A Letter on Justice and Open Debate

[John Bailey]

I'm not attacking or defending Rowling, or wading into the topic she waded into.
But the angry tweets referred to in Thomas' article aren't censorship.
That's what democratic 'open debate' looks like. If you say something
that some people find hateful, some of them might respond in ways that
you don't like. If you're truly committed to open debate you'll engage
in dialogue with these foul dissenters.
Or you can just demonise them. That's a tactic.

On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 6:45 PM Thomas Eckhardt
<thomas.eckhardt at uni-bonn.de> wrote:
>
>
> Am 09.07.2020 um 01:02 schrieb John Bailey:
> > Rowling is obviously the most current case, with defenders
> > using the 'now now, let her speak' defence as if utterances are
> > without consequence.
>
> I am still at a loss to see what was "hateful" and "hurtful" and
> "transphobic" about Rowling's statements. I have to say that the, err,
> arguments brought forward in the replies to Rowling's tweets fail to
> convince me:
>
> https://medium.com/@rebeccarc/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-activists-a-story-in-screenshots-78e01dca68d
>
> Disclaimer: I have never read a book by J.K. Rowling and happen to think
> that she was very stupid indeed to believe in the Bana Alabed atrocity
> propaganda story.
>
> --
> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l