66

There is no true free speech for anyone who's gender critical anymore. The above statement, which I'm sure we've all read countless times by now, assures that anyone writing critically against the gender cult could be targeted for harassment (online and offline), and might end up cancelled and out of a job. All this for speaking their mind, for having the 'wrong thought'.

How did this mantra gain such traction? How can there even be such a thing as a 'wrong thought'? If your speech has consequences, then it's clearly not free. TRAs even use the word 'deplatform' to describe what they're doing against adverseries. They use the excuse that when someone is 'a bigot' they can do whatever is needed to silence this person. However, in these cases, the word 'bigot' is never clearly defined. It's just anyone who disagrees with or criticises them. Therefore JK Rowling is called a bigot for writing clearly and compassionately, without any bigoted ideas whatsoever.

Freedom of speech should be free, meaning that every word, every thought should be permissable. An idea should be met with well thought out criticism, but not dogpiling or harassment. And a thought should be met with another thought, and not mantras.

Maybe TRAs don't like freedom of thought, because they have so few thoughts themselves.

There is no true free speech for anyone who's gender critical anymore. The above statement, which I'm sure we've all read countless times by now, assures that anyone writing critically against the gender cult could be targeted for harassment (online and offline), and might end up cancelled and out of a job. All this for speaking their mind, for having the 'wrong thought'. How did this mantra gain such traction? How can there even be such a thing as a 'wrong thought'? If your speech has consequences, then it's clearly not free. TRAs even use the word 'deplatform' to describe what they're doing against adverseries. They use the excuse that when someone is 'a bigot' they can do whatever is needed to silence this person. However, in these cases, the word 'bigot' is never clearly defined. It's just anyone who disagrees with or criticises them. Therefore JK Rowling is called a bigot for writing clearly and compassionately, without any bigoted ideas whatsoever. Freedom of speech should be free, meaning that every word, every thought should be permissable. An idea should be met with well thought out criticism, but not dogpiling or harassment. And a thought should be met with another thought, and not mantras. Maybe TRAs don't like freedom of thought, because they have so few thoughts themselves.

53 comments

If your speech has consequences, then it's clearly not free.

I used to be one of those people that said "freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences" but I'm on your side on this now. I used to be fine with it when people were getting fired for saying REALLY RACIST and stupid shit (you all remember the AIDS lady?) But nowadays seeing multiple GC people get fired for mildly bucking against gender ideology (like the teacher and assistant principal from Oregon) makes me rethink even that. That could easily be me. Saying stupid (or unpopular) shit online shouldn't get anyone fired, as long as they're not actually threatening doxxing or stalking someone. And the threat of losing your livelihood is enough to get most people to shut up when they otherwise wouldn't- so no, it wouldn't really be "free" speech.

Look up "Holy Land Hummus" - Palestinian immigrant family built up a food business. The adults weren't that internet saavy, so they were unaware back in 2012 their 14 year old daughter was posting things like "Bring Hitler back" and using the N-word. It's all "edge lord" teenager stuff - which no one really cared enough to report to twitter and get it taken down back then. Somewhere along the way she grew up and realized it was inappropriate. She was working for her family's company in 2020.

In 2020 - someone dug it up, and her father's company lost all their contracts, had to shut down their factory, and let go most their employees.

It's the whole "two wrongs don't make a right" and "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" in my opinion.

Maybe a better response to "freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences" is just "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" - but I suppose that would be written off as a conservative attitude, even though I'm liberal/left and atheist.

In 2020 - someone dug it up, and her father's company lost all their contracts, had to shut down their factory, and let go most their employees.

not to mention that this company hired mostly other Arab immigrants. so this Palestinian immigrant who started a local business’s life gets destroyed and dozens of other immigrants are fired and lose their livelihoods and healthcare even though the man literally did nothing wrong, it was his daughter. and this is counted as a win for the progressive left. blocked and reported (which I know is a controversial podcast here) recently did an episode about this insanity and also analyzed the NPR coverage that painted the man as an evil bigot.

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" - but I suppose that would be written off as a conservative attitude,

I always associate a more punative attitude as being the more conservative one. I'm curious why you think this would be written off as conservative?

This might be a good example of horseshoe theory...

Because conservatives are the ones taking the role of “free speech warrior” now.

"Eye for an eye" is a biblical term - it's considered a fair punishment from the old testament, but Jesus preaches against it. I read this as "let people walk all over you" which I don't endorse either.

"“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you."

Wow, that poor family :(

It's the whole "two wrongs don't make a right" and "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" in my opinion.

Yes, that's a perfect way to put it!