For you. This is similar to a white male saying he does not want to get involved in the substantive argument against racism to a room of black people, that he is only interested whether racists have freedom of speech (or even, blacks). You can expect the reaction.
-
-
Replying to @AlessandraAster @SpinningHugo and
It’s also Just. Not. True. Several tweets were dedicated to the immorality and unpleasantness of what women were saying, before the ‘defend to the death your right to say it’ bit. What we’re saying isn’t nasty! It’s essential!! Independently of our rights to free speech!!!
1 reply 0 retweets 51 likes -
Replying to @HJoyceGender @AlessandraAster and
But, again, that was not the argument. Indeed if there was nothing offensive about the stickers my argument goes through a fortiori. Those stickering should have the freedom to do so and the police are mistaken.
5 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @SpinningHugo @MForstater and
Again. By your argument the Oxford dictionary is offensive. Biological facts are not offensive. Gravity is not offensive. 2+3=5 is not offensive. Adult woman female is not offensive. And the context is not oh poor trans. The context is millions of women die because of biology.
1 reply 0 retweets 23 likes -
Replying to @AlessandraAster @MForstater and
This is where we started. No, context matters. Saying "you're fat." may be (a) true and (b) inoffensive in most contexts. That doesn't mean it is inoffensive in all contexts, meaning not being a matter of dictionaries.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SpinningHugo @AlessandraAster and
I appreciate the argument, but in this context saying "I reject that you get to redefine what I am" isnt quite the same as saying "you eat too much pie".
1 reply 0 retweets 17 likes -
Replying to @amglarson @AlessandraAster and
And nobody claimed that they were, I was explaining how a statement of fact can be offensive.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @SpinningHugo @amglarson and
Hugo. This is the point. The people who find the stickers offensive (not trans people but people who see the GC view as offensive) find it offensive in *every* context. So by your formula the moral thing for GC people to do is stay quiet to avoid giving offense.
2 replies 0 retweets 30 likes -
Replying to @MForstater @amglarson and
That doesn't follow, no. I think gender critical views can be expressed in a non-offensive way, and that even if they cannot, there is no moral imperative to always restrain from doing anything that offends other people.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SpinningHugo @MForstater and
If you truly believe that I'm afraid you have no Idea what you are talking about. No debate is allowed. I suggest you read up on the threats, harassment, sackings, disciplinary actions, censorship, physical assaults etc meted out to GC women, and a few men.
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes
I know. Its an empirical question. If there *was* a way of doing this "right" according to Hugo's judgement without being labelled offensive & bigoted & subject to serious personal cost, we'd be able observe people; civil society leaders, politicians, academics doing just that
-
-
Replying to @MForstater @Sparrlyten and
We all started with reasonable observations. It took only a few hours for me to receive the first death threats.
0 replies 1 retweet 4 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Replying to @MForstater @SpinningHugo and
He doesn't understand that how the debate is manipulated by accusations of extremism and bigotry. His argument inherently accepts those charges, by saying GC are not being nice/reasonable. There is nothing actually rude or extremist about saying women don't have penises.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.