It was great to listen to Kathleen Stock appear on Brain in a Vat podcast:
I'm pleased the presenter who 'disagreed with her' talked about how no-platforming is wrong and debate is important. However, it was frustrating that other than saying he disagreed with her views, and asking her to defend her position, he didn't offer any challenge or specify what he disagreed with and why.
This reinforces claims that there are no coherent arguments beyond, TWAW, be kind, bigot and wrong side of history.
Am I the only one who would welcome some genuine/ convincing challenge to get stuck in to or to challenge my thinking. Much of my frustration and occasional despair is that the whole 'debate' is ridiculous and lacks coherence from the TRA side