psquared2

Also: PLEASE note that "respect" and "respectability" are different. It is VERY important, especially if your first language is English. [/s]

I never said what Gareth Roberts said was a hate crime. It is just a heinous opinion, which in my opinion, deserves a backlash.

But (IMO) there are two separate issues at play here. 1. everyone is entitled to free speech 2. every action has consequences.

[truth] 1. People who get "cancelled" complain that they don't have free speech [which is obviously not true], which is the crux of the discussion here. The right/wrong of the opinion doesn't matter in free speech.

[opinion] 2. "Consequences" (IMO) is a mix of {a sense of righteous indignation, mob mentality, schadenfreude} - but more importantly, also very much free speech. Vigilantism implies taking the law into their own hands, which "cancelling" is not.

When I say "deserve a backlash", (IMO) it is because people who get "cancelled" are often people with a platform/entitlement/privilege. Taking that away is pretty much the only leverage that people have. Even after that, the right to free speech is still not lost.

(But do I think "cancelling" is ok? That's context-specific. I agree with some cancelling, some not.)

BLM: it is proven by various metrics (economic, medical statistics etc.) that the Black Americans are being left behind because of SYSTEMIC racism. A radical change is necessary to address that, and people who want status quo wants 1. to deny that it exists 2. to resist the movement.

The "reality" changes everyday. The "truth" is not constant, because we don't know everything. So "terrified" that you may be wrong just may mean that you are clinging to the old "truth" and unwilling to change.

(Btw? It costs you nothing to acknowledge someone that they exist as they are, whether you believe it or not. They want to be called she/her? Fine. You can still have your opinion and respect someone's existence - it's not either-or.)