Political rant I

Well, I'm sorry you feel this way. At your age, it sucks that you already have the negativity that we adults have.

Being too politically correct is sometimes a problem - I get that. I think maybe that's where you should put your frustrations.

Still, people can say what they want - we have the freedom of speech, for sure! But there's nothing that says "You have the freedom to speech AND are immune to any punishment from it!"

If you're advocating for people to be bullies, I really recommend that you think about what you're saying. It may not seem like a problem to you, but it's a lot of negativity and that's something that no one needs to deal with...it makes you unhappy and just brings you down.

 

To be honest... I'm really hesitant to agree with what you're saying. I definitely see where you're coming from, but after seeing just how hurtful rude comments can be, I just can't agree with you. Yes, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but a mean comment is a mean comment. A lot of people don't understand how hurtful rude comments can be, especially to a, say, gay teenager still self-conscious about their sexuality. When someone insults such a deep part of you, it really stings, and it can lead to things like depression, anxiety, low self esteem, etc.

There's a difference between a comment and hate. If a person were to calmly explain to me why they think being lgbt+ is wrong, I'd probably try to change their mind for a little, send if that's not possible, then I'd at least walk away knowing I had a constructive, helpful conversation with someone about our differing opinions. If a person were to insult me for being lgbt+, I'd get upset and I'd probably block that person or walk away, likely having my day ruined. Do you see what I'm getting at?

Yes, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Yes, we shouldn't punish people for speaking their minds. But when someone insults and bullies someone else, there needs to be punishment. No one should be putting anyone else down for being different. I do, however, absolutely, positively, 100% encourage constructive, helpful conversations and friendly debates, because that can help people see different perspectives and open their mind to other opinions.

 

Freedom of speech does not equal the right to say whatever you want whenever you want. You're still restricted by the legal framework of what's considered verbal assault, for example.

I don't think much about safe zones. I mean, why would I care? If someone doesn't want me to say the word "massacre" at a gathering of children who have been present at a school shooting, it's not like I'll be "No! It's my right to say what I want! Freedom! 'Murica! Massacre, massacre, massacre." One simply doesn't do that, it's called common tact. If I feel like certain conditions to a safe zone (though I've never experienced a safe zone IRL) are unreasonable, I can just choose not to go there, right? If it's somewhere I have to go or really want to go, I can just keep their wishes a little in mind. It's not so hard. Some people have these things because they want to feel safe somewhere. Why not just let them? What gain is there in spending time hating on them?

 

A lot of this issue stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of what freedom of speech is. It's easier to illustrate what freedom of speech is by illustrating what it isn't:

1. Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. Being able to say "whatever you want" does not mean that people are not allowed to disagree with you, ignore you, or even shout you down. Speech sometimes elicits a negative response, and that negative response is also speech. Freedom of speech might guarantee you a right to speak, but it does not guarantee you a right to an audience.
2. Freedom of speech is not the freedom to say whatever you want whenever you want wherever you want. Freedom of speech is a prohibition against the government enacting a law that would prevent someone from speaking their opinions. In some countries, it is illegal to criticize the government. Freedom of speech was created to prevent an authoritarian law like that. It does not mean that private institutions and groups cannot come up with their own rules.

For example, it is against the rules of a public school for a teacher to preach their political and religious views to their class. In a religious private school, the rules about religious views would probably be quite different. This is because schools and the education system set their own rules. I may have the freedom of speech to be a racist, but I cannot go into my job tomorrow and expect not to be fired if I start going on a racist rant. That is because my place of work has its own rules, rules that go beyond the general stipulations of the 1st amendment.

It is also against the rules in most schools to make homophobic comments. A school is not a political forum. It is a place of education. And you do not have the right to make school uncomfortable for LGBT students. LGBT students (and all students) are there to learn and if what you are doing is impeding that, then you will be punished, and rightfully so.

Safe Spaces do not violate freedom of speech, provided they are set within the confines of a private group's own rules*. And I find it incredibly ironic that people on this site complain about safe spaces so much. You do realize this site is a safe space, correct? For example, a person could not join this site and then proceed to condemn every homosexual or trans person here and tell them they're going to hell if they don't repent. They have the 1st amendment right to do that, but the rules of this site say otherwise, and thus they cannot do that here and would be rightfully banned for attempting to do so.

