Kathleen Stock on the Moral Maze at 8pm today 31 May 2023 - Cancel Culture

Yes, Carla was particularly pathetic - couldn't say why Kathleen Stock is wrong, but suggested it was traumatising for the little darlings to have her speaking so close to exam time. FFS!

This programme hammered home the BBC's deafening silence on women's rights, in relation to this particular iteration of men's rights. They can skim over the surface of Cancel Culture, but no further.

I noticed that the two men were quite happy to refer to the man Carla as 'she'. Melanie Phillips laboriously avoided using any pronouns for this male person. But this reinforces the low regard with which such men hold women.

Carla, whoever he is, gave the most preposterous justification for cancelling Kathleen Stock. Ie that it might be upsetting for students to know that someone says sex is real. He could give no other justification.

The two women academic troughers, fortunately for them, adhere to the creed. Perhaps they just think Kathleen Stock is a fool for not playing the game.

Well done Rishi Sunak for standing up for some one who I doubt would ever vote for him.

I had forgotten just how much I despise this programme.
This.
And I know I shouldn't, but I laughed when Philips said to the the last 'academic ', the lecturer in philosophy at Essex (who was wilfully wooly in her responses) 'so, if someone said you were thick and a trouble maker that would ok?'

The University of Bristol made a last-minute decision that the student group organising the discussion would have to pay for security, but also said that members of the public couldn't attend, effectively cutting off the organisers' ability to raise the necessary funds. This made the whole thing unviable. Fortunately, the Free Speech Union stepped in and organised an off-campus venue. So the event did go ahead, but no thanks to the University.

Melanie Philips was very clear on the chill effect of the no debate and heckle approach which means women loose jobs and friends etc but had no real support on that

the last speaker - a university professor - basically said it is ok to smear someone if you don’t agree with their view. Ie it’s ok to smear Kathleen Stock. Unbelievable. Even more so since she didn’t see that as problematic

People like Stock and Rowling and Forstater are the very tip of this - the most well-known, wealthy, well-connected or just tenacious enough to speak up whatever the cost. There are thousands of us who have been cancelled in many ways through questioning this ideology and many, many more who see what happens and keep quiet.

What is also not being said is the number of academics who don’t cover any gender topics now in their courses.

I have a friend who has told me they dropped a unit discussing it a couple of years ago, and her colleagues all have been doing so since. All from fear of complaints that will lose them their tenures.

This was covered in a news article recently too as becoming common.

So, the toxicity of students not able to engage with a topic without ‘cancelling’ the lecturers careers is having this impact on the student’s education. It is a dangerous self fulfilling cycle.

Sorry to go off on a tangent, but did the event at Bristol uni not happen in the end?

I told my adult daughter about it a few days before. We disagree on gender issues (surprise, surprise) as she is more on the side of twaw. Having said that we do talk about it sometimes as she's too polite to tell me to shut up.

She's also a bright young woman who I thought might benefit from that debate. Didn't think she would have made it at such short notice, but it's a terrible shame if it never even went ahead.

Anyone know the story?

Iwanttoretire makes a key point about cancel culture:
Its a great shame that those newspapers and journalists who are willing to write about gender critical views dont do more to protect the unknown women who are being cancelled and intimidated.

Julie Bindel and Suzanne Moore have years of media knowledge and contacts that help them find alternative ways of sharing their views when newspapers won't publish their articles. It's the women who post here about being scared to refuse to add pronouns to emails, the athletes who are worried about losing sponsorship who are being cancelled. Just as one swallow doesn't make a summer, so one prominent GC commentator doesn't mean cancellation doesn't exist.

There was a telling sentence in the Janice Turner article about being in a broom cupboard in the Oxford Union with Kathleen Stock. Earlier Monroe Bergdorf had been invited to speak at another Oxford Union debate. However, she had not needed to arrive with security guards or hide in a cupboard.

No.

One comment that I found interesting was towards end. A woman said (paraphrasing) that as long as some academics/significant people could express these views then there wasn't anything to worry about.

I found that pretty shocking, as so many women who are academics or teachers or nhs staff feel their job will be at risk if they express these views. It's kind of like saying you don't need to mention you are gay at work because there are a few gay pop stars.

I can't believe people are so willing to give up freedom of speech.

If that's your definition, then I'd say that trans people are cancelling themselves. There have been endless examples of trans activists refusing to speak or go on a platform, or pulling out of a documentary or programme.
Think of the outcry on Gender Wars, or on the JKK witch podcast. I remember the producer of the Stella o'Malley documentary on trans children saying he'd never encountered such resistance and pushback in getting people to talk to him and he'd done documentaries on the Israel/Palestine conflicts.
I'm very, very keen to platform trans activists on main stream media. Let's hear Grace Lavery define woman on ITV or Ch4 as the person who gets fucked or Andrea Long Chu explain how being female is about having an expectant asshole and blank eyes.
Even better let's hear from Susie Green and have her to tell everyone how putting children on hormones is a good idea if they're gender nonconforming.
Trans activists avoid the limelight because they know that if the general public heard what what they're saying, support for them would drop overnight. That's not being cancelled. It's them avoiding incriminating themselves.

Stock was a hero on this - brilliant forensic answers. I only got through half.

Who ever was speaking for the tra side didn't half go round in circles and then when pushed conceded it was reasonable for Stock to talk at the union. Wouldn't say WHAT it was they disagreed with, as it is the "man can't be woman" and the optics of that of the radio don't work. That was a hoot

Yes there could have been more but to the uninitiated it was a good intro to the lunacy.

Merlin clearly didn't listen as those points were covered so Merlin's contributions to this thread are BS. It's also a weak argument.

Everything you read from the media is all from the perspective of Gender Criticals innit?

Only because, despite you writing it, no-body reads it.

I’d love to hear your answer to my question actually.

@Boomboom22 I’d be surprised if a decapitated terf counted. For an example, @MerlinsLostMarbles would you say sir Thomas More was cancelled? He had been raised to the exalted position of lord chancellor, but then he refused to sign a letter to the pope or the oath to Henry viii although did not dare to speak out in public against them. Long story short, Nonetheless various accusations were raised against him until one succeeded, and a jury with a number of members of Anne Boleyns family found him guilty in 15 minutes, to be executed via decapitation. His papers as chancellor I believe were not archived in the usual manner due to his disgrace and I also think his book utopia banned at one point. But, everyone knows his name today and many libraries have his books which are widely available so a mere beheading presumably does not a cancellation make? Interested in your take 😊

do you actually believe the rubbish you write or do you say these things for a laugh/bet? (delete as appropriate)

Think of all the times the media/radio/TV reports on the trans/gender-critical discussion. How often do Gender Criticals get platformed, and how often do actual transpeople get platformed?

Everything you read from the media is all from the perspective of Gender Criticals innit?

Could @MerlinsLostMarbles give an example of someone who in their view has been cancelled?

If you listened to the programme that this thread is about, you would know that that was one of the topics that was discussed.

I think they must be stupid as well as violent. I feel sorry for people who actually have identity issues, this lot would jump on any bandwagon that allowed them to be violent to women.

TRAs keep saying this. How can you be cancelled? You're still talking.

It's so stupid it's almost painful to have to address it.

If you have been invited, or arranged, to speak somewhere, and the venue or organisers cancel it due to pressure or threats from transactivists, you've been cancelled.

That's it.

You might subsequently be able to speak somewhere else, but again, you might get cancelled from there too. It doesn't mean they've actually ripped your tongue out and put you in a cell.

Honestly, these people. It's so painful