the crime of being trans.

And free speech does cut both ways, which is why a crowd decrying Stocks bigotry is both a good thing and positively part of free speech. But you're decrying it as fascist. Then again, you think the SNP are fascist, so we all know it's a concept you have zero understanding of.

I see. One side has the right to speak, but not the other. Says rather a lot about you really.

 

[Rob Ray]

I see. One side has the right to speak, but not the other. Says rather a lot about you really.

Both sides have the right to speak in that scenario.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Both sides have the right to speak in that scenario.

When people are prepared to use physical force to prevent one person from speaking, it would seem not.

 

[Rob Ray]

When people are prepared to use physical force to prevent one person from speaking, it would seem not.

Blocking someone from speaking in a particular venue happens all the time, and is only controversial here because it's a contested space. Fascists are fairly broadly barred from speaking in LGBT pubs (which amazingly do not suddenly become fascist themselves when doing so). Communists rarely get an even hand on Newsnight. I can't speak at the University of Oxford at this very moment (along with millions of others) for the quite boring reason that I'm not considered important enough to do so. Man City fans will probably get a kicking if they walk into the Trafford on match day and start singing the Munich song.

This intimation that the mere fact of opposition to a given speaker at a given place and time is automatically also an authoritarian attack on the right to speak is nonsensical. That right is a completely different concept based on whether the State takes on itself the power to control what is and isn't said in public discourse. Stock can (and lord above does she) speak all over the country. She can write books, have newspaper columns and go on the telly whenever she likes - in fact her voice is fucking everywhere. She is not in any realistic sense censored, quite the opposite - her voice is materially privileged through extraordinary media access.



What she is is controversial, and thus unwelcome in parts of the country where her insults and attacks are regarded as beyond what people living there are prepared to tolerate. You are of course, if you wish, free to complain that such a lack of tolerance is unfair, unfounded or unpleasant. You can argue the limits being set are too harsh - though I would counter that expecting to be able to deliver hate speeches unhindered whenever and wherever you like suggests a seriously entitled attitude. It is not, however, an attack on her rights, let alone some de facto fascist-flavoured endeavour.

 

[belboid]

I see. One side has the right to speak, but not the other. Says rather a lot about you really.

You very clearly dont see. They both have the right to speak. You are decrying one groups right to do so. Try thinking before typing.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I see. One side has the right to speak, but not the other. Says rather a lot about you really.

But are you aware that you have the right to shut up and stop making a fool of yourself?

 

[Sasaferrato]

But are you aware that you have the right to shut up and stop making a fool of yourself?

The fact that you indulge in an ad hom attack, as usual, merely confirms what a clown you are.

 

[Rob Ray]

The fact that you indulge in an ad hom attack, as usual, merely confirms what a clown you are.

The fact you ignored me meanwhile merely confirms what I already thought - you aren't serious about free speech and what it actually means, you merely reckoned you had a handy stick. So honestly you can fuck off calling anyone else a clown.

 

[two sheds]

The fact that you indulge in an ad hom attack, as usual,

merely confirms what a clown you are.

no ad hom attacks there

 

[Epona]

If we have to keep conversation about trans issues to a "trans thread", is it possible to have just one without people fucking attacking us?
This wouldn't be acceptable if it was supporting racists (and race hate promoters) on a thread about race issues, so why is it acceptable here?

 

[Sasaferrato]

You very clearly dont see. They both have the right to speak. You are decrying one groups right to do so. Try thinking before typing.

Sorry? What have I misunderstood about a mob outside a venue, there with the stated purpose of preventing someone from speaking?

I defend the right of any person, with the usual caveats, to state their view. They have the right to speak, I have the right not to listen. What no one has the right to do is turn up mob handed in an attempt to intimidate and silence.

This is of course Urban, which in many ways lost touch with reality long long ago.

 

[Sasaferrato]

The fact you ignored me meanwhile merely confirms what I already thought - you aren't serious about free speech and what it actually means, you merely reckoned you had a handy stick. So honestly you can fuck off calling anyone else a clown.

