3 ms·

I don't think that child pornography falls under speech at all, and I don't see the connection. Child pornography sole purpose is to serve prurient interests.

I don't think that child pornography falls under speech at all, and I don't see the connection. Child pornography sole purpose is to serve prurient interests. Sorry I don't mean to say that speech should be a free for all, threats will not be tolerated, nor would harassment, but we already have longstanding laws and procedures to deal with those things, they are nothing new. "it's pretty clear which voices get silenced. Which voices have been silenced for decades and decades" I don't think it's clear at all, nobody is currently being silenced, however I can see the pattern of existing laws and policies around harassment and threats being misused to silence political opponents. This is a very bad development, and mostly recent phenomenon. I think as far as thats concerned we have crossed the rubicon so to speak, and the polarization will only accelerate. "So in practice, somebody will always be silenced on some topics." I don't agree. Even child pornography can be discussed however children have no agency and can't consent to their images being used in such a way. So it can never be legalized. There are many subjects that cannot be discussed (racial issues, social issues) that are considered by the left to be unmentionable even though points expressed are perfectly respectful and salient.

wpietri 8y ago
You should read a little more history. The US has a long track record of violence, threat of violence, and social power being used to suppress women and black people, for example. The #MeToo campaign happened recently not because women weren't being sexually exploited in the past, but because their power has finally grown enough that some of them can start to speak with less fear of consequence. Studies show that this power imbalance continues online. Accounts with female and/or black get a lot more crap. Crap that acts to suppress not just the people receiving it, but anybody who sees it happen and thinks they might become a target of it. So if you're running a platform, you have a pretty clear choice. Somebody's getting silenced. The question is whether you let the people who want to silence others run rampant, or whether you protect the voices they're trying to suppress. And I'd add that the left talks about racial and social issues quite a bit, so I think your characterization there is at best misleading.

wpietri 8y ago

You should read a little more history. The US has a long track record of violence, threat of violence, and social power being used to suppress women and black people, for example. The #MeToo campaign happened recently not because women weren't being sexually exploited in the past, but because their power has finally grown enough that some of them can start to speak with less fear of consequence. Studies show that this power imbalance continues online. Accounts with female and/or black get a lot more crap. Crap that acts to suppress not just the people receiving it, but anybody who sees it happen and thinks they might become a target of it. So if you're running a platform, you have a pretty clear choice. Somebody's getting silenced. The question is whether you let the people who want to silence others run rampant, or whether you protect the voices they're trying to suppress. And I'd add that the left talks about racial and social issues quite a bit, so I think your characterization there is at best misleading.