Hacker News Reader

If his logic didnt matter, shouldnt he be condemned for only being inappropriate or hostile? Yet it seems that his current reputation among the public at large is that of an actual paedophilia/rape apologist. Whether he actually was or not, this lack of concern for subtleties is the very reason why "societal censure" should only be the authority on matters relating to politeness and not criminality.

View on HN

I disagree. Societal censure is appropriate on the topics you declare exempt. It is appropriate to fear censure and exile from your society when caught to simply be considering such activities, even if no criminal action is occurs. They are societally unacceptable. If his historical actions and present words lead others to be concerned that he’s an apologist, it is appropriate to react societally.

I'm not aware that practicing radical self-censorship for the sake of conformity is the current standard of social justice, and, as far as I can tell, numerous forms of injustice were at one point or another deemed socially acceptable.

Even justifiable concerns are just exactly that, justifiable concerns. If anything, it is the society that cannot behave however it wants but has an obligation to uphold justice. It needs to have a fair legal system as opposed to mob justice and to punish only genuine criminals as opposed to merely people with criminal reputation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com