Hacker News Reader

> I'm a jew, I see the neo nazi groups with banners or Kanye ranting and just laugh. Who cares? Now if they want to come at me with physical violence then that's something else. I'll respond in kind

You're acting as though the likely outcome of neo-nazi groups is some skinhead trying to fight you. What actually happens is neo-nazi groups radicalize angry young men who then go out a gun down a whole bunch of people at a synagogue.

>Trans people are for some reason the only large visible group yelling that speech is violence and saying mean things about them should be illegal.

This is simply nonsense. Pretty much every group in the country has a contingent that wants speech against them regulated

There are always consequences to freedom of ideas. Some good, some bad. The suppression of speech and ideas leads to a dictatorship. I think people that attack others verbally for who or what they are are bad people. I just think that the consequences of suppression of speech are worse. It's all good when the leaders we like are in power and stifle the speech of those we disagree with. It's not so fun when the pendulum swings and those we disagree with have that power.

"What actually happens is neo-nazi groups radicalize angry young men who then go out a gun down a whole bunch of people at a synagogue." Sometimes. Are you willing to ban Islam since so often it's ideals are corrupted and lead to groups like Isis or the Taliban? The only way to eliminate violence based on ideals is to eliminate free will. 1984 here we come.

>The suppression of speech and ideas leads to a dictatorship.

That's not true. Nazi ideology is banned in Germany, and they are a far healthier democracy than the United States.

> I just think that the consequences of suppression of speech are worse.

So if a group of people were plotting to kill you, you'd only want the State (i.e. the police) to step in after they had gone through with their plot?

> Sometimes. Are you willing to ban Islam since so often it's ideals are corrupted and lead to groups like Isis or the Taliban?

You're making up things that I 'believe'. I don't personally think that nazi ideology should be banned.

I was merely pointing out that your fantasy of 'responding in kind' is nonsense. The end result of these hate ideologies is mass shootings and terrorism, not street fights you can be prepared for or defend yourself against.

"So if a group of people were plotting to kill you, you'd only want the State (i.e. the police) to step in after they had gone through with their plot?" That's already a crime friend. Conspiracy. I think you are smart enough to understand the difference between free speech and plotting a murder.

"I was merely pointing out that your fantasy of 'responding in kind' is nonsense". Cool, I still support near absolute free speech.

Nazis are banned in Germany as a result of WW2 and was part of their rehabilitation. Who do we give the power of deciding what speech is banned in modern day America? Biden? Trump? Desantis? Elizabeth Warren? The supreme court? I agree Nazis are bad, I just don't think anyone in the United States should have the power to ban ideas.

>That's already a crime friend. Conspiracy.

Yes it is, because the State decided to censor and restrict 'free speech' in that case.

>I think you are smart enough to understand the difference between free speech and plotting a murder.

Sure, I'm very open to my belief we should censor and punish some speech. I just wanted to establish that you do support censorship and you do believe that sometimes saying 'don't let those words affect you' isn't an appropriate reaction.

>Who do we give the power of deciding what speech is banned in modern day America?

That power already resides with Congress and then hypothetically the Supreme Court. Functioning democracies can have conversations and then decide when, where, and how to restrict speech. We've been doing that for 250 years.

>I just don't think anyone in the United States should have the power to ban ideas.

We've already established that you think the government can and should restrict ideas. 'Free speech absolutist' are rarely actually absolutist.

Never claimed to be an absolutist. In other posts I specifically say: "My beliefs regarding freedom of speech is that is should be just shy of absolute. Only limit should be believable threats of violence." There are likely other crime related caveats. Now with that said I am not advocating for freedom from social consequences just preventing the state from using its lock on violence to implement those consequences.

"I just wanted to establish that you do support censorship and you do believe that sometimes saying 'don't let those words affect you' isn't an appropriate reaction." I do think its an appropriate reaction. Again large difference between saying something mean about a group of people and calling for their murder. I think anti-trans people are bad, just like I think the same of anti anything people. I just think banning speech is worse.

I support government restricted speech in the context of preventing physical harm, that's pretty much it. You are right that congress creates the laws but in most cases the supreme court is going to prevent things that are overruled by the 1st. As it should be.

My main point is that saying speech is violence makes no sense. People should stop letting anonymous figures on the internet rile them up and affect them and just get on with their lives. We spend 99% of our time worrying about things that in reality have no effect on our lives. If JewHater99@twitter thinks jews control the media, who cares? Stop worrying about pointless nonsense.

>Never claimed to be an absolutist.

You're whole premise is that the government shouldn't regulate speech, as it "leads to dictatorship"

>In other posts I specifically say: "My beliefs regarding freedom of speech is that is should be just shy of absolute. Only limit should be believable threats of violence."

That's fine if that's what you believe. 'Believable threats of violence' is a completely ambiguous and meaningless term in regards to actual regulation and laws.

>e. People should stop letting anonymous figures on the internet rile them up and affect them and just get on with their lives.