My point is, freedom of speech is a general stipulation of the federal government, that they will not pass laws restricting a person's right to speak and print their views. It is not a prohibition against a school or a business or a private group setting their own rules about what is allowed and not allowed within their domain.

*Safe spaces are simply smaller domains with stricter rules. This is what they should be at least. Something like an LGBT student group. An LGBT student group would not allow homophobic ranters to join. However, safe spaces can be problematic when their scope is expanded. A college campus, for example, cannot truly be a "safe space", since it should allow for a diversity of opinion and organizations. It's the organizations themselves that can potentially be safe spaces. But even this has limits. You could not for example, start a college "neo-Nazi group".

 

The problem with this line of thinking is that it punishes the people being teased or bullied while simultaneously giving a free pass to the people perpetuating it. What kind of message is that to send? People deserve to be able to go to school or work without being harassed or bullied - that isn't 'freedom of speech', it's just nasty behaviour that should be stamped out wherever & whenever it occurs.

If you ask me, a person's right to 'freedom of speech' does not exceed a person's right to feel safe and secure in what ought to be a safe and secure environment (school). Telling people to grin and bear it, instead of tackling shitty behaviour, gives the worst people in our society the ammo they want.

---------- Post added 29th Apr 2016 at 08:39 PM ----------

Words might just be words to you and me, but people have killed themselves for a lot less.

 

I don't think you quite understand what freedom of speech is. Someone above has already states it quite beautifully and I suggest you read it.

Why do I encourage schools to be a safe space for LGBT people? Because I grew up in the south. I was lucky enough to be seen as a straight white girl, but my friends...They were lesbian women and gay men. I watched people verbally assault then daily. For one if my friends it also became a case where she was also being sexually harassed because she was a lesbian. And she couldn't do anything about it because there was no proof, and because one I'd the her tormentors was the son of an office adminstator. I witness first hand as the boy's mother said "Oh you must be mistaken. (___) would never do that. He might say mean things but he is just joking. You should learn to take a joke, loosen up a little"
Which for the boy and his friend translated into: we can get away with being homophobic asses, let's eaculate things!
They ended throwing rocks at a group of LGBT students during lunch. And when I reported them for it I was told the same thing as my friends, and then the office staff told the guys I told on them.

But I mean god forbid if I think schools should be a safe place.
Hate words often lead to hateful actions. Hateful words can affect others even if you can so easily shrug it off. People have killed themselves for the verbal bullying they received at school. But you know, maybe they should of just grown a thicker skin like the rest of us.

 

I do understand where you're coming from, but we do not need to respect or tolerate opinions that disrespect our existence. The LGBTQ+ community has been dragged through the mud for long enough.

Yes, I totally understand that people can be too obsessed with being politically correct, however, I do think that safe spaces are important and that people should never invade those spaces. Yesterday, I had to deal with some absolute t*at on here who went on and on about how bisexuality isn't a valid sexuality and that we're just greedy heterosexuals. Because he thought that because he was a gay man, he was entitled to be a complete and utter prat. Safe spaces can be important because there are so many people in the world who refuse to accept or even acknowledge us. Why shouldn't we want to be free from that every once in a while?

My belief is that people are entitled to an educated opinion. So just because some dick goes "oh! Respect my opinion!" does not mean that we should when their opinion disrespects our existence.

---------- Post added 29th Apr 2016 at 02:55 PM ----------

Also, I realise that I myself am the problem here, but I think that if somebody was insulting towards the LGBTQ+ community to my face, telling me that my sexuality wasn't real etc... Yeah, I'd probably start shaking with anger at the very least, actually getting violent at the worst. And whilst physical violence would be my fault and I would expect to be punished, it would not be unprovoked and I would expect the bigot to be punished as well as myself.

 

My friend got banned from a 'safe space' some time ago, quite an amusing story. Every safe space has the potential to be a cult, that's how I see it.
I do support a strict anti-bullying policy at schools, though. Kids can be quite nasty.

