Support NeoGAF

[Erin S Kittens]

Feminist author Greer was due to give a talk at Cardiff University next month – but cancelled the talk of her own accord after a number of activists protested her repeated derogatory comments about trans women.

Greer has previously spoken out against “man’s delusion that he is female”, claiming trans women are “some kind of ghastly parody” but will never be women because they do not know what it’s like to have a “big, hairy, smelly vagina”.

The author has since caused more outrage, referring to Caitlyn Jenner as a “he/she” who “wanted the limelight that the female members of the family were enjoying”

Wading into the row, evolutionary biologist and atheist author Richard Dawkins has lashed out at people who tried to get Greer blocked from speaking over her comments.

“Those who think it’s nonsense are entitled to stay away. Or come and argue. They should not censor views they think are nonsense.

“A university is not a ‘safe space’. If you need a safe space, leave, go home, hug your teddy & suck your thumb until ready for university.”

Well, it looks like Dick Dorkins' ignorance and hatred toward marginalized communities continues to know no bounds.

Edit: For those thinking it's appropriate to give Greer a platform at a university, would you have a similar response to David Duke being given forum in the same venue?

 

[Vincent Alexander]

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

 

[ReplacementPelican]

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.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

OP backfire incoming.

Greer is awful and Dawkins is still right.

 

[Game-Biz]

Greer sounds like an ass, but Dawkins isn't wrong here. Every point of view deserves to heard, no matter how bigoted it might be.

 

[Dennis]

Dawkins: “A university is not a ‘safe space’. If you need a safe space, leave, go home, hug your teddy & suck your thumb until ready for university.”

Can't argue with that.

If you can't be challenged at a university then they are pointless.

 

[finowns]

Also agree with Dawkins.

 

[War Peaceman]

I really don't understand what Greer has been doing. It is fucking terrible and she should be ashamed.

Dawkins, in this particular case, is correct though.

 

[Tinfoilhatsron]

Was this assembly mandatory?

 

[Metrotab]

Yup, Dawkins is right.

 

[TheKaeptain]

Greer sounds horrible but:

Or come and argue.

Dawkins is right. A lot of people don't want to argue or debate. They rather tell someone they're wrong and stick their thumbs in their ears.

 

[Toxi]

Was this assembly mandatory?

College assemblies rarely are.

 

[Archaix]

I disagree entirely with what Dawkins is saying. University funds shouldn't be going towards spreading ignorance. A speaker at a school doesn't come just to have a laugh, they get paid fairly well for their appearances. In that context a group of students has every right to protest a decision like this one.

 

[Guerrillas in the Mist]

Greer sounds like an ass, but Dawkins isn't wrong here. Every point of view deserves to heard, no matter how bigoted it might be.

Pretty much. Dawkins can be an ass at times, but he's right on the money here.

 

[Dicktatorship]

Dawkins is actually right for once.

Also: is there any good reading material that explains the different sects of feminism? It seems like they've got a lot going on these days.

 

[Vincent Alexander]

So, who the hell is Greer? This is the first I've heard of her, but I gotta say....not a fan so far.

 

[dity]

Heard about Greer before. Sounds like an awful person. They're not some dumb shock comedian, so it would have been funny to see them with egg in their face in a university debate setting. But now it'll never be.

Honestly though I don't care much as to if Greer could speak or not at some university. Their views will just be destroyed on stage somewhere else is all.

 

[Toxi]

Dawkins is right. A lot of people don't want to argue or debate. They rather tell someone they're wrong and stick their thumbs in their ears.

Arguing with a transphobic person is like arguing with a young Earth creationist, except the young Earth creationist is less likely to insult you.

 

[Vinsanity.]

The guy that hosted Family Feud??

 

[Zhengi]

I disagree entirely with what Dawkins is saying. University funds shouldn't be going towards spreading ignorance. A speaker at a school doesn't come just to have a laugh, they get paid fairly well for their appearances. In that context a group of students has every right to protest a decision like this one.

So only pay for speakers who agree with your point of view?

 

[maniac-kun]

I agree with him.

 

[Shredderi]

As much as Greer's comments disgust me this Dawkins fella is right here.

 

[Archaix]

So only pay for speakers who agree with your point of view?

Don't pay people to spread ignorance and hate. I don't think that's too much to ask.

 

[Team Alucard]

Feminist author Greer was due to give a talk at Cardiff University next month – but cancelled the talk of her own accord after a number of activists protested her repeated derogatory comments about trans women.

Sounds like she's the one who needs to 'go home and hug a teddy bear'

 

[Earthstrike]

Nah, I'm tired of this idiocy where we need to pander to morons.

Remember how terence howard thinks 1x1=2? Imagine your university paid 5000$ for a lecture from him for this amazing idea! Would you be fine with it if you know this money was coming from a foundation created using your student fees? Universities are absolutely entitled to block individuals who are idiots or advocate for non-controversially idiotic ideals.

