Freedom of speech vs Respecting other people's feelings

Page 2 of 7 [ 110 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next


What is more important to you?
Freedom of speech 74%  74%  [ 17 ]
Respecting other people's feelings 26%  26%  [ 6 ]
Total votes : 23

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 23,606
Location: Universe 25

12 Feb 2023, 3:27 pm

Dengashinobi wrote:
Excellent analysis as always techstepgenr8tion. Yes a concern of mine is that what people say might affect their ability to make a living. But this question is more of a personal level. Like what you personally think it's better, to speak what you believe is true or to avoid that because it might hurt a person's feelings even if you believe that that person is wrong. I used the term "free speech" for a reason of course.

It really depends on how much damage their doing - both to others unnecessarily and to the objectives of their own cause.

A rather clear-cut or unambiguous (at least these days) example might be someone getting harassed or even doxed for standing up on radio to the excess of the 1980's 'Satanic panic'.

One of the risks is when there's social contagion that contagion takes power through threat of violence to cowe those who'd be horrified of the infringements that contagion had on civil liberties but as that contagion picks up it fills up as well with mercenaries and rent-seekers, the way the mercenaries working for the Pope in the middle ages had a great time terrorizing the Cathars - ie. disproportionate behavior from people who just wanted the right to do psychopathic things and find a place that gives them the license they were looking for to do what they wanted to anyway.


_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin


The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,555
Location: Reading, England

12 Feb 2023, 5:03 pm

I don't think people should be killed for anything they have said, and they should never be imprisoned for "hurt feelings". Inciting hatred should be a very high bar. Obviously serious fraud, spilling state secrets, etc. are good grounds for imprisoning someone for speech, but probably outside the remit of the question.

In terms of "would I rather tell the truth and offend someone, or bite my tongue to be nice?" - that's too black and white. Neither is universally more important to me than the other. I probably come down more on the side of "blunt truth" than the average person, but at the same time, to give an example, if I see e.g. a really visually unappealing person, I don't say "gosh, you're ugly!" even if it is my true opinion, because that would just be cruel. Obviously that's an extreme example, but with more mundane examples you've got to take each situation on its own merits. I don't give false compliments because I think that undermines your credibility, but I also don't offer "the harsh truth" unless I think it is important.



Minder
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

Joined: 29 Feb 2016
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 212

12 Feb 2023, 5:08 pm

The_Walrus wrote:
I don't think people should be killed for anything they have said, and they should never be imprisoned for "hurt feelings". Inciting hatred should be a very high bar. Obviously serious fraud, spilling state secrets, etc. are good grounds for imprisoning someone for speech, but probably outside the remit of the question.

In terms of "would I rather tell the truth and offend someone, or bite my tongue to be nice?" - that's too black and white. Neither is universally more important to me than the other. I probably come down more on the side of "blunt truth" than the average person, but at the same time, to give an example, if I see e.g. a really visually unappealing person, I don't say "gosh, you're ugly!" even if it is my true opinion, because that would just be cruel. Obviously that's an extreme example, but with more mundane examples you've got to take each situation on its own merits. I don't give false compliments because I think that undermines your credibility, but I also don't offer "the harsh truth" unless I think it is important.


There are definitely cases where harsh truth is called for. Like at an intervention for an addict. But these are pretty rare. And I think you can be harsh without being cruel.

"You've lost your job, you spent all your money on heroin, and you've been kicked out of your house. Your life is a mess, and you need to fix it."

vs

"You're life is a mess because you're a stupid loser!"



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 23,606
Location: Universe 25

12 Feb 2023, 6:54 pm

Minder wrote:
There are definitely cases where harsh truth is called for. Like at an intervention for an addict. But these are pretty rare. And I think you can be harsh without being cruel.

"You've lost your job, you spent all your money on heroin, and you've been kicked out of your house. Your life is a mess, and you need to fix it."

vs

"You're life is a mess because you're a stupid loser!"

Hate is othering and othering is a form of power. Part of why it's so contagious with NT's - its more a social extraction technology than a vice.


