Yes let the guy who made comments about pedophiles being okay and his password being Long Knives 1290 speak. Jesus Christ Joanne listen to yourself. Your defending the type of person you say we trans women are.

“If you BELIEVE in freedom of speech as a crucial democratic principle and not just a matter of point scoring for your ‘side,’ then you should believe everyone gets to have their voice heard—and yes, I mean EVERYONE.”

I will never understand how JKR thinks that a literal racist Neo-Nazi who thinks having sex with minors is “dangerous and sexy”, but that a trans woman who wants to keep to herself, use a toilet, and leave without interacting with anyone else in the bathroom is the real threat.

Free speech does not mean you are entitled to a platform. Free speech does not mean you are entitled to a platform. Free speech does not mean you are entitled to a platform. Free speech does not mean you are entitled to a platform. Free speech does not mean you are entitled to a platform. Free speech does not mean you…

I believe in freedom of speech in the sense that the government should not put their thumb on the scale and decide who gets the right to speak. That is dangerous for any number of reasons and that’s why it’s prohibited in the Constitution.

There’s a difference between leftist and liberal. Soviet Russia was leftist - but very illiberal. This distinction is lost on many.

Her completely failing to see the irony of her statement “... get on that platform and expose him for the charlatan that he is. You push back hard.” when she utterly refuses to listen to the trans people that she has harmed with her hate speech show how completely deluded and blinkered she is.

You’re not wrong that Milo used the attempts to deplatform him to grow his brand, but right-wingers disingenuously do that all the time, always claiming that the left is attempting to silence them whenever they get the slightest pushback. By your logic, we should just let them say whatever they want with no refutation…

Yeah. Authoritarianism would involve banning him from speaking anywhere. He can still blog. He can still rent private venues and sell tickets to his ‘debates’ or ‘lectures’ or whatever. Hell, he can even rant on street corners.

No, but you should feel badly about yourself for this post.

This isn’t really true, and she isn’t solely discussing public universities.

Comparing someone like Angela Davis to Milo is insane. People like him are attention whores. He doesn’t go to college campuses and other venues to participate in “ a marketplace of ideas.” He goes there to build a brand. Every speaking event is an opportunity to post “blue-haired she/her liberal cries gets demolished!!…

Milo’s not there to debate in good faith. He wants to promote his views, which are already known to be appalling — all in the name of earning a few bucks as a provocateur.

It’s not really either/or though, is it? If university officials invite someone to speak at the university and the students - the people paying tuition to get an education - don’t want to give the speaker a platform, then that is not censorship. As someone else explained, the students are not the authority. And I say…

Imagine saying this opinion out loud in 2023, a time when Milo is absolutely broke and this is the first headline I’ve seen with his name in it in months, if not years. If you have some philosophical objection to deplatforming, that’s one thing, but trying to knock it strategically is very funny, given the outcome.

The creep of authoritarianism is threatening the world’s richest and most successful author from being able to, repeatedly and to great attentive fervor, voice their opinion online, in the press, and in a vanity podcast entirely engineered around the idea her voice is being silenced.

You can disagree with the methods that some students have chosen to protest, but to call a group of individuals with no real power joining together collectively to make their voices heard and enact change “authoritarian” really makes it seem like you have no idea what that word actually means. The students are not the…

Except, the speaker was invited by the school, not the students attending it who ultimately chased him away. That’s not censorship. That’s a group of people making their voice heard.

Yeesh.

If a speaker is invited to a public university, their speech is protected by the First Amendment. To deplatform them—no matter *who* they are—is censorship.