Free speech means in public squares you can say whatever you want. If you operate in a private square, you are allowed to block every moron who thinks being in possession of a mouth gives them the right to advocate whatever the fuck they want.

 

[Woody Invincible]

The guy that hosted Family Feud??

LOL

 

[The Technomancer]

So only pay for speakers who agree with your point of view?

I know people take ire when the "would you be okay with a blatantly racist speaker was invited" analogy in these conversations but in this case what Greer is saying really is comparable to "black people are just mentally deficient" and would we really be upset at students protesting a speaker with views that offensive?

 

[minor effort]

I disagree entirely with what Dawkins is saying. University funds shouldn't be going towards spreading ignorance. A speaker at a school doesn't come just to have a laugh, they get paid fairly well for their appearances. In that context a group of students has every right to protest a decision like this one.

I'm inclined to agree. With how frequently trans people are still mocked and bullied, universities don't need to pay people to contribute to that hostility.

 

[squidyj]

Sounds like she's the one who needs to 'go home and hug a teddy bear'

they can all go home and hug teddy bears.
teddy bears for everyone.

 

[Fusebox]

Greer has outgrown her usefulness and Dawkins is right. People comparing her to Terrence Howard are missing how influential she used to be in these circles though. This isn't some random dummy spouting crap, it's Germaine Greer spouting crap.

 

[Damaniel]

Edit: For those thinking it's appropriate to give Greer a platform at a university, would you have a similar response to David Duke being given forum in the same venue?

Yes.

I'd expect that any attempt by David Duke to speak at a university would result in protests like you've never seen, but I see no reason why freedom of speech shouldn't apply to him as well (as disgusting as he is, and as long as he isn't outright inciting racial violence).

Germaine Greer is a horrible person, but she has the right to say what she wants, and if a university wants to give her a platform to do so then so be it. I don't like Richard Dawkins much either, but he's also right that people need to accept that there's a wider range of opinions out there than the comfortable ones that some people hold on to. University is supposed to be a place filled with controversial ideas - how can you grow if you stick yourself in a little box?

 

[Zhengi]

Don't pay people to spread ignorance and hate. I don't think that's too much to ask.

So basically don't pay anyone who has a controversial opinion to come speak at a university at all?

 

[Erin S Kittens]

Color me soooo surprised that GAF is mostly in favor of paying people to speak at a university who cause material harm to marginalized people. So surprised.

Spoiler

Surprised no one's defending Greer's hate speech yet--but totally certain it's coming.

 

[Vincent Alexander]

Edit: For those thinking it's appropriate to give Greer a platform at a university, would you have a similar response to David Duke being given forum in the same venue?

Without know who this is....I am of the opinion what holds true for one crazy that I may disagree with holds true for them all. Censorship isn't the right answer.

So basically don't pay anyone who has a controversial opinion to come speak at a university at all?

Yep. Then we'll never have anyone speak again at a university. Or we just make a 1-10 super simple scale to rate speakers from Not Controversial to Batshit Insane. Then we just need a committee to rank them.

And people think I don't have good ideas...

 

[Aureon]

Are we talking pro bono speeches, or that author is getting paid for this?

I disagree entirely with what Dawkins is saying. University funds shouldn't be going towards spreading ignorance. A speaker at a school doesn't come just to have a laugh, they get paid fairly well for their appearances. In that context a group of students has every right to protest a decision like this one.

Arguing down in public a frothing moron can be a very efficient way to learn important lessons.

 

[Archaix]

So basically don't pay anyone who has a controversial opinion to come speak at a university at all?

So basically don't pay anybody who wants to come speak to spread ignorance and hate.

Just like I fucking said the first and second times.

Arguing down in public a frothing moron can be a very efficient way to learn important lessons.

Plenty of morons in colleges, no need to pay somebody 10K to come be a moron for you.

 

[Kinitari]

I disagree entirely with what Dawkins is saying. University funds shouldn't be going towards spreading ignorance. A speaker at a school doesn't come just to have a laugh, they get paid fairly well for their appearances. In that context a group of students has every right to protest a decision like this one.

I think University funds should go towards challenging and educating students.

What happens when students are never given the opportunity to actually engage with people who hold these sorts of views in an academic matter? I worry that it creates an environment where people don't know why something is not just hateful, but wrong. Eventually the only people actually trying to argue are the terrible people, and that means they get all the practice.

So basically don't pay anybody who wants to come speak to spread ignorance and hate.

Just like I fucking said the first and second times.

Who gets to decide what is ignorant and hateful? By who's metrics do we judge this by?

 

[lazygecko]

Were they protesting with the expressed intent of blocking Greer from speaking?

 

[The Technomancer]

Yes.

I'd expect that any attempt by David Duke to speak at a university would result in protests like you've never seen, but I see no reason why freedom of speech shouldn't apply to him as well (as disgusting as he is, and as long as he isn't outright inciting racial violence).

