You can’t stop other people from badmouthing you behind your back. That’s just life. Accept it and move on. Trying to censor people because you don’t like what they’re saying is peak liberal fascism.
The paradox of tolerance doesn’t mean what you think it means.
The “paradox” is fully resolved if you have strong guarantees for the tolerance you care about: fundamental freedoms and equality, and punishments for those who attempt to subvert them. So you don’t “tolerate” people who are in the process of dismantling that tolerance by advocating for or engaging directly in harassment of trans people (for example) but you also don’t punish people who, for example, are opposed to trans women participating in womens’ sports - because while equal participation ought to be a guaranteed matter of equality, we’ve also broadly agreed as a society that sports ought to be split, and the precise nature of that split is not a guaranteed matter of equality.
Applying this to Lemmy, there is no risk to tolerance in allowing a discussion about sex, gender and sports. There is a risk to tolerance in allowing a “discussion” in which trans people are generally disparaged on the basis of their transition, because it can lead to actions which go beyond mere speech.
To look at this another way, rather than linking a wikipedia page with a dumb insult and saying “try learning something”, you’d be better off identifying the behaviour you don’t want to see, what action you want to take about it, and why it’s justified based on the consequences of not taking that action. “Tolerance” and “intolerance” are vague terms, so have a more productive discussion by being precise.
lol ah the classic crybaby wannabe-fascist “paradox of tolerance” garbage. Just admit it, you can’t handle people who have different beliefs and opinions to your own because you can’t defend your own with any intelligence.
Ah, the actual fascist “nobody deserves to be safe” garbage. Just adjust it, you want to use your own personal freedoms as a cludge to undermine the rights of others.
the actual fascist “nobody deserves to be safe” garbage
Everybody deserves to be safe. What are you talking about? Someone badmouthing you behind your back doesn’t make you “unsafe”. Despite what you might try to pretend, words are NOT violence.
Just adjust it, you want to use your own personal freedoms as a cludge to undermine the rights of others.
How? What am I saying that even remotely hints at anything like this?
You can’t stop other people from badmouthing you behind your back. That’s just life. Accept it and move on. Trying to censor people because you don’t like what they’re saying is peak liberal fascism.
here, let me link you to the paradox of tolerance, you absolute mudcake.
try learning something.
The paradox of tolerance doesn’t mean what you think it means.
The “paradox” is fully resolved if you have strong guarantees for the tolerance you care about: fundamental freedoms and equality, and punishments for those who attempt to subvert them. So you don’t “tolerate” people who are in the process of dismantling that tolerance by advocating for or engaging directly in harassment of trans people (for example) but you also don’t punish people who, for example, are opposed to trans women participating in womens’ sports - because while equal participation ought to be a guaranteed matter of equality, we’ve also broadly agreed as a society that sports ought to be split, and the precise nature of that split is not a guaranteed matter of equality.
Applying this to Lemmy, there is no risk to tolerance in allowing a discussion about sex, gender and sports. There is a risk to tolerance in allowing a “discussion” in which trans people are generally disparaged on the basis of their transition, because it can lead to actions which go beyond mere speech.
To look at this another way, rather than linking a wikipedia page with a dumb insult and saying “try learning something”, you’d be better off identifying the behaviour you don’t want to see, what action you want to take about it, and why it’s justified based on the consequences of not taking that action. “Tolerance” and “intolerance” are vague terms, so have a more productive discussion by being precise.
The “you care about” is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
And while you’re right, the guy is just a edgelord. Providing him with a nuanced and detailed take wasn’t going to do anything.
lol ah the classic crybaby wannabe-fascist “paradox of tolerance” garbage. Just admit it, you can’t handle people who have different beliefs and opinions to your own because you can’t defend your own with any intelligence.
Classic leftist.
Ah, the actual fascist “nobody deserves to be safe” garbage. Just adjust it, you want to use your own personal freedoms as a cludge to undermine the rights of others.
Classic libertarian
Everybody deserves to be safe. What are you talking about? Someone badmouthing you behind your back doesn’t make you “unsafe”. Despite what you might try to pretend, words are NOT violence.
How? What am I saying that even remotely hints at anything like this?
I lampooned your own words to show you how stupid it sounded, not for you to take it seriously. Holy shit man.
No, you made yourself look stupid by saying stupid things that made no sense. What I said is perfectly clear and makes sense.