Richard Dawkins’s Facebook Account Deleted After He Posted that Genetically Male Boxers Should Not Fight Women
Richard Dawkins’s Facebook account has been deleted after he posted that genetically male boxers should not fight women. The famous evolutionary biologist posted on X this morning about the shocking censorship, writing that while no reason was given for the sudden removal of the account, it seems to be linked to a post in which he’d written that “genetically male boxers such as Imane Khalif (XY undisputed) should not fight women in Olympics”. Dawkins’s tweet has so far been viewed over 10 million times.
My entire @facebook account has been deleted, seemingly (no reason given) because I tweeted that genetically male boxers such as Imane Khalif (XY undisputed) should not fight women in Olympics. Of course my opinion is open to civilised argument. But outright censorship?
(Dawkins writes that he “tweeted” the comment, but presumably the post appeared on Facebook if he suspects it as the cause of the deletion.)
Does anything sum up more perfectly the dire state of free speech today than an eminent biologist being kicked off a major social media platform for stating the plain implications of a biological fact?
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The One World Government (incoming) is starting to flex more strongly by the day.
Meanwhile, apparently the *men* who are in charge of the IOC are still wondering how to differentiate between men and women athletes, studiously avoiding the fact there’s existed a sex test for donkey’s years which both of these boxers failed at the World Championships, because they scored Y chromosomes in their results and so were not allowed to compete with women, because they’re bloody males! Jeez, I need a lie down, this is mental…
Oops, I forgot. We’re meant to still be blaming the feminists, NOT the Woketards, for all of this, aren’t we?? LOL
”IOC President Thomas Bach says there is no ‘scientific’ system to identify a woman.
“If somebody is presenting us a scientifically solid system, how to identify man and woman- We are the first ones to do it. We do not like this uncertainty.”
https://x.com/OliLondonTV/status/1821970143037231231
IOC President Thomas Bach says there is no ‘scientific’ system to identify a woman.
This is wonderful in it’s way because what he’s admitting is that he cannot – at least in public – say what his eyes are telling him.
Yep, it’s absolutely ridiculous. This other biologically male boxer is having a whinge but they didn’t even appeal the results, so what does that tell you? Good job the Olympics is ran by outrageous Woketards who’ll let proven males beat women in order to win gold. ”Taiwanese boxer at center of Olympics gender row attacks the International Boxing Association (IBA) claiming the gender test ‘she’ previously failed was ‘false.’ Lin Yu-Ting was found to have biological male XY chromosomes after undergoing two tests in 2023 but has now claimed the results were ‘false’ and that the IBA is “deliberately going after me.” In an interview the boxer has said “After all, we have proven it false (the IBA’s test), and the process didn’t follow any standards, but there was still a fuss.” The comments come after the IBA held a press conference confirming the boxer had failed two gender tests and revealing Yu-Ting did not appeal the results at the time.” https://x.com/OliLondonTV/status/1821843734553636981 You can watch the IBA talking about the results and how both boxers had the right to appeal the decision based on the results within 21 days in this short clip. If sex chromosomes, something which no amount… Read more »
So what the IOC is essentially saying is that men are better at being women than natural born women, shame that women unlike Trans are not a protected group, because then the IOC could be accused of discrimination
Thomas Bach would have trouble working on a farm, considering that understand the sex of your cattle requires the ability to recognize sex.
Let me show him what a woman is since he seems unable to identify one and then we can ask him what his eyes are telling him.
That’s not a bloke
I see your eyes ae working fine.
Saved that picture, thanks Varmint!
In the natural world where I spend much of my time, there is no such dilemma. It is down to who is the mummy and who is the daddy. Sexuality is entirely related to reproduction, you are either the mummy or the daddy or you are a waste of space.
Are there no “Mumady’s” or “Dadum’s” that have little “birl’s” and “goy’s”?
suggestion, female atheletes en masse should rfuse to compete in the Olympics and indeed in any other event that allows the biological male to take precedence just because they call themselves female.Those events do not reperesent sport, they do not represent fairness, call them out for what they are, mens clubs and male sporting events, the only event I can think of where the female has any chance of beating a male is in either equestrian or the female gymnastics events, and isn’t it strange that you don’t see many Trans competing in the latter.
