this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2023
416 points (90.5% liked)

Web Comics

1081 readers
1 users here now

founded 3 years ago
 

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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Let's replace the word with "N*****" and see if you still feel clever

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I know it's saying that, and I think that's bullshit.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think it's a defeatist attitude that allows hatred to fester.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So you’d rather control what people can say irl? Freedom has its consequences and some people are just dicks

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I don't think that's tge only option

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Excellent rebuttal.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Real life footage of this actually happening, and the result: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8DJGw3rIwI

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah it was the same day as that massive gold heist.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Saying good things and saying bad things are different actually

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

but that's not the message of the comic

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago

I think you're missing the point. You have to take it in the context it was written in.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Care to elaborate on how it relates to my comment?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If you include the context it isnt insufficient. It is also a short comic.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Short comics are notoriously not great at depicting nuanced concepts.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You can't see the difference between "butts" and the n word?

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The point is, this argument doesn't hold up.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That seems like a reach to me. This comic reads to me as the fantasy of a bigot.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

That's just a failure of understanding what someone is actually stating with their offense. Being offended does not "give you any rights", and arguing against that is fighting a strawman.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The argument isn't about racial slurs.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Abstract thinking is impossible for some people it seems

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It contains the single most popular defence of free speech absolutism

[–] [email protected] -1 points 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.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

hey, its freedom to offend, right ?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hate speech and offensive speech are very different lol

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

where do u draw the line?

(genuine question ,, not advocating hate speech)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 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.