In consultation with the organisers of RadFem 2012 and our legal advisors, Conway Hall has decided not to allow the booking in July 2012 to proceed. This is because it does not conform to our Terms and Conditions for hiring rooms at Conway Hall. In addition, we are not satisfied it conforms with the Equality Act (2010), or reflects our ethos regarding issues of discrimination.Radfems were outraged by the slight against their freedom of association. Sorry, but if we want it for ourselves, we have to allow it to others.
We had sought assurances that the organisers would allow access to all, in order to enable the event to proceed at the venue. We also expressed concern that particular speakers would need to be made aware that whilst welcoming progressive thinking and debate, Conway Hall seeks to uphold inclusivity in respect of both legal obligations and as a principle.
Saturday, June 30, 2012
Why do so many people regard politically correct queer activism as a nest of special pleading? For one thing, it often is. "Freedom of association" has long been a snarl term among those who believe that they have the right to participate in any gathering that they choose, despite the wishes of those who organized those gatherings in the first place. Sometimes, however, the Birkenstock is on the other foot, as with a radical feminist conference whose organizers sought to exclude transgendered people. The original venue declined to provide space for reasons relating to nondiscrimination:
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
"And speaking of hypocrisy, let's not even start on the Catholic Church and its apparent need to save the kids from gay marriage. This is only slightly more absurd than, say, taking dietary advice from the Cookie Monster." — Kevin Maher, The Times of London
Saturday, June 16, 2012
People in the politically correct left, in America and in other countries, often say that America goes overboard in protecting freedom of speech and that freedom of speech should sometimes bow to the need not to give offense. The real-world effect of implementing such a viewpoint can be seen here:
Angry Catholics have accused an Indian skeptic of blasphemy after he argued a dripping crucifix was caused by faulty plumbing rather than divine intervention, leaving him facing a possible prison term.The argument that concerns over hate speech should outweigh the First Amendment is weak enough; the argument that they should do so only when we want them to is just nonexistent. People who want do-good control-freakery to trump the First Amendment should remember the iron law, "Me today, you tomorrow."
* * *
The legislation bans "deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs" -- a rule Edamaruku believes runs counter to freedom of expression.
Thursday, June 14, 2012
In this series of blog posts, your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to read each quote and guess, before doing a Web search, whether someone in the religious right or the politically correct left said it.
In today's post-modern, queer-focused world, bisexuality is being promoted ... as the latest fashionable trend.
* * *
For a straight woman, having a girlfriend on the side is almost like having the latest Prada handbag.
* * *
I believe there is no gay (or for that matter bisexual) "gene[.]"
Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Yesterday, we had the primary election for city council. Since I did not want any of the candidates representing me, I eliminated the most heinous to arrive at six only moderately heinous candidates. Besides, I sometimes think I have more effect by writing letters to the editor than by voting, as when the city shelved a potentially disastrous development plan after I had been the only one to crunch some key numbers.
Saturday, June 9, 2012
"Something must be done about X (in this case, obesity). Y (in this case, an admittedly ineffectual ban) is something. Therefore Y must be done. This syllogism gave America Prohibition, mandatory-minimum sentences, the sentencing disparity between convictions for crack and powder cocaine, and that great guarantee of everyone’s security, shoe removal at airports." — Lexington, The Economist
Wednesday, June 6, 2012
I've finally gotten around to seeing Pariah. What I like most about the movie is that it resists the temptation to set up Mary Sues and anti-Sues, but instead presents well rounded characters, imperfect human beings trying to make their way through an imperfect world. The devout mother is the most obvious candidate for villain, but she inspires sympathy for trying to do what she sincerely believes to be best for her daughter. Also, an initially sympathetic character turns out to be a spacy teenager who, like teenagers in general, has no idea of what she wants.
Here a lesbian blogged about her sexual exploration. In the comments, someone wrote:
I’m sort of divided on this issue. If we’re going to be consistent, we shouldn’t celebrate the same activity for which lesbians have long (correctly, IMHO) rebuked gay men.The original blogger responded that she was "all for gay men having the sex," but another commenter responded (emphasis added):
I could care less what dudes do, of course they will mate like rabbits, they are MEN for pete’s sakes!I will let that last comment, particularly the bolded part, speak for itself.
Who tells lesbians to be “consistent”? hets? We are humans, we eat, we laugh, we love, sometimes if we are fortunate, we get laid every now and then.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg wants to limit the size of sugar-sweetened soda servings, for your own good of course. While a Big Gulp is probably not one of the most basic human necessities, people who care about liberty for LGBT people should care about such nanny-statism. As I noted previously, restrictions on individual liberty "for your own good" do not work out well for us.