# Liberal, can we talk about hate speech? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 26, 2005, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980 "2005-02-26T05:33:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 12:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/41 "2005-02-26T12:06:47Z")
> [@jinwicked](#): > > Don’t try to turn this around on me to distract from what you said or to keep from answering my question. I’m not advocating the banning of anything. You are. No, I’m not. See that’s why you need all this special attention. That’s why, even if I explained it yet a third time, you still wouldn’t get it. You just plain don’t listen. But for the benefit of anyone interested enough to read it, here is my position on the matter: There should be no rule against so-called hate-speech. For one thing, it is impossible to define objectively. For another, it only encourages the use of euphemisms. And third, it creates an issue where one might not otherwise exist (like here, for example). That said, **IF** there is to be a rule against it, and **IF** it is to be defined as pejorative, **THEN** ban all words that are intended as pejoratives. ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/42 "2005-02-26T12:11:45Z")
> [@THespos](#): > > Come on, **Desmostylus** , just because he makes an assertion that turns out to be factually inaccurate, does that make him a liar? Can we give **Liberal** the benefit of the doubt? No, not really. He said: > [@Liberal](#): > > I’m perfectly willing to accept the prohibition of “hand stabber” right along with “fundie”. Except he didn’t hold himself to his own prohibition. So his “fundie” complaint is just a complete wank. ---
**Author:** ![THespos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8c91f0/32.png) [@THespos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/THespos)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/43 "2005-02-26T12:14:41Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > There should be no rule against so-called hate-speech. For one thing, it is impossible to define objectively. For another, it only encourages the use of euphemisms. And third, it creates an issue where one might not otherwise exist (like here, for example). That said, IF there is to be a rule against it, and IF it is to be defined as pejorative, THEN ban all words that are intended as pejoratives. I agree with you. Oh, and if it’s up for a vote at some point, I cast my vote for “fundie” as harmless insult, as I’d like to continue to use it to describe a certain acquaintance of mine without being accused of using hate speech. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 12:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/44 "2005-02-26T12:15:28Z")
> [@THespos](#): > > Come on, **Desmostylus** , just because he makes an assertion that turns out to be factually inaccurate, does that make him a liar? Can we give **Liberal** the benefit of the doubt? And on top of that, it really isn’t even factually inaccurate since I knew (and Desmostylus knew as well) that Kaylasdad, with whom I’ve had interactions for several years in threads on theism and atheism, was talking about references to hard atheists, not violent feminists. The plain fact is that Desmostylus is obsessed with me, and everyone knows it, from ordinary members to moderators. He pops into threads where I post for no purpose other than to attack me. He has derailed whole threads in the past, and is attempting to do so now, in order to feed his psychotic addiction. He received [a final warning about his aggressive behavior](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5077165&postcount=32) from TVeblen in July when he called me a troll. But he lacks the self-control to stop. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 12:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/45 "2005-02-26T12:17:27Z")
> [@THespos](#): > > I agree with you. > > Oh, and if it’s up for a vote at some point, I cast my vote for “fundie” as harmless insult, as I’d like to continue to use it to describe a certain acquaintance of mine without being accused of using hate speech. And I’d like to use it for Jerry Falwell. But I’d also like to use “hand stabber” for Harry Binswanger. ---
