As a straight, cisgender man, I’m sick to the fucking teeth of straight, cisgender men, talking shite about a lived experience that they(we) will never understand. It’s not stifling free speech when one group boycotts another for their views, it’s precisely an expression of free speech. Yank culture wars are fucking with us.
Freedom of speech does not mean obligatory participation from the other side.
You are allowed say what you want. In the process, others are allowed to say that they no longer want to associate with you because of what you said. That is allowed under THEIR freedom of speech.
“Freedom of speech” is yet another one of these stupid Americanisms that has been imported in by the conservative movement. It nearly always is code for “I want to say what I want, about whoever I want, with no consequence and no retort.”
This is a fucking stupid take.
> Some people, however, do have opinions for various reasons. To categorise them all as being rooted in prejudice and to insist they be excluded from the public square is something that should alarm anybody interested in liberal democracy.
I agree. I am an ally buy I think pride have gone too far too fast with this.
Hear me out. Maybe Bigots shouldn’t be involved in discussions of fairness and equality.
Also we are not America. “But mah freedom of speech” isn’t a say what I want free card.
I must have missed the bit where “they be excluded from the public square” was espoused by the Pride organisers. The flip side of this coin is that the Pride Organisers have to be compelled to use RTÉ as it’s main media platform.
Why is the Government getting involved?
From what I’ve heard it was mild justifiable criticism.
>Substitute “bishops” for “organisers” and that last sentence could well have been written 50 years ago by the Catholic Press Office following an edition of The Late, Late Show discussing the lives of same-sex couples.
Weak. All NGOs/CSOs should complain when they feel like their views aren’t being properly represented. That’s one of their roles. Doesn’t matter if its Friends of the Irish Environment on a tv show that they feel didn’t accurately or fairly represent modern-day environmentalism, Catholic Bishops on a show about the role of religion in Irish schools, or Dublin Pride in this case.
It’s a shitty bad faith attack to make.
> Then the organisers said this in a tweet: “RTÉ is our national broadcaster. LGBTQ+ people and our allies make up the majority of people in Ireland. We are the majority shareholders in RTÉ, and we have a right to hold it accountable for its actions.”
>Are the organisers of Dublin Pride suggesting that the majority of people in this country consider any discussion on transgender issues to be indecent, and those who engage in it hate-filled and transphobic?
They’re saying that they represent the majority of people in Ireland. Whether that’s accurate or not, it’s irrational to then argue that if they represent a population of <X>, that means 100% of population <X> have identical views.
Does the author question every single TD, Minister or political party when they make a statement that they’re representing their constituents interests?
>Among the contributors were women from an organisation who have strong feelings about language in contexts in which “person” has been substituted for “woman” and “mother”.
Who cares? Having strong feelings about a subject that is inclusive and harmless doesn’t make them legitimate.
>And there was discussion around ‘safe spaces’ for women and various problems that some contributors have with aspects of what appears to be a strict orthodoxy around gender identity.
The point is they aren’t legitimate ‘problems’. All the claims that terfs make about safe spaces have been comprehensively and conclusively debunked. Views that have been proven to be fantastical and anti-intellectual do not have a right to be represented as being legitimate – which is where Duffy should have been educated enough, as host, to step in and strongly question those people offering these debunked views and make them defend such.
When one person is peddling anti-climate change views and another is stating the overwhelming scientific consensus, the host of a show’s role is not to be neutral.
>Then there was a lecturer from Waterford, Colette Colfer, who spoke cogently about gender identity theory and suggested there are parallels with a belief system as it applies to religion. She also noted that the theory was considered in some quarters to be, well, Gospel.
She did not speak cogently. Her claims are risible and nonsensical – any argument predicated on ‘gender identity issues’ having (or becoming) dominant as the Catholic Church has declined are clearly not ‘cogent’.
