Discussion Is freedom of expression overrated?

[Chinaski]

Hell of a lot of "actually l agree with feminism, however l can not bring myself to support it because feminists are not polite enough to men" style bullshit going on in this thread, l wasn't around here last year but l bet you couldn't move for the "of course l agree black lives matter, but only in the context that ALL lives matter" posts.

 

[Aurora Vanderlux]

Hell of a lot of "actually l agree with feminism, however l can not bring myself to support it because feminists are not polite enough to men" style bullshit going on in this thread, l wasn't around here last year but l bet you couldn't move for the "of course l agree black lives matter, but only in the context that ALL lives matter" posts.

I would like to be an anti-progressive feminist, I think it is a way of making things visible in an unbiased way

 

[GentleJerk]

Ah freedom of speech, this one's a doozy.

People get riled up when they hear someone saying hateful and harmful things, and rightfully so. Great care should be taken, words are powerful and they have contributed to genocides. They can cause a lot of harm. Many people hide behind freedom of speech to broadcast their bigotry and prejudice without legal repercussions. These people should be argued and rallied against by their opposing parties.

But in a society with freedom of speech laws, deciding that these idiots can't say such things, or when these idiots say that others can't denounce them or shout them down, because 'muh freedum of speech'.... Uh, yes they can! Ridiculous. That's what freedom of speech is.

Freedom of speech is fundamentally important, it means that the king can't send you to the gallows just for criticizing his tax hike on large hams. It wasn't really intended just to give immunity to buttholes who wanna say terrible things. It serves a very important purpose.

We technically no longer have real freedom of speech laws in my country. And no good has come out of this.

 

[Chinaski]

I would like to be an anti-progressive feminist, I think it is a way of making things visible in an unbiased way

Well corporate, carceral, neo-liberal feminism does exist as a brand l guess but gender politics within a patriarchal society are, and should be, emancipatory by definition and a feminism which does little to challenge the status quo is reductive, quota-based, ladder-pulling stuff imo. There are users of this forum who are definitely better equipped for this discussion than l am, men discussing what is and what is not acceptable feminism is not great imo so I'm going to leave it at this point.

 

[motel rooms]

Can someone be a feminist and anti-progressive at the same time? This question also applies to others.

I'm a man & apparently I'm not allowed to talk about feminism. I think real feminism is about fighting for equality, but what do I know?

 

[Mixo]

I think many here are either mischaracterizing what feminism is or I suspect are uncomfortable when the dominant conversation is not focused on their own experiences of suffering. Yes, feminism is about equal rights for women. However, there is a distinct difference between structural oppression and general prejudice and this idea seems to be repeatedly lost on the many voices who are conflating the two as one and the same.

I have said before on a different thread that was started by a male user lamenting about his lack of interest by the opposite sex, but it appears to have been wiped so I'll say it again: feminism is nothing more than a theoretical system which seeks to elucidate forms of structural oppression and privilege, with the ultimate aim of taking those who are marginalized in society and bringing them into the center (i.e. on the basis of gender, race, ability, immigration status, gender identity, sexuality, economic status, etc.) with a special focus on gender.

I promise you Judith Stein and Audre Lorde weren't out there writing books saying that all feminists must, by virtue of identifying as a feminist, must "hate men". This is an ill-willed, nasty characterization of this movement and equally disgusting is how people are pathologizing dissenting female voices as "crazy." Feminism also contains considerable discourse on how a patriarchal society with rigid gender expectations negatively impact men as well. WOW, IMAGINE THAT. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT MEN CAN ACTUALLY BENEFIT FROM HAVING LESS GENDER EXPECTATIONS AND NOT JUST WOMEN! Ya know, the very same gender expectations that many men on this forum have complained about (i.e. not fitting into whatever main society deems as what a "real man" does, has, looks like?).

---
Separate comment: Are we really now at the point where we're allowed to diagnose and pathologize other members who piss us off, or collectively take an informal vote on what mental disorder someone has? I am seriously disturbed and how this is being tacitly allowed now.

 

[TotallyIsolated]

Oh boy.

