No Julie, no

It also shows their own ideas are bankrupt and can’t withstand the slightest attack.

No surprise that sections of the left are fascists, seeing as Fascism is a branch of Socialism.

The left, collectively, seem to have suffered some form of mental collapse.

On what used to be a comedy show, Have I got News for You, last night, the celebs and the audience laughed uproariously at a photo of George Osborne standing in a funny way. Weird enough, but the following picture of Theresa May, standing in a not funny at all, but slightly awkward, way, produced gales of hysterical laughter.

It’s as though the virus that got Corbyn elected made Murphy be seen as an economics guru and made Zoe stoutly maintain that the left were entitled to spit on whomever they want, has infected large segments of the lefty populace and left them drooling idiots.

Well, yes, ok, they had a bit of a head start, but really…

Mind you, the funniest laugh was seeing Abbott trying to look like a sex bomb.

– john miller The hysteria has been building since 2010, but since the general election result they’ve gone proper mental, as psychologists say.

I love the way she is spinning this as some vast right wing patriarchy excluding her, whereas in fact the men doing it are also left wing nut jobs with even more bonkers and extreme ideas.

And, of course, hoisted with her own petard.

I live in a Welsh university town, and in the May election was agent for one of the candidates.

The Students’ Union held a hustings. It was themed around what they wanted of the election winners, their demands being helpfully circulated in advance.

I was surprised when the lady chair gave a “safe space” rubric on what could not be said and who was not to be offended: offenders would be asked to leave or if necessary removed. Had we known in advance it might have influenced our decision to attend. It would certainly have elicited a response.

One candidate (the lady from the Socialist Labour Party) was not there. I presumed she had another engagement. I presumed wrong. Part way through proceedings the doors at the back of the lecture theatre flew open, and an indignant vision in Crimplene trouser suit and a backpack burst in. They had not invited her. They had not even informed her of the event. They had invited candidates whose parties had reached a certain threshold in the previous General Election and weren’t having anyone else.

It would have mitigated matters if the Chair had acknowledged a mistake, issued some sort of apology and invited the candidate to speak. She didn’t. She was all for summoning security and having the lady removed. It was only the intervention of the other candidates which eventually allowed her to speak.

dcardno

No
It’s a university. They have certain obligations in respect of free speech.
They didn’t pre-announce the restrictions on speech, and they didn’t pre-announce that not all candidates were invited.
If they had done, they would have had a frosty response from us.

@dcardno
No, the organisers did not set criteria they thought were appropriate. They announced an open debate and then – after the invitees turned up – announced a different rules for a restricted discussion.
To put it succintly – they lied and misled students into attending a deliberately skewed performance designed to favour (“protect”) certain viewpoints. The words that immediately springs to mind are “cheat” and “liar”.

Matthew L – “Julie Bindel is as much a feminist as SMFS is a gay rights activist.”

In what way is La Bindel not a feminist? What does a chick have to do to be a feminist that she has not done?

TL;DR version: two perceived victim groups are having a massive bitch fight.

Butter-coated popcorn, please.