Barristers rebel against ‘anti-trans’ speaker at LGBTQ event - Times Article

Here's hoping my liberty never depends on a barrister who doesn't know the meaning of debate.

It's the automatic cry of 'it's unsafe!' if someone with different views than them is in the room that's so risible. Barristers, fgs.

I think when the highly egocentric 'unsafe' rhetoric was confined to navel-gazing students it was to some extent batted away as a fad. Now it's being seen amidst barristers, the BBC and university staff, the cat is well and truly out of the bag about the effects of Stonewall's schemes and scheming.

Kelley was scheduled to be joined by Kieran Aldred, Stonewall’s head of policy, and Robin Allen, QC, who was on a working party that lobbied for the proposed ban on conversion therapy to be included in the Queen’s Speech.

What sort of 'debate' were they expecting to have with 3 people who all shared the same view?

It does rather suggest they don't have much confidence in their own argument, or much evidence, and quite possibly that they deep down agree with these people they are so afraid to talk to.

There are whole cohorts of people in the wrong job it seems. There are barristers, journalists at the BBC, university lecturers, who can't handle the very idea of an opposing view being debated.

Barristers don't feel competent to argue with GC views?

Oh dear. That's going to be a bit of a problem then, isn't it? Possibly some more training required? Back bone? Directions to the grip shop?

Horizon I think that’s a really good point

I love this shift in wording that I’ve seen recently.

When JKR first made her gender critical comments I made a point on here that news reports kept saying she had made ‘controversial’ comments: this is a loaded word which implies that her views were out of step with the majority of people.

Now I keep seeing the word ‘controversial’ relating to the views of TRAs and Stonewall.

I think the journalist got the tone of that article exaclty right.

"Nancy Kelley, the chief executive of Stonewall, the campaign group that has adopted a controversial approach to gender self-identity...

Stonewall campaigns for a wide definition of conversion therapy that would make it a criminal offence for therapists to try to help patients with gender dysphoria to feel comfortable in their birth sex...."

Stonewall's approach is absolutely shocking when explained honestly.

Well clearly Nancy Kelly and stonewall don't want people looking to hard at the conversion therapy bill I wonder why that is 🤔

The comments are great!

The comments on that article are good and I think totally representative of ordinary people's views on this matter.

People are soon going to realise that it's not just views they disagree with. It's views they desperately don't want to be made public.

In this case discussion regarding

"the fight to ban gay conversion therapy”

As one of the comments points out "It was a debate, not a ‘celebration of inclusion’. Debates are about debating. That’s the whole point."

Indeed they are.

Surely they are not saying that Nancy Kelley, Kieran Aldred (Stonewall’s head of policy) and Robin Allen (on working party that lobbied for the ban on conversion therapy) are no match for Naomi Cunningham?

There’s been a lot about this on twitter with the vast majority of people aghast that barristers or people who want to be barristers, want to exclude someone whose views they don’t agree with. As many have pointed out “you’ve picked the wrong job then”

I suspect “barristers” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here as well as of the 100, I suspect its the fox botherer, a handful of others & 95 law students.