You're NOT free to say or do absolutely anything you want. You are not free to kill, or steal, or to violate any one of the tens of thousands of statutes and rulings that make up common law. In the US and Europe (and probably most countries) you're not free to threaten people, to incite illegal activity, or even to violate intellectual property.

Your freedom has limits and it always has. There are very good reasons why you are not free to impinge upon another person's rights.

I don't wish to steal @OceanBlue 's thunder, but theres WAY more to it that just misogyny being more widespread.

"Kill all men" doesn't carry the same weight as "kill all women", as there aren't legions of people out there in the real world who are killing and brutalising men every single day, and who would take that as a call to arms. One would not find that message amplified by a culture that is allowed to exist openly that treats violence against men as the norm, or as somehow acceptable or inevitable. Men don't have to live with threats of violence going unchecked. Men don't generally have to worry that women are following them home after making a comment, or just apropos of nothing. Men don't live in a society where police will overlook violence against them, distort reports of violence, or even where female police officers will abuse or kill them when trying to report such crimes. Men don't have to tolerate the injustice of a legal system that lets women get away with violence against men, where men are forced to change their testimony or to drop charges against abusers.

Its the context that matters. They're not the same.

 

[lostundead]

 

[Mixo]

[Mod note: Quoted content removed]
There is nothing fanatical about wanting people to be discussed in a respectful manner that does not reduce them to being a product of a mental health disorder.

 

[Aurora Vanderlux]

I wanted to ask admins – did motel react in the same way when OTH called him out? He's DMing multiple people, told me he has admin's support. I cannot add his comments (that I explained were abusive) to new threads so people can see for themselves, he's avoiding scrutiny.

You're allowing him to get away with harassment of users and I see why THO felt bullied if this is what they had to deal with on this forum. Your golden boy is throwing a tantrum and does not show any remorse for how he treated THO (who btw may have had a point because only sexist men would react like this to misandry statements).

To Motel:

You are clearly a sexist man and from that stems contempt to all things 'feminine'. If I were you I would examine the constant need to assert that you are stereotypically 'masculine' (I've seen multiple references to 'not a twink, 'hairy' etc.).

When I say I'm a misandrist, it's primarily designed to rile up sexist and misogynistic men (you see how you fell for it). This statement does not result in discrimination towards men and as a man you should be ashamed that you feel comfortable telling women how to behave about their own oppression.

Men who recognise the subjugation of women would never deny that misandry is unjustified, they would agree with the sentiment. The same goes for other forms of oppression: such as 'white people are the worst' (or stronger terms), it's a correct generalisation – only racists will start arguing, but white supremacy censors this so much that people can't even spell 'white people' as full words.

Also, regarding the sexual content you often insert in unrelated threads – use spoiler function with TW, some people may be explicit content averse.

Absolutely STOP DMing people and don't blame others if you're blocked – people can make their own observations and given time many will see through you.

Stop diverting the thread already, dammit! We have different ideas, and we love Master Roshi, end of discussion

But seriously speaking, if we talk about Feminism, I think that it has already done its job and we need to make visible other social problems, like Xenophobia, dammit! now the internet is flooded with this type of memes that I will post below

Spoiler: Images

This is when I feel that freedom of expression goes beyond the limits, I have been beaten and discriminated against for being from Venezuela

 

[Chinaski]

Stop diverting the thread already, dammit! We have different ideas, and we love Master Roshi, end of discussion

But seriously speaking, if we talk about Feminism, I think that it has already done its job and we need to make visible other social problems

Going to ask in good faith here to what extent you think feminism has "done it's job", the implication being that as a socio-political movement it should be jettisoned and consigned to history.

Will also add that there isn't a need for only one political struggle to exist at any given time, as if there's a battle for prominence and space for their co-existence in short supply. For example, the civil rights movement and the various movements around LGBTQ+ equality continue to co-exist due to necessity, one does not need to step aside and abandon their cause to allow for the other to gain prominence.

 

[Aurora Vanderlux]

Going to ask in good faith here to what extent you think feminism has "done it's job", the implication being that as a socio-political movement it should be jettisoned and consigned to history.

