4 ms·

Because the only defense they constantly employ for saying atrocious things is that it's not literally illegal to say them. It's not literally illegal to be rac

Because the only defense they constantly employ for saying atrocious things is that it's not literally illegal to say them. It's not literally illegal to be racist, it's not literally illegal to be xenophobic, it's not literally illegal to be transphobic. So they think they should be all those things, although they don't call themselves those names. Things should be said based on the inherent merit of what they say, not be said just because it's not literally illegal to say them. If the only reason you can find for justifying what you say is that nobody has made a law yet to stop you (and we do have laws to stop some things from being said), then perhaps you need to find a better thing to say.

young_unixer 6y ago
I agree with you, but Twitter is rife with leftists being almost as horrible as Gab's extremists and not getting banned because Twitter execs lean left. So let's not act like Gab users are the only ones being awful.
- throwaway3699 6y ago
  Good luck with that position. Too many people fail to recognise the Ying and Yang that is Twitter and Gab. Both of them are dominated by extreme ideologies, but only one has all celebrities, politicians, governments and business leaders.
- wp381640 6y ago
  Complete nonsense false equivalence. Gab is _dominated_ by far-right racist content and conspiracy theories. My mum uses Twitter and doesn't see a single far-left opinion, 99% of the content on Twitter is that way. You're comparing an entire polluted pool that is unfit to swim in with a single floating turd in the ocean.
  - motogpjimbo 6y ago
    Really? It literally isn't possible to look at the "trending" panel in Twitter without seeing far-left talking points. For example, today's trending topics include the "cancellation" of Dr Seuss (with many tweets giving examples of why he should be cancelled in the author's opinion) and the use of the words "latinx" and "womxn" to avoid offending people by using gendered language.
    - pessimizer 6y ago
      > It literally isn't possible to look at the "trending" panel in Twitter without seeing far-left talking points. You've gone from complaining that twitter is consumed by the left to complaining that the left is allowed on twitter at all. > For example, today's trending topics include the "cancellation" of Dr Seuss (with many tweets giving examples of why he should be cancelled in the author's opinion) and the use of the words "latinx" and "womxn" to avoid offending people by using gendered language. Right-wingers post about that stuff 10:1 compared to anyone on the left. You're posting about it now.
      - motogpjimbo 6y ago
        > You've gone from complaining that twitter is consumed by the left to complaining that the left is allowed on twitter at all. I'm not complaining about anything though - are you confusing posts from different HN users? I really don't care who uses Twitter or for what purpose. I'm pointing out that it's unlikely someone could use Twitter and be unaware of left-wing posts on the platform given that Twitter themselves amplify such content daily.
    - SamoyedFurFluff 6y ago
      Stuff trends on Twitter without it appearing in my timeline all the time though, so it is quite true you can use Twitter and never deal with left wing politics even if the rest of Twitter is ranting about bean dad or whatever that was. Hell kpop shows up on the trending as often as leftist stuff but I don’t claim kpop controls Twitter.
    - ModernMech 6y ago
      I just looked and nothing about seizing the means of production from our capitalist overlords, or that money is a construct that needs to be abolished is trending on Twitter today.
      - motogpjimbo 6y ago
        You are attempting humour of course, but leftists in the West have long since abandoned those goals - I wouldn't expect anything of that sort to trend on Twitter.
- jordigh 6y ago
  Ah yes, false equivalences. However, the current state of affairs is more like far left far right <----------------------------------------> [Overton Window] perceived perceived far left far right Why is "both sides" or "they started it" or "what about" the only other retort that always comes up?
  - young_unixer 6y ago
    I'd say it's more like this: far left center far right <-------------------|--------------------> [Western O.W.] [US Overton W.] [ Gab users* ] [ Twitter users* ] *: 90% of users, because there will always be outliers.
    - jordigh 6y ago
      Nah, Twitter just seems full of leftists to you because you use the "both sides" or "what about" argument, a common conservative talking point. You think arguments like hey, let's use a word like "latinx" to be a far left talking point. It's silly, but the position is nowhere nearly as radical as "let's get rid of all governments, by force if necessary". The extreme left views to you seem to be to get rid of Dr Seuss. You can't even think of even more extreme left views as viable discourse, such as getting rid of all world rulers. There aren't nearly enough leftist talking points on Twitter as it appears to your rightist brain, and there's plenty of homophobia, "feminism has gone too far", "it's okay to be white", worldwide anti-immigration sentiments, and (still!) Trump supporters. Maybe they're bots or whatever, but the talking points are there.
abernard1 6y ago
