O/T Is the worm turning against wokeism at last?
Just read of a social worker who has won her case against both Westminster Council and Facebook over discrimination and infringement of her rights under the European Convention of Human Rights articles 9 and 10 which allow "freedom of thought and freedom to manifest beliefs". The lady in question believes that there are only two ***es and that a person cannot change their *** and "liked" various posts on social media which expressed similar. Some reading these posts took offence and contacted her employer, who then suspended her.
The solicitor who represented her and helped her win her case commented that this was a "landmark victory for common sense and free speech" and should "sound alarms for ...employers...That they should not let their processes be weaponised by activists and on silencing the debate on freedom of speech on gender"
This is going to be an important ruling I feel. Her beliefs are -I would posit-actually held by the vast majority of the UK population but it is the minority who use "cancel culture" to try and get their own way. With the important caveat that anyone holding such views does not express or incite hatred or violence against those who have other opinions on the subject then they should indeed have the right to express their views regardless of whether the latter chose to take offence.
Personally, I think a lot of the problems around gender derive from semantics. Up until this century the definition of "gender" was very much linked with biological genitalia so that a person's ***uality might be whatever they wanted, but their gender was either male, female or hermaphrodite. The current dictionary definition of "gender" has now changed however to be more linked with "self identification" and gender roles (a concept ironically first mooted in the 1970s with regard to discussions around feminism).
For my own part, I don't have a problem with anyone having whatever ***uality they want and I have great sympathy for those who feel they are "born in the wrong body" and wish to change gender/***. However, all this self-identification stuff smacks of self entitlement and in many cases I'm left siding with J K Rowling-if you've got a dick, then however much you want to be a woman or feel like a woman doesn't make you one. A priori arguments may have their place in mathematical or scientific theories but the bottom line is that just because you can conceive of something (e.g. Unicorns or God) doesn't mean they exist in reality. As empiricism would argue, you cannot simply believe something into existence.
The real point and importance of this ruling however is in its defence of freedom of thought and speech and an encouragement of debate on the topic of gender rather than a closing down of it via "cancel culture" by those who decide to take "offence" based purely on disagreement of views expressed rather than on evidence of incitement of hatred or violence.
