10 ms·
Which ideas do they want to censor? Edit: I'm looking for specific examples. Otherwise we are just feigning outrage. I had an ex co-worker who confided in me
by kelukelugames 11y ago
Which ideas do they want to censor?
Edit: I'm looking for specific examples. Otherwise we are just feigning outrage.
I had an ex co-worker who confided in me that he doesn't like gay people. I was very happy that he couldn't say that in public.
- masterleep 11y agoThe no-good verybad wrongthink ideas, of course. What are you, some kind of dissident?
- lexcorvus 11y agoThey want to censor what might be called secular heresy—anything that questions the reigning "mainstream" (progressive) orthodoxy.
- ffn 11y agoWell according to that Vox article about that liberal prof who got censored (and links therein) linked by the parent comment, the following things: 1. works of Edward Said 2. works of Mark Twain 3. works of Upton Sinclar 4. works of Maureen Tkacik 5. Ovid's Metamorphoses 6. The movie Avengers 7. Debates about abortion 8. Some "Afrobeat" band that had too many white people in it 9. Some male professor who was "creepy" at a conference 10. Asking harassment victims for proof And if I recall correctly from pop culture several months back: 11. The comedic act of Jerry Seinfeld 12. The comedic act of Chris Rock
- rthomas6 11y agoHere are some. Note that I do not necessarily believe these ideas, just that they are considered taboo to the point that they cannot be tolerated or seriously discussed in certain circles. * The USA is a moral country. * The USA is morally superior to most/all other countries. * A specific member of an in-power "preferred" group can experience unjustified prejudice, oppression, and bullying from members of an out-of-power group. * Men and women have some neurological differences. * Some cultures are morally superior to other cultures. * Christianity's values are moral. * Conforming gender identities exist for more reasons than culturally enforced gender roles. * Abortion involves the killing of a baby. * Poor whites are not a privileged class.
- dionidium 11y agoThis is a good list, but of course the most incendiary additions would involve race.
- lukeschlather 11y ago> Poor whites are not a privileged class. I just wanted to respond to this because (like a lot of these ideas) I think they represent a response to a strawman. The core point of the discussion of privilege acknowledges that all people have privileges. The question then is defining what they are and how useful they are. When talking about white privilege, the point is that poor whites are better off than poor blacks, just by virtue of being white. The interesting thing here is that there are privileges only afforded to poor blacks. The problem is that the privileges afforded to poor whites are more useful than those afforded to poor blacks.
- dragonwriter 11y ago> When talking about white privilege, the point is that poor whites are better off than poor blacks, just by virtue of being white. Its not clear to me that that that's true; there is complicated intersectionality at play. Poor whites are more likely to have social networks and other advantages that provide things useful to getting out of poverty, and may -- due to racism and the racially unequal distribution of wealth and power -- have better responses from people in power independent of their own social networks. OTOH, they may also be more likely to have social networks that are less understanding of an accepting of poverty. Whether this is a net advantage or net disadvantage varies, among poor whites, considerably from individual to individual. Group privilege exists mostly in terms of average conditions across groups (and may not thus be particularly useful in discussing the positions of individuals.) Taking White privilege as a given (which I think does accurately reflect reality, in terms of on-average advantage), I'm not sure that poor White privilege (compared to, poor non-White ) is valid; its certainly not a necessary corollary of White privilege.
- bratsche 11y ago> I had an ex co-worker who confided in me that he doesn't like gay people. I was very happy that he couldn't say that in public. He can still talk about it when he's around other like-minded people though. By not being able to say it in public, isn't he basically ensuring that he'll never have a conversation with someone with a dissenting opinion and never be forced to think through it? These things just reinforce his attitude probably.
- caseysoftware 11y ago> I had an ex co-worker who confided in me that he doesn't like gay people. I was very happy that he couldn't say that in public. Good call. As long as your opinions remain "acceptable" you have nothing to worry about.
- kelukelugames 11y agoAre you being sarcastic? I'm happy that he's not harassing my other co workers.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- venomsnake 11y agoSaying "I don't like you" is not harassment.
- pasquinelli 11y agoyeah, but if he felt free to say publicly that he didn't like them because they're homosexual, then he might feel free to harass them, as has been the custom.
- kelukelugames 11y agoDoes HN really think telling a person that you don't like them because of orientation/gender/race/religion doesn't contribute to a hostile work environment? That's kind of disturbing.
- repop 11y agoYes, ALL of HN thinks that! What a violent online community!
- kelukelugames 11y agoI'm judging by the number of downvotes my post had. Don't get too excite. Welcome and enjoy your stay. ;)
- repop 11y agoWhy should that idea be censored by an external source? If he really wants to say that, he will pay the societal penalties.
- jonnathanson 11y ago"I had an ex co-worker who confided in me that he doesn't like gay people. I was very happy that he couldn't say that in public." Let's unpack this. Are you happy that homophobia is now socially inappropriate? Or are you happy that it is verboten to reveal or express a homophobic opinion? There is an important distinction to be drawn here. That homophobia is becoming socially backward and marginal is a wonderful thing. That nobody can say something homophobic is not. The way free speech works is, at its most basic: you're allowed to express yourself publicly. The public will then determine how it deals with you. If you say "I don't like gay people" to your co-workers, and your co-workers ostracize you, and/or you are fired for creating a hostile work environment, then you reaped the just results of your decision to speak up. But you should have the freedom to speak up, nevertheless. The choice should be yours. We should also note that prior restraint and group-self-censorship aren't going to change your co-worker's opinions. Whether or not he's too scared to speak his mind, his mind is made up. Deprive him of the chance to engage in any sort of dialogue about his beliefs, and he'll never get the chance to have them challenged, and they'll remain deeply held.
- caskance 11y agoIf you reasonably expect to lose your job for expressing the opinion, you're not free to express that opinion in any meaningful way.