[AshleyO]

What would have been a more... accurate target would have been myself, actually being that I have in fact used words such as "fag", "bitch" and other words in jest. But this isn't about self policing and I'll admit that Jon most likely isn't the best candidate for the discussion.

Alan did correct me.

It's interesting that you spoke up and I'm glad that you did. I appreciate that you think that I'm calling myself the arbiter of policy when in fact, the definition and the form of hate speech isn't on me to determine. How can I when I don't experience or know hate speech on the receiving end. People on here COULD call me Cracker Von Patriarch all day long and the worst that could come of it would be a mild annoyance.

Obviously the mechanism of confronting oppressive speech should be determined on the terms of those that are oppressed.

For example: Would it really be so surprising if laws were crowd sourced to say Solumnia, Saya, and other females of G.net and when doing so, the word "bitch", "slut", and "whore" were explicitly determined to be banned? Some of these words already are, actually. I would ask why they would have to take up the responsibility of enduring hate speech so that our concept of freedom of speech can prevail? Where is their freedom from oppression?

If I'm not mistaken, you can't say the "N" word on G.net. If we were to leave it up to the members here who are PoC, would it be no surprise that racial slurs were banned? I would ask why they would have to take up the responsibility of enduring hate speech so that our concept of freedom of speech can prevail? Where is their freedom from oppression?

The point I'm getting at is that the idea of "freedom of speech" may in fact just be a protection FOR hate speech if you look at it in terms of class, race, gender, and orientation. Obviously it's not up to me, but at least I can understand why I could see myself being against the concept of free speech. Which was the whole point.