4 ms·

There is a definition for hate speech though.

by mewpmewp2 2y ago

reginald78 2y ago
Actually, I think the problem is there are many definitions of hate speech.
- mewpmewp2 2y ago
  I think there's only 1 main definition. Which is clear in spirit, but it's of course possible that people may interpret the definition definitely.
  - jacobr1 2y ago
    That may be so, but the denigrate (and common case as this thread suggests) is to expand the notion to any offensive speech that is disliked by the offended person. That is much more subjective and hard to define. The fact that we have some (better) definitions doesn't really help. The desire to censure speech is widespread, for different reasons, many conflicting. And the fact that there might be a rough academic consensus on where to draw lines (at least theoretically if not practically) isn't good enough in practice to actually define clear rules.
    - mewpmewp2 2y ago
      The spirit needs to be understood clearly. The spirit of hate speech is to by forms of communication cause harm to a person or group of people for certain inherent characteristics that are not harmful for the society. Harm in such a way that manifests itself as violence or discrimination.
baggy_trough 2y ago
What do you think the definition is?
- mewpmewp2 2y ago
  Any speech (or well communications) that intends to incite violence or general harm on groups of people or a person with certain characteristics such as age, sex, orientation, race, etc. E.g. "X race/gender/sexual orientation are bad for the society for reason Y, and therefore they should be treated with Z (a negative consequence)" So intending to call out harm because of certain inherent characteristics a group of people have, and such characteristics that are not harmful for the society.
  - belorn 2y ago
    People will endlessly argue over what "incite violence or general harm" actually mean, and they will also endlessly argue over if something should be considered an implied "characteristics of age, sex, orientation, race, etc". Currently there is an ongoing court case regarding the case where a person criticized and made offensive statements about Muhammad, and if that should count as inciting violence or general harm against Muslims. One side is arguing that any negative statements about Muhammad is veiled statements directed against Muslims as a group, and the other side is arguing it is criticism against the religion and not about people who believe in that religion. People did similar arguments with Monty Python movie Life of Brian. When it comes to symbols like flags, people often characteristic any action (positive and negative) as a form of hate speech if they dislike it, or as important symbolic gestures when they like it. Burning flags get often called hate speech, and forbidding people from waving flags (including general rules against all flags for specific events) has also been called hate speech.
    - mewpmewp2 2y ago
      What was the negative statement? To me the logic is that: 1. Criticising a religion != hate speech, or generally making fun of or criticising any sort of religious figure like Muhammad or Jesus != hate speech. 2. Calling out for a group of people of certain religion to have X negative consequences = hate speech.
      - belorn 2y ago

There is a definition for hate speech though.

reginald78 2y ago

Actually, I think the problem is there are many definitions of hate speech.

mewpmewp2 2y ago
I think there's only 1 main definition. Which is clear in spirit, but it's of course possible that people may interpret the definition definitely.
- jacobr1 2y ago
  That may be so, but the denigrate (and common case as this thread suggests) is to expand the notion to any offensive speech that is disliked by the offended person. That is much more subjective and hard to define. The fact that we have some (better) definitions doesn't really help. The desire to censure speech is widespread, for different reasons, many conflicting. And the fact that there might be a rough academic consensus on where to draw lines (at least theoretically if not practically) isn't good enough in practice to actually define clear rules.
  - mewpmewp2 2y ago
    The spirit needs to be understood clearly. The spirit of hate speech is to by forms of communication cause harm to a person or group of people for certain inherent characteristics that are not harmful for the society. Harm in such a way that manifests itself as violence or discrimination.

baggy_trough 2y ago

What do you think the definition is?

mewpmewp2 2y ago
Any speech (or well communications) that intends to incite violence or general harm on groups of people or a person with certain characteristics such as age, sex, orientation, race, etc. E.g. "X race/gender/sexual orientation are bad for the society for reason Y, and therefore they should be treated with Z (a negative consequence)" So intending to call out harm because of certain inherent characteristics a group of people have, and such characteristics that are not harmful for the society.
- belorn 2y ago
  People will endlessly argue over what "incite violence or general harm" actually mean, and they will also endlessly argue over if something should be considered an implied "characteristics of age, sex, orientation, race, etc". Currently there is an ongoing court case regarding the case where a person criticized and made offensive statements about Muhammad, and if that should count as inciting violence or general harm against Muslims. One side is arguing that any negative statements about Muhammad is veiled statements directed against Muslims as a group, and the other side is arguing it is criticism against the religion and not about people who believe in that religion. People did similar arguments with Monty Python movie Life of Brian. When it comes to symbols like flags, people often characteristic any action (positive and negative) as a form of hate speech if they dislike it, or as important symbolic gestures when they like it. Burning flags get often called hate speech, and forbidding people from waving flags (including general rules against all flags for specific events) has also been called hate speech.
  - mewpmewp2 2y ago
    What was the negative statement? To me the logic is that: 1. Criticising a religion != hate speech, or generally making fun of or criticising any sort of religious figure like Muhammad or Jesus != hate speech. 2. Calling out for a group of people of certain religion to have X negative consequences = hate speech.
    - belorn 2y ago