> If the only reason you can find for justifying what you say is that nobody has made a law yet to stop you (and we do have laws to stop some things from being said), then perhaps you need to find a better thing to say. If a person thinks that perhaps, maybe, there's 2 genders and not 700+, they should be prevented from civic discourse? That maybe we should not be providing chemical treatments to toddlers for gender reassignment, that's hate? If they believe that math isn't actually racist, but is an objective way of making sense of reality, are they racist? How about people who criticize Islam and argue that it is a fundamentally violent ideology? That lockdowns and "scientific" COVID-19 recommendations were harmful because Florida had fewer deaths per capita than NY or CA Today, merely speaking any of these positions gets a person called a "transphobe" or a racist or a science denier. In addition to not convincing anyone and unfairly slandering the speakers, it destroys our ability to think as a society. Socially "acceptable" speech has never needed legal protection (in any society, liberal or authoritarian). It's the offensive things that need protection from the book burners.
- thamidolide 6y ago
  Your right-wing talking points are a collection of disingenuous shit: > If a person thinks that perhaps, maybe, there's 2 genders and not 700+ Nonsense comparison. No-one thinks there are 700+ genders. > That maybe we should not be providing chemical treatments to toddlers for gender reassignment Toddlers aren't being given medication for gender reassignment, this is blatantly false. > If they believe that math isn't actually racist No-one is seriously suggesting that math is racist. > How about people who criticize Islam and argue that it is a fundamentally violent ideology? Again, missing the point. The issue is when Muslims are treated badly based on stereotypes of what they believe.
kukx 6y ago
And a religious person would say that we should follow ten commandments. Should we make it illegal not to follow them? Should we move toward punishing the sinners by law? I am against immoral behavior but it does not mean I am for banning speach and art, quite the opposite. The Christian culture is crumbling and is being slowly replaced by a more repressive one. And it is worrisome to say the least.
soundnote 6y ago
It's also possible that their defenses sound like that to the people making the "not literally illegal to say them" crowd. As a stereotypical example, grab a random Christian, they say they believe gay marriage is wrong on Biblical grounds, this gets interpreted as "I want to hate gay people". If we look at racist hate speech, people literally lecture that people who happen to look like me are "born into not being human", say the lives of people like me don't matter. We are told we should not speak and yet that our silence is violence. Trainings for "diversity" across a wide range of institutions have started segregating along racial lines, and the list goes on. During the Grievance Studies hoax, for example, one of their papers was sent back because it was too sympathetic and not sociopathic enough. Said paper advocated making white students sit on the floor and putting them in chains as a learning experience. Yet open racism is fine, because the target ethnic group and sexual orientation are acceptable to the activist class. Likewise, people who get kicked out for "transphobia" will often not be people who hate transpeople in any proper sense, but have policy disagreements where there are no win-win solutions. Yet anything but being completely on board with the activist class's 100% no limits pro-trans policy agenda is "phobia". The claim holds up as well as wet paper. How about gender affirming treatment for kids who cannot physically know what sexuality properly is because they haven't been through puberty? Someone's a bit off their gender role? Tomboy, nah, they're a boy, time to stuff them full of hormones. Concerns that this just might be insane are again, labeled hate. Said cultists insist on mantras of trans(wo-)men are (wo-)men in an explicit denial of biology that the best of our medicine can't alter: We just craft a facade that eases dysphoria to care for our fellow human beings. As Buck Angel put it: "I use testosterone to masculinize myself so I feel more like me." He's routinely called a transphobe. This is basically the biology equivalent of flat eartherism or young earth creationism, but not subscribing to the creed is stamped hate speech. The mantra wouldn't even be necessary if its claim was actually true. Hell, it's arguably even worse than flat eartherism, since a human can't at a glance confirm that the Earth is indeed round, but TWAW/TMAM asks us to baldly deny the input of our eyes in everyday life. It's not one side that has gone insane: Good chunks of both are open lunatics. Q at least is thankfully fringe, but even they've managed to get representatives elected.
- jordigh 6y ago
  I was gonna skip replying to this but > How about gender affirming treatment for kids who cannot physically know what sexuality properly is because they haven't been through puberty? Someone's a bit off their gender role? Tomboy, nah, they're a boy, time to stuff them full of hormones. Concerns that this just might be insane are again, labeled hate. Trans girls have horrible anxiety about going through puberty. It's not them being "a little off their gender role". It's a fundamental dread about being given an irreversible treatment of hormones that will change their voice and secondary sexual characteristics. Puberty is far more irreversible than HRT. The percentage of people who detransition is tiny; far more people who transition are much happier for doing so. It is also incredibly difficult to actually get HRT. The therapy is beyond the reach of most children. It's a total boogieman that this is happening left and right and all of the children are getting stuffed full of synthetic hormones. Please educate yourself more. Anti-trans positions are up there with "gay people are going to sexually assault my children" or "being gay is disgusting 'cause I don't like thinking about anal sex". Complete and utter bullshit based on unfounded fears.

