Support NeoGAF

[Agent Gibbs]

I agree with Dawkin's sentiments that censorship should not occur at universities and discussions of even controversial opinions should take place

Greer however is an odd case, she's a staunch feminist who has some great pragmatic views on a lot of things.................
Unfortunately her views on Trans people are shocking, and its hard to understand her view point. That said i'd like to see her brought to universities as art of a group of speakers where she can offer her 'views' and be challenged

But we are all missing something her talk she was due to come about was not on Trans issues, it was on Women and feminism in the 20th century, trans issues should have been a small part of that entire topic - i'm sure she'd have got challenged in questioning after but i suspect the talk she had planned wasn't 90 min of trans bashing, it could have been a very small part

So censoring her work on feminism because of one very disgusting comment is extreme, she should come and she should be rightfully challenged on it

Still a conflicting topic, should the views of one person be utterly dismissed because they've one bigoted comment? it goes to show that even a supposed person championing rights for one group can be a bigot on another topic, just as a complete bigot may have some good views

If this woman was insulting black or muslim students, this thread would look sooooooo different right about now.

i'd rather like it not to do (don't jump to that conclusion) they should equally still be invited (but probably not paid) so they can be challenged, challenging them allows you the potential to change their mind, address any possibly criticism and generates a platform to show what such a bigoted view something is
Pushing ideas and views underground will only see those that hold those views band together and rebel against those they see as oppressors, the way to prevent that is keep the disgusting views in the light and challenge and change them

 

[Pie and Beans]

Dawkins can wobble from time to time and get trapped down cul-de-sacs of extremism due to the nature of the internet and things like Twitter, but he's laser focussed and on point right here.

If you can't debate or bare to be around it, don't try and call yourself a scholar. You'll only ever be a censor interested in a fantasy land without friction, without disagreements and without any challenge whatsoever.

 

[marrec]

Dawkins can wobble from time to time and get trapped down cul-de-sacs of extremism due to the nature of the internet and things like Twitter, but he's laser focussed and on point right here.

If you can't debate or bare to be around it, don't try and call yourself a scholar. You'll only ever be a censor interested in a fantasy land without friction, without disagreements and without any challenge whatsoever.

All they did was protest though.

 

[ebullientprism]

Yeah fair enough, what Dawkins says make sense.

 

[Alexlf]

All they did was protest though.

And I'd argue their protests were poorly thought out and ultimately counter-productive to their education.

 

[partyphone]

And I'd argue their protests were poorly thought out and ultimately counter-productive to their education.

how's that?

 

[ampere]

She was worried about people throwing things at her which happened when the Queer Avengers threw glitter over her in New Zealand. She doesn't want to deal with that shit at her age.

Hm, well I'd disagree with that type of response

 

[Lowmelody]

her talk she was due to come about was not on Trans issues, it was on Women and feminism in the 20th century,

Trans women are women. Holy fuck.

and this

i suspect the talk she had planned wasn't 90 min of trans bashing, it could have been a very small part

What the fuck am I reading? No amount of trans bashing is acceptable.

Surely there is a second-waver they could invite to speak that doesn't need to devote even a very small portion of their lecture to "trans bashing"?

 

[Alexlf]

how's that?

They missed the chance to hear history and viewpoints from a very prominent feminist who has written several books of critical acclaim and who has received international recognition for her work.

 

[partyphone]

They missed the chance to hear history and viewpoints from a very prominent feminist who has written several books of critical acclaim and who has received international recognition for her work.

there are better candidates for that. she's isn't the only feminist of note.

 

[Subpar Spatula]

They missed the chance to hear history and viewpoints from a very prominent feminist who has written several books of critical acclaim and has received international recognition.

They already know her views. They don't want her around because she's an unabashed bigot. The idea these students are being challenged is laughable. It's as if some people think the only way to be challenged is to be confronted by or confront bigots.

 

[marrec]

They missed the chance to hear history and viewpoints from a very prominent feminist who has written several books of critical acclaim and who has received international recognition for her work.

Somehow I don't think the protesters would have shown up to her talk in good faith had she given any kind of talk... :/

 

[Gawge]

Greer can literally write in any national newspaper she wants and get paid for it. She is not being silenced. There are constant news articles on her views, she is not being silenced. She appears on national TV and in international news on a regular basis!