To quote from Ms Colfer:
>As someone who is hugely interested in religion, I have noticed that as the Catholic Church is declining in importance in Ireland, new belief systems are emerging to take up some of the spaces vacated. **One of these in particular – gender identity theory – is rising to prominence and quickly becoming dominant.**
Here’s some more of her pseudo-intellectualism:
>People from all these religions and belief systems permitted me to enter their worlds with no compulsion on me to participate or to believe. Yet today, in Ireland, when it comes to gender identity theory, it is becoming difficult to adopt the phenomenological perspective as there is increasing pressure to accept this theory uncritically.
>Although there is no concept of the divine in gender identity theory, there are elements that could be considered religious. There are symbols, chants, flags, parades, and ‘holy’ days. There is a belief in what could be termed transubstantiation where the substance of the body is believed to change from one sex to another. A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul.
Yes Mick, very cogent.
>“The debate is shut down,” said Ms Colfer.
The debate was had on Joe Duffy’s show. The debate is happening right now. How is it being shut down?
>The Irish Council for Civil Liberties apparently believes so. Joe Duffy read out a complaint from the ICCL about the programmes, but nobody from the ICCL wanted to come on and explain whose civil liberties were being infringed.
The ICCL covered this already Mick: “In the context of increasing transphobic and homophobic attacks, this #liveline conversation is incredibly irresponsible.”
>Online, Twitter was ablaze with comments from people who claimed that Liveline was facilitating an entry into the country for right-wing elements who want to deliver us into fascism.
Actually, twitter is ablaze with TERFs crawling out of the woodwork crowing about how they and their free speech is being oppressed, none of them seemingly capable of seeing the irony in such.
> The premise for shutting down debate, as best can be determined, is that any discussion in this area is concerned with negating or removing the rights of transgender people.
>This would infer, for instance, that nobody in sport should discuss whether or not it is fair that a transwoman competes in exclusively female competitions. Or that medical or mental health specialists cannot give any opinion on the matter that doesn’t conform to the prevailing orthodoxy.
This is Mick using hyperbole. Is it ok for quack doctors to argue that pschology is a sham? Was it ok for quack doctors to go on Liveline and have free reign to peddle misinformation about vaccines? Is it ok for racists to go on TV and talk about the Great Replacement happening in Ireland and how schools are becoming less and less ‘white’?
Absolutely not.
>Like what I suspect is the vast majority of people, I don’t have strong opinions around gender issues, apart from wishing well anybody in how they live as long as it doesn’t impact negatively on anybody else.
Sure Mick, of course you don’t have strong opinions. Which is why you wrote a lengthy and stupid op-ed on it.
> Some people, however, do have opinions for various reasons. To categorise them all as being rooted in prejudice and to insist they be excluded from the public square is something that should alarm anybody interested in liberal democracy.
>For instance, by the standard being propagated, all those who voted against same-sex marriage in 2015 are homophobic. Anybody who voted against repealing the Eighth amendment in 2017 is a misogynist.
Uh, that’s not how a liberal democracy works. Freedom of speech isn’t a right to have your speech broadcast anywhere by anyone. Not even in Libertarian America. And yes, people who voted against gay marriage were largely homophobes and those against abortion, misogynists.
That correlation is true across the world.
>And what of the debates that preceded both referenda? Were so-called platforms hate-filled? Or was there a constructive exchange of views in which people were educated? The suspicion is that if there had been no debate, the Yes result in each case would, at the very least, not have been as emphatic as it was.
Whose suspicion? Who argued that there shouldn’t be a debate over those referenda?
>For sure, the conversation may have been uncomfortable for some, but to be fair to Duffy, he moderated it professionally and attempted to ensure that discomfort was minimised.
He didn’t moderate it professionally.
>Any other organisation, on any other issue, would be castigated far and wide as attempting to stifle free speech. Apart maybe from the bishops of yore.
Their behaviour isn’t stifling free speech. Mick’s is. That’s the irony.
“We will no longer partner with RTE and we find their behaviour unacceptable” vs “This organisation behaving this way is wrong and an attack on our entire system of being, they must be stopped OUR RIGHTS MUST BE PRESERVED”
Which is stifling free speech more?
The trans activists didnt actually say what comments they found hateful which is ridiculous.
When the topic being discussed is removing the word woman/man from state legislation, you would hope for a robust debate.
