The culture of Rape, Bill Cosby Story

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

 

 

You just have a different approache, instead of legal, it´s public shaming, say something against the wars the US have started in the last 50 years...you are probalby, anti-american etc, and will  be shamed into ground.

Or elected to public office as a Democrat.

 

<cue rimshot>

 

is (not) worth noting that in a poll conducted by nobody reputable, fully 1/2 of american democrats would support a limit on hate speech.

 

democrats.

 

*snort*

 

in any event, we will observe that our most frequent disappointment regarding free speech is not that bigots and lunatics get to spew hate freely but rather that most americans do not use their speech rights to respond to the villains. americans, while less passive than most, is far too willing to stand idly by while their fellow human beings is tormented by evil men.

 

there ain't no active duty to respond to hate, but surely there is a moral obligation to do so.  we all too often see americans fail to live up to such obligations.  we wait for a pundits to gather in a climate-controlled tv studio, miles and days removed from any actual bigotry and hate, to calmly debate the the issues facing american society.  three minutes o' quasi-scripted dialectic ensues before the inevitable commercial break.  are your clothes as clean as they can be?  matthew mcconaughey drives a lincoln, and so should you.

 

sitting at home, having watched the battle o' tin knights with paper swords, we cheer democracy and free speech and america. hurrah.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 You see Gromnir you are in a very fortunate position to be able to intellectualize hate speech so you defend its usage even though you don't like it

 

I live in a country where we haven't got to that point yet and people are very much effected by  words . So we ban hate speech and certain words and its makes perfect sense

 

The truth is certain  words do matter  and truly hurt some people in a palpable and psychological way. So why allow them?

 

ban hate speech does not stop hate.  it is our belief that banning hate speech has a tendency to increase hate.  regardless, ban hate speech does not in any way solve the larger problems that created the hate.  open and vigorous debate at least has the possibility o' curing problems.

 

also, what if the folks spewing hate is right?  what if we label folks and history proves that they were correct.  hell, maybe they is wrong, but if they can't speak because their message offends, how much speech is chilled? is not many decades past that american blacks marching and protesting were considered disruptive.  why can't the homosexuals just use their votes to bring about change instead o' their silly parades?  those folks who disagree with US foreign policy is clearly communists and we need to shut-em up and blacklist 'em and whatnot.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

You right,  banning hate speech doesn't stop hate speech.

 

is not what we said.  ban hate speech does not stop hate.  you limit expression and you cause the hate to seethe and fester.  you can't fight hate by gaging bigots.  all you are doing is creating a generation o' bigots who not only hate blacks or homosexuals or whomever, but they also hate and distrust the government for limiting their ability to express themselves.  folks with nothing in common save for the fact that the government is silencing them is gonna become unnatural allies.  you are exacerbating problems and instead o' dealing with those problems out in the open, you is gonna eventual need find 'em, dig 'em out and... what?  

 

the positives o' silencing bigots is obvious and it actual does resonate in most o' the world.  in most democracies, as between an individual's right to speak and the competing right o' folks to be free o' the vile epithet, the world chooses to side with the victim rather than the bigot.  that is the obvious choice.  we think it is the wrong choice.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

 

 

You just have a different approache, instead of legal, it´s public shaming, say something against the wars the US have started in the last 50 years...you are probalby, anti-american etc, and will  be shamed into ground.

Or elected to public office as a Democrat.

 

<cue rimshot>

 

is (not) worth noting that in a poll conducted by nobody reputable, fully 1/2 of american democrats would support a limit on hate speech.

 

democrats.

 

*snort*

 

in any event, we will observe that our most frequent disappointment regarding free speech is not that bigots and lunatics get to spew hate freely but rather that most americans do not use their speech rights to respond to the villains. americans, while less passive than most, is far too willing to stand idly by while their fellow human beings is tormented by evil men.

 

there ain't no active duty to respond to hate, but surely there is a moral obligation to do so.  we all too often see americans fail to live up to such obligations.  we wait for a pundits to gather in a climate-controlled tv studio, miles and days removed from any actual bigotry and hate, to calmly debate the the issues facing american society.  three minutes o' quasi-scripted dialectic ensues before the inevitable commercial break.  are your clothes as clean as they can be?  matthew mcconaughey drives a lincoln, and so should you.

 

sitting at home, having watched the battle o' tin knights with paper swords, we cheer democracy and free speech and america. hurrah.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 You see Gromnir you are in a very fortunate position to be able to intellectualize hate speech so you defend its usage even though you don't like it

 

I live in a country where we haven't got to that point yet and people are very much effected by  words . So we ban hate speech and certain words and its makes perfect sense

 

The truth is certain  words do matter  and truly hurt some people in a palpable and psychological way. So why allow them?