To say this is infringing on her freedom of speech is laughable.

Listening to trans women, these views are extremely harmful and can result in violence. To not allow views like that to be aired on a university campus seems good to me.

Greer is not being silenced. Listen to trans women.

 

[boiled goose]

Greer can literally write in any national newspaper she wants and get paid for it. She is not being silenced. There are constant news articles on her views, she is not being silenced. She appears on national TV and in international news on a regular basis!

To say this is infringing on her freedom of speech is laughable.

Listening to trans women, these views are extremely harmful and can result in violence. To not allow views like that to be aired on a university campus seems good to me.

Greer is not being silenced. Listen to trans women.

What I think they should do instead is let her speak, but then challenge her with some good questions. Then broadcast those responses along with some kind of counter response. With trans issues specifically, there is still so much more education to be done.

Let the good ideas win out.

 

[Alexlf]

They already know her views. They don't want her around because she's an unabashed bigot. The idea these students are being challenged is laughable. It's as if some people think the only way to be challenged is to be confronted or confront bigots.

It's great that your assuming her entire existence is defined by hating trans people, but if you're aware of any of her other work it's clearly not the case. Having her speak as a lecturer for a woman's study class could absolute be useful in teaching students.

there are better candidates for that. she's isn't the only feminist of note.

Absolutely there are other candidates. She was the one available at the time to that university in the budget they allotted though.

Somehow I don't think the protesters would have shown up to her talk in good faith had she given any kind of talk... :/

True, but maybe not. I'd like to think that people would be able to remain civil during the talk, whether or not they end up needing to debate a topic.

 

[The Adder]

It's great that your assuming her entire existence is defined by hating trans people, but if you're aware of any of her other work it's clearly not the case. Having her speak as a lecturer for a woman's study class could absolute be useful in teaching students.

It's great that you assunme that's the only thing anyone who protested against her know about her.

 

[Alexlf]

It's great that you assunme that's the only thing anyone who protested against her know about her.

They may have had other points, but none are described in the article posted in the OP. If there was any arguments against her ability to teach the lecture she was going to give then they might be valid, but I've yet to hear any.

 

[marrec]

True, but maybe not. I'd like to think that people would be able to remain civil during the talk, whether or not they end up needing to debate a topic.

Well, I doubt they'd show up actually. Why would they?

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Greer can literally write in any national newspaper she wants and get paid for it. She is not being silenced. There are constant news articles on her views, she is not being silenced. She appears on national TV and in international news on a regular basis!

To say this is infringing on her freedom of speech is laughable.

Listening to trans women, these views are extremely harmful and can result in violence. To not allow views like that to be aired on a university campus seems good to me.

Greer is not being silenced. Listen to trans women.

Were the views that are loathed by trans folk in any way relevant to the talk she was going to give? Is the mere potential that she MIGHT say something along those lines - unlikely, unless one of these protesters cornered her on it - cause to shun the entirety of her intellectual contributions?

 

[Alexlf]

Well, I doubt they'd show up actually. Why would they?

I doubt the protesters make up the entirety of the student body who might be interested in her talk.

 

[Zakalwe]

You're essentially suggesting maintaining this smoke screen vacuum of speakers of the same cloth. Speakers who can already pander the students along the same echelon of thought and discourse. That seems counter-productive to me. Students should be prepared for the real world. It's good to give them something to fight that exist out there.

It is silly to try and shut down people. Engage them in debate. Allow them to speak, to show that the campus can walk the talk they claim to be.
That is why in many democratic societies we allow KKK and Neo-Nazi rallies to persist. They are plauge on society, but we allow them express their "toxic", "hateful", "Outdated views" and [insert ruined cliche shut down semantic] because it just proves that democracy work. Their trolling has little effect, and nobody is falling for that shit.