young_unixer 6y ago

I agree with you, but Twitter is rife with leftists being almost as horrible as Gab's extremists and not getting banned because Twitter execs lean left. So let's not act like Gab users are the only ones being awful.

throwaway3699 6y ago
Good luck with that position. Too many people fail to recognise the Ying and Yang that is Twitter and Gab. Both of them are dominated by extreme ideologies, but only one has all celebrities, politicians, governments and business leaders.
wp381640 6y ago
Complete nonsense false equivalence. Gab is _dominated_ by far-right racist content and conspiracy theories. My mum uses Twitter and doesn't see a single far-left opinion, 99% of the content on Twitter is that way. You're comparing an entire polluted pool that is unfit to swim in with a single floating turd in the ocean.
- motogpjimbo 6y ago
  Really? It literally isn't possible to look at the "trending" panel in Twitter without seeing far-left talking points. For example, today's trending topics include the "cancellation" of Dr Seuss (with many tweets giving examples of why he should be cancelled in the author's opinion) and the use of the words "latinx" and "womxn" to avoid offending people by using gendered language.
  - pessimizer 6y ago
    > It literally isn't possible to look at the "trending" panel in Twitter without seeing far-left talking points. You've gone from complaining that twitter is consumed by the left to complaining that the left is allowed on twitter at all. > For example, today's trending topics include the "cancellation" of Dr Seuss (with many tweets giving examples of why he should be cancelled in the author's opinion) and the use of the words "latinx" and "womxn" to avoid offending people by using gendered language. Right-wingers post about that stuff 10:1 compared to anyone on the left. You're posting about it now.
    - motogpjimbo 6y ago
      > You've gone from complaining that twitter is consumed by the left to complaining that the left is allowed on twitter at all. I'm not complaining about anything though - are you confusing posts from different HN users? I really don't care who uses Twitter or for what purpose. I'm pointing out that it's unlikely someone could use Twitter and be unaware of left-wing posts on the platform given that Twitter themselves amplify such content daily.
  - SamoyedFurFluff 6y ago
    Stuff trends on Twitter without it appearing in my timeline all the time though, so it is quite true you can use Twitter and never deal with left wing politics even if the rest of Twitter is ranting about bean dad or whatever that was. Hell kpop shows up on the trending as often as leftist stuff but I don’t claim kpop controls Twitter.
  - ModernMech 6y ago
    I just looked and nothing about seizing the means of production from our capitalist overlords, or that money is a construct that needs to be abolished is trending on Twitter today.
    - motogpjimbo 6y ago
      You are attempting humour of course, but leftists in the West have long since abandoned those goals - I wouldn't expect anything of that sort to trend on Twitter.
jordigh 6y ago
Ah yes, false equivalences. However, the current state of affairs is more like far left far right <----------------------------------------> [Overton Window] perceived perceived far left far right Why is "both sides" or "they started it" or "what about" the only other retort that always comes up?
- young_unixer 6y ago
  I'd say it's more like this: far left center far right <-------------------|--------------------> [Western O.W.] [US Overton W.] [ Gab users* ] [ Twitter users* ] *: 90% of users, because there will always be outliers.
  - jordigh 6y ago
    Nah, Twitter just seems full of leftists to you because you use the "both sides" or "what about" argument, a common conservative talking point. You think arguments like hey, let's use a word like "latinx" to be a far left talking point. It's silly, but the position is nowhere nearly as radical as "let's get rid of all governments, by force if necessary". The extreme left views to you seem to be to get rid of Dr Seuss. You can't even think of even more extreme left views as viable discourse, such as getting rid of all world rulers. There aren't nearly enough leftist talking points on Twitter as it appears to your rightist brain, and there's plenty of homophobia, "feminism has gone too far", "it's okay to be white", worldwide anti-immigration sentiments, and (still!) Trump supporters. Maybe they're bots or whatever, but the talking points are there.