_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin


Joe90
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 26,059
Location: UK

12 Feb 2023, 8:09 pm

The best way is being liberal.

If someone expresses a controversial belief or opinion, it's not cool to say nasty insults to them and calling them names just because you don't agree with it, but everyone should have the right to say how they feel too, like "I'm glad that works for you but I don't really think it's a good idea myself and I certainly wouldn't do it". Then if they ask why, give reasons. Usually there's a reason behind a negative opinion. If there isn't a reason behind a negative opinion and they just want to judge or mock you, then that's not valid.

It's like if people shudder when I talk about my pet rats, I don't take offense. A lot of people are afraid of rats, for some it's because they're not educated enough. Not everyone has to like rats, and people are free to say their opinions. Some people don't come round to our place any more because they don't like my rats. That's fair enough. Not everyone thinks the same way as I do.
But I do find it rude and upsetting when people say bad things about my rats, like saying I should kill them and all that. There is no need to say that, they are my pets and I love them.

There is a difference but I think a lot of Aspies fail to understand where abouts the line is drawn between the two.


_________________
Female


Joe90
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 26,059
Location: UK

12 Feb 2023, 8:28 pm

One more thing I was going to mention, which might explain why me and most people I know get frustrated with political correctness.
My work colleagues were actually having a conversation about this the other day. One of them posted a cute photo of his 2-year-old on Facebook with chocolate smeared all over her face. But his photo got taken down by Facebook, saying that his photo was racially offensive, and he got a ban for two weeks. Then another colleague said that her teenage daughter was being bullied on Facebook, people she both knew and didn't know were writing really nasty comments on her profile picture, saying she looked ugly and "retarded", all because she had some zits on her face. She got severely hurt and had to take a week off school with severe depression and she now suffers self-esteem issues. But Facebook never took those comments down and the bullies never got banned.
So political correctness seems to be more important than actual personal insults and bullying.
And this isn't just a one-off occurrence, I see it happen all the time on the internet.
I don't quite know what was so racist about a toddler with chocolate all over her face but I'm assuming it's offensive to black people because of the old-fashioned stereotype thing they used in cartoons of white characters being black or something.

I think that is why many people roll their eyes at political correctness. It's not that we're disrespectful, it's the fuss caused by 21st century cancel culture that makes people want to turn a blind eye to it. I wish people here would get it.

I must admit, WP is good for dealing with political incorrectness AND personal attacks. But Facebook only panics about political incorrectness, never mind about people who are being publicly cyberbullied.


_________________
Female


Dengashinobi
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Dec 2022
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 598

13 Feb 2023, 3:44 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Dengashinobi wrote:
Excellent analysis as always techstepgenr8tion. Yes a concern of mine is that what people say might affect their ability to make a living. But this question is more of a personal level. Like what you personally think it's better, to speak what you believe is true or to avoid that because it might hurt a person's feelings even if you believe that that person is wrong. I used the term "free speech" for a reason of course.

It really depends on how much damage their doing - both to others unnecessarily and to the objectives of their own cause.

A rather clear-cut or unambiguous (at least these days) example might be someone getting harassed or even doxed for standing up on radio to the excess of the 1980's 'Satanic panic'.

One of the risks is when there's social contagion that contagion takes power through threat of violence to cowe those who'd be horrified of the infringements that contagion had on civil liberties but as that contagion picks up it fills up as well with mercenaries and rent-seekers, the way the mercenaries working for the Pope in the middle ages had a great time terrorizing the Cathars - ie. disproportionate behavior from people who just wanted the right to do psychopathic things and find a place that gives them the license they were looking for to do what they wanted to anyway.


There is a very interesting chapter in the book "The Road to Serfdom" by Friedrich Hayek. The chapter is called "why the worst get on top". He tries to explain the ascendance of evil individuals on leading positions of intelectualy dishonest ideological groups, such as communism, fascism and the like. He suggests that in a system that is based on assumptions that do not correspond with reality, individuals are forced to make decisions against facts so they can conform and thus affirm the ideology. Moral individuals shy away from positions that require to compromise their objective judgement. Thus giving an advantage to individuals who have no such moral qualms and who are driven by personal success. So, ideological systems that are irrational and fail to grasp reality give rise to morally corrupt individuals e.g. the dark triad or tetrad types.