 

ban hate speech does not stop hate.  it is our belief that banning hate speech has a tendency to increase hate.  regardless, ban hate speech does not in any way solve the larger problems that created the hate.  open and vigorous debate at least has the possibility o' curing problems.

 

also, what if the folks spewing hate is right?  what if we label folks and history proves that they were correct.  hell, maybe they is wrong, but if they can't speak because their message offends, how much speech is chilled? is not many decades past that american blacks marching and protesting were considered disruptive.  why can't the homosexuals just use their votes to bring about change instead o' their silly parades?  those folks who disagree with US foreign policy is clearly communists and we need to shut-em up and blacklist 'em and whatnot.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

You right,  banning hate speech doesn't stop hate speech.

 

is not what we said.  ban hate speech does not stop hate.  you limit expression and you cause the hate to seethe and fester.  you can't fight hate by gaging bigots.  all you are doing is creating a generation o' bigots who not only hate blacks or homosexuals or whomever, but they also hate and distrust the government for limiting their ability to express themselves.  folks with nothing in common save for the fact that the government is silencing them is gonna become unnatural allies.  you are exacerbating problems and instead o' dealing with those problems out in the open, you is gonna eventual need find 'em, dig 'em out and... what?  

 

the positives o' silencing bigots is obvious and it actual does resonate in most o' the world.  in most democracies, as between an individual's right to speak and the competing right o' folks to be free o' the vile epithet, the world chooses to side with the victim rather than the bigot.  that is the obvious choice.  we think it is the wrong choice.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 But your view is shaped on your views of the USA and you right in the USA you have generations of systemic bigots. Also the USA has to deal with a different type of bigot IMO

 

But we have an alternative view, people stop using certain words in public because society just doesn't accept it and since Apartheid ended I can honestly say most  people just know not to say these words. That's a victory for me, I don't care if people pretend not to be bigots and I don't know if  there bigotry festers...I just know we have less hate speech

[Gromnir]

we had the first amendment before we had our civil war and emancipation and the civil rights battles that lasted into the 1960s... and beyond.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps protecting the unpopular and offensive speaker From society is the point.

Edited July 9, 2015 by Gromnir

[Gromnir]

as an aside, Gromnir is not claiming that the USA is or has always been perfect regarding free speech.  we gave examples above, yes?

 

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/episodes/elia-kazan/about-elia-kazan/642/

 

where we screw up, where we stumble and lose our way, is when we allow fear to replace what we should know is right and just.  the First Amendment is an ideal, and we so often do not live up to the ideal.  we keep falling and failing.  we can and should do better.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

as an aside, Gromnir is not claiming that the USA is or has always been perfect regarding free speech.  we gave examples above, yes?

 

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/episodes/elia-kazan/about-elia-kazan/642/

 

where we screw up, where we stumble and lose our way, is when we allow fear to replace what we should know is right and just.  the First Amendment is an ideal, and we so often do not live up to the ideal.  we keep falling and failing.  we can and should do better.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Sure, I know you aren't saying its perfect but you believe in the principle 

 

In fact I would argue its your unshakable belief in the sanctity of the First Amendment that unintentionally adds to the festering bigotry and hate speech that pops up in America and " "suddenly people and the media are amazed it still exists " and we are subjected to days of analysis on CNN with people making these platitudes and of course sincere points

 

And then civil society thinks that the Confederate flags should get removed and amongst fanfare and  more media attention we see the flag getting removed and everyone pats themselves on the backs and the media proudly says " we have struck a blow to racism and bigotry" . Yet Gromnir still wakes up the next day  and goes to work still resenting white people and possibly even more now because of there pointless efforts and grandstanding 

 

Yet I doubt it all this effort makes any difference to the core principle of stopping bigotry  but sometimes people need to feel good about something after a  tragedy?

[Gromnir]

hate speech is not a social ill that needs correction.  hate is the social problem.  suppress hate speech exacerbates the problem.

 

worse, the majority has a tendency to label.  that which is unpopular or offensive should be suppressed for the greater good.  is extreme few folks who support the yutz who burns a koran to protest islam or dress up in white hoods to rail against miscegenation.  a couple decades ago it would be hard to find folks who would support communists or gays.  go back further and we find support for minorities to be equal unpopular.

