Reposted by DippingSauce
DippingSauce
@racecaryeen.bsky.social
130 followers 351 following 81 posts
Moderate Yeen Enthousiast. Rally simmer of the non-crashy sort. Closing in on two decadss of simracing. National Rental Kart champ, Rental Karting Endurance World finalist. World champion in stinky
![Chalkboard sandwich board sign that says:
Another weekend.
Another iced hibiscus tea
[drawing of a fox man lying on his stomach holding an iced drink]
With my beautiful fox boyfriend
God I love him.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:5ylgu6bytpxjdm2s2zavgrcv/bafkreihymayoamq54henpuckm2kbqstf62nj4p4av6g75naljuokjq4qja)
![For years, Sex Matters has portrayed itself as a victim of censorship. According to its public messaging,
gender-critical voices are supposedly excluded from civil society, silenced by institutions, shut out of
debate and denied freedom of expression. Every disagreement is framed as an existential attack on free
speech.
Yet the moment a major human rights ('non-anti-rights') organisation publishes research that is critical of
them, their response is not to publish a rebuttal, commission alternative research, or engage with
Amnesty's arguments. Instead, they boast that they were prepared to sue Amnesty International for
defamation.
The irony is difficult to ignore.
This letter repeatedly invokes freedom of expression, dialogue and human rights. It speaks of "constructive
dialogue", complains that Amnesty failed to engage with them, and insists that differing views should be
respected. Yet the same letter proudly declares that had Amnesty not withdrawn its report, Sex Matters
intended to drag one of the world's best-known human rights organisations into court.
Apparently, freedom of expression is a universal principle right up until somebody expresses an opinion
they don't like.
This has become a familiar pattern. When gender-critical organisations are criticised, they frequently
respond by claiming persecution. They argue that disagreement amounts to censorship, that criticism
amounts to discrimination, and that being called out for their campaigning somehow infringes their human
rights. But criticism is not censorship. Being challenged is not being silenced. And having your views
scrutinised is not an attack on free speech.
Freedom of expression cuts both ways. If Sex Matters believes it has the right to publish reports, lobby
government, intervene in court cases, criticise public bodies and campaign against the rights of
transgender people, then Amnesty International has the same right to analyse those activities and reach
conclusions that Sex Matters dislikes[...]](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:njup4kv6td4bzhh6g64faacb/bafkreidy7kpyusod2zfw5swnir4kknhavqcx7vgqkfzuhddyxhik3fwv4a)