Why not put this to a public referendum to see what the people think, maybe also include the self-ID law which went under the radar too.
Why should state legislation be changed to appease the 0.001 % of people who are trans?
>Then the organisers said this in a tweet: “RTÉ is our national broadcaster. LGBTQ+ people and our allies make up the majority of people in Ireland. We are the majority shareholders in RTÉ, and we have a right to hold it accountable for its actions.”
Takes on this?
It doesn’t paint Dublin Pride in a great light when they shun a national broadcaster for any less than 100% agreement with no chance to raise an opposing voice. Its weird because most would be fine with pride on the telly but a few Joe Duffy takes are enough to cut all ties and positivity a national broadcasted pride event would have been. They don’t know how to play the game so to speak.
We’re living in very dangerous times, it is now deemed acceptable to ostracise and block out those who hold a view which is deemed as being incorrect. This is exactly the opposite of what should happen, how can we gain an educated opinion on a matter when one side is blocked out or tarred and feathered?
Without a free press our country wouldn’t be were it is today. A more open and equitable society, that has problems, but we are still progressing.
The last time we allowed an infallable group to dictate every aspect of our lives it did not end well for many people particularly women and children.
My fear is that extreme TRAs are opening the door for extremists on the right, or other bad actors.
The problem is that when you platform racist, homophobic and transphobic views on the same level as someone advocating for equality for the sake of “hearing both sides”, it only emboldens people with those views already thinking their disgusting and downright wrong views are on equal footing with people arguing for the opposite.
If all the “free speech” weirdos think we should platform racists and transphobes then they should expect others using their free speech rights to boycott and express anger at those who allow those views on the national broadcaster.
“RTE should have the freedom to air what they want, but Dublin Pride exercising their freedom to associate with RTE as a partner is a threat to freedom of speech”
What a fucking joke of an article. It’s vile how only the pro-trans side is being held to account for exercising their freedoms how they wish.
Freedom isn’t free, it costs folks like you and me
I have absolutely no issues whatsoever with LGBT+ people, I see them as equals who should not be discriminated against. On the other hand, people can hold the opinion that they think being a member of the LGBT+ community is wrong. As much as I disagree with them they are entitled to hold and express thise opinions so long as they don’t actively discriminate or use words that are intended to cause distress.
And herein lies the problem, if you try to suppress those opinions you are only going to embolden the people who express them. I think Dublin pride made a mistake here, what they did could be interpreted as an attempt to force RTE to ignore those who hold contrary opinions.
What Dublin pride should have done was to say…. we don’t like what was said, but let’s try and figure out how we can can work to change the opinions of the people who said those things.
For an organisation that prides itself on inclusiveness, trying to exclude those with contrary opinions seems to go against that principle.
Debates over whether a group of people should be allowed to continue to peacefully exist never result in more freedoms.
This notion of a limitless freedom of speech is one of those sacred cows that have been built up in culture without actually considering whether it is actually a good thing. Like jury trials.
They are a linch mob simple as that
You say something you are not aware is wrong…..boom you get cancelled, name and reputation destroyed.
You have to go by the terms they make up on the spot and hope you don’t get a axe to the back of the head.
I’m all for equality and for people to live how they please but for fuck sake just take it easy on us if we are out of line even by a small bit.
And having gay friends I can tell you for a absolute fact the most hatful speech towards the LGBTQ community is said by themselves about other members…..it’s actually sick to hear the shit they say about each other…..things me and you would be hung over
If youre down the pub or in the street and you dont like or are offended by what someone says to you then you at the very least stop engaging with them and walk away .
Thats whats happened here . Im all for freedom of speech but it doesnt mean i have to listen to or engage with someone who i think is treating me like a twat .
Watching the tds pretend to give a fuck is hilarious
I think hate speech needs to be defined more clearly because anytime someone says something they dont like hate speech is often cited.
