"In the above post it is mentioned that the Board of Directors from ACA denounced Stephen Woodford for a specific you tube movie.
However that is not quite in their official statement. The statement does not give examples."
Well I think due to the timing and I think there's only one video that could have been the culprit which was this video released recently before his appearance on the atheist experience show:
"What I miss in all of this is some kind of communication from both sides.
Did ACA contact Woodford before making the formal statement?
It doesn't say so in the statement.
It seems to me that this would be a fitting thing to do, just to make sure that he is indeed what they claim him to be. I mean, it is quite something to first invite someone to co-host your show and then denounce him soon after by stating that they would not have invited him in the first place, if they had known his alleged views on transgenders."
That's the issue. They found out about his video but they didn't talk to him, and instead condemned him as a trans-phobic. But he's not even close to that.
That is something that he and you concluded. I can't say one way or another.
"The reaction from the side of Woodford mystifies too.
He goes to youtube to make a reaction movie. Again at no time does he state that he asked the ACA why they denounced him. Would he not want to know what videos and what statements? As he says himself, the only one he can recall is the one video on transgender athletics. And this is what he thinks they are upset about, not what they tell him they are upset about."
Again I think that video due to timing and content is the only video that could've caused the issue.
Yes, as you stated before: you assume so. I cannot say one way or another.
"I find the above reaction from Shane illustrative for the climate.
He finds ACA's reaction absurd and then wishes Matt Dillahunty to leave the Atheist Experience and make his own show.
One absurd reaction is denounced and then another is proposed."
That's not absurd IMO. The ACA is now shutting out all talks about trans people. They don't care about critical thinking and logical discourse they are just behaving like a religion and shutting up any talk that doesn't go with their agenda. They sent me this message: "The ACA has made a decision to be an inclusive organisation. This means that we don’t allow any negativity or marginalisation of already marginalised groups. their feelings of comfort and safety take priority."
I must have missed these arguments in your first post. I think your post came down to two statements that you did not otherwise argue. Which is my point.
"A trans woman is a woman. Contrasting her to a regular woman is contributing to marginalisation and therefore a violation.
Should have said "regular woman" in quotes. Because there's no such thing. As long as you contrast trans women from "regular women", you will not be able to participate in the group."
That's alarming that they're not letting people talk about what they want. But it's not much related to atheism anyway, the real issue is how they shut out the RR guy because he didn't align with their beliefs. And they didn't talk to him. They mistreated him that's the issue
"Do we know what Matt's opinions are? Maybe he agrees with the Board?
Did people consider that Matt was a member of the board himself? Did he check?"
No Matt's not on the board. He clarified that on his fbook page and said he agrees with Rationality Rules video about the ACA denouncing him.
"As a reminder:
I'm not the Atheist Community of Austin (ACA).
I'm not the president, I'm not on the board, I make no decisions, I'm not on the official Facebook page, I'm not a moderator...
I'm a member and a host on our show.
My statements shouldn't ever be construed as representing that organization... and vice versa."
and then he later posted Stephens video and said "Agreed".
Can you provide a link? This would be very helpful when you are arguing a case.
"Or perhaps the Board of Directors of ACA has a very good reason for their denouncement?"
I think it's clear the trans video is the reason for their denouncement. They consider is trans phobic and "marginalizing" to even talk about trans people competing against regular women. If you try to talk about trans women competing against cis women on their fbook page they will block the comment.
"In any event, Woodford himself states that he has reconsidered some of his views"
Yeah but he didn't change any major views, and again, the problem was he simply gave an opinion, but was then inappropriately labelled a transphobe and then shut out. The ACA doesn't want to hear you talk about it at all. Stephen says in his video how he should've been treated and he's right. People should be allowed to give an opinion about trans people. They shouldn't be condemned and labelled a transphobe. That's the type of thinking the ACA is supposed to be against and that's why it's so alarming that they would take that stance.