It is not a new issue for the Olympics as they used to put the female athletes on testosterone to gain an advantage. Not to mention the Lance Armstrong blood scam.
I feel v sorry for the genuine athletes.
That is the only action which will stop the nonsense.
All female athletes should refuse to participate. Starve the beast.
”A Marxist system is recognized by the fact that it spares the criminals and criminalizes political opponents.” Solzhenitsyn.
This ‘piece of work’ on Newsnight saying free speech is not an absolute right, trying to justify increased censorship. Well it is the despicable Beeb;
”What we are seeing is precisely why the West was such an anomaly in the history of mankind. Specifically, the reflex to suppress speech with which the rulers/elite disagree is the default reflex, and we are seeing a return to it. The West is facing the classic Herculean fork in the road. Take the easy or hard road in defending free speech.”
https://x.com/GadSaad/status/1822113783231492160
There may not be any universal right to freedom of speech, any more than there is a universal right to wear clothes. But does any person have the right to remove my clothes, or the right to remove my ability to speak freely?
Facebook is exercising a right it does not have. Is there a universal right to censor critics?
With things like facebook and other platforms, it’s a policy you sign up to – it’s buried there somewhere in the small print. But nowhere does it explicitly state what opinions are in line with it’s community guidelines and what kinds of opinions are violations.
Of course, the claim of there being “community standards” is utterly bogus, but the interesting thing is that the views/facts being censored are invariably those disliked by the Western Globalist Establishment.
Facebook really is the most ridiculous corporation on the planet. I think a lot of us are in the same boat: I was cancelled off the platform about 4 years ago, after a period of 6 months of facebook silence! I had “violated community guidelines” apparently (no other reason given and appeal turned down without explanation).
So what happened then, did some algorithm retroactively pick up on something I’d said six months ago? Or is posting nothing on facebook a violation of community guidelines? I guess I’ll never know because it turns out the only way to contact a human being at facebook is to mail or phone their US headquarters! Other than that, all you can do is send a report that then gets buried, or look up their “Help Centre”, which only deals with generic enquiries. (There’s not even email!)
As for Dawkins, I actually disagree with about half of what he says (the current example being an exception)… But if he can’t publicize his opinion, then I can’t disagree with it!
Facebook is a creation of the US Federal Government, and provides said government with censorship and surveillance services. Thus Facebook is an interesting example of the contemporary merging of the state and the “private” corporations. As this is a system pioneered by Mussolini, Facebook, and the US Government, are in their essentials, fascist.
Facebook coerced by threats of anti-trust law suits?
Just unbelievable!
I don’t have a problem with Facebook kicking off someone whose opinions they don’t like.
It’s a private company and they can have whoever they want. Facebook is crap anyway.
The problem is when saying things becomes a crime and people get arrested for it. That’s a big problem. Much bigger than getting your Gacebook account closed.
And the other big problem (not as big but still very serious) is when companies collude.to create a cartel to economically harm people for their opinions. Cartels are.illegal for a good reason. They aim to monopolise markets.
But as long as there is a free market for media free.of collusion, let Facebook cancel people they don’t like. Other platforms will benefit from It.
As I say, Facebook is a bunch of crap anyway and best ignored altogether.
A Facebook friend of mine – whom I know in real life – who had an abortion about 15 years ago – is now claiming that she is a man!
Are you sure she/he/it wasn’t previously a man claiming to be a woman?
Confused?
Well someone sure is!
I trust he has a backup copy?
No? Dumb.
I don’t think women should be boxing full stop. A society which thinks this is entertaining to watch is sick. Everyone knows it’s unnatural, but regrettably that’s largely why people find it so entertaining.
I regret to say Dawkins is discovering where his own atheistic world-view ultimately leads: a revolt against the created order itself, and increasing totalitarianism.