And noone even knows the actual definition
No it doesn’t? No one is trying to censor “free speech” – but an organisation representing trans people is choosing to disaffiliate from a broadcaster they feel doesn’t have trans peoples’ best interests at heart. I don’t see how free speech is involved
What age are you, what do you not understand. Have you spoken to survivors of sexual abuse. Predators will do absolutely anything to access their victims. Volunteer as swimming coaches, gymnastics coaches, scout leaders.
Self ID let’s predators pretend to be trans, this allows them access to female spaces, and if someone in good faith queries their behaviour, that person is a bigot
I’m living memory 10s of thousands of Irish people were neglected or willfully abused, while official Ireland did nothing, I think the least we can do now is let people voice their fears in public.
So all the Liveline sessions about travellers, racism, misogyny etc. never resulted in being dragged before an Oireachtas committee…. but this one does? Very telling.
Pride is a protest group. And mick comparing pride members to bishops of past, who held massive fucking power and still control vast resources – is absolutely fucking ridiculous.
So tell me how does that make you feel. Ah jaysus
And tomorrow on Lifeline: Genocide – yay or nay? Listen to survivors and neo-Nazis respectfully disagree on this complex topic. /s
Like honestly, PC has gone too far stifling all debate around being trans, but allowing what looks like a concerted effort of spreading hate speech 3 or 4 days in a row, how is that unbiased? And there was no effort made, as far as I’m aware, to explain the science behind being trans. Only ‘people who feel like a woman’ rhetorics when there is evidence that being trans isn’t just a “feeling”.
There’s a trend of cosplaying as trans but that’s usually young girls with internalised misogyny thinking they’re boys. It’s not male predators pretending to be women to access women’s toilets. The sad truth is that they do not need to go through such a hassle to commit violence against women.
Dublin pride really choosing the wrong side here. Free debate of a controversial issue shouldnt be a problem
I think it’s a pretty small hill to die on to be honest. If you stifle debate than nobody is going to learn and as a 40 something straight male, there is a big knowledge gap in my generation that needs to be bridged but most people are terrified to have a discussion on this subject for fear of offending somebody. It has big consequences these days saying the wrong thing out of lack of knowledge on the subject so it is just avoided.
31 comments
Free speech doesn’t absolve one of consequences
As a straight, cisgender man, I’m sick to the fucking teeth of straight, cisgender men, talking shite about a lived experience that they(we) will never understand. It’s not stifling free speech when one group boycotts another for their views, it’s precisely an expression of free speech. Yank culture wars are fucking with us.
Freedom of speech does not mean obligatory participation from the other side.
You are allowed say what you want. In the process, others are allowed to say that they no longer want to associate with you because of what you said. That is allowed under THEIR freedom of speech.
“Freedom of speech” is yet another one of these stupid Americanisms that has been imported in by the conservative movement. It nearly always is code for “I want to say what I want, about whoever I want, with no consequence and no retort.”
This is a fucking stupid take.
> Some people, however, do have opinions for various reasons. To categorise them all as being rooted in prejudice and to insist they be excluded from the public square is something that should alarm anybody interested in liberal democracy.
I agree. I am an ally buy I think pride have gone too far too fast with this.
Hear me out. Maybe Bigots shouldn’t be involved in discussions of fairness and equality.
Also we are not America. “But mah freedom of speech” isn’t a say what I want free card.
I must have missed the bit where “they be excluded from the public square” was espoused by the Pride organisers. The flip side of this coin is that the Pride Organisers have to be compelled to use RTÉ as it’s main media platform.
Why is the Government getting involved?
From what I’ve heard it was mild justifiable criticism.
>Substitute “bishops” for “organisers” and that last sentence could well have been written 50 years ago by the Catholic Press Office following an edition of The Late, Late Show discussing the lives of same-sex couples.
Weak. All NGOs/CSOs should complain when they feel like their views aren’t being properly represented. That’s one of their roles. Doesn’t matter if its Friends of the Irish Environment on a tv show that they feel didn’t accurately or fairly represent modern-day environmentalism, Catholic Bishops on a show about the role of religion in Irish schools, or Dublin Pride in this case.
It’s a shitty bad faith attack to make.
