Free Speech for Me but Not for Thee

Post Reply New Topic

But if we censor free speech because the reason is to keep people safe, sensitive people, will just become more and more sensistive if they do not face real world disagreements though, and are taught to believe that disagreements are okay. If we teach sensitive people that disagreements are not okay, than we just end up making them more sensitive and their skins will get thinner and thinner.

Even best friends disagree.

Let’s not become like Putin.

I don’t like the all or nothing attitude at all.

I'm not sure people learning to accept always facing intolerance is a positive that deserves to be celebrated.

Perhaps certain blocs need to learn to accept their values and beliefs being criticized when they're demonstrably harmful to a society and the individuals who make up that society instead of dismissing any criticisms as "wokeness" and "thin-skinned".

Well I guess I would have to know is why do disagreements bother thin skinned people so much compared to someone who is more thicker skinned? If thick skinned people do not care and do not these disgareements bother them, then isn't that a more healthy way to live, rather than more thin skinned people constantly trying to think that any disgreements are going to hurt them and they are constantly worrying about that? That just seems less healthy to me.

Coddling people with thin skin makes them even more thin skinned, so the best thing to do is to let people like that know that having a thin skin is bad, and having a thick skin is good.

I think the whole thick skin vs. thin skin trope you're talking about is a distraction.

People complaining about facing discrimination or bigotry aren't thin-skinned for expressing their concerns but calling them thin-skinned is a common deflection to avoid having to actually consider their concerns.

But bigotry is everywhere, and cannot be stopped. The best thing to do is just accept that some people are just going to be biggots and not let it bother us all?

Sorry to inform you, "Binarism" is a thing these days.

The principle involved is freedom of expression.
There are very few instances I can see where it shouldn't be applied.

I'm a hardcore atheist.
Should I never ever talk about my beliefs because there are theists who might be offended?

It isn't black & white (can we still use that expression today? )
People who are traumatised need special consideration, but ultimately, it would be healthy if they could be desensitised from their triggers. I have read there are programs like that, such as in overcoming "Arachnophobia", as an example.

But generally speaking, it is my opinion that self-expression, without malice, shouldn't be restricted in most situations.

There is also another consideration.
The direction of self-expression.

A comment made to a general "audience" does not usually have the same emotional impact as when a comment is made specifically to an individual.
As you can see, there is complexity/nuances involved.

The wise old skunk has spoken.

You have funnelled the conversation into a specific context.
Just sayin'.

Oh but it seems that most progressives are against the idea of freedom of speech though, so does that mean that most progressives are victims of trauma though?

Plus another thing though, I myself am a victim of trauma, and that has caused me to develop a thick skin, and I was told this by others as well. So are most people who are traumatized thin skinned as a result, and I am unusual case?

A lot of what is described as “thin skin” is misplaced priorities. If you are taught words are violence you will often react to words as if the are actual violence.

Also constant and instantaneous transmission of bad things from everywhere is a problem. There is often no context and nuance to this information. Skewed view of the world, no time to separate the bad from the really bad, no time to recharge. The world was just as bad if not worse when us “thick skinned” boomers grew up but we did not have the disadvantages the “thin skinned” zoomers have to deal with.

Yes, we Boomers could often "get over it" long before the next assault came; but when a person is constantly inundated with hostile words and images that are seemingly directed at them, there is neither time nor opportunity to withdraw and "deal with it" effectively.  Some "thin-skinned" people may just have a form of PTSD* from the barrage of hostility and contempt, such that even the most innocent of terms might trigger an anxiety attack.

(*Disclaimer, I am not a mental-health professional.)

Why are zoomers taught that words are actual violence? Isn't that unhealthy to teach? And why can't zoomers tell the difference?

But if this is true why are zoomers constantly picked on more than older people?

Also most of these words they don't like are in the internet, so how is it constant, if the can just 'change the channel' so to speak?

Perhaps somebody could inform slamthunderbird. He managed to get a thread locked by getting personal.