**Author:** ![THespos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8c91f0/32.png) [@THespos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/THespos)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/46 "2005-02-26T12:24:05Z")
> [@Desmostylus](#): > > Except he didn’t hold himself to his own prohibition. So his “fundie” complaint is just a complete wank. And here I was, thinking you were complaining about the fact that **Liberal** had used “handstabber” (or “hand stabber”) at some later point, after he said he had last used it. But lemme get this straight…Because **Liberal** said he “was willing to accept the prohibition of ‘hand stabber’ right along with ‘fundie’” and continued to use it, that makes him a liar? I think **Liberal** has made clear his stance on the issue and that the statement referenced above is equivalent to “Well, if yer gonna ban ‘fundie,’ yer gonna hafta ban ‘hand stabber’ as well.” More of a hypothetical than anything else. Then again, that’s just my interpretation. **Lib** , if I’m putting the wrong words in your mouth, just whack me with a stick or something. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 12:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/47 "2005-02-26T12:26:39Z")
No stick necessary. You have it exactly right. ---
**Author:** ![butter\_pie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/aca169/32.png) [@butter\_pie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/butter_pie)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/48 "2005-02-26T12:27:03Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > There should be no rule against so-called hate-speech. For one thing, it is impossible to define objectively. For another, it only encourages the use of euphemisms. And third, it creates an issue where one might not otherwise exist (like here, for example). I agree with your basic point, except that I do ban racist and what I consider hate speech in my own online community. However, context is everything and I do not have a blanket list of “words” that I consider to be hate speech. I ban people when I think they are behaving like assholes. > [@](#): > > That said, **IF** there is to be a rule against it, and **IF** it is to be defined as pejorative, **THEN** ban all words that are intended as pejoratives. Would you say that “all words intended as pejoratives” included the ones you used like _feminazi_? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/49 "2005-02-26T12:31:12Z")
> [@jinwicked](#): > > I agree with your basic point, except that I do ban racist and what I consider hate speech in my own online community. However, context is everything and I do not have a blanket list of “words” that I consider to be hate speech. I ban people when I think they are behaving like assholes. Fair enough. And thanks for acknowledging that you understand my point. 🙂 > [@](#): > > Would you say that “all words intended as pejoratives” included the ones you used like _feminazi_? Yes. If hate-speech is to be defined as the use of pejorative terms, then pejorative terms are hate-speech. Let me put it another way: how many direct references to “fundie” (other than clinical discussions like this) can you find just on this board that are NOT pejoratives? It isn’t used as a handy abbreviation. It is used in the same way as homo. (That’s one of the arguments I made above.) ---
**Author:** ![butter\_pie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/aca169/32.png) [@butter\_pie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/butter_pie)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/50 "2005-02-26T12:33:56Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > FYes. If hate-speech is to be defined as the use of pejorative terms, then pejorative terms are hate-speech. Let me put it another way: how many direct references to “fundie” (other than clinical discussions like this) can you find just on this board that are NOT pejoratives? It isn’t used as a handy abbreviation. It is used in the same way as homo. (That’s one of the arguments I made above.) I wouldn’t know. For the most part I stay out of GD, which is where I imagine it gets used mostly, because I find GD rather boring. Watching people get angry and fling insults is much more interesting reading. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/51 "2005-02-26T12:40:23Z")
> [@jinwicked](#): > > I wouldn’t know. For the most part I stay out of GD, which is where I imagine it gets used mostly, because I find GD rather boring. Watching people get angry and fling insults is much more interesting reading. 😃 Actually, it gets used in the Pit quite a lot. I haven’t complied any statistics on it either, but I’d be willing to wager $10 against $1 that when it’s used, it’s used in the context I described more than 90% of the time. ---