abernard1 6y ago

> If the only reason you can find for justifying what you say is that nobody has made a law yet to stop you (and we do have laws to stop some things from being said), then perhaps you need to find a better thing to say. If a person thinks that perhaps, maybe, there's 2 genders and not 700+, they should be prevented from civic discourse? That maybe we should not be providing chemical treatments to toddlers for gender reassignment, that's hate? If they believe that math isn't actually racist, but is an objective way of making sense of reality, are they racist? How about people who criticize Islam and argue that it is a fundamentally violent ideology? That lockdowns and "scientific" COVID-19 recommendations were harmful because Florida had fewer deaths per capita than NY or CA Today, merely speaking any of these positions gets a person called a "transphobe" or a racist or a science denier. In addition to not convincing anyone and unfairly slandering the speakers, it destroys our ability to think as a society. Socially "acceptable" speech has never needed legal protection (in any society, liberal or authoritarian). It's the offensive things that need protection from the book burners.

thamidolide 6y ago
Your right-wing talking points are a collection of disingenuous shit: > If a person thinks that perhaps, maybe, there's 2 genders and not 700+ Nonsense comparison. No-one thinks there are 700+ genders. > That maybe we should not be providing chemical treatments to toddlers for gender reassignment Toddlers aren't being given medication for gender reassignment, this is blatantly false. > If they believe that math isn't actually racist No-one is seriously suggesting that math is racist. > How about people who criticize Islam and argue that it is a fundamentally violent ideology? Again, missing the point. The issue is when Muslims are treated badly based on stereotypes of what they believe.

kukx 6y ago

And a religious person would say that we should follow ten commandments. Should we make it illegal not to follow them? Should we move toward punishing the sinners by law? I am against immoral behavior but it does not mean I am for banning speach and art, quite the opposite. The Christian culture is crumbling and is being slowly replaced by a more repressive one. And it is worrisome to say the least.

soundnote 6y ago

It's also possible that their defenses sound like that to the people making the "not literally illegal to say them" crowd. As a stereotypical example, grab a random Christian, they say they believe gay marriage is wrong on Biblical grounds, this gets interpreted as "I want to hate gay people". If we look at racist hate speech, people literally lecture that people who happen to look like me are "born into not being human", say the lives of people like me don't matter. We are told we should not speak and yet that our silence is violence. Trainings for "diversity" across a wide range of institutions have started segregating along racial lines, and the list goes on. During the Grievance Studies hoax, for example, one of their papers was sent back because it was too sympathetic and not sociopathic enough. Said paper advocated making white students sit on the floor and putting them in chains as a learning experience. Yet open racism is fine, because the target ethnic group and sexual orientation are acceptable to the activist class. Likewise, people who get kicked out for "transphobia" will often not be people who hate transpeople in any proper sense, but have policy disagreements where there are no win-win solutions. Yet anything but being completely on board with the activist class's 100% no limits pro-trans policy agenda is "phobia". The claim holds up as well as wet paper. How about gender affirming treatment for kids who cannot physically know what sexuality properly is because they haven't been through puberty? Someone's a bit off their gender role? Tomboy, nah, they're a boy, time to stuff them full of hormones. Concerns that this just might be insane are again, labeled hate. Said cultists insist on mantras of trans(wo-)men are (wo-)men in an explicit denial of biology that the best of our medicine can't alter: We just craft a facade that eases dysphoria to care for our fellow human beings. As Buck Angel put it: "I use testosterone to masculinize myself so I feel more like me." He's routinely called a transphobe. This is basically the biology equivalent of flat eartherism or young earth creationism, but not subscribing to the creed is stamped hate speech. The mantra wouldn't even be necessary if its claim was actually true. Hell, it's arguably even worse than flat eartherism, since a human can't at a glance confirm that the Earth is indeed round, but TWAW/TMAM asks us to baldly deny the input of our eyes in everyday life. It's not one side that has gone insane: Good chunks of both are open lunatics. Q at least is thankfully fringe, but even they've managed to get representatives elected.

jordigh 6y ago
I was gonna skip replying to this but > How about gender affirming treatment for kids who cannot physically know what sexuality properly is because they haven't been through puberty? Someone's a bit off their gender role? Tomboy, nah, they're a boy, time to stuff them full of hormones. Concerns that this just might be insane are again, labeled hate. Trans girls have horrible anxiety about going through puberty. It's not them being "a little off their gender role". It's a fundamental dread about being given an irreversible treatment of hormones that will change their voice and secondary sexual characteristics. Puberty is far more irreversible than HRT. The percentage of people who detransition is tiny; far more people who transition are much happier for doing so. It is also incredibly difficult to actually get HRT. The therapy is beyond the reach of most children. It's a total boogieman that this is happening left and right and all of the children are getting stuffed full of synthetic hormones. Please educate yourself more. Anti-trans positions are up there with "gay people are going to sexually assault my children" or "being gay is disgusting 'cause I don't like thinking about anal sex". Complete and utter bullshit based on unfounded fears.