How Can We Reduce The Amount Of Traffic...
Motoring0 min ago
A Lot About The Free Speech Union
101 Answers
on Newsnight tonight. I joined. Maybe fellow ABers might be interested as I'm sure we must all agree with free speech.
Answers
I wonder what the FSU would do if one of their members were critical of the FSU?
00:44 Wed 06th Jan 2021
Sounds fair, seven. Probably the best we can do.
Jim //It's also important again to emphasise that the opposition is not silenced by being uninvited to certain events or dismissed from their jobs. "Free Speech" is a defence from the Government, not from the people who can choose not to listen and aren't obliged to entertain you.//. That's true, but being dismissed from a job, is fairly bullying. Also, many "disinvited speakers" were due at universities etc, which are public. That should be different from choosing a private after-dinner speaker at your own house?
Exactly, naomi... if we ever get to the point where telling the truth is illegal.... we are all in a lot of trouble.
Jim //It's also important again to emphasise that the opposition is not silenced by being uninvited to certain events or dismissed from their jobs. "Free Speech" is a defence from the Government, not from the people who can choose not to listen and aren't obliged to entertain you.//. That's true, but being dismissed from a job, is fairly bullying. Also, many "disinvited speakers" were due at universities etc, which are public. That should be different from choosing a private after-dinner speaker at your own house?
Exactly, naomi... if we ever get to the point where telling the truth is illegal.... we are all in a lot of trouble.
the government wants to force universities to adopt its approved definition of anti-semitism or face penalties. The universities say this would infringe freedom of speech. Where does the FSU stand?
https:/
https:/
// Not necessarily. J K Rowling was recently severely vilified for saying that ‘people who menstruate’ are called ‘women’. She’s absolutely right - they are... I think that [what Rowling was complaining about/subject to] is the sort of nonsense this organisation objects to.//
Setting aside what Rowling said, the people who were objecting to Rowling did not in any sense take away her freedom of speech. There were some who certainly crossed a line themselves, and they deserve condemnation for the abuse they directed to her, but there was also a legitimate disagreement that what she said was unhelpful. The specific example is revealing, because in the first place "people who menstruate" isn't a perfect synonym for "women" even if you agreed with Rowling's broader point, but also because transgender people are real and deserve a respect that Rowling doesn't give. Her attempts to justify her position, moreover, were not always based on fact or hard evidence*; calling the criticism "valid" is a value judgement, rather than an objective position.
*Understatement, most of it was nonsense that was thoroughly discredited even before she'd written it.
Setting aside what Rowling said, the people who were objecting to Rowling did not in any sense take away her freedom of speech. There were some who certainly crossed a line themselves, and they deserve condemnation for the abuse they directed to her, but there was also a legitimate disagreement that what she said was unhelpful. The specific example is revealing, because in the first place "people who menstruate" isn't a perfect synonym for "women" even if you agreed with Rowling's broader point, but also because transgender people are real and deserve a respect that Rowling doesn't give. Her attempts to justify her position, moreover, were not always based on fact or hard evidence*; calling the criticism "valid" is a value judgement, rather than an objective position.
*Understatement, most of it was nonsense that was thoroughly discredited even before she'd written it.
Jim, "people who menstrate" isn't a synonym for "women" and nobody has suggested it is. Just that only women do. Her comments were not "unhelpful" just literally factual.
I actually stopped reading an article about menopause yesterday, as it kept saying "people with vaginas" and flatly refused to give us our proper name.
I actually stopped reading an article about menopause yesterday, as it kept saying "people with vaginas" and flatly refused to give us our proper name.
Employees have certain protections, it is true, but so do employers, and both have to work within the law and the guidelines of the job. Employees who are victims of harassment (on basis of sex, race, gender identity, sexuality, etc), that people can attempt to hide behind free speech, are protected; and employees who are perpetrators of that harassment are not, nor should they be.
The truth is not a threat, and telling the truth should never be illegal, but we should be wary of the blind and naive assumption that any of us is indisputably in possession of that truth.
The truth is not a threat, and telling the truth should never be illegal, but we should be wary of the blind and naive assumption that any of us is indisputably in possession of that truth.
'free speech' can be a complex minefield.
pixie:" but being dismissed from a job, is fairly bullying." -- if for exercising 'free speech' ? is that not 'discrimination'?
jno, the whole judeophobia /antisemitism is fraught with pitfalls
https:/
https:/
pixie:" but being dismissed from a job, is fairly bullying." -- if for exercising 'free speech' ? is that not 'discrimination'?
jno, the whole judeophobia /antisemitism is fraught with pitfalls
https:/
https:/
Seven, //pixie:" but being dismissed from a job, is fairly bullying." -- if for exercising 'free speech' ? is that not 'discrimination'?//
It seems to depend which "free speech" it is. I guess we need to stick with the free, but legal. But hounding someone out of a job for their views... maybe debatable.
