The emails from the officer of the National Union of Students were unequivocal. Fran Cowling, the union’s lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) representative, said that she would not share a stage with a man whom she regarded as having been racist and “transphobic”.
That the man in question is Peter Tatchell – one of the country’s best-known gay rights campaigners, who next year celebrates his 50th year as an activist – is perhaps a mark of how fractured the debate on free speech and sexual politics has become.
In the emails, sent to the organisers of a talk at Canterbury Christ Church University on Monday on the topic of “re-radicalising queers”, Cowling refuses an invitation to speak unless Tatchell, who has also been invited, does not attend. In the emails she cites Tatchell’s signing of an open letter in the Observer last year in support of free speech and against the growing trend of universities to “no-platform” people, such as Germaine Greer, for holding views with which they disagree.
Cowling claims the letter supports the incitement of violence against transgender people. She also made an allegation against him of racism or of using racist language. Tatchell told the Observer that the incident was yet another example of “a witch-hunting, accusatory atmosphere” symptomatic of a decline in “open debate on some university campuses”...
The Observer.
A predictably disingeneous piece about Peter Tatchell.
As the article states this isn't about 'no-platforming', Peter here is just piggy-backing on a current hot topic to serve himself, something he's made an art of for the last 30 years.
Nor, rather obviously, has he been denied of freedom of speech or been censored.
One (1!) student panellist, Fran Cowling, said she wouldn't be attending as she thinks Tatchell's been racist and transphobic.
Perhaps, quite understandably, she just didn't want to be near this awful man?
It's surely more remarkable that other people are still willing to enter into serious discussion with this increasingly silly, erratic and ridiculous self
publicist.
It is predictably hypocritical of Saint Peter to wibble on about free speech when, for example, he has argued for no-platforming of
Islamic 'hate preachers' at the East London Mosque and the
Muslim scholar, Dr Yusuf al-Qaradawi.
He's even had a book withdrawn for commiting the supreme crime;
criticising Peter Tatchell!
He's tried to hound other people out of their jobs.
He supported the prosecution of a Northern Ireland bakers who didn't want to make a cake with a pro-gay marriage message on (until two weeks ago!).
He's even
tried to have music and musicians banned.
Going crying to The Observer to complain about a young female student who'd dared to criticise him seems part of his infamous arrogant and bullying behaviour.
He must have known this would lead to her being harrassed online - presumably this was his intention?
It's hardly the action of some self-proclaimed champion of free speech.
But observers of Peter Tatchell will know all Peter Tatchell is interested in now is Peter Tatchell.
With his tireless and tiresome yet successful campaign of self-promotion in the media, by reducing a movement to himself, it is hard to think of anyone who has done more damage to furthering the cause of gay activism in this country.
Whilst
most many gay men on the left now think he has become a liability, the likes of The Daily Mail declare him a 'national treasure'.
One would hope Peter will apologise for his disgusting behaviour - but when has Mr Vain ever done that before?
In the interests of 'free speech', if nothing else, can this odious mentalist 70s gay dinosaur now shut the fuck up and retire?
•
Help I'm Being Persecuted: Hypocrisy and free speech, Scott Long 2015.
PS The second half of The Observer feature; a potted biography of Tatchell, where Saint Peter is credited for every advance in gay rights over the last 50 years, is so fawning, ridiculous and uncritical it could have been written by him.
Posts
