5 upvotes, 1 direct replies (showing 1)
View submission: Should we have freedom of hate speech?
Well, that's the thing. I can't actually find what was actually said. If what was said was so aggregous that she is barred from a university radio show, I would have expected to at least find some actual quotes from the show itself, somewhere. She also states that she invited two guests who were critical of gender idiology, 'platforming' them. However, there are interviews with connie shaw, and in none of them, does she engage in any speech that would meet your criteria for hate speech. Though she was not punished by law, she was socially ostracised and removed from her position for her views. That seems like a clear violation of someone's personal right to freedom of speech, and it's not like it's the first time.
Anyway. Freedom of expression fundermentally does mean you can say whatever you want to say (anger and hatred are forms of expression), but laws have made certain forms of expression an exception. I'm not saying that's a bad thing. As you say, infringing on another's right to be free from discrimination is probably not a great idea. However, this is where things get messy in regards to free speech and even opinions or objections to certain political policies, ideas, and ideologies, slur free, are attacked by the cancel culture that is so prominent in the uk. That's my take on it anyway.
Comment by VickiActually at 31/01/2025 at 01:56 UTC
18 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I actually think it's the other way around.
There's also an issue here about platforming, which you brought up. To me, the freedom to speak doesn't mean you have the right to hold the megaphone. There's no "right to be listened to".
I get what you mean about messiness. From my view though, I think some of this mess comes from the "other" side. There was a story a while ago that blew up, about someone who was done for hate speech against a trans woman. The story went viral, "she's been arrested for social media posts!!" What she actually did was encourage her followers to attack this person online, and she made multiple accounts to avoid being blocked so she could repeatedly target this same transgender woman. She was arrested for *harassment*, with hate speech being part of that. But the viral story was "you can't criticise trans people anymore!"
I bring this up because I think it's the same issue. This woman had the right to share her views with anyone who wanted to listen. She had been doing that for ages. What she *didn't* have the right to do was force this one trans woman to listen. I think this is where we need to be clear on what precisely our freedoms are. We have a right to speak, not a right to force other people's ears.
Heck, I mean how often do we see actual transgender people on the news? Rarely if ever. If their free speech meant they have a right to be platformed, we'd see them all the time!
What do you reckon? I'd be interested in your take on that