zlacker

It's very convenient that one side of the asile is always in a position to define what hate speech is.

Neat trick, but it doesn't work anymore.

>>simple+(OP)
Not a trick, but yeah saying we should harm certain groups of people is hate speech.

>>roflye+t1
Who is saying that people should be harmed? Seriously. Whoever you have in mind, if they're actually advocating violence against people then I'm in agreement with you. That's not cool and they shouldn't be doing that.

Are you referring to calling a trans person by their biological sex?

>>roflye+t1
Joking about political figures isn't hate speech.

>>simple+(OP)
You have to give credit to whomever came up with it, its a cheap but effective linguistic kill shot. No doubt it was engineered to be divisive, and whomever is wielding it is unlikely to be reasoned with.

>>simple+E2
Why does your mind instinctively go to that example?

>>biohac+r5
Exactly

>>Apocry+t6
Because leftists often use that as an example of hate speech.

>>simple+49
And rightly so.

>>simple+E2
When a doctor is speaking with a trans person about their body, it's an appropriate time to speak about their biological sex. That is certainly not hate speech.

When a stranger is yelling at a trans person about their biological sex, it's done to inflict emotional harm on the trans person. They transitioned away from that gender to reduce harm (that is the definition of a trans person), and the stranger is intentionally trying to bring that harm back.

Imagine shouting at a woman about her "biological breast size" because she is wearing a push-up bra, or had surgery to enlarge or reduce her breast size. Would that seem like a normal, harm-free way to interact with another person you don't know? Obviously not.

>>simple+E2
Putting aside transphobic nonsense

> Who is saying that people should be harmed?

The rights actions speak so loud no one can hear their words.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/17/briefing/right-wing-mass-...

https://www.businessinsider.com/right-wing-extremists-kill-3...

https://www.salon.com/2021/06/25/filling-the-trump-void-righ...

>>jacque+ab
Depends on the context. People have been suspended from Twitter from saying things like "transwomen are actually men so stop letting them compete in women's sports, it's not safe or fair for actual women", which isn't hate speech, doesn't target an individual, and is a legitimate political opinion, so in theory should be fine. Yet bans are handed out anyway.

>>ciler+3h
I’m not familiar with the lightness with which Twitter bans conservatives. Could you provide an example close to the example you gave? Or will any example be even more bigoted?

>>kodyo+33
Just because it's about a political figure doesn't make something not hate speech.

If someone drops an n-word at a state rep, does it become not hate speech? The answer is (obviously) that hate speech is still hate speech.

>>simple+E2
People are actually advocating violence against people, and they have gotten banned for it.

>>ciler+3h
I don't believe that. I know several conservatives who posted that shit all the time and didn't get banned.

>>kodyo+33
Who said it was?

>>roflye+se1
They're referring to a Babylon Bee article where they misgender a trans public figure repeatedly.

It's the tweet that got the Bee suspended from twitter because they refused to delete it.

>>jacque+ab
Stating facts is not hate speech -- especially if you're trying to force society to go along with your unreality for political reasons.

>>roflye+ne1
So Twitter needs to bad them all for you to be convinced?

>>Shared+BQ1
It was a satire on USA Today naming Levine as one of their Women Of The Year.

This isn't hate speech, just social commentary on organizations giving awards and accolades reserved for women to men who want to be women.

>>simple+642
Stating facts can be hate speech. For example, if someone said "I was just attacked on my way home" and someone said "you're black" in response, yeah. Facts. Hate speech.

See? :)

>>simple+h42
No. I just don't believe there is a "ban this speech" b/c in my experience that didn't happen.

>>bennie+b82
The right is incredibly fucked up today. See this article: https://unherd.com/thepost/was-the-fake-boobs-teacher-a-hoax...

>>roflye+vN2
Seems highly unlikely this is a satirical protest.

More probably it's just a man bringing his fetish to work and expecting everyone to comply, as is the zeitgeist of today.

>>bennie+OA3
Of course you say that, nevermind the evidence saying otherwise!

>>roflye+bU3
An anonymous comment on 4chan is not evidence of anything.

Come on, do you really believe this is anything other than the usual trolling that goes on over there: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FdXO_XkXgAsIMFy?format=jpg&name=...

>>roflye+jN2
Wait, so how is that hate speech?