3 ms·
If something is violence, it's violence. You could say violence towards homophobes is ok because they aren't a protected class. But if you make the case that ha
by benj111 4y ago
If something is violence, it's violence. You could say violence towards homophobes is ok because they aren't a protected class. But if you make the case that hate speech is violence, then it's violence regardless of who it's directed at.
- anon84873628 4y agoI wasn't really arguing the "hate speech == violence" position, which is pretty silly. That doesn't mean hate speech shouldn't be an add-on offense to other crimes though. Or the idea that all targets of "hate speech" are equal. (Because it's only true "hate speech" if the targets are protected). This is kinda like the question, "can white people experience racism?" One school of thought says no, because (in the USA) non-white people cannot wield the psychological threat of systematic persecution against white people. You could offend a white person, or be prejudiced against them, but not really "commit racism". Partly this is just a semantic argument about what "racism" means - it is not merely a superficial difference in race between parties, but rather an encapsulation of the historical and systemic forces at play. Racism is a more powerful tool for white people than it is for others.
- benj111 4y agoDo people argue that white people can't experience racism?!? If a black person applies for a job and doesn't get it because of his race, that's racism. The same applies to a white person. The same power dynamic is at play.