Will also add that there isn't a need for only one political struggle to exist at any given time, as if there's a battle for prominence and space for their co-existence in short supply. For example, the civil rights movement and the various movements around LGBTQ+ equality continue to co-exist due to necessity, one does not need to step aside and abandon their cause to allow for the other to gain prominence.

So, somehow an ideology must be prevented from going out of its way to become a joke, I believe in the variety of thought and that any ideology or movement works if it is applied only at the right time
Countries like Spain and Argentina have an excess of feminism, women have more rights in those countries now, now, feminism should be brought to those countries that do not have it or where the treatment of women is terrible. Venezuela still has one of the highest numbers of femicides in the region

 

[Sanva]

[...] the various problems that we are facing in society, the number of girls raped during the pandemic is alarming, and that problem is being handled at a snail's pace, In some way, the problems must be made more directly visible.

But seriously speaking, if we talk about Feminism, I think that it has already done its job and we need to make visible other social problems, like Xenophobia, dammit!

isn't this a bit contradictory? if feminism has done its job and sexism is therefore over, why are so many women still being raped, sexually assaulted, harassed...

 

[Aurora Vanderlux]

isn't this a bit contradictory? if feminism has done its job and sexism is therefore over, why are so many women still being raped, sexually assaulted, harassed...

This is because modern feminism is loaded with idealism and not work. True feminism is one that makes a problem visible and seeks solutions, not going around raising screams and burning the streets, it is about proposing solutions, so current feminism needs a restructuring

 

[Chinaski]

This is because modern feminism is loaded with idealism and not work. True feminism is one that makes a problem visible and seeks solutions, not going around raising screams and burning the streets, it is about proposing solutions, so current feminism needs a restructuring

The problem with this position is that it's not incumbent on someone like yourself, who aligns themselves in support of the status quo, to instruct those who agitate for change to cease. Political struggle is principally between those with power and those upon whom those powers are exercised, and it's not incumbent on the former to declare when the latter should withdraw. A trade union who cancelled industrial action because their bosses considered it uncouth would not be a political movement fit for purpose.

 

[Arrow]

No. I have trouble thinking of something that matters more. People should be allowed to say pretty much whatever they believe to be true. I say this because if i couldn't express myself freely and say what I thought was true I would probably lose my mind.

 

[motel rooms]

"Kill all men" doesn't carry the same weight as "kill all women"

Allow me to respond to this statement by quoting what you started your comment with:

Oh boy.
You're NOT free to say or do absolutely anything you want. You are not free to kill, or steal, or to violate any one of the tens of thousands of statutes and rulings that make up common law. In the US and Europe (and probably most countries) you're not free to threaten people, to incite illegal activity, or even to violate intellectual property.

Your freedom has limits and it always has. There are very good reasons why you are not free to impinge upon another person's rights.

I'm gay & I've been forced to physically defend myself & others from homophobes on a couple of occasions. I assume they were str8. That doesn't entitle me to call all str8 people homophobic heteroscum & walk the streets of my city yelling out, "Kill all str8 men/people!" That would constitute despicable hate speech & it would be counterproductive to the LGBTQ+ cause - most people & journalists would simply write me off as an extremist lunatic. There's a big difference between shouting, "Kill all men!" & "Lock all abusive men up!"

Do you think professional Black rights activists instruct protesters to chant, "Kill all whites!"? Do you think they're that stupid? They know they can't change things for the better without white allies. Gays can't successfully fight homophobes without the help of str8 people & women can't defeat misogynists without the help of men. You don't win men over by screaming you want to kill all of them, that alienates them! Is that so hard to understand? Human rights activists who know how to do their job aren't rabid fools who play into their enemies' hands by alienating potential supporters...

 

[Chinaski]

Allow me to respond to this statement by quoting what you started your comment with:



I'm gay & I've been forced to physically defend myself & others from homophobes on a couple of occasions. I assume they were str8. That doesn't entitle me to call all str8 people homophobic heteroscum & walk the streets of my city yelling out, "Kill all str8 men/people!" That would constitute despicable hate speech & it would be counterproductive to the LGBTQ+ cause - most people & journalists would simply write me off as an extremist lunatic. There's a big difference between shouting, "Kill all men!" & "Lock all abusive men up!"