 

It's not technically a freedom of speech issue, because that only applies to the government, but I agree nonetheless. Those things aren't just places without homophobia/racism/sexism/whatever, they're "safe" from dissenting opinion. Infact, I think they tend to be bigoted. Like really feminist ones for example, where you can be scalded for saying women are capable and not helpless victims of evertything. And then these same people call the police over campus free speech zones and pull fire alarms or send bomb threats when speakers they disagree with come on campus. They're really unhealthy for everyone involved, I think.

 

It's nice to see someone as young as you actually stating this unpopular opinion here.

It's true that freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom of consequences. People have the right to react negatively to any opinion. The government however, and this applies to anything that is public funded, doesn't.(as long as it's a democracy, obviously)

That's because, and I know a lot will disagree, protecting LGBT people is as much as an opinionated belief as attacking LGBT people. Human rights will only exist as long as most people in a society agree with it and no one knows what most people in such society will think about it in 50 years or even less. I personally think acceptance of LGBT people will mostly grow in the next decades though (in the West).

That being said, I think safe places and that trigger warning bs not only is stupid, but isn't even effective in protecting minorities. People who are against such minorities will simply be more subtle in their actions. You can't change people's opinion with just a non-discrimination law. As I said in another post, if your employer wants to fire you based on your sexuality and that is forbidden, he will just find another excuse to do it.

You know where else there are safe places around the world? North Korea is a giant safe place against opinions that are hurtful to the Kim regime. Iran is a giant safe place against opinions that are hurtful to Islam.

Anyway, I think such places, in the West, will only be restricted to colleges and some schools. It's a shame, because teens who get used to such places will have their feelings crushed when they reach adulthood. The real world doesn't give a damn about your precious feelings.

 

It doesn't, but most workplaces won't tolerate bullying, particularly if it is aimed at minority people specifically for their minority status, and given employers in most civilised nations cannot dismiss their employees without a valid reason, it's probably easier than you think to prove that someone has been discriminated against. It would probably be harder to prove that you weren't chosen for a job because of your sexuality/whatever else given most employers don't even bother telling you why you weren't selected (and many won't get back to you whatsoever).

The problem with a lot of right-leaning people is that they accept things for how they are and see no point in trying to change anything, which is a defeatist attitude and, like I said, punishes the victims while giving a nod/free pass to the pieces of shit who make their life a misery. Nothing was ever achieved by sitting on your arse and saying 'This is how the world works, so shut up and get used to it'. It's a good thing not everyone takes such an approach to life, otherwise homosexuality would probably still be illegal in the West, let alone the rest of the world.

For any normal person, with an ounce of compassion, the solution to bullying or discrimination of any kind isn't to say 'Toughen up and stop crying about it'. Like I mentioned earlier, to a lot of people, words are just words - sticks and stones and all that - but given LGBT youth kill themselves at a far, far higher rate than non-LGBT youth, I think it's fair to say that recurrent bullying has pretty severe impacts on a person's well-being well into adulthood, and people who choose not to tackle that are just wrong. What kind of bullshit are you trying to peddle here?

 

Perhaps I shoud clarify, eh? My problem with safe places is that it makes people weak, not willing to fight for themselves and deal with dissent, which is a crucial skill if they want to get ahead in the world. You shouldn't depend on the state (or anyone else) to protect you against discrimination, because, well, you won't get satisfied. I don't know where I ever said that you should conform to those who offend you. I think you should take the matter in your own hands rather than cry on the internet.

I also just said that we don't know how the world will work in 50 years or even less, so I don't know where you read that I think we should accept things as they are. The world will change, don't worry, it always has and always will, but to what direction? No one knows.

 

Yeah, but you see, you're just highlighting more flaws in the way the current system works - you need to be 'tough' and 'abrasive' to get ahead, neither of which are especially positive qualities. I think we should stop rewarding people for behaving like jackasses. Some people are gentle and quiet by nature - expecting everyone to have that fighting spirit is horribly naive. If everyone in the world displayed that kind of behaviour, the world would be even worse than it already is. I'm willing to bet 90% of people on this forum are quiet and don't have the 'get up and go' to stand up to everyone - so you're effectively calling a big chunk of this site's membership wimps because they feel the only place they can express their concerns or worries in life is on the internet.

