PayPal and Etsy ban biologist Colin Wright
twitter.com
twitter.com
It's likely this is retaliation for his efforts in educating people on the importance of biological sex and sex-based rights, in an era where these are increasingly being demolished.
I find it shocking that these tech giants have apparently collaborated to cut off his income streams. I do wonder what is happening behind the scenes to coordinate this attack on him.
so for all I know he hasn't said anything controversial in his profession but been accused of having sex with an intern or shooting a protected royal duck. I don't know. So when I learn his problems I will probably say hah hah, you deserve it, but so far I have been unable to learn his problems.
on edit: ok did the suggested Colin Wright politics search and found out some more things about him, so he's somewhere on the right but still don't know what got him banned. Don't tell me about how the right is persecuted, because nobody is banned just for being on the right. People are banned for specific things or actions that are making waves at the moment.
Thank you! People aren't banned because they align with a particular ideology, its due to actions they take on behalf of their ideology and those actions are usually quite extremist
The graphics on the shirt include male/female gender icons with text "reality's last stand", text saying "thought criminal", and a comic along the lines of "if you yell at me, I'll disagree with you more". -- Those are all fairly inoffensive conservative opinions, or do you think it's reasonable for Etsy to ban him for listing those items?
If there's no indication of other reasons he's getting banned, seems fair to call it a ridiculous banning.
on edit: I guess from what I read there it seems he's saying being male and female are biological categories, but he does not specify what kind of category transexuality would fall under, that is to say from looking at just that page not sure if he has said transexuality does not exist, only that it must be something different than the male and female categories. Which from what he writes seems that he wants these terms to mean 'born with male organs' and 'born with female organs' respectively.
It's the same principle for most gender critical people. In this case, Wright is both a biologist and an atheist, so he's rather predisposed to being sceptical of ideologies that aren't based in material reality, given his background.
Hate speech would be an incitement to violence, or saying awful, dehumanising things about people with a shared group characteristic.
Merely exprsssing a point of view on sex versus gender identity isn't hate speech by any reasonable definition.
And sex is also widely considered a protected characteristic - by the same logic, when trans rights activists assert their belief in the primacy of gender identity over sex, are they also committing an act of hate speech?