Response To Comment On Censorship

Yesterday I wrote a post asking if certain writers were being censored and stated that censorship  “is more in keeping with Hitlers Nazi Germany than the modern day western world.”

I received a few negative comments on Twitter about using that analogy and this morning I found a lengthy comment on the original article that I believe deserves the right of a full and respectful reply.  You can check out the article and the comment by “R” here if you want to add some context.  Of course I could just have trash canned the comment but I don’t believe in censorship of any form

“R” argues that my comment comparing censorship to Nazi Germany is offensive and irrelevant in this context.  In response to this I would ask “R” to consider Gordon Allport’s work.


The fact is that the writers I mentioned have already been raised to level 2 on Allport’s scale.  Both of the writers and myself have been subjected to verbal attacks, accused of being conspiracy theorists etc etc.  In fact in his or her reply “R” gives a perfect example when they say in the last sentence “You’re just facing the consequences of sloppy, clickbait, agenda driven writing.”  A comment aimed at being spiteful, demeaning and which invites people to ignore our writing because they don’t like it.

It is fact that in any arena, from the school playground to single party dictatorships, creating negative myths and bad-mouthing people is the first in a series of steps designed to silence them.  I would suggest that “R” reaches for the history books to enlighten themselves about how the Nazi’s used these tactics to legitimise themselves long before the war started.

If you don’t believe that this happens in the modern world you might care to check out this article.

Interestingly “R” then confirms what I suspected.  They openly admit that fans have taken action to close down both Aaron Butterfield and Sex at Oxbridge.

In the latter case by reporting content to Buzzfeed as inappropriate content because they don’t agree with their viewpoint.  In Aaron’s case the attack was even more insidious.  he was attacked through Attitude magazine.  His original article wasn’t even on that platform.  “R” clearly states that there was an organised conspiracy to shut Aaron down by One Direction fans who disagreed with what he said.

“R” then goes on to say “Larries like to say they are the biggest force in the fandom, but they’re just often the loudest. Many of us tolerate/ignore them because as long as they aren’t harassing people, why not let them do their thing?” There we go, back to anti -locution on Allport’s scale.

In another comment “R” uses a comment that I believe is aimed squarely at me.  “All you’re doing is reposting fanfiction and participating in the bullying a week old infant and his mother.”  A perfect example of someone speaking up thinking they have all the answers but without checking facts.

Let me state a few for you.  I have never once stated in my paid writing that “Larry is real” nor have I ever said that I don’t believe the baby is real nor have I ever said that I don’t think Louis is the father.  I have however written extensively on the doubts that people have about the whole thing.  I have said here, on my own blog that I think Louis may be gay and Harry Bi.  That is a personal view, not something I have written about in my pad work.

What I find really disturbing about “R”‘s comment is the open admission that they believe it is perfectly acceptable to attack and shut down those with whom they disagree.  They do so under the guise of saying “Y’all aren’t being censored. You’re just facing the consequences of sloppy, clickbait, agenda driven writing. Do better.”

Well I don’t know about you but that sounds like censorship to me.

“Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication or other information which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions.”

There my friends I rest my case.

6 thoughts on “Response To Comment On Censorship

  1. dontasktofly

    When I read “R”’s comment there were two main things that really hit me hard.

    The first one was reading about how the content that was taken down might have simply been offensive to some so it had to be deleted. Because my first thought was “Well.. That actually makes sense, we don’t want to make anyone uncomfortable.”
    But as soon as I realised what I was thinking I was kind of shocked at myself.
    No, of course we don’t want to hurt anyone. Matter of fact, we’re doing this for the sole reason that we want two men and the people who support them to be free and happy, no matter in which way.
    But why was my initial reaction to see the fault in us/you/myself for maybe having offended someone by stating facts and theories based on those facts? I read all the recent articles, just like most of us did, and I don’t recall anyone saying anything that was meant to be offensive. It was simply suggested that maybe the truth isn’t always as obvious as some might think.
    So why was my first instinct to apologise for having an opinion that matches that of someone I completely support?
    It is definitely scary how groups of people can be trained to feel guilty and like they have to defend themselves for their opinion, even though they are far from doubting it. That just messes with my head a bit.

    The second thing that bothered me was “R” using the phrase “edgy citizens journalism”. Now I am not even sure I would take that as something offensive in any other context. Actually, I don’t think I found it all that bad here either.
    I can imagine “R” spitting it out like it is meant to hurt someone’s feelings but really? It sounds more like they’re judging someone for not being afraid to use their brain. Which I obviously do not see as a bad thing at all.
    The words here were probably meant to drip with sarcasm but in all honesty, I think they could’ve been chosen more fittingly to get that point across.
    Truth is, we kind of are a bit of an edgy group voicing our edgy opinions.
    But I genuinely can’t find anything to be wrong with questioning the public opinion, about digging a bit deeper when you find something that apparently doesn’t add up.


    1. The Sound of Summer Post author

      Hi, thanks for sharing your thoughts.

      The reality is that we are conditioned from birth to believe what the powerful tell us. The education system, the media etc teaches us to become wage slaves and to live a life based on consumption and the acquisition of “stuff”.

      In short we must accept the status quo. The powerful fear independent thought


  2. Patty. (@phouse1964)

    It frightens me that people don’t know that history repeats itself. You start with segmenting the population and shutting down their voices one by one. Oh sure, it’s only the 1D fandom. But think about those millions of fans -MILLIONS-that they are trolling into believing they have no voice and nothing they do will make a difference. So they all sit down and shut up. And when something really horrific happens, they don’t speak. Because 1) nobody will believe them and 2) one person can’t do anything.

    Do I think R has a right to speak, Sure. Do I think those of us that are fighting for the truth (no matter what the trust is) have a right to be heard? Absolutely. It’s important to fight for what you believe in. But maybe some of these people need to study a little history. It wasn’t all that long ago that people actually died fighting for the truth. Hell, they are STILL dying to get people to see the truth.



Sing out here if you want to be heard!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s