Like in that context

well, marginalized

whatever new word they use to describe people who are protected

also, by denying the problems of an entire gender by dismissing them with one word, could be considered encouraging continued violence against them. I.E. ignoring the complains of a woman that she is being sexually harassed as her just women-complaining or something.

mansplaining can be used in that way, therefore the term is hate speech, because context doesn't matter. like the n word.

I agree that using mansplaining to shut someone up is rude and not nice. But hate speech is a loaded thing that I would not use lightly. Especially if the silencing is not enforced and it just disrupts conversations...

well i think the point is that the term hate-speech is used like every other buzz word, like racism, sexism, islamaphobia

most things called "hate-speech" are mostly people just being dick-bags

and if we'd all stop being snowflakes and just call someone a d-bag and ignore them, move on, or better yet, prove them wrong, things would work themselves out

that's not possible, dave

"Men men spread because we wear genitals outside. If you don’t like, please demand women to contract heir boobs inside of their bodies"

big boobs are demeaning to those with smaller boobs, all women should be forced to strap their boobs down so that we all look like men.

Yeah. If I have the feeling someone is being condescending towards me I tell them...

Why the generalizatiom

I would say attacking the credibility of a person based on their gender should qualify as this hate speech thingie everyone is talking about.

I'm really on the fence because that opens up the whole can words be attacks thing

there's no such thing as hate speech in the US

and there never *should* be

used to say *will* but I dunno anymore

also @I AM ERROR we already have terms for that slander/libel

But that is mostly words that cause your image in general eye damage. If someone insults you with mansplaining just makes them look dumb and out of arguments.

words that have a financial or reputational harm

insulting someone is fair game

and always should be, just walk away and ignore

So, the media is allowed to report on TR arrest now I guess

and they're saying that 1) he pled guilty and 2) he expressed regrets

this is giving rise to people saying he should be there and he committed a crime and the FreeTommy movement should stop now

but you know fuck free speech right?

free speech doesn't exist outside America

only "Speech we agree with"

right

"They wouldn't be given a free trial" .. wait weren't these people in sentencing anyway?

funny fact

the dutch actually have a freedom of speech law,

But its 7th, whilst the freedom of religion is 1st

Hence its a higher priority to openly do your religion than it is to say what you want

but what if your religion is the "religion of free speech"?

it must be a recognised religion

so even a Jedi doesn't count

so now you have a government validating what someone believes is either recognized or not

Also, our freedom of speech law has conditions,

The state may take your right away if it damages reputation, or harms security

yeah we don't have that

never can be taken away

hence, Tommy would be arrested in Netherlands too, on the grounds his livestream would reflect poorly on Muslims