It seems to depend which "free speech" it is. I guess we need to stick with the free, but legal. But hounding someone out of a job for their views... maybe debatable.
On the subject of truth, I understand that there are people who who insist that the words "woman, she" etc. only refer to biological sex. But that is not how language works. Language is a matter of consensus and convention, and those tend to change over time. Many people now use the word "woman" to refer to how a person identifies and sees themselves within a society, not specifically their biology or genetics. Whether you agree with them or not, it is a matter of truth and fact that they do, and it's a matter of truth and fact that society as a whole, and language, is evolving to admit this. No one person is the arbiter of what words mean; nor is a dictionary, as dictionaries merely serve to record the meanings of words as the author(s) understood them at the time they were written.
Well, Jim, the consensus clearly isn't there yet. And in any case, what good would it do? We would just need to find different words to describe biological men and women, as sometimes, that is what is needed.
We need to get over this idea that identity and sex must match all the stereotypes, so nobody needs to pretend any more.
We need to get over this idea that identity and sex must match all the stereotypes, so nobody needs to pretend any more.
'facts' are not synonymous with truth, just as 'honesty' is not synonymous with truth... and 'the science' can often be 'the currently accepted science'
jno, I will guess you are referring to your post @ 13:06 Thu 07th Jan 2021 ... "“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
The "guidance notes'' are another matter and not acceptable to me.
jno, I will guess you are referring to your post @ 13:06 Thu 07th Jan 2021 ... "“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
The "guidance notes'' are another matter and not acceptable to me.
A better solution to the confusion would be to allow context to dictate what is meant in general settings; or perhaps refer to "trans women" to differentiate them from "cis women". Solutions do exist, and it's not clear why any of them should be deemed undesirable. In the long run, perhaps language will change further, or society will change so that the battle over labels is no longer deemed relevant.
I only sideways noticed JK Rowling's "people who menstruate" complaint at the time. What was her actual issue? That the headline should have said "women who menstruate", or just "women"?
The article she was referring to was specifically about menstruation. If she thinks the headline should have said "women", I don't think that would have been as specific a headline as "people who menstruate", which is a subset of women. If however she meant that the headline should have read "women who menstruate", then that's very specific, but a bit picky. So, one way or the other, I think she was wrong to pick fault with that headline. But, of course, I'd defend to the death her right to do so ...
> the government wants to force universities to adopt its approved definition of anti-semitism or face penalties. The universities say this would infringe freedom of speech. Where does the FSU stand?
A very good question.
The article she was referring to was specifically about menstruation. If she thinks the headline should have said "women", I don't think that would have been as specific a headline as "people who menstruate", which is a subset of women. If however she meant that the headline should have read "women who menstruate", then that's very specific, but a bit picky. So, one way or the other, I think she was wrong to pick fault with that headline. But, of course, I'd defend to the death her right to do so ...
> the government wants to force universities to adopt its approved definition of anti-semitism or face penalties. The universities say this would infringe freedom of speech. Where does the FSU stand?
A very good question.
Oh dear it seems the Free Speech Union is anything but:
https:/
"Instead of finding a forum for their hopes of opposing repressive regimes and helping minority voices to get heard, they claim that they were censured if they disagreed with the group’s right-of-centre orthodoxy. And they say they were dismayed to realise that the supposedly grassroots project appeared to be an “astroturfed” front for Toby Young’s controversial pressure group, the Free Speech Union (FSU).
“We have been used by Toby Young to legitimise this project,” said Harry Walker, president of the Bristol Free Speech Society, who emphasised that he spoke in a personal capacity. “Organisations like the FSU are just perpetuating a culture war.”"
https:/
"Instead of finding a forum for their hopes of opposing repressive regimes and helping minority voices to get heard, they claim that they were censured if they disagreed with the group’s right-of-centre orthodoxy. And they say they were dismayed to realise that the supposedly grassroots project appeared to be an “astroturfed” front for Toby Young’s controversial pressure group, the Free Speech Union (FSU).
“We have been used by Toby Young to legitimise this project,” said Harry Walker, president of the Bristol Free Speech Society, who emphasised that he spoke in a personal capacity. “Organisations like the FSU are just perpetuating a culture war.”"
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.