You kill with love, you kill with debate. You don't put your head in the sand and pretend this is not going on. That is the whole problem with safe-space. I'm all for that lecturers like this don't get paid for doing this, but absolutely does students need to engage in this discourse. People like Greer are a product of the world.
I don't buy that students will be corrupted by her sthick. Any semi-decent person can see how telling it is when someone hates someone else for no reason. It's personal suicide that only touches those who have already fallen so far down the slope that they can't see straight.
But there is always a line. And that line is hate speech. It doesn't read like that. It just reads like childish ignorant ramblings of woman putting out her anger on others. I don't get the impression that she wants them to die or be gassed or that she instigating people to harm them.

I like this post a lot.

 

[Yrael]

yeah, she's definitely not keen, I think from her position as a feminist, it's quite a rational view.

She has been criticized pretty thoroughly by other feminists for her stance, pointing out that it isn't rational (she's been criticized for more than just her views on trans people, for that matter).

She was worried about people throwing things at her which happened when the Queer Avengers threw glitter over her in New Zealand. She doesn't want to deal with that shit at her age.

I have to admit that I wasn't taking her concern about having things thrown at her that seriously when I read it, but given that she has had things thrown at her before in protest, even if it was only a glitter-bombing of all things, I can have more sympathy for her perspective in not wanting to deal with it.

(I have to hope that throwing things at her wouldn't actually have been allowed, although a university can't exactly 100% guarantee that it wouldn't happen.)

 

[marrec]

I doubt the protesters make up the entirety of the student body who might be interested in her talk.

Oh for sure, people would absolutely show up for the talk, what I mean is that the protestors probably wouldn't because... why?

So they weren't harming their "education" in any way. Greer deprived interested students her "wisdom" by chickening out of the talk.

 

[Subpar Spatula]

It's great that your assuming her entire existence is defined by hating trans people, but if you're aware of any of her other work it's clearly not the case. Having her speak as a lecturer for a woman's study class could absolute be useful in teaching students.

I am aware of her other work.

My contention is with "challenged". What is she going to challenge these students with? Obviously by this protest a good chunk of the students know who she is. They know what she is about (the good and the bad) and choose to protest her speaking because she is quite vocal about her bigotry.

 

[Alexlf]

Oh for sure, people would absolutely show up for the talk, what I mean is that the protestors probably wouldn't because... why?

So they weren't harming their "education" in any way. Greer deprived interested students her "wisdom" by chickening out of the talk.

Ah, I see the disconnect here. I'm saying that the protests shouldn't have happened so the students who did care to learn would be able to. Ideally the student's protesting would show up as well, at least in part.

It is on her for not showing up at all, but I do understand being afraid of the lecture being interrupted. Not a great excuse really though.

 

[Agent Gibbs]

Trans women are women. Holy fuck.

When did i say they weren't? I kept it as Trans (singluar) rather than specifying Trans Women on the chance someone ripped into me for not considering Transmen (FtM) only because i was vague for someone to rip into me and make out i was saying they aren't women - holy fuck people leap to what they want to think on here!

What the fuck am I reading? No amount of trans bashing is acceptable.

who said ANY transbashing was acceptable? no where in the OP does it state what her talk was about, even the article doesn't, its only a linked article to that - so since people in this very thread have assumed she was coming to do an entire talk on bashing trans i've clarified what the talk topic was about, but i guess if you can cut out sound bites from my post to make me seem like i'm a bigot then its fair game right?

Why do i post on Pol/GAF threads? you try and defend freedom of speech whilst saying abhorrent views should be challenged, only for someone to snip out the context of a post to bash you unjustly!

Surely there is a second-waver they could invite to speak that doesn't need to devote even a very small portion of their lecture to "trans bashing"?

I'm sure there is, but my point was (as you so expertly removed from quotes) was that people with those views should still be invited and challenged on their disgusting vitriol! I even mentioned it would be preferable to have her brought in with others as a group so the ideas could be debated with others (who don't share the view)

I'm out theres no point trying to even discuss anything on GAF

 

[Scarecrow]

I saw John Waters at my university years ago. There were people there that loved his movies, and people there who thought they were vile, evil films.

 

[A Link to the Past]

I'm just going to reiterate my issue that, if Greer was a white supremacist, it would be far less acceptable for her to speak at a University (as well it shouldn't). Greer's viewpoints are only as protected as they are because people are closer to agreeing with her than they are to agreeing with white supremacy.

