3 ms·
Nope, not about fragility at all. It's about creating spaces where a large chunk of people aren't being literally attacked (and told they are better suited to b
by llamataboot 11y ago
Nope, not about fragility at all. It's about creating spaces where a large chunk of people aren't being literally attacked (and told they are better suited to being slaves) by a speaker. What's the problem? Free speech can also mean no speech. I have no problem with people pulling out if they disagree so strongly with the social views of another participant. This isn't the government smashing someone's printing press, this is people voluntarily deciding not to share the stage with someone whose views they abhor.
- Karunamon 11y agopeople aren't being literally attacked (and told they are better suited to being slaves) by a speaker. Was that actually the content of his talk? If so.. okay, this makes perfect sense. If not, it's crap.
- llamataboot 11y agoNope, talk content doesn't matter. If I know you believe that "rape doesn't exist" and you regularly publish about it, but you are giving a talk on 'advanced garbage collection in Ruby", I can still feel totally ostracized from the conference knowing what you've said in other spaces is literally an attack on my safety.
- Karunamon 11y agoA speaker's personal views are not and cannot be an attack on your safety.
- llamataboot 11y agoand here comes the onslaught on downvotes by the anti-PC police. Why do I have a suspicion that EVERY downvote is coming from a white cis male?
- llamataboot 11y agoI don't know what part of "free speech also means no speech" and "voluntarily not speaking has nothing to do with censorship" is a hard argument, even for the most staunch Libertarian.