Inspired by this bizarre period of post-war public house architecture I have put together a map of flat-roofed pubs in Edinburgh. There are some rules in the description that will explain why some candidates are on the exclusion list. www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/e...
Edinburgh Flat-roofed Pubs - Google My Maps
A map of post-WW2, purpose-built flat-roofed pubs in Edinburgh. The rules are: 1. Must be flat-roofed (pitched porticos etc. will be tolerated). I understand that this will exclude The Gauntlet. 2. Mu...
google.com
Andy Arthur💃🏰⚓🦌 Threadinburgh 🧵@threadinburgh.scot · 2w agoThe one nearest me actually did have a murder quite recently so instead here is the Willie Muir in West Granton mysteriously burning down in 1998. Reputedly had Scotland's first Karaoke night
![For years, Sex Matters has portrayed itself as a victim of censorship. According to its public messaging,
gender-critical voices are supposedly excluded from civil society, silenced by institutions, shut out of
debate and denied freedom of expression. Every disagreement is framed as an existential attack on free
speech.
Yet the moment a major human rights ('non-anti-rights') organisation publishes research that is critical of
them, their response is not to publish a rebuttal, commission alternative research, or engage with
Amnesty's arguments. Instead, they boast that they were prepared to sue Amnesty International for
defamation.
The irony is difficult to ignore.
This letter repeatedly invokes freedom of expression, dialogue and human rights. It speaks of "constructive
dialogue", complains that Amnesty failed to engage with them, and insists that differing views should be
respected. Yet the same letter proudly declares that had Amnesty not withdrawn its report, Sex Matters
intended to drag one of the world's best-known human rights organisations into court.
Apparently, freedom of expression is a universal principle right up until somebody expresses an opinion
they don't like.
This has become a familiar pattern. When gender-critical organisations are criticised, they frequently
respond by claiming persecution. They argue that disagreement amounts to censorship, that criticism
amounts to discrimination, and that being called out for their campaigning somehow infringes their human
rights. But criticism is not censorship. Being challenged is not being silenced. And having your views
scrutinised is not an attack on free speech.
Freedom of expression cuts both ways. If Sex Matters believes it has the right to publish reports, lobby
government, intervene in court cases, criticise public bodies and campaign against the rights of
transgender people, then Amnesty International has the same right to analyse those activities and reach
conclusions that Sex Matters dislikes[...]](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:njup4kv6td4bzhh6g64faacb/bafkreidy7kpyusod2zfw5swnir4kknhavqcx7vgqkfzuhddyxhik3fwv4a)
