As someone who has been a member of the program committee for a large tech conference, I can say that in my personal opinion, I'd have very little problem rejecting a talk from someone whose track record clearly demonstrated a style and set of values that significantly diverged from the culture and explicitly stated values of the community I was trying to serve. My job, as a program committee member was to find speakers who could deliver great content in a great way – both matter, both produce value for the conference attendees and organizers.
At a minimum, if the talk proposal was overwhelmingly compelling from a content angle, I'd have little issue with being explicit, up front and individually direct with said person about the expectations for how speakers conduct themselves.
Choosing to reject a talk from someone because of who the presenter is or how they have handled themselves in the past is completely legitimate and it is not "censorship" – a conference is a curated event and someone has the job to make sure the content fits the conference.
If you want a brogrammer conference, go start one, but don't demand that we accept that sort of crap at ours just because you think you're hot shit and can offend anyone you want because "it's funny".
At a minimum, if the talk proposal was overwhelmingly compelling from a content angle, I'd have little issue with being explicit, up front and individually direct with said person about the expectations for how speakers conduct themselves.
Choosing to reject a talk from someone because of who the presenter is or how they have handled themselves in the past is completely legitimate and it is not "censorship" – a conference is a curated event and someone has the job to make sure the content fits the conference.
If you want a brogrammer conference, go start one, but don't demand that we accept that sort of crap at ours just because you think you're hot shit and can offend anyone you want because "it's funny".