 

the only speech that needs a constitutionally protected right is speech that offends.  in a democracy, free speech is a limit on The People.  "Congress shall make no law..." a right to free speech that does not protect the offending speaker is... pointless.  this should be axiomatic.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps a muslim-american's defense o' hate speech

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/05/04/muslims-defend-pam-geller-s-right-to-hate.html

 

and for those anglophiles

 

"First, if any opinion is compelled to silence, that opinion may, for aught we can certainly know, be true. To deny this is to assume our own infallibility.

 

"Secondly, though the silenced opinion be an error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of truth; and since the general or prevailing opinion on any subject is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied.

 

"Thirdly, even if the received opinion be not only true, but the whole truth; unless it is suffered to be, and actually is, vigorously and earnestly contested, it will, by most of those who receive it, be held in the manner of a prejudice, with little comprehension or feeling of its rational grounds."

 

--John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, 1859

Edited July 9, 2015 by Gromnir

[BruceVC]

hate speech is not a social ill that needs correction.  hate is the social problem.  suppress hate speech exacerbates the problem.

 

 

Well I guess only time will tell but so far our social experiment is working for us 

[Blarghagh]

A massive worldwide increase in hateful people resorting to shooting up innocents would beg to differ.

[Gromnir]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/21/africa/south-africa-xenophobia-attacks/

 

http://www.uj.ac.za/EN/Faculties/humanities/NewsEvents/news/Documents/2012%20articles/A%20massive%20rebellion%20of%20the%20poor%20Prof%20Peter%20Alexander.pdf

 

http://www.economist.com/news/21589143-where-protest-likeliest-break-out-ripe-rebellion

 

unlike austria (HA!)  you don't have the advantages o' a relative homogenized and stable society.  you got big and real problems to face and your historically oppressed people is, unlike in the USA, representing a majority o' the population. am hopeful that things will eventually work for you, and am recognizing that you got unique problems.  is suppressing speech necessary in south africa 'cause o' your different situation, or is the well-intentioned attempt to avoid civil strife as misguided in johannesburg as it is in vienna? 

 

*shrug*

 

we don't have all the answers.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

A massive worldwide increase in hateful people resorting to shooting up innocents would beg to differ.

 

Remember there will be different degrees of success for countries. In our case it has seen success but our American friends face vastly more  different challengers. That include an ineffective mental health system, a large number of mentally unstable people normal to a large population and a market environment where its  very easy to get guns

[BruceVC]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/21/africa/south-africa-xenophobia-attacks/

 

http://www.uj.ac.za/EN/Faculties/humanities/NewsEvents/news/Documents/2012%20articles/A%20massive%20rebellion%20of%20the%20poor%20Prof%20Peter%20Alexander.pdf

 

http://www.economist.com/news/21589143-where-protest-likeliest-break-out-ripe-rebellion

 

unlike austria (HA!)  you don't have the advantages o' a relative homogenized and stable society.  you got big and real problems to face and your historically oppressed people is, unlike in the USA, representing a majority o' the population. am hopeful that things will eventually work for you, and am recognizing that you got unique problems.  is suppressing speech necessary in south africa 'cause o' your different situation, or is the well-intentioned attempt to avoid civil strife as misguided in johannesburg as it is in vienna? 

 

*shrug*

 

we don't have all the answers.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

You spot on Gromnir, we do have unique challengers and I understand if people want and do immigrate

 

But I am working with others to help rebuild a new South Africa and its very rewarding...and sometimes we have sucess 

 

http://dailystar.com.lb/News/World/2015/Jul-09/305875-south-africas-chief-justice-to-meet-zuma-over-bashir-ruling-row.ashx

[cirdanx]

unlike austria (HA!)  you don't have the advantages o' a relative homogenized and stable society. 

 

Well thats true, and i certainly hope it stays that way but we all have our problems don´t we?

 

Also well said on the hate speech, i agree totally^^

[Blarghagh]

 

A massive worldwide increase in hateful people resorting to shooting up innocents would beg to differ.

 

Remember there will be different degrees of success for countries. In our case it has seen success but our American friends face vastly more  different challengers. That include an ineffective mental health system, a large number of mentally unstable people normal to a large population and a market environment where its  very easy to get guns

 

 

Not sure what this has to do with my claim of worldwide? I mean, Anders Breivik didn't exactly live in a backwards nation.

[luzarius]

But I wouldn't allow posts of a similar nature that  luzarius created  about how the LGBT community destroyed Bioware because I see this as subtle hate speech

 

Censorship, denial of freedom of speech. 

 

I don't hate anyone, but I will call Bioware out when they take politically correct bull**** too far, to the point where it hurts a game instead of making it better.