**Author:** ![butter\_pie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/aca169/32.png) [@butter\_pie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/butter_pie)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/52 "2005-02-26T12:49:01Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > 😃 Actually, it gets used in the Pit quite a lot. I haven’t complied any statistics on it either, but I’d be willing to wager $10 against $1 that when it’s used, it’s used in the context I described more than 90% of the time. Ah, well… que sera, sera. I must not notice it. For the most part I just skim thread titles while I’m uploading big files or waiting for something to download anyway, I usually don’t even open a thread unless I think I might reply to it. And I’m not wagering you any $$ 'cause I gotta buy groceries this week. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/53 "2005-02-26T14:53:43Z")
Certainly there are varying degrees of hate. On the one hand there is the very real fear of violence experienced by the OP, and on the other hand there is the inexpressable feeling that you will not be accepted by “the group” because of your ethnicity or religion. Our hate laws in Canada and elsewhere do not make a distinction based on the degree of potential violence. I should add also that I’ve noticed countless number of times where a poster has been charged with being hateful just for his/her beliefs regarding the merits of gay marriage for example. Its on that basis that I believe \*\*Liberal \*\* is operating on. Do not think that fundies are not subject to violence for their religion. I’m very sure that in many areas of Canada and the US that the school playground has been the site for violence directed at kids who are different from the general population for a variety of reasons. I myself have gone through a period in my life where I was hated because I was a Dutch immigrant. I had to run and hide for a decade from gangs of older youths shouting taunts of Dutchie, Dutchie, while I walked to a school on the other side of a United Empire Loyalist town in Ontario. Seven blocks east and seven blocks south. I had to look down each street to make sure it was safe and decide which path to take. History will never record that period of hate in the 50’s for a young Dutch immigrant. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/54 "2005-02-26T18:18:49Z")
For God’s sake, give it a rest already, **Desmo**. Lord knows I’m no fan of **Liberal** ’s, but your obsession with him is sad and pathetic, and entirely counterproductive. Everytime you jump on him with one of your bizarre and insupportable accusations, you actually make him look _better_. Please, just stop already. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/55 "2005-02-26T18:46:03Z")
> [@Reeder](#): > > Lib is a “fundie” of course it’s hate speech to him. Give him a break. > > If I were unwashed “pigpen” would be hate speech to me. No, he’s not a fundie. Not all Christians are fundies. And likewise, _not all fundies are Christian._. I think a lot of people forget that. You can have fundie Muslims, fundie Jews, fundie pagans, even fundie atheists, in some odd cases. Most people use the word “fundie” to denote religious zealots who think that anyone who doesn’t believe the exact same way THEY do are scum and that everyone should be FORCED to do things their way-regardless of beliefs. Fundie means someone who uses their beliefs to be a jerk. Period. It doesn’t mean “Christian”, or any other religion. It is a TYPE of person. Whereas most hate speech like nigger, kike, raghead or faggot simply means someone who is black, Jewish, Middle-Eastern/Muslim, or gay. Not someone who DID anything-but an entire group of people. > [@](#): > > Violent and aggressive feminists are fair game. By that logic, **Liberal** , then violent and hateful CHRISTIANS are fair game. You can’t have it both ways. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/56 "2005-02-26T18:48:22Z")
> [@Guin](#): > > You can’t have it both ways. I agree, Guin. Which is what I’ve been saying. I can’t, but neither should the opposing side. Ban ALL hate speech, or just forget about it. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/57 "2005-02-26T18:56:47Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > Fundie means someone who uses their beliefs to be a jerk. Period. It doesn’t mean “Christian”, or any other religion. It is a TYPE of person. Whereas most hate speech like nigger, kike, raghead or faggot simply means someone who is black, Jewish, Middle-Eastern/Muslim, or gay. Not someone who DID anything-but an entire group of people. Oops, missed that comment. Again, I agree on the whole. But an awful lot of people use it to describe people whose hearfelt beliefs they just don’t like or find offensive. ---
**Author:** ![TVeblen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/4bbf92/32.png) [@TVeblen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TVeblen)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/58 "2005-02-26T19:20:31Z")
Okay, **Desmo** and **Lib** , you two fighters are to retreat to your respective corners. This routine has gotten very old. **Desmo** , it’s quite obvious **Lib** drives you crazy. Either ignore him altogether or pick your battles with him more judiciously. **Lib** , you’ve been informed–and re-informed–in numerous Pit threads exactly how and why your behavior annoys people. It isn’t amusing, enlightening or dismissable as just an idiocyncracy with you. TVeblen Pit mod ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/59 "2005-02-26T19:24:31Z")
