Sorry, I respectfully disagree. Censorship is someone else preventing you from saying something you want to say. Self censorship (as something you want to say but do not because of fear of the consequences) is not a thing, simply because you cannot distinguish between the want to utter and the want not to utter and which is eventually winning in your head and the fact that you did or did not utter something. It is a process we call thinking. We choose our words or the absence of them and that makes them worth while.

There is also no opposite to self-censorship: I want to be able to say everything I want without consequence. You say something because you want it to have and audience and thus consequences. Saying you want the consequences, just not the negative ones is saying you want everyone to confirm you are right. Well join the other 7 billion.

The idea of self-censorship is also not innocent because you are robbing people of agency. You actually deny them to choose their own words. The idea of self-censorship requires an external party to declare someone wanted to say something, but he or she is self-censoring, That implies that you know what they think and the absence or presence of words gets filled in with whatever that third party thinks that person wanted to say.