This is a men's rights issue for obvious reasons. MRA's like Warren Farrell and Paul Nathanson, dissident feminists like Christina Hoff Sommers and student groups attempting to screen The Red Pill have all been subject to attempts at "no-platforming" and sometimes outright harassment and abuse.

A new study reveals that A fifth of undergrads now say it’s acceptable to use physical force to silence a speaker who makes “offensive and hurtful statements.”

Financial support for the study was provided by the far right Koch foundation, which will no doubt draw into question its veracity. However according to the Washington Post the Koch brothers "had no involvement in designing, administering or analyzing the questionnaire."

Moreoever, according to the same author the problem is also present on the right.

Conservative students have objected to classroom discussions of religious beliefs, as well as exposure to sexual or homosexual content. One educator said complaints about the moral propriety of nude models in a studio art class led administrators first to offer trigger warnings and ultimately to stop using nude models altogether.

In another high-profile example, religious students at Duke boycotted the assigned summer reading, “Fun Home,” because the graphic novel depicted nudity and homosexuality.

Such cases, by the way, jibe with other survey data showing that young people are supportive of stifling speech offensive to targets on both the left and right. A recent Pew Research Center survey found that 40 percent of millennials believe the government “should be able to prevent people from saying . . . statements that are offensive to minority groups.” A third of millennials also say the government should be able to prevent speech “offensive to your religion or beliefs.”

While there "were no statistically significant differences in response to this question based on political affiliation", there was a significant gender difference.

Women are more likely than men to believe hate speech is not constitutionally protected (49 percent vs. 38 percent, respectively).

This confirms my suspicion that the American left's historical championing of free speech has been fundamentally undermined by the feminist movement. The same is presumably true in other Western countries. Rather than viewing everything solely through the lens of left vs right, we should also be analyzing these issue according to authoritarian/anti-authoritarianism and even (controversially) by gender.

Edit: there are some other interesting outcomes in the study:

Democrats were significantly more likely to believe that "shouting over" a speaker was acceptable; there was no significant difference between Democrats and Republicans on whether violence was acceptable in shutting down speech; and women were less likely to view violence as acceptable for same (however, the whole idea of "no-platforming" seems to have come mostly from the feminist "intersectionality" movement.)

The biggest divide seems to be a generational one. And for the millenials reading this: yes, I recognize that the the majority of you guys still support free speech. That's important to stress.