I saw John Waters at my university years ago. There were people there that loved his movies, and people there who thought they were vile, evil films.

Yo, can you clarify on whether you're actually making an argument that seeks to compare outrage to sexually explicit films to outrage to hate speech? Otherwise I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

 

[Alexlf]

I am aware of her other work.

My contention is with "challenged". What is she going to challenge these students with? Obviously by this protest a good chunk of the students know who she is. They know what she is about (the good and the bad) and choose to protest her speaking because she is quite vocal about her bigotry.

She not necessarily going to "challenge" them at all. She could speak on her books and help to provide context to her views not available in the text.

And to imply the protester had a balanced view on the talk she was going to give is laughable considering they where trying to get her "banned under a ‘no platform’ policy, which typically extends to fascist, extremist or far-right groups", ESPECIALLY considering her talk had nothing to do with her views on trans people.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

"Calling out"? She off-handedly mentioned she felt uncomfortable with someone propositoning her at 4 AM in an elevator without specifying who it was.

The fact that Richard Dawkins, out of everything he could've possibly decided to react to within the atheist movement, decided to write his cringeworthy dear muslima letter speaks volumes about his priorities.

She made an offhand remark in a longer video to say that she is uncomfortable with that behaviour (which many women would feel threatened by; being propositioned in an elevator at 4am is pretty creepy). She did not name the person who propositioned her, or describe him, so he was not personally publicly shamed. The "Dear Muslima" response and its appeal to the fallacy of relative privation was ridiculous.

I think Dawkins is very, very bad at making his point in situations like this, but the more general point about modern feminism's inability to distinguish between essentially personal problems - like discomfort in a, frankly, pretty ambiguous situation, in which a variety of emotional responses is obviously possible - and objective problems needing correction. The way in which he actually went about addressing that was hyperbolic and made him look like an arrogant ass, but he was essentially right that little "offhand comments" like that (and when you have as large a platform as she did, even "offhand comments" end up with weight), and the more general "the personal is political" mantra that fuels much of modern activism, only dilute feminism and feed into stereotypes.

Edit: And there is a larger point that is getting consistently missed, here, which is that one can make a case that inviting someone and giving them a platform for bullshit could be harmful, though universities, I think, given their place as a central port for the debate of ideas, can give themselves a lot more leeway in who they do or do not invite. However, the university was not inviting her to give a talk about trans people, but about her intellectual contributions to feminism, which I'm pretty sure are longer, richer, and more relevant than whatever bigoted bullshit she's uttered. The protests happening are happening because people think that that bigotry invalidates any other contribution she could possibly make. THIS is what I have a big, big problem with, and it's an aspect of the modern Left that makes my skin crawl. Just a few months ago, a friend of mine was trying to put together an interview on the rise of podcasts and why they seemingly have displaced blogs as the popularly-consumed medium of personal expression. For this, one of the people he got was Dean Esmay, someone who was a HUGE right-wing blogger in the previous decade but who has, more recently, become a very prominent Men's Rights Activist. My friend does not go in with MRAs on the vast majority of issues, but he's a guy who works 40 hours per week and does stuff like this interview on his personal time and personal dime, meaning his choices of interview subject are somewhat limited. For another person, he got a very prominent podcaster, but that podcaster backed out because "Men's Rights Activist" was such a no-go that he couldn't even associate with one on an intellectual pursuit that was completely unrelated to MRA bullshit. That, to me, is the kind of intellectual smallness and personal sanctimony that I despise in modern progressivism, and Dawkins, here, is right to call such bullshit out.

 

[marrec]

Ah, I see the disconnect here. I'm saying that the protests shouldn't have happened so the students who did care to learn would be able to. Ideally the student's protesting would show up as well, at least in part.

It is on her for not showing up at all, but I do understand being afraid of the lecture being interrupted. Not a great excuse really though.

I'm mostly ambivalent to the entire idea of the protests vs her speaking. Students are free to protest and she's free to show up and give a talk she was scheduled to give.

The protesters likely know all they need to about Greer, which is probably why they were protesting. Showing up to see her talk isn't going to make them suddenly accepting of her transphobia, nor should it.

 

[A Link to the Past]

She not necessarily going to "challenge" them at all. She could speak on her books and help to provide context to her views not available in the text.

