Angelos Sofocleous was a model student at Durham University. He was president-elect of Humanist Students, assistant editor of the college’s philosophy society’s undergraduate journal, Critique, and co-editor-in-chief of the online student magazine, the Bubble.
But then, he did something radical. He tweeted out something with which almost everyone in the history of the world has agreed: women do not have penises. Within a month, he’d lost all of those positions. Why?
“The email stated that his comments served to ‘belittle trans experiences’ while leaving ‘no room for or to promote any fair discussions.’ ”
Of course, they didn’t explain how his assertion of biological fact left no room for discussion. It’s almost as if they don’t realize how discussion works. One person makes a claim, another can respond to it. On Twitter, this happens with a whiplash-inducing alacrity. It’s called “a conversation” and it happens all the time.
So, why did he lose his positions on campus? “My position at the magazine, I was told, required me to be impartial. Being impartial, however, requires having no views at all. At least when it comes to gender.”
They keep using the word “impartial,” but I don’t think it means what they think it means. Fact are — definitionally — impartial. That’s why they’re called “facts” and not “opinions.” However promoters of identity politics never let little things like details get in the way of a good social ostracizing.
Sofocleous goes on to explain what I’ve been lamenting on this blog for a long amount of time. “The reaction against me was extreme, yet it was far from exceptional. On campus, the subject of gender is now off limits for those who fail to fall into line with the new orthodoxy: that being a man or a woman is fluid. Anyone who says otherwise is liable to find themselves hounded into silence.”
We must not go along with this madness, and I commend Sofocleous for standing up and telling his story.
Hat Tip: Spectator
Image Credit: Twitter