Germaine Greer is a horrible person, but she has the right to say what she wants, and if a university wants to give her a platform to do so then so be it. I don't like Richard Dawkins much either, but he's also right that people need to accept that there's a wider range of opinions out there than the comfortable ones that some people hold on to. University is supposed to be a place filled with controversial ideas - how can you grow if you stick yourself in a little box?

I mean...the question then is if protests don't explicitly say "this person should not speak" then do they implicitly say it? Would massive protests at David Duke speaking not carry the same message if they were just careful not to verbally demand he not be allowed to speak?

 

[Mariolee]

Reminds me of a Community episode.

 

[FStop7]

So basically don't pay anyone who has a controversial opinion to come speak at a university at all?

Yes? There's no guaranteed right to speak at universities.

And saying "trans women are “some kind of ghastly parody” is not having a controversial opinion, it's straight up spewing hatred and dehumanizing a group of people.

 

[The Technomancer]

I think University funds should go towards challenging and educating students.

What happens when students are never given the opportunity to actually engage with people who hold these sorts of views in an academic matter? I worry that it creates an environment where people don't know why something is not just hateful, but wrong. Eventually the only people actually trying to argue are the terrible people, and that means they get all the practice.

No-one says she can't set up a chair in the park. But a speaker brought in and sponsored by the University carries a certain level of implicit endorsement.

 

[TheKaeptain]

Nah, I'm tired of this idiocy where we need to pander to morons.

Remember how terence howard thinks 1x1=2? Imagine your university paid 5000$ for a lecture from him for this amazing idea! Would you be fine with it if you know this money was coming from a foundation created using your student fees? Universities are absolutely entitled to block individuals who are idiots or advocate for non-controversially idiotic ideals.

Free speech means in public squares you can say whatever you want. If you operate in a private square, you are allowed to block every moron who thinks being in possession of a mouth gives them the right to advocate whatever the fuck they want.

Cardiff is a public University right?

 

[Tinfoilhatsron]

I know people take ire when the "would you be okay with a blatantly racist speaker was invited" analogy in these conversations but in this case what Greer is saying really is comparable to "black people are just mentally deficient" and would we really be upset at students protesting a speaker with views that offensive?

Personally? No. I've had argurments and debates with morons who thought I should've been sterilized. But I still wanted to argue and debate againt their ignorence.

In this case? Eh...
Morally gray because the Uni is paying for them. I'd ask the Uni to take a vote IMO.

 

[s_mirage]

I might not agree with Greer's opinions, but Dawkins is right. The coddling that some students seem to demand these days is getting tiresome. Don't agree with someone's views? Rebut them, debate them, campaign against their views, but don't demand that they be silenced.

 

[Opto]

So basically don't pay anyone who has a controversial opinion to come speak at a university at all?

This isn't some disagreement on economic policy. This is a person who continues a bigotry that assumes trans people are not who they say they are, denying their identify, and marginalizing them that leads to violence and suicide.

 

[FStop7]

Nah, I'm tired of this idiocy where we need to pander to morons.

I can see why Dawkins is so concerned about it, it's a matter of self-preservation for him.

 

[metalslimer]

Universities aren't a safe space for kids but they have a right to complain about their own money being used to pay people. That doesn't mean the university should listen and controversial views should be banned though.

You have to be sympathetic to the views of the people protesting though. We can say listen to everyone but why would people want to spread the ignorance that leads so so many trans individuals dying every year

 

[Spoo]

I'm of two minds on the subject. Normally, with a controversial opinion that has some measure of right to exist, I'd like to protect the ability for people to share that opinion. On the other hand, there are discussions that seem like they've been had, and keeping them "open" is just a route for bigoted or racist people to continue being that way. Kind of like the reddit channels/forums that argue they have some basis for existence because they ask really deep, important questions about boys and panties, or whatever.

I guess the question is, does the talk have any merit? Socially, intellectually, scientifically, or is it just out to offend?

Short answer: I think Dawkin's is correct. Slightly longer answer: in this case, I kind of wish he wasn't, but I can't have it both ways, I guess. It seems a non-issue since this woman withdrew her desire to speak on the matter, but it's still an interesting question.

 

[Divvy]

Nah, I'm tired of this idiocy where we need to pander to morons.

Remember how terence howard thinks 1x1=2? Imagine your university paid 5000$ for a lecture from him for this amazing idea! Would you be fine with it if you know this money was coming from a foundation created using your student fees? Universities are absolutely entitled to block individuals who are idiots or advocate for non-controversially idiotic ideals.

Free speech means in public squares you can say whatever you want. If you operate in a private square, you are allowed to block every moron who thinks being in possession of a mouth gives them the right to advocate whatever the fuck they want.

I think the difference is that there is no debate over whether 1x1=2

There is however an ongoing dialogue about trans and other gender issues. Greer's comments are disgusting, but they are a part of a broader conversation people are having about gender identity and is relevant in this moment of history.

Personally, I think the road to trans acceptance is not to shush ignorant people away necessarily, but to let them speak and argue them down. Let them know why they are wrong, and let trans people know there is a swelling vocal support for them