Another clown.

 

[Rob Ray]

You haven't the wit to engage with reality Sass, that's the problem. Never got beyond the tabloid rendering of it.

 

[Sasaferrato]

no ad hom attacks there

I have a stated policy, don't indulge in ad homs against me, I'll not indulge in ad homs against you.

Frank the plank's two unconnected neurons can't grasp that, despite having been told this a number of times.

 

[Sasaferrato]

You haven't the wit to engage with reality Sass, that's the problem. Never got beyond the tabloid rendering of it.

It really is a clown show today.

(And stop parodying my ancestor with your user name )

 

[Rob Ray]

I have a stated policy, don't indulge in ad homs against me, I'll not indulge in ad homs against you.

Frank the plank's two unconnected neurons can't grasp that, despite having been told this a number of times.

And yet you totally ignored my considered rebuttal, instead waiting until I defended someone else and then dismissing me as a clown. It's almost as though your "principles" are self-serving garbage.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I have a stated policy, don't indulge in ad homs against me, I'll not indulge in ad homs against you.

Frank the plank's two unconnected neurons can't grasp that, despite having been told this a number of times.

I didn't say you were a fool, only that you were making a fool of yourself. Which, again, you are free to stop doing at any point.

 

[Sasaferrato]

If we have to keep conversation about trans issues to a "trans thread", is it possible to have just one without people fucking attacking us?
This wouldn't be acceptable if it was supporting racists (and race hate promoters) on a thread about race issues, so why is it acceptable here?

The whole trans issue is utterly toxic.

 

[Rob Ray]

In your hands, yes.

 

[Sasaferrato]

And yet you totally ignored my considered rebuttal, instead waiting until I defended someone else and then dismissing me as a clown. It's almost as though your "principles" are self-serving garbage.

Whatever.

 

[belboid]

Sorry? What have I misunderstood about a mob outside a venue, there with the stated purpose of preventing someone from speaking?

I defend the right of any person, with the usual caveats, to state their view. They have the right to speak, I have the right not to listen. What no one has the right to do is turn up mob handed in an attempt to intimidate and silence.

This is of course Urban, which in many ways lost touch with reality long long ago.

Being so well versed in this subject and having studied it seriously for so long you will undoubtedly have read the word of the organisers of the demo:

Organisers of the Trans+ Pride demonstration insisted they did not want to stifle free speech.

Diman, who is studying for a PhD in politics, said: “I will be on the frontline to make sure that everyone can come in. I’ll make sure that the event goes ahead, because I don’t believe in violence. I believe in the rule of law. And I’ll be fighting for her freedom of speech.”

But don't let tedious things like the actual facts get in the way of your ignorant ramblings.

 

[Sasaferrato]

I didn't say you were a fool, only that you were making a fool of yourself. Which, again, you are free to stop doing at any point.

Ooooh look, you got a like from your equally feeble minded sycophant.

 

[Rob Ray]

Ooooh look, you got a like from your equally feeble minded sycophant.

I think that might be the only like I've given him in this entire thread, but sure thing buddy. As for feeble minded, you're the one who's signally failed to show your workings Sass - you're currently on about the same level of debate as Staker.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Being so well versed in this subject and having studied it seriously for so long you will undoubtedly have read the word of the organisers of the demo:

Organisers of the Trans+ Pride demonstration insisted they did not want to stifle free speech.

Diman, who is studying for a PhD in politics, said: “I will be on the frontline to make sure that everyone can come in. I’ll make sure that the event goes ahead, because I don’t believe in violence. I believe in the rule of law. And I’ll be fighting for her freedom of speech.”

But don't let tedious things like the actual facts get in the way of your ignorant ramblings.

So I didn't see a woman being escorted in through the back door, accompanied by four security people?

Now, if the mob at the front were so benign, why did that happen?

I'm talking about a television news broadcast. Not speculation or supposition, a directly observed event.

I have no side whatsoever in the trans debate. People are who they are, and it is none of my business. I do have a side in the free speech debate.