It has nothing to do with the government protecting people in all aspects of life - but no, people shouldn't have to go to work or school and be repeatedly harassed - there is nothing wrong with telling people to defend themselves in the face of hostility, but we should try to prevent such behaviour from happening in the first place. All companies should have rules prohibiting such behaviour - it isn't positive, and it is not needed, and I think it's fair to say that countries where such laws exist, are better than the ones where they don't. By a big margin. If it curtails on 'freedom of speech' (however you define it), fine.

 

I apologize if that's what you got from my message. I never meant to call people wimps and I for one am very quiet lol. My ''cry on the internet'' rant was a bit emotional.

I guess we'll never be in agreement because we start from different premises. You think the need for toughness is a flaw of the system, whatever that is. I think some toughness will always be required in any system, because humans are still animals, and their biology hasn't really changed in the last 50,000 years (and yes, that is the part where my right-leaning side acts). So I think it's an utopia to think all humans will ever coexist nicely in a heart-warming way.

Second, I think depending on yourself against offenses is simply smarter, because the state will always be somewhat flawed in its way to satisfy the people and you will eventually be left on your own to deal with a problem.

 

(*hug*)

I might not agree with you on everything here, but it's nice to see young people who do care about freedom of speech in the first place. There's a troubling trend I've seen from youth where people would rather (in some cases) get violent than have a dialogue with someone who's opinions they don't like (especially in regard to what Baconpox mentioned about speakers on college campuses). If someone has opinions you don't like, then argue against them, demonstrate why you're right, don't try to shut them down before they even have a chance to speak (and this is not about safe spaces, but about clashing ideals).

---------- Post added 30th Apr 2016 at 05:30 PM ----------

For the most part, I agree with that, but I think one of the key points that the right often misses is that the state is not just a reflection of the whims of the majority. The state also upholds fundamental rights and principles that transcend majority opinions. Even if a majority of people in a certain town wanted black people banned from their town, that would not be allowed, because there are laws that protect the rights of those black people that supersedes the "will of the people". The government doesn't only reflect the majority, it also protects minorities from tyranny by the majority. Regarding what you said earlier, protecting LGBT people does supersede attacking them, because a person has a right not to be discriminated or harassed. You do not have a right to discriminate and harass.

What makes some of the "safe space" and "trigger warning" stuff problematic, however, is that often we are not talking about discrimination or harassment, we are simply talking about disagreement. You have a right to believe homosexuality is a sin, for example, but you don't have a right to bully a gay kid at school because you believe that.

 

Something I wanted to add about "safe spaces": Safe spaces were originally created so that people who were being bullied or otherwise treated badly would have a place where they could meet and talk to other people in similar predicaments without the threat of that bullying or negative treatment occurring there. I.e. an LGBT student group. LGBT students might face bullying in school or condemnation from their parents, so an LGBT student group is a "safe space" where they can meet other LGBT students and don't have to worry about being bullied there (as I said before, this very site serves essentially the same function). I don't see why anyone should have a problem with such a thing. Obviously we know that the "real world" is not going to be like that, but such safe spaces are places where people can hopefully learn how to deal with problems in the real world. Think about all the advice given to people here on how to deal with their closed-minded families and troublesome school life. Can you honestly that this is somehow counter-productive?

The issue with safe spaces is when they are extended to entire schools or college campuses. It's one thing to prohibit anti-gay people from an LGBT student group and it's one thing to fight against harassment and bullying, but it's another thing to say that people shouldn't be able to express their "contrary" views on homosexuality in college or their support for Trump or their support for stronger immigration laws, etc. A private group can set their own parameters, but once the domain gets larger, people have to be ready to deal with opposition, and hopefully, come prepared to successfully argue their points.

(Sorry that some of this is repetitive, but I keep thinking of better and better ways to say what I originally intended).

I've always been the same way; I was always into politics in school, as well as being on various debate teams and such, etc. People knew me as an argumentative opinionated firecracker. In English class junior year of high school, we learned about logical fallacies and argumentative strategies and I was often one of the most vocal when we'd debate issues. It's a healthy way to be, really.

 

You're all hating on safe spaces, what do you think this site is?