Dengashinobi
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Dec 2022
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 598

13 Feb 2023, 4:01 am

Joe90 wrote:
One more thing I was going to mention, which might explain why me and most people I know get frustrated with political correctness.
My work colleagues were actually having a conversation about this the other day. One of them posted a cute photo of his 2-year-old on Facebook with chocolate smeared all over her face. But his photo got taken down by Facebook, saying that his photo was racially offensive, and he got a ban for two weeks. Then another colleague said that her teenage daughter was being bullied on Facebook, people she both knew and didn't know were writing really nasty comments on her profile picture, saying she looked ugly and "retarded", all because she had some zits on her face. She got severely hurt and had to take a week off school with severe depression and she now suffers self-esteem issues. But Facebook never took those comments down and the bullies never got banned.
So political correctness seems to be more important than actual personal insults and bullying.
And this isn't just a one-off occurrence, I see it happen all the time on the internet.
I don't quite know what was so racist about a toddler with chocolate all over her face but I'm assuming it's offensive to black people because of the old-fashioned stereotype thing they used in cartoons of white characters being black or something.

I think that is why many people roll their eyes at political correctness. It's not that we're disrespectful, it's the fuss caused by 21st century cancel culture that makes people want to turn a blind eye to it. I wish people here would get it.

I must admit, WP is good for dealing with political incorrectness AND personal attacks. But Facebook only panics about political incorrectness, never mind about people who are being publicly cyberbullied.


It's because that's what political correctness is, It's political. It doesn't seek to really moderate verbal aggression but rather to affirm a political stance.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

13 Feb 2023, 7:11 am

If anybody believes a picture of a toddler with chocolate all over his/her face is “racist,” I would believe that “somebody” is just “looking for offense in every nook and cranny.”

This is a manifestation of “wokism” in extreme.



Joe90
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 26,059
Location: UK

13 Feb 2023, 7:22 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
If anybody believes a picture of a toddler with chocolate all over his/her face is “racist,” I would believe that “somebody” is just “looking for offense in every nook and cranny.”

This is a manifestation of “wokism” in extreme.


Nobody reported it, it's just the Big Brother of Facebook scanning around for anything intentionally or unintentionally racist or homophobic in the slightest. It's what the world is becoming now. It's not Joe90 being disrespectful, it's millions of people including Joe90 not liking how over the top it's becoming.


_________________
Female


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

13 Feb 2023, 7:51 am

Most people actually have common sense.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 23,606
Location: Universe 25

13 Feb 2023, 10:03 am

Dengashinobi wrote:
There is a very interesting chapter in the book "The Road to Serfdom" by Friedrich Hayek. The chapter is called "why the worst get on top". He tries to explain the ascendance of evil individuals on leading positions of intelectualy dishonest ideological groups, such as communism, fascism and the like. He suggests that in a system that is based on assumptions that do not correspond with reality, individuals are forced to make decisions against facts so they can conform and thus affirm the ideology. Moral individuals shy away from positions that require to compromise their objective judgement. Thus giving an advantage to individuals who have no such moral qualms and who are driven by personal success. So, ideological systems that are irrational and fail to grasp reality give rise to morally corrupt individuals e.g. the dark triad or tetrad types.

TY for sharing that, it makes a lot of sense.

I'm at a point where I'm simultaneously trying to juggle Darwinian game theory with the results of poorly designed systems or cases like the current NPD / BPD juggernaut in our culture where it seems like by being closed to reason they're able to herd reasonable people according to their will (something like an extended version of Nassim Taleb's 'Minority Rule') and yet their strategy isn't a genetic one because BPD and NPD aren't gene traits but rather early life trauma - which means quite often that, particularly with any dark triad/tetrad traits that are taking the reigns of power, at least outside of psychopaths where there indeed may be more going on, we're being taken over by those too wounded to function. That's where our current ideologies (like 'just be nice and harmless and you'll be good') are really dangerous and have opened us to some awful exposures in the sense that Hayek mentioned.