And to imply the protester had a balanced view on the talk she was going to give is laughable considering they where trying to get her "banned under a ‘no platform’ policy, which typically extends to fascist, extremist or far-right groups", ESPECIALLY considering her talk had nothing to do with her views on trans people.

I guess you could argue that the protester's view was not balanced, but that's a good thing. I am absolutely made uncomfortable by the prospect of a person who's "somewhere in the middle" on someone who spreads some seriously vile hate speech.

 

[Gawge]

I'll also add that whilst it may seem 'interesting debate' to some, and that their views should be heard as much as possible so that they can be shown for their hateful opinions etc.... Is fine, but trans women are actually being killed and suffering daily because of these type of views.

Again, Greer can wake up in a morning and pretty much choose which newspaper to write for, and which television show to appear on - and get paid for it.

Trans women have very little voice in society. If peoppe don't want this hateful speech which can lead to violence in their spaces, then I think people should fully support that.

More than this, rather than a rebuttal in a university campus that a few hundred might hear. This protest has led to news stories around the world, a much more effective protest and backlash against Greer and other transphobes.

 

[Kill3r7]

She sounds awful. And I agree with Dawkins. Nice and simple.

Jesus, I had no idea Greer was saying such offensive shit.

Dawkins is right though, shutting people up isn't the way to win an argument.

OP backfire incoming.

Greer is awful and Dawkins is still right.

Nailed it.

 

[Alexlf]

I'm mostly ambivalent to the entire idea of the protests vs her speaking. Students are free to protest and she's free to show up and give a talk she was scheduled to give.

The protesters likely know all they need to about Greer, which is probably why they were protesting. Showing up to see her talk isn't going to make them suddenly accepting of her transphobia, nor should it.

Sure they know all they "need", but they don't know all they could. All I'm saying is it's a shame to ignore potentially insightful and relevant information due to unrelated issues, at a university no less.

And under absolutely no circumstance would I expect them to be accepting of her transphobia, but it doesn't mean they can't become "accepting" to other valid information she might present.

 

[Foffy]

I kind of side with Dawkins. Don't censor stupid, ignorant logic, but combat it head on.

Let hateful self-images be seen in public, for that may be the only way such close mindedness can ever be contested. Greer has some absolutely pigshitted line of thought going on, but she'll find a platform to spew her fecal matter. Why not one where people can call her out on her bullshit?

 

[partyphone]

Nailed it.

I'm choosing to read this as sarcasm because I don't like the black and white fantasy land you all live in.

 

[marrec]

I kind of side with Dawkins. Don't censor stupid, ignorant logic, but combat it head on.

Let hateful self-images be seen in public, for that may be the only way such close mindedness can ever be contested. Greer has some absolutely pigshitted line of thought going on, but she'll find a platform to spew her fecal matter. Why not one where people can call her out on her bullshit?

They did call out her bullshit, and she chose to not speak because of it.

 

[wildfire]

They missed the chance to hear history and viewpoints from a very prominent feminist who has written several books of critical acclaim and who has received international recognition for her work.

While it would be more sensible to protest like a debater instead of angry mob ultimately it was in the power of the university to control how everyone talked to each other since it is their venue.

Greer decided to take her ball and quit the playground because she couldn't handle the harsher criticism of a protest mob. She didn't even bother to ask for any assurances from the university to provide a venue where there is more back and forth discussion instead of one side shouting down the other.

Dawkins was wrong to say the protesters were censoring her. They were making their points heard in a stronger fashion that greater numbers allows.

 

[Alexlf]

I guess you could argue that the protester's view was not balanced, but that's a good thing. I am absolutely made uncomfortable by the prospect of a person who's "somewhere in the middle" on someone who spreads some seriously vile hate speech.

Ridiculous. Your goal in university is to learn. If you're made uncomfortable with what someone believes than by all means be uncomfortable. Dislike them. Whatever. But to imply being uncomfortable justifies not learning is flat out wrong and terrible.

EDIT:

While it would be more sensible to protest like a debater instead of angry mob ultimately it was in the power of the university to control how everyone talked to each other since it is their venue.

