I had someone steel this and change “butts” to “Christian” and weirdly enough, lengthen my skirt. Kept the flame boots, but no short skirts.

  • MrMonkey@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Too many people would change their minds based on what the sign says.

    Does you reaction change if the sign read: “Black Lives Matter” or if it read “Back the Blue”?

    Or one that says “Trans women are women” vs “trans women aren’t women”?

    Or “pineapple on pizza is ok” vs “pinapple on pizza is the work of the devil”?

    • SneakyWeasel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Honestly, the first thing that I thought about was what if the sign had a slur word. Sure freedom of speech means say what you wanna say, that doesn’t mean people aren’t gonna sock you in the face.

      • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        free speech ≠ hate speech

        Everyone is allowed to have an opinion but if your opinion involves being a dick to certain people, keep it for yourselves.

        In the comic above, no certain group is targeted so there’s no reason to be offended.

          • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Pretty sure it was made by a left wing gay man whos existence was considered offensive to conservatives

            • TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              if it was made by a left wing gay man then i guess they are both gay and dumb because they inadvertently made a comic that pushes narratives used to defend homophobia

              • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                No offense but based on what I’m hearing you need to study your history of censorship and left wing support of free speech in response to that censorship. And I mean government censorship, not reddit banning a right winger and them crying about it.

          • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah it doesn’t really make sense. “Butts” isn’t offensive to anyone and no you don’t have the right to offend a group of people.

              • Robaque@feddit.it
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Small nitpick, but stupid / evil suggests it’s some static state of being, when it’s a choice. Selfish is a good descriptor though, as is ignorant, greedy, bigoted, hateful, fascist…

                • stewie3128@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  You always are, and people are always allowed to call you an asshole if they feel compelled to do so.

      • Robaque@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The problem with free speech is probs that what people are really fighting over is who gets to control and define what “free” speech is. Only in an anarchist society would free speech really be as you described - say what you want, but be prepared to face the consequences of your words (and actions). Without the protection of government and socio/economic hierarchies, bigots wouldn’t feel quite as invincible while they spew hate and oppression.

    • NightAuthor@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think I’m still of the mind that “intent to incite violence” is the line. And even that can be crossed when the government needs to be overthrown.

      But I could be convinced otherwise

      • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Violence is extremely useful and will be the only tool you have left if you want to stop climate change or protect yourself+your social network from the effects of capitalism.

        • nik282000@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think climate change is beyond the point of violence. The number of people, corporations, and equipment involved in the production and consumption of fossil fuels is beyond what non-military action could take on. Not to mention you have to get people to filter between useful petrochemical products (medical supplies) and problematic ones (god damned plastic bags, mylar balloons, fuckin solo cups) and not just arson us back to the stone-age.

          Things are gonna suck for a long time before they get better.

            • nik282000@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ideally political leaders will get the cocks out of their asses and realize that their children and grand-children WILL suffer through the most unusual chapter in human history. For sure it wont be the what most people go through but there will be a noticeable reduction the the quality of life for everyone.

              • hglman@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Political leaders, especially in the anglosphere, have no interests beyond self-enrichment.

  • irmoz@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    1 year ago

    Let’s replace the word with “N*****” and see if you still feel clever

    • Numuruzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      The point still stands, in the minutiae you’re addressing. People post absolute garbage opinions on a regular basis, and are free to do so, as long as their platform allows it. This doesn’t go into the consequences of pissing off a lot of people, but you’re still free to do it.

      • irmoz@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        The point does not stand. I don’t think any set of rules that sees “N***** N***** N*****” as acceptable speech should be respected, nor any person who thinks that way.

        • Numuruzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree with the spirit, but I disagree with what the point of the comic is - it’s not trying to make a point about respect per se, just about freedom of speech. Even if you wouldn’t be a part of a community that allows hate speech, if you encounter it “in the street” so to speak - there’s just nothing you can do.

    • Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Let’s replace some of the words in your comment to “I am a pooopoo head and I eat poopoo”, and see how do you feel then. Bet pretty stupid, huh?

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Defending free speech that says good things is different than defending free speech that is just being racist. The implication of hypocrisy that you’re suggesting with your comment doesn’t really work unless you view all speech as equivalent, which it self evidently isn’t.

              • irmoz@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Defending free speech that says good things is different than defending free speech that is just being racist.

                That’s kinda the point I’m making, though. This argument is not nuanced enough, because the only standard it sets is that for something to be truly offensive, it must “offend everyone”. This is an absurd and impossible standard.

                The implication of hypocrisy that you’re suggesting with your comment doesn’t really work unless you view all speech as equivalent, which it self evidently isn’t.

                I didn’t say anything about hypocrisy. I just said that the argument presented is insufficient.

        • Duamerthrax@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because it’s a short comic, it doesn’t have the time to go into the nuances. One word has a long history of being used to dehumanize an “other” group and the other just a word for a body part. If body parts offend you as much as racial slurs, you may have your own issues.

          • irmoz@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            18
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Still missing the point

            If this logic can be used to defend race hate, then maybe the logic isn’t sound

            Also, if the issue is too nuanced for you to convey in a short comic, maybe don’t make a short comic about it

            • Duamerthrax@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              16
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              If the only argument against something is that it’s offensive and they can’t rationalize it at all, the argument can be thrown out. That’s all the comic is about.

              • irmoz@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                That’s just rationalisation. To me, this comic highlights the absurd logic of bigots and free speech absolutists. “Offensive to everyone” is an impossible standard to meet; bigots are obviously never going to be offended by bigotry, so even hate speech doesn’t meet that threshold.

                Also, it’s never just “butts”, and it’s never just a single person, so it’s a bit of a misrepresentation.

                • Duamerthrax@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Bigots can’t rationalize their bigotry. At least not in a way that can’t be torn apart. They always end up using circular logic, which is what the comic is address.

                  I’m “offended” at racism because it creates an unsafe culture for everyone involved. I can cit research about the effects of generational racism leading to higher crime for instance.

                  They’re offended at the sight of black people being able to use the same water fountain as them. They can’t tell me why, which is why their argument ends at their “offense” and is the scenario the comic is about.

                  Also, it’s never just “butts”

                  I’ve seen people online get offended at the bumper sticker “Fuck Cancer”.

          • irmoz@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m gonna need you to engage in just a little more abstract thinking for me. I’m not talking about racism either.

            Let’s try another thing instead: “Got hates fags”

            How about: “Jews did 9/11”

            It’s pretty easy to say “free speech! I can say whatever I like!! I’m not responsible for your hurt feelings!” without any nuance, but speech is a bit more complicated than that.

            • R00bot@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              The cartoon isn’t about free speech absolutism. It’s just about offensive stuff. All the things you said are hate speech.

                • R00bot@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s from a website called TheDevilsPanties bro. I get where you’re coming from but it’s clearly about book bannings/conservatives getting upset with content in movies/books/signs/etc. The comic doesn’t explicitly say it’s excluding hate speech but it shouldn’t have to.

            • jarfil@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Hate speech is a call to attack some people.

              It may sometimes sound like “just offensive”, since it often uses offensive code words to coordinate an attack.