4 ms·
Social science research indicates that it isn't about "hiding" hate directed speech, but rather to consider the impact on the victims of such speech. That is, w
by foolrush 8y ago
Social science research indicates that it isn't about "hiding" hate directed speech, but rather to consider the impact on the victims of such speech. That is, when one is able to say the word "hiding", it is spoken from the position of privilege; it is a very real existential threat to those impacted.
Constricting hate speech has a notable impact on the dignity and well-being of those impacted[1].
[1] EG: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13504630.2015.1128810?src=recsys&journalCode=csid20 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13504630.2015.11...
- wycs 8y agoDo you care at all about free speech? You are willing kill this beautiful freedom we have for that?
- glenda 8y agoFree speech refers to the freedom to not be thrown in jail by the government for things you have said that fall under protected speech. It has nothing to do with being allowed to post anything on any website you’d like.
- hannasanarion 8y agoIf you're yelled at, boycotted, have your show canceled, or get banned from an internet community, your free speech rights aren't being violated. It's just that the people listening think you're an asshole and they're showing you the door.
- wycs 8y agoI guess I am worried that as the societal norm for allowing ideological differences to be expressed degrades that it will leak into politics in the form of hate speech laws. We are starting to have fully private struggle sessions on Twitter, using such tools to sick the mob on opponents. A new sort of bully pulpit. I am not sure any populist politician has quite realized this power. Trump has to an extent but he has no backing from anyone in media, education, or most government employees. Now that Trump has broken so many tacit rules, I fear a charismatic leftist populist would be able to nationalize these private struggle sessions and vastly amplify his or her power. The mob has not been a force in politics for a long time. I fear a resurgence.
- bdcravens 8y agoTwitter, Apple etc are still private enterprises. This very forum exercises its rights every day - whether you call it censorship or moderation depends on your ideology.
- tonysdg 8y agoIf you're going to quote Randall Munroe, at least include a link ;-) https://xkcd.com/1357/ https://xkcd.com/1357/
- foolrush 8y agoI would happily "kill" your idea of "beauty" if it means more people can live the life you are without detrimental effects of hate speech on them, yes. You realize which country has some of the more effective and stringent hate speech laws in the world? If you do, did you stop to ask yourself why?
- pnw_hazor 8y ago#cancelhatespeech
- spamizbad 8y agoI would never support the government throwing Alex Jones in jail espousing his views (Assuming we're not talking about edge cases where freedom of speech does not apply). But I also fully support the property rights of Twitter, Facebook, etc to exercise control over the content of their platforms. You wouldn't permit someone setting up camp on your front lawn, passing out, say, NAMBLA literature would you? It's unlikely you'd say "Sir, I do not like that that you are on my lawn evangelizing man-boy love, but it's your god-given right to do so!" -- you'd probably (rightly say) "Get get the F--- off my lawn!" Your property, your rules.
- wycs 8y agoMy point is Foolrush would.
- foolrush 8y agoIndeed I do support hate speech laws. As does a majority of the rest of the world. There is a correlation between the support of freedom of speech and gender / race, unsurprisingly. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00902.x https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1559-1816....