zlacker

That language seems very odd to me. What's the difference between "defining someone's identity" and "having an opinion about someone that is contrary to how they view themselves"?

The difference is that once you establish that it's "defining someone's identity", then disagreement with that person is "denying their right to exist", and so basically violence, from which the person you disagreed with deserve protection. These are the lines along which this kind of conversations typically proceeded inside Google.

>>xyzzyz+(OP)
> once you establish that it's "defining someone's identity", then disagreement with that person is "denying their right to exist", and so basically violence

Hyperbole doesn't even begin to describe this.

>>dgzl+H3
Yes, this is absurd, but I've seen this play out over and over again right in front of my eyes at Google.

>>xyzzyz+B4
Whenever I hear people describe non-physical confrontation as "violence", my only thought is that they have no idea what real violence is.

The tech echo-chamber is fostering unrealistic opinions about life and liberty.

>>dgzl+Y5
Turns out we needed broken bones to realize why words never hurt.

>>KUcxrA+x91
Honestly, not an unreasonable thought.