Do you think professional Black rights activists instruct protesters to chant, "Kill all whites!"? Do you think they're that stupid? They know they can't change things for the better without white allies. Gays can't successfully fight homophobes without the help of str8 people & women can't defeat misogynists without the help of men. You don't win men over by screaming you want to kill all of them, that alienates them! Is that so hard to understand? Human rights activists who know how to do their job aren't rabid fools who play into their enemies' hands by alienating potential supporters...

THE OPPRESSED: fuck my oppressor

SANCTIONED SUICIDE DOT ORG USER 'MOTEL BENEATH THE ROOMS' : well ur hardly going to persuade your oppressor with that attitude!!! also before you accuse me of woolly liberal thinking may l remind you I'm gay and therefore have opinion infallibility on this

 

[whatevs]

No. I have trouble thinking of something that matters more. People should be allowed to say pretty much whatever they believe to be true. I say this because if i couldn't express myself freely and say what I thought was true I would probably lose my mind.

Everything in moderation, though. Complete free speech is impossible, the best is *almost* complete free speech. Obviously harassment and calling for violence ought to be out of bounds, for example.

 

[Flippy]

"The only winning move is not to play"

 

[Sherri]

Imo there is no freedom of speech, that's all an illusion. Try your freedom of speech on the streets and you will see how quick the police gets there to suppress everyone.

 

[Aurora Vanderlux]

Everything in moderation, though. Complete free speech is impossible, the best is *almost* complete free speech. Obviously harassment and calling for violence ought to be out of bounds, for example.

You are right, what worries me is that there is the discourse of "Freedom of expression is overrated", it eliminates the little freedom we have

 

[whatevs]

Imo there is no freedom of speech, that's all an illusion. Try your freedom of speech on the streets and you will see how quick the police gets there to suppress everyone.

Or anyone that gets offended and decides to make you silent in a physical way.

 

[Chinaski]

Imo there is no freedom of speech, that's all an illusion. Try your freedom of speech on the streets and you will see how quick the police gets there to suppress everyone.

Just out of interest and this is not aimed specifically at Sherri but is a genuine question for everyone - what examples are there of things you are desperate to say out loud that you feel you can not, and how severe are the repercussions for saying them?

 

[Dot]

Just out of interest and this is not aimed specifically at Sherri but is a genuine question for everyone - what examples are there of things you are desperate to say out loud that you feel you can not, and how severe are the repercussions for saying them?

Slf nt hld prejdce agnst n.e partclr grps bt slf hs non-pc snse of humr - am vry selctve ovr wh slf shre tht snse of humr wth bcse sme wll assme am racst / homphbc / trns-phbc / sxst e.t.c fr fndng certn jkes fnny.

Apprs tht comdy = vctm of othrs wntng 2 censr thngs a.t.m bcse thy nt undrstnd nuancs of humr

 

[Chinaski]

Slf nt hld prejdce agnst n.e partclr grps bt slf hs non-pc snse of humr - am vry selctve ovr wh slf shre tht snse of humr wth bcse sme wll assme am racst / homphbc / trns-phbc / sxst e.t.c fr fndng certn jkes fnny.

Apprs tht comdy = vctm of othrs wntng 2 censr thngs a.t.m bcse thy nt undrstnd nuancs of humr

Full disagree, the world is full to the gunnels with comedians who are far less funny than they are edgy. Nobody has outlawed "non pc" humour, and people have always had to be selective as to when and where they display their individual sense of humour. I'd also say the repercussions of displaying such a sense of humour are pretty much non-existent, certainly not to the point where these mutton-heads need to bellow about the erosion of free speech and bleat about being cancelled by a "woke" mob, however if someone is to express, for example, a racist sentiment within the context of a joke they should expect some pushback on it. Anyone expressing any opinion does so with the understanding that they may be expected to subsequently defend it. Nobody is being silenced, nobody is having their liberty curtailed, honestly l don't accept this as a legit example.

 

[Dot]

Full disagree, the world is full to the gunnels with comedians who are far less funny than they are edgy.Nobody has outlawed "non pc" humour, and people have always had to be selective as to when and where they display their individual sense of humour. I'd also say the repercussions of displaying such a sense of humour are pretty much non-existent, certainly not to the point where these mutton-heads need to bellow about the erosion of free speech and bleat about being cancelled by a "woke" mob, however if someone is to express, for example, a racist sentiment within the context of a joke they should expect some pushback on it. Anyone expressing any opinion does so with the understanding that they may be expected to subsequently defend it. Nobody is being silenced, nobody is having their liberty curtailed, honestly l don't accept this as a legit example.

Undrstnd u nt accpt as legtm8 exmple bt wll gve cple exmples

1stly - agree tht snse of humr = oftn savd fr ppl of simlr dispostn & am nt defndng n.e. racst sentmnts

A comdn wh/ hs bn on u.k circt fr ovr 30 yrs - Roy 'Chbby' Brwn ws recntly tld thy cld nt perfrm in certn councl-ownd venus n.e mre tht thy hve perfmrd in fr yrs bcse of petitn tht hd bn submttd bcse sme ppl fnd thr mterial unsavry - in prevs yrs ppl wh/ nt lke tht humr wld jst hve nt purchsd tckts - slf cld undrstnd if ws spreadng h8 spch or smethng bt = nthng lke tht

Lk @ wht happnd w/ Dve Chpplle & hs cnflcts w/ th trnsgndr cmmnty in th cse of 'Dphne' - a trnsgdnr comdn wh/ defndd D.Cs trnsgndr jkes & ws attckd s/ fiercly b/ th cmmnty onlne bcse of it tht sh/ c.t.b nt lng aftr - tht = mch bggr thm smple psh-bck

Dve Chpplle hs opnly supprtd th rghts 2 dignty rspct & sfety fr th trnsgdnr cmmnty bt h/ wll wrte obsrvatnl jkes abt thm lke h/ wll mny othr grps - ppl nt hve 2 lke thm bt mob mentalty mns tht ppl bcme outragd & jmp on th h8 train w/o evn wtchng vdeo clps & jdgng fr thmslves wht h/ sayng

Comedns oftn nrr8 wht thy r witnssng in socty - thy r excutd in sme cntries fr tht reasn s/ thy r a grp lke mny artsts wh/ in opn sciety shld hve freedm of exprssn - ovr-reactve respnss cmbind w/ socl mdia expsre r cre8ng snse of moral panc & waterng dwn wht thy cn tlk abt @ th rsk of cmplte d-platfrmng - mny r retirng erly as a reslt or leavng prfssn altgthr

 

[Chinaski]

Undrstnd u nt accpt as legtm8 exmple bt wll gve cple exmples

1stly - agree tht snse of humr = oftn savd fr ppl of simlr dispostn & am nt defndng n.e. racst sentmnts

A comdn wh/ hs bn on u.k circt fr ovr 30 yrs - Roy 'Chbby' Brwn ws recntly tld thy cld nt perfrm in certn councl-ownd venus n.e mre tht thy hve perfmrd in fr yrs bcse of petitn tht hd bn submttd bcse sme ppl fnd thr mterial unsavry - in prevs yrs ppl wh/ nt lke tht humr wld jst hve nt purchsd tckts - slf cld undrstnd if ws spreadng h8 spch or smethng bt = nthng lke tht

Lk @ wht happnd w/ Dve Chpplle & hs cnflcts w/ th trnsgndr cmmnty in th cse of 'Dphne' - a trnsgdnr comdn wh/ defndd D.Cs trnsgndr jkes & ws attckd s/ fiercly b/ th cmmnty onlne bcse of it tht sh/ c.t.b nt lng aftr - tht = mch bggr thm smple psh-bck

Dve Chpplle hs opnly supprtd th rghts 2 dignty rspct & sfety fr th trnsgdnr cmmnty bt h/ wll wrte obsrvatnl jkes abt thm lke h/ wll mny othr grps - ppl nt hve 2 lke thm bt mob mentalty mns tht ppl bcme outragd & jmp on th h8 train w/o evn wtchng vdeo clps & jdgng fr thmslves wht h/ sayng

Comedns oftn nrr8 wht thy r witnssng in socty - thy r excutd in sme cntries fr tht reasn s/ thy r a grp lke mny artsts wh/ in opn sciety shld hve freedm of exprssn - ovr-reactve respnss cmbind w/ socl mdia expsre r cre8ng snse of moral panc & waterng dwn wht thy cn tlk abt @ th rsk of cmplte d-platfrmng - mny r retirng erly as a reslt or leavng prfssn altgthr

My view on this take is that it reinforces my point, that the erosion of free speech is a myth and the repercussions of espousing shitty opinions are minimal, rather than refutes it.

The Chubby Brown example - this man is in his seventies, he has made a good living from telling his jokes over several decades, his dvds are still on sale, there are people who still like him, however comedy has moved on and each passing generation will consign the less appealing cultural output of the preceding generation to the bin. If the best example of free speech being eroded and those who disobey are being severely punished is that racist comedians are getting fewer gigs, it doesn't stick - one could make the same argument about the cancellation of the Black & White Minstrel Show and it would be equally flimsy.

There are also a high number of actually right wing comedians at work these days, it's a growing theme in comedy to the point where there is an actual UK tour of unfunny, balding, craggy-faced blokes raking it in for turning puce on stage as the rant about how the world seems to have forgotten them. There are comedians like Geoff Norcott, a catastrophically unfunny individual whose main shtick is that he's a "working class tory", and you can barely move for BBC current affairs output slinging him on the panel to review the day's news from that most marginalised perspective of "middle-aged white bloke with macho right-wing politics". Comedians aren't an endangered species, and if the erosion of "free speech" centres around the declining ticket sales of old racist windbags I'm not overly concerned.

 

[Dot]

My view on this take is that it reinforces my point, that the erosion of free speech is a myth and the repercussions of espousing shitty opinions are minimal, rather than refutes it.

The Chubby Brown example - this man is in his seventies, he has made a good living from telling his jokes over several decades, his dvds are still on sale, there are people who still like him, however comedy has moved on and each passing generation will consign the less appealing cultural output of the preceding generation to the bin. If the best example of free speech being eroded and those who disobey are being severely punished is that racist comedians are getting fewer gigs, it doesn't stick - one could make the same argument about the cancellation of the Black & White Minstrel Show and it would be equally flimsy.

There are also a high number of actually right wing comedians at work these days, it's a growing theme in comedy to the point where there is an actual UK tour of unfunny, balding, craggy-faced blokes raking it in for turning puce on stage as the rant about how the world seems to have forgotten them. There are comedians like Geoff Norcott, a catastrophically unfunny individual whose main shtick is that he's a "working class tory", and you can barely move for BBC current affairs output slinging him on the panel to review the day's news from that most marginalised perspective of "middle-aged white bloke with macho right-wing politics". Comedians aren't an endangered species, and if the erosion of "free speech" centres around the declining ticket sales of old racist windbags I'm not overly concerned.

U hve ignrd th Dve Chpplle exmple whch = v crrnt & th Ry Chbby Brwn exmpl ws nt abt dcning tckt sales - ppl wntd 2 prchse tckts - it ws abt ppl wh/ nt wtch artsts prssurng vnus nt 2 hst thm bcse nt lke it & vnues gvng in2 tht prssre

Slf nt evn wtch thse oldr artsts bt @ th sme tme = nt up 2 othr ppl 2 dcde wht slf shld b abl 2 wtch if slf chse 2 - & tht = hppnng in vnues up & dwn th cntry 2 up & cmng artsts also

 

[Chinaski]

U hve ignrd th Dve Chpplle exmple whch = v crrnt & th Ry Chbby Brwn exmpl ws nt abt dcning tckt sales - it ws abt ppl wh/ nt wtch artsts prssurng vnus nt 2 hst thm bcse nt lke it & vnues gvng in2 tht prssre

Slf nt evn wtch thse oldr artsts bt @ th sme tme = nt up 2 othr ppl 2 dcde wht slf shld b abl 2 wtch if slf chse 2 - & tht = hppnng in vnues up & dwn th cntry

The reason why l focused on Brown specifically is because the bloke has mad literally *millions of pounds* from being a racist comedian for decades, his dvds still sell, a venue deciding not to host this man is not an example of our free speech being under threat, nor is it an example of people being made to suffer for expressing their opinion.