Transgender Icon Allegedly Banned From Facebook For 'Transphobic Slurs' - Polidicks

[QUOTE=HawkeyeTy;44599005]Jayne County's first studio single was called "Fuck You" and a follow-up was called "Are you man enough to be a woman." People are shocked by someone who's transgender and made a career out of saying obscene shit, because she's saying something considered controversial relating to transgenders. I'm not even going to get into the obvious argument of it's context and the intents of her saying it, as I can tell by the 5 pages that's probably been thrown out by everyone who believes their right to be offended trumps others right to basic free speech.[/QUOTE] freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence or critique.

[QUOTE=Ownederd;44599107]freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence or critique.[/QUOTE] The consequences should come from society and other people. Not the government. [QUOTE=Arctic-Zone;44583225]People who say freedom of speech should also include hateful speech have probably never been on the receiving end of hate speech or similar harassment. Like, shit, if somebody says something hateful specifically to offend or demean, is it really so bad to tell them to stop or punish them for it? Especially if it's in public/they're influential.[/QUOTE]

This is where I tend to disagree with people. Nobody has the right to remove the rights of others. By imposing "social consequences" on somebody, you are effectively removing their right to free speech. It's the same situation as blocking the rights for gays to marry. NOBODY should possess the ability to remove the rights of another. Everyone should be free to speak their minds, regardless of message. We have the right to call them out on it. But nobody has the right to take that a step farther by imposing actual punishments, be they social or physical, on anyone.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;44599524]This is where I tend to disagree with people. Nobody has the right to remove the rights of others. By imposing "social consequences" on somebody, you are effectively removing their right to free speech. It's the same situation as blocking the rights for gays to marry. NOBODY should possess the ability to remove the rights of another. Everyone should be free to speak their minds, regardless of message. We have the right to call them out on it. But nobody has the right to take that a step farther by imposing actual punishments, be they social or physical, on anyone.[/QUOTE] Ha, the first amendment protects you from [B]government[/B] critique not public critique. They dont have to deal with people's bullshit on the website if they are a private company.

[QUOTE=codemaster85;44599814]Ha, the first amendment protects you from [B]government[/B] critique not public critique. They dont have to deal with people's bullshit on the website if they are a private company.[/QUOTE] So you're saying it's ok for people to remove the rights of others?

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;44599314]The consequences should come from society and other people. Not the government.[/QUOTE] since when does facebook count as the goverment [editline]20th April 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;44599867]So you're saying it's ok for people to remove the rights of others?[/QUOTE] nobodys removing your right to say anything. why do you think its ok to remove my right to be mad at them and voice my free speech about being mad? your argument is a double edged sword.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;44599867]So you're saying it's ok for people to remove the rights of others?[/QUOTE] There is no right to post on Facebook.

[QUOTE=Paige;44599874]since when does facebook count as the goverment [editline]20th April 2014[/editline] nobodys removing your right to say anything. why do you think its ok to remove my right to be mad at them and voice my free speech about being mad? your argument is a double edged sword.[/QUOTE] That's not what I'm saying. You have the right to voice your opinion and call them out. That's not the problem. In my opinion, however, you don't have the right to force some sort of "consequence" on them for voicing their opinion. It's a de-facto punishment for exercising a right.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;44599910]That's not what I'm saying. You have the right to voice your opinion and call them out. That's not the problem. In my opinion, however, you don't have the right to force some sort of "consequence" on them for voicing their opinion. It's a de-facto punishment for exercising a right.[/QUOTE] my "consequence" is disliking them. oh boy. not to mention last time i checked im not the goverment.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;44599524]This is where I tend to disagree with people. Nobody has the right to remove the rights of others. By imposing "social consequences" on somebody, you are effectively removing their right to free speech. It's the same situation as blocking the rights for gays to marry. NOBODY should possess the ability to remove the rights of another. Everyone should be free to speak their minds, regardless of message. We have the right to call them out on it. But nobody has the right to take that a step farther by imposing actual punishments, be they social or physical, on anyone.[/QUOTE] I agree that societal consequences rub people off the wrong way. I'm unsure why people disagree, especially if oppressed minorities have suffered from them. (see: Kate Chopin) It's not the harsh retorts, I'm mostly talking about job loss, defamation, etc. It's very unlikely that they're going to pull a 180 and fully love the people that ostracized them. Although harassment is understandable in some cases, it won't have a positive outcome for both sides at all.

[QUOTE=CoolKingKaso;44600073]I agree that societal consequences rub people off the wrong way. I'm unsure why people disagree, especially if oppressed minorities have suffered from them. (see: Kate Chopin) It's not the harsh retorts, I'm mostly talking about job loss, defamation, etc. It's very unlikely that they're going to pull a 180 and fully love the people that ostracized them. Although harassment is understandable in some cases, it won't have a positive outcome for both sides at all.[/QUOTE] Ah, yes. You hit the nail on the head of what I was trying to say.