6 ms·

I'm afraid people now see it as an antiquated and outmoded perspective on free speech. His attitude was embraced by progressive people of the late 20th century

I'm afraid people now see it as an antiquated and outmoded perspective on free speech. His attitude was embraced by progressive people of the late 20th century. That said, he too had to own his own platform in order to exercise his rights.

krapp 6y ago
Given how much porn there is on the internet I don't think that many people have an issue with the Larry Flynts of the world.
- mbg721 6y ago
  Not anymore, but it was a huge deal a few decades ago. Not that porn was ever lacking an audience, but openly accepting it as okay for polite society was a much less popular opinion in the 80s than it is now.
- kenneth 6y ago
  Today the thought people can't bear is no longer porn, it's anything remotely not woke. It's any opinion that even slightly diverges from their own.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - camjohnson26 6y ago
    I’m not sure a minimum wage is a good idea.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - camjohnson26 6y ago
    I don’t think Trump is a racist.
    - mariuolo 6y ago
      A nice experiment:)
      - aikinai 6y ago
        Not really. Downvotes are specifically intended for comments that don't contribute to the discussion, so downvoting these wouldn't indicate disagreement or censorship.
        malandrew 6y ago
        I felt like it contributed as it demonstrated the intended thought in a self-referential way.
        Const-me 6y ago
        Doesn't matter what they are intended for. What matters is reality. Based on my observations, quite a few people on this web site use downvotes to indicate disagreement or dislike. Many of them appear to hate Trump.
  - stonogo 6y ago
    So we keep hearing, ad infinitum, on every single platform open to public comment. It's amusing.
    - igorkraw 6y ago
      While shutting down any idea that is not 100% aligned in their own platforms. But it's okay, I believe safe spaces are important
  - igorkraw 6y ago
    You know there's a difference between Larry flint not being legally allowed to peddle smut, do satire etc. and people telling you they don't like your opinion and not giving you a platform, organising boycotts etc? Also, I assume you are completely offended by fox news,OANN etc. lack of progressive voices? I agree, conservative media should open themselves up to platform more leftwing ideas in order to ensure diversity of thought. Similarly to the conservative subreddit, which is enforcing its groupthink the same way the literal communist subreddit is.
  - viraptor 6y ago
    This is demonstrably not true - have you been on Twitter? You'll find every extreme represented there. Including accounts/messages not globally removed but marked "illegal in Germany".
    - pjmlp 6y ago
      We don't have any issue with pornography though, just with people that pretend the holocaust are a pile of lies that never happened.
- bdcravens 6y ago
  Larry Flynt was someone pushing the boundaries of his day, even in the world of pornography (Hustler was more explicit than Playboy, for example). Today's random pornographer is not a "Larry Flynt". Flynt is more akin to Snowden or Assange, or even Parler, in boldness. (not comparing content, just free speech boldness)
  - tinalumfoil 6y ago
    To say Larry Flynt was politically correct by today's standards is completely false. Just look at Wikipedia. He called Sandra Day O'Connor "a token cunt". He wore the American flag as a diaper. Hustler regularly published Chester the Molester, a comic strip, even after the author was convicted of molestation (which later got overturned).
    - bdcravens 6y ago
      Definitely - not sure if you're responding to me with intention of suggesting it, but I definitely didn't say he was politically correct. My father had a collection of Hustler from the 70s and 80s that as a teen in the early 90s I sneakily perused; this was definitely the golden age of the magazine's anti-PC speech, with all you mentioned, as well as unveiled racism.
      - tinalumfoil 6y ago
        I guess I was reading too much into the "in his day" part. My point was that the world hasn't gotten less sensitive to his attitude and speech. It might have even gotten more sensitive.
        bdcravens 6y ago
        Yes, I was responding to a comment implying his pornography would be considered tame by today's standards (which it would, but you must consider the context of the time). I agree that his non-pornographic content would be viewed with a very sensitive eye today.
eyelidlessness 6y ago
I don’t understand what’s wrong with owning your platform to exercise your speech rights. You still have a public square. It’s as free as it’s been since Flynt was a prominent figure. (I’m happy to talk about how unfree it can be from experience, but it hasn’t gotten worse especially for the people most up in arms about platform access.) Instead of being constantly on the defense here... Why do you think you have a right to someone else’s resources for your speech? What entitles you to be published by anyone else at all?
- ThrowawayR2 6y ago
  > "I don’t understand what’s wrong with owning your platform to exercise your speech rights." MLK and the civil rights movement didn't own their own platform. The LGBT rights movement didn't own their own platform. The women's rights movement didn't own their own platform. Would you have been okay with them being swept under the rug? It's not as if people in power didn't want to.
  - AdamJacobMuller 6y ago
    The bigger problem is "define platform" Don't like twitter censorship, make your own twitter. Ergo, Parler. Oh, but, that's not "your" platform, that's built on AWS's platform. So AWS can deplatform you. What's next, if Parler sets up in a datacenter with their own physical servers are people going to attack their colocation/transit/peers or their DNS provider or their domain registrar or their SSL certificate issuer? Is LetsEncrypt a platform? The biggest issue IMO is that with this you're centralizing all the idiotic and dangerous opinions and putting them in a huge echo chamber where they only ever see (mostly stupid) opinions of people they agree with. It's accomplishing the some of the goal the de-platformers want (they don't want to see the dumb content) but the content is still there, just more fringe and more radical and now they can rightfully complain about suppression of their opinions.
    - ALittleLight 6y ago
      Oh, your phone app is banned? Just make your own phone, hardware and software.
CerealFounder 6y ago
Your comment is confusing. Flynt fought the government, people who are complaining about cancel culture are complaining about people not liking their spicy takes.
- lightgreen 6y ago
  > people who are complaining about cancel culture are complaining about people not liking their spicy takes This is oversimplification. There’s quite a difference between “not liking” and ruining career, denial of access to services etc. Part of the problem is that only small group of people really “don’t like it” but capable of cancelling, and vast majority of people are happy to just ban that person in their feed and go on with their life (and large number of people are actually open to opposing views).
- postalrat 6y ago
  How cute and simplistic.
david38 6y ago
Indeed. It’s now been reframed as “freedom from government prosecution”, not from organized canceling.
- mywittyname 6y ago
  It's always been "freedom from government prosecution." Flynt faced "organized canceling" from many groups. They just couldn't (continue to) use their influence in the government to punish him. He's in a wheelchair because of a failed "permanent cancellation" attempt. Also, Democrats of the era didn't much liked him either. Could you imagine 90s-era Hillary Clinton ranting against language in rap music while simultaneously supporting this guy?