_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin


Joe90
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 26,059
Location: UK

13 Feb 2023, 8:40 pm

I still think political correctness with race is becoming way too focused (and it's becoming like that with gender now too). Like nearly every old Disney classic is racist. But the strange thing is that in a lot of family movies I've watched I've noticed there's often a snooty British butler who also happens to be an evil villain. That's never called out as racist against British people. But what if they always made the evil villain an African butler or a Japanese butler or something?

Also almost every episode of The Simpsons where they travel to another country has some sort of racist controversy - unless it's in England or Australia or Canada. They can stereotype and mock all they want and nobody cares. But in the episodes where they go to countries like Africa, Brazil and India, it's offensive, unless you take out any stereotypes and just have those countries look like America. But every country has their own culture and tradition, so not all stereotypes should be offensive.

I fail to understand the double standards. Why does racism only seem one-sided? Why can't every race be treated equally?


_________________
Female


Dengashinobi
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Dec 2022
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 598

14 Feb 2023, 5:51 am

Joe90 wrote:
I still think political correctness with race is becoming way too focused (and it's becoming like that with gender now too). Like nearly every old Disney classic is racist. But the strange thing is that in a lot of family movies I've watched I've noticed there's often a snooty British butler who also happens to be an evil villain. That's never called out as racist against British people. But what if they always made the evil villain an African butler or a Japanese butler or something?

Also almost every episode of The Simpsons where they travel to another country has some sort of racist controversy - unless it's in England or Australia or Canada. They can stereotype and mock all they want and nobody cares. But in the episodes where they go to countries like Africa, Brazil and India, it's offensive, unless you take out any stereotypes and just have those countries look like America. But every country has their own culture and tradition, so not all stereotypes should be offensive.

I fail to understand the double standards. Why does racism only seem one-sided? Why can't every race be treated equally?


It's because of ideology. Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality preach that we should not be treated equally. Those who belong to historicaly disadvantaged groups should be treated with absolute respect. Those who belong to historically privileged groups are to be put down and to bow to the disadvantaged ones. It's basically reverse racism and sexism. Have you ever heard something more moronic than that? This is what is being tought in schools right now.



Joe90
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 26,059
Location: UK

14 Feb 2023, 6:30 am

Dengashinobi wrote:
Joe90 wrote:
I still think political correctness with race is becoming way too focused (and it's becoming like that with gender now too). Like nearly every old Disney classic is racist. But the strange thing is that in a lot of family movies I've watched I've noticed there's often a snooty British butler who also happens to be an evil villain. That's never called out as racist against British people. But what if they always made the evil villain an African butler or a Japanese butler or something?

Also almost every episode of The Simpsons where they travel to another country has some sort of racist controversy - unless it's in England or Australia or Canada. They can stereotype and mock all they want and nobody cares. But in the episodes where they go to countries like Africa, Brazil and India, it's offensive, unless you take out any stereotypes and just have those countries look like America. But every country has their own culture and tradition, so not all stereotypes should be offensive.

I fail to understand the double standards. Why does racism only seem one-sided? Why can't every race be treated equally?


It's because of ideology. Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality preach that we should not be treated equally. Those who belong to historicaly disadvantaged groups should be treated with absolute respect. Those who belong to historically privileged groups are to be put down and to bow to the disadvantaged ones. It's basically reverse racism and sexism. Have you ever heard something more moronic than that? This is what is being tought in schools right now.


I mean I belong to a historically disadvantaged group (women), but I hate political correctness.


_________________
Female


r00tb33r
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2016
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,762

14 Feb 2023, 6:44 am

I've had a situation with a person who would accuse me of hurting their feelings by doing "x". But I know I didn't do "x".

Then they accuse me of invalidation when I say I didn't do what I didn't do.

I can't win. I can't win.


_________________
Enjoy the silence.


Last edited by The_Walrus on 14 Feb 2023, 6:50 am, edited 1 time in total.: Removed page-breaking gif