Trans row' student banned from free speech debate

Alan

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
61,607
#1
A student, whose tweet that "women don't have penises" led to a transphobic row, has been banned from taking part in a debate about free speech at the University of Bristol.Angelos Sofocleous, a Durham University student, cannot take part in the Free Speech Society event due to "security concerns". The society said the student union had banned him from the panel discussion.

The union said it was "committed" to free speech but security was needed. Mr Sofocleous was sacked from his post as assistant editor at Durham University's philosophy society's journal last August after he tweeted comments deemed by some people to be transphobic. He wrote: "RT [retweet] if women don't have penises", linked to an article in The Spectator on the same subject, and later defended his views.

A discussion panel asking "is there a problem with free speech on campus?" is due to take place at the university on Wednesday. Mr Sofocleous tweeted he had been "de-platformed" from the debate due to concerns "my presence might spark protests which might lead to physical violence". He wrote "nothing could provide a more ironic indication of the current status of social justice orthodoxy in academia than banning a speaker from an event titled 'free speech on campus'."

The university's free speech society said it had been told by the student union "in order to hold the event as scheduled we must disinvite him as a panellist" due to his presence on campus being a "high risk". The society said: "The university security services informed us that they were not at all consulted by the students union on the matter."
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-47199156
 

Alan

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
61,607
#3
At least twitter are no longer bothering with their neutrality charade....

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey said in an interview last week that the company could no longer “afford to take a neutral stance anymore.”

He made this statement after being asked by podcaster Sam Harris why Twitter’s bans and suspensions always seem to “reliably land on one side of the political divide.” He pointed out that progressive feminist Megan Murphy – who is no friend to conservatives – was banned for tweeting that “Men are not women” and asking, “How are transwomen not men? What is the difference between men and transwomen?” yet unapologetic anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan is still allowed on the platform.

I don’t believe that we can afford to take a neutral stance anymore. I don’t believe that we should optimize for neutrality,” Dorsey said immediately. Later in the podcast, Dorsey mentioned the Murphy ban again, saying, “The case you brought up. I’m not sure what was behind that, but I certainly don’t believe it was that one tweet.” He added that most people who are punished by the platform were repeat offenders.

Dorsey, according to NewsBusters, also dodged a question about the First Amendment. Harris had asked him why Twitter couldn’t just ban actual violent speech, but allow all other forms of speech, even those many vehemently disagree with. Dorsey said Twitter’s policies follow “the spirit of” the First Amendment.

Dorsey also didn’t seem willing to answer a question about why organizations such as Hezbollah and Hamas — both designated as terrorist organizations by the U.S. — could continue to operate on Twitter while alt-right commenters were banned completely.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/43328/twitter-ceo-i-dont-believe-we-can-afford-take-ashe-schow
 

thestaggy

Honorary Master
Joined
May 11, 2011
Messages
13,374
#7
Perhaps it's a sign of the times when I can't tell if you're being facetious or not.
Its real. At least 'front hole' is.

Traditional safe seχ guides are often structured in a way that presumes everyone’s gender (male/female/nonbinary/trans) is the same as the seχ they were assigned at birth (male/female/interseχ or differences in seχual development),” reads a statement on Healthline. “These guides also often unnecessarily gender body parts as being ‘male parts’ and ‘female parts’ and refer to ‘seχ with women’ or ‘seχ with men,’ excluding those who identify as nonbinary. Many individuals don’t see body parts as having a gender — people have a gender. …

“For the purposes of this guide, we’ve chosen to include alternative words for readers to use for their geηitals,” the statement continues. “For example, some trans men choose to use the words ‘front hole’ or ‘internal geηital’ instead of ‘νagina.’ Alternatively, some trans women may say ‘strapless’ or ‘girl d***’ for peηis. This usage is meant for one-on-one communication with trusted persons, such as your doctor or partner, not for broad discussion.”
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/people-angry-safe-sex-guide-calls-vagina-front-hole-012527170.html
 
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Messages
4,280
#10
Wonder how the trans folk take it being called a violent bunch.
They are that. The transwomen, anyway. And their handmaidens/squires.
I've lost count of the number of times I've seen posts calling for "TERFs" to die, or be killed.
And then they show up at women's meetings and intimidate, or even physically attack women.
These are men who don't take kindly to women saying no to them, remember.
 

Moosedrool

Expert Member
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
4,358
#15
I swear this is all a secret ploy to get to straight okes. Reject a dude hitting on you then get accused of being transphobic. Imagine it's law, and you were drunk enough to take a trap home with you:

Would you risk going to jail and reject cause you felt a bit more than expected down there or take the shaft?
 

NarrowBandFtw

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
15,369
#17
Would you risk going to jail and reject cause you felt a bit more than expected down there or take the shaft?
The trick would be to immediately start identifying as a woman so that you can claim rape.

That or chop the shaft off and call him a trans phobe if he resists.
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
44,533
#18
I swear this is all a secret ploy to get to straight okes. Reject a dude hitting on you then get accused of being transphobic. Imagine it's law, and you were drunk enough to take a trap home with you:

Would you risk going to jail and reject cause you felt a bit more than expected down there or take the shaft?
 
Top