Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectual society

Re:Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectua... by banannaise on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @05:43PM (#34811891)

As noted (and then, weirdly, disagreed with) in the article, you have to make a clear delineation between speech that is offensive and speech that is abusive. And that is not always an easy distinction to make!

Repeatedly using slurs is abusive, but what if the majority of people don't see it as a slur? If your answer is "then it's not a slur", then what do you think of the frequent use of the N-word in the first half of the 20th century?

Is it abusive to repeatedly and baselessly accuse an entire group of child abuse ("grooming")?

If you repeatedly attend community gatherings to repeat speech that is deliberately offensive to that community, does that rise to the level of abuse?

These are reasonable questions that we tend to just skip over when we talk about "cancel culture" and those who are characterized, fairly or unfairly, as victims of it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectua... by s1artibartfast on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @06:00PM (#34812164)

abusive speech isnt illegal either

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectua... by gallopingcomp on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @06:48PM (#34812706)

Which is not to the parent comment’s point anyway.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectua... by s1artibartfast on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @07:20PM (#34813065)

Then maybe I missed the point of the comparison. Why would we care if speech is considered abusive of not?

From the perspective of the article, hurtful speech (abuse), is and always will be subject to the interpretation of the listener. As such it will always change with time and context.

Anything can be interpreted as abusive speech at any time. It is not a consensus definition.

[ Parent | on HN ]