The focus is on people who have their loved ones massacred because of people who were riled up online.

>If JewHater99@twitter thinks jews control the media, who cares?

Well, the family members of the people JewHater99 ends up massacring might.

hmmm, your entire argument appears to be overly focused and convinced on the supposed fact that everyone that holds negative views of a race or people becomes a mass murderer. That's very much not the case. If if was, there wouldn't be very many people left at all. 99.999999% of the time JewHater99 is just going to go about living a normal life and continue posting anonymously on the web.

>hmmm, your entire argument appears to be overly focused and convinced on the supposed fact that everyone that holds negative views of a race or people becomes a mass murderer. That's very much not the case

That's not what I've said and you know it. It really seems like you don't actually understand the position you think youre arguing against.

Pretty sure it was.

"What actually happens is neo-nazi groups radicalize angry young men who then go out a gun down a whole bunch of people at a synagogue."

"The end result of these hate ideologies is mass shootings and terrorism"

"Well, the family members of the people JewHater99 ends up massacring might"

The USA is a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy.

> Trans people are for some reason the only large visible group yelling that speech is violence and saying mean things about them should be illegal.

this in an incredibly disingenuous take. Who is trying to make saying antitrans things should be illegal? last i checked trans people were still trying to access affirming medical care and not be attacked in the streets. If you are referring to like pronouns/names, I still think you are being disingenuous. I think right to self determination is a meaningful thing to fight for, you can argue that one persons request to be called by their chosen name impedes on your speech but i think you're wrong.

> I don't really see F2M people doing it

This is actually a really interesting phenomena! It does have to do with existing double standards in how society treats men and women. The fact is a lot of trans men either have an easier time passing bc masculine aesthetics are easier to adopt or they are dismissed because they aren't seen as a threat by people who think a penis is the thing that makes you dangerous. Of course trans men have their own battles but they largely aren't being branded as a sex offender for existing in the way that trans women are. Also they absolutely are fighting for the same rights, it may seem quieter because the popular culture war talking point is specifically about drag queens. I don't think the media has figured out how to villainize trans men.

> Stop asking for special treatment.

Every minority group fighting for their rights has been told this

"Who is trying to make saying antitrans things should be illegal?"

Come on, did you read the post I was responding to? My post was a response to another post. Op appeared to want it to be made illegal. Calling speech violence implies that certain speech should be illegal as inflicting violence on others is illegal.

"Every minority group fighting for their rights has been told this" The recent movement against trans is wholly due to the movements attempt to bring kids into it. Keep it out of schools and respect parental rights and I guarantee the focus on this goes away.

The only reason the focus is on drag queens is because kids are being taken to highly sexualized shows. Stop doing that and no one cares about drag queens anymore.

NSFW

https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1603512564628987922?...

I wrote that comment and I don't want to make speech illegal I want acknowledgement that speech can be harmful and allow communities to self moderate if they are threatened.

> The recent movement against trans is wholly due to the movements attempt to bring kids into it

Frankly this is a lie. The root of your issue with trans people is that you think they are gross. It's circular logic to say that trans adults shouldn't exist because it will encourage my kid to grow up to be a trans adult. It's like saying that you don't want to live around Atheists because you want your kid to be Christian, fine enough but you can't stop people from being a thing you don't like, and your ability to stop your child from being it probably wanes earlier than you'd like.

> Stop doing that and no one cares about drag queens anymore.

no yall will find another reason to demonize trans people because you actually don't care about safety you care about your delicate sensibilities. It's a witch hunt and drag shows are the current "spell"

Where is the line with where one persons existence affects children? Sure your libsoftiktok "citation" is an example of an entertainer being too lewd for the audience but in no way does an entire demographic need to take the fall for a cherry-picked example of lewdness. Also who gets to decide what is too lewd? Do you want to give the government that power? Should it be illegal to show your kid an R rated movie? Is it the parents responsibility or the production team of the movie? Or are movies and movie likers at large to blame? Is a trans person going to the grocery store a danger to your kids? Is telling kids that trans people exist a danger? Where is the line between telling kids that its ok that some people in the world are trans and turning kids trans?

IDK Maybe we should also not tell our kids anything about "traditional" gender norms lest we anger any indignant parents who might agree/disagree that girls should have aspirations beyond motherhood.

"The root of your issue with trans people is that you think they are gross" What? I have no issues with trans people at all as long as they just live their lives like everyone else and stop attempting to enforce trans education in schools, unfairly compete in women's sports and not perform lewd acts in front of kids. Other than that I wish them nothing but happiness. Trans people should be able to do whatever they want in normal polite society. The backlash that the trans community has started over parents just saying please don't be sexual around my kids is crazy. Or please don't tell my kids in school that maybe they may be the wrong gender. Or schools please don't lie to parents if our kids express gender confusion. How are these outrageous requests? It very much seems that a portion of the trans community wants special treatment above and beyond the general population.

