This House believes in the right to offend @ Cambridge Union

As a point of principle I believe that everything should be up for debate.

Hence it's only the posh accents you hear. Debate societies are a politicians training ground. Gotta keep the riff raff out of contention, haven't they.

membership fees are huge

Did I hear £180 mentioned to join? That's mind-boggling!

Yes, the committee members have always worn black tie and speakers dress formally. The audience just dress normally.

@MummBRaaarrrTheEverLeaking I thought the same. The three lads to the side of Kass drew my attention more than Kass did. I want to know what the middle one was showing/texting, especially when he clearly texted someone on the other side of the room then signalled with his eyes.

Also a real mix of attire on speakers Vs audience. Do only the speakers and chair have to dress up?

Isn’t Kathleen Stock indigenous and gender non conforming?

Ah, Kass - Trinity is, for the unfamiliar, a bastion of wealth & privilege within the university. Kass is big into control - no offending people; pronoun pressure; & the absolute right of men to reclaim the entirety of the College, naturally. No more of this “women’s toilets” nonsense! Kass wants everything to be “gender-neutral”. Making it clear that Kass doesn’t care about women who actually have been assaulted/women who are prohibited from sharing bathrooms with men/women who play sport…

The Union tends to be full of wealthy would-be politicians. (Vs the SU, which has more of a mix eg Wes Streeting was CUSU President but AFAIK not a Union member.) Seriously skewed wee segment of the student population - membership fees are huge; & as debates are always on a Thursday [first day of the Cambridge week] if - for example - you belong to an orchestra that rehearses then or team that practises then… Notorious for being the flame to the Tory Boy moths 🙄

Sorry @ApocalipstickNow I would have responded earlier but I WAS HAVIN' A FAG!*

*cigarette!

Loved him and his "biting my tongue body language"

Not one considered the offence women feel.

Mini misogynists.

Apart from blue shirt guy who was scathing, "you're all wasting my time!"

There should be a law about speaking plain English among 20 somethings.

I think a few have swallows a butler tome.

Kathleen was v good. Switched the first one's main point on its head.

You think it will take him 20 years? I would give him two years as an MPs intern intern , a couple of years as a special advisor, then a safe seat…….

I really had this in mind as I listened to the Cambridge debate today.
Os seconding thanks to OP for posting. Right up my alley and wouldn't have found otherwise

Posted this in another thread but think it got lost in one of those more complex/fiery exchanges that came straight after 😂

Think this thread might be better. Interesting for those who enjoy listening to stuff around free speech. Description under link

podcasts.apple.com/dk/podcast/the-we-hate-hate-speech-speech-with-helen-dale/id1602842758?i=1000585082793

This is a fascinating episode of Corinna Cohn and Nina Paley's podcast series, where they interview Helen Dale on the history of Hate Speech laws. The discussion covers a hugely broad field, and could actually be a good micro example of what we are discussing here, as Helen Dale is probably contentious in her views on feminism to many on this board. Yet there would still be lots to agree on. She bigs up Louise Perry. She seems to be an absolute polymath; law, classical history, anthropology, politics. Her insights into lobbying are fascinating (lots to say on trans rights lobbying).
Sooo enlightening/thought provoking on the topic of free speech, hate speech, freedom of association.
Highly recom

I thought the woman from the floor raised a good point from the Opposition suggesting other Opps weren’t challenging the meaning of ‘rights’ (can offend, but not a right. Can go to Sainsburys, not a right, etc).

Really enjoyed Arif. Very eloquent and clear. I really appreciate speakers who can formulate clear, considered arguments without appeals to emotion or straw man arguments. I do feel like the last of the opposition did better than his counterparts.

Kiss really was a joke and showed an appalling lack of critical thinking and debate skills. By all means hold firm in your position, but it wasn’t clear if he actually had one on the topic. It looks like it just wanted a platform to rant and rave.

I agree about the “dandies” sashagabadon. I agree with you on the last speaker too. I thought he was the best of the three but his arguments sort of sounded like he agreed with the house and when he tried to reason why we shouldn’t have the right to offend in I don’t the UK or Cambridge or whatever it all seemed to fall apart and as you say sounded like he was coming from a safe and secure position therefore not feeling the need to challenge any of the prevailing orthodoxies at present, the naïveté of youth or he was just found his best to make an argument which he didn’t really believe in which part of learning how to debate. I wish someone could have refuted his comments on Helen Joyce however.