> Then the organisers said this in a tweet: “RTÉ is our national broadcaster. LGBTQ+ people and our allies make up the majority of people in Ireland. We are the majority shareholders in RTÉ, and we have a right to hold it accountable for its actions.”
>Are the organisers of Dublin Pride suggesting that the majority of people in this country consider any discussion on transgender issues to be indecent, and those who engage in it hate-filled and transphobic?
They’re saying that they represent the majority of people in Ireland. Whether that’s accurate or not, it’s irrational to then argue that if they represent a population of <X>, that means 100% of population <X> have identical views.
Does the author question every single TD, Minister or political party when they make a statement that they’re representing their constituents interests?
>Among the contributors were women from an organisation who have strong feelings about language in contexts in which “person” has been substituted for “woman” and “mother”.
Who cares? Having strong feelings about a subject that is inclusive and harmless doesn’t make them legitimate.
>And there was discussion around ‘safe spaces’ for women and various problems that some contributors have with aspects of what appears to be a strict orthodoxy around gender identity.
The point is they aren’t legitimate ‘problems’. All the claims that terfs make about safe spaces have been comprehensively and conclusively debunked. Views that have been proven to be fantastical and anti-intellectual do not have a right to be represented as being legitimate – which is where Duffy should have been educated enough, as host, to step in and strongly question those people offering these debunked views and make them defend such.
When one person is peddling anti-climate change views and another is stating the overwhelming scientific consensus, the host of a show’s role is not to be neutral.
>Then there was a lecturer from Waterford, Colette Colfer, who spoke cogently about gender identity theory and suggested there are parallels with a belief system as it applies to religion. She also noted that the theory was considered in some quarters to be, well, Gospel.
She did not speak cogently. Her claims are risible and nonsensical – any argument predicated on ‘gender identity issues’ having (or becoming) dominant as the Catholic Church has declined are clearly not ‘cogent’.
To quote from Ms Colfer:
>As someone who is hugely interested in religion, I have noticed that as the Catholic Church is declining in importance in Ireland, new belief systems are emerging to take up some of the spaces vacated. **One of these in particular – gender identity theory – is rising to prominence and quickly becoming dominant.**
Here’s some more of her pseudo-intellectualism:
>People from all these religions and belief systems permitted me to enter their worlds with no compulsion on me to participate or to believe. Yet today, in Ireland, when it comes to gender identity theory, it is becoming difficult to adopt the phenomenological perspective as there is increasing pressure to accept this theory uncritically.
>Although there is no concept of the divine in gender identity theory, there are elements that could be considered religious. There are symbols, chants, flags, parades, and ‘holy’ days. There is a belief in what could be termed transubstantiation where the substance of the body is believed to change from one sex to another. A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul.
Yes Mick, very cogent.
>“The debate is shut down,” said Ms Colfer.
The debate was had on Joe Duffy’s show. The debate is happening right now. How is it being shut down?
>The Irish Council for Civil Liberties apparently believes so. Joe Duffy read out a complaint from the ICCL about the programmes, but nobody from the ICCL wanted to come on and explain whose civil liberties were being infringed.
The ICCL covered this already Mick: “In the context of increasing transphobic and homophobic attacks, this #liveline conversation is incredibly irresponsible.”
>Online, Twitter was ablaze with comments from people who claimed that Liveline was facilitating an entry into the country for right-wing elements who want to deliver us into fascism.
Actually, twitter is ablaze with TERFs crawling out of the woodwork crowing about how they and their free speech is being oppressed, none of them seemingly capable of seeing the irony in such.
> The premise for shutting down debate, as best can be determined, is that any discussion in this area is concerned with negating or removing the rights of transgender people.
>This would infer, for instance, that nobody in sport should discuss whether or not it is fair that a transwoman competes in exclusively female competitions. Or that medical or mental health specialists cannot give any opinion on the matter that doesn’t conform to the prevailing orthodoxy.
This is Mick using hyperbole. Is it ok for quack doctors to argue that pschology is a sham? Was it ok for quack doctors to go on Liveline and have free reign to peddle misinformation about vaccines? Is it ok for racists to go on TV and talk about the Great Replacement happening in Ireland and how schools are becoming less and less ‘white’?
