Times article - Students told not to ban speakers for ‘transphobia’

[OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon]

I don’t have a share token (the other half has the times subscription on his phone) but this is excelllent

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/students-told-not-to-ban-speakers-for-transphobia-vq3vctl8j

Share token:
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/students-told-not-to-ban-speakers-for-transphobia-vq3vctl8j?shareToken=3a04e837ce9dcd97938a28aa7bb1008a

Wow. That is great.

Top story on Today Programme.
I nearly fainted.

And very precise, naming Linda Bellos etc as examples, defining that views are not hate speech etc.
At last something sensible!

Nice to have some good news for a change!

A very positive move, not just in regards to the trans debate but for any topic that someone felt they were too delicate to hear.

It was on the radio. I could almost hear the high pitched shriek in the distance of ‘but they’re literally killing ussssssssss’.

I was listening closely to the pieces on FMG (hope the mum gets 13 years and the bloody dad needs convicting too) and Sanpro on hospitals on R4 this morning. Odd lack of the use ‘she/girls/women’ in both pieces by the presenters.

Wow, that sign the woman in the hat is holding. She could have just written "Shut Up, Abuse Victims", it would have conveyed the same intent in a more succinct manner.

Why are students being allowed to ban anyone because they don't agree with them? Having your ideas challenged is part of what universities are for.

Just heard it on Radio2 news. Very clear guidance - you unions are invited charities, we are the university and we will insist you read all 51 pages and then procede to act like adults

I’ve seen all sorts of absolute pigs invited to speak - you know the types of men (‘religious’ women hating, beat your wife, segregate the sexes, women belong to their husbands etc) but a woman steps up and...

Just had a quick look at the times. All the weans with the signs - that photo will follow them for ever (and not in a good way).

This is fantastic!

The best word in that article is ‘still’. Transwomen are still men. This is clear language. Because the sentence ‘believe that transwomen are men’ is not comprehensible to someone who doesn’t know what a transwoman is. I am fairly sure that even some Times readers would not be quite sure whether a transwoman is a biological male or female.

On the today programme now...

I think the R4 piece could have been better if they hadn’t used the example of no-platforming people saying that a ‘man with a CR cert is a woman wasn’t a woman’ but ‘any man who says they are a woman and demands the rights given to women for their own protection and equality’.

The pushback continues. Excellent.

Thank you. I saw this on A Womans Place on FB and I was hoping there was a thread.
I'm probably not going to articulate this very well, but I'm becoming increasingly pissed off with the lack of insight of these protesters. Just where is the 'hate' speech? Why do they feel that they have the right to decide that it is just because they say so?
Men cannot become women. Its a fact.
I'm really lucky in that my university union is in house and has no affiliation with the NUS.

I definately see a lack of critical thinking and debate. The Tweet generation can’t actually think can they?

Do they even believe it themselves (the sign holders) or is it just some sort of elaborate posturing? I always wonder what they're getting out of it.

The guidance has been written by the Equality and Human Rights Commission with the National Union of Students and university leaders.

The guidance says that hate speech has “no legal meaning. The criminal law balances the right to freedom of expression with the protection of individuals and communities from threats, abuse and harassment both on and offline. Where this line is crossed, the perpetrator may be prosecuted.”

Could someone advise our more woke police forces that hate speech has no legal meaning?

This was linked. Is it normal for the Times not to allow comments on articles about films?

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/interview-with-trans-twins-arno-and-nora-monsecour-born-identical-boys-now-brother-and-sister-qzzxb38zz

So the woke young student on the Today piece, who claimed to enjoy debate and challenging views, said be that one person who should definitely not be allowed to speak is Germaine Greer.

I don't agree with everything GG says. Her views can be challenging and she's not afraid to express them. But really, why is an 80ish year old woman, an elder stateswoman of academia, seen as such a threat?

Actually as I wrote the last paragraph I realised it's because she's a woman, and in particular an older woman, who doesn't tow the line. Are there any men of a similar profile who are no platformed quite so vigourously?

Her son would have spent a lifetime pushing back to have her voice heard. I bet she’s never seen anything quite like this though. Men in dresses (not always) saying they are just as much (or more of) a woman than she is. She must be wobbling her head on a daily basis to check she isn’t dreaming this.

Her son? That was ‘germain’ autocorrected!

Ha ha Fekko, I was very confused as I didn't think GG had any kids, and even if she did I wasn't sure what her son had to do with it!!