Greer decided to take her ball and quit the playground because she couldn't handle the harsher criticism of a protest mob. She didn't even bother to ask for any assurances from the university to provide a venue where there is more back and forth discussion instead of one side shouting down the other.

Dawkins was wrong to say the protesters were censoring her. They were making their points heard in a stronger fashion that greater numbers allows.

I do agree it's bad on her for pulling out like this, as I mentioned above to marrec. That said the protesters were absolutely trying to censor her.

 

[A Link to the Past]

I kind of side with Dawkins. Don't censor stupid, ignorant logic, but combat it head on.

Let hateful self-images be seen in public, for that may be the only way such close mindedness can ever be contested. Greer has some absolutely pigshitted line of thought going on, but she'll find a platform to spew her fecal matter. Why not one where people can call her out on her bullshit?

Trust me, we have no shortage of people saying the exact same things about trans people. This kind of hate speech gets all of the exposure it could possibly ask for.

Also, do you really not understand the problem with paying her to speak at a University?

Ridiculous. Your goal in university is to learn. If you're made uncomfortable with what someone believes than by all means be uncomfortable. Dislike them. Whatever. But to imply being uncomfortable justifies not learning is flat out wrong and terrible.

You're right, let's go to the Westboro Baptist Church and learn uncomfortable positions like "f*gs eat poop".

Can we please stop describing people being tired of a popular view of trans people being subhuman as being uncomfortable? This is explicitly a unique situation because while we see people with problematic views on race, gender, sexuality, etc., but no one is as given as strong a platform as transphobic bigots, and as we see people reject the idea of allowing white supremacists at universities, we still have people acting like it's free speech to dehumanize an entire group of people. It's unfair to silence people (who have boundless opportunities to speak on the subject, especially compared to her protesters), you should be listening to uncomfortable opinions (things that the protesters hear every day of their lives online and about town).

 

[Scarecrow]

Yo, can you clarify on whether you're actually making an argument that seeks to compare outrage to sexually explicit films to outrage to hate speech? Otherwise I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

Speakers draw diverse audiences.

 

[ItIsOkBro]

Ridiculous. Your goal in university is to learn. If you're made uncomfortable with what someone believes than by all means be uncomfortable. Dislike them. Whatever. But to imply being uncomfortable justifies not learning is flat out wrong and terrible.

So you think for example, a university could have anti-vaccine courses and if you don't like it just ignore it?

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Trust me, we have no shortage of people saying the exact same things about trans people. This kind of hate speech gets all of the exposure it could possibly ask for.

Also, do you really not understand the problem with paying her to speak at a University?

Again, she wasn't being paid to talk ABOUT trans people. This is a very major point that people seem to be missing, here. She is a bigot, but that's totally unrelated to the actual talk she was going to give, which is why protesting and trying to exclude her is ridiculous. I wouldn't invite James Watson to give a lecture on his views about race, or a conference on how to properly credit and include female scientists you work with, but I'd gladly invite him to lecture on deducing the structure of DNA molecules, and to protest and try to exclude him BECAUSE of his racist bullshit or his pilfering of Rosalind Franklin's data would be ridiculous in a university context.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Speakers draw diverse audiences.

Well yes, but it's still a speaker who makes movies attracting a diverse audience and speakers who spread hate speech.

Again, she wasn't being paid to talk ABOUT trans people. This is a very major point that people seem to be missing, here. She is a bigot, but that's totally unrelated to the actual talk she was going to give, which is why protesting and trying to exclude her is ridiculous. I wouldn't invite James Watson to give a lecture on his views about race, or a conference on how to properly credit and include female scientists you work with, but I'd gladly invite him to lecture on deducing the structure of DNA molecules, and to protest and try to exclude him BECAUSE of his racist bullshit or his pilfering of Rosalind Franklin's data would be ridiculous in a university context.

That's ridiculous. There are people in society who would be given no platform no matter what they are talking about. Do you think Shirley Phelps, if she was an economist, would be given a platform at Universities? Would you consider it a travesty that she was not?

 

[marrec]

Ridiculous. Your goal in university is to learn. If you're made uncomfortable with what someone believes than by all means be uncomfortable. Dislike them. Whatever. But to imply being uncomfortable justifies not learning is flat out wrong and terrible.