Absolutely not.
>Like what I suspect is the vast majority of people, I don’t have strong opinions around gender issues, apart from wishing well anybody in how they live as long as it doesn’t impact negatively on anybody else.
Sure Mick, of course you don’t have strong opinions. Which is why you wrote a lengthy and stupid op-ed on it.
> Some people, however, do have opinions for various reasons. To categorise them all as being rooted in prejudice and to insist they be excluded from the public square is something that should alarm anybody interested in liberal democracy.
>For instance, by the standard being propagated, all those who voted against same-sex marriage in 2015 are homophobic. Anybody who voted against repealing the Eighth amendment in 2017 is a misogynist.
Uh, that’s not how a liberal democracy works. Freedom of speech isn’t a right to have your speech broadcast anywhere by anyone. Not even in Libertarian America. And yes, people who voted against gay marriage were largely homophobes and those against abortion, misogynists.
That correlation is true across the world.
>And what of the debates that preceded both referenda? Were so-called platforms hate-filled? Or was there a constructive exchange of views in which people were educated? The suspicion is that if there had been no debate, the Yes result in each case would, at the very least, not have been as emphatic as it was.
Whose suspicion? Who argued that there shouldn’t be a debate over those referenda?
>For sure, the conversation may have been uncomfortable for some, but to be fair to Duffy, he moderated it professionally and attempted to ensure that discomfort was minimised.
He didn’t moderate it professionally.
>Any other organisation, on any other issue, would be castigated far and wide as attempting to stifle free speech. Apart maybe from the bishops of yore.
Their behaviour isn’t stifling free speech. Mick’s is. That’s the irony.
“We will no longer partner with RTE and we find their behaviour unacceptable” vs “This organisation behaving this way is wrong and an attack on our entire system of being, they must be stopped OUR RIGHTS MUST BE PRESERVED”
Which is stifling free speech more?
The trans activists didnt actually say what comments they found hateful which is ridiculous.
When the topic being discussed is removing the word woman/man from state legislation, you would hope for a robust debate.
Why not put this to a public referendum to see what the people think, maybe also include the self-ID law which went under the radar too.
Why should state legislation be changed to appease the 0.001 % of people who are trans?
>Then the organisers said this in a tweet: “RTÉ is our national broadcaster. LGBTQ+ people and our allies make up the majority of people in Ireland. We are the majority shareholders in RTÉ, and we have a right to hold it accountable for its actions.”
Takes on this?
It doesn’t paint Dublin Pride in a great light when they shun a national broadcaster for any less than 100% agreement with no chance to raise an opposing voice. Its weird because most would be fine with pride on the telly but a few Joe Duffy takes are enough to cut all ties and positivity a national broadcasted pride event would have been. They don’t know how to play the game so to speak.
We’re living in very dangerous times, it is now deemed acceptable to ostracise and block out those who hold a view which is deemed as being incorrect. This is exactly the opposite of what should happen, how can we gain an educated opinion on a matter when one side is blocked out or tarred and feathered?
Without a free press our country wouldn’t be were it is today. A more open and equitable society, that has problems, but we are still progressing.
The last time we allowed an infallable group to dictate every aspect of our lives it did not end well for many people particularly women and children.
My fear is that extreme TRAs are opening the door for extremists on the right, or other bad actors.
The problem is that when you platform racist, homophobic and transphobic views on the same level as someone advocating for equality for the sake of “hearing both sides”, it only emboldens people with those views already thinking their disgusting and downright wrong views are on equal footing with people arguing for the opposite.
If all the “free speech” weirdos think we should platform racists and transphobes then they should expect others using their free speech rights to boycott and express anger at those who allow those views on the national broadcaster.
“RTE should have the freedom to air what they want, but Dublin Pride exercising their freedom to associate with RTE as a partner is a threat to freedom of speech”
What a fucking joke of an article. It’s vile how only the pro-trans side is being held to account for exercising their freedoms how they wish.
