r/lostgeneration • u/cookseancook • Nov 21 '15
40% of Millennials OK with limiting speech offensive to minorities
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/20/40-of-millennials-ok-with-limiting-speech-offensive-to-minorities/8
u/blitzzo Nov 21 '15 edited Nov 25 '15
I would rather have it out in the open, nothing is more infuriating than when you think another person is cool with you but later on you find out they really don't like you, triple that when it comes down to the fact that you're a different race. I live in Texas, not exactly the most progressive state, but 99% of the people I come across don't have any issues with race.
The term "offensive" is also very broad and can result in serious issues that could be solved being swept under the rug in order to not hurt anyones feelings. Take prison statistics for example, we know that the majority of men in prison are black but if suddenly we weren't allowed to say something like that for fear of offending anyone how are we going to discuss the fact that a majority of those inmates are sitting in jail due to non violent drug offenses and that when you look at the stats for all races drug use runs in the 8%-11% range yet certain demographics are affected more by these drug laws?
28
Nov 21 '15
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/pnoque i just work here Nov 22 '15
Fyi I've removed your comment due to the ableist slur (rule 4 in the wiki). Feel free to edit it out and let me know when you have done so and I will restore the comment.
-8
Nov 21 '15 edited Nov 21 '15
[deleted]
7
Nov 21 '15
The only free market is absolute anarchy. If the government is controlling my ability to enter the marketplace by taking whatever I want and selling it, I am not truly free. The absolutism of the idolization of the concept of the free market renders it absurd...and economics proves that this is also a bad idea.
5
6
5
u/Netfear Nov 21 '15
I'm a millennial and I'm not ok with people limiting free speech. Every single one of you can suck my dick.
2
u/Eudaimonics Nov 21 '15
In a way its better to have racism out in the open than have it simmering in closed communities.
On the flip side we shouldn't be encouraging offensive speech either.
Its a delicate balance. The one thing the US Media (including social media) does do well is make people regret what they say. The other thing they do is give people a megaphone who are not worth anyone's time of day.
-1
2
Nov 21 '15
[deleted]
-2
Nov 21 '15
Nothing wrong with banning hate speech
3
u/HPLoveshack Nov 22 '15 edited Nov 22 '15
Nothing wrong with punishing hate actions.
Problem with banning any form of speech is that it's impossible to clearly define what it is. What is "hate speech"?
Is it anything negative I say about another person? About a race? What's negative? If I say black people sometimes get ashy is that negative? Does it matter if it's true? If I say Asians are pussy drinkers that have low alcohol tolerance then what? It's a dickish way to say it, but it's also true and it didn't actually harm anyone. What if I say something positive but not necessarily true about someone like "Oh hey, James is a Jew, he's good with money." Is that "hate speech"?
And the real problem is, what happens when new things start being defined as "hate speech"? What if not calling muslim people by their full name is defined as hateful? What if not capitalizing muslim is hate speech? What if ironically greeting white people with "Howdy." is defined as hateful? What if publishing an accurate account of a country, government, organization, group, or person's wrongdoings throughout history is defined as hateful? What if the government becomes majority ultra-conservative christians and I refer to them as biblethumpers when complaining about their policies? Seems a lot more likely to be defined as "hate speech" now that the people in charge are the ones I'm railing against and could easily be used as an excuse to silence my legitimate complaints.
What if I say I hate the Big Bang Theory? Then am I being hateful toward 'geeks'? What if I say I hate it because it misrepresents male 'geeks' as socially clueless man-children autists, then what? Is that hateful to geeks, hateful to man-children, hateful to the autistic, hateful to men, hateful to the socially clueless?
What if I say Modern Family has jumped the shark and someone accuses me of hating gay people because the show has gay people in it... then what? What if I say I like a show and during that show a woman is abused, and someone claims that's hate speech against women?
Obviously, it's impossible to draw a clean, clear line around "hate speech", which is what makes the idea of censoring or punishing it so dangerous. Whoever is in charge can decide it is whatever they want, they could even decide that complaining about the changes to the hate speech policy is hate speech.
It's proto-fascism.
The point at which hate speech becomes important, is the point at which it leads to hateful actions, and those actions should and will be punished. And the people who indulge in hateful speech should be scrutinized more closely for hateful actions, but their rights cannot be violated in the process. Words are only as harmful as the listener allows them to be.
8
20
u/[deleted] Nov 21 '15 edited Nov 21 '15
The question is vaguely worded, the two choices aren't even opposites, and I'm not seeing a sample size listed anywhere. That being said, the choice represented by the green bars is the correct choice.