Trans people largely dont want to be "sexual" around children. The problem is that you are conflating a performance art (drag) with an entire demographic of people (trans people). Do you actually think trans people are sexually assaulting kids or do you just perceive them existing in society as an assault? Why are trans topics in education bad if they describe the lived experience of your neighbors? I don't genuinely believe you would leave trans people alone, if they gave up any ground. you just want them to shut up and get out of sight so they don't legitimize a lifestyle that you disprove of.

> as long as they just live their lives like everyone else

The way you live your life and your opinions around what to teach kids about gender are a cultural choice. You make the active decision every day to teach kids that boys cant wear dresses, or that girls and boys need to be separated in sports. You can justify those beliefs all you want but at the end of the day, you are saying that your perspective is right and that trans people are wrong. So no you are not asking them to "live their life like I do" because you don't want them to advertise a lifestyle different from yours

I've never done anything negative to a trans person in my life so not sure what you mean by I won't leave them alone. Unless you think having a calm conversation and exchange of ideas on HN is harassment.

As far as "The way you live your life and your opinions around what to teach kids about gender are a cultural choice." Yup, and as a parent I make choices for my kids every day based on what I think is right for their success and happiness. I don't wish trans people ill at all indeed I wish them good lives but I very much don't want my kids to be trans as it's a much harder life. For a variety of reasons. Plus I want my boys to be boys. That's my preference. But I'm not looking to make that choice for any adult. Adult being the key word.

As soon as the trans community says yes sexual drag shows for kids is wrong and schools lying to parents is wrong and discussing sexuality in school is wrong then I'm all good.

there isnt like a trans spokesperson. Individual trans people arent responsible for every bad event you attribute to them. I'm sure trans people will agree with you on isolated cases but others might reject bad-faith characterizations of drag overall. Also i don't know what you mean about "lying to parents".

> I very much don't want my kids to be trans as it's a much harder life.

How cowardly. Why do you think its a harder life? Might it be because trans people are hated by society? Might that be because people continue to perpetuate myths that they are corrupting education?

> That's my preference

then dont teach my kids that there is only one way to live your life. Do you also want your kids to reach 18 and be surprised by the existence of trans people when they finally leave your shelter? How do you think they'll react after being taught that "boys should be boys"?

"How cowardly" Alright, I think we have reached a point in the conversation where you are too emotionally compromised to continue and hurling insults instead of having a calm conversation. I wish you all the best

> Every minority group fighting for their rights has been told this

Because equal rights are the goal, not special treatment.

> by people who think a penis is the thing that makes you dangerous

It is the means by which a man can forcibly impregnate a woman. This is a very real risk to women, and is one reason why so many women are deeply uncomfortable with males imposing themselves in spaces where women are vulnerable, like bathrooms and locker rooms.

our current system does not prevent sexual assault from occurring in public restrooms, men can enter restrooms and assault someone if they really want to and sexual predators arent transitioning to get more access to women. Trans women also experience a high proportion of sexual/physical assault from men, should they be asked to enter a potentially dangerous situation? Is 1 trans woman a threat to a bathroom with 3 cis women in it? Or are 3 cis men in a bathroom a threat to 1 trans woman?

Any enforcement of bathroom norms sounds more dystopian than this fiction of rampant trans sexual assault. Do you want genital checks at the bathroom door? Maybe you want to have a security detail watching people piss. Do you want trans people to be reported to the authorities for using an enclosed stall alone?

This is a very shortsighted, historically-ignorant take that singles out M2F trans folks disingenuously - there have been plenty of calls from all over society, from cis women to trans women to trans men to gay folks to straight folks to any and all racial groups.

No, let’s just ignore all the times this has happened in history and all the times other groups had raised similar points (their possible merits aside), pretend this is a new problem, and blame MTF folks for it.

Beware isolated standards of rigor, folks.

Surely you would feel very differently if you were born in a slightly different time in the not-so-distant past. How do you imagine the first "actual Nazis" came to the position of power where they could slaughter thousands of your community with impunity for nearly a generation? How do you imagine it couldn't happen again, if not in your lifetime, at some point in humanity's timeline? If not regarding Jews, regarding some new community?

Do you really think it would be avoided simply by more people taking "don't let words affect you" to heart [ * ]?

[ * ] (assuming, quite unreasonably, that that's actually something that could happen at a societal level)

Don't call me Shirley. Sorry I had too. There is a very large difference between random people doing it and the actual government the possesors of state sanctioned violence stirring people against you and I think you know that. On top of that, we live in the now in the United States. Freedom of speech is a very real thing that I very strongly believe should be close to absolute. Otherwise who gets to choose what is forbidden speech? Probably would not have liked it if Trump could decide what people are allowed to say.

> Do you really think it would be avoided simply by more people taking "don't let words affect you" to heart [ * ]?

Yes because the Nazis were butthurt bitches and used their perceived victimisation as an excuse to met out horrible torture, violence and dehumanisation.

Hitler tried to have a guy in Italy bought to heel for making his dog do a Nazi salute FFS.