Freedom isn’t free, it costs folks like you and me
I have absolutely no issues whatsoever with LGBT+ people, I see them as equals who should not be discriminated against. On the other hand, people can hold the opinion that they think being a member of the LGBT+ community is wrong. As much as I disagree with them they are entitled to hold and express thise opinions so long as they don’t actively discriminate or use words that are intended to cause distress.
And herein lies the problem, if you try to suppress those opinions you are only going to embolden the people who express them. I think Dublin pride made a mistake here, what they did could be interpreted as an attempt to force RTE to ignore those who hold contrary opinions.
What Dublin pride should have done was to say…. we don’t like what was said, but let’s try and figure out how we can can work to change the opinions of the people who said those things.
For an organisation that prides itself on inclusiveness, trying to exclude those with contrary opinions seems to go against that principle.
Debates over whether a group of people should be allowed to continue to peacefully exist never result in more freedoms.
This notion of a limitless freedom of speech is one of those sacred cows that have been built up in culture without actually considering whether it is actually a good thing. Like jury trials.
They are a linch mob simple as that
You say something you are not aware is wrong…..boom you get cancelled, name and reputation destroyed.
You have to go by the terms they make up on the spot and hope you don’t get a axe to the back of the head.
I’m all for equality and for people to live how they please but for fuck sake just take it easy on us if we are out of line even by a small bit.
And having gay friends I can tell you for a absolute fact the most hatful speech towards the LGBTQ community is said by themselves about other members…..it’s actually sick to hear the shit they say about each other…..things me and you would be hung over
If youre down the pub or in the street and you dont like or are offended by what someone says to you then you at the very least stop engaging with them and walk away .
Thats whats happened here . Im all for freedom of speech but it doesnt mean i have to listen to or engage with someone who i think is treating me like a twat .
Watching the tds pretend to give a fuck is hilarious
I think hate speech needs to be defined more clearly because anytime someone says something they dont like hate speech is often cited.
And noone even knows the actual definition
No it doesn’t? No one is trying to censor “free speech” – but an organisation representing trans people is choosing to disaffiliate from a broadcaster they feel doesn’t have trans peoples’ best interests at heart. I don’t see how free speech is involved
What age are you, what do you not understand. Have you spoken to survivors of sexual abuse. Predators will do absolutely anything to access their victims. Volunteer as swimming coaches, gymnastics coaches, scout leaders.
Self ID let’s predators pretend to be trans, this allows them access to female spaces, and if someone in good faith queries their behaviour, that person is a bigot
I’m living memory 10s of thousands of Irish people were neglected or willfully abused, while official Ireland did nothing, I think the least we can do now is let people voice their fears in public.
So all the Liveline sessions about travellers, racism, misogyny etc. never resulted in being dragged before an Oireachtas committee…. but this one does? Very telling.
Pride is a protest group. And mick comparing pride members to bishops of past, who held massive fucking power and still control vast resources – is absolutely fucking ridiculous.
So tell me how does that make you feel. Ah jaysus
And tomorrow on Lifeline: Genocide – yay or nay? Listen to survivors and neo-Nazis respectfully disagree on this complex topic. /s
Like honestly, PC has gone too far stifling all debate around being trans, but allowing what looks like a concerted effort of spreading hate speech 3 or 4 days in a row, how is that unbiased? And there was no effort made, as far as I’m aware, to explain the science behind being trans. Only ‘people who feel like a woman’ rhetorics when there is evidence that being trans isn’t just a “feeling”.
There’s a trend of cosplaying as trans but that’s usually young girls with internalised misogyny thinking they’re boys. It’s not male predators pretending to be women to access women’s toilets. The sad truth is that they do not need to go through such a hassle to commit violence against women.
Dublin pride really choosing the wrong side here. Free debate of a controversial issue shouldnt be a problem
I think it’s a pretty small hill to die on to be honest. If you stifle debate than nobody is going to learn and as a 40 something straight male, there is a big knowledge gap in my generation that needs to be bridged but most people are terrified to have a discussion on this subject for fear of offending somebody. It has big consequences these days saying the wrong thing out of lack of knowledge on the subject so it is just avoided.