Your mistake here is the idea that this was some kind of mandatory lecture that people had to show up for.

Your goal in university is to learn, for sure, but that doesn't mean you have to be forced to listen to all the drivel available out there to listen too. In fact, classes have highly curated curriculum that are controlled by the teacher so it's not like it's a 100% free thought zone of idea exchange.

So, again, this is completely on her for abandoning her "teaching" opportunity simply because student were exercising their right to free speech.

 

[Agent Gibbs]

Edit: And there is a larger point that is getting consistently missed, here, which is that one can make a case that inviting someone and giving them a platform for bullshit could be harmful, though universities, I think, given their place as a central port for the debate of ideas, can give themselves a lot more leeway in who they do or do not invite. However, the university was not inviting her to give a talk about trans people, but about her intellectual contributions to feminism, which I'm pretty sure are longer, richer, and more relevant than whatever bigoted bullshit she's uttered. The protests happening are happening because people think that that bigotry invalidates any other contribution she could possibly make. THIS is what I have a big, big problem with, and it's an aspect of the modern Left that makes my skin crawl. Just a few months ago, a friend of mine was trying to put together an interview on the rise of podcasts and why they seemingly have displaced blogs as the popularly-consumed medium of personal expression. For this, one of the people he got was Dean Esmay, someone who was a HUGE right-wing blogger in the previous decade but who has, more recently, become a very prominent Men's Rights Activist. My friend does not go in with MRAs on the vast majority of issues, but he's a guy who works 40 hours per week and does stuff like this interview on his personal time and personal dime, meaning his choices of interview subject are somewhat limited. For another person, he got a very prominent podcaster, but that podcaster backed out because "Men's Rights Activist" was such a no-go that he couldn't even associate with one on an intellectual pursuit that was completely unrelated to MRA bullshit. That, to me, is the kind of intellectual smallness and personal sanctimony that I despise in modern progressivism, and Dawkins, here, is right to call such bullshit out.

Thank you! you've made the point i was making so much more eloquently than i did

 

[Alexlf]

Trust me, we have no shortage of people saying the exact same things about trans people. This kind of hate speech gets all of the exposure it could possibly ask for.

Also, do you really not understand the problem with paying her to speak at a University?



You're right, let's go to the Westboro Baptist Church and learn uncomfortable positions like "f*gs eat poop".

Can we please stop describing people being tired of a popular view of trans people being subhuman as being uncomfortable? This is explicitly a unique situation because while we see people with problematic views on race, gender, sexuality, etc., but no one is as given as strong a platform as transphobic bigots, and as we see people reject the idea of allowing white supremacists at universities, we still have people acting like it's free speech to dehumanize an entire group of people. It's unfair to silence people (who have boundless opportunities to speak on the subject, especially compared to her protesters), you should be listening to uncomfortable opinions (things that the protesters hear every day of their lives online and about town).

So you think for example, a university could have anti-vaccine courses and if you don't like it just ignore it?

You wouldn't allow people who's goal in coming to the university was to spread hate, or people who refused to listen to facts/debate properly.

She was NOT coming to the university to speak on her views on transphobia.

If a WBC "patron" wanted to come and talk about woodworking as a professional carpenter, they can go right ahead! An anti-vaxxer coming to talk about their experience in a war? Absolutely useful.

 

[Arkeband]

So you think for example, a university could have anti-vaccine courses and if you don't like it just ignore it?

COURSES?

She was a guest speaker, not offering credit hours.

 

[ItIsOkBro]

Again, she wasn't being paid to talk ABOUT trans people. This is a very major point that people seem to be missing, here. She is a bigot, but that's totally unrelated to the actual talk she was going to give, which is why protesting and trying to exclude her is ridiculous. I wouldn't invite James Watson to give a lecture on his views about race, or a conference on how to properly credit and include female scientists you work with, but I'd gladly invite him to lecture on deducing the structure of DNA molecules, and to protest and try to exclude him BECAUSE of his racist bullshit or his pilfering of Rosalind Franklin's data would be ridiculous in a university context.

Her views on trans women aren't unrelated to a talk about women, I think.