Apart from Kathleen, Arif was also excellent and kudos to him for spelling out the campaign of harassment which Kathleen had endured. Speaking of which, another thing that the opposition didn’t seem to grasp, the distinction between harassment and offensive speech.

This, I suppose is the result of post modern “queering” of language, a confused youth for whom words no longer have concrete or distinct meanings. So that a statement of fact or belief can be construed as an act of violence where no physical violence is intended or enacted or even suggested.

I listened to it all. I was really trying to understand all the arguments and thought sone of the speakers very eloquent. I liked the two “ dandy” dresses students both pro free speech.
I was also bemused by the speaker at the end clearly posh and very well spoken and well educated whose argument essentially was there is free speech ( in my posh world) and we are basically such an excellent society that we are post free speech and no longer need to bother ourselves with it and move on from it. I hate the phrase white male privilege as I hate identity politics but that pov is such a good example of it. He has free speech and can never envisage it being taken away therefore it is not important anymore.
But I did think he was a good speaker and a good listen. Shame he was on the opposition side of debate!

Kathleen Stock is a warrior! Imagine having to stand up and speak after those personal attacks from previous speakers, the mob baying for your blood outside, an apparent consensus inside the room that you shouldn’t have been invited. She showed them an example of resilience and courage in the face of clear offensive speech and attempted social exclusion. I’d say she was properly stunning and brave.

As for the first two student speakers, seriously they didn’t seem to have a clue what they were talking about and as Arif said the speakers in opposition of the motion didn’t apparently have any arguments against what the speakers for the motion were actually saying so they just made stuff up to argue against instead. Good effort from the last guy though, Joshua was it?

Thanks for sharing this here @ScreamingMeMe I wouldn’t have seen it otherwise.

I now despair for the future of our country if these students are supposed to be our brightest and best, only one or two of them seemed to actually grasp the arguments being made at all. For example for most of them the difference between offensive speech and libel or incitement to violence was far beyond their capacity to comprehend.

What I also note, and of course it is obvious, because Oxbridge, is the priviledge in the accents of ALL those speaking. The phrase "no clue about the real world" was never far from my mind in the listening I'm afraid.

I enjoyed the chap who said he was offended by those speaking against the proposition and that therefore they should not speak 😁

Kass was a raging idiot who turned it into an ad hominem attack against KS. Agree, the chair should have intervened. KS and Arif Ahmed were excellent. Really enjoyed listening to them. And the first audience point for abstentions was spot on. I thought speakers 2 and 3 against were ok and tried to address the issue, they were just outclassed.

Suspect many women didn't want to speak because it's a bloody dangerous topic for women to speak out on publicly. But yes, total manel attacking the lone woman.

Never mind Kass's gender conforming appearance, what on earth was Kass's point in the debate? Kass did not apparently say a single thing in support of the right to offend, and indeed spent most of the speech complaining about being offended.

Kathleen Stock was definitely the grown up in the room. She sounded shaken, or nervous, or something. But she got her point across and made a good case.

Apart from her I was most impressed by the young man complaining about his time being wasted.

What Kass, you're badgered and harrassed whilst walking home from a night out wearing heels and a dress? (I'm hazarding a guess that's the kind of thing Kass is wearing when in the situations Kass mentions!)

Welcome to our world!

If only women could walk around doing and wearing whatever they fancied without getting harassed. It sometimes still happens to me now in middle age when I'm just out running wearing a pair of leggings and a T-shirt.

There was a bit where Kass looked like they were very angry and going to burst into tears when something the opposition said in the middle of their speech was applauded - I think that was very telling of the way Kass has possibly been brought up. Kass should be able to say and do and think whatever they like - but gets very upset when others do the same.

IT’S SPUD-YOO-LIE-KAH!!!!

Kass is really going to regret showing himself up like this when he grows up.

I may be cynical, but I suspect there will be no negative consequences and that Kass’s conscience will effortlessly brush aside any negative considerations during, what will almost certainly be a continuation of, a very privileged life.