I don’t think it’s particularly fair to include **Liberal** in that warning. I don’t see where he’s done anything objectionable in this thread, except for defend himself from a lunatic. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980/60 "2005-02-26T19:35:20Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > I don’t even know what hate-speech means. I’ve said that many times. That’s why I usually preface it with such qualifiers as “nebulous” or “so-called”, unless I’m directly referencing Lynn’s rule. My point isn’t the simplistic assertion, “fundie is hate speech”; my point is the more complex conditional, “if homo is hate speech, then fundie should be too”. And I’ve explained why. And I’ve explained why you’re wrong. You haven’t adequately responded. Words we consider to be “hate speech” have a much stronger effect than “fundie” or even your favorite word (which I found in posts from September of last year in user searches.) Maybe fundie is an insult (though why it is, you still haven’t deigned to explain.) But for you to bring up violence in India or Indonesia is irrelevant because you haven’t had violence done against you for being Christian. Like virtually every gay person in this country (who’s not completely closeted), I’ve experienced words like “faggot” as a prelude to violence. It creates a moment of abject terror in me when I hear it (and it’s not easy to write about these things.) Unless you can explain why “fundie” does the same thing to you, then I don’t see how you can consider them equivalent. Furthermore, are you willing to do more than stop saying “hand-stabber”? I think an apology might be in order, if you wish to see others stop using the word “fundie”. After all, “fundie” makes no accusations of violence. > [@Liberal](#): > > Oh, I see. It isn’t that you disagree with the argument; it’s that you don’t comprehend it. Maybe this will help — answer the converse of your own question: if you can call people fundies just because you don’t agree with their views, then why is terrorist, feminazi, or hand stabber so-called hate speech? No one here said those were hate speech. They were brought up as approximate equivalents to “fundie”. (Though “terrorist” and “hand-stabber” imply that your opposition is violent, and “feminazi” makes a rather unfair comparison to perhaps the worst group of human beings who ever lived.) It’s you who’s been drawing an analogy between “faggot” and “fundie”, and like I’ve shown above, that’s unjustifiable. > [@Liberal](#): > > There should be no rule against so-called hate-speech. For one thing, it is impossible to define objectively. For another, it only encourages the use of euphemisms. But like I’ve demonstrated, the true words of hatred have a power independent of the denotative meaning because of the context in which people have heard them. No euphemism has the power of “faggot”. I don’t think any euphemism matches “nigger” either. > [@Liberal](#): > > And third, it creates an issue where one might not otherwise exist (like here, for example). That said, IF there is to be a rule against it, and IF it is to be defined as pejorative, THEN ban all words that are intended as pejoratives. So your view is predicated on the idea that “hate speech” and “pejorative” are equivalents, no? Doesn’t my OP explain why “faggot” has a power far stronger than as a mere pejorative? No one is calling for pejoratives to be banned. There is a rule (that I’m not taking a position on) restricting hate speech. I don’t think you really understand what hate speech means if you think “fundie” counts in the same way as “faggot”. This is the point I’ve been trying to make. “Pejoratives” are not outlawed here, in the interest of restricting speech as little as powerful. Hate speech is not the same as insulting speech; pejoratives are not necessarily hate speech. And “fundie” and “faggot” just are not equivalent. > [@grienspace](#): > > Do not think that fundies are not subject to violence for their religion. I’m very sure that in many areas of Canada and the US that the school playground has been the site for violence directed at kids who are different from the general population for a variety of reasons. Is there any evidence that fundamentalist Christians are targetted with violence for being fundamentalist Christians? Not hypothetical like here or in Starving Artist’s posts. I mean actual _evidence_. I ask because I’ve never heard of that happening. We had plenty of strongly Christian kids at my elementary school, though I didn’t then know enough to know whether they were fundamentalists or not. They _were not the targets of violence_ because of it. (Though I suffered a certain amount of harassment through elementary school for saying I didn’t believe in God.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-can-we-talk-about-hate-speech/291980.md?page=4)