krapp 6y ago

Given how much porn there is on the internet I don't think that many people have an issue with the Larry Flynts of the world.

mbg721 6y ago
Not anymore, but it was a huge deal a few decades ago. Not that porn was ever lacking an audience, but openly accepting it as okay for polite society was a much less popular opinion in the 80s than it is now.
kenneth 6y ago
Today the thought people can't bear is no longer porn, it's anything remotely not woke. It's any opinion that even slightly diverges from their own.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- camjohnson26 6y ago
  I’m not sure a minimum wage is a good idea.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- camjohnson26 6y ago
  I don’t think Trump is a racist.
  - mariuolo 6y ago
    A nice experiment:)
    - aikinai 6y ago
      Not really. Downvotes are specifically intended for comments that don't contribute to the discussion, so downvoting these wouldn't indicate disagreement or censorship.
      - malandrew 6y ago
        I felt like it contributed as it demonstrated the intended thought in a self-referential way.
      - Const-me 6y ago
        Doesn't matter what they are intended for. What matters is reality. Based on my observations, quite a few people on this web site use downvotes to indicate disagreement or dislike. Many of them appear to hate Trump.
- stonogo 6y ago
  So we keep hearing, ad infinitum, on every single platform open to public comment. It's amusing.
  - igorkraw 6y ago
    While shutting down any idea that is not 100% aligned in their own platforms. But it's okay, I believe safe spaces are important
- igorkraw 6y ago
  You know there's a difference between Larry flint not being legally allowed to peddle smut, do satire etc. and people telling you they don't like your opinion and not giving you a platform, organising boycotts etc? Also, I assume you are completely offended by fox news,OANN etc. lack of progressive voices? I agree, conservative media should open themselves up to platform more leftwing ideas in order to ensure diversity of thought. Similarly to the conservative subreddit, which is enforcing its groupthink the same way the literal communist subreddit is.
- viraptor 6y ago
  This is demonstrably not true - have you been on Twitter? You'll find every extreme represented there. Including accounts/messages not globally removed but marked "illegal in Germany".
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    We don't have any issue with pornography though, just with people that pretend the holocaust are a pile of lies that never happened.
bdcravens 6y ago
Larry Flynt was someone pushing the boundaries of his day, even in the world of pornography (Hustler was more explicit than Playboy, for example). Today's random pornographer is not a "Larry Flynt". Flynt is more akin to Snowden or Assange, or even Parler, in boldness. (not comparing content, just free speech boldness)
- tinalumfoil 6y ago
  To say Larry Flynt was politically correct by today's standards is completely false. Just look at Wikipedia. He called Sandra Day O'Connor "a token cunt". He wore the American flag as a diaper. Hustler regularly published Chester the Molester, a comic strip, even after the author was convicted of molestation (which later got overturned).
  - bdcravens 6y ago
    Definitely - not sure if you're responding to me with intention of suggesting it, but I definitely didn't say he was politically correct. My father had a collection of Hustler from the 70s and 80s that as a teen in the early 90s I sneakily perused; this was definitely the golden age of the magazine's anti-PC speech, with all you mentioned, as well as unveiled racism.
    - tinalumfoil 6y ago
      I guess I was reading too much into the "in his day" part. My point was that the world hasn't gotten less sensitive to his attitude and speech. It might have even gotten more sensitive.
      - bdcravens 6y ago
        Yes, I was responding to a comment implying his pornography would be considered tame by today's standards (which it would, but you must consider the context of the time). I agree that his non-pornographic content would be viewed with a very sensitive eye today.