Women are as entitled to box as they are to wrestle or do any of the martial arts, or any other contact sport I might have missed. As long as there’s enough women who wish to compete in these sports professionally and there’s enough people who want to watch them do it then what is there to object about? I personally find the shooting and archery boring as anything but nobody’s forcing me to watch these events, plus there seems an awful lot of supporters watching them and many competitors, so it boils down to ”horses for courses” at the end of the day, but to say somebody shouldn’t do something based purely on their gender is archaic. Is men’s boxing necessarily more ”entertaining” and less ”sick”, or is it just more socially acceptable watching men batter each other until they’re all fat lips, bleeding misshapen heads, with an underlying brain injury?
A stupid sport on all levels!
I agree. I’ve never seen the attraction in watching men beat the living daylights out of each other, personally. But look how popular it is and how much money is involved. Certainly men’s boxing is never going away. However, I’m now wondering how much of a hit ( pardon the pun ) women’s boxing will take, if any, now that we’ve seen two biological men win with ease at the Olympics, beating the rightful winners in the female category. Will women still be so keen to box if they see who they’re going to be up against continually? Will spectators continue to want to watch men parodying women ( got the test results to prove it ) in order to rob them of their rightful achievements? Women’s Olympic sporting ambitions are being trampled on, rightful winnings and medals fraudulently taken from their grasp and certain sporting bodies ( thankfully not the IBA ) are enabling this to happen, all because they’re afraid to be seen as ‘un-PC’, or ‘non-inclusive’. It’s both a safety and an ethics issue. So maybe we’ll see women’s boxing go down in popularity as a result of this Olympic fiasco. Meanwhile, just one of many articles… Read more »
Why should it’s entertainment value be justification or otherwise of women’s boxing as a part of professional sport? If women want to compete against other women, and the public want to watch that, what’s the problem? I agree wholeheartedly that biological males should NEVER be allowed to compete against females in any sport and especially boxing. But I would like to know: What do you mean when you claim Dawkin’s worldview leads to a revolt against the created order? Surely, if the created order is characterised by a marked distinction between male and female, then Dawkins is an outspoken proponent of this order, and not a stalwart of the revolt against it. Furthermore, I don’t think it’s his atheistic worldview that naturally leads to totalitarianism. Totalitarianism on both the left and right, is borne of a desire to control populations, regardless of religious persuasion or atheism.
Never saw this coming. Seems the women’s boxing should be renamed ‘mixed’ boxing;
”RETWEET! The IOC has failed women
A SECOND male boxer is now a female Olympic champion.
Lang Yu-ting (XY) beats Julia Szeremeta (XX)
Male power smashes female talent AGAIN”
https://x.com/fairplaywomen/status/1822359165634785558
LibDems must be proud about the millions in salary their former leader has earned for assisting Facebook.
He was deputy PM when the Cameron-Clegg scheme called The Nudge Unit was announced. It is nothing but state propaganda in favour of the elites.
Getting banned by the appalling hypocrite Zuckerberg (“Embrace net zero, everyone, as soon as I’ve taken delivery of my brand new diesel superyacht”) is a badge of honour, Prof. Dawkins
Let Elon do the dirty work for you, he’ll push back against the woke creep
Je später der Abend desto liebe die Gäste. Notwithstanding, welcome to the club.
Great news. The more prominent people cancelled the more others might start waking up to the problem.
Whilst we can see the visible front it is not clear who is really behind the woke revolution and why.
The sooner everyone with a brain boycotts facebook, the better. It does not serve a purpose unless you want to know what you best friend had for lunch yesterday.
Anyone who uses Facebook are supporters of their own shackles, Facebook owes allegience to its masters in Governments and the WEF, if you continue to use Facebook you are complicit in censorship, all that is needed is enough people to abandon the thing and Zuckerberg would fold.
Dawkins has more wisdom, wit and expertise than a hundred Zuckerbergs.
Used to think the world of Dawkins, then not so much, now a bit more. Sorry to be so fickle, Prof.
Anyone with un-woke views should close down their Facebook account. Starve the beast and…. leave it in an echo-chamber of left-wing nonsense.
The battle cry of the non elites should be ” it’s a bloke love”. That will bring down social media quicker then 2tier
GB should refuse to fund through any Government or Lottery funding, any sport which does not carry out sex testing, and lobby other countries to do the same. Tough on some potential competitors I know, but would put pressure on the IOC to realise “inclusivity” has its limits.