Comments Elsewhere

«While Reason tabled there, they were also supposed to have a panel. It was approved, but a week before YALcon, it became unapproved. Why would that happen? It turns out the subject matter was too triggering for the organization. What was so risky a topic that YAL had to censor it? Feminism. . . . According to YAL, they deemed this to be too “divisive” and controversial. They offered the panel the timeslot again only if they altered the description and event so that the word “feminism” was avoided, but Reason turned down that feeble attempt at compromise. » Note that when a male, conservative speaker gets up to the podium, he is *advertised* for his offensiveness. (“If he doesn’t offend you,” they said, “then he didn’t do his job.”) When a group of female libertarian activists and writers propose a panel on the history of libertarian feminism, this is too “divisive” for the word even to be spoken aloud. I. . . I wonder what could explain the difference in treatment? What could it possibly be?