 

I don't fear labeling tactics, LGBT community can come at me and say whatever they want. I will never do anything to take away your right to speak your mind.

 

http://www.twitter.com/luzariuslive

http://www.twitch.tv/luzarius

http://www.facebook.com/luzariuslive

 

You're welcome to send me death threats, harass me, torture me, beat me to near death, I'll laugh at you. https://youtu.be/Ve5XWCd8EFs?t=25

 

I'm voting for any republican in 2016.

Edited July 11, 2015 by luzarius

[Hurlshort]

You are not entitled to freedom of speech on the Bioware forums or here.  The forums belong to the company.  They can censor as they wish, because they are entitled to certain freedoms as a company.  

[Orogun01]

 

hate speech is not a social ill that needs correction.  hate is the social problem.  suppress hate speech exacerbates the problem.

 

 

Well I guess only time will tell but so far our social experiment is working for us 

 

Next you should tackle homelessness, just hide them away and pretend they're in a happy place. It will also work for you since it seem that you care less about the actual issue than about mending your feelings.

[luzarius]

You are not entitled to freedom of speech on the Bioware forums or here.  The forums belong to the company.  They can censor as they wish, because they are entitled to certain freedoms as a company.  

 

Don't care.  if I was in charge I would enable freedom of speech on the internet. In any public forum, your freedom of speech would be protected.  If companies want privacy and censored discussion, then they would have to make the forum private and only viewable by those who sacrifice their rights.

 

The way it is right now, a company like Bioware can choose to remove posts that don't fit their agenda, essentially making their forum appear one sided. That is wrong IMO.

 

Long live America, down with North Korea and Nazi style censorship of freedom of speech.

 

I believe Voat is on the right track.

Edited July 11, 2015 by luzarius

[BruceVC]

 

 

hate speech is not a social ill that needs correction.  hate is the social problem.  suppress hate speech exacerbates the problem.

 

 

Well I guess only time will tell but so far our social experiment is working for us 

 

Next you should tackle homelessness, just hide them away and pretend they're in a happy place. It will also work for you since it seem that you care less about the actual issue than about mending your feelings.

 

 

Thats like a really....really bad analogy

 

Homelessness can really only be solved through social grants or ending the poverty cycle like creating jobs for the homeless

 

Prohibiting racist comments is about what people are allowed to say that others and the law of  land find offensive and hurtful

 

The two examples aren't even remotely similar 

[Deadly_Nightshade]

 

You are not entitled to freedom of speech on the Bioware forums or here.  The forums belong to the company.  They can censor as they wish, because they are entitled to certain freedoms as a company.  

 

Don't care.  if I was in charge I would enable freedom of speech on the internet. In any public forum, your freedom of speech would be protected.  If companies want privacy and censored discussion, then they would have to make the forum private and only viewable by those who sacrifice their rights.

 

 

R00fles! That's one of the silliest things I've read this week, thanks for the laugh.

 

 

The way it is right now, a company like Bioware can choose to remove posts that don't fit their agenda, essentially making their forum appear one sided. That is wrong IMO.

 

They're paying for the site and it's their property, if you want to say something that you cannot on their forums there are plenty of other places on the internet you can go to.

[Hurlshort]

You have free speech on the internet.  You are free to make your own site and say whatever you want.  

 

 

I like how Luzarius basically wants to strip companies of their freedom to do business so he can be free to spout bad stuff on their forums.  

[Elerond]

 You are free to make your own site and say whatever you want.  

 

That is true to only some extent, although taking some care when selecting where you put or where you rent your server you can get much more leeway (because you get more time to move your before it is taken down). Of course most people will never say/publish/write/etc. such things that get official try to take it down with every legal and sometimes illegal means.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

And, if you really want to say objectionable things, you can always host your own stuff if you cannot find someone who wants to rent you a server.

[Volourn]

"nd, if you really want to say objectionable things, you can always host your own stuff if you cannot find someone who wants to rent you a server."

 

Not for long as that will change.

[Elerond]

"nd, if you really want to say objectionable things, you can always host your own stuff if you cannot find someone who wants to rent you a server."

 

Not for long as that will change.

 

Official have now over decade hunted and closed down servers which content they find objectionable even though in most cases said content has been legal in countries where servers located. Although governments have tried their best to make officials job easier when it comes such closures.

[BruceVC]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/19/arts/bill-cosby-deposition-reveals-calculated-pursuit-of-young-women-using-fame-drugs-and-deceit.html?_r=0

 

For those interested more information about the appalling antics of Cosby through the decades