Mumsnet censorship

[anonymouselephantx]

Mumsnet has been deleting any comment at all that criticises Charlie Kirk... just because he has died does not mean he is infallible. He is still an evil person who did and said evil things, contributed to so much suffering of families at the hands of ICE etc., mocked the Palestinians undergoing a genocide? Mumsnet, disturbing much? I had to get MN by email to delete a thread of mine as I was getting bullied and people were making personal attacks against me (the talk guidelines say personal attacks will be deleted, yet I had to BEG for this), but they are censoring anything anyone says about Charlie Kirk? Why are we not allowed to have freedom of speech and freedom to debate, especially when it is someone who did and said SO MUCH EVIL!

I have already explained my comments to you multiple times. Stop repeating yourself

Well you keep trying to sweep your karma is a bitch comment under the carpet and rewrite the thread as you just won't mourn him.

Your posts are are all here for us to see. This wasn't just a 'I won't mourn him' at all.

It's called debate. So this guy may have had views that you or I may not have agreed with but he didn't scream abuse, he didn't try to force people to agree with him. He just politely challenged other's opinions and that is what freedom of speech is all about.

I’m not sweeping anything under the carpet. I said “karma is a bitch” and I stand by it and I’ve explained exactly what I meant by it. Pointing out irony isn’t the same as celebrating murder, no matter how many times you try to twist it.
Get a hobby Gloria hun

A “polite” racist or misogynist is still a racist or misogynist. Wrapping cruelty in a calm tone doesn’t make it noble, it just makes it easier to platform. And most of the time he was not even polite so I am not sure what you are talking about.
Freedom of speech means he could say it. It also means the rest of us can call it out for what it was harmful rhetoric dressed up as debate.

Another interesting clip about his views on being Gay. He doesn't think what someone does "in the bedroom" is the most important part of their identity. As a Christian he doesn't agree with that lifestyle (of course he doesn't) but he is accepting and welcoming to a young gay conservative.

Still waiting for OP, or anyone else, to produce actual evidence of his hatred of anyone......

https://x.com/GayRepublicSwag/status/1966219378971889949

There is no politely challenging someone's rights,.particularly their right to not be subjugated due to their race or sex. My right to my bodily autonomy or not to have to submit to my husband isn't an opinion I hold, it's just equal standing with his rights as a white man. His "opinion" is that I shouldn't have that right and while I understand a free society allows him to hold that regressive oppressive opinion, why does he get cookies for how he says it? Why is it worse for someone to scream at a man telling them they are not deserving of democratic rights, than to be the person wishing to strip people of their rights? I can't believe where we've got to with literacy that people have lost what debate actually means. Rage baiting and shit posting online, isn't debating just because you're arguing with people.

As for not forcing people to agree with him...he literally helped an insurrection of thugs to try and force change the result of a democratic election FFS. His political organisation massively lobbied against speech espousing left wing values or ideals, he was probably right wing free speech also.

Charlie Kirk said, and I quote:

“If I see a black pilot, I’m going to be like, ‘Boy, I hope he's qualified.” The Irish Times
That one was widely quoted as an example of racial stereotyping and distrust of Black competence. The Irish Times+1

“Happening all the time in urban America, prowling blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that’s a fact.” The Irish Times+1
This was aired on The Charlie Kirk Show, and people have criticised it as a blatant racist trope. The Irish Times+2Wikipedia+2

“Islam has conquest values. They seek to take over land and territory, and Europe is now a conquered continent.” Media Matters+1
That quote comes from a broadcast of his, where he framed Islam as a political ideology bent on domination rather than a religion. Critics call that Islamophobic fear-mongering. 5Pillars+3Media Matters+3Wikipedia+3

“It’s not Islamophobia to notice that Muslims want to import values into the West that seek to destabilize our civilization.” Wikipedia+2Wikipedia+2
Framed as “not Islamophobia,” but it’s a clear example of framing a religious community as a civic threat. Media Matters+3Wikipedia+3Wikipedia+3

“The 'Great Replacement' is not a theory, it's a reality.” Wikipedia+2Wikipedia+2
Kirk used the “great replacement” conspiracy trope to argue that immigration and Democratic policies were actively working to reduce the white population in America. That idea is closely tied to far-right, racist conspiracy thinking. Wikipedia+2Wikipedia+2

“If you’re a WNBA, pot-smoking, black lesbian, do you get treated better than a United States marine?” The Irish Times+1
Ridiculing intersectional identities while questioning whether someone gets “better treatment”—a rhetorical move critics say draws on demeaning and reductive stereotypes. The Irish Times+2Wikipedia+2

On Martin Luther King Jr.: Kirk has said that criticism of King was “not trampling sacred ground” because King was “just a man … a very flawed one at that” and called him a “mythological anti-racist creation of the 1960s.” Wikipedia+1
Critics say that kind of language diminishes the civil rights legacy and frames King as a constructed hero rather than a real leader.

Again with this “I don’t need to mourn him” tripe.

As I said upthread and you failed to have an explanation for - why do you keep repeating this like a parrot? No one has asked or expects you to mourn him, or be sad. So why do you keep saying it?

I keep saying it because every time I point out his harmful legacy, people pile on with “have some compassion” or “be kinder.” That’s just a roundabout way of telling me I should mourn him, or at least pretend to. So yes, I’ll keep repeating it until it’s clear: I don’t owe him empathy, and I won’t be shamed into showing it.

He is accepting of gay people into his movement, I.e. be conservative and vote right wing as long as you're happy with the fact we're gonna try and strip you of the rights you've fought for and won. If you listened to his full exchange with a gay conservative, he says his sexuality isn't as important as the other things they have in common politically - what do you think that means? We all know what that means.

Charlie Kirk wanted gay people stripped of their right to marry and parrots the same age old homophobic tripe of gay people corrupting people's children aka gay panic in 2025. You're either being deliberately obtuse or you're not bothering to do even a full search before posting this stuff.

Because everyone is welcome to share their opinion. Charlie loved loudly sharing his opinions including those that were unnecessary or upsetting as everyone keeps repeating he was entitled to do so - why should everyone shut up about them now he's died because some people want to sanitize him?

The pilot one was regarding a discussion on black and women pilots being selected as part of Left DEI initiatives, so he was saying he hopes they are there on merit, not picked just because of their sex/race, to make up numbers.

I wish people would quote his shows/college debates rather than news articles that cherry pick.

I’m no fan of the guy, disagreed with him on most things, agreed on a couple, but so many things are being taken out of context.

I’ve seen the “context.” He wasn’t just neutrally talking about merit - he singled out Black pilots and said “if I see a Black pilot, I hope he’s qualified.” That’s not a critique of DEI, that’s stereotyping Black professionals as less competent by default.
Quoting him directly isn’t “cherry picking.” It’s his own words. And the pattern across his shows and debates is the same: race-baiting, Islamophobia, transphobia, minimising gun deaths, and mocking Palestinians. You don’t get to wave it away as “out of context” when he built his entire career on it.

Umm the fact that you think DEI initiatives mean that people of colour or women are hired based on their race or sex instead and that they aren't adequately qualified is racist and sexist. Let me guess, all the decades of white male pilots had nothing to do with their race or sex right? They were all just the best man for the job?🤨

No he didn’t. Because it was a discussion on a specific pilot DEI program. It fitted in with that. He didn’t say that black pilots are incompetent because they are black. You can’t just make things up.

Own words taken out of context.

Refusing to lie about what a woman is, how one cant change sex, retaining sex based spaces and not denying material reality isn’t transphobia. Not wanting to give ‘gender affirming care’ to young confused people isn’t transphobia.

Whether it was during a DEI discussion or not, he still said “if I see a Black pilot, I hope he’s qualified” - and that plays straight into a racist stereotype, regardless of the framing. Same with his other remarks: you can try to soften them as “just stating material reality” or “just opposing DEI,” but the pattern across his career was demeaning marginalised groups.

Regardless, I don’t really care. He’s dead now, and that’s that. I don’t care about him, I don’t care that he’s dead. I just want people to stop calling others sociopaths for not having empathy toward him. That’s literally all.

So if they aren't incompetent because they're black, why would he or you have a problem with DEI initiatives hiring black people? Given DEI initiatives are there when diversity is lacking in the industry, and your knee jerk reaction is that they might not be adequately qualified as a pilot... why? Why would they be any less qualified than the white pilots?

Telling women to get back in the kitchen IS misogyny and telling black people their civil rights were a mistake IS racism.

Get a hobby? Well I could say the same to you.

What a thread. Feeling sorry for yourself about alleged 'mumsnet censorship' then posting repeated criticisms of someone who has just been horrifically murdered. So crass.

Has anyone actually said people who don’t show empathy towards him are sociopaths? Yet another made up thing. There’s a pattern here.

People are criticising those cheering his death. That doesn’t equate to forcing you to mourn for him. Only you are saying it does.

Gloria, you’ve spent just as much time on this thread as I have, and it is my thread where people are debating me. I’m not “feeling sorry for myself,” I’m pointing out double standards in moderation. And I’m not celebrating his murder, I’m refusing to sugarcoat the legacy of someone who built his career demeaning others. Crass is pretending harm didn’t happen just because the person causing it has died. I do not care if someone is alive or dead, if they did bad things I will speak up.

Yes, people have said that.. read the thread. That’s what I’m pushing back against.
I haven’t cheered his death, I haven’t celebrated it. I’ve just said I don’t mourn him. If others can post sympathy, I can post the opposite. That’s all there is to it.

I didn’t say I agreed with him. I gave context to what was being said. I would want anyone, regardless of age, sex, race, whatever, to be qualified to do the job they were doing down to merit, not just to ensure some DEI box is ticked.

I mean your own posting history on the dead is pretty crass which makes you all the more hypocritical here. Maybe get a mirror as well as a hobby if you can't see the hypocrisy, but then you're also still insisting people aren't being censored while you come back again to just...criticise people posting their opinion. Notice you haven't engaged in a single response to your posts about his actual words or actions that you call nice and polite still. What makes a nice misogynist and what makes a nasty one again please? Is it tone, volume etc?

I have mentioned being a sociopath in one of my posts