And at this point your argument is holed below the waterline. If anything this is or could be offensive to someone is ‘dehumanising’ and anything ‘dehumanising’ is banned then you have nothing near free speech.
-
-
Replying to @Amanhas50935590 @Tredyn and
Meaningful speech is often ‘offensive’, people found those speaking in favour of gay tights to be ‘offensive’ and ‘dehumanising’. Saying almost anything worthwhile will offend someone.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Amanhas50935590 @LYNESTAR_ and
One of the biggest killers of trans people is suicide, and a large contributing factor to that is feeling shunned or hated by the outside world. Hate speech contributes to that, even if not directed at the trans person. When words like f*g are used the reinforce lethal hate.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Tredyn @LYNESTAR_ and
That is beyond ridiculous “this particular class of people is extremely fragile, so we’re going to ring fence them legally from any kind of back and forth that life consists of”.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Amanhas50935590 @LYNESTAR_ and
I'm not saying legally. But as people we should tolerate it way less. Hence why it's good for platforms to not allow it. There doesn't need to be laws, just more social pressure or consequences for this kind of hate speech.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Tredyn @LYNESTAR_ and
So basically, the extent of the public discussion should be, to a large extent, decided by large multinationals reacting to vocal activists? And you don’t think that could ever come back to bite you?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Amanhas50935590 @LYNESTAR_ and
Do you have anything other than slippery slope fallacies? "we shouldn't take a stand against a because what if they take a stand against x?" Still isn't a good point. I think it's ok for people and cooperations to take a stand against bigotry.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Tredyn @LYNESTAR_ and
But it’s not a fallacy, we’re watching this in real time. Feminists are being banned for saying that women don’t have penises. If you think this cannot turn around and bite you then you are hopelessly naive.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Amanhas50935590 @LYNESTAR_ and
A. Some women have penises, that's a fact. TERFs are being banned for saying that because it's a hateful falsehood B. If the actions protecting marginalized people get bad, then I'm against them. We shouldn't kill bigots, but we should take their platformhttps://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Tredyn @LYNESTAR_ and
A. It’s really not. It’s a biological fact that women do not have penises. B. Can you not see just how foolish it is to rely upon big business enforcing whatever is fashionable? What do you do where ‘marginalised’ interests collide, like Islam vs lgbt, or feminism vs trans?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
TERFs aren't feminists. They're an irrational hateful outlier. And trans women are women. Any actual feminist supports us. Most Islamic people are fine with LGBT people just like most christians are. The ones that aren't are extremists that don't deserve a major platform.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.