eyelidlessness 6y ago

I don’t understand what’s wrong with owning your platform to exercise your speech rights. You still have a public square. It’s as free as it’s been since Flynt was a prominent figure. (I’m happy to talk about how unfree it can be from experience, but it hasn’t gotten worse especially for the people most up in arms about platform access.) Instead of being constantly on the defense here... Why do you think you have a right to someone else’s resources for your speech? What entitles you to be published by anyone else at all?

ThrowawayR2 6y ago
> "I don’t understand what’s wrong with owning your platform to exercise your speech rights." MLK and the civil rights movement didn't own their own platform. The LGBT rights movement didn't own their own platform. The women's rights movement didn't own their own platform. Would you have been okay with them being swept under the rug? It's not as if people in power didn't want to.
- AdamJacobMuller 6y ago
  The bigger problem is "define platform" Don't like twitter censorship, make your own twitter. Ergo, Parler. Oh, but, that's not "your" platform, that's built on AWS's platform. So AWS can deplatform you. What's next, if Parler sets up in a datacenter with their own physical servers are people going to attack their colocation/transit/peers or their DNS provider or their domain registrar or their SSL certificate issuer? Is LetsEncrypt a platform? The biggest issue IMO is that with this you're centralizing all the idiotic and dangerous opinions and putting them in a huge echo chamber where they only ever see (mostly stupid) opinions of people they agree with. It's accomplishing the some of the goal the de-platformers want (they don't want to see the dumb content) but the content is still there, just more fringe and more radical and now they can rightfully complain about suppression of their opinions.
  - ALittleLight 6y ago
    Oh, your phone app is banned? Just make your own phone, hardware and software.

CerealFounder 6y ago

Your comment is confusing. Flynt fought the government, people who are complaining about cancel culture are complaining about people not liking their spicy takes.

lightgreen 6y ago
> people who are complaining about cancel culture are complaining about people not liking their spicy takes This is oversimplification. There’s quite a difference between “not liking” and ruining career, denial of access to services etc. Part of the problem is that only small group of people really “don’t like it” but capable of cancelling, and vast majority of people are happy to just ban that person in their feed and go on with their life (and large number of people are actually open to opposing views).
postalrat 6y ago
How cute and simplistic.

david38 6y ago

Indeed. It’s now been reframed as “freedom from government prosecution”, not from organized canceling.

mywittyname 6y ago
It's always been "freedom from government prosecution." Flynt faced "organized canceling" from many groups. They just couldn't (continue to) use their influence in the government to punish him. He's in a wheelchair because of a failed "permanent cancellation" attempt. Also, Democrats of the era didn't much liked him either. Could you imagine 90s-era Hillary Clinton ranting against language in rap music while simultaneously supporting this guy?