Question: can someone like Joanna Cherry be “cancelled”? Are her opinions being suppressed when she’s appearing in public all the time talking about her opinions being suppressed? Is she really being silenced when she’s talking so much? Will these questions never end? Who can say.

Ms Cherry herself has been pretty definitive on the matter. As everyone in the world knows by now because there’s been lots of free speech about it, the MP was due to appear at a Fringe event before it was cancelled because staff at The Stand said they were uncomfortable with her views on transgender issues. Ms Cherry said she’d been no-platformed because she’s a lesbian with the gender-critical view that sex is immutable.

The response of those who supported the cancellation was that Ms Cherry hadn’t been no-platformed at all. She has a right to free speech, they said, and has plenty of platforms on which to practise it, but she doesn’t have the right to make other people listen to those views, or help disseminate them.

The problem was that Ms Cherry is a lawyer and knows her stuff and in particular knows that gender-critical views such as hers are protected under the Equality Act, meaning cancelling her event on the basis of such opinions was probably illegal. Once The Stand had spoken to lawyers who agreed with the MP, the club said they’d been guilty of unlawful discrimination, apologised and said the event would now go ahead.

Ms Cherry's response was that she hoped the club’s decision would benefit other people by discouraging similar discrimination in the future, but I’m not so sure. Last year I listened to Ms Cherry give a speech at Holyrood about the SNP’s self-ID law in which she said that when rights conflict, we need to have a civilised discussion about how to rub along. Quite right. But I’m worried the people who need to put in the hard work to make that happen aren’t doing it and we’re taking one step forward and one step back. We’re progressing (maybe) but not very far and not very fast.

Let me give you an example. A couple of weeks ago I was due to attend a screening at Edinburgh University of a film called Adult Human Female. You’ve probably heard about it: it’s the film that explores the gender-critical views of Ms Cherry and others and it’s controversial because some people consider it hateful and transphobic. The first attempted screening of the film last year was cancelled after protests, so I knew things were likely to kick off at the second attempt.

And they did. The doors to the lecture theatre were blocked by activists, faces hidden behind masks and glasses, and at one point an extremely plucky octogenarian called Flora Brodie attempted to storm past the protesters and get into the building. I spoke to Ms Brodie and she was a fine example of the genre of redoubtable Edinburgh lady. “Why is the film hateful?” she told me. “There is nothing hateful about saying that a man has a penis and a woman has ovaries and a womb.”

The problem – and I watched it happen – was that the stewards appeared to be more concerned about the actions of the people who wanted to see the film than the actions of the protesters attempting to shut it down. Several of the stewards blocked Ms Brodie from going any further but did nothing to clear the entrances to the building. Perhaps they were worried about public safety and the possible risk of violence, but if there is such a risk, the university authorities have a duty to face it and put measures in place, with the police if necessary, to ensure that they have control over their own campus.

This is where my point about certain people needing to put in the hard work really kicks in. When some of the staff at The Stand said they weren’t prepared to work on Joanna Cherry’s event, the management should have taken a firm stance right away. The same applies to other venues that have caved in a similar way. Perhaps the staff could have been offered alternative shifts but they certainly should have been told that they cannot dictate who appears in the venue. Ultimately, if they don’t like it, they could leave or be sacked.

I appreciate that this is not an easy thing for management to do, particularly if they’re middle-aged, which they tend to be, and manage a comedy club and want to keep in with the cool views of the younger people who tend to be the ones checking the tickets and pouring the pints during the interval. It’s also easier just to go along with those who kick up a fuss because people think it makes for a quiet life, except that it doesn’t because Joanna Cherry is not the quiet type, thankfully.

So fixing this situation, and ensuring the right to free speech can be freely exercised (even by people whose views you don’t like) is going to require some robustness from the people who run comedy clubs, public venues, lecture theatres and so on, even though managerial robustness is not very fashionable. There is a type of manager – common in comedy clubs and universities I’m sure – that eschews telling people what to do for fear of appearing bossy, dictatorial or – God forbid – conservative, but you know what: they are just going to have to get on with it.

This is especially so at Edinburgh University, and every other university. The women who are trying to stage the screening of Adult Human Female are due to have a meeting with the university management this week but they are not hopeful progress is being made. The management are certainly talking a good game and say they are committed to upholding freedom of expression but we do not even know yet if they are willing to support another screening of the film and if they are, what they will do to ensure it happens.

I suspect, as the managers of The Stand may also do, that the university authorities hope the gender-critical feminists with their pesky films and their pesky opinions will just go away and give them a quiet life.

And in some ways I get that: I would hate to be the one trying to solve this situation because it’s not going to be easy: I spoke to some of the protesters at the aborted screening of Adult Human Female and they’re clearly prepared to do it again.

The thing is though: the people who run our public spaces must meet the protesters’ determination with determination of their own. It’s going to be difficult, and it could get worse, but that’s just how it is sometimes. An easy life isn’t